Talk:Electric battery/Archive 2

Voltage Sag
Why is there not a section and/or article on voltage sag and how to overcome the sag? Reddwarf2956 (talk) 13:58, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Proposed merge from Electrical cell
This is getting a little bit out of my area of expertise, but I found the stub article Electrical cell, and figured that it's a duplicate of a more thorough article. I found that Cell (electricity) redirects here, so it makes sense to me to merge that article into this one. Let me know what you think. Wizard191 (talk) 18:49, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Removing sourced statements indicating the lightest and largest batteries
User:King of Hearts has twice removed sourced statements on the largest and lightest batteries, claiming that such information is unencyclopedic, without further support. There was no attempt to counter the longstanding practice of measuring batteries by Wh/kg, which we do in our infoboxes and which establishes the substantial notability of battery mass. The largest installation is notable in its own right, as a measure of the success of a certain kind of cell. I recommend that if there are any actual reasons that this information be removed, that they be listed here so that they can be discussed. 69.228.209.174 (talk) 08:18, 25 February 2009 (UTC)


 * If you want examples, just look at any other article, like Computer or Human. Computer size and human height are mentioned, but I do not see any world records on the page. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 06:57, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * After reading over the section again, I found that the information might be of some value. However, this article is intended to provide only a general overview; therefore, I've moved it to the more detailed List of battery types. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 07:02, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * My understanding is that longstanding policy has mandated that our articles are supposed to be comprehensive. Is there a reason that this article in particular is only supposed to be a general overview and not comprehensive? 76.254.86.42 (talk) 17:02, 27 February 2009 (UTC)


 * "Comprehensive" does not mean an indiscriminate list of information. -- King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 00:59, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It is very difficult to see any implication that two world records for the largest and lightest cells supplemented with a current event regarding grid shaping might be indiscriminate as a good faith attempt to improve the encyclopedia. What sort of information do you propose as potentially more discriminate than the statistic that we list at the top of the battery infoboxes? 69.228.87.198 (talk) 07:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Unless there is any evidence that such potentially more discriminate information may exist, I intend to re-insert the deleted material along with the information about the fastest charging and discharging from Nature below. NCC-8765 (talk) 05:00, 15 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Is there a reliable source stating that this is the largest battery in history? In the first decade of the 19th century, there was a battery with 2000 cells built by Davys, and a battery with copper and zinc plates 4 x 8 feet built by another British experimenter. From the 1890s through at least the 1920's, several U.S. cities had giant batteries to back up their DC utility systems. Edison (talk) 02:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The removed text with citations reads: The world's largest battery is in Fairbanks, Alaska, composed of Ni-Cd cells. ref> Conway, E. (2 September 2008) "World's biggest battery switched on in Alaska" Telegraph.co.uk /ref> Sodium-sulfur batteries are being used to store wind power. ref> Biello, D. (December 22, 2008) "Storing the Breeze: New Battery Might Make Wind Power More Reliable" Scientific American /ref> Lithium-sulfur batteries have been used on the longest and highest solar powered flight. ref> Amos, J. (24 August 2008) "Solar plane makes record flight" BBC News /ref> 69.228.87.198 (talk) 07:13, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Fast charging with LiFePO4
Kang, B. and Ceder, G. (2009) "Battery materials for ultrafast charging and discharging" Nature 458: 190-3. 1:00-6:50 (audio) NCC-8765 (talk) 05:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)

Corrosion and batteries from a chemical perspective
My wall clock died and when I replaced the AA battery I found the negative terminal was covered in a yellow-tinged white mineral deposit, perhaps a crystallization of some sort. I am curious what the corrosion is chemically and why it occurred in this dead battery and not in others. I read a few internet forums and most of the wiki article on batteries I didn’t find a link to anything that explained white corrosion in the chemical section. I suggest that the article is slightly focused on an industrial perspective of batteries and could be more encyclopedic if it also connected with Wikipedia's body of chemical knowledge. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Pstaight (talk • contribs) 15:44, 23 March 2009 (UTC) Following "also see" -> "Alkaline battery" -> "leak" I found that the white corrosion is probably potassium hydroxide and I'm assuming it was caused by a manufacturer defect. All in all it's a good article covering a tremendous amount of information maybe it could be a starting point for understanding chemistry, maybe all it needs is to have the word "alkaline" in the chemistry section link to the article on alkaline batteries. (also what is SineBot?)--Pstaight (talk) 16:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Extending Battery Life
I think this section could use a table describing the best way to treat specific battery types to extend their life.

