Test/Review of AWT IMR18350 700mAh (Yellow)

7 posts / 0 new
Last post
HKJ
HKJ's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 min ago
Joined: 05/24/2011 - 12:23
Posts: 7451
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark
Test/Review of AWT IMR18350 700mAh (Yellow)

AWT IMR18350 700mAh (Yellow)

Button top version

DSC_6519

Official specifications:

  • Rated Capacity: 800mAh (0.5CA Discharge)
  • Rated Voltage: 3.7V
  • Internal Resistance: <100mOh (with PTC)
  • Cut-off Discharge Voltage: 2.75V
  • Charge Upper Limit Voltage: 4.20±0.05V
  • Charging Time(Std): 4.0hours
  • Standard Charging Circuit: 0.2C A
  • Charging Circuit: 0.5C A
  • Standard Discharging Circuit: 0.2C A
  • Fast Discharging Current: 0.5C A
  • Max Discharging Current: 2C A
  • Weight: about 21.5g
  • Height: 65mm
  • Operational Temperature: charge (0 ~ 45°C), discharge (-20 ~ 60°C)
  • Storage Temperature: within 1 month (-20~ 50°C), within 3 months (-20~ 40°C), within 3 months (-20~ 20°C)


AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-info

This is a high current 18350 cell. It has 6.4A continuous and 10.5A pulse rating.

DSC_6518

DSC_6520 DSC_6521

DSC_6522
DSC_6523

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-Capacity

The is some capacity difference between the two cells. It easily handles loads up to 5A, but has problems at 7A and cannot do 10A.

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-CapacityTimeHours

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-CapacityTime

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-Energy

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-PowerLoadTime

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-TripCurrent

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20BT-Charge



Flat top version

DSC_6525

Official specifications:

  • Nominal Voltage: 3.7v
  • Capacity: 700mAh
  • Standard charger: cc/cv(max ,charging rate 2A)
  • Cycle Life: >1000cycles
  • Max .continuous discharge rate:6A
  • Operating Dishcharge Temperature: under10 and over 60 Degree Celsius
  • Dimensions: 18.15x49.82mm


AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-info

Same cell as above, but this time in flat top version. It has slightly less capacity.

DSC_6524

DSC_6526 DSC_6527

DSC_6528
DSC_6529


AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-Capacity

These cells handles 7A better.

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-CapacityTimeHours

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-CapacityTime

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-Energy

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-PowerLoadTime

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-TripCurrent

AWT%20IMR18350%20700mAh%20(Yellow)%20FT-Charge



Conclusion

The cells has very good performance at high current, but the difference between the cells means that they are best used one at a time (i.e. not in series).



Notes and links

The batteries was supplied by AWT for a review.


How is the test done and how to read the charts
How is a protected LiIon battery constructed
More about button top and flat top batteries
Comparison to other LiIon batteries

My website with reviews of many chargers and batteries (More than 1000): https://lygte-info.dk/

Edited by: HKJ on 10/08/2014 - 12:04
how2
Offline
Last seen: 1 month 1 week ago
Joined: 06/01/2010 - 10:26
Posts: 2489
Location: london

Nice review hkj but which lights use this size of battery

HKJ
HKJ's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 min ago
Joined: 05/24/2011 - 12:23
Posts: 7451
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

how2 wrote:
Nice review hkj but which lights use this size of battery

It is probably most used in custom lights (Like: http://lygte-info.dk/review/Review%20Lux-RC%20FL33%20UK.html ). It can also be used in some lights that can use 1x18650 or 2xCR123, if the brightness is a bit low on 18650, but the above batteries are not recommended for that.

My website with reviews of many chargers and batteries (More than 1000): https://lygte-info.dk/

Werner
Werner's picture
Offline
Last seen: 2 years 3 months ago
Joined: 10/19/2012 - 15:00
Posts: 3679
Location: Germany

Thanks for testing all the small cells too. Is the difference between BT and FT because of the contact resistance of the button?
Where to buy the Awt cells? Fastech sells the 18350 800mAh for 5$, are there other sources?
I am currently looking for some short Imr cells and the Awt18350 and the efan18350 seems to be the best you tested. I have some efest 16340 and 18350 on order but the 18350Awtand Evan are better judging from your comparator.
As I never had or heard from awt/efan I am a bit suspicious especially because it are unprotected imr cells…

HKJ
HKJ's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 6 min ago
Joined: 05/24/2011 - 12:23
Posts: 7451
Location: Copenhagen, Denmark

Werner wrote:
Is the difference between BT and FT because of the contact resistance of the button?

I believe the difference is due to 3 factors:

  • The button top adds some resistance
  • Less contact surface may add some resistance
  • The contact resistance in my rig may vary slightly between batteries.

All 3 is in the very low milli ohm range.

I could fix the two contact resistance issues by switching to a fully 4 terminal rig, but that would also mean that all batteries I tested in the future will look slightly better at high current. I have not decided if I am going to switch.

My website with reviews of many chargers and batteries (More than 1000): https://lygte-info.dk/

light-wolff
Offline
Last seen: 5 days 5 hours ago
Joined: 06/26/2013 - 16:16
Posts: 219
Location: Germany

HKJ wrote:
I could fix the two contact resistance issues by switching to a fully 4 terminal rig, but that would also mean that all batteries I tested in the future will look slightly better at high current. I have not decided if I am going to switch.

You could maybe compensate for the contact resistance in older measurements in the comparator to keep them comparable with new results.
cajampa
Offline
Last seen: 5 years 6 months ago
Joined: 08/01/2014 - 01:55
Posts: 1963
Location: Sweden
light-wolff wrote:
HKJ wrote:
I could fix the two contact resistance issues by switching to a fully 4 terminal rig, but that would also mean that all batteries I tested in the future will look slightly better at high current. I have not decided if I am going to switch.
You could maybe compensate for the contact resistance in older measurements in the comparator to keep them comparable with new results.

+1

You should be able to work out (i hope) a multiplier that make the results comparable.