Battery charge tests - running a battery to 0 frequently - checking re-charge times

[Andy Burnelli]

I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
_frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.

Case in point, I've been letting the phone run to shutoff overnight (by
running NewPipe YouTube videos and disabling the screen shutoff).

In the morning, invariably, when I boot the phone back, it's at 4%.

Then I have a sentence that says "your phone is at 100%" so I don't have to
watch the charging go on, and then I snapshot the status periodically.

Lookit this!
<https://i.postimg.cc/T1CkDhcC/charging12.jpg> Fastcharge in about 2 hrs
<https://i.postimg.cc/zGvhGxSb/charging13.jpg> Fastcharge in 2-1/4 hours
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1rgxwNB/charging15.jpg> Fastcharge in 2-3/4 hours

Just what one might expect (although I agree the dataset is minimal).
I'll keep testing this as I'm curious what happens in the real world.

Luckily all modern phones nowadays have huge batteries so it matters less
how long it takes since it always takes less than 3 hours from empty using
the charger that came free in the box (and which I didn't have to buy).

Anyway, here's the full set (notice I went from Android 11 to Android 12).
<https://i.postimg.cc/qvHYTf3L/charging01.jpg> Huge charging indicators
<https://i.postimg.cc/cL7z1D7N/charging02.jpg> Customizable sound alert
<https://i.postimg.cc/CKFQRjJn/charging03.jpg> All sorts of indicators
<https://i.postimg.cc/jSX2j0Mj/charging04.jpg> Tested many battery apps
<https://i.postimg.cc/sXBgKBsB/charging05.jpg> Usage & predictive graphs
<https://i.postimg.cc/8CCjC1VT/charging06.jpg> Big percentage indicators
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNrWgwVc/charging07.jpg> Evertyhing you'd want
<https://i.postimg.cc/gchrjS1L/charging08.jpg> Resize widgets to taste
<https://i.postimg.cc/9fSngSyH/charging09.jpg> Charging settings & chimes
<https://i.postimg.cc/Hs8srGDF/charging10.jpg> 4 hour slow charge
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1D9dNqw/charging11.jpg> Fastcharge in about 2 hrs
<https://i.postimg.cc/T1CkDhcC/charging12.jpg> Fastcharge in about 2 hrs
<https://i.postimg.cc/zGvhGxSb/charging13.jpg> Fastcharge in 2-1/4 hours
<https://i.postimg.cc/FK7RLSby/charging14.jpg> Multi-port USB chargers
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1rgxwNB/charging15.jpg> Fastcharge in 2-3/4 hours
--
Usenet is a world-wide team sport where purposefully helpful kind-hearted
adults help each other and learn by pooling our individual capabilities.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-05 19:19, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
> _frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.

Somewhat related, I saw this past Saturday an article about a study
testing charging batteries to full (of electric cars), or only a percent.

The article is in Spanish, but you can use google translate to read it.
It points to a study in German, but I do not see its link.

Seems that the best is to limit the battery cycle to 20%/80%.
Interestingly, my new moto g52 phone can limit the charge to 80% and has
functionality to disconnect charger when its' been continuously
connected for 3 days. I don't know if this will work with any charger or
has to be the manufacturer one. I think the former.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[John McGaw]

On 5/5/2022 1:19 PM, Andy Burnelli wrote:
> I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
> _frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.
>

snip...

I have no idea. In my entire experience using mobiles I've never gotten to
zero. I take my phone off of the wireless charger on my night table every
morning, use the phone all day, and every evening I put it back. Sometimes
it might be down to 35-45%. Last night, for the first time that I recall
the phone warned me that it was low and was going into battery saving mode.
That really shocked me but, looking back, I had wasted _many_ bored hours
at the Subaru dealership and the phone was active much more than usual. As
for damaging the battery, I don't worry since the "adaptive charging"
feature is gentle, making sure that the battery is up to full by alarm time
in the morning but never forcing the matter. There are important things in
life to worry about but charge times is not one of them, for me at least.

--
Noli sinere pessimi nequissimique te tristificare!

[sms]

On 5/5/2022 12:11 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2022-05-05 19:19, Andy Burnelli wrote:
>> I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
>> _frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.
>
> Somewhat related, I saw this past Saturday an article about a study
> testing charging batteries to full (of electric cars), or only a percent.
>
> The article is in Spanish, but you can use google translate to read it.
> It points to a study in German, but I do not see its link.
>
> Seems that the best is to limit the battery cycle to 20%/80%.

There are two ways that EV makers are able to guarantee their batteries
for 100K miles. The first is to limit how high it charges and how low it
discharges. The second is to define what constitutes "excessive capacity
loss."

[AJL]

On 5/5/2022 12:33 PM, John McGaw wrote:

> In my entire experience using mobiles I've never gotten to zero. I
> take my phone off of the wireless charger on my night table every
> morning, use the phone all day, and every evening I put it back.

Me too. I have always done it that way whether with wireless or regular
chargers. 100% charge every morning. And so far the battery has always
outlasted the phone before being replaced. And I've never needed it
(yet) but that extra 20% charge just might come in handy someday...

[Jolly Roger]

On 2022-05-05, John McGaw <Nob...@Nowh.ere> wrote:
>
> In my entire experience using mobiles I've never gotten to zero. I
> take my phone off of the wireless charger on my night table every
> morning, use the phone all day, and every evening I put it back.
> Sometimes it might be down to 35-45%. Last night, for the first time
> that I recall the phone warned me that it was low and was going into
> battery saving mode. That really shocked me but, looking back, I had
> wasted _many_ bored hours at the Subaru dealership and the phone was
> active much more than usual. As for damaging the battery, I don't
> worry since the "adaptive charging" feature is gentle, making sure
> that the battery is up to full by alarm time in the morning but never
> forcing the matter. There are important things in life to worry about
> but charge times is not one of them, for me at least.

Same here. I never think about charging, other than throwing it on the
charger before going to sleep. Our devices are here to serve us, and not
the other way around. Personally, I have far more productive things to
do than babysit my devices.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[Jolly Roger]

Same here. I keep a charge cable handy in the car and living room in
case I need it, but that's a rarity. I can't recall the last time I
needed it.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Thu, 5 May 2022 18:19:30 +0100, Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com>
wrote:

>I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
>_frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.

Why? Kinda reminds me the Chernobyl, where the fools were trying see
if they could squeeze some power out of the reactor that was almost,
but not quite shut down. It didn't go well for the Russians and is
likely to go badly with your battery.

Couldn't you just recharge the battery starting at 20% of capacity and
live with that? If you must run your phone overnight playing videos
that nobody watches, then buy an external battery bank and do your
best to kill it.

Do you also add gasoline to your car just before you totally run out
of gasoline?

Also, I have a little experiment going with two friends. We all have
the same Moto G Power (2020) phones that were purchased with a month
of each other. I also have an identical spare (loaner) phone, that I
don't use much. Usage patterns and apps are quite different between
us. So are the battery recharge patterns. Two of us use the stock 10
watt charger, while one uses a 30 watt charger. I also have a 30 watt
charger, but have only used it maybe 3 times, when I really needed a
fast charge. After about a year of data logging (using AccuBattery
Pro) the batteries on the 10 watt chargers are currently at 97% and
98% (from a 105% start when new) of the rated 5000ma-hr capacity. The
phone on the 30 watt charger is currently showing 92%. The
implication is that fast charging is slowly killing the battery. I
tend to recharge mine when it is 50% charged. The owner of the 30
watt charger seems to recharge at 20%, which might be another factor
in killing his battery. Partial screen grab:
<http://www.learnbydestroying.com/jeffl/crud/AccuBattery%20Pro%20Moto%20G%20Power%20(2020).jpg>
Full report in maybe 6 to 9 months.


--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Chris]

Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
charging will reduce the battery life.

[Carlos E.R.]

It would be nice if when pluging the charger the phone asked whether we
want a fast or a slow charge.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[sms]

On 5/6/2022 12:57 AM, Chris wrote:

<snip>

> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
> charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
> charging will reduce the battery life.

Actually there is no evidence that "fast charging," at the rates we're
currently seeing on most phones, damages batteries.

The phone firmware manages the charge rate. If you look at the Galaxy
S22, which Samsung touts as having a charge rate of up to 45 watts,
there is barely any difference in charge time between using a 45 watt
charger versus a 25 watt charger because the phone manages the charge
rate and the high rate only occurs when the battery is nearly empty. The
phone reduces the charge rate as the battery charges.

"According to industry experts, a battery when charged with a fast
charger is most stressed after the 80 percent charge level. This is the
time when high voltage current is not absorbed by the battery as
efficiently as it does when charging from zero to 50 percent.
Lithium-ion batteries are like a sponge – they absorb the charge
efficiently during the initial phase and begin to drop-off after 70-80
percent charge level.
<https://www.slashgear.com/779353/smartphone-fast-charging-technology-myths-and-facts>.

If you plug in a USB current/voltage/power meter during charging, you'll
see that the phone reduces the charging rate as the battery charges to
prevent stressing the battery.

The iPhone 13 Pro Max has a 16.75WH battery. Battery manufacturers
recommend a charge rate of 0.8C or less which would mean a 13.4W charge
rate. But the 0.8C recommendation is misleading because it assumes a
constant charge rate all the way up to 100%. In reality, there is no
damage from a higher charge rate when the charger rate is tapered down
as the battery charges, which is exactly how phones are now designed.
When you're talking about really fast charging, like the 200 watt
charging that Xiaomi is coming out with, then that may be another story.

Also see
<https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-409-charging-lithium-ion> and
<https://engineering.stanford.edu/magazine/article/rapid-charging-and-draining-doesn-t-damage-lithium-ion-battery-electrodes-much>.

[nospam]

In article <t52s8u$edg$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> > Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
> > charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
> > charging will reduce the battery life.
>
> Actually there is no evidence that "fast charging," at the rates we're
> currently seeing on most phones, damages batteries.

actually, there is extensive evidence.

whether it matters for a device that will be replaced in a couple of
years is another story.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 6 May 2022 07:57:08 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
>charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
>charging will reduce the battery life.

Nope, or at least not what I've seen with my testing (and screwing
around). A few decades ago, I decided that NiCd cells would only
become warm if over charged past 100%. Well, I was off a little but
my thermocouple tests showed that up to about 75% of full charge, I
could literally charge the NiCd cell at whatever sky high rate I found
amusing. The problem was that if I missed and went over about 85% of
full charge at the ridiculous rates I was using, the cell would
generate enough gas and heat to blow the end out and generally make a
mess.

Roll forward to a few years ago, and I'm doing the same charge tests
with LiIon cells. It was pretty much the same story. I could charge
at almost any rate I wanted as long as I didn't go over about 75 or
80% of full charge. The battery remained cool and did not overhead.
Past about 75%, the cell started to get warm. You can easily
reproduce the effect with any LiIon fast charger and a phone app that
displays battery temperature. I think I was using DevInfo Pro:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.asterisklab.devinfo>
Try: Temperature tab -> chrg_therm
and Temperature tab -> battery
Sorry, not graphs but other programs will plot most of the internal
sensors. Unfortunately, you won't see the battery temp rise very much
because the phone reduces the fast charge rate at 80% to some lower
number.

My guess(tm) is that it's not the temperature that kills the
batteries, but rather the charge rate and number of charge cycles that
does the damage.

Gotta run...

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 6 May 2022 03:11:39 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

>Actually there is no evidence that "fast charging," at the rates we're
>currently seeing on most phones, damages batteries.

I realize that it's anecdotal evidence, but two identical Moto G Power
(2020) phones, charged with 10 watt and 30 watt chargers, seem to show
that the measured battery capacity (ma-hr) is dropping for the 30 watt
charger. I'll admit that it's not much in the way of evidence or even
a controlled experiment, but it should provide a hint that there might
be a problem.

About 6 months after I bought my first Moto G Power (2020), I bought
another identical phone on eBay as a spare and loaner. It arrived
with a battery life showing 97% of rated capacity. At the time, my
original phone was showing 105%. I asked the sell what he was doing
to cause the decrease. I eventually found that he was using
replacement charger that indicated "Turbo Power connected" on the home
screen, which methinks is Motorola speak for 30 watt charging. My 10
watt charger displays "Charging Rapidly". Not the best evidence, but
does suggest a possible problem. Also, it's difficult for me to
perform battery life tests because the phone will be obsolete by the
time my testing is complete.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 06 May 2022 07:53:16 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>I think I was using DevInfo Pro:
><https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.asterisklab.devinfo>
>Try: Temperature tab -> chrg_therm
>and Temperature tab -> battery

Oops. Wrong app. The one I was using is:
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.liuzh.deviceinfo>

[Jolly Roger]

On 2022-05-06, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, 5 May 2022 18:19:30 +0100, Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
>>> _frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.
>>
>> Why? Kinda reminds me the Chernobyl, where the fools were trying see
>> if they could squeeze some power out of the reactor that was almost,
>> but not quite shut down. It didn't go well for the Russians and is
>> likely to go badly with your battery.
>>

>> (snip)

>>
>> After about a year of data logging (using AccuBattery Pro) the
>> batteries on the 10 watt chargers are currently at 97% and 98% (from
>> a 105% start when new) of the rated 5000ma-hr capacity. The phone on
>> the 30 watt charger is currently showing 92%. The implication is
>> that fast charging is slowly killing the battery.
>
> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact.
> Fast charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery,
> therefore fast charging will reduce the battery life.

It's also an established fact that running a battery down to zero
repeatedly will increase heat and prematurely age the battery as well.
Laughably, Arlen (Andy) is willingly harming his battery for no real
benefit. You can't fix stupid. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

[Andy Burnelli]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>>I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
>>_frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.
>
> Why?

That's like asking a chemistry teacher why there's a chemistry lab.
Or asking a physics professor why she bothers to run the lab.
Or asking why a microbiology class bothers to grow bacterial cultures.

Bear in mind that the answer to the question of what kind of charging
damages a smartphone battery has about a billi... no... a few billion
questions on the Internet... with answers spanning the globe.

So it's not just me who is curious what happens in the real world.

I've always been curious about the best way to do almost any thing.
And destructive testing is a fantastic way to figure out what really
happens in the real world under real world conditions, even as you can't
hope to run a "consumers report" style full-fledged scientific
investigation with basic home equipment.

Still... I try to learn... and destructive testing is part of learning.
When I was a kid, my dad kept a box of old "stuff" for me to take apart.

The first time I took apart a 6V battery, it stunk and was all crumbly.
But then I _learned_ how they make 9V batteries by taking it apart.
And, I was shocked when I took apart a Radio Shack D-sized NiCad battery!

In graduate school, I was tasked with figuring out why defibrillators
failed and then when I took apart the batteries, I was shocked (in the
opposite direction!) when I took apart their GE C-cell soldered battery
assembly).

What a freaking difference between the Radio Shack "D", um, I mean "secret
C" cell Ni-Cad and the GE industrial strength C cells by weight alone!

I shorted them, of course, where the Radio Shack c cell barely burned the
wire but where the huuuuuuuuuuuuuuuge current surge of the low-impedence
current source of the GE battery literally burned out a Romex ground wire!

When I took apart old TVs, I would marvel at the intricacy of the vacuum
tubes and when I imploded the monitor, I was surprised by the force. I'd
even marvel as the lovely yellow selenium (I think it was selenium) plates
which were used as diodes (although I was sure not to overheat them!).

