Energizer 2013 AA Cell already leaking

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 14:28:19 -0800, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

On Sun, 1 Jan 2012 10:51:36 -0800 (PST), "hrhofmann@att.net"
hrhofmann@att.net> wrote:

Good pont about the idle/leakage current. I just checked it, 25 ma
draw when pushing a button, 0 ua standby, so I guess idle/leakage
current is out of the picture.

I goofed(tm). Two batteries in series do not add the Amp-Hr capacity.
My thanks to Dave Platt for the correction.

Well, if your remote uses 2 batteries, you would have a total of 4000
ma-hr of capacity. At a 25ma draw, that's
4000 / 25 = 160 hrs = 6.67 days
if someone sat on a remote button.

That should be:
2000 / 25 = 80 hrs = 3.4 days

Could I trouble you to double check the standby current, possibly with
a more sensitive amps guesser? To drain the 4000 ma-hr batteries in 2
years (17,520 hrs), you only need:
4000 / 17520 = 228 ua
of leakage.

That should be:
2000 / 17520 = 114 ua

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

 

[William Sommerwerck]

"Sylvia Else" <sylvia@not.here.invalid> wrote in message
news:9mci45F284U1@mid.individual.net...

On 2/01/2012 3:53 AM, hrhofmann@att.net wrote:

Happened to try a seldom-used tv remote control last night, dead.
opened it up, one 2013 AA Energizer battery was fine, the other was
dead and leaking. I stupidly thought that the date on batterries was
how long they were supposed to last if they were not used - shelf
life.

That aside, batteries are not meant to leak anymore. Some of us can no
doubt remember when batteries were sold in two varieties - ordinary, and
(more expensive) leak proof - the point being that the ordinary ones
were pretty much guaranteed to leak when discharged, whereas the leak
proof ones would not. The ordinary ones have long since vanished.

Intent and practice aren't necessarily the same. Alkaline cells often
"discharge" or develop a fuzzy crud. Duracells are notorious for liquid
leaks, while Evereadys have never caused me problems. (Other people report
exactly the opposite.)

If the battery damaged the unit, contact the manufacturer. Duracell replaced
the case of a dictation machine its batteries had damaged.

 

[Mark Zacharias]

<hrhofmann@att.net> wrote in message
news:8105e931-33a4-4e27-af8a-a4b2cf527c39@t13g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...

Happened to try a seldom-used tv remote control last night, dead.
opened it up, one 2013 AA Energizer battery was fine, the other was
dead and leaking. I stupidly thought that the date on batterries was
how long they were supposed to last if they were not used - shelf
life.

Since the battery was not used more than a few minutes since it was
put in the remote a couple of years ago, and had been in an air-
conditioned and heated room in the house for its entire time since I
brought it home from the store, I thought that it was safe to leave it
in the remote without having to periodically check for leakage.
Fortunately, the leakage was minor and because of the physical
position of the remote, the leakage went onto the inside of the back
cover and did not get into the electronics in the remote.

Just thought I would post it here as a reminder not to assume anything
about battery life.

A year or so back I picked up a Micronta 22-206 FET multimeter in almost NOS
condition in it's box.

Inside the meter were an original Radio Shack C cell and a 9V battery.

Both were dead, but absolutely NO sign of leakage (lucky me).

The dates of the unit and batteries were about 1975 IIRC.

Mark Z.

 

[hrhofmann@att.net]

On Jan 1, 10:53 am, "hrhofm...@att.net" <hrhofm...@att.net> wrote:

Happened to try a seldom-used tv remote control last night, dead.
opened it up, one 2013 AA Energizer battery was fine, the other was
dead and leaking.  I stupidly thought that the date on batterries was
how long they were supposed to last if they were not used - shelf
life.

Since the battery was not used more than a few minutes since it was
put in the remote a couple of years ago, and had been in an air-
conditioned and heated room in the house for its entire time since I
brought it home from the store, I thought that it was safe to leave it
in the remote without having to periodically check for leakage.
Fortunately, the leakage was minor and because of the physical
position of the remote, the leakage went onto the inside of the back
cover and did not get into the electronics in the remote.

Just thought I would post it here as a reminder not to assume anything
about battery life.

I registered a complaint on the energizer web site, we'll see if they
respond or if I have to actually call them.