Lithium Titanate Oxide Cells

[BobZilla]

These cells look really incredible. I already have some LifePO4 cells and really like them but this looks like the next generation of the technology.

The main thing is the Anode construction. It allows for very rapid and efficient transfer.

The effect and benefit of this alteration and inclusion of lithium-titanate nanocrystals is that the surface area of the anode of the Lithium-Titanate battery is about 100 square meters per gram in contrast to the only 3 square meters per gram that Li-Ion batteries hold. The result of the lithium-titanate nanocrystals with their enlarged surface area is that electrons are able to enter and leave the anode much more rapidly, leading to fast recharging and enhanced lifetimes of the battery.

Source:
http://www.ev-power.eu/LTO-Tech/

I think I will purchase some small cells to play with. Anyone out there have any experience with this chemistry?

[BobZilla]

Here is some more good information about these cells and comparison to more familiar chemistry

http://neicorporation.com/white-pape..._Paper_LTO.pdf

[ZPDM]

Here is some more good information about these cells and comparison to more familiar chemistry

http://neicorporation.com/white-pape..._Paper_LTO.pdf

This was on Google's front page for awhile
http://planetsave.com/2015/06/28/lit...-cut-costs-50/

The claims are pretty outrageous, 1/2 or less the cost, 5 times the storage, easier to make. Whether, valid or perhaps partially so, I think incremental battery improvements will be hard to stop. Heck if they are right that is a Tesla with a 1,000 mile range.

[BobZilla]

Thanks for the link.

I think we will start seeing more improvements, we already are. The Chinese are doing a lot of R&D in the field and have built several very large manufacturing plants. I wish the USA would take on more of that role but I guess economics are not permissive currently.

What we really need is a way to do away with storage all together and just run things directly. Sort of like the hydrogen on demand method but with the vacuum.

Batteries are taking a turn for the better though and that's great for now I guess. Look at how much LED technology has spread out now. Flashlights that can run for days on a few small cells, lighting in buildings that is 80+ more efficient. Remember when a flashlight would last 1 night if you were lucky and it took 4 - 6 D cells,, things are getting better ;-)

[Faraday88]

Any Chemistry.. Bedini Charging is the key to charge any Rechargeable Batteries under the sun and beyond!!!!!!
Rgds,
Faraday88.

[ZPDM]

Thanks for the link.

I think we will start seeing more improvements, we already are. The Chinese are doing a lot of R&D in the field and have built several very large manufacturing plants. I wish the USA would take on more of that role but I guess economics are not permissive currently.

What we really need is a way to do away with storage all together and just run things directly. Sort of like the hydrogen on demand method but with the vacuum.

Batteries are taking a turn for the better though and that's great for now I guess. Look at how much LED technology has spread out now. Flashlights that can run for days on a few small cells, lighting in buildings that is 80+ more efficient. Remember when a flashlight would last 1 night if you were lucky and it took 4 - 6 D cells,, things are getting better ;-)

Yes, the progress in tech is something and great, but makes it all the more clear that our problems aren't primarily technological. The whole "behold I give you a land flowing with milk and honey" then every thing goes south problem. Just looking at improvements in batteries, possibly it has never been more clear that its more a people problem then tech problem, myself included.

Lastly, you didn't give me a good in to argue you with you about the ether/vacuum, but I will do it anyways. I don't feel real strongly about this especially as is often the case I am introduced to new knowledge. However, there is no ether, there is no vacuum pun intended. Energy is created from nothing or more coherently if you like from the Creator. The ether/vacuum has no attributes, no taste, smell, feel, sight, sound etc. Until some characteristic of the ether is demonstrated I can only say "energy" can be created and I suppose destroyed. I am not trying to be a wiseass just considering what is considered nonsense by most, and if Bedini charged batteries charge up at a rate that they should not then I'm all for that needing to balance out with the etheric realm of Zebulon. But barring any sensory data the other conclusion is that energy can be created. That is my take. On other notes if people don't go nuts when the monetary system collapses they will find they are wealthier then they were with their usurious' overlords. Small chance of that, but see land flowing with milk and honey and really good batteries aforementioned reference.

[BobZilla]

Did you ever watch the energy from the vacuum series? I think it was the first video where Mr. Bearden explains very well where energy comes from and the naturally occurring replenishing dipoles.