A rough example. I'm not saying the information in the table is correct.

Pneumatic battery
Mention in the article that besides metals, air-fuelled batteries also exist. See http://www.elektor.com/news/air-fuelled-battery-could-power-portable-devices.965568.lynkx —Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.182.189.205 (talk) 10:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)

Battery Power / Rating / Energy
Explain how batteries are rated and what the amp-hour designation means —Preceding unsigned comment added by 198.253.49.6 (talk) 23:11, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Requested move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

The result of the move request was page moved.  GB fan  talk 15:12, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Battery (electricty) → Battery (electricity) — Immediately, to fix this spelling error but ultimately to reverse a page renaming to an undiscussed and decidedly minority viewpoint. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:14, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Move this should be non-controversial, it is a simple spelling error  GB fan  talk 14:59, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) I have moved this to Battery (electricity), over the redirect.   Mae din \talk 15:15, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move

 * The following discussion is an archived discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section. 

Not moved Vegaswikian (talk) 06:59, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Battery (electricity) → Electrochemical battery — I request to move the article to electrochemical battery (page was moved a few days ago to this name, but was reverted as it is considered a controversial move). As there is already the article electrochemical cell, and a battery (in electricity) is simply a combination of these, it is only appropriate to move it here (article coherence). Also, a battery on itself could mean a variety of things (eg gun battery, ...) thus the "electrochemical" is crucial is this differs the article from the other "batteries" Electrochemical battery is btw not a "popular term", but no one would find battery (electricity) a popular term neither (I wouldn't think anyone would search for the article with this term) Thanks, KVDP (talk) 06:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose - WP:COMMONNAME says it all really. The current name is common and correctly disambiguated. Knepflerle (talk) 11:03, 12 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Oppose Properly disambiguated common name. Yes battery has many different uses and battery takes one to a disambiguation page so that they can find what they are looking for.  There is a better chance someone would look for battery rather than electrochemical battery in looking for this.   GB fan  talk 12:45, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

User:KVDP has made a number of alterations to the article in line with the rejected change of title. The article needs to be reverted to the version timed at 6:05 6 October 2009 to remove the erroneous edits (and subsequent reverted vandalism). I don't know ho to do this but someone else may. --20.133.0.13 (talk) 14:27, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Battery University is an unreliable source
To avoid duplication of discussion, see the relevant discussion on lithium-ion battery discussion page. --20.133.0.13 (talk) 14:38, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

battery load tester
Too little material about the photographed tester on this page.

Is it ok to assume the voltage measured at intensity zero is an indicator of the remaining charge?

What would be a typical load resistance to get a more accurate figure?

Skwa (talk) 07:31, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Add nickel-zinc battery
Rechargeable nickel-zinc batteries are now available from many sources, including Amazon.com. I think they should be added to the lists and mentioned in the write up. I would do it myself, but I would rather let someone who has already worked on the article do it. --Dwane E Anderson (talk) 13:12, 17 November 2009 (UTC)
 * That's not (ideally) how it works - ideally, you add a sentence or paragraph in the article to get the topic started, hopefully with a reference.  Anyway, check out Rechargeable battery and Nickel-zinc battery and see if you can improve them - the latter article especially needs help. --Wtshymanski (talk) 14:07, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Lead acid batteries
"The lead-acid battery is also very heavy for the amount of electrical energy it can supply"

This is misleading at best. Whether you measure the amount of power over time, or the amount of current in a short time, the lead-acid battery is NOT 'very heavy' for its energy output. The only batteries that can put out comparable or greater electricity in the same weight and size are NiMh and Li-ion, the latter of which is still only experimental. The other battery types can not put out the bulk power of lead-acid batteries, so quoting their energy density is misleading.

The tables on batteries are quite inaccurate. For instance, lead acid batteries are said to be 'moderately expensive' while NiMh, NiZn, and NiCd batteries are said to be 'inexpensive'. They are decidly NOT inexpensive, they are all much more expensive than lead acid batteries. In the lead acid section it says they are inexpensive !

The batteries conatining Nickel produce large amounts of toxic materials in their construction, the table infers that they have no toxic properties.203.26.122.12 (talk) 05:18, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Dry Cell
The Dry Cell section is written poorly. Using phrases such as "any random position" and having a link to en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dry_cell" which directs back to this article. Needs desparate updating. 124.149.55.3 (talk) 07:43, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:SOFIXIT - you're somebody, you can fix it. --Wtshymanski (talk) 13:57, 15 December 2009 (UTC)