When I took apart a 1950's baseball catchers mitt and my mother's 1940's
era high heels, I marveled at the fantastic construction, just as I did
when I rewound my own alternator coils (it's hard to keep the wires taught
enough not to vibrate and to coat them with a non-conductive heat-resistant
coating with just a kitchen oven and bench vise).

I replaced my battery's sulfuric acid and I autopsy every part that ever
failed on my cars and bikes just so that I learn how & why they failed.

When I moved from NY I had to empty my welding tanks, so I filled up
balloons with oxygen and acetylene, and I _learned_ how _loud_ that could
be.

In chemistry class, I mixed iodine crystals with nitric acid, and after
drying with alcohol and acetone, a fly landing on it would touch it off
(emanating a lovely purple cloud).

In Physics lab, I'd stick circa 30VDC large electrolytic caps in the lab
bench switched branch of electrical sockets - which I'm sure you know what
they looked like even before the autopsy.

To learn about impedance, I literally hooked up a 120VAC circuit using
_only_ capacitors, resistors and coils, where, since you know the math,
it's hard to find handy the right size for those things.

I even ran an autopsy on my cat (internal damage as far as I could tell).

Why does anyone run any experiment?
--
The only class that doesn't have a lab that SHOULD are math classes
(which is why, I think, kids don't learn math as well as they can).

[Jolly Roger]

On 2022-05-06, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
> On 5/6/2022 12:57 AM, Chris wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact.
>> Fast charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery,
>> therefore fast charging will reduce the battery life.
>
> Actually there is no evidence that "fast charging," at the rates we're
> currently seeing on most phones, damages batteries.

Wrong. There's plenty of evidence that fast charging increases heat
which is damaging to batteries.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2022-05-06, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>
> My guess(tm) is that it's not the temperature that kills the
> batteries, but rather the charge rate and number of charge cycles that
> does the damage.

Temperature definitely plays a part in it.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On 6 May 2022 15:44:56 GMT, Jolly Roger <jolly...@pobox.com> wrote:

>On 2022-05-06, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>>
>> My guess(tm) is that it's not the temperature that kills the
>> batteries, but rather the charge rate and number of charge cycles that
>> does the damage.

>Temperature definitely plays a part in it.

I was referring to charging temperature, not ambient temperature.
LiIon cells are useless below 0C. Body heat helps keep the phone
warm. Yes, temperature has an effect:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=lithium+ion+battery+cold+weather>

However, I'm talking about the temperature rise inside the LiIon cell
during charging. If the charge controller is worthy of its name, one
of its primary functions is to limit the temperature rise inside the
battery. If it doesn't do it's job, then yes, there will be problems.
However, if it keeps the temperature rise reasonable by reducing the
charge rate, there should be no loss in cell life.

[Andy Burnelli]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> Oops. Wrong app. The one I was using is:
> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.liuzh.deviceinfo>

To add more to that suggestion, personally I install only apps that are GSF
free and that don't contain ads and which have high'ish ratings & installs.

*DevCheck Hardware and System Info* by flar2
Free + inapp, ad free, google free, gsf free, rated 4.8, 1M+ installs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=flar2.devcheck>

*Inware* by evowizz
Free, ad free, google free, gsf free, rated 4.4, 100K+ installs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.evo.inware>

*Device Info HW* by Andrey Efremov
Free, ad free, google free, gsf free, rated 4.7, 1M+ installs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=ru.andr7e.deviceinfohw>

My FOSS google play store client sets filters to only show such apps.
<https://i.postimg.cc/RF06HBB3/aurora05.jpg> Only high ratings & installs
<https://i.postimg.cc/RhpcFLbH/aurora16.jpg> Filter out all Google apps
<https://i.postimg.cc/PrvDyT8Y/aurora03.jpg> Spoof hardware & geolocation
<https://i.postimg.cc/SQ2DS1wd/aurora18.jpg> Spoof any device & OS version
<https://i.postimg.cc/V6tyDpNd/aurora17.jpg> Do NOT delete APK postinstall
<https://i.postimg.cc/7PdGfdQ6/aurora08.jpg> Save search filter settings

Such that the files are saved from Android directly to a drive on Windows.
<https://i.postimg.cc/cJK9rbjn/update03.jpg> APKs saved into Windows drive
<https://i.postimg.cc/Y0wQWVJn/update08.jpg> Android system on Windows

Although for some reason, moving from Android 11 to 12 removed hundreds!
<https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!
<https://i.postimg.cc/0QN3z96f/update13.jpg> Hundreds of apps are gone.

Where a few hundred apps did NOT get deleted (but even Zoom disappeared)
<https://i.postimg.cc/15m2YzgR/update15.jpg> Where did they go?
<https://i.postimg.cc/brtpv9T1/update17.jpg> Even Zoom disappeared!
<https://i.postimg.cc/fy7P3bJR/update18.jpg> Updates in 3 locations

Luckily Android is tied directly to Windows so you can slide them all back.
<https://i.postimg.cc/N0G1TXcZ/scrcpy01.jpg> Mirror Android on any PC
<https://i.postimg.cc/hjkVFyqJ/scrcpy07.jpg> Android mnt as drive letter
<https://i.postimg.cc/9FJMKYch/scrcpy21.jpg> Windows Drive: === Android
<https://i.postimg.cc/c4Wq5x9j/scrcpy22.jpg> Vysor IP address option

Even iOS is tied directly to Windows using the same tools Android does.
<https://i.postimg.cc/QNwjsCDM/vysor01.jpg> Vysor Android/iOS PC mirror

Where the Windows mouse & keyboard work over Wi-Fi to the Android phone.
<https://i.postimg.cc/mrz6gJpC/scrcpy23.jpg> Android SMS/MMS on Window

And you can just drag and drop an APK from Windows to Android over Wi-Fi.
<https://i.postimg.cc/wvsbcNBz/scrcpy05.jpg> Drag APK from Windows

So it's not hard to recover even with hundreds of apps gone AWOL.

But what you see here are the adfree hardware device info apps I suggest:
*DevCheck Hardware and System Info* by flar2
*Inware* by evowizz
*Device Info HW* by Andrey Efremov

[sms]

On 5/6/2022 7:53 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2022 07:57:08 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
>> charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
>> charging will reduce the battery life.
>
> Nope, or at least not what I've seen with my testing (and screwing
> around). A few decades ago, I decided that NiCd cells would only
> become warm if over charged past 100%. Well, I was off a little but
> my thermocouple tests showed that up to about 75% of full charge, I
> could literally charge the NiCd cell at whatever sky high rate I found
> amusing. The problem was that if I missed and went over about 85% of
> full charge at the ridiculous rates I was using, the cell would
> generate enough gas and heat to blow the end out and generally make a
> mess.

Ni-cad cells are less efficient when slow-charged (see
<https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-407-charging-nickel-cadmium>).

NiMH cells are best charged using the "step-differential" method (see
<https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-408-charging-nickel-metal-hydride>).

It seems like many people want to believe that slow-charging batteries
has some benefit in longevity and/or capacity, so you see statements
like "it is a known fact...," even when the statements are really not true.

If the choice is only between a) "fast charge at high-current to 100%
capacity" versus b) slow-charge at low current to 100% capacity" then
yes, slow charging is better, but that's not how modern smart phones, or
modern electric vehicles, with lithium-based batteries actually are charged.

[nospam]

In article <t53kkp$kjq$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Ni-cad cells are less efficient when slow-charged (see

your link states that the charge efficiency is better at faster rates,
not battery health. you're moving the goalposts, as usual.

also, nicad isn't used in consumer products anymore, nor are the
batteries even available (other than special purpose).

> NiMH cells are best charged using the "step-differential" method (see

step-differential is proof that fast charging can be a problem,
otherwise it wouldn't step down when it reaches a certain threshold.

although nimh is still used in some devices, it's nowhere near as
common as lithium ion, the topic of the thread.

you're grasping at straws.

> It seems like many people want to believe that slow-charging batteries
> has some benefit in longevity and/or capacity, so you see statements
> like "it is a known fact...," even when the statements are really not true.

it seems like you are trolling again.

> If the choice is only between a) "fast charge at high-current to 100%
> capacity" versus b) slow-charge at low current to 100% capacity" then
> yes, slow charging is better, but that's not how modern smart phones, or
> modern electric vehicles, with lithium-based batteries actually are charged.

straw man.

[Wade Garrett]

On 5/6/22 11:43 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
> On 2022-05-06, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/6/2022 12:57 AM, Chris wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact.
>>> Fast charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery,
>>> therefore fast charging will reduce the battery life.
>>
>> Actually there is no evidence that "fast charging," at the rates we're
>> currently seeing on most phones, damages batteries.
>
> Wrong. There's plenty of evidence that fast charging increases heat
> which is damaging to batteries.
>

I worry about heat too. Wireless charging my iPhone on the Qi pad in my
car warms the phone...and more so if I leave it in its case.

And it warms even more if I also rest it on the sticky pad I sometimes
keep on the car's charge pad to prevent the phone from sliding when
turning corners.

--
There are two ways to conquer and enslave a country. One is by the
sword, the other is by debt.
- John Adams

[Jolly Roger]

On 2022-05-06, Wade Garrett <Wa...@cooler.net> wrote:
> On 5/6/22 11:43 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2022-05-06, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/6/2022 12:57 AM, Chris wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact.
>>>> Fast charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery,
>>>> therefore fast charging will reduce the battery life.
>>>
>>> Actually there is no evidence that "fast charging," at the rates
>>> we're currently seeing on most phones, damages batteries.
>>
>> Wrong. There's plenty of evidence that fast charging increases heat
>> which is damaging to batteries.
>>
> I worry about heat too. Wireless charging my iPhone on the Qi pad in
> my car warms the phone...and more so if I leave it in its case.
>
> And it warms even more if I also rest it on the sticky pad I sometimes
> keep on the car's charge pad to prevent the phone from sliding when
> turning corners.

Quod sequitur. Wireless charging is generally less efficient than using
a physical connection, and the greater the distance between the coils,
the less efficient the transfer of energy is and the more heat gets
generated. A case will increase the distance and lessen the efficiency.

Since I use an old iPhone SE as a dash cam in my car, and I don't smoke,
I have a Lightning to USB charge cable semi-permanently connected to the
cigarette lighter port in the center console. So I just use that same
cable in the extremely rare instances I need to charge my daily-driver
iPhone in the car (can't actually remember the last time that was though
- probably on a road trip).

[sms]

On 5/6/2022 11:29 AM, Wade Garrett wrote:
> On 5/6/22 11:43 AM, Jolly Roger wrote:
>> On 2022-05-06, sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>>> On 5/6/2022 12:57 AM, Chris wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact.
>>>> Fast charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery,
>>>> therefore fast charging will reduce the battery life.
>>>
>>> Actually there is no evidence that "fast charging," at the rates we're
>>> currently seeing on most phones, damages batteries.
>>
>> Wrong. There's plenty of evidence that fast charging increases heat
>> which is damaging to batteries.
>>
> I worry about heat too. Wireless charging my iPhone on the Qi pad in my
> car warms the phone...and more so if I leave it in its case.
>
> And it warms even more if I also rest it on the sticky pad I sometimes
> keep on the car's charge pad to prevent the phone from sliding when
> turning corners.

Inductive charging is not the same as wired charging.

For wired charging, there is no downside to proper fast charging that
charges at a higher rate when the battery is very discharged then
reducing the charge rate as the battery fills.

From
<https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/does-fast-charging-affect-battery-life-6-phone-battery-questions-answered/>:

"Unless there's some technical flaw with your battery or charger
electronics, however, using a fast charger won't do your phone's battery
any long-term damage.

Here's why. Fast-charging batteries work in two phases. The first phase
applies a blast of voltage to the empty or nearly empty battery. This
gives you that blazing charge of from 50% to 70% in the first 10, 15 or
30 minutes. That's because during the first phase of charging, batteries
can absorb a charge quickly without major negative effects on their
long-term health."

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 6 May 2022 17:44:09 +0100, Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com>
wrote:

>Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>
>> Oops. Wrong app. The one I was using is:
>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.liuzh.deviceinfo>

>To add more to that suggestion, personally I install only apps that are GSF
>free and that don't contain ads and which have high'ish ratings & installs.

What's a GSF? All I could find was Golden State Foods.

My criteria for apps is no adds and the ability to do at least the one
thing that I need very well. I don't care about the rest.

>Although for some reason, moving from Android 11 to 12 removed hundreds!

Ummm... How many apps do you have on your Android phone? See:
Settings -> Apps and Notifications
and look for something like "See all 202 apps". Mine has 202 apps,
which I consider to be an overdose.

> <https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!

I'm still on Android 11 and am now at end of life with the last
security update on Apr 22, 2022.
<https://motorola-global-portal.custhelp.com/app/software-security-page/g_id/6806#gs=eyJndWlkZUlEIjo2ODA2LCJxdWVzdGlvbklEIjo0LCJyZXNwb25zZUlEIjoyMSwiZ3VpZGVTZXNzaW9uIjoiSjFJZ2huRXAiLCJzZXNzaW9uSUQiOiJKMUlnaG5FcCJ9>
That's a 2 year useful life from date of Apr 2020 release. Part of
the problem is that Motorola has too many models to maintain:
"Evolution of Motorola Moto G 2013 - 2021"
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8d2tUYjn0U>

>So it's not hard to recover even with hundreds of apps gone AWOL.

I would think that the Android 12 update did you a favor. Time for a
spring cleaning. Wipe everything and start over from scratch.

>But what you see here are the adfree hardware device info apps I suggest:
> *DevCheck Hardware and System Info* by flar2
> *Inware* by evowizz
> *Device Info HW* by Andrey Efremov

Ok, I'll give them a try but will probably add them to my "run once"
app collection. Thanks for including the author's name. Apps with
duplicated names are becoming all too common.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:07:35 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

>On 5/6/2022 7:53 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 07:57:08 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
>>> charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
>>> charging will reduce the battery life.
>>
>> Nope, or at least not what I've seen with my testing (and screwing
>> around). A few decades ago, I decided that NiCd cells would only
>> become warm if over charged past 100%. Well, I was off a little but
>> my thermocouple tests showed that up to about 75% of full charge, I
>> could literally charge the NiCd cell at whatever sky high rate I found
>> amusing. The problem was that if I missed and went over about 85% of
>> full charge at the ridiculous rates I was using, the cell would
>> generate enough gas and heat to blow the end out and generally make a
>> mess.
>
>Ni-cad cells are less efficient when slow-charged (see
><https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-407-charging-nickel-cadmium>).

"Where does it say that on the URL you mentioned? All I find is:
To achieve a reliable voltage signature, the charge rate must be 0.5C
and higher. Slower charging produces a less defined voltage drop,
especially if the cells are mismatched in which case each cell reaches
full charge at a different time point."
In other words, the dip in terminal voltage that defines EOC
(end-of-charge) is less obvious for a slow charge than for a faster
charge. If the charge controller misses this dip, it could easily
overcharge the NiCd battery and ruin it. There's nothing in there
about "efficiency".

>NiMH cells are best charged using the "step-differential" method (see
><https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-408-charging-nickel-metal-hydride>).

I think we have different definitions of what is "best". From the
above URL:

"Chargers utilizing the step-differential or other aggressive charge
methods achieve a capacity gain of about 6 percent over a more basic
charger. Although a higher capacity is desirable, filling the battery
to the brim adds stress and shortens the overall battery life. Rather
than achieving the expected 350 - 400 service cycles, the aggressive
charger might exhaust the pack after 300 cycles."

