 |
Matronics Email Lists
Web Forum Interface to the Matronics Email Lists
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest
|
 Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2008 7:13 am Post subject: CBA-II Battery Tester modifications/improvements? |
 |
|
| Quote: |
I think that's an idea worth exploring!
I've developed a 500W (400W continuous) electronic load that can be
used to extend the capabilities of any analyzer or discharger
(http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=938266) but there's
a real need for "host" software and a load in the power range of the
CBA, perhaps 100W-200W. This would be perfect for most DIY'ers and
could easily be paralleled for higher power handling.
The software would have to be very graphics-capable as the plotting
and graphing features would be extremely important. I'd love to see
it not require a huge installation just to run. But, the options
may be limited.
|
I'm not so sure about the graphics. Yes, they do make for an
effective display of data . . . and comparison of similar
batteries . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/AA_Bat_Test.pdf
The data for this article was taken with a one-sample-per-second
data acquisition module that produces columnar data easily
imported into graphics applications like autocad and excel.
For the purpose of writing articles, the graphics offered by
WestMountainRadio are pretty . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/9vBatteryTests.jpg
but from an engineering perspective, a numerical value for
energy delivered under the prescribed test conditions is
quite sufficient. The results of dynamic tests for evaluating
battery source impedance could be offered out as numerical
values.
I did a flight test program for Raytheon a few years
back where the Weeder Technology modules proved quite
useful.
http://www.weedtech.com/
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Test_Equipment/Data_Acquisition/Weedtech_DAS_2.jpg
As a first pass for crafting a more robust version of
the CBA-II, a Weeder analog input module for $69 and
an analog output module for $99 would offer 95% of
the hardware to implement the task. Very simple programs
in any language of choice could be crafted to orchestrate
the testing, gathering of data values and presentation
of end-point results with no graphics capabilities
at all.
One could also store individual data points on the
hard drive in a format easily imported to Excel.
| Quote: | The CBA software has a nice light footprint though. An executable,
help file, settings file, three DLLs for USB comms and forms
handling. It may have some registry keys or other files in public
directories but it doesn't seem to require the NET
framework. MileHighWings' eFlightWatt logger had a single
executable file that did everything, no installation
needed. Something like this for an open source tester would be terrific.
|
Sure. And I wouldn't discourage any interested parties
from turning their vision into really nifty applications
by exercising their programming skills. From the hands-on
engineering perspective, my personal needs for battery
testing can be easily addressed with more rudimentary
software.
In fact, I still keep 20 year old copies of
Turbo-Basic that outputs compiled .exe files
for talking/listening to the Weeder modules.
I have a supply of these guys on the shelf from
various programs over the years. They still
offer the hammer-n-nails approach to crafting
a quick and useful test-setup.
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
CamLight
Joined: 19 Dec 2008
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 28, 2008 11:28 pm Post subject: Re: CBA-II Battery Tester modifications/improvements? |
|
|
| nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: | I'm not so sure about the graphics. Yes, they do make for an
effective display of data . . . and comparison of similar
batteries . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/AA_Bat_Test.pdf
The data for this article was taken with a one-sample-per-second
data acquisition module that produces columnar data easily
imported into graphics applications like autocad and excel.
For the purpose of writing articles, the graphics offered by
WestMountainRadio are pretty . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/9vBatteryTests.jpg
but from an engineering perspective, a numerical value for
energy delivered under the prescribed test conditions is
quite sufficient. The results of dynamic tests for evaluating
battery source impedance could be offered out as numerical
values. |
As someone involved heavily in engineering, I agree.
But you'll find a lot of very strong opposition to devices that only output numerical values for later importing and graphing or for use in creating a table. These all take extra work to do and is considered a total PITA by those who don't revel in the numbers the way we do.
In my opinion, the success of the CBA is in its software (and its price, of course). It allows for very, very easy and no-work testing and comparison of different cells. There are other devices out there that allow for exporting to Excel or other saving of data, but they aren't nearly as popular.
