What's a PP9 battery?

  • Thread starter Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun
  • Start date
W

Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun

Guest
http://www.gift-directory.co.uk/Application/Products/Bush-radios/bush-
TR82-1GB.asp

Says it uses a PP9 battery. Whazzat?

Also, at
http://hometown.aol.co.uk/oldradioparts/semiconductors.htm

Has anyone ever seen an LED labeled like this, with a CQ as the first
two letters?

Also some good info about old germanium transistors incl the OC45
here.

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
"Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'" wrote:
http://www.gift-directory.co.uk/Application/Products/Bush-radios/bush-
TR82-1GB.asp

Says it uses a PP9 battery. Whazzat?

Also, at
http://hometown.aol.co.uk/oldradioparts/semiconductors.htm

Has anyone ever seen an LED labeled like this, with a CQ as the first
two letters?

Also some good info about old germanium transistors incl the OC45
here.

--
Click to expand...
here is the datasheet on the 276 battery

http://data.energizer.com/datasheets/library/primary/carbon_zinc/industrial/276.pdf


--


Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
 
In article <3F4837B9.5F83FF1C@earthlink.net>,
mike.terrell@earthlink.net mentioned...
"Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'" wrote:

http://www.gift-directory.co.uk/Application/Products/Bush-radios/bush-
TR82-1GB.asp

Says it uses a PP9 battery. Whazzat?

Also, at
http://hometown.aol.co.uk/oldradioparts/semiconductors.htm

Has anyone ever seen an LED labeled like this, with a CQ as the first
two letters?

Also some good info about old germanium transistors incl the OC45
here.

--

EverReady PP9, 276, NEDA 1603 is a large 9 volt battery used in early
transistor radios. here are some pictures of the skins used to make
reproductions.

http://www.roberts-radios.co.uk/batteries/pages/pp9.htm
Click to expand...
Thanks, Mike. I think I had a Heathkit that used one of those. Might
have been a metal detector. I built a few kits for other people back
in the '70s, I think it was one of them. The guy I worked for bought
it to find the sprinkler pipes in his yard. Worked okay, and we had
some fun digging up some junk too, mostly pennies. I think nickels,
dimes, and quarters are shiny enough to be seen easily in the grass
and are picked up, but pennies get buried. Here's a good story about
a metal detector. http://slate.msn.com/id/2086909/
But I don't remember seeing that style of 9v battery in a store since
before Heathkit went out of business. I think I'd just find a battery
holder that can hold 6 AAA cells, probably about the same size.

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
I nosed around on the following URL and observed some information:
http://data.energizer.com/datasheets/frames.htm

An alkaline AA cell has a capacity of 2850 mAh. A C cell has about 3
times that capacity, and a D cell has about 6 times that capacity. A
AAA cell has less than half that capacity, about 44 percent.

The roughest service, according to the industry standard tests, that
the AA cells are subjected to is digital camera and flash. I though
that toys would be the worst, but the digital camera and flash, are by
far, the highest current drain.

Apparently as the batteries get old on the shelf, they lose capacity.
they show that for Alkaline, for 80% capacity the shelf life is 7
years.

On another note, I was disappointed when I tried to find rechargable C
and D cells at Fry's the other day. I looked thru their selection of
Ni-MH C and D cells, and they are all rated at not much more than the
AA cells, which are 2000 mAh. The C and D cells are light weight,
which indicates to me that they are really AA cells inside of a C or D
package. I've seen the ratings for true C and D Ni-MH cells online,
and their capacities are similar to the alkaline C and D cells, which
is much greater than the 2000 or so mAh that I found on the store
shelf. Are they afraid that people won't pay the higher price for the
higher capacity C and D Ni-MH cells?

If I wanted to make some money selling something, I would send off to
China and get a hundred thousand plastic 'adapters' made, which would
be the size of a C or D cell and hold an AA cell inside of it. This
would allow anyone to use the cheaper Ni-MH AA cells instead. I've
never seen these on the store shelves, and it seems like a good idea.

I experimented with a light that held a D cell, and I found that I
could put 3 or 4 AA cells inside the space where the D cell was
supposed to go. So if someone could figure out a way to parallel 2 or
more AA cells without dropping any voltage, then more than 1 AA cell
could be put inside this adapter to get more current.

The following might also be a good selling item. Get some plastic
adapters made that are the same size as two C or D cells, and hold
three AA cells. This would allow one to put the adapter inside a two
C or D cell flashlight, and use a LED light bulb, which requires the
higher voltage. However, I've now seen that some company is selling
replacement LED lights that have a V boost circuit inside the lamp
base. If they hit the store shelves, then there wouldn't be any need
for an adapter.