I have often thought if Mr. Bedini didn't just look at a flyback diode on an old motor which was and still is very common and say well hell why loop it away when we could grab it and put it over here,, and then design more intentional flyback events. It's not exactly whats going on with a bedini wheel but it is close enough that I could see it being an inspiration.

You want to touch/taste/smell or sense the ether in some way. I would say that if we are constantly immersed in it then it would make sense that our senses would not pick up on it. Sort of like a white noise, it's always there. All of our senses work by noticing variance in something, temperature, particle shape or mass (as with taste/smell) velocity or whatever, something that changes and an organ can sense something has changed state. If we are swimming in the energy all the time then we would not have developed senses for it, hopefully you get my meaning.

Anyway Energy is my hobby not my profession so I'm quite sure that I cannot unveil the mysteries of the universe ;-) I will just keep charging batteries.

[ZPDM]

Hi Bobzilla,

I have seen the first energy from the vacuum series and I think I recall Dr. Bearden talking about dipoles pouring in real energy from the vacuum if I understood correctly. I am pretty sure Tom has also pointed out that we have no rigorous well accepted definition in physics for "energy" so all that I'm saying is in one way really semantics and arguing angels on the the head of a pin, however, and this is far afield and possibly unfortunately so from Lithium Titanate batteries, but what piques me a little is that a "vacuum" by definition is the absence of something. In FE we are not talking about absence of air we are talking almost about a Platonic vacuum, some non-defined place from whence things actualize. The other terminology I have heard is "virtual' particles, such as virtual Dirac sea. So my silly question is, is a virtual particle real? I am virtually certain it isnt So why are we talking about it. Is there something sensory/useful/predictive that can be said about the virtual state. I don't know, maybe there is, maybe if Tom Bearden was here he would say well when you factor in the DeBroglie wave equations you can predict the spin of the particles before they appear out of the virtual state. I might not know what he was saying but I would know why there is this whole virtual framework. Or he might say, sure its fine to consider it being created from nothing the point is that there is an asymmetrical appearance of energy.

Now when Bedini shuts off one of his machines then shows how a light lights up when moved along the insulated connecting wires I can say, yes that is some sort of etheric energy and yes perhaps that etheric energy is always present and only just being picked up after running the machine. The other possibility is that it was created from nothing, from the vacuum. I'll give a few quick examples further, perhaps the strongest, Velko Milkovik over in Serbia is reporting a COP of >10 from basically a well engineered pendulum swinging on a see-saw. Is that also energy from the vacuum, from the virtual Dirac sea? You can watch him just pushing the pendulum. Perhaps the weakest, when I look at one wire power transmission it sometimes seems like the power is created based on where and how many diodes I place, that it is created at different spots. Then there is Stan Meyer's COP>1.0 from splitting water. There is, I am blanking on his name, Schlauberger? the German scientist that did so much with spiral vortices, is that OU from the vacuum, the same vacuum? I am not taking issue with any of the work and research of pioneers and giants in the FE field such as Tom Bearden, I just wonder whether terminology wise we aren't dancing around the issue a little. The simple answer to me seems to be that the phrase "energy can neither be created nor destroyed" may be abject nonsense. Certainly if entropy is always increasing than any sort of definition of energy that I can muster is decreasing. But it seems to me energy is created all the time whether in cold fusion experiments, spiral vortices, Melkovik mechanical devices or Bedini electromagnetic devices.

On the one hand it is a small point of semantics but on the other it is the question of whether creation was a one off bang, then nothing is created or destroyed (sort of portraying creation as God) but it is nihilistically and inevitably running down, or whether creation is an ongoing process. And if there isn't some sort of balance sheet process going on between the "virtual" non defined vacuum, such that between the two energy is not being created or destroyed and both are nihilistically running down together with increasing entropy together when the two are averaged out, then energy, and "things", are being created. And if things are being created, well I think that leads to questions that some people might be petty enough they would rather people not ask. That's why I have a bit of a pet peeve that if it appears that energy is being created we should just come out and say it. Sorry, bit too much too drink and philosophy undergraduate degree from Jesuits, too much nonsense at a young age, not that the nonsense of Heidgegger or Nietzche could ever hold a candle to the nonsense Bearden and Bedini have introduced and demonstrated for me. Actually I think Heidgegger and certainly Nietzche were a bit nuts and not to come across as insulting Tom or John with the comparison, the nonsense remark was a pun about Bearden's 4 Law Logic. May both Bearden and Bedini continue to light the way as they wish.