As a first step, just storing the data for import into Excel is OK. Even for taking and creating tables with. But, it would be nice to see a growth path possible for the software to include on-screen graphing/plotting. There are many constant-current load circuits out there but they're not being built and used by very many people, I think the right software is what would make the difference.
| nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: |
I did a flight test program for Raytheon a few years
back where the Weeder Technology modules proved quite
useful.
http://www.weedtech.com/
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Test_Equipment/Data_Acquisition/Weedtech_DAS_2.jpg
As a first pass for crafting a more robust version of
the CBA-II, a Weeder analog input module for $69 and
an analog output module for $99 would offer 95% of
the hardware to implement the task. Very simple programs
in any language of choice could be crafted to orchestrate
the testing, gathering of data values and presentation
of end-point results with no graphics capabilities
at all.
One could also store individual data points on the
hard drive in a format easily imported to Excel.
|
Those are nice units!
I've been using the USB-6008 DAQ unit from National Instruments (http://sine.ni.com/nips/cds/view/p/lang/en/nid/14604) for various projects, which is competitively priced. It includes driver and basic logging software too. I'd have to check closer to make sure it can support what the project might need but it's worth checking out IMHO.
Another option is one you alluded to earlier, a PIC. That would result in a very small and inexpensive unit to control the load with and acquire and upload the data from. Someone would have to develop and test the firmware though.
There's still a decent amount of hardware left to work out though...PCB design and selection of the MOSFETs, op-amps, resistor/capacitors, voltage regulators, microprocessor, connectors, heat sink, fan, etc., for the load itself.
| nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: |
Sure. And I wouldn't discourage any interested parties
from turning their vision into really nifty applications
by exercising their programming skills. From the hands-on
engineering perspective, my personal needs for battery
testing can be easily addressed with more rudimentary
software.
In fact, I still keep 20 year old copies of
Turbo-Basic that outputs compiled .exe files
for talking/listening to the Weeder modules.
I have a supply of these guys on the shelf from
various programs over the years. They still
offer the hammer-n-nails approach to crafting
a quick and useful test-setup.
Bob . . . |
I remember Turbo-Basic. You're right, a very useful software package! 
I think you bring up a very good point. There will be two groups of users for this load. The ones who just need the raw data outputted in the simplest way possible and those who want it displayed in graphical form to allow for the quickest way to see what they need to see.
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
John M.
Owner
CamLight Systems |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 5:41 am Post subject: CBA-II Battery Tester modifications/improvements? |
|
|
| Quote: | > but from an engineering perspective, a numerical value for
> energy delivered under the prescribed test conditions is
> quite sufficient. The results of dynamic tests for evaluating
> battery source impedance could be offered out as numerical
> values.
As someone involved heavily in engineering, I agree.
But you'll find a lot of very strong opposition to devices that only
output numerical values for later importing and graphing or for use
in creating a table. These all take extra work to do and is
considered a total PITA by those who don't revel in the numbers the way we do.
In my opinion, the success of the CBA is in its software (and its
price, of course). It allows for very, very easy and no-work
testing and comparison of different cells. There are other devices
out there that allow for exporting to Excel or other saving of data,
but they aren't nearly as popular.
As a first step, just storing the data for import into Excel is
OK. Even for taking and creating tables with. But, it would be
nice to see a growth path possible for the software to include
on-screen graphing/plotting. There are many constant-current load
circuits out there but they're not being built and used by very many
people, I think the right software is what would make the difference.
|
I bought the devices when they offered a high
return on investment for answering some questions
about battery performance between brands and
battery condition for insuring performance in a
$high$ instrumentation job. Looking at all the
data files in my CBA output folder I see that I've
conducted perhaps 100 battery cap-checks on various
devices.
Even when I was doing cross brand comparisons,
graphical display of data was useful only for helping
my readers understand . . . it was of no value in
deducing the results of the tests, i.e. total energy
delivered under a particular test condition.
I guess I'm not clear as to your design and market
goals. If it's your desire to fabricate large
quantities of a product to compete with the CBA-II
then "window dressing" will be important. If you're
goal is to offer a sort of DIY work-around for
the CBA-II's shortcomings to be shared with some
cognizant individuals, then the super-graphics
features become problematic for return on investment.