I read that as a 6% theoretical gain, at the cost of 100 service
cycles or about 30% of the useful life of the battery. As I vaguely
recall, the justification for step-differential charging was that it
was less likely to overcharge a battery when the battery was being
"topped off" near the EOC. The 30% loss of useful life was considered
justifiable compared to killing the battery from overcharging.

>It seems like many people want to believe that slow-charging batteries
>has some benefit in longevity and/or capacity, so you see statements
>like "it is a known fact...," even when the statements are really not true.

It is a known fact that most known facts are wrong.

Please note that until you brought up the term "battery", which means
more than one "cell", the discussion was about cell phones, which
currently favor one LiIon cell and do not use a "battery" of cells.
With a single cell, the complexities of a BMS (battery management
system), cell balancing, over/under voltage, over/under current, etc
are not quite as complexicated as with a battery of cells.

>If the choice is only between a) "fast charge at high-current to 100%
>capacity" versus b) slow-charge at low current to 100% capacity" then
>yes, slow charging is better, but that's not how modern smart phones, or
>modern electric vehicles, with lithium-based batteries actually are charged.

True. Again, we started this discussion with single LiIon cells as
found in smartphones. It would be nice if your could limit the
discussion to this arrangement.

Note that the common dictionary definition of battery is "consisting
of one or more cells". It wasn't always like that, but since
literally everyone uses battery when they should be using call, the
official definition was mutilated to accommodate an expanded
definition.

[AJL]

On 5/6/2022 2:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> Note that the common dictionary definition of battery is "consisting
> of one or more cells". It wasn't always like that, but since
> literally everyone uses battery when they should be using call, the
> official definition was mutilated to accommodate an expanded
> definition.

Language changes. Always has. Battery is a correct usage for cell phones
these days according to several dictionaries. Just as doing things you
really really enjoy makes you gay. Well at least it did in my youth...

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 6 May 2022 16:43:41 +0100, Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com>
wrote:

>Jeff Liebermann wrote:

Please not that I didn't write the following quote, you did. Please
watch your attributions.

>>>I am testing if it takes _longer_ to "fast charge" a phone if you
>>>_frequently_ let the battery run down to zero - and it seems to be.
>>
>> Why?
>
>That's like asking a chemistry teacher why there's a chemistry lab.
>Or asking a physics professor why she bothers to run the lab.
>Or asking why a microbiology class bothers to grow bacterial cultures.

No, it's not. I guess I should be more specific. I would like to
know why you find it necessary to test a LiIon cell in a charge range
of zero to 20%, where literally every recommendation by the
manufacturers declare that to be an RBI (really bad idea)? Looks that
specs for any BMS (battery management system) found inside most LiIon
battery packs. There is a feature that literally disconnects the cell
if the terminal voltage goes below some value which usually works out
to about 20% charge. Maybe this will help you understand the problem
you're creating for yourself:
"Lithium Ion Cell Operating Window"
<https://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm>
Notice that the "operating area" is between 20% and 90% SOC.

>So it's not just me who is curious what happens in the real world.

Yes, but you are not the entire real world. Your currently
undisclosed operating criteria is not the same as every user and
certainly not the same as the cell phone manufacturer. The
manufacturer wants big numbers because big number sell phones.
Whatever it takes to produce big numbers balanced by cost and safety
issues. Big numbers are rather useless if the phone catches fire in
the owners pocket. So, the game of battery specmanship degenerates
into squeezing as many watt-hours out of the battery as possible by
any means deemed economical (and maybe reliable). Do it wrong, and
you have a situation like Apple, where the phone had to be slowed down
to produce a reasonable runtime as the battery aged. At that point,
the user gets involved and tries to squeeze out as much power as
possible. However, they can't because the manufacturer has already
done that with a complexicated BMS algorithm. So the user looks to
see what can be gained by breaking the safety rules. Good luck. If
you are actually able to run the phone at extremely low SOC, then the
manufacturer has screwed up and is selling an unsafe phone, battery,
or both. What phone and battery are you using and I'll be sure to
blacklist it.

>I've always been curious about the best way to do almost any thing.
>And destructive testing is a fantastic way to figure out what really
>happens in the real world under real world conditions, even as you can't
>hope to run a "consumers report" style full-fledged scientific
>investigation with basic home equipment.

Please note my domain name, LearnByDestroying.com. The intent is
slightly different from yours. It's my contention that one does not
understand how something works without first breaking it, and
subsequently fixing it. Destructive testing, without subsequent
understanding (and enlightenment) is useless.

>Still... I try to learn... and destructive testing is part of learning.

It's a tiny part but admittedly the fun part. It's lots of fun to
blow things up. It's less fun, but more educational to understand how
the device you just destroyed functions. When you destroy something
(like your phone battery), do you take or record measurements? Do you
record a video for an instant replay? Have you worked out in advance
what you expect to happen? Do you look for anomalies? Do you own a
data logger? How would blowing up a cell phone battery demonstrate
anything if you don't know at what voltage (or SOC) and temperature it
blew up? Did you put a plastic bag over the phone to capture any
gasses (and flying glass) produced? Do you have a new battery or
phone available for comparisons? Without these, all you've "learned"
is how to blow up a battery or phone.

>When I was a kid, my dad kept a box of old "stuff" for me to take apart.

Hint: I still act like I'm kid. I even take things apart BEFORE I
try operating them.

>Why does anyone run any experiment?

Usually because they are suspicious of the established theories of
operation and have reason to suspect that parts of the theories are
wrong or badly understood.

[sms]

On 5/6/2022 2:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

<snip>

> "Where does it say that on the URL you mentioned? All I find is:
> To achieve a reliable voltage signature, the charge rate must be 0.5C
> and higher. Slower charging produces a less defined voltage drop,
> especially if the cells are mismatched in which case each cell reaches
> full charge at a different time point."

"Fast charging improves the charge efficiency. At 1C charge rate, the
efficiency of a standard NiCd is 91 percent and the charge time is about
an hour (66 minutes at 91 percent). On a slow charger, the efficiency
drops to 71 percent, prolonging the charge time to about 14 hours at 0.1C."

[Jeff Liebermann]

The original definition of battery referred to a collection of
artillery for military purposes.
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artillery_battery>
"Historically the term "battery" referred to a cluster of cannon in
action as a group, either in a temporary field position during a
battle or at the siege of a fortress or a city."

Ok. Let's say you have exactly one cannon. Would you call it a
"battery"? Or would you call it a "battery of cannon"? Methinks not.
So why would you call a single cell, as found in a cell phone, a
"battery"?

What do you call a collection of cells? A gallery of cells such as
celery?

Drivel:
One mouse, two mice.
One house, two hice?

[Wade Garrett]

Just curious- do you leave the phone sitting on the dash when parking
the car in the street or parking lot?

--
If an old dude ever gives you advice while peeling an apple with a
pocket knife and eating the pieces right off the blade, you should
probably take it.

[AJL]

On 5/6/2022 3:43 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2022 15:04:21 -0700, AJL <noe...@none.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/6/2022 2:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>>> Note that the common dictionary definition of battery is
>>> "consisting of one or more cells". It wasn't always like that,
>>> but since literally everyone uses battery when they should be
>>> using call, the official definition was mutilated to accommodate
>>> an expanded definition.
>>
>> Language changes. Always has. Battery is a correct usage for cell
>> phones these days according to several dictionaries. Just as doing
>> things you really really enjoy makes you gay. Well at least it did
>> in my youth...
>
> The original definition of battery referred to a collection of
> artillery for military purposes.
> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artillery_battery> "Historically the
> term "battery" referred to a cluster of cannon in action as a group,
> either in a temporary field position during a battle or at the siege
> of a fortress or a city."

And the original definition of gay was happy. I repeat, language
changes. Dictionaries usually give the current meaning, though they
sometimes disagree as well.

> Ok. Let's say you have exactly one cannon. Would you call it a
> "battery"? Or would you call it a "battery of cannon"?

I'd call it a cannon. That's current usage. Language is not always
logical...

> Methinks not. So why would you call a single cell, as found in a cell
> phone, a "battery"?

Because it's the current common usage.

> What do you call a collection of cells?

A battery. My 9 volt battery contains a collection of cells. Likewise my
car battery. Current usage...

> A gallery of cells such as celery?

That may be the usage someday, you never know... 8-O

> Drivel: One mouse, two mice. One house, two hice?

One Usenet post is a post, several Usenet posts are a fence??

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Fri, 6 May 2022 15:42:02 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
wrote:

Oops. I missed that part. However, it's still wrong. 1C is a fast
charge for a NiCD. 0.1C is a normal charge rate. 0.05C to 0.1C is a
trickle charge:
<https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/electronic_components/battery-technology/nicad-nicd-nickel-cadmium-recharging.php>
"Normally cells are charged at a rate of around C/10."

C/10 is maintained to where the NiCd is charged to about 70% SOC:
"It is found that during the first stage of charging, up to about 70%
of full charge, the charging process is nearly 100% efficient. After
this it falls."

So, C/10 is considered a normal charge.

"It is found that a fast charge for NiCd cells also improves charge
efficiency. At a 1C charge rate, the overall charge efficiency of a
standard NiCd is about 90%"

So, 1C is considered a fast charge.

That leaves a trickle charge:
"This trickle charge can be achieved safely by applying a small
current to the cell or cells at a level between about 0.05C and 0.1C."

So, 0.05C and 0.1C are considered a trickle.

Incidentally, my NiCd fast charge testing was mostly done at 10C with
ocassional excursions up to 25C. Using 800ma-hr AA NiCd cells, 25C is
20Amps charge current.

[nospam]

In article <t53ssf$ogt$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> For wired charging, there is no downside to proper fast charging that
> charges at a higher rate when the battery is very discharged then
> reducing the charge rate as the battery fills.

false.

<https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2021/12/211202153918.htm>
When a battery is charged too quickly, however, intercalation
becomes a trickier business. Instead of smoothly getting into the
graphite, the lithium ions tend to aggregate on top of the anode's
surface, resulting in a "plating" effect that can cause terminal
damage -- no pun intended -- to a battery.
...
"The faster we charge our battery, the more atomically disordered
the anode will become, which will ultimately prevent the lithium ions
from being able to move back and forth," Abraham said. "The key
is to find ways to either prevent this loss of organization or to
somehow modify the graphite particles so that the lithium ions can
intercalate more efficiently."

<https://www.imeche.org/news/news-article/fast-charging-can-damage-elect
ric-car-batteries-in-just-25-cycles>
Fast-charging of electric batteries can ruin their capacity after
just 25 charges, researchers have said, after they ran experiments
on batteries used in some popular electric cars.

...

> Here's why. Fast-charging batteries work in two phases. The first phase
> applies a blast of voltage to the empty or nearly empty battery. This
> gives you that blazing charge of from 50% to 70% in the first 10, 15 or
> 30 minutes. That's because during the first phase of charging, batteries
> can absorb a charge quickly without major negative effects on their
> long-term health."

'without major negative effects' is very different than *no* negative
effects.

[nospam]

In article <9t2b7hpv47g0flnoi...@4ax.com>, Jeff

Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:

> >To add more to that suggestion, personally I install only apps that are GSF
> >free and that don't contain ads and which have high'ish ratings & installs.
>
> What's a GSF? All I could find was Golden State Foods.

google services framework

[nospam]

In article <er4b7hpdsec422dmg...@4ax.com>, Jeff

he's forever moving the goalposts.

> Note that the common dictionary definition of battery is "consisting
> of one or more cells". It wasn't always like that, but since
> literally everyone uses battery when they should be using call, the
> official definition was mutilated to accommodate an expanded
> definition.

yep. language evolves.

[nospam]

In article <t53pdq$s0q$1...@dont-email.me>, Wade Garrett <Wa...@cooler.net>
wrote:

> And it warms even more if I also rest it on the sticky pad I sometimes
> keep on the car's charge pad to prevent the phone from sliding when
> turning corners.

slow down!

[Clifford Heath]

On 7/5/22 7:26 am, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2022 17:44:09 +0100, Andy Burnelli <sp...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>>
>>> Oops. Wrong app. The one I was using is:
>>> <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.liuzh.deviceinfo>
>
>> To add more to that suggestion, personally I install only apps that are GSF
>> free and that don't contain ads and which have high'ish ratings & installs.
>
> What's a GSF? All I could find was Golden State Foods.

GNU Software Foundation perhaps?

[John McGaw]

On 5/6/2022 5:14 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
snip...

>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
>> charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
>> charging will reduce the battery life.
>

> It would be nice if when pluging the charger the phone asked whether we
> want a fast or a slow charge.
>
>

Actually, the "adaptive charging" option seems to do that but without
asking. Place the phone on the wireless stand after the phone knows that it
is "sleepy time" and it will automatically restrict the charge rate to what
is needed to have 100% at the next alarm time. It has seemed to work fine
for me on my Pixel 6 Pro, anyway. Of course you have to switch the option
on in settings before it will know to do that. I'm guessing that this will
work with plugged-in charging but I have never really tried and I almost
never used wired charging except when in the car on a long road trip.

--
Noli sinere pessimi nequissimique te tristificare!

[sms]

There's no reason to manually select slow charge or fast charge on
recent vintage iPhones or Android phones. The phone automatically sets
the charge rate based on the charge level of the battery. There's no
down-side to fast charging a battery that has a low amount of charge and
then having the charger reduce the power as the battery level increases.

If someone really wants to charge as slow as possible, with a wired
charger, you can use a data blocker and the charger will be unable to
communicate with the phone and will default to the lowest charge rate,
i.e. <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B082WDHS22> or
<https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00T0DW3F8>. For a wireless charger, use one
that plugs into a USB-A power adapter and ensure that you're using only
a 2.5 watt or 5 watt power adapter.

[nospam]

In article <t54ghq$vhp$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> If someone really wants to charge as slow as possible, with a wired
> charger, you can use a data blocker and the charger will be unable to
> communicate with the phone and will default to the lowest charge rate,

which will be extremely slow and might even be insufficient to overcome
idle demands of the device because it will be 5V@100ma, or 1/2 watt,
assuming it works at all, since such adapters are non-compliant with
the usb spec.

a better and more practical solution is use a 5w/1a charger, which most
people have.

[Andy Burnelli]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>>To add more to that suggestion, personally I install only apps that are GSF
>>free and that don't contain ads and which have high'ish ratings & installs.
>
> What's a GSF? All I could find was Golden State Foods.

It's worse than that, but just as prevalent in apps you don't want it in.
Can you handle detail, perhaps with a bit of confusion involved on my part?

It's actually difficult to find a _good_ explanation of GSF for you.
<https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+android+%22google+services+framework>

But I just made these two graphics for you to illustrate the general idea:
<https://i.postimg.cc/0Q4xmPPR/gsfid01.jpg> How to change GSF ID
<https://i.postimg.cc/HkTxTWLB/gsfid02.jpg> Filter out GSF apps

I'd welcome a better description from someone here than I can find for you.

For example, this sounds innocuous, right?
<https://m.apkpure.com/google-services-framework/com.google.android.gsf>
Google Play services framework is used to update Google apps
and apps from Google Play. This component provides core functionality
like authentication to your Google services, synchronized contacts,
access to all the latest user privacy settings, and higher quality,
lower-powered location based services. Google Play services framework
also enhances your app experience. It speeds up offline searches,
provides more immersive maps, and improves gaming experiences.
Apps may not work if you uninstall Google Play services framework."