Just a few observatons. Further contributions welcomed.


In article <3F483E60.31583EF9@earthlink.net>,
mike.terrell@earthlink.net mentioned...
"Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'" wrote:

http://www.gift-directory.co.uk/Application/Products/Bush-radios/bush-
TR82-1GB.asp

Says it uses a PP9 battery. Whazzat?

Also, at
http://hometown.aol.co.uk/oldradioparts/semiconductors.htm

Has anyone ever seen an LED labeled like this, with a CQ as the first
two letters?

Also some good info about old germanium transistors incl the OC45
here.

--

here is the datasheet on the 276 battery

http://data.energizer.com/datasheets/library/primary/carbon_zinc/industrial/276.pdf
Click to expand...

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
"Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'" <alondra101@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:MPG.19b22d5b246e1767989c41@news.inreach.net...
On another note, I was disappointed when I tried to find rechargable C
and D cells at Fry's the other day. I looked thru their selection of
Ni-MH C and D cells, and they are all rated at not much more than the
AA cells, which are 2000 mAh. The C and D cells are light weight,
which indicates to me that they are really AA cells inside of a C or D
package. I've seen the ratings for true C and D Ni-MH cells online,
and their capacities are similar to the alkaline C and D cells, which
is much greater than the 2000 or so mAh that I found on the store
shelf. Are they afraid that people won't pay the higher price for the
higher capacity C and D Ni-MH cells?
Click to expand...
Perhaps consumers are satisfied with the current capacity of C/D cells,
which are mostly used for flashlights, while everybody complains about
their digital camera draining batteries like mad.

If I wanted to make some money selling something, I would send off to
China and get a hundred thousand plastic 'adapters' made, which would
be the size of a C or D cell and hold an AA cell inside of it. This
would allow anyone to use the cheaper Ni-MH AA cells instead. I've
never seen these on the store shelves, and it seems like a good idea.
Click to expand...
Now that's a good idea! But take a look at this, seems that
someone else had the same idea:
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/greenbatteries-store/aatodbatad.html
It could be made a little better, with a larger negative pad on
the bottom. I didn't search for C adapters.

[snip]

--
Thanks,
Frank Bemelman
(remove 'x' & .invalid when sending email)
 
In article <3f4896cc$0$28911$1b62eedf@news.euronet.nl>,
bemelmanx@euronet.nl.invalid mentioned...
"Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'" <alondra101@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:MPG.19b22d5b246e1767989c41@news.inreach.net...

On another note, I was disappointed when I tried to find rechargable C
and D cells at Fry's the other day. I looked thru their selection of
Ni-MH C and D cells, and they are all rated at not much more than the
AA cells, which are 2000 mAh. The C and D cells are light weight,
which indicates to me that they are really AA cells inside of a C or D
package. I've seen the ratings for true C and D Ni-MH cells online,
and their capacities are similar to the alkaline C and D cells, which
is much greater than the 2000 or so mAh that I found on the store
shelf. Are they afraid that people won't pay the higher price for the
higher capacity C and D Ni-MH cells?

Perhaps consumers are satisfied with the current capacity of C/D cells,
which are mostly used for flashlights, while everybody complains about
their digital camera draining batteries like mad.

If I wanted to make some money selling something, I would send off to
China and get a hundred thousand plastic 'adapters' made, which would
be the size of a C or D cell and hold an AA cell inside of it. This
would allow anyone to use the cheaper Ni-MH AA cells instead. I've
never seen these on the store shelves, and it seems like a good idea.

Now that's a good idea! But take a look at this, seems that
someone else had the same idea:
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/greenbatteries-store/aatodbatad.html
It could be made a little better, with a larger negative pad on
the bottom. I didn't search for C adapters.

[snip]
Click to expand...
Cool. Yeah, someone beat me to the punch. The one I had in mind
would look just like a C or D cell with a slot in the side, having the
guts of a regular AA battery holder, with spring, contact, etc. I
made some dummy AA batteries out of a 2 inch screw with a washer on
the negative end, some nylon washers as spacers, and 3 or 4 nuts to
hold everything in place. It was just a short from end to end, of
course. But it worked. This tin can shown in the URL is okay, but if
it's used in a flashlight and it's dropped or rolls off the table,
will the AA cells fall out of place inside the can?