<snip>
| Quote: | Another option is one you alluded to earlier, a PIC. That would
result in a very small and inexpensive unit to control the load with
and acquire and upload the data from. Someone would have to develop
and test the firmware though.
There's still a decent amount of hardware left to work out
though...PCB design and selection of the MOSFETs, op-amps,
resistor/capacitors, voltage regulators, microprocessor, connectors,
heat sink, fan, etc., for the load itself.
|
Yes . . . if you're looking to optimize a
product and marketing effort. I would estimate
30-40 hrs to work up a documentation package
for hardware. Firmware in the PIC would take
10-20 hrs. The PC based application could take
as long or longer than the hardware and firmware
combined. So if your goals are to compete with
the CBA-II in their sandbox, you're looking at
a development program with a market value on
the order of $10K before you manufacture and
sell a single device.
| Quote: | I think you bring up a very good point. There will be two groups of
users for this load. The ones who just need the raw data outputted
in the simplest way possible and those who want it displayed in
graphical form to allow for the quickest way to see what they need to see.
|
I'm not sure what a graph tells me that a number
in an output box doesn't tell me. In fact, the way
the early CBA-II software outputs graphics, one has
to get out a pencil and straight edge to drop the cut-off
crossing to the baseline and then visually do a
linear interpolation to arrive at a number. The
upscale version of the software give you the "box
score" and the graph . . . what does the graph tell
anyone that the box score does not?
My disappointments with the CBA-II application is that
it offers only constant-current discharge testing
which doesn't emulate very many real life situations.
After all the work has been done to achieve their
present software package, it's a relatively simple
addition to offer constant-resistance and constant-
power discharge protocols with some dynamic internal
impedance measurements thrown in for "frosting on
the cake". Of course there's still the issue of
marginal thermal performance and selection of load
devices.
No doubt West Mountain Radio has made a significant
market penetration and their product offers a lot
of bang for the buck. I own two of them! If you're
considering development of a competing product, will
the features you and I find useful convince future
buyers of battery analyzers to pay more dollars for
the offerings of the new kid on the block? More
importantly, do potential sales for the super-whizzy
product bode well for return on investment?
Bob . . .
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CamLight
Joined: 19 Dec 2008
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 29, 2008 1:44 pm Post subject: Re: CBA-II Battery Tester modifications/improvements? |
|
|
| nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: | I bought the devices when they offered a high
return on investment for answering some questions
about battery performance between brands and
battery condition for insuring performance in a
$high$ instrumentation job. Looking at all the
data files in my CBA output folder I see that I've
conducted perhaps 100 battery cap-checks on various
devices.
Even when I was doing cross brand comparisons,
graphical display of data was useful only for helping
my readers understand . . . it was of no value in
deducing the results of the tests, i.e. total energy
delivered under a particular test condition.
I guess I'm not clear as to your design and market
goals. If it's your desire to fabricate large
quantities of a product to compete with the CBA-II
then "window dressing" will be important. If you're
goal is to offer a sort of DIY work-around for
the CBA-II's shortcomings to be shared with some
cognizant individuals, then the super-graphics
features become problematic for return on investment.
|
You mention it three times in your post so I want to be clear, I'm not interested in designing a product to compete with the CBA. I create high-power loads for dischargers/cyclers/analyzers/testers. I don't want the ultra price-sensitive "low" end of the market. But, if this project moved forward, I would offer to lay out a PCB that others could use for building the load. If enough people were interested, I'd have a batch of boards run and offer them at my cost. Each person involved would contribute to the project where they can, and for me, it's the hardware.
I'm just bringing up other thoughts about the possible feature set for a very good DIY project. You want just raw data and feel it offers the most and that graphics offer little, if nothing, compared to box-scored raw data. But many users of battery analyzers disagree. I have to keep going back to the CBA and its popularity. A lot of people don't care what the actual number is. They can look at a graph of a test involving several cells or packs and see instantly which lasted the longest, or had the highest voltage-under-load, for that test. Whether the "best-performing" battery had a capacity of 10.02Ah or 10.10Ah, they wouldn't care. Which battery that they can afford (or physically fit, etc,) came out on "top". No need to check or compare actual numbers.