This is a completely _different_ description, isn't it, of what GSF is?
<https://www.technologitouch.com/tech-tips/what-is-google-services-framework/>
"The Google Services Framework For Android is the foundational program
for Android smartphones. This application is in charge of all of the
operating system's services. By utilizing the application's features,
you will be able to execute any application loaded on your devices
without difficulty. You may experience issues with your device's
operation while using it."

Here's a stackexchange question on it, but even there, they gloss over what
GSF is and concentrate only on what Google Play Services is instead.
*What is Google Play Services & Google Services Framework (gapps)?*
<https://android.stackexchange.com/questions/216176/what-is-the-exact-functionality-of-google-play-services-google-services-framew>

If you can find a good description of GSF, I'll be all ears, trust me,
where the _simplest_ way I can explain what I think it is - is that it's a
set of APIs from our good old trustworthy friends at Google that many apps
can link to so that they don't have to write calls for stuff that Google
provides for them.

That should make you feel real confident in using apps that use it!
Luckily, the FOSS google play store clients clearly list those apps
as you can see in this snapshot I made moments ago of my Android phone.
<https://i.postimg.cc/HkTxTWLB/gsfid02.jpg> Filter out GSF apps

The problem is that GSF is sneaky too, since it comes from you know who.
<https://i.postimg.cc/X7ZspnsG/gsfid01.jpg> I just changed my GSF ID

Personally I prefer to stay away from "SDKs" that other apps link to that
our good old friend Google provides to them, presumably for a reason.

> My criteria for apps is no adds and the ability to do at least the one
> thing that I need very well. I don't care about the rest.

I have so many APKs that I install on so many phones that I keep an archive
<https://i.postimg.cc/bN875p8b/apk01.jpg> 1600 APKs extracted onto Windows

All the FOSS google play store clients have filters for GSF as shown here.
<https://i.postimg.cc/W1BwgSpm/aurora14.jpg> Filter out GSF apps

You'd be hard pressed to find better apps than the ones I use, e.g.,
say you wanted to know whether your phone was connecting to your unique
femtocell tower ID or you needed to know what your neighbor's Wi-Fi signal
strength is, nicely graphed along with yours with the typical channel
graph, then I'd _start_ with finding a free, ad free, google free, gsf
free, app with usually a 4+ rating and, oh, over a million installations,
and then, if none show up, you slowly open your search criteria...

Most of my apps are FOSS but there isn't a switch specifically for that.
For example this ia one of the best FOSS application managers for Android.
<https://github.com/MuntashirAkon/AppManager>

You can pages upon pages of information for any one given app with that.
<https://i.postimg.cc/mgFkM1bs/apk05.jpg> Sort by install or last update

Such as Activities, Services, installation date, updates, services,
receivers, providers, app ops, permissions, trackers, versions, features,
configuration, signatures, shared libs, etc.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gt53TdVt/apk06.jpg> View every activity in each app

These app managers are useful when you search by installed or updated dates
<https://i.postimg.cc/MZPpFmHw/apk07.jpg> List by install or update date

And, of course, they give you an idea of the number of trackers in each app
<https://i.postimg.cc/L5gnX3GS/linktopc07.jpg> List the trackers

What you're looking for is the best app which is also the least intrusive,
which, let's be clear, probably takes time to get to know the app well.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Gmj8xDYc/intent05.jpg> Call apps by intent

But you have to start by finding the best starting point for any
functionality, so, for example, for Wi-Fi/Cellular debuggers, start with
free ad free google free gsf free highly rated often downloaded apps.

An example is this wi-fi debugger which I personally find rather useful.
*Cellular-Z*, by JerseyHo
Free, ad free, google free, gsf free, 4+ rating, 100K+ installs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=make.more.r2d2.cellular_z>
<https://i.postimg.cc/CKFhMZtS/signal03.jpg> Cellular-Z output info

While that's not foolproof of course, it's far better than wading thru this
<https://play.google.com/store/search?q=graph%20wi-fi%20signal%20strength&c=apps>
<https://i.postimg.cc/fLC4zcm6/wifi04.jpg> Many signal strength apps

>>Although for some reason, moving from Android 11 to 12 removed hundreds!
>
> Ummm... How many apps do you have on your Android phone? See:
> Settings -> Apps and Notifications
> and look for something like "See all 202 apps". Mine has 202 apps,
> which I consider to be an overdose.

That doesn't really tell you the truth as you can install an app which
won't show up in that list, nor will it show up in the Google Play Update
list (and each of the specific update apps also gives different numbers).
<https://i.postimg.cc/j2g26zws/apk03.jpg> Google Play Store update apks

I have plenty of tools that can tell me how many "packages" are installed.
<https://i.postimg.cc/02jbkHFr/apk04.jpg> Sort & display apps how you like

You can sort and view your apps by many methods to keep track of them all.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Jhxs4VrD/apk08.jpg> Sort by all sorts of criteria

Usually around 700 "packages" but we covered this question in gory detail
in the past on the Android newsgroup where you'd actually be hard pressed
to get _two_ of the many application managers to give the same answer each.
<https://i.postimg.cc/02jbkHFr/apk04.jpg> Sort & display apps how you like

Since every app installed on Android up until recently was packaged as an
APK, it is easy to _not delete_ the APK after you install each & every app.
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zBjX5kJ/aurora09.jpg> Count your archived APKs

>> <https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!
>
> I'm still on Android 11 and am now at end of life with the last
> security update on Apr 22, 2022.
> <https://motorola-global-portal.custhelp.com/app/software-security-page/g_id/6806#gs=eyJndWlkZUlEIjo2ODA2LCJxdWVzdGlvbklEIjo0LCJyZXNwb25zZUlEIjoyMSwiZ3VpZGVTZXNzaW9uIjoiSjFJZ2huRXAiLCJzZXNzaW9uSUQiOiJKMUlnaG5FcCJ9>
> That's a 2 year useful life from date of Apr 2020 release. Part of
> the problem is that Motorola has too many models to maintain:
> "Evolution of Motorola Moto G 2013 - 2021"
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T8d2tUYjn0U>

We have had _many_ discussions on the Android newsgroup about what the
update life is for an Android phone, and, well, you seem to be the type who
can handle detail, and detail is what you're going to need to handle if you
ever want to figure out what the various versions are for Android, and what
their actual EOL dates are for support, given there are _many_ levels!
*How long does GOOGLE say they'll update the two dozen core modules in project mainline?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/_ZUiLVtLbsg/>

Suffice to summarize there are at least the following main Android updates,
each with their own update schedule, some of which are completely unknown:
1. User apps (such as your personal APK archive) are often updated forever
2. Key apps (such as the default web browser) are often updated forever
4. Firmware (such as the Qualcomm modem firmware) are updated by Qualcomm
5. Security updates
6. Android version updates (a team effort of google, mfr & carrier)
7. Core modules (such as the two dozen core modules) are updated by Google
8. Those core modules are always donated to the AOSP to maintain forever

But even that only scratches the surface, given the complexity of
a. Google Play Store app updates
b. Google Play Services updates
c. Google Play System updates

Each updates a different way as you can see from this recent screenshot:

<https://i.postimg.cc/fy7P3bJR/update18.jpg> Updates in 3 locations

It's the same with just finding which version is which scattered about:
<https://i.postimg.cc/mkSVvfc0/update05.jpg> 22.12.15 (190400-439420056)

I don't think I've ever in my life found anyone who mentioned the actual
versions correctly (or fully) when they "think" they updated Android.
<https://i.postimg.cc/854Qkrbw/update19.jpg> Android System Updates
<https://i.postimg.cc/0NgqVvQG/update20.jpg> Android Core App Updates

>>So it's not hard to recover even with hundreds of apps gone AWOL.
>
> I would think that the Android 12 update did you a favor. Time for a
> spring cleaning. Wipe everything and start over from scratch.

It's no big deal as I can install hundreds of apps very quickly since I
maintain a well organized Android system as a Windows 10 drive letter.

Since I love learning how things work, the Android 11 to Android 12 update
gave me a perfect opportunity to figure out what "indexing" does when you
update Android, where I never had to look into what it does before.

I have a thread on this topic over here which I opened a day or two ago:
*Warning when updating Android 11 to Android 12*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/GngVnfddiT8>

Here are just some of the results I'm gathering from that experiment.

<https://i.postimg.cc/FHJ16nvF/update01.jpg> Android 11->12 screwed up!

<https://i.postimg.cc/BZD7B2tr/update02.jpg> 22.12.15 (150400-439420056)
<https://i.postimg.cc/cJK9rbjn/update03.jpg> Reload all software :(
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNwf9T4r/update04.jpg> Google Play Services update
<https://i.postimg.cc/mkSVvfc0/update05.jpg> 22.12.15 (190400-439420056)
<https://i.postimg.cc/QNqfqdVX/update06.jpg> Android system on Windows
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNtmVWnz/update07.jpg> WebDav set to Android root
<https://i.postimg.cc/Y0wQWVJn/update08.jpg> Windows reads Android root
<https://i.postimg.cc/DzQFrfw3/update09.jpg> The default homescreen
<https://i.postimg.cc/Xqqb6wcn/update10.jpg> The Nova homescreen
<https://i.postimg.cc/MHNhkgpY/update11.jpg> App is not installed
<https://i.postimg.cc/nc9yKV3S/update12.jpg> App can be installed
<https://i.postimg.cc/0QN3z96f/update13.jpg> Only then does it work
<https://i.postimg.cc/L4tFb7ND/update14.jpg> The apps are gone!

<https://i.postimg.cc/15m2YzgR/update15.jpg> Where did they go?

<https://i.postimg.cc/mgQkjB77/update16.jpg> 119 homescreen pages!

<https://i.postimg.cc/brtpv9T1/update17.jpg> Even Zoom disappeared!
<https://i.postimg.cc/fy7P3bJR/update18.jpg> Updates in 3 locations

<https://i.postimg.cc/854Qkrbw/update19.jpg> Android System Updates
<https://i.postimg.cc/0NgqVvQG/update20.jpg> Android Core App Updates

>>But what you see here are the adfree hardware device info apps I suggest:
>> *DevCheck Hardware and System Info* by flar2
>> *Inware* by evowizz
>> *Device Info HW* by Andrey Efremov
>
> Ok, I'll give them a try but will probably add them to my "run once"
> app collection. Thanks for including the author's name. Apps with
> duplicated names are becoming all too common.

I'm well aware that there are many apps with the same name, and, some even
try to copy the icon of the best apps (try finding the best pedometer, for
example) where a lot of times what happens is the open source FOSS app is
shamelessly copied by other apps who try to muscle in on the success.

You'll find that all over the Internet, as with SatStat for example, where
the source code is often copied and then ads are added which is a shame
that people fall for that trick.
<http://mvglasow.github.io/satstat/index.html>
<https://www.f-droid.org/en/packages/com.vonglasow.michael.satstat/>

As proof of concept, I strongly suspect this is a shameless ad-added copy!
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.drunkdeveloper.location.sensor.radio.network.wifi.status>

Same with NewPipe, and a bunch of very kewl Open Source apps that are
shamelessly copied which detracts from the overall Android experience when
people fall for those bait-and-switch tricks by the shameless copiers.
<https://newpipe.net/> (seems to be down at the moment)
<https://f-droid.org/en/packages/org.schabi.newpipe/>

People fall for that copy crap, which is why a good filter is de rigueur.
--

[Andy Burnelli]

Clifford Heath wrote:

>> What's a GSF? All I could find was Golden State Foods.
>
> GNU Software Foundation perhaps?

I apologize for not being clear, where I'm not sure exactly what Google
Services Framework is other than it's a set of APIs that our good friend
Google provides so that apps can link in all sorts of stuff from Google.

If that alone doesn't make you wonder what's inside of it, bear in mind
there's also a (loosely? tightly?) associated _permanent_ unique GSF_ID.

Luckily, after some effort, I figured out a way, using Windows FOSS tools,
to replace the GSF ID without too badly affecting the operating system.
<https://i.postimg.cc/0Q4xmPPR/gsfid01.jpg> I changed the permanent GSF_ID

The main point though is that all the FOSS google play store clients have
an option to filter out the GSF ID (in addition to plenty of other
options), none of which will be in the google play store client itself.
<https://i.postimg.cc/YStB48LH/gsfid03.jpg> Filter out GSF apps
--
Usenet is a world-wide team sport where purposefully helpful kind-hearted
adults help each other and learn by pooling our individual capabilities.

[Andy Burnelli]

You were the first person to tell me about GSF years ago, which I
appreciate since you said (rightly so) that it's getting harder over time
to find apps that don't incorporate these Google calls into their code.

I'm not ashamed to admit I don't know how exactly the GSF code deals with
the supposedly permanent unique GSF ID but that may be why my Android 11 to
Android 12 upgrade deleted hundreds of apps (perhaps they're linked to the
old GSF ID.. dunno... it's too many to be simply that as I only figured out
how to change the GSF_ID recently).

BTW, if others are interested in looking at your permanent unique GSF ID,
this is the app I used to make sure that my experiments actually changed it
*Device ID* by Evozi
Free, ad free, Google free, GSF free, rated 4.5, 1M+ installs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.evozi.deviceid>

Note as someone already noted, many apps have the same names in the repos
<https://play.google.com/store/search?q=device+id>

Without filters in the FOSS Google Play Store clients, I don't know how
anyone can find decent apps given they frequently use similar names, icons,
and descriptions - and yet - many have ads and many incorporate GSF calls.
<https://auroraoss.com/>
--
Usenet is a team sport where each person adds unique value as they see fit.

[Andy Burnelli]

Jeff Liebermann wrote:

> No, it's not. I guess I should be more specific. I would like to
> know why you find it necessary to test a LiIon cell in a charge range
> of zero to 20%, where literally every recommendation by the
> manufacturers declare that to be an RBI (really bad idea)?

I _know_ it's a really bad idea, which is _why_ I want to see what happens.

I got a handful of these phones for free, so I have _plenty_ to work with.
It's just a phone. Phones are a dime a dozen. They're a commodity.

This is a Samsung Galaxy A32-5G, which, even if I paid for it, is cheap.

People do drop tests all the time, don't they?
That's a really bad idea too. :)

> Looks that
> specs for any BMS (battery management system) found inside most LiIon
> battery packs. There is a feature that literally disconnects the cell
> if the terminal voltage goes below some value which usually works out
> to about 20% charge. Maybe this will help you understand the problem
> you're creating for yourself:
> "Lithium Ion Cell Operating Window"
> <https://www.mpoweruk.com/lithium_failures.htm>
> Notice that the "operating area" is between 20% and 90% SOC.

I designed microcontroller-based batter chargers as experimental tools back
in the 80's in graduate school but it has been a long time since then.

I've probably forgotten more than I learned by then, but my main point is
that I consider all smartphones merely a tool to play with to learn about.

If you don't do destructive testing, you won't learn as much as if you do.
(As an aside, you should see the destructive testing I did on the iPad!)

I take risks with the mobile devices all the time in order to learn more.