Have you ever seen the spool that's left over after a cash register
runs out of paper? Looks about the right size for an adapter. Or a
piece of wood dowel cut off and hole drilled down the center. A
washer screwed to one end would make the negative contact. Or a 35 mm
plastic film canister, or a pill bottle.

I checked on http://data.energizer.com/ and I found that the diameter
of two AA cells side-by-side would be about 3 mm larger than a single
C cell. So I guess it would not be possible to fit three AA cells in
the space where two C cells normally go.

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
"Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'" <alondra101@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:MPG.19b2770846dd190d989c43@news.inreach.net...
In article <3f4896cc$0$28911$1b62eedf@news.euronet.nl>,
bemelmanx@euronet.nl.invalid mentioned...
"Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun'" <alondra101@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:MPG.19b22d5b246e1767989c41@news.inreach.net...

On another note, I was disappointed when I tried to find rechargable C
and D cells at Fry's the other day. I looked thru their selection of
Ni-MH C and D cells, and they are all rated at not much more than the
AA cells, which are 2000 mAh. The C and D cells are light weight,
which indicates to me that they are really AA cells inside of a C or D
package. I've seen the ratings for true C and D Ni-MH cells online,
and their capacities are similar to the alkaline C and D cells, which
is much greater than the 2000 or so mAh that I found on the store
shelf. Are they afraid that people won't pay the higher price for the
higher capacity C and D Ni-MH cells?

Perhaps consumers are satisfied with the current capacity of C/D cells,
which are mostly used for flashlights, while everybody complains about
their digital camera draining batteries like mad.

If I wanted to make some money selling something, I would send off to
China and get a hundred thousand plastic 'adapters' made, which would
be the size of a C or D cell and hold an AA cell inside of it. This
would allow anyone to use the cheaper Ni-MH AA cells instead. I've
never seen these on the store shelves, and it seems like a good idea.

Now that's a good idea! But take a look at this, seems that
someone else had the same idea:
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/greenbatteries-store/aatodbatad.html
It could be made a little better, with a larger negative pad on
the bottom. I didn't search for C adapters.

[snip]

Cool. Yeah, someone beat me to the punch. The one I had in mind
would look just like a C or D cell with a slot in the side, having the
guts of a regular AA battery holder, with spring, contact, etc. I
made some dummy AA batteries out of a 2 inch screw with a washer on
the negative end, some nylon washers as spacers, and 3 or 4 nuts to
hold everything in place. It was just a short from end to end, of
course. But it worked. This tin can shown in the URL is okay, but if
it's used in a flashlight and it's dropped or rolls off the table,
will the AA cells fall out of place inside the can?

Have you ever seen the spool that's left over after a cash register
runs out of paper? Looks about the right size for an adapter. Or a
piece of wood dowel cut off and hole drilled down the center. A
washer screwed to one end would make the negative contact. Or a 35 mm
plastic film canister, or a pill bottle.

I checked on http://data.energizer.com/ and I found that the diameter
of two AA cells side-by-side would be about 3 mm larger than a single
C cell. So I guess it would not be possible to fit three AA cells in
the space where two C cells normally go.
Click to expand...
Here's a better adapter:
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/greenbatteries-store/battery-adapter.html


--
Thanks,
Frank Bemelman
(remove 'x' & .invalid when sending email)
 
In article <MPG.19b22d5b246e1767989c41@news.inreach.net>,
Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun' <alondra101@hotmail.com> wrote:

On another note, I was disappointed when I tried to find rechargable C
and D cells at Fry's the other day. I looked thru their selection of
Ni-MH C and D cells, and they are all rated at not much more than the
AA cells, which are 2000 mAh. The C and D cells are light weight,
which indicates to me that they are really AA cells inside of a C or D
package. I've seen the ratings for true C and D Ni-MH cells online,
and their capacities are similar to the alkaline C and D cells, which
is much greater than the 2000 or so mAh that I found on the store
shelf. Are they afraid that people won't pay the higher price for the
higher capacity C and D Ni-MH cells?
Click to expand...
It's the usual sort of thing. They can advertise "C" and "D"
batteries at a substantially lower price than a vendor who carries
only the real-good-stuff sort. An amazingly large percentage of the
buying population makes their buying decisions based almost entirely
on the price ("Hey, it's a bargain") without bothering to read the
rest of the label and compare apples to apples.

If I wanted to make some money selling something, I would send off to
China and get a hundred thousand plastic 'adapters' made, which would
be the size of a C or D cell and hold an AA cell inside of it. This
would allow anyone to use the cheaper Ni-MH AA cells instead. I've
never seen these on the store shelves, and it seems like a good idea.
Click to expand...
Oh, these do exist, and have existed for years. I've seen 'em in some
mail-order catalogs.

