In news:4aefeba0$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net,
M.I.5¾ typed on Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:37:22 -0000:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
> news:hcngj2$i5f$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> Maybe this URL may help. It seems accurate as far as I can tell.
>>
>> http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm
>>
>> Which says that lithium batteries will last longer if they are
>> operated between 15°C (59°F) to 50°C (122°F). And by 70ºC (158°F)
>> the threat is really from thermal runaway. Poof!
>
> 50°C???!!!?? That will kill a Lithiom ion in no time at all.
It seems too high to me too. But I don't have any hard evidence that
they are incorrect. I am currently testing one battery sitting at 95°F
(35°C) and floated at 4.2v per cell. IMHO 4.2v is too high (but 4.10v is
fine), but you say it is okay. And I am not sure about 95°F, but I am
hoping this isn't warm enough to do any real harm.
--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2
"BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
news:hcptll$f7j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
> In news:4aefeba0$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net,
> M.I.5¾ typed on Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:37:22 -0000:
>> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
>> news:hcngj2$i5f$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>> Maybe this URL may help. It seems accurate as far as I can tell.
>>>
>>> http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm
>>>
>>> Which says that lithium batteries will last longer if they are
>>> operated between 15°C (59°F) to 50°C (122°F). And by 70ºC (158°F)
>>> the threat is really from thermal runaway. Poof!
>>
>> 50°C???!!!?? That will kill a Lithiom ion in no time at all.
>
> It seems too high to me too. But I don't have any hard evidence that they
> are incorrect. I am currently testing one battery sitting at 95°F (35°C)
> and floated at 4.2v per cell. IMHO 4.2v is too high (but 4.10v is fine),
> but you say it is okay. And I am not sure about 95°F, but I am hoping this
> isn't warm enough to do any real harm.
>
Laptops don't heat batteries by anywhere near this much and they kill them
inside a year.
In news:4af1594c$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net,
M.I.5¾ typed on Wed, 4 Nov 2009 10:37:37 -0000:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
> news:hcptll$f7j$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>> In news:4aefeba0$1_1@glkas0286.greenlnk.net,
>> M.I.5¾ typed on Tue, 3 Nov 2009 08:37:22 -0000:
>>> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote in message
>>> news:hcngj2$i5f$1@news.eternal-september.org...
>>>> Maybe this URL may help. It seems accurate as far as I can tell.
>>>>
>>>> http://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm
>>>>
>>>> Which says that lithium batteries will last longer if they are
>>>> operated between 15°C (59°F) to 50°C (122°F). And by 70ºC (158°F)
>>>> the threat is really from thermal runaway. Poof!
>>>
>>> 50°C???!!!?? That will kill a Lithiom ion in no time at all.
>>
>> It seems too high to me too. But I don't have any hard evidence that
>> they are incorrect. I am currently testing one battery sitting at
>> 95°F (35°C) and floated at 4.2v per cell. IMHO 4.2v is too high (but
>> 4.10v is fine), but you say it is okay. And I am not sure about
>> 95°F, but I am hoping this isn't warm enough to do any real harm.
>
> Laptops don't heat batteries by anywhere near this much and they kill
> them inside a year.
Are you sure? As plastic feels so much cooler than say metal. My Asus
EeePC netbooks gets 110°F top and bottom. Although the battery is much
cooler. AJL calls his hot, while I call this lukewarm. And this is much
cooler than my laptops. My Toshiba 2595XDVD ('99 era) laptops for
example, are really hot. I should check them with my IR temperature gun.
They have to be in 130°F range on the bottom at least. And the batteries
has to be very close to this.
--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2
>My Asus EeePC netbooks gets 110°F top and bottom. Although the battery is much
>cooler. AJL calls his hot, while I call this lukewarm.
I didn't call your Eee PC netbook hot, I called my Eee PC netbook hot,
specifically my 2G Surf model (7" screen, 520M memory, 2G SSD). To the
touch it runs very hot. Course at only 2 pounds I usually hold it like
a newspaper to read it so perhaps it gets touched more. It has never
had a problem during operation so I'm guessing that it is just the
nature of the beast. While your netbooks look like this model there
are several differences and heat is apparently one of them.
Contrary to what you would think my more powerful netbook the Eee PC
1000HD (10" screen, 1G memory, 160G HDD) runs much cooler than the
little Surf and gets almost twice the battery time (same capacity
battery). So in later designs (and more expensive models) the design
has improved...
In news:h8t3f5p7ar61k99nrla7l5dbulj06k3pou@4ax.com,
AJL typed on Wed, 04 Nov 2009 15:34:22 -0700:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>> My Asus EeePC netbooks gets 110°F top and bottom. Although the
>> battery is much cooler. AJL calls his hot, while I call this
>> lukewarm.
