This
seems relevant here. Looks like an update to one discussed above.
1 Thank
I will do that. As you said, I will want to play with the device. More importantly, at some point I want to be able to try and correlate the readings with my records from using the MC3000 over the years.
This was purchased through AliExpress. from China. So I am not sure when I will receive it. If you donāt hear somethin in two to three weeks, feel free to remind meā¦
1 Thank
Yeahā¦ and about $6 less than what I paid. Typical of my luck. But at least I was able to find a few review/test reports on the specific meter that I bought.
EDIT: I just notice the shipping charge. It would really be about $5 more than what I paidā¦ The USB C port is nice. The extra digit for voltageā¦??. Accuracy claimā¦ Well TBD.
Thanks in advance, and that sounds good. I guess my request wonāt take you far out of your way, as it sounds as if youāll be as interested in the results as I am, albeit perhaps for different reasons. I gather/believe our expectations regarding the results are likely very different, but we will be equally interested in them.
1 Thank
What are your expectations? I am very curious.
I am not sure what mine are exactly. Though, I am quite sure they will be considerably different than what I am used to seeing from the MC3000.
1 Thank
AX seems to have quite a few of these ācheapā IR metersā¦makes one wonder whether those MFG will calibrate each batch
I saw the price of a hioki battery tester such as the BT-3554 and ā¦oh wow
but comparatively my uni-t ut139s is quite on par with my fluke basic multimeter
1 Thank
If you decide to buy one of these āimpedance metersā (which I do not personally recommend for those with requirements similar to my own [testing and documenting the health / quality / condition / performance of cells for use in flashlights], I recommend choosing one that has been reviewed on lygte and has documented accuracy. Although most are very ācheapā, many are fairly accurate (sufficiently so) at doing what they do; but do choose wisely, especially when buying ācheapā stuff.
That said, I believe youāll find (as this thread develops in the near term - if you stay tuned for it) that the most important issue will not be accuracy (if you verify that as above), but will rather be what these devices actually measure, which is apples and oranges compared with the charger / analyzer youāre using. If you donāt fully understand the technical differences, I highly recommend you not buy one until you do. Those differences involve things well beyond comparability of data with other sources - thatās just the tip of an iceberg. IOW, I think if you buy one it will likely end up collecting dust in a closet in fairly short order; or if you decide to use it, you may not get the information you probably should be wanting to have if youāre using it for measuring cells for use in flashlights. There are however other uses for these devices for which they are indeed quite useful, if you have other applications / needs in mind.
I keep seeing this kind of thing in your posts, but you havenāt explained it.
If I can get reasobaly accurate and repeatable measurements of cell internal resistance using on of these meters that uses AC (1 kHz I think), why would it be any less applicable to our use of cylindrical cells and correlating that to the same parametersā¦
??? Are we not gathering information about those same things, just using a different method of getting the data?
Do you think that using AC IR measurement with a 4 wire system will somehow lead to different conclusions.
I am really curious as to your specific reasons for indicating that you believe that these meters may not be suitable for accomplishing the stated goals.
1 Thank
Patience, @Mandrake50. Iām not only older and slower now, but am also somewhat preoccupied with other things of late. I believe my planned response (which I am still finishing formulating) will address all the issues you raise (and perhaps more), but it will likely be neither short, nor simple (to explain), so donāt expect that. It may well be somewhat long, and somewhat complex, because the issues behind my general statements involve fairly complex factors for the average reader (such as ācomplex impedanceā). Iāve been researching and thinking, not typing. I donāt want to address these various issues piecemeal, as they are interrelated, and should be addressed in full context. I do, however think the info is worth documenting for those attempting to find answers to the questions Iāve been asking myself, which I believe are questions shared by many, and is info Iāve not seen documented in this thread (or anywhere else that I can recall). I donāt want to present my own conclusions / decisions without adequate explanation for such readers. Iām not that guy;-)
I donāt think youāll have a single question after you read it (if Iāve done my job correctly), and if you do, Iāll address it easily in the context of what Iāve already stated by that point. There is method to my madness here.
Youāve already thought this stuff through, formed opinions / reached conclusions, and purchased equipment for the job. That train has left the station. Others may still be trying to answer the questions I had / have to answer, and possibly to make purchase decisions. Those people (if any) are why I want to document my conclusions, because I believe it would be of benefit to them. I know it would have been valuable info for me, and this is a rare case where I think I have info to offer which will advance the discussion significantly beyond where it is currently.
1 Thank
My statement was based almost entirely on expectations already expressed previously in this thread by both of us. If you go back through this thread, you will find them. Instead of revisiting those statements, I would prefer to move forward and expand on them, which I intend to do.
The aforementioned tangential information may be found here, for those who might be interested:
1 Thank
Those numbers look pretty consistent for the MC3000.
I did some tests on my Vapcell S4+ and YR1030+ (AC IR tester). Iāll post the results here instead of over in the MC3000 thread.
As you see from the data below, the S4+ isnāt that great at consistency (per slot or across the slots). Seems like my slot #2 gives the most repeatable values. As you can also see, the AC IR tester is very consistent.
I tested a cell with the highest IR and also one with the lowest.
16340 (protected)
| S4+ (slot 1) | S4+ (slot 2) | S4+ (slot 3) | S4+ (slot 4) | YR1030+ | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Test #1 | 153 | 143 | 150 | 157 | 147.6 |
| Test #2 | 175 | 159 | 165 | 154 | 147.6 |
| Test #3 | 173 | 164 | 181 | 175 | 147.7 |
| Test #4 | 187 | 154 | 168 | 205 | 147.6 |
Molicel P45B
| S4+ (slot 2) | YR1030+ | |
|---|---|---|
| Test #1 | 12 | 6.63 |
| Test #2 | 14 | 6.64 |
| Test #3 | 10 | 6.67 |
| Test #4 | 12 | 6.66 |
| Test #5 | 10 | 6.63 |
| Test #6 | 10 | 6.60 |
| Test #7 | 12 | 6.62 |
| Test #8 | 12 | 6.60 |
4 Thanks
Thanks for posting this!! This gives me some info to consider, regarding several different things Iāve been contemplating, that I did not previously have access to. I have some serious analysis to do now! Thanks again! To be continued, Iām sure.
I took some recent measurements that will hopefully help. I used a Vapcell 26650 K62 at 4.16 volts (reported by the MC3000) that had been sitting for about 24 hours since a full charge. All units are mOhms as reported by either the MC3000 or the RC3563
MC3000
Slot 1 38, 35, 36, 36
Slot 2 36, 35, 35, 33
Slot 3 36, 37, 34, 35
Slot4 36, 35, 35, 34
I tested on the rc3563 that I just got. I used the included fixture to hold the cell. This should allow a pretty consistent connection.
First I wanted to ask others that use this kind of meterā¦ how should I handle the decimal? Here is a picture:
If I move the decimal one place to the right, the readings match up very well with those I took with the MC3000. If notā¦ they are way offā¦obviously.
RC3563
3.524, 3.536, 3.527, 3.514, 3.527
These are tighter than the MC3000 reading by quite a bit, but my problem is learning how to interpret them.
2 Thanks
No interpretation is required or in order. That meter indicates 3.514 mOhms. The decimal placement is ārealā, and the value relates to my quote from HKJ in post #27 (in italics), and the comment I added to it:
To quote HKJās review of the Vapcell YR1030 tester from my post #27: āWhen 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 measureā¦ā. [āThe 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)].ā
Iāll add another HKJ quote from his article on internal resistance and internal impedance measurement:
"Impedance is a AC measurements and the custom is to use 1000 Hz (1 kHz) for batteries. This makes it impossible to measure with an ordinary DMM.
The impedance is considerable lower than the resistance as can be seen in these measurements."
This should help explain my repeated comments regarding āexpectationsā, and also several regarding ācomparabilityā (the lack thereof) in a couple of threads.
Also possibly worth noting: When I looked up the cell you were testing, I saw that they spec the āinternal resistance (AC 1kHz)ā as ~16 mOhms". Theyāre actually referring to āinternal impedanceā, of course, despite the term they use.
I hope youāll also get around to testing some smaller cells as I requested earlier, as that will allow for some comparisons with cell sizes I (and many others) most commonly use. Iām hoping for āapples to applesā info using similar size apples, as these huge cells have extremely low IR by comparison, and while not āorangesā, are almost like a different type of apple. Given completely different measurements (DCIR / ACIR), 2-wire vs 4-wire and other variables, it would be nice to minimize unnecessary variables. I do understand that you use a lot of large(r) cells though, and thus your first focus is on things you use most. That makes sense. No worries, and no rush getting around to that though, as patience is one thing I have plenty of (unlike money) 
That said, thank you for posting this! Iāll be hoping for more to follow as we both explore this subject further, and you have both of the required instruments to obtain that data. Have fun exploring, and hopefully we both learn some stuff from it! I already am. Thanks again.
AC IR 3.5mOhm seems very low.
Molicel P42B has one of the lowest IR and AC IR is 7mOhms. (DC IR 16mOhms)
I think the unit is not zeroed correctly for the measuring jig. Have you tried to connect the two ends and checked if it gives zero ohm? If you are connecting different measuring tools, I think you should zero every time you switch tools.
Thanks for that. It seems low to me as well. So far I donāt see a way to zero it. I was just trying to find calibration info.
I will, for sure. I just got the new meter today.
BTW, I was hoping to compare the readings to see how I could correlate them to what I already have recorded. Maybe they are not ādirectlyā comparable, but I am hoping to discover, at least, some relationship. But I just started this, so wee will see.
One thing I am happy about, once I have some confidence that the meter is not just hosed, the consistency of the readings is quite good.
BTW, does the manual that came with your new meter look like the one I downloaded from this link when I searched for one?
Itās not particularly fresh, but if still relevent, it answered a few of my questions. From what I can tell, it might address 1 or 2 of your concerns - assuming it actually applies to your specific device. I read about some related issues that it addresses.
I searched how the meter can be zeroed, and noticed that it does not need to zero.
The Amazon listing for RC3563 provides specific answers to this in the Q&A section. It states that the internal program calculates the theoretical zero.
The manual for YR1035+, available in the above link by Desertcat, also mentions that zeroing is not normally required (see page 3 in the PDF under section 9).
I think your meter could be faulty, or there might be poor calibration at the factory. (Unless your battery has very very low IR.)