I don't think they're terribly popular, though, because they _force_
the user to acknowledge that they're using low-capacity batteries.
Most folks don't realize that this is exactly what they're doing if
they buy a typical low-capacity "C" or "D" lamb-in-sheep's-clothing
NiCd.

I experimented with a light that held a D cell, and I found that I
could put 3 or 4 AA cells inside the space where the D cell was
supposed to go. So if someone could figure out a way to parallel 2 or
more AA cells without dropping any voltage, then more than 1 AA cell
could be put inside this adapter to get more current.
Click to expand...
This could be useful for convenience. I'm not sure it'd make a great
deal of economic sense, though. The online prices I see for
full-capacity NiCD and NiMH "D" cells (e.g. at www.batterystation.com)
seem to be approximately 3x the prices of "AA" cells which have
approximately 1/3 the ampere-hour capacity. So, price-wise, it's
probably a wash for the batteries themselves. Add the cost of the
adapter (plastics and metal) and it'd probably be cheaper just to buy
the real "D" cells.

--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
 
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote:
It's the usual sort of thing. They can advertise "C" and "D"
batteries at a substantially lower price than a vendor who carries
only the real-good-stuff sort. An amazingly large percentage of the
buying population makes their buying decisions based almost entirely
on the price ("Hey, it's a bargain") without bothering to read the
rest of the label and compare apples to apples.
Click to expand...
Of course, in the case of batteries, it's not like the label tells you what
their ampacity is anyway, now, does it? :-(

I'd also like to see standard consumer electronics products such as radios
and TV tell you something about their sensitivity, e.g., the input power
necessary to produce, say, 20dB SNR output. Alas, that's not going to
happen any time soon either.

Most folks don't realize that this is exactly what they're doing if
they buy a typical low-capacity "C" or "D" lamb-in-sheep's-clothing
NiCd.
Click to expand...
For a number of years Radio Shack had their 'standard' "C" and "D" NiCads,
that were something like 2.2 A*hr, and the 'high capacity' versions (that
had a significant price premium to them) that were 4 A*h. The later were
not some fancy, higher efficiency material, but -- as you've mentioned --
just making use of the entire volume of the cell.

It's ironic that there are now AA cells that are better than 2.2 A*hr! In
fact, as far as I can tell, the industry spends the most time trying to
improve the capacity of AA's vs. the other cells. Hmm... let's see... from
the data.energizer.com site again... mAh per mm^3 for Eveready alkalines:

AAA -- 0.309
AA -- 0.325
C -- 0.294
D -- 0.303

OK, not as much variation as I would have guessed, but AA is clearly on top.
(And C is on the bottom -- it seems as though C cells have been awfully
neglected in the industry! Although at some time there must have been a B
battery, and that's certainly not around at all anymore!)

Another interesting observation is that the Energizer 'e^2' batteries have
about 10-15% more energy in them than the regular Everyready Alakalines. In
my experience the price premiums for such batteries are _well_ above 10-15%!

Oh, and one final observation -- in the U.S. here, I'd wager that 90+% of
all AA/C/D batteries sold are alkalines (or 'fancier,' e.g., lithium). If
you go to a big store such as Target or Wal*Mart, there's a very small
selection of the old carbon zinc batteries, and the prices are not much
cheaper. On the other hand, at least in New Zealand -- where I've been long
enough to take notice of such things! -- it's almost reversed -- tons of
carbon zinc batteries, and just a small selection of alkalines with rather
large price premiums. Anyone want to wager a guess as to why this might be?

---Joel Kolstad
 
In article <bib6ud$pbn$1@news.oregonstate.edu>,
Joel Kolstad <JKolstad71HatesSpam@Yahoo.Com> wrote:

For a number of years Radio Shack had their 'standard' "C" and "D" NiCads,
that were something like 2.2 A*hr, and the 'high capacity' versions (that
had a significant price premium to them) that were 4 A*h. The later were
not some fancy, higher efficiency material, but -- as you've mentioned --
just making use of the entire volume of the cell.

It's ironic that there are now AA cells that are better than 2.2 A*hr!
Click to expand...
I think those are NiHM rather than NiCd? NiCd AA cells still seem to
be limited to 700 - 1300 mAh, while NiMH seem to range from 1700 to
2300.

