Tempest / BatterySpec AGM batteries?

No experience, but I can offer a clue. The quality of the battery is often proportional to the amount of lead inside. Look at the net weight of the battery for a rough idea. The above kit of two 12V 18A batteries is 12 lbs each. For example, the "plus" version of the same batteries, from the same vendor:

is 13 lbs per battery.

Same from other vendors:

12.6 lbs

rest assured that's some no-name chinese battery and quality wasn't a design concern, at all.

Stick with panasonic or yuasa if you care about quality. Some of those are from china now, but are less bogus than the rest of the stuff out there.

A statement full of prejudice and innuendo.

Facts?

are

It's certainly full of prejudice, but that's our stock in trade around here. If you work in electronics for a couple of decades you build up useful prejudices without explicitly knowing what they are based on. It's unscientific, but science is a tolerably expensive way of building up a body clearly connected facts, while prejudice is cheaper and less reliable, but a great deal better than nothing, particularly when science hasn't got around to quantify what you need to know.

As for innuendo

there's nothing indirect about opinion being presented - its a plain statement of opinion, without any obvious hidden agenda.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Tell us why a company would go through the huge, multi-million dollar expense to put cell manufacturing machinery in a building and make batteries that will not compete with any others and will not perform and will not have "quality" in mind.

You do know that most of those companies are really contract manufacturers of a design that was made by the bigger boys, right?

I mean entire processes are bought and sold in that industry and they ARE viable, or they would not get manufactured... or bought and sold both in the design phase through manufacturing and all the way up though sales as well.

Essentially, he was right, and you are an ass with little or no intelligence on the subject.

So, the question is, what is your agenda?

You do this stupid exercise quite often. You know, "prejudices without explicitly knowing what is going on..." describes you to a "T".

Electronics is a quite explicit science.

You are explicitly NOT a scientist.

se are

ere.

It happens all the time. The executives involved don't know what they are dong, or they have been bribed, or the production people are a bunch of sloppy bastards who can't get anything right.

Some of them are. Sometimes they even make the design right - rather than making it cheaper or "better" or easier to make.

The processes were viable, once, with a particular group of people. Transplanting that expertise isn't always easy. I was involved with production from time to time at Cambrdige Instruments, and most of that was solving problems that had come up. Sometimes because something hadn't been designed right in the first place, but mostly because purchasing or production had chosen to change what was being produced or the way it was produced to make it cheaper or easier. This was transplanting expertise inside one organisation on a single site.

You'd like to think so, bec ause you are an as with very little experience of manufacturing.

Discouraging nonsense posts.

hout

You may think so.

Regrettably, a lot of it is art. It is based on science, but proper scientific optimisation of any even moderately complicated electronic design would take several lifetimes.

That might be your - ill-informed - opinion, but I've got a Ph.D. in experimental physical chemistry and I've published papers in peer- reviewed journals (as A W Sloman - see scholar.google.com) that have been cited in other peer-reviewed articles, and that does - explicitly

- make me a scientist.

If you weren't posting under a fatuous pseudonym, I could ask you to produce evidence that you knew enough about science to pontificate about who is or isn't a scientist, but since you are just an anonymous windbag, we can skip that step.

Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Didn't the original battery have a satisfactory lifetime? Why not just buy the APC replacement, they are pretty good about it (and they take the old battery back for recyclling).

The folk who engineered the product presumably have a pretty good handle on battery qualities.

have fun with your cheapest-found-on-the-internet batteries.

AGM - Anthropogenic Global Moderation? ;-)

Cheers! Rich

Electronics manufacturing is not battery cell manufacturing.

That is a chemical industry, actually. Pretty straightforward that the two are far different animals.

That's funny, considering the fact that you are the one that condones cutting corners.

Where I work, it MUST be exactly as contracted from the first article, through the life span of the item.

If a change gets made (not by us), we implement it as requested, and from then on, the part cannot carry the original numbering. It must also carry a deviation notice. These protections allow for traceability such that a device can be serviced in the field and the person will know exactly what the product is by referencing the knowledge base for the product.

I know more about manufacturing than you ever did or ever will.

Hell, I got a proto printing platform recently and print parts on it, insert PEMs into them and make operating prototype pieces. A printed prototype is far cheaper than a Delrin plate and the machining of it. You ain't real bright, boy.

So, nope, Sloman, I am not an ass, and my original declaration that you are holds. You are an ass, and the reasons number in the thousands. Of that, I have no doubt, and several thousand of your Usenet posts as proof.

Yet you do not know a goddamned thing about Polynesian or Asian power cell manufacturers or manufacturing.

Poof! You're a scientist.

Damn! It didn't work. Oh, that's right... I'm not a fairy.

That's OK, you are still not a scientist.

You couldn't be transformed anyway. You hard wired yourself stupid, and there is no recovery from that.

Way back then (your degree), obsolete boy. You don't go obsolete as quickly after your degree as the electronics realm, but it did go obsolete by now, regardless of whether you choose to believe it or not.

Hell, I'll bet you haven't even kept up in decades with your own realm. I have more on the ball than you from simply reading tech articles.

I probably know more about material science than you, even WITHOUT your precious Chemistry PhD.

the

Also pretty obvious to someone whose Ph.D. is in Physical Chemistry and whose summer jobs - as a student - were in the chemical industry (titanium dioxide pigment manufacture) at time when my father was research manager at a pulp and paper mill (which also counts as a chemical industry).

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

I don't condone it - and you've got to be pretty stupid to think that you could claim that I did. What I said was that it happened, that it caused problems, and fixing those problems involved getting people do do what they had been told to do.

Sure. But does it happen all the time?

so

That's standard quality control. We had that at Cambridge Instruments, and it worked almost all the time.

It seems unlikely - though not as unlikely as that you could know enough about what I know to be able to make that claim. For instance you don't seem to be aware of my experience in chemical industry.

Recently? I was making one-off prototypes back in 1974, and the last one I made was in 2002. How does your - limited - experience in this area make you brighter than me? The fact that you appear to think that that claim is justified by your assertion suggests quite the opposite.

We'd like to believe you, but the evidence does point the other way

Or so you'd like to think, without adducing any shred of credible evidence to support your propostion. =A0

Since I've now made 14646 posts to this user-group, you would appear to be rejecting the less asinine posts, where I'm not wasting my time jeering at dim twerps like you. You presumably lack the wit to understand the more constructive posts.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Perhaps, but you were claiming that I was not a scientist

"You are explicitly NOT a scientist."

- to which - moronic - assertion I posted a perfectly adequate reply, which you have snipped.

What I posted was "I've published papers in peer-reviewed journals (as A W Sloman - see scholar.google.com)" which is a testable assertion.

Your response implies that I was claiming specific expertise in "Polynesian or Asian power cell manufacturers or manufacturing" whereas I was just pointing out that any technology transfer involves fallible human beings.

I can't really tell whether you are terminally stupid or intentionally dishonest, but "both" also works.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

I have read your horseshit here occasionally for years. I know what your background, and what your current, pathetic status is, idiot.

The way you responded stripped you of any scientific "stature" you ever thought you had.

I called you on it. You're done... toast.

You might have read it, but you clearly didn't understand it, otherwise you wouldn't have made it obvious how throughly stupid you are by wasting bandwidth pointing out that battery manufacture was chemistry, not electronics,

"Electronics manufacturing is not battery cell manufacturing.

That is a chemical industry, actually. Pretty straightforward that the two are far different animals."

as this impied that I wouldn't know anything about it.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen