----- Original Message -----
From: "Tim Hughes" <timhughes@xxxxxxxx>
To: <olympus@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, September 18, 2005 5:28 PM
Subject: [OM] Re: E10 quirks--just me?
> In a previous post I calculated the Energy capacity of Li-ion CRV-3's, and
> said it was modestly more than the NiMh's. I had assumed they were
> conventional Li-ion cells with a Li-cobalt cathode, I was wrong , they
> appear to be Li-phosphate cells. The conventional Li-Co cells have a
> nominal voltage of about 4.1V. In fact the CRV-3 rechargeable is a
> replacement for a 3V primary cell, so it uses a different cathode to
> produce a lower nominal voltage (around 3.25V). This results in a
> significantly lower energy.
> On the face of it they will have a lower capacity/lower run times than the
> high capacity NiMh cells. (as pointed out by CH). As I pointed out
> previously though, users report much better results from these CRV-3
> rechargeables than from Nimh.
>
> In general the lower voltage (~3.2V) Li-ion rechargeable batteries using
> phosphate cathode materials, are not common (except maybe CR3V's ??) and
> are not popular because the energy density is much lower than the the
> ~4.1v cells. However, they have some desireable characteristics which may
> help in this case: They can generally deliver much higher peak currents
> and have better cycle life. The high peak current and flat discharge
> curve may help in this case to increase run time.
>
> Regards,
> Tim Hughes
>
>
>
> ==============================================
> List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
> List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
> ==============================================
>
>
==============================================
List usage info: http://www.zuikoholic.com
List nannies: olympusadmin@xxxxxxxxxx
==============================================
|