A similar step-up in capacity exists for C and D cells - the better
NiCd ones seem to be up around 5 amp-hours, while NiMH are rated
anywhere from 7500 to 9000 (I don't know if the latter is actually a
rating which works out in practice, or a manufacturer's puffery).

--
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!
 
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote:
In article <bib6ud$pbn$1@news.oregonstate.edu>,
Joel Kolstad <JKolstad71HatesSpam@Yahoo.Com> wrote:
It's ironic that there are now AA cells that are better than 2.2 A*hr!

I think those are NiHM rather than NiCd?
Click to expand...
Ah yes, you're very much correct. Sorry for the misinformation.

---Joel
 
In article <bib6ud$pbn$1@news.oregonstate.edu>,
JKolstad71HatesSpam@Yahoo.Com mentioned...
Dave Platt <dplatt@radagast.org> wrote:
It's the usual sort of thing. They can advertise "C" and "D"
batteries at a substantially lower price than a vendor who carries
only the real-good-stuff sort. An amazingly large percentage of the
buying population makes their buying decisions based almost entirely
on the price ("Hey, it's a bargain") without bothering to read the
rest of the label and compare apples to apples.

Of course, in the case of batteries, it's not like the label tells you what
their ampacity is anyway, now, does it? :-(

I'd also like to see standard consumer electronics products such as radios
and TV tell you something about their sensitivity, e.g., the input power
necessary to produce, say, 20dB SNR output. Alas, that's not going to
happen any time soon either.

Most folks don't realize that this is exactly what they're doing if
they buy a typical low-capacity "C" or "D" lamb-in-sheep's-clothing
NiCd.

For a number of years Radio Shack had their 'standard' "C" and "D" NiCads,
that were something like 2.2 A*hr, and the 'high capacity' versions (that
had a significant price premium to them) that were 4 A*h. The later were
not some fancy, higher efficiency material, but -- as you've mentioned --
just making use of the entire volume of the cell.

It's ironic that there are now AA cells that are better than 2.2 A*hr! In
fact, as far as I can tell, the industry spends the most time trying to
improve the capacity of AA's vs. the other cells. Hmm... let's see... from
the data.energizer.com site again... mAh per mm^3 for Eveready alkalines:

AAA -- 0.309
AA -- 0.325
C -- 0.294
D -- 0.303

OK, not as much variation as I would have guessed, but AA is clearly on top.
(And C is on the bottom -- it seems as though C cells have been awfully
neglected in the industry! Although at some time there must have been a B
battery, and that's certainly not around at all anymore!)

Another interesting observation is that the Energizer 'e^2' batteries have
about 10-15% more energy in them than the regular Everyready Alakalines. In
my experience the price premiums for such batteries are _well_ above 10-15%!

Oh, and one final observation -- in the U.S. here, I'd wager that 90+% of
all AA/C/D batteries sold are alkalines (or 'fancier,' e.g., lithium). If
you go to a big store such as Target or Wal*Mart, there's a very small
selection of the old carbon zinc batteries, and the prices are not much
cheaper. On the other hand, at least in New Zealand -- where I've been long
enough to take notice of such things! -- it's almost reversed -- tons of
carbon zinc batteries, and just a small selection of alkalines with rather
large price premiums. Anyone want to wager a guess as to why this might be?
Click to expand...
Here in L.A. you walk into any 99 cent cut-rate store and you find
racks of carbon-zinc cells, mainly because they can't sell alkalines
at a profit for 99 cents(!)

But if your equipment used the carbon-zinc C cells, for instance, and
you put C to AA adapters in it and used the alkaline AAs, the capacity
would be almost the same as the old carbon-zinc cells. BTW, I think
you meant capacity, not ampacity.

One other observation. The "Two Buck Chuck" wine costs three bucks a
bottle on the east coast, probably because it costs more to ship it
there from Calif., where it's made. So I would venture to guess that
one of the reasons why more carbon-zinc cells are sold close to where
they are made (in China?) is because when the shipping costs are added
on, say to here in the U.S., the price diff is less, so there's less
profit in the cheaper cells. And then the alkalines are made in the
U.S., where raw mat'ls are cheap, so the overseas batteries are facing
some real competition.

As I mentioned earlier, the most demanding of the loads found on this
energizer website is the digital camera/flash, with a current drain of
an amp. So my guess is that people notice that their camera eats
batteries quickly, so people are forced into buying the higher
capacity AA cells, by necessity. But I don't think any of the
average photographers thinks about adding a fanny pack with a battery
pack in it, plugged into the power jack of their camera. Some high
capacity cells in the pack will make things much easier on the camera
buff.