For example, I recently figured out a way to change my supposedly permanent
supposedly unique Google-supplied GSF ID, which may be the reason that
the Android 11 to Android 12 update on my Samsung deleted hundreds of apps.
*Have you ever tried to CHANGE your unique GSF ID on your Android device?*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/Ixl2uMSLADc>

>>So it's not just me who is curious what happens in the real world.
>
> Yes, but you are not the entire real world. Your currently
> undisclosed operating criteria is not the same as every user and
> certainly not the same as the cell phone manufacturer. The
> manufacturer wants big numbers because big number sell phones.
> Whatever it takes to produce big numbers balanced by cost and safety
> issues. Big numbers are rather useless if the phone catches fire in
> the owners pocket. So, the game of battery specmanship degenerates
> into squeezing as many watt-hours out of the battery as possible by
> any means deemed economical (and maybe reliable). Do it wrong, and
> you have a situation like Apple, where the phone had to be slowed down
> to produce a reasonable runtime as the battery aged. At that point,
> the user gets involved and tries to squeeze out as much power as
> possible. However, they can't because the manufacturer has already
> done that with a complexicated BMS algorithm. So the user looks to
> see what can be gained by breaking the safety rules. Good luck. If
> you are actually able to run the phone at extremely low SOC, then the
> manufacturer has screwed up and is selling an unsafe phone, battery,
> or both. What phone and battery are you using and I'll be sure to
> blacklist it.

It's the Samsung Galaxy A32-5G and it's the T-Mobile model SM A326U.

You'll see some of my experiments on the XDA Developers' forum:
<https://forum.xda-developers.com/f/samsung-galaxy-a32-5g.12145/>

>>I've always been curious about the best way to do almost any thing.
>>And destructive testing is a fantastic way to figure out what really
>>happens in the real world under real world conditions, even as you can't
>>hope to run a "consumers report" style full-fledged scientific
>>investigation with basic home equipment.
>
> Please note my domain name, LearnByDestroying.com. The intent is
> slightly different from yours. It's my contention that one does not
> understand how something works without first breaking it, and
> subsequently fixing it. Destructive testing, without subsequent
> understanding (and enlightenment) is useless.

Like you appear to do, I try to learn why things fail when they fail.

For my BMW, a lot of parts break, where I take them apart to find what
caused the failure, whether that's the FSU or the expansion tank.

You can't put that stuff back together, although I did try to reseat the
myriad "angel hair" wires inside the ABS control module, which are just
impossible to do without specialized machines.

Having said that, my cars are decades old where I fix everything I can,
even to the point of mounting and balancing my own tires at home, so if I
_can_ fix it after taking it apart, I will fix it after taking it apart.
<https://i.postimg.cc/zvvyL2tq/mount24.jpg> Analyze the wear
<https://i.postimg.cc/X7hcV3ps/mount26.jpg> Keep close track of wear
<https://i.postimg.cc/63Kc80x9/mount29.jpg> Watch wear over time
<https://i.postimg.cc/wTf1xnzJ/mount36.jpg> Inspect root causes
<https://i.postimg.cc/g004XCLW/mount37.jpg> Run experiments
<https://i.postimg.cc/g004XCLW/mount37.jpg> Gather more data
<https://i.postimg.cc/G3HWPtQg/mount39.jpg> Test your assumptions
<https://i.postimg.cc/8zVxVHVx/mount40.jpg> ID engineering principles
<https://i.postimg.cc/YqHVb5gY/mount33.jpg> Fix root cause
<https://i.postimg.cc/DwnjgJY3/mount08.jpg> Buy a new tire
<https://i.postimg.cc/FKfFwJ25/mount48.jpg> Break the bead
<https://i.postimg.cc/g004XCLW/mount37.jpg> Replace the valve
<https://i.postimg.cc/WzZW9MvT/mount07.jpg> Mount the tire
<https://i.postimg.cc/28JK2bFB/mount58.jpg> Balance the wheel
<https://i.postimg.cc/0NGXktgp/mount59.jpg> Recycle the carcass

Bear in mind it's difficult to find out why some wear patterns happen
simply because they are on perfectly well aligned vehicles sometimes.
<https://www.quora.com/When-turning-I-see-there-is-a-plus-camber-in-a-vehicle-Why>

>>Still... I try to learn... and destructive testing is part of learning.
>
> It's a tiny part but admittedly the fun part. It's lots of fun to
> blow things up. It's less fun, but more educational to understand how
> the device you just destroyed functions. When you destroy something
> (like your phone battery), do you take or record measurements? Do you
> record a video for an instant replay? Have you worked out in advance
> what you expect to happen? Do you look for anomalies? Do you own a
> data logger? How would blowing up a cell phone battery demonstrate
> anything if you don't know at what voltage (or SOC) and temperature it
> blew up? Did you put a plastic bag over the phone to capture any
> gasses (and flying glass) produced? Do you have a new battery or
> phone available for comparisons? Without these, all you've "learned"
> is how to blow up a battery or phone.

I can't disagree with anything you've said as I run experiments all day
every day, some of which are detailed (like those tire experiments) and
others aren't as detailed (as my phone battery experiments are).

>>When I was a kid, my dad kept a box of old "stuff" for me to take apart.
>
> Hint: I still act like I'm kid. I even take things apart BEFORE I
> try operating them.

The one thing really convenient about destructive autopsies is you don't
have to put anything back together. You just put it in the recycling bin.

>>Why does anyone run any experiment?
>
> Usually because they are suspicious of the established theories of
> operation and have reason to suspect that parts of the theories are
> wrong or badly understood.

Notice the tire experiments above where there is precious little
information on the Internet why all the cars that are perfectly aligned in
any given twisty road area wear the tires the exact same abnormal way.

Take a look at the Scotty Kilmer video below, and note particularly that
the photos I've been posting (which I've posted for years) are the _same_
as in Scotty Kilmer's videos (just look and you'll recognize my pictures!).
<https://youtu.be/i7alzjqmPQo>

This is a shot he took of my BMW tires, for example, with wear lined up:
<https://i.postimg.cc/HngnZR6h/scottykilmer.jpg> He stole my images! :)
--
I find it a testament to my thoroughness that Scotty Kilmer stole my photos
(which clearly are the same photos as I've been posting here all along).

[sms]

On 5/6/2022 10:07 AM, sms wrote:

<snip>

> If the choice is only between a) "fast charge at high-current to 100%
> capacity" versus b) slow-charge at low current to 100% capacity" then
> yes, slow charging is better, but that's not how modern smart phones, or
> modern electric vehicles, with lithium-based batteries actually are
> charged.

One other thing, which could be good or bad depending on your point of
view, is that for iPhones that are capable of fast charging, if you turn
the phone off _after_ the phone is plugged into a USB-C PC charger. then
the charge rate goes down (on the iPhone, if the phone is off and a
charger is plugged in then the phone automatically turns on so you must
turn it off _after_ the charger is plugged in).

On my iPhone, with the phone on the battery begins charging at around
18W (9V@2a) then falls to about 10W (9...@1.15A) as the battery charges;
with the phone off, it charges at about 10W (5.1V@2A) then falls to
about 5.5W (5...@1.08A).

With a USB-C PD charger, it takes _longer_ to charge an iPhone is the
power is off since the voltage never goes above the nominal 5V, yet
current is always limited to a nominal 2A. This is because the PMIC
inside the iPhone can't negotiate the USB-C PD charge rate when the
phone is off. On an Android phone, at least phones with Qualcomm
Snapdragon chipsets, QC charge rates are unaffected by the phone being
on or off.

Also, on the iPhone, unlike on Android devices, there is no indication
as to whether or not the phone is fast charging. Someone could be using
a junky, USB-C to Lightning cable, that they don't realize does not
support fast charging, but think that their phone is fast charging. You
need to plug in a USB-C to USB-C power meter between the USB-C PD
charger and the iPhone to see the charge rate.

[nospam]

In article <t55u4r$8u3$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Also, on the iPhone, unlike on Android devices, there is no indication
> as to whether or not the phone is fast charging. Someone could be using
> a junky, USB-C to Lightning cable, that they don't realize does not
> support fast charging, but think that their phone is fast charging.

that is false. it's very easy to tell if it's fast charging.

> You
> need to plug in a USB-C to USB-C power meter between the USB-C PD
> charger and the iPhone to see the charge rate.

there is no such need.

[Chris]

Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com> wrote:
>
> Drivel:
> One mouse, two mice.
> One house, two hice?

An upper class english accent pronounces a house as "hice". English is a
bastard language with so many accents and vernaculars that it's pointless
arguing over what is "correct".

[nospam]

In article <t560il$r56$1...@dont-email.me>, Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>

wrote:

> > Drivel:
> > One mouse, two mice.

mouses is an acceptable plural when referring to a computer mouse. not
applicable to the rodent.

<https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mouse>
plural also mouses : a small mobile manual device that controls
movement of the cursor and selection of functions on a computer
display

> > One house, two hice?
>
> An upper class english accent pronounces a house as "hice". English is a
> bastard language with so many accents and vernaculars that it's pointless
> arguing over what is "correct".

true.

[sms]

I have two close friends that moved from England to California. After a
couple of decades in the U.S. they learned to speak proper English, but
they occasionally slipped up.

When they first moved to the U.S. there were some embarrassing/amusing
incidents, one involving trying to buy pencil erasers at Walgreen's, and
one involving the item used for washing pots and pans, while on a
backpacking trip.

[AJL]

On 5/7/2022 7:43 AM, Chris wrote:

> An upper class english accent pronounces a house as "hice".

Usage and pronunciation are different things.

> English is a bastard language with so many accents and vernaculars
> that it's pointless arguing over what is "correct".

Much of the DISCUSSION here is pointless. But it IS often entertaining...

[sms]

On 5/7/2022 7:02 AM, sms wrote:
> On 5/6/2022 10:07 AM, sms wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> If the choice is only between a) "fast charge at high-current to 100%
>> capacity" versus b) slow-charge at low current to 100% capacity" then
>> yes, slow charging is better, but that's not how modern smart phones,
>> or modern electric vehicles, with lithium-based batteries actually are
>> charged.
>
> One other thing, which could be good or bad depending on your point of
> view, is that for iPhones that are capable of fast charging, if you turn
> the phone off _after_ the phone is plugged into a USB-C PC charger.

Oops, USB-C PD, not USB-C PC.

[mike]

On 07-05-2022 20:31 sms <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> I have two close friends that moved from England to California. After a
> couple of decades in the U.S. they learned to speak proper English, but
> they occasionally slipped up.
>
> When they first moved to the U.S. there were some embarrassing/amusing
> incidents, one involving trying to buy pencil erasers at Walgreen's, and
> one involving the item used for washing pots and pans, while on a
> backpacking trip.

When a person makes a mistake like that, if you dislike them, it's
annoying, but if you like them, it's cute.

On the other hand, if you prefer speed x while driving and someone zooms by
at 2 x, they're an idiot but someone in front of you at 1/2 x is a jerk.

[Bob F]

On 5/6/2022 2:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
> On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:07:35 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>

>> On 5/6/2022 7:53 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:

>>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 07:57:08 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
>>>> charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore fast
>>>> charging will reduce the battery life.
>>>

>>> Nope, or at least not what I've seen with my testing (and screwing
>>> around). A few decades ago, I decided that NiCd cells would only
>>> become warm if over charged past 100%. Well, I was off a little but
>>> my thermocouple tests showed that up to about 75% of full charge, I
>>> could literally charge the NiCd cell at whatever sky high rate I found
>>> amusing. The problem was that if I missed and went over about 85% of
>>> full charge at the ridiculous rates I was using, the cell would
>>> generate enough gas and heat to blow the end out and generally make a
>>> mess.
>>
>> Ni-cad cells are less efficient when slow-charged (see
>> <https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-407-charging-nickel-cadmium>).

>
> "Where does it say that on the URL you mentioned? All I find is:
> To achieve a reliable voltage signature, the charge rate must be 0.5C
> and higher. Slower charging produces a less defined voltage drop,
> especially if the cells are mismatched in which case each cell reaches
> full charge at a different time point."

> In other words, the dip in terminal voltage that defines EOC
> (end-of-charge) is less obvious for a slow charge than for a faster
> charge. If the charge controller misses this dip, it could easily
> overcharge the NiCd battery and ruin it. There's nothing in there
> about "efficiency".

>

"Fast charging improves the charge efficiency. At 1C charge rate, the
efficiency of a standard NiCd is 91 percent and the charge time is about
an hour (66 minutes at 91 percent). On a slow charger, the efficiency
drops to 71 percent, prolonging the charge time to about 14 hours at 0.1C.

During the first 70 percent of charge, the efficiency of a NiCd is close
to 100 percent. The battery absorbs almost all energy and the pack
remains cool. NiCd batteries designed for fast charging can be charged
with currents that are several times the C-rating without extensive heat
buildup. In fact, NiCd is the only battery that can be ultra-fast
charged with minimal stress. Cells made for ultra-fast charging can be
charged to 70 percent in minutes."

https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-407-charging-nickel-cadmium

[Carlos E.R.]

Yes, my phone does say it will end charging by alarm time.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

Actually, my night charger does so at "1 load unit", and does the job
just fine.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-06 19:07, sms wrote:
> On 5/6/2022 7:53 AM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 07:57:08 -0000 (UTC), Chris <ithi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>

>>> Interesting to see it born out in practice, but it is a known fact. Fast
>>> charging heats up the battery and heat damages the battery, therefore
>>> fast
>>> charging will reduce the battery life.
>>

>> Nope, or at least not what I've seen with my testing (and screwing
>> around).  A few decades ago, I decided that NiCd cells would only
>> become warm if over charged past 100%.  Well, I was off a little but
>> my thermocouple tests showed that up to about 75% of full charge, I
>> could literally charge the NiCd cell at whatever sky high rate I found
>> amusing.  The problem was that if I missed and went over about 85% of
>> full charge at the ridiculous rates I was using, the cell would
>> generate enough gas and heat to blow the end out and generally make a
>> mess.
>
> Ni-cad cells are less efficient when slow-charged (see
> <https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-407-charging-nickel-cadmium>).
>

> NiMH cells are best charged using the "step-differential" method (see
> <https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-408-charging-nickel-metal-hydride>).
>
>
> It seems like many people want to believe that slow-charging batteries
> has some benefit in longevity and/or capacity, so you see statements
> like "it is a known fact...," even when the statements are really not true.

Well, I have been slow charging my previous phone during 4 years, and
battery life is almost the same as when I bought it. There was a
decrease or impact the first year or two, then none.

>
> If the choice is only between a) "fast charge at high-current to 100%
> capacity" versus b) slow-charge at low current to 100% capacity" then
> yes, slow charging is better, but that's not how modern smart phones, or
> modern electric vehicles, with lithium-based batteries actually are
> charged.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[sms]

nospam is wrong of course™.

You can charge at the very low rate by not letting the charger see the
resistors on the data pins.

There's no upside to charging at 100mA, just as there is no upside to
charging at 500mA or 1A, versus higher rate charging, but not everything
anyone does is necessarily based on actual data. You still have people
doing 3000 mile oil changes on new cars, not because they are necessary,
but because it makes them feel good.

[nospam]

In article <t58hup$esn$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> You can charge at the very low rate by not letting the charger see the
> resistors on the data pins.

by not seeing the resistors (or actual negotiation), the 'very low
rate' is 100ma, as per the usb spec, which is insufficient to charge a
phone battery.

some devices will even say not charging:
<https://cdn-60c35131c1ac185aa47dd21e.closte.com//wp-content/uploads/201
8/04/iPad-Not-Charging-Message-300x136.png>

> There's no upside to charging at 100mA,

because it's too low to actually do anything.

> just as there is no upside to
> charging at 500mA or 1A, versus higher rate charging,

yes there is. the upside for charging at 500ma-1a versus faster rates
is longer battery life.

