Battery Desulphation - Why Keep Dancing and Jiving with it ?

[BillBlake]

Pulse Tech sent me some studies and I hear the US Air Force came up with some goodies.
However I'm not putting any time into it because it's not worth it to me.
Too much jive.

Same as trying to deal with the Nickel Iron Battery Dealers.
Just way too much jive.

This CLEAR Battery Case on You Tube showing the Battery Desulphation Story
(and other batteries that could be built just like it)

could take the jive right out of the never ending Battery Desulphator debate.

With so many millions $ involved - they can't do some decent presentations ??
Can I get a witness?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p-nuDejqy7M


Bill Blake

[waynefromnscanada]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jive
"Jive" aside, I don't personally swallow what this video is promoting. They show three different cells, we have no way of knowing what life they've had, and to top it all off, pulse desulphators supposedly work by knocking off the sulphated lead, not dissolving what cannot be dissolved. Therefore if this device did work, there would be a pile of crap in the bottom of the case, but there is not.
My opinion? One more in a long line of desulphator scams.

[PNjunction]

Even if you revive it, what does it come back to? 85% capacity? At that point, I'd be replacing it anyway somewhere near 80% under normal conditions anyway.

I'd like to see before and after measurements of impedance as well. In the long run, I think it would be cheaper to just get a new battery, and maintain it properly.

[BillBlake]

Bringing batteries back from the dead is one angle. My interest is in looking at the technology as a maintenance item
when starting off with new batteries. Sandia National Labs had some thoughts about the benefits of pulse charging but
the last I read they had mixed reports and needed to do more work. They had other parameters besides just sulphation.
That was years ago and testing Lead Acid batteries for most anything seems to be out of fashion today.

For that matter the US Navy had serviceable (take apart) Lead Acid Submarine batteries before World War I.
The early 1900's Submarines also had Nickel Iron Batteries that could be fully rejuvenated back to full efficiency.
The Edison Nickel Iron Electrolyte could get 'The Treatment' after they used compressed air to remove the electrolyte
from the cells and a simple pump was used to return it back into the cells again when they were done with it.

The NiFe electrolyte could also also be used as a Carbon Dioxide Scrubber under emergency conditions.
They claimed it had the power to keep the crew alive, breathing well along with Oxygen generators, for 100 days.
You can Google 'Nickel Iron (Ni-Fe) Battery Life Cycle Chart .. from the Manufacturer'
if interested in the US Navy story.

The US Military Loves their Solar / Pulse Battery Maintainers and for good documented reasons.
However most any Solar Charger is going to have a positive effect on some battery that just sits there
not getting any charge for stretches of time.

Companies could do similar, well thought out, documented clear case battery experiments IF they wanted to.

There is a whole lot of untold battery story.

Bill Blake

[john p]

The reason you dont see manufacturers doing real comparison tests because its so difficult to do so. It is very time consuming to do the tests. As a minimum it takes months and its not something that can be easily automated. It need continuous manpower to abserve all that is happening and then puting all those figures and obsevations into print.. I know as we have done many tests like that for many reasons at work. Cost wise it can cost as much as $6000 in pay expenses alone to have simple comparison tests done between just 2 batteries. And that will double in cost if exhausive testing is done on those two batteries.

[Cariboocoot]

Like John said, it's difficult to do a real test.
But it's easy to make a fake video.

Caveat emptor.

[BillBlake]

The reason you dont see manufacturers doing real comparison tests because its so difficult to do so. It is very time consuming to do the tests. As a minimum it takes months and its not something that can be easily automated. It need continuous manpower to abserve all that is happening and then puting all those figures and obsevations into print.. I know as we have done many tests like that for many reasons at work. Cost wise it can cost as much as $6000 in pay expenses alone to have simple comparison tests done between just 2 batteries. And that will double in cost if exhausive testing is done on those two batteries.

John P,

Just can't help but think these guys could Easily pull it off
IF they wanted to. Clear battery cases saves a whole lot of talkin - IF it's done properly.

http://investing.businessweek.com/re...capId=25203758


For whatever it's worth:

SCIENCE
OF
SOLARGIZER

September 1999

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=...0Solargizer%22


Ensuring Lead-Acid Battery Pe r f o r m a n c e
With ReNew-IT Pulse Te c h n o l o gy

http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=...8&fr=yfp-t-701

Bill Blake