---Joel Kolstad
Click to expand...

--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
In article <vkib015tv50490@corp.supernews.com>, Dave Platt wrote:
In article <bib6ud$pbn$1@news.oregonstate.edu>,
Joel Kolstad <JKolstad71HatesSpam@Yahoo.Com> wrote:

For a number of years Radio Shack had their 'standard' "C" and "D" NiCads,
that were something like 2.2 A*hr, and the 'high capacity' versions (that
had a significant price premium to them) that were 4 A*h. The later were
not some fancy, higher efficiency material, but -- as you've mentioned --
just making use of the entire volume of the cell.

It's ironic that there are now AA cells that are better than 2.2 A*hr!

I think those are NiHM rather than NiCd? NiCd AA cells still seem to
be limited to 700 - 1300 mAh, while NiMH seem to range from 1700 to
2300.
Click to expand...
I think those 2 or 2.2 AH NiCd cells are a size known as "sub-C".

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
 
In article <MPG.19b2770846dd190d989c43@news.inreach.net>,
Watson A.Name - 'Watt Sun' <alondra101@hotmail.com> wrote:
If I wanted to make some money selling something, I would send off to
China and get a hundred thousand plastic 'adapters' made, which would
be the size of a C or D cell and hold an AA cell inside of it. This
would allow anyone to use the cheaper Ni-MH AA cells instead. I've
never seen these on the store shelves, and it seems like a good idea.

Now that's a good idea! But take a look at this, seems that
someone else had the same idea:
http://shop.store.yahoo.com/greenbatteries-store/aatodbatad.html
It could be made a little better, with a larger negative pad on
the bottom. I didn't search for C adapters.

[snip]

Cool. Yeah, someone beat me to the punch. The one I had in mind
would look just like a C or D cell with a slot in the side, having the
guts of a regular AA battery holder, with spring, contact, etc. I
made some dummy AA batteries out of a 2 inch screw with a washer on
the negative end, some nylon washers as spacers, and 3 or 4 nuts to
hold everything in place. It was just a short from end to end, of
course. But it worked. This tin can shown in the URL is okay, but if
it's used in a flashlight and it's dropped or rolls off the table,
will the AA cells fall out of place inside the can?

Have you ever seen the spool that's left over after a cash register
runs out of paper? Looks about the right size for an adapter. Or a
piece of wood dowel cut off and hole drilled down the center. A
washer screwed to one end would make the negative contact. Or a 35 mm
plastic film canister, or a pill bottle.
Click to expand...
An AA is already the same length as a C, so all you need is something
to bulk up the diameter. Perhaps a section of plastic pipe with a piece
of foam pipe insulation inside it?

Check out ftp://ftp.eskimo.com/u/m/mzenier/batxtnd.jpg (128 kbytes)
I got tired of feeding AA cells into a walkman type cassette player and
came up with this. It has either a 4 cell AA holder, to get the last
hour out of those $0.17 korean batteries, or a dual D cell holder for
long duration. It turns out that 3/8 inch ID polyethelene tubing is
the same outer diameter as an AA cell. The + end is the sawed off head
of a brass flathead woodscrew, the - end a couple of #10 washers.

I'd hate to try to get it through airport security, though.

Mark Zenier mzenier@eskimo.com Washington State resident
 
Mark Zenier wrote:

[snip]

An AA is already the same length as a C, so all you need is something
to bulk up the diameter. Perhaps a section of plastic pipe with a piece
of foam pipe insulation inside it?
Click to expand...
According to the data sheets at http://data.energizer.com/ the AA is 5.5
mm shorter than a C cell. Click on data sheets and consumer.
 
In article <bim4dp$3tcie$1@hades.csu.net>,
Lizard Blizzard <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote:

Mark Zenier wrote:

[snip]

An AA is already the same length as a C, so all you need is something
to bulk up the diameter. Perhaps a section of plastic pipe with a piece
of foam pipe insulation inside it?

According to the data sheets at http://data.energizer.com/ the AA is 5.5
mm shorter than a C cell. Click on data sheets and consumer.
Click to expand...
Somebody needs to check and find out what the person(s) writing that
datasheet were smoking...

Regardless of what the 'sheet claims, I've got a AAA, a AA, a C, and a D
(All Duracells, if anybody cares) lined up right here in front of me. D
looks to be about 5 or 6mm taller than C, AA looks to be *MAYBE* 0.5mm
taller than C, and AAA looks like it's about 4-5mm shorter than either
the C or AA.