> but not everything
> anyone does is necessarily based on actual data.

you being the prime example of that.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-08 16:20, nospam wrote:
> In article <t58hup$esn$1...@dont-email.me>, sms
> <scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> You can charge at the very low rate by not letting the charger see the
>> resistors on the data pins.
>
> by not seeing the resistors (or actual negotiation), the 'very low
> rate' is 100ma, as per the usb spec, which is insufficient to charge a
> phone battery.

Don't be that absolute. When you do that, you deserve getting the
«nospam is wrong of course™» response.

Some phones may not charge at that rate, others do.

I have one such cable with just two wires, and all of my devices (with
micro-usb connectors) can charge with it, except an old Samsung Galaxy
Mini 2 phone. That cable came with a BT headphone, probably with the
purpose of forcing slow, low rate, charging.

I have a charger with eight outputs. 2 of them are "1 load unit", same
as an old computer. They can charge all my phones, tablets, headsets,
cameras, etc. All of those with USB connection, that is. Except one,
that old Samsung phone.

So I intentionally use those two outputs to charge my phone while I
sleep, or other devices that I'm likely to forget I left charging.

I have been doing that to my previous phone for four years, the battery
is just fine.

>
> some devices will even say not charging:
> <https://cdn-60c35131c1ac185aa47dd21e.closte.com//wp-content/uploads/201
> 8/04/iPad-Not-Charging-Message-300x136.png>

Ah, an iPad. :-P

...

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-07 22:02, Bob F wrote:
> On 5/6/2022 2:53 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 May 2022 10:07:35 -0700, sms <scharf...@geemail.com>
>> wrote:

...

> During the first 70 percent of charge, the efficiency of a NiCd is close
> to 100 percent. The battery absorbs almost all energy and the pack
> remains cool. NiCd batteries designed for fast charging can be charged
> with currents that are several times the C-rating without extensive heat
> buildup. In fact, NiCd is the only battery that can be ultra-fast
> charged with minimal stress.

Lead-acid could be fast charged. They do that some times with cars on
garages. It is dangerous, the battery must be disconnected from the car
first, or the electronics can be destroyed (overvoltage). Happened to me.

> Cells made for ultra-fast charging can be
> charged to 70 percent in minutes."
>
> https://batteryuniversity.com/article/bu-407-charging-nickel-cadmium

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <4j9nki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

>
> Lead-acid could be fast charged.

it can, but also reduces the life of the battery, depending on how fast
it is.

> They do that some times with cars on
> garages.

they do, because they want to move onto the next customer.

> It is dangerous,

only if improperly done.

> the battery must be disconnected from the car
> first, or the electronics can be destroyed (overvoltage). Happened to me.

the battery doesn't need to be disconnected.

modern car battery chargers initially supply a constant current until
the battery voltage rises to ~14.4v (bulk charge), at which point it
switches to constant voltage to top it off (absorption charge) until
the current draw is minimal, and then switches to trickle charging (aka
float).

when the vehicle is running, the voltage is ~13.8v with a fully charged
battery (higher if it's not).

chargers that do not limit voltage and/or current can destroy all sorts
of things, including the battery. do not use.

[nospam]

In article <289nki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> You can charge at the very low rate by not letting the charger see the
> >> resistors on the data pins.
> >
> > by not seeing the resistors (or actual negotiation), the 'very low
> > rate' is 100ma, as per the usb spec, which is insufficient to charge a
> > phone battery.
>
> Don't be that absolute. When you do that, you deserve getting the
> «nospam is wrong of course » response.

the usb spec is absolute, as are other specs.

the usb spec *requires* that a device initially source 100ma, with
higher rates only after negotiation. originally, that required a
request, but that was not practical for a simple charger, which is why
resistors were added to the spec.

if you disagree, take it up with the usb consortium.

> Some phones may not charge at that rate, others do.

the rate is defined by the usb spec.

non-compliant devices do exist, however, they should be avoided. there
is no guarantee what they will do.

compliance not only guarantees expected functionality and compatibility
between manufacturers, but also a level of safety.

> I have one such cable with just two wires, and all of my devices (with
> micro-usb connectors) can charge with it, except an old Samsung Galaxy
> Mini 2 phone. That cable came with a BT headphone, probably with the
> purpose of forcing slow, low rate, charging.

any cable with only two wires is non-compliant with the usb spec, and
if it came with a bt headphone, then that too is non-compliant.

you have a lot of non-compliant devices. that's unfortunate.

[sms]

You can charge a phone, albeit very slowly, at 100mA.

There's no good reason to do this, but someone else was concerned that
when you plug a phone into a fast charger there is no way to force it
charge at a lower rate. For an iPhone there is two ways a) turn off the
phone, b) use a power-only USB cable or a device that prevents the data
lines from being seen.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-09 13:51, nospam wrote:
> In article <4j9nki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
> <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>
>> Lead-acid could be fast charged.
>
> it can, but also reduces the life of the battery, depending on how fast
> it is.
>
>> They do that some times with cars on
>> garages.
>
> they do, because they want to move onto the next customer.
>
>> It is dangerous,
>
> only if improperly done.
>
>> the battery must be disconnected from the car
>> first, or the electronics can be destroyed (overvoltage). Happened to me.
>
> the battery doesn't need to be disconnected.

nospam, don't talk of things you don't understand

Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car itself.

What you say now is trash:

>
> modern car battery chargers initially supply a constant current until
> the battery voltage rises to ~14.4v (bulk charge), at which point it
> switches to constant voltage to top it off (absorption charge) until
> the current draw is minimal, and then switches to trickle charging (aka
> float).
>
> when the vehicle is running, the voltage is ~13.8v with a fully charged
> battery (higher if it's not).
>
> chargers that do not limit voltage and/or current can destroy all sorts
> of things, including the battery. do not use.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <t5bedb$8fo$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> You can charge a phone, albeit very slowly, at 100mA.

extremely slowly (as in days), and it needs to be powered off because
idle power consumption is higher than 100ma.

if it's powered on, it won't actually charge, which is what causes the
no charging indicator to be shown on the display. link in another post.

> There's no good reason to do this, but someone else was concerned that
> when you plug a phone into a fast charger there is no way to force it
> charge at a lower rate. For an iPhone there is two ways a) turn off the
> phone,

except that the phone will turn on when connected to a charger (android
partly boots, iphone fully boots) and then will charge at whatever rate
the charger supports and negotiates with the device.

> b) use a power-only USB cable or a device that prevents the data
> lines from being seen.

that won't work. see above.

the correct way to charge at a slow rate is use a 2.5w (500ma) or 5w
charger (1a).

[nospam]

In article <g3unki...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> the battery must be disconnected from the car
> >> first, or the electronics can be destroyed (overvoltage). Happened to me.
> >
> > the battery doesn't need to be disconnected.
>
> nospam, don't talk of things you don't understand

take your own advice.

i'm *very* familiar with battery chargers for various battery
chemistries. you clearly are not.

> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car itself.

that is flat out false. where did you get that bogus information?

applying 20-30v to a 12v lead acid car battery will destroy it.

fast charging is a function of the *current*, not the voltage. see
below, and the initial charge phase is constant current, while the
battery voltage rises to a particular threshold. see below for
specifics.

> What you say now is trash:

it isn't.

here's an example of a ctek car battery charger and its various phases.
other brands are similar.

<https://www.motorcycle.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/022514-CTEK-
battery-charger-3-chart-633x360.jpg>

[sms]

On 5/9/2022 10:03 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

<snip>

> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
> itself.

I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).

The exception is the "pulse chargers" that attempt to remove sulfation
in lead-acid batteries by using high-voltage, high-frequency pulses, and
in that case it would make sense to disconnect the battery from the
vehicle prior to attempting this.

There is no conclusive proof that pulse charging has any positive
effect, only some limited empirical evidence. There are ways to remove
sulfation from non-sealed lead-acid batteries, but not with pulsed charging.

[nospam]

In article <t5bk64$f9c$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

>
> > Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
> > voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
> > absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
> > itself.
>
> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).

2.75v is the acceptable maximum.

> The exception is the "pulse chargers" that attempt to remove sulfation
> in lead-acid batteries by using high-voltage, high-frequency pulses, and
> in that case it would make sense to disconnect the battery from the
> vehicle prior to attempting this.

pulse chargers are nowhere near 20-30v.

for ctek, it's 15.8v for the initial (and mostly useless) desulfation
phase, which will not destroy a vehicle's electronics.

> There is no conclusive proof that pulse charging has any positive
> effect, only some limited empirical evidence.

true.

> There are ways to remove
> sulfation from non-sealed lead-acid batteries, but not with pulsed charging.

none that reliably work.

[Lewis]

You're ignorance is showing.

> You can charge a phone, albeit very slowly, at 100mA.

Not likely, since the phones need to be on in order to charge, and they
use more than 100mA to be on. You will not charge the phone at 100mA,
you will very slightly slow the phones discharge.

> There's no good reason to do this

Of course not, since it will not charge the phone.

> For an iPhone there is two ways a) turn off the phone,

No iPhone will not charge at all when off.

--
"Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"
"I think so, Brain, but nose rings are kinda passé by now."

[Andy Burnelli]

ohg...@gmail.com wrote:

>> Notice the tire experiments above where there is precious little
>> information on the Internet why all the cars that are perfectly aligned in
>> any given twisty road area wear the tires the exact same abnormal way.
>>
>> Take a look at the Scotty Kilmer video below, and note particularly that
>> the photos I've been posting (which I've posted for years) are the _same_
>> as in Scotty Kilmer's videos (just look and you'll recognize my pictures!).
>> <https://youtu.be/i7alzjqmPQo>
>>
>> This is a shot he took of my BMW tires, for example, with wear lined up:
>> <https://i.postimg.cc/HngnZR6h/scottykilmer.jpg> He stole my images! :)
>>
> Kilmer is a backyard mechanic at best who doesn't know any more about,
> well, *anything* than any one else. I wouldn't let this guy change
> the oil on a car.

I understand and I don't disagree since I, myself, have a love:hate
relationship with Scotty Kilmer, as he seems to spew every bit of nonsense
in the book - but - he's also an extremely experienced mechanic.

BTW, this offshoot tangent happened when Jeff Liebermann asked how many
apps I have installed if I can lose hundreds without blinking an eye,
and the test I just ran moments ago shows 663 installed 3rd-party
"packages" and 390 system packages.

I include the documentation of a post I just made below so that the folks
on this newsgroup (which is different from that post) can benefit from the
tremendous effort in making the solution easily cut & paste for everyone.

If anyone here can help find the missing apps, I'd appreciate your
knowledge since I've tried what I know offhand and that has failed so far.

Please see below for a post I just made for this recent thread today:
*Using Windows to find hidden files on the Android file system over Wi-Fi*
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/gonmj6NB2f0>


WIP: Using Windows to find hidden files on the Android file system

Help requested from those who know more about finding hidden files
on Android from the Windows computer over your local Wi-Fi network.

Recently I updated Android 11 to 12 and all hell broke loose (perhaps
because I change my GSF ID which, we can assume, is saved by apps).
<https://i.postimg.cc/0Q4xmPPR/gsfid01.jpg> How to change GSF ID
Maybe changing the GSF ID caused apps with GSF to be indexed wrong?
<https://i.postimg.cc/YStB48LH/gsfid03.jpg> Some apps use GSF APIs

This learning experience is perhaps a good thing as it's an opportunity to
learn where Android apps typically install their code into.
<https://groups.google.com/g/comp.mobile.android/c/GngVnfddiT8>

As that location is likely still there (I find it hard to believe that
Google _deleted_ the apps off my Android phone during the update).
<https://i.postimg.cc/L4tFb7ND/update14.jpg> The apps are gone!

Running adb over Wi-Fi (tcpip port 5555) allows me to list packages:
C:\> adb shell pm list packages > installed.txt (lists 663 packages)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -s (of which 390 lines are system)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -3 (and where 273 lines are third party)
One of which, we would have hoped, would be zoom, but it's not there:
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f | findStr "zoom" (finds nothing)

Luckily, re-installing even hundreds of apps on Android is trivial since
all the APKs are automatically _not deleted_ when apps are installed.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Z5kdD2rg/aurora04.jpg> Just don't delete APKs

Which means they can be saved directly onto a Windows mount point.
<https://i.postimg.cc/cJK9rbjn/update03.jpg> APKs saved into Windows
And then the APKs can simply be slid onto Android to re-install apps.
<https://i.postimg.cc/wvsbcNBz/scrcpy05.jpg> Drag APK from Windows

But even without that, just clicking on the now-dead grayed-out icons
brings up the correct _new_ APK in the FOSS google play store client.
<https://i.postimg.cc/MHNhkgpY/update11.jpg> App is not installed

The point being the problem is NOT to re-install hundreds of APKs, as that
part is already trivial.... the problem here is to see if they're _still_
on the Android phone, where I need to know _where_ apps typically go.

Now it's time to look where the missing apps are typically installed into.

Let's take Zoom for example, which seems to have simply disappeared.
<https://i.postimg.cc/brtpv9T1/update17.jpg> Even Zoom disappeared!

First, let's check if Zoom requires GSF, and when we do, we see it does.
<https://i.postimg.cc/XJrSQ0w6/update21.jpg> Zoom requires GSF

So now, the question is whether or not Zoom is _already_ installed and
perhaps just hidden - but _where_ would zoom be installed onto Android?
<https://duckduckgo.com/?q=where+does+android+zoom+install+into>
<https://duckduckgo.com/?q=where+do+android+apps+install+into>

*Android Developers > Docs> Guides > App install location*
<https://developer.android.com/guide/topics/data/install-location>
"android:installLocation manifest attribute"

Apparently the flow is that the developer declares the location
android:installLocation=<unset>
App will be installed on internal storage only
android:installLocation="preferExternal"
App will be installed on sdcard if available
android:installLocation="auto"
App will be installed

But adb seems to show the location of installed packages.
<https://stackpointer.io/mobile/android-adb-list-installed-package-names/416/>

So let's try those adb commands over wi-fi (TCPIP port 5555) to see stuff.
C:\> adb kill-server
C:\> adb tcpip 5555
restarting in TCP mode port: 5555
C:\> adb connect 192.168.0.2:5555
connected to 192.168.0.2:5555
C:\> adb devices
List of devices attached
192.168.0.2:5555 device

I was hoping the "disabled" apps option would list zoom, but it didn't:
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -d > disabled_apps.txt (219L)
Nor did the enabled apps option list zoom (which wasn't expected):
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -e > enabled_apps.txt (444L)

I'm not at all sure what the definition of a "disabled" app really is.
But what was interesting was disabled apps were mostly in 1 spot.
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -d -f > location_disabled_apps.txt
package:/data/app/~~{stuff} (208L)
package:/product/app/. (3L)
package:/system/app/. (3L)
package:/system/priv-app/. (5L)

While enabled apps were far more scattered about the Android filesystem.
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -e -f > location_enabled_apps.txt (444)
package:/apex/. (11L)
package:/data/app/~~{stuff} (87L)
package:/product/app/. (8L)
package:/product/overlay/. (28L)
package:/product/priv-app/. (7L)
package:/system/app/. (106L)
package:/system/carrier/. (4L)
package:/system/framework/. (2L)
package:/system/priv-app/. (171L)
package:/system/system_ext/priv-app/. (8L)
package:/vendor/overlay/. (11L)
package:/vendor/priv-app/. (1L)

Of course, if I _install_ Zoom, the commands below will tell me where it
installed into, but I'm trying to find out if it's really still there.