[BobZilla]

I can see your point of view and I don't disagree with much of it. I personally have to think that we do not create energy though and that we capitalize on transformation of energy/matter. I say that because if you look at all other things we see a constant give/take transformation. Nature seems to have an order of things and if you disrupt that order it takes over to re-order the change. We burn a fuel and it transforms into different gasses, a plant harvests light and transforms minerals into cells. If you remove the light the plant dies and decays back into minerals. Maybe not the best examples but the point is we always see transformations in nature. The virtual particles must be a part of a re-ordering, they do not come from nothing but they are in some transformational state. Maybe all of the higher ordered particles all around them are donators to the process, kind of how radio active material gives off. I certainly do not know Lol but I just think that no matter what we do we are not creating anything, only dealing with transformations.

[BobZilla]

Greetings,
I finally got my hands on some LTO cells and thought I would report back to the group my observations with them.

I have the Toshiba 2.9AH cells featured on the page linked below. I got the small ones so that I could test out different things before deciding if it would be worth buying larger. These things are expensive but when you consider the lab testing shows that after 40,000 cycles they still store 80% of their rated capacity perhaps it is more economical than any other cell. That roughly works out that you could charge and discharge these things twice a day for 50 years! Now if that holds up to be true or not, who knows but that is how they are rated.

Here is the manufacture page for my cells:
http://www.scib.jp/en/product/cell.htm

The cells come with no insulation and when checked with a continuity check it shows that the case as positive, you might call it a positive ground. The first thing I needed to do was wrap all of the cells with electrical tape. Below is a picture of a bare one and a wrapped one together.



I built two packs with six cells each to make a 12v equivalent type of battery, meaning something that could be used to run loads that you normally would put a 12v on. The nominal voltage for these cells is 2.4v and the swing voltage is 2.8vFull down to 1.9vLow. I could have used five cells instead but by using six I am intentionally staying away from the upper charge and the lower limit for the cells and basically operating in the middle nominal range which should make them last even longer.

I have been charging them up to 15.5v and using them on a harbor freight solar controller, not using the solar part but using the box as a load controller. I have a 12v plug to USB inverter that I plug two 18650 battery chargers into and charge 18650 cells. I also charge my phone and other USB battery boxes the same way. Now this is where these batteries shine in a way. They have no problem providing serious current. When I have tried the same loads on a garden battery in the past it usually can only run a short time before the voltage sags below the load controllers cut off (10.5v) even though there is still a lot of energy in the battery it cannot handle the 3+ amps I pull. These LTO cells have no problem at all and that is a huge advantage. They are also quite small and light which is nice.

As I said these are only for testing and the capacity is quite small but I do get a lot of charging from them anyway. I can only imagine how nice the larger 20AH cells would work. Here is a picture of the charge station I described with the USB chargers hooked up. You will notice the current is shown on the little socket inverter and the pack voltage on the load box. The 18650's being charged were almost there so the current is not as high as it would be at the beginning but even so you can see that under almost a 2A load the battery is still over 15v, those of you who work with batteries often will understand how that is different from a LA battery.




I have been charging these cells on my small machine "clack", the aluminum frames one. They will charge in both mode one and generator mode. I tend to use generator mode because of the current, as I said these things can both take and give current in very large quantity's with no problem. Look at that manufacture page. I will make some charts of both modes and post them at a later time.

Anyway I wanted to post about these cells because it is really hard to find much information on them and especially using them with Bedini tech. We all benefit when we share our experiences with the group, many of you may never have these cells but at least you can read some information from a guy who is testing with them right.

[John_Koorn]

Great write up Bob, thanks for sharing. Will be watching this thread with interest

John K.

[BobZilla]

Thanks John,

Today I am back with some test results. What I have done is run my big machine in generator mode at a high input (around 7.5A) to charge the cells pretty quickly. So that we could have some sort of equality in gauging the results I did three runs each consuming 3AH into the machine. I did a discharge of 3A, 1.5A, and .75A so that we could have a look at the performance of these cells under various loads. I did say in the video a few times that this is not meant to be about looking at the charging efficiency of what I was doing. I ran this way simply to throw a large current at the batteries but I say it so that people not familiar with the machine will not misunderstand what I am trying to show here. I think I could do much better in fact if I did tune the machine to a more reasonable level but that may be for a later post.