Dunno why, but when the documentation says something that contradicts
what I'm sitting here looking at "live and in person", my belief in the
documentation tends to go sailing out the window...

You sure the sheet you're reading isn't for AAA vs. C or AA vs. D?
Without breaking out a micrometer to get something more accurate than an
eyeball measurement, I'd say the either the C/AAA difference or the D/AA
difference would fit the 5.5mm height difference you're reporting, while
the C/AA comparison isn't even *SORTA* close to that much difference.

--
Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net <--- Preferred Email - unmunged, SpamAssassinated
Hate SPAM? See <http://www.spamassassin.org> for some seriously great info.
I will choose a path that's clear: I will choose Free Will! - N. Peart
Fly trap info pages: <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/Horses/FlyTrap/index.html>
 
On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:39:49 GMT, the renowned Don Bruder
<dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:

In article <bim4dp$3tcie$1@hades.csu.net>,
Lizard Blizzard <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote:

Mark Zenier wrote:

[snip]

An AA is already the same length as a C, so all you need is something
to bulk up the diameter. Perhaps a section of plastic pipe with a piece
of foam pipe insulation inside it?

According to the data sheets at http://data.energizer.com/ the AA is 5.5
mm shorter than a C cell. Click on data sheets and consumer.



Somebody needs to check and find out what the person(s) writing that
datasheet were smoking...
Click to expand...
http://www.panasonic.ca/English/batteries/industrialbatteries/alkaline_specs.asp

Dia mm/in
D 61.1/2.407
C 50.0/1.969
AA 50.50/1.988
AAA 44.50/1.752



Regardless of what the 'sheet claims, I've got a AAA, a AA, a C, and a D
(All Duracells, if anybody cares) lined up right here in front of me. D
looks to be about 5 or 6mm taller than C, AA looks to be *MAYBE* 0.5mm
taller than C, and AAA looks like it's about 4-5mm shorter than either
the C or AA.

Dunno why, but when the documentation says something that contradicts
what I'm sitting here looking at "live and in person", my belief in the
documentation tends to go sailing out the window...

You sure the sheet you're reading isn't for AAA vs. C or AA vs. D?
Without breaking out a micrometer to get something more accurate than an
eyeball measurement, I'd say the either the C/AAA difference or the D/AA
difference would fit the 5.5mm height difference you're reporting, while
the C/AA comparison isn't even *SORTA* close to that much difference.
Click to expand...
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
speff@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
 
In article <k9ctkvkga1dm7i3t8j0bq4thouljgahg2a@4ax.com>,
Spehro Pefhany <speff@interlog.com> wrote:

On Fri, 29 Aug 2003 00:39:49 GMT, the renowned Don Bruder
dakidd@sonic.net> wrote:

In article <bim4dp$3tcie$1@hades.csu.net>,
Lizard Blizzard <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote:

Mark Zenier wrote:

[snip]

An AA is already the same length as a C, so all you need is something
to bulk up the diameter. Perhaps a section of plastic pipe with a piece
of foam pipe insulation inside it?

According to the data sheets at http://data.energizer.com/ the AA is 5.5
mm shorter than a C cell. Click on data sheets and consumer.



Somebody needs to check and find out what the person(s) writing that
datasheet were smoking...

http://www.panasonic.ca/English/batteries/industrialbatteries/alkaline_specs.a
sp

Dia mm/in
D 61.1/2.407
C 50.0/1.969
AA 50.50/1.988
AAA 44.50/1.752




Regardless of what the 'sheet claims, I've got a AAA, a AA, a C, and a D
(All Duracells, if anybody cares) lined up right here in front of me. D
looks to be about 5 or 6mm taller than C, AA looks to be *MAYBE* 0.5mm
taller than C, and AAA looks like it's about 4-5mm shorter than either
the C or AA.

Dunno why, but when the documentation says something that contradicts
what I'm sitting here looking at "live and in person", my belief in the
documentation tends to go sailing out the window...

You sure the sheet you're reading isn't for AAA vs. C or AA vs. D?
Without breaking out a micrometer to get something more accurate than an
eyeball measurement, I'd say the either the C/AAA difference or the D/AA
difference would fit the 5.5mm height difference you're reporting, while
the C/AA comparison isn't even *SORTA* close to that much difference.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
Click to expand...
Ummm... This D battery I'm looking at isn't anywhere near 61mm = 6cm
(+/-) = ~2.5 inches in diameter. An inch, and maybe a quarter, but
there's no possible way to stretch what I'm seeing to get ~2.5 inches
out of it, no matter how "creative" you might be. The *LENGTH* is
reasonably close to that figure, but not the diameter.