So let's try this adb command over wi-fi (TCPIP port 5555) to see:
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f -s > sys_package_location.txt (390L)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f > 3rd_package_location.txt (663L)

Summarizing those files, the system apps seem to be installed into
package:/apex/.
package:/data/app/.
package:/product/app/.
package:/product/overlay/.
package:/product/priv-app/.
package:/system/app/.
package:/system/carrier/.
package:/system/framework/.
package:/system/priv-app/.
package:/system/system_ext/priv-app/.
package:/vendor/overlay/.
package:/vendor/priv-app/.

And the third-party apps seem to be installed into:
package:/apex/. (11L)
package:/data/app/~~{stuff} (295L)
package:/product/app/. (11L)
package:/product/overlay/. (28L)
package:/product/priv-app/. (7L)
package:/system/app/. (109L)
package:/system/carrier/priv-app/. (4L)
package:/system/framework/. (2L)
package:/system/priv-app/. (176L)
package:/system/system_ext/priv-app/. (8L)
package:/vendor/overlay/. (11L)
package:/vendor/priv-app/. (1L)

There are two others options of interest which may help find zoom.
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f -i > installer.txt (663L)
installer=com.android.settings (1L)
installer=com.android.vending (20L)
installer=com.aurora.adroid (9L)
installer=com.aurora.store (85L)
installer=com.facebook.system (3L) <== note WA is installed, not FB
installer=com.google.android.packageinstaller (57L)
installer=com.sec.android.app.samsungapps (1L)
installer=com.sprint.ce.updater (1L) <== note it's a T-Mobile phone
installer=com.tmobile.pr.adapt (4L)
installer=null (482)

This might help if I knew what a UID was and what the UID for Zoom is:
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f -U > UID.txt (663L)
The UID is apparently particular for an application:
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/5708906/what-is-uid-on-android>
The UID (aka AID) is the backbone of the Android sandboxing, apparently:
<https://source.android.com/security/app-sandbox>

This sounds promising but it lists installed packages apparently:
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -i > installer.txt (663L)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -u > uninstaller.txt (663L)

Let's run a quick Windows diff filecompare of these two after sorting:
C:\> fc installer.txt uninstaller.txt (206L) <== too confusing

At this point, let's inventory all that is on the Android phone without
using adb but simply by using the Windows "dir" command on Android.
Pseudocode: dir android_file_system > list_of_all_files_on_android.txt

To more easily search my non-rooted phone, I mounted the Android root file
system as a Windows 10 drive letter using a free WebDAV server on Android.
*WebDAV Server* by The Olive Tree
Free, not ad free, Google free, requires GSF, rated 3.5, 100K+ installs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.theolivetree.webdavserver>

*WebDAV Server - BestDAV PRO* by ZQ Software
Free, ad free, Google free, GSF free, rated 4.2, unknown # of installs
<https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.zq.webdav.app_pro>

I'm using "The Olive Tree" WebDav server because I can't figure out the
settings to get the "BestDav" WebDav server to allow _write_ from Windows.
(If you can solve this problem, I'd appreciate the help you can provide.)

For whatever reason, using "The Olive Tree" I can mount everything on
Android but the sdcard (which I haven't yet figured out why - but it
appears that the Windows adb command _can_ see what's on the SDCARD).
(If you can solve this problem, I'd appreciate the help you can provide.)

And then I ran this simple command on Windows to mount the phone:
net use Z: \\192.168.0.2@8080\DavWWWRoot
Where DavWWWRoot can be defined as any location on the phone you want.
<https://i.postimg.cc/Y0wQWVJn/update08.jpg> Windows reads Android root
Namely these are the following locations most people set DavWWWRoot to:
(o) Root (/)
(_) SdCard
(_)DCIM
(_)Custom folder
(_)Ext. SdCard
As shown in this graphic using that setting for the Windows mount point:
<https://i.postimg.cc/yNtmVWnz/update07.jpg> WebDav set to Android root

So that I could make a list of every file on the Android file system:
C:\> Z:
Z:\> dir /s/a/l/on/b > c:\tmp\android_filesystem.txt (3914L)

And then I could grep (findstr) for the hidden presence of zoom files.
C:\> findstr /i /r /c:"^.*oom" android_filesystem.txt
z:\pictures\photoroom
z:\pictures\photoroom\photoroom-20220421_205546.png
z:\pictures\photoroom\photoroom-20220421_205619.png
z:\aurora\store\downloads\com.mushroom.recogniser
z:\aurora\store\downloads\com.mushroom.shroomify
z:\aurora\store\downloads\com.photoroom.app
z:\aurora\store\downloads\com.shroomid
z:\aurora\store\downloads\com.shroomid\337\com.shroomid.apk
z:\aurora\store\downloads\com.shroomid\337\config.arm64_v8a.apk
etc.

Drat. There wasn't a single file on the Android filesystem with
"Zoom" anywhere in the name as far as I can tell from this.

Does anyone out there reading this know more about finding hidden files
on Android from the Windows computer over your local Wi-Fi network?
--
On Usenet, kind-hearted purposefully helpful people carry on polite
discussions which benefit everyone who participates in the conversation.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-09 19:48, sms wrote:
> On 5/9/2022 10:03 AM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
>> itself.
>
> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).

I have.

>
> The exception is the "pulse chargers" that attempt to remove sulfation
> in lead-acid batteries by using high-voltage, high-frequency pulses, and
> in that case it would make sense to disconnect the battery from the
> vehicle prior to attempting this.
>
> There is no conclusive proof that pulse charging has any positive
> effect, only some limited empirical evidence. There are ways to remove
> sulfation from non-sealed lead-acid batteries, but not with pulsed
> charging.

No, this is just an industrial sized fast charger, intended to be used
on garages to give enough charge in 10 minutes to a battery so that it
can start the car and the client leaves. The client is told he has to
replace the battery soon.

It is brutal.

It pushes the 12v battery up to 20 or 30 volts.

The instructions specifically say to disconnect the battery from the
car. It is obvious, 20 volts can destroy the car electronics.

This is not done on a good battery.

And yes, I have seen this with my own eyes. You will not easily find it
on google.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <f3rpki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
> >> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
> >> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
> >> itself.
> >
> > I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
> > least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
>
> I have.

where have you heard that?

citations required.

> >
> > The exception is the "pulse chargers" that attempt to remove sulfation
> > in lead-acid batteries by using high-voltage, high-frequency pulses, and
> > in that case it would make sense to disconnect the battery from the
> > vehicle prior to attempting this.
> >
> > There is no conclusive proof that pulse charging has any positive
> > effect, only some limited empirical evidence. There are ways to remove
> > sulfation from non-sealed lead-acid batteries, but not with pulsed
> > charging.
>
> No, this is just an industrial sized fast charger, intended to be used
> on garages to give enough charge in 10 minutes to a battery so that it
> can start the car and the client leaves. The client is told he has to
> replace the battery soon.

what is the make/model of this mythical charger?

> It is brutal.

it can be. fast charging is harsher on the battery than slow charging,
but sometimes it's needed in an emergency. it should not be used
routinely.

> It pushes the 12v battery up to 20 or 30 volts.

no it doesn't, since 20-30v will destroy a 12v lead acid battery.

you are confusing volts with amps.

fast chargers supply 20-30 *amps* to rapidly charge a car battery. not
volts.

many of them can supply more than that, most of which can also supply
significantly higher currents to start the vehicle (not to recharge).

car repair shops have something similar to these:
<https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61PD7OB6rvS._AC_SL1200_.jpg>
<https://www.toolsource.com/images/prod_images/ASO6001A_1200Wx1200H.jpg>

> The instructions specifically say to disconnect the battery from the
> car. It is obvious, 20 volts can destroy the car electronics.

it will also destroy the battery.

> This is not done on a good battery.

because good batteries do not need to be recharged.

> And yes, I have seen this with my own eyes. You will not easily find it
> on google.

because what you describe is wrong.

otherwise, it would easily be found with a search.

[Andy Burnelli]

UPDATE

Since I've tentatively concluded, much to my chagrin, that Android did,
indeed, completely wipe out _hundreds_ of apps (zoom among them),
perhaps because they were GSF apps which didn't like that I changed
the supposedly permanent unique GSF ID tracking identification number...
<https://i.postimg.cc/X7ZspnsG/gsfid01.jpg> You can change the GSF ID
<https://i.postimg.cc/YStB48LH/gsfid03.jpg> GSF Apps use the GSF ID

I decided to _install_ Zoom (which was easily enough done) and then run
the adb commands again to see where it put stuff as an added learning
effort.
<https://i.postimg.cc/wBndvc4d/update22.jpg> Re-installing Zoom is easy
<https://i.postimg.cc/tCzy56Jh/update23.jpg> Now let's look where it went

This is where Zoom seems to have installed on Android:
<https://i.postimg.cc/MKr5hWsv/update24.jpg> Zoom in /data/app/~~{stuff}
<https://i.postimg.cc/MKr5hWsv/update24.jpg> Zoom in /data/app/~~{stuff}
package:/data/app/~~PzJKYsZQ2ZCx6CppblPgRQ==/us.zoom.videomeetings-zGYsIcaI0d-LZ0jXknyD6A==/base.apk=us.zoom.videomeetings

But something is wrong with my Windows dir /s/a/l/on/b since it didn't
find the installed zoom location for some unknown-to-me-as-yet reason.

All it found were six new lines (all of which is the saved APK only).
C:\> findstr /i /r /c:"^.*zoom" android_filesystem.txt
z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings
z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\.651004.download-complete
z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004

z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004\config.arm64_v8a.apk
z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004\config.xhdpi.apk

z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004\us.zoom.videomeetings.apk

Since this experiment of adding just one app is rarely done, here are the
file
size differences between Android minus Zoom and Android with Zoom just now.
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f -s > sys_package_location.txt (390L ->
390L)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f > 3rd_package_location.txt (663L ->
664L)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages > installed.txt (663L -> 664L)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -d > disabled_apps.txt (219L -> 299L)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -e > enabled_apps.txt (444L -> 445L)
C:\> adb shell pm list packages -f -U > UID.txt (Zoom uid:10588)
dir /s/a/l/on/b > c:\tmp\android_filesystem.txt (3914L -> 3920L)

In summary, it does appear that migrating from Android 11 to Android 12
actually deleted hundreds of apps, among them zoom, where there's no trace
of those apps on Android after the upgrade other than the Nova launcher
saved
their location in the well-organized homescreen hierarchy.

Hence re-installing those hundreds of apps is trivial simply because
just tapping on the apps opens up the FOSS google play client to install
the latest version off the Google Play Store repository - or - I can
just as easily slide the APK from Windows over to Android - or - I can
just tap on the saved APK on Android (if I had happened to save it there).

I haven't conclusively proven anything yet as to why the migration of
Android 11 to Android 12 wiped out hundreds of apps, but I suspect it
was simply that the GSF apps misbehaved when they found out that I had
changed the supposedly permanent GSF ID.
--
Usenet is a world-wide team sport where purposefully helpful kind-hearted
adults help each other and learn by pooling our individual capabilities.

[Andy Burnelli]

UPDATE:

I learn more about computers by breaking the rules than by following them.
1. It's (only?) GSF apps that are gone after upgrading Android 11 to 12
2. It may be due to the fact I changed the supposedly permanent GSF ID
3. Luckily Nova knows (almost) exactly how to point to the app installer
4. However it's a mystery _how_ Nova knows (almost) exactly which it is
5. Given the app appears to otherwise be wiped completely off the map
6. However Windows, for some reason, doesn't _find_ the installed app
7. And yet, adb on Windows can easily find that newly installed app

The main questions that need to be resolved are
a. Why can't Windows "dir" find the installed app when Windows adb can?
b. How does Nova launcher know exactly which app was wiped off the phone?
c. Why should Android upgrades even care about the GSF ID?

Bear in mind there's almost no effort whatsoever in re-installing the
hundreds of missing apps; all the effort is going into trying to figure out
_why_ and _how_ that happened (as a lot of "magic" seems to have occurred).

> Since I've tentatively concluded, much to my chagrin, that Android did,
> indeed, completely wipe out _hundreds_ of apps (zoom among them),
> perhaps because they were GSF apps which didn't like that I changed
> the supposedly permanent unique GSF ID tracking identification number...

Every disaster is an opportunity to learn, where, so far, as I'm going
slowly since it's something I look at when I need an app, all the missing
apps were GSF apps, which, for now, fits the hypothesis that they never
tested Android upgrades for the circumstance that the GSF ID changed.

But why would an Android upgrade even _care_ that a GSF ID had changed?
What's it to them?

> I decided to _install_ Zoom (which was easily enough done) and then run
> the adb commands again to see where it put stuff as an added learning effort.

> But something is wrong with my Windows dir /s/a/l/on/b since it didn't
> find the installed zoom location for some unknown-to-me-as-yet reason.
> All it found were six new lines (all of which is the saved APK only).
> C:\> findstr /i /r /c:"^.*zoom" android_filesystem.txt
> z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings
> z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\.651004.download-complete
> z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004
> z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004\config.arm64_v8a.apk
> z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004\config.xhdpi.apk
> z:\aurora\store\downloads\us.zoom.videomeetings\651004\us.zoom.videomeetings.apk

This is another _new_ learning experience.
Why didn't the Windows "dir" command find the zoom installation hierarchy?
Where does Zoom put its installed files if not in the system directory?

> Hence re-installing those hundreds of apps is trivial simply because
> just tapping on the apps opens up the FOSS google play client to install

> the latest version off the Google Play Store repository...

Yet another new learning experience is the fact that the ease of installing
the app is based on "something" (I don't know yet) which is hidden data.

Something about the grayed out icons tells Android exactly which app to
find in the FOSS google play store client... however... in one or two cases
so far, it did _not_ find the right "something" in that client.

So there's yet more "magic" going on that I don't understand about this yet
but it has been a wonderful new learning experience since you can't learn
this stuff without some lab work in destructive testing procedures.
--
I learn more about Android by breaking the rules than by following them.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-10 14:33, nospam wrote:
> In article <f3rpki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
> <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
>>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
>>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
>>>> itself.
>>>
>>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
>>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
>>
>> I have.
>
> where have you heard that?
>
> citations required.

I saw it personally.



--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <b3kqki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
> >>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
> >>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
> >>>> itself.
> >>>
> >>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
> >>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
> >>
> >> I have.
> >
> > where have you heard that?
> >
> > citations required.
>
>
> I saw it personally.

that's not a citation, nor did you see that.

what you saw was a 20-30 *amp* charger. not volts.

20-30 volts (3.3-5v/cell) would destroy a 12v lead acid battery, also
risking explosion, potentially destroying quite a bit more.

feel free to cite a credible reference to the contrary *and* go back to
the garage and take a photo of the charger that you claim was used so
that its specs can be verified.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-10 20:14, nospam wrote:
> In article <b3kqki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
> <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
>>>>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
>>>>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>
>>>>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
>>>>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
>>>>
>>>> I have.
>>>
>>> where have you heard that?
>>>
>>> citations required.
>>
>>
>> I saw it personally.
>
> that's not a citation, nor did you see that.

Cite me. I saw it. I am the source.

>
> what you saw was a 20-30 *amp* charger. not volts.

Nope. Volts. Several electronic devices in my car were destroyed.