What I find very interesting about these runs was that I used the same amount of power to charge each time so we sort of know the battery pretty much was brought to the same level but on the discharge we got pretty much the same AH out at each rate, only the time varies because of the load current. My experience with regular batteries would tell me not to expect nearly the same output energy from a 3A pull to 10v as a .75A pull to 10v. I would expect to get quite a bit more from the lighter load but that is not the case in this test scenario at least.

These cells are pretty amazing but I am not familiar with them yet. I do not know the best way to charge them or how to tune a machine for best performance on them, they are far different from LA in how they behave. I have no doubt that they can be fast charged with lots of current though. If they truly have the cycle life they claim then I am very impressed by them.

Here are some charts of the run. First the CBA showing the three discharges:



And this was a chart running on a different meter showing both the charge and discharge. The primary was unhooked during the discharge cycles so that is why it goes flat on the chart.



And finally a video of this being done. It is kind of long, sorry about that.

https://1drv.ms/v/s!AmzmftzD-V0mhneDlMLqkpcXKc4i

[John_Koorn]

Hi Bob, looks interesting. I know absolutely zero about this type of battery but from the charts it looks like they are undercharged. I would've expected more than ~1.5Ah out of a new 2.9Ah battery.

I'm not sure if pulse charging them is a good idea either. For example, I am working with 18650 Li-ion cells which have a specific CC/CV charging algorithm. At the moment I am charging them conventionally and logging some charge curves, just so I can get a baseline. Next step is to use them in a 3 battery switch to see how they perform (or not) there. I'm not planning at all to either radiant or capacitive discharge methods on them. Not suggesting you should do the same, but worth thinking about.

John K.

[BobZilla]

Hi Bob, looks interesting. I know absolutely zero about this type of battery but from the charts it looks like they are undercharged. I would've expected more than ~1.5Ah out of a new 2.9Ah battery.

I'm not sure if pulse charging them is a good idea either. For example, I am working with 18650 Li-ion cells which have a specific CC/CV charging algorithm. At the moment I am charging them conventionally and logging some charge curves, just so I can get a baseline. Next step is to use them in a 3 battery switch to see how they perform (or not) there. I'm not planning at all to either radiant or capacitive discharge methods on them. Not suggesting you should do the same, but worth thinking about.

John K.

John I said in the video but you may have missed it, they are not fully charged. These cells go to 2.8v per cell full so 16.8 would have been full, we were at about 14.6 in those runs. Now with that understanding think of what it says about performance. Even half charged those things put out 3A continuous. When I am using them for actual loads I charge them to about 15.25V which also is not full but I get a lot more out of them. I cannot go higher because the inverter will not take the voltage.

I am with you on the pulse though. I read an artical somewhere that I need to find again that actually said the LTO cells do better on a pulse but I also know Mr. Bedini said it was not a good idea on other lithium cells so I'm not really sure but you are right to caution against it. I am about to install a 400 watt panel array to replace a few individual 50 watt panels I have so when I free up one of those 50's I am going to try charging these cells from that instead. I have a little buck converter that I can dial in to say 16v and hook to them.

On a side note I am also working with some 18650's. I am about to put together some large packs with them. I saw guys making their own versions of tesla walls with them and it sparked my intrest. I am not doing anything that large but I have 200 cells that I plan to make into either two or four packs. I will post about those separately when I get working on them.

I will also be posting very soon about my new Edison cells that I just got. I have a bunch of 10AH NiFe to play with. Thanks for your input.

[John_Koorn]

Haha Bob, you got me. I should've watched the video first, but I was waiting until my lunch hour to do that.

Wow, those cells have some pretty awesome power density. They do "fall off the cliff" pretty quickly at around 13v though. I think they will do great on solar. If you have a charge controller/inverter where you can program the min/max charge and discharge voltages you should be set.

Good to hear you're working with 18650's too. I joined a DIY Powerwall forum where some guys are doing some amazing things. I'm not going that big either (yet, at least) but it is interesting. Maybe we should start a thread on that, don't want to hijack your thread here.

Looking forward to hearing about your Edison cells too. I have a few that I bought second hand, I think they were used by the Japanese in the war. Start a thread on those too and we can share...

John K.