Ditto the rest of that list - 44.5mm diameter for a AAA battery???
Ummm... I respectfully don't think so... Then again, I guess it's
possible that somebody redefined how big a millimeter is while I wasn't
paying attention... There's no way this AAA battery sitting here less
than a foot in front of me gets even sorta semi kinda almost close to
that size. It's a little bigger than a cigarette (which is about 8-ish
mm - at least, the one I'm smoking at the moment is), which is *WAY*
less than 4 centimeters in diameter! (44mm = 4.4cm = close enough to 2
inches for purposes of this discussion) A 50.5mm (5cm, +/-, or close
enough to 2.5 inches) diameter for a AA battery? Ummm... Something just
ain't "measuring up", if you'll pardon the pun.

Either I'm confused, somebody changed things *MAJORLY* while I wasn't
looking, or everybody's talking about completely different measurements
than everybody else...

--
Don Bruder - dakidd@sonic.net <--- Preferred Email - unmunged, SpamAssassinated
Hate SPAM? See <http://www.spamassassin.org> for some seriously great info.
I will choose a path that's clear: I will choose Free Will! - N. Peart
Fly trap info pages: <http://www.sonic.net/~dakidd/Horses/FlyTrap/index.html>
 
Somebody needs to check and find out what the person(s) writing that
datasheet were smoking...

http://www.panasonic.ca/English/batteries/industrialbatteries/alkaline_specs.a
sp

Dia mm/in
D 61.1/2.407
C 50.0/1.969
AA 50.50/1.988
AAA 44.50/1.752

The above are heights, diameters are
Click to expand...

33.3/1.312
25.5/1.004
14.50/0.571
10.49/0.413

(from the same(?) table)

--
John W Hall <wweexxsseessssaa@telus.net>
Cochrane, Alberta, Canada.
"Helping People Prosper in the Information Age"
 
In article <phx3b.16323$dk4.536446@typhoon.sonic.net>,
dakidd@sonic.net mentioned...
In article <bim4dp$3tcie$1@hades.csu.net>,
Lizard Blizzard <NOSPAM@rsccd.org> wrote:

Mark Zenier wrote:

[snip]

An AA is already the same length as a C, so all you need is something
to bulk up the diameter. Perhaps a section of plastic pipe with a piece
of foam pipe insulation inside it?

According to the data sheets at http://data.energizer.com/ the AA is 5.5
mm shorter than a C cell. Click on data sheets and consumer.



Somebody needs to check and find out what the person(s) writing that
datasheet were smoking...

Regardless of what the 'sheet claims, I've got a AAA, a AA, a C, and a D
(All Duracells, if anybody cares) lined up right here in front of me. D
looks to be about 5 or 6mm taller than C, AA looks to be *MAYBE* 0.5mm
taller than C, and AAA looks like it's about 4-5mm shorter than either
the C or AA.

Dunno why, but when the documentation says something that contradicts
what I'm sitting here looking at "live and in person", my belief in the
documentation tends to go sailing out the window...

You sure the sheet you're reading isn't for AAA vs. C or AA vs. D?
Without breaking out a micrometer to get something more accurate than an
eyeball measurement, I'd say the either the C/AAA difference or the D/AA
difference would fit the 5.5mm height difference you're reporting, while
the C/AA comparison isn't even *SORTA* close to that much difference.
Click to expand...
The difference between AAA and C is 5.5 mm, according to the URL. And
the difference between AA and C is .5 mm. So a sleeve with open ends
will work. However there might be a problem with the smaller contact
button.



--
@@F@r@o@m@@O@r@a@n@g@e@@C@o@u@n@t@y@,@@C@a@l@,@@w@h@e@r@e@@
###Got a Question about ELECTRONICS? Check HERE First:###
http://users.pandora.be/educypedia/electronics/databank.htm
My email address is whitelisted. *All* email sent to it
goes directly to the trash unless you add NOSPAM in the
Subject: line with other stuff. alondra101 <at> hotmail.com
Don't be ripped off by the big book dealers. Go to the URL
that will give you a choice and save you money(up to half).
http://www.everybookstore.com You'll be glad you did!
Just when you thought you had all this figured out, the gov't
changed it: http://physics.nist.gov/cuu/Units/binary.html
@@t@h@e@@a@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@m@e@e@t@@t@h@e@@E@f@f@l@u@e@n@t@@
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top