@Mandrake50 -
I would agree that this is at risk of turning into a bit of a pointless, circular (and off-topic) discussion, and I’m starting to get dizzy:-) Sorry if I contributed to that.
I’ve spent many decades routinely / constantly using, and at times caring for the maintenance / cal of electronic test equipment of all types that cost somewhere between a month and a year’s salary+ for me (which fortunately I didn’t have to purchase myself). I don’t claim to know much, I’ve just been trying to learn for a long time! Sounds like we both have an adequate understanding of ‘accuracy’, although our personal standards for testing our flashlight cells may differ, as accuracy is relative, and depending on application, can be subjective. That’s not an issue for either of us. We each have our personal requirements, and that’s natural. I’m trying to stick to objective stuff as much as possible.
I had no desire to bring the MC3000 into the discussion, but did so in post 13 solely because it was being implied by others that all of the ‘charger/analyzers’ generally in use are inherently inaccurate. I provided that reference to the MC3000 test simply to point out that, depending on one’s personal requirements and standards, that is not entirely correct, and they are far from being ‘all created equal’. HKJ demonstrated what he considered to be ‘very good’ accuracy in that example, and I am in agreement, in the context of this application; up until relatively recent firmware changes by the manufacturer apparently blew that completely out of the water. I consider that to be an out of bounds condition induced by the manufacturer into a mature product rather than an intrinsic performance limitation anyway, and definitely a subject for a different thread (where that matter is already under discussion, as you know). I would not have mentioned that unit otherwise, as it is not directly relevant to the OP. That said, accuracy is somewhat subjective, and our standards for this application can (and perhaps do) vary, but not due to a lack of understanding of and experience with highly accurate test equipment, but rather our perception of the requirements in this case.
I likewise also asked a question regarding, and linked to information regarding, the Vapcell charger; because it was introduced into the conversation by another party, and I had a question regarding it - which I guess is still outstanding.
I believe you brought into the discussion(?) the consistency / repeatability of IR measurements w/ the MC3000, and I responded by volunteering to provide test results concerning that from my MC3000 unit (which I was already planning to post before this thread was started), and thus I will do so, but will post that in the relevant MC3000 thread and link to that in this thread. Like absolute accuracy, consistency can be and in this case may be also subjective. Such things should usually viewed in the context of the requirements of an application, and not in general absolute terms. Perfection is generally not an option. I will document the consistency I observe with my unit, and everyone can / will have their own opinion on the adequacy of that for the purpose. I’d be interested in your opinion of it, and perhaps in the context of the relative performance of your particular unit(s); although not in this thread.
I’d greatly prefer to get back to providing the info that I told the OP several days ago I would provide to them, and stay on the topic of these unit(s) the OP inquired about. A number of users have expressed interested in such devices and posted links to them now, so clearly there is great interest. I still need to further check some info on the suggested devices before posting that.
I believe there exists significant misperceptions / misunderstanding on the part of some regarding exactly what most (if not all) of these units are, what they are not, how they work, and how / why all that absolutely affects the efficacy of their use by people for testing their flashlight cells. I believe I can perhaps provide some enlightening information, which will likely come as a surprise to some, and therefore may be helpful to others. I want those interested to understand the results they will / would get from these devices, and decide whether or not they actually want to measure what these devices actually measure, or if in fact they might instead prefer to measure something different, and therefore something else might better serve their needs.
I’d like to fully explain the statement I made earlier, as I feel that would be a better use of our time, and the reasons behind that statement are a bit complex and require explanation:
As a prelude to that, w/o details (which many may not be interested in): The standalone testers referenced in this thread, vs most of the charger / analyzers on the market (Opus, SkyRC, etc.), do not actually measure the same thing, although the confusing terms used to describe them, even by their manufacturers, might easily cause some to assume that they do. They measure what they measure in different ways, they produce different measurements (although both are in Ohms), and their results in testing cells / batteries are not directly comparable. To quote HKJ’s review of the Vapcell YR1030 tester: “When used to measure resistance it will give same value as an ordinary DMM except for much better resolution at low values. On batteries the value cannot be compared to the values chargers measure…”. The measurements from such standalone testers likely also will not correlate with data published for cell testing at lygte and perhaps other similar resources (in case that matters). On the other side of that coin however, measurements from such testers likely may / will correlate with some cell specifications provided by some cell manufacturers / suppliers (in case that is a priority for you). Both are useful and relevant, but serve different needs. They are, therefore not completely interchangeable where cell testing is concerned, and it very much matters which type you decide to use; it all depends on what you’re trying to use the info for / accomplish with it. There also exists no direct constant or conversion factor to reconcile / convert between those 2 types of results. Some will need to understand this for a purchase decision. Some may very well elect to use both types of equipment, but they too will need to understand the differences if they do, and be prepared for the fact that the results will not agree and likely won’t even be very close to each other, with the results for these testers likely being considerably lower values than those from the ‘charger / analyzers’ referenced. I believe I can help clarify all of that, if anyone’s interested in that info. If anyone has a specific question about anything in this post, feel free to ask, as there may be a short / simple answer without getting too far into the weeds (and these weeds can get pretty deep).
One other important note. I haven’t finished looking through all the linked equipment in this thread, but just to clarify: When I refer to standalone testers like many referenced in this thread, by any description / ‘name’, I’m referring specifically to testers which exclusively use a test source of an AC 1 kHz sine wave signal to perform their measurements. That may or may not apply to / include all the devices being referenced here.