But, we should definitely have just a raw data-capture and store program. In fact, it should be the first thing developed as it's the easiest to do. But I feel strongly that we shouldn't design out the ability of someone to do a more graphics-oriented package. It makes the project more desirable for more people and that's important to help draw other designers and developers to the project. This results in better, less expensive designs for those who want to DIY the hardware, and easier to use and fuller-featured software. Hopefully not with useless bloat but with great stuff like various discharge modes, IR measurement, etc.
Never at the expense of a really good, very basic, data capture hardware design and software program. Just as other options for an open-source project that should encourage anyone to contribute to. Whether we'd ever use that hardware or software or not.
| nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: |
Yes . . . if you're looking to optimize a
product and marketing effort. I would estimate
30-40 hrs to work up a documentation package
for hardware. Firmware in the PIC would take
10-20 hrs. The PC based application could take
as long or longer than the hardware and firmware
combined. So if your goals are to compete with
the CBA-II in their sandbox, you're looking at
a development program with a market value on
the order of $10K before you manufacture and
sell a single device.
|
No marketing effort, no product development. This is an open-source DIY project. You mentioned the use of a PIC earlier and I was alluding to that. If that's no longer an idea you're interested in seeing possibly be used for this DIY project, then the Weeder modules (or other equivalent) are a quicker way to get going. You also mentioned a friend who might possibly, maybe, be interested in taking on the PC software development. No $10K to develop something great that everyone could use.
As a open-source project, anyone who wants to contribute, can. Whether its integrating existing I/O boards, creating an integrated PIC board, writing data storage PC software or creating a full-blown graphics package (which will certainly do the raw data storage), I think there's room for someone who wants to do any of the above. We'd all just use the software/hardware that best matched our needs and wants.
| nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelect wrote: |
I'm not sure what a graph tells me that a number
in an output box doesn't tell me. In fact, the way
the early CBA-II software outputs graphics, one has
to get out a pencil and straight edge to drop the cut-off
crossing to the baseline and then visually do a
linear interpolation to arrive at a number. The
upscale version of the software give you the "box
score" and the graph . . . what does the graph tell
anyone that the box score does not?
My disappointments with the CBA-II application is that
it offers only constant-current discharge testing
which doesn't emulate very many real life situations.
After all the work has been done to achieve their
present software package, it's a relatively simple
addition to offer constant-resistance and constant-
power discharge protocols with some dynamic internal
impedance measurements thrown in for "frosting on
the cake". Of course there's still the issue of
marginal thermal performance and selection of load
devices.
No doubt West Mountain Radio has made a significant
market penetration and their product offers a lot
of bang for the buck. I own two of them! If you're
considering development of a competing product, will
the features you and I find useful convince future
buyers of battery analyzers to pay more dollars for
the offerings of the new kid on the block? More
importantly, do potential sales for the super-whizzy
product bode well for return on investment?
Bob . . . |
A graph doesn't tell you anything a number doesn't. But, the right graph can make understanding various numbers, groups of numbers, and their relationships, easier to understand. Edward Tufte's books so wonderfully illustrate that.
What's great about this project is that everyone can get exactly what they want. One person can create a bare-bones, tiny-footprint, data uploading and storage program. Another person can create a graphics-analysis package to show tons of data in easy to read graphs. One person could develop hardware that integrated existing products, another could create a custom PIC board.
I think a really important part of al of this would be to create a set of standards for comms between the PC software and the boards, and for a data storage format. This would allow for easy "black-box" development of both the hardware and the software. Either could have any set of features but all would be compatible with each other.
I agree with you on the lack of discharge profiles for the CBA. They do have a constant-power discharge option in the Pro software now though. It would be nice to see constant-current, constant-power, and constant-resistance "modes" in the open-source hardware/software. Also nice would be allowing the user to be able to create or select a "profile" for discharging. Whether it's just a burst of current for a while every minute, or a complex profile to recreate a "real world" usage scenario, I think it would offer a lot.