>
> I didn't call your Eee PC netbook hot, I called my Eee PC netbook hot,
> specifically my 2G Surf model (7" screen, 520M memory, 2G SSD). To the
> touch it runs very hot. Course at only 2 pounds I usually hold it like
> a newspaper to read it so perhaps it gets touched more. It has never
> had a problem during operation so I'm guessing that it is just the
> nature of the beast. While your netbooks look like this model there
> are several differences and heat is apparently one of them.
>
> Contrary to what you would think my more powerful netbook the Eee PC
> 1000HD (10" screen, 1G memory, 160G HDD) runs much cooler than the
> little Surf and gets almost twice the battery time (same capacity
> battery). So in later designs (and more expensive models) the design
> has improved...
It is ashamed you don't have anything to measure the temperature with.
As I really believe we have different opinions on what we call hot. Most
of the keyboard and the bottom of mine runs about 102°F. Although by the
right ALT key gets 110°F and one spot on the bottom also gets 110°F
(where the WiFi card sits). It is 75°F in this room and if left in
standby, runs about 85°F top and bottom. While the battery capacity
rating between your two, the 1000HD has a higher rated battery voltage,
right?
--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2 (quit Windows updates back in May 2009)
In news:9934f5d70ad51k9v2cerj7a6lc5i1h4g1t@4ax.com,
AJL typed on Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:26:06 -0700:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>> My Asus EeePC netbooks gets 110°F top and bottom.
>
> I just noticed this *Cool* article...
>
> http://www.reghardware.co.uk/2009/11...us_thermal_pc/
Oh I like that! ;-)
--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 701G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Windows XP SP2 (quit Windows updates back in May 2009)
>It is ashamed you don't have anything to measure the temperature with.
Yes, I wish I had a way to accurately measure the surface temperature
so we could compare. I probably need one of those surface
thermometers. Maybe I could sneak the Surf into Home Depot and use the
demo??
>As I really believe we have different opinions on what we call hot.
That could very well be. Here in Phoenix we often are over 110 degrees
in the summer and yes I do call that hot...
>While the battery capacity rating between your two, the 1000HD
>has a higher rated battery voltage, right?
Both batteries are 7.4V (4400 mAh). In fact their outside dimensions,
including the curves, are identical. Course Asus put a different
connector in each so I can't interchange them...
Re: "I wish I had a way to accurately measure the surface temperature"
What would you do if you thought you had the flu? My guess is that you
do have a temperature measuring device.
AJL wrote:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>> It is ashamed you don't have anything to measure the temperature with.
>
> Yes, I wish I had a way to accurately measure the surface temperature
> so we could compare. I probably need one of those surface
> thermometers. Maybe I could sneak the Surf into Home Depot and use the
> demo??
>
>> As I really believe we have different opinions on what we call hot.
>
> That could very well be. Here in Phoenix we often are over 110 degrees
> in the summer and yes I do call that hot...
>
>> While the battery capacity rating between your two, the 1000HD
>> has a higher rated battery voltage, right?
>
> Both batteries are 7.4V (4400 mAh). In fact their outside dimensions,
> including the curves, are identical. Course Asus put a different
> connector in each so I can't interchange them...
AJL wrote on Wed, 04 Nov 2009 16:52:53 -0700:
> "BillW50" <BillW50@aol.kom> wrote:
>
>> It is ashamed you don't have anything to measure the temperature with.
>
> Yes, I wish I had a way to accurately measure the surface temperature
> so we could compare. I probably need one of those surface
> thermometers. Maybe I could sneak the Surf into Home Depot and use the
> demo??
>
>> As I really believe we have different opinions on what we call hot.
>
> That could very well be. Here in Phoenix we often are over 110 degrees
> in the summer and yes I do call that hot...
>
>> While the battery capacity rating between your two, the 1000HD
>> has a higher rated battery voltage, right?
>
> Both batteries are 7.4V (4400 mAh). In fact their outside dimensions,
> including the curves, are identical. Course Asus put a different
> connector in each so I can't interchange them...
I have been checking the temperatures of both Asus and my Toshiba
2595XDVD laptops. Those Toshiba laptops I always thought of being hot.
Although they only read 110F at a few spots. Only when the fan kicks on
high, I can read 130F coming out of the fan. The Asus netbooks, the
highest I read is 110F. And not much difference if I am running Linux or
Windows XP. So maybe the Asus 700/701/702 *does* run hot. ;-)
--
Bill
Asus EEE PC 702G4 ~ 2GB RAM ~ 16GB-SDHC
Xandros Linux (build 2007-10-19 13:03)
Re: Battery recalibrate ideas 
Linear Mode
