merl
Full Member
- Posts
- 1,853
- Likes
- 3,447
Your text in bold highlights one of my points, the 50% guidance/rule (which has now morphed into the law) ISN'T based on experience is it? How many people who are spouting this rule ACTUALLY have the experience of how discharging to say 60% has affected their battery life massively over and above what they got from a 40% discharge? I'd argue virtually NO ONE can and further any 'experience' as such could easily be affected by other sources like temperature and sitting at a partially charged state so the 'firm experience' becomes anecdotal experience.A rule of thumb.= A rough and useful principle or method, based on experience rather than precisely accurate measures.
it is in that context that r4dent and many others ( E.g 12volt Planet) use 50% and imho is entirely appropriate in the context it was used. If you don’t find it useful then that’s your call.
This rule isn't based on experience, it's based on a snowball effect of people parroting useless advice over and over again until it becomes fact.
Yep, I know that there's lots of references to the 50% rule all over the place including established business that repeat the rule parrot fashion without any significant reason or backup. Funnily enough I've just watched 2 of the QI elves on the BBC only this morning commenting on just how much 'common knowledge ' is actually incorrect. They included an example of the high that you get from heavy exercise, typically running isn't from Endorphins (as is widely accepted) but from a chemical similar to the stuff in cannabis. Spinach isn't massively high in Iron either.
When I see the FACTS about how exactly a battery's life is affected by how much you discharge it by looking at a cycles Vs depth of discharge plot I see 50% as a point on a sliding scale and cant see for the life of my this stupid rule has caught traction.
I've a notion that it actually comes from battery manufacturers data when, back in the day, they wanted to give an indication of how many cycles a customer could expect from a battery, as we know (from the discharge plots) that this depends on how deep you discharge it so the makers had to decide on how much to discharge for a test? Well they chose 1/2 way...50% and this has lead to a widely held assumption that 50% is OK and anything deeper is bad. TOTAL GUFF!
As already pointed out this guide is aimed at newbies but armed with poor info a newbie could easily sit in the dark at night because they were scared of taking their battery below 50%. David/Wildbus agrees with me and has previously said that he's done the maths and a deeper discharge point can actually give better bang for your buck, now I've not checked his maths but from the plots is easy to see that the damage gets worse the deeper you discharge, the line isn't straight but there's no significant 'heel' or drop off point either so the 50% rule makes no sense.
So, here's a challenge, you say you feel the rule is "entirely appropriate" but can you explain why (other than 12 volt planet and his dog says so) it's appropriate? Take a look at a life Vs depth of cycle plot and explain why 50% is an appropriate rule and 60% or 40% or ANY other percentage for that matter isn't just as appropriate?