And the IR measurements feature is a great idea. There are so many "standards" and methods for measuring IR that it would be great to see the hardware/software eventually support a user-created IR test (timing, current, etc.).
We're starting to get into the meat of this...good stuff.
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
John M.
Owner
CamLight Systems |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Sam
Joined: 18 May 2008
Posts: 135
|
| Posted: Wed Dec 31, 2008 2:52 pm Post subject: CBA-II Battery Tester modifications/improvements? |
|
|
So, bringing this down to earth for the rest of us...
If I want to do annual capacity checking of my $25 ah battery$, in an aircraft that requires 15-20 amps to stay afloat, will the CBA II give me the information I need? Say, if I run it at 65W to save the device?
Or would it be better to find an analyzer that ran at 200+ watts?
BTW, Happy New Year!
Sam Hoskins
www.samhoskins.blogspot.com
On Sun, Dec 28, 2008 at 9:11 AM, Robert L. Nuckolls, III <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)> wrote:
[quote]--> AeroElectric-List message posted by: "Robert L. Nuckolls, III" <nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com (nuckolls.bob(at)aeroelectric.com)>
| Quote: |
I think that's an idea worth exploring!
I've developed a 500W (400W continuous) electronic load that can be used to extend the capabilities of any analyzer or discharger (http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=938266) but there's a real need for "host" software and a load in the power range of the CBA, perhaps 100W-200W. This would be perfect for most DIY'ers and could easily be paralleled for higher power handling.
The software would have to be very graphics-capable as the plotting and graphing features would be extremely important. I'd love to see it not require a huge installation just to run. But, the options may be limited.
|
I'm not so sure about the graphics. Yes, they do make for an
effective display of data . . . and comparison of similar
batteries . . .
http://aeroelectric.com/articles/AA_Bat_Test.pdf
The data for this article was taken with a one-sample-per-second
data acquisition module that produces columnar data easily
imported into graphics applications like autocad and excel.
For the purpose of writing articles, the graphics offered by
WestMountainRadio are pretty . . .
http://www.aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Curves/9vBatteryTests.jpg
but from an engineering perspective, a numerical value for
energy delivered under the prescribed test conditions is
quite sufficient. The results of dynamic tests for evaluating
battery source impedance could be offered out as numerical
values.
I did a flight test program for Raytheon a few years
back where the Weeder Technology modules proved quite
useful.
http://www.weedtech.com/
http://aeroelectric.com/Pictures/Tools/Test_Equipment/Data_Acquisition/Weedtech_DAS_2.jpg
As a first pass for crafting a more robust version of
the CBA-II, a Weeder analog input module for $69 and
an analog output module for $99 would offer 95% of
the hardware to implement the task. Very simple programs
in any language of choice could be crafted to orchestrate
the testing, gathering of data values and presentation
of end-point results with no graphics capabilities
at all.
One could also store individual data points on the
hard drive in a format easily imported to Excel.
| Quote: | The CBA software has a nice light footprint though. An executable, help file, settings file, three DLLs for USB comms and forms handling. It may have some registry keys or other files in public directories but it doesn't seem to require the NET framework. MileHighWings' eFlightWatt logger had a single executable file that did everything, no installation needed. Something like this for an open source tester would be terrific.
|
Sure. And I wouldn't discourage any interested parties
from turning their vision into really nifty applications
by exercising their programming skills. From the hands-on
engineering perspective, my personal needs for battery
testing can be easily addressed with more rudimentary
software.
In fact, I still keep 20 year old copies of
Turbo-Basic that outputs compiled .exe files
for talking/listening to the Weeder modules.
I have a supply of these guys on the shelf from
various programs over the years. They still
offer the hammer-n-nails approach to crafting
a quick and useful test-setup.
Bob . . .
[b]
| | - The Matronics AeroElectric-List Email Forum - | | | Use the List Feature Navigator to browse the many List utilities available such as the Email Subscriptions page, Archive Search & Download, 7-Day Browse, Chat, FAQ, Photoshare, and much more:
http://www.matronics.com/Navigator?AeroElectric-List |
|
_________________
Sam Hoskins
www.samhoskins.blogspot.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
Get Email Distribution Too!
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