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[nospam]

In article <70qqki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >>>>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
> >>>>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
> >>>>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
> >>>>>> itself.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
> >>>>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
> >>>>
> >>>> I have.
> >>>
> >>> where have you heard that?
> >>>
> >>> citations required.
> >>
> >>
> >> I saw it personally.
> >
> > that's not a citation, nor did you see that.
>
> Cite me. I saw it. I am the source.

that's not how citations work. you can't cite yourself.

what you describe is not how lead acid batteries are charged.

take a photo of the charger and/or find one or more links describing it.

> > what you saw was a 20-30 *amp* charger. not volts.
>
> Nope. Volts. Several electronic devices in my car were destroyed.

again, take a photo of the charger and/or find some links describing it.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-10 21:18, nospam wrote:
> In article <70qqki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
> <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
>>>>>>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
>>>>>>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
>>>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
>>>>>>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have.
>>>>>
>>>>> where have you heard that?
>>>>>
>>>>> citations required.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I saw it personally.
>>>
>>> that's not a citation, nor did you see that.
>>
>> Cite me. I saw it. I am the source.
>
> that's not how citations work. you can't cite yourself.

I am a witness.

>
> what you describe is not how lead acid batteries are charged.
>
> take a photo of the charger and/or find one or more links describing it.

Nope. It was over a decade ago.

Take my word for it, then you waste your time and find the information.
I did that research at the time.
What you get is my recollection.

You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics of
my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I would
have stopped them. I could have sued them.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[sms]

On 5/10/2022 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

<snip>

> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
> dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics of
> my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I would
> have stopped them. I could have sued them.

I don't know where that repair shop would have found such a battery
charger unless they were using a 24V charger on a 12V battery.

Trying to charge a nominal 12V battery at 30 volts would have unexpected
consequences. The battery is a huge load with very low internal
resistance so in order for the vehicle electronics to be damaged the
charger must also have been supplying enormous amounts of current.

You can hook up a small, unregulated, 20V solar panel to keep a non-AGM
car battery charged because the current is so low (a fraction of an amp)
that as soon as you connect the battery the load drops the output to
around 12 volts.

[nospam]

In article <j90rki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >
> >>>>>>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
> >>>>>>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
> >>>>>>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
> >>>>>>>> itself.
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
> >>>>>>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car
> >>>>>>> battery).
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I have.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> where have you heard that?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> citations required.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> I saw it personally.
> >>>
> >>> that's not a citation, nor did you see that.
> >>
> >> Cite me. I saw it. I am the source.
> >
> > that's not how citations work. you can't cite yourself.
>
> I am a witness.

apparently the only one, since such a device cannot possibly work.

applying 20-30v to a 12v lead acid battery is a *really* bad idea.

> > what you describe is not how lead acid batteries are charged.
> >
> > take a photo of the charger and/or find one or more links describing it.
>
> Nope. It was over a decade ago.

it doesn't matter when it was.

all it takes is to find a device that charges 12v lead acid batteries
at 20-30v. it doesn't have to be available for purchase anymore.

let's see its specs, how it works, etc.

note that there are chargers that charge *24v* lead acid batteries at
~29v, except that those batteries are not used in cars, nor would a
garage have such a charger because they'll never encounter such a
vehicle.

24v lead acid batteries (usually two 12v in series) are often found in
scooters, wheelchairs, lawn mowers, etc. they also normally have a
custom connector for the charger.

> Take my word for it, then you waste your time and find the information.
> I did that research at the time.
> What you get is my recollection.

your recollection is not substantive.

find a link or even just an article about the existence of such a
charger.

what is working against your claim are countless links about charging
lead acid batteries at a constant current until the terminal voltage
rises to ~2.4v/cell. i already posted the graph of the various stages.

> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
> dangerous thing to do;

exactly why such a device does not exist.

if it did exist, there would be *something* written about it somewhere,
even if it's nothing more than to avoid it.

> in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics of
> my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I would
> have stopped them. I could have sued them.

a bigger question is how many cars were destroyed by this garage.

you should have sued them for destroying your property as well as the
manufacturer of the mythical charger, because such a charger, if it did
exist, could cause explosions, which would cause all sorts of damage
and injuries, possibly fatal.

[nospam]

In article <t5el75$d1f$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> Trying to charge a nominal 12V battery at 30 volts would have unexpected
> consequences.

exactly

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-10 23:24, sms wrote:
> On 5/10/2022 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
>> dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics
>> of my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I
>> would have stopped them. I could have sued them.
>
> I don't know where that repair shop would have found such a battery
> charger unless they were using a 24V charger on a 12V battery.

Nope. Just 12 volt battery, huge garage charger with a setting on
"boost" or "super boost" mode.

Something like this, but I don't see documentation on the site:

<https://suministrosorozco.com/epages/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70.sf/es_ES/?ObjectPath=/Shops/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70/Products/A807546>

The one they used had wheels.

>
> Trying to charge a nominal 12V battery at 30 volts would have unexpected

I think it was rather 20.

> consequences. The battery is a huge load with very low internal
> resistance so in order for the vehicle electronics to be damaged the
> charger must also have been supplying enormous amounts of current.

Which it did.

CMOS electronics stands 18 volts. Considering that the electronics (the
entire display setup) failed maybe two months later, the voltage on the
car would have been around 20. The radio survived because it was
disconnected. The car was diesel, so no ignition. I think the remote
door opener also failed.


The charger was used by someone that was not a full mechanic, but one
that was usually on the front desk. A full mechanic would have known
that the instructions for that mode say to disconnect the battery from
the car because you can fry the electronics. And she did fry the
electronics, but unfortunately not instantly, not that minute, so we did
not made the connection.

And yes, I did read the documentation, two years later the incident. I
found it somewhere, but I do not know the keyword to find it again.

--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Lewis]

Do you also have a picture of a stack of books to "prove" it?

You are so entirely STUPIDLY wrong it's not even funny.

--
Adolescence is the period between childhood and adultery

[Lewis]

In message <70qqki-...@Telcontar.valinor> Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2022-05-10 20:14, nospam wrote:
>> In article <b3kqki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
>> <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
>>>>>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
>>>>>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
>>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
>>>>>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
>>>>>
>>>>> I have.
>>>>
>>>> where have you heard that?
>>>>
>>>> citations required.
>>>
>>>
>>> I saw it personally.
>>
>> that's not a citation, nor did you see that.

> Cite me. I saw it. I am the source.

No you are not. You are an ignorant fool.

--
A dyslexic walks into a bra...

[nospam]

In article <nq8rki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> >> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
> >> dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics
> >> of my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I
> >> would have stopped them. I could have sued them.
> >
> > I don't know where that repair shop would have found such a battery
> > charger unless they were using a 24V charger on a 12V battery.
>
> Nope. Just 12 volt battery, huge garage charger with a setting on
> "boost" or "super boost" mode.

those modes are high *current*.

> Something like this, but I don't see documentation on the site:
>
>
> <https://suministrosorozco.com/epages/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70.sf/
> es_ES/?ObjectPath=/Shops/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70/Products/A807546>

<https://www.telwin.com/en/prodotti/index.html?id=807546&lingua=E>
<https://www.nonpaints.com/en/telwin-alpine-20-boost-portable-electric-b
attery-charger-12-and-24-volt-18-amp-300-watt>

€ Charging current: 18 A

it's also a 12/24v charger. maybe someone set it to 24v, which would
quickly destroy a 12v battery and anything connected to it that was
expecting only 12v (actually 13.8v when the engine is running).

> The one they used had wheels.

most high current chargers do.

<https://m.media-amazon.com/images/I/61PD7OB6rvS._AC_SL1200_.jpg>

> > Trying to charge a nominal 12V battery at 30 volts would have unexpected
>
> I think it was rather 20.

20 amps, sure.

20 volts, definitely no.

if it was manually set for 24v batteries, it would be ~29v.

here's a graph of charging three types of 12v lead acid batteries. note
that the threshold voltage is slightly different for each, and always
under 15v. double the values for a 24 battery.
<https://newcontent.westmarine.com/content/wm-img/WestAdvisor/articles/B
attery-Chargers-2.jpg>

[Lewis]

In message <j90rki-...@Telcontar.valinor> Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2022-05-10 21:18, nospam wrote:
>> In article <70qqki-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.
>> <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> Fast charging a lead acid battery means supplying it with a high
>>>>>>>>> voltage, maybe 20 or 30 volts, much more than what the battery can
>>>>>>>>> absorb. If the car is not disconnected, that voltage reaches the car
>>>>>>>>> itself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I've never heard of high-voltage charging of lead-acid batteries, at
>>>>>>>> least not beyond 2.5 volts per cell (14.8V for a six cell car battery).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> where have you heard that?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> citations required.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I saw it personally.
>>>>
>>>> that's not a citation, nor did you see that.
>>>
>>> Cite me. I saw it. I am the source.
>>
>> that's not how citations work. you can't cite yourself.

> I am a witness.

You are a moron who has no idea what you saw, or is simply making shit
up.

>> what you describe is not how lead acid batteries are charged.
>>
>> take a photo of the charger and/or find one or more links describing it.

> Nope. It was over a decade ago.

And you got the details wrong.

> Take my word for it,

Not a chance in hell. I've seen a lead-acid battery pop its acid when
the wrong voltage charger was used, back in the days when VWs had lower
volt batteries that the standard 12V.

> then you waste your time and find the information.

There we go, you cannot find any source to back up your claim.
Congratulations, you have now proved your claim is bullshit.

> I did that research at the time.

No you didn't.

> What you get is my recollection.

Which is worthless.

--
If women wear a pair of pants, a pair of glasses, and a pair of
earrings, why don't they wear a pair of bras?

[Lewis]

In message <nq8rki-...@Telcontar.valinor> Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
> On 2022-05-10 23:24, sms wrote:
>> On 5/10/2022 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
>>> dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics
>>> of my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I
>>> would have stopped them. I could have sued them.
>>
>> I don't know where that repair shop would have found such a battery
>> charger unless they were using a 24V charger on a 12V battery.

> Nope. Just 12 volt battery, huge garage charger with a setting on
> "boost" or "super boost" mode.

That is AMPS that are boosted, you numpty moron, not volts.

> Something like this, but I don't see documentation on the site:

> <https://suministrosorozco.com/epages/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70.sf/es_ES/?ObjectPath=/Shops/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70/Products/A807546>

Translation:

Battery chargers for charging free electrolyte (WET) batteries with 12/24 V voltage, protection against overloads and inversions
of polarity. Equipped with an ammeter and normal, fast load selector (BOOST) and ammeter.

And:

Charging current 18 A (12 V) 12 A (24 V)

--
"Are you pondering what I'm pondering?"

"Wuh, I think so, Brain, but wouldn't anything lose its flavor on the
bedpost overnight?"

[sms]

On 5/10/2022 4:24 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
> On 2022-05-10 23:24, sms wrote:
>> On 5/10/2022 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
>>> dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics
>>> of my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I
>>> would have stopped them. I could have sued them.
>>
>> I don't know where that repair shop would have found such a battery
>> charger unless they were using a 24V charger on a 12V battery.
>
> Nope. Just 12 volt battery, huge garage charger with a setting on
> "boost" or "super boost" mode.
>
> Something like this, but I don't see documentation on the site:
>
> <https://suministrosorozco.com/epages/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70.sf/es_ES/?ObjectPath=/Shops/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70/Products/A807546>

Ah, your confusion is that "Boost" doesn't increase the voltage being
used, it increases the current to a level great enough to start the
vehicle even when there is a dead battery loading down the electrical
system. See <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07DM34RLH>. At 250 amps you can
pretty much start any vehicle, even one where the vehicle's battery has
close to zero internal resistance.

I have an SUV that I don't drive very often. If I let the battery run
down completely I can't even start it with a 50 amp booster, I have to
charge the battery for a while (or use a Li-Ion jumper battery which is
able to provide a large amount of current for a short time).

[Bob F]

On 5/10/2022 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:

So, what you seem to be saying is that you managed to find some clown
with bad theory and a huge power supply that you then let destroy the
electronics on your car.

Quite a reference!

It's a good thing nobody else fell for this scam.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-11 02:11, Lewis wrote:
> In message <nq8rki-...@Telcontar.valinor> Carlos E.R. <robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:
>> On 2022-05-10 23:24, sms wrote:
>>> On 5/10/2022 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
>>>> dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics
>>>> of my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I
>>>> would have stopped them. I could have sued them.
>>>
>>> I don't know where that repair shop would have found such a battery
>>> charger unless they were using a 24V charger on a 12V battery.
>
>> Nope. Just 12 volt battery, huge garage charger with a setting on
>> "boost" or "super boost" mode.
>
> That is AMPS that are boosted, you numpty moron, not volts.

Plonk


--
Cheers, Carlos.

[Carlos E.R.]

On 2022-05-11 02:49, sms wrote:
> On 5/10/2022 4:24 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>> On 2022-05-10 23:24, sms wrote:
>>> On 5/10/2022 1:58 PM, Carlos E.R. wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>> You will not find current information because it is an incorrect and
>>>> dangerous thing to do; in fact, it destroyed part of the electronics
>>>> of my car. But I did not know what they were doing at the time or I
>>>> would have stopped them. I could have sued them.
>>>
>>> I don't know where that repair shop would have found such a battery
>>> charger unless they were using a 24V charger on a 12V battery.
>>
>> Nope. Just 12 volt battery, huge garage charger with a setting on
>> "boost" or "super boost" mode.
>>
>> Something like this, but I don't see documentation on the site:
>>
>> <https://suministrosorozco.com/epages/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70.sf/es_ES/?ObjectPath=/Shops/2efc024d-9b23-4ccc-92e1-bcfa345cea70/Products/A807546>
>
>
> Ah, your confusion is that "Boost" doesn't increase the voltage being
> used, it increases the current to a level great enough to start the
> vehicle even when there is a dead battery loading down the electrical
> system. See <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07DM34RLH>. At 250 amps you can
> pretty much start any vehicle, even one where the vehicle's battery has
> close to zero internal resistance.

No.

This is charging the battery, not starting the car. When the battery is
sufficiently charged, the battery is connected back to the car, and you
try to start it.

Second.

To increase the amps going to the battery, you have to increase the
voltage given by the charger. There is no other way. Of course, the
transformer and rectifier must be able to maintain the voltage at the
current that results.


Stop going round what I said. It is exactly what I said, a lead-acid
charger that provides a *brutal voltage* to the battery to charge it
very fast.

Maybe you don't use this method over in your country. Maybe they decided
it is not worth it, because it destroys batteries and cars if misused.
Even if not.




--
Cheers, Carlos.

[sms]

That is untrue. If anything increasing the voltage decreases the
current. But the reality is that the voltage on battery chargers is
regulated so it does not exceed the maximum safe voltage. For charging
lead-acid batteries you'd be hard-pressed to find any high-current
charger that goes over 15 volts for a 12 volt battery. The "boost"
setting increases the current so the car can be started from the
charger, which isn't possible from a charger that is supplying only 2
amps or 10 amps (the two common settings on small chargers).

> Stop going round what I said. It is exactly what I said, a lead-acid
> charger that provides a *brutal voltage* to the battery to charge it
> very fast.

Sorry, but what you have stated makes no sense, including your belief
that the only way to increase the current to the battery can only be
achieved by increasing the voltage. Constant voltage/constant current
(CVCC) is the best way to charge lead-acid batteries, CV is the
second-best way.

> Maybe you don't use this method over in your country. Maybe they decided
> it is not worth it, because it destroys batteries and cars if misused.
> Even if not.

It is not used in any country.

[nospam]

In article <nfdski-...@Telcontar.valinor>, Carlos E.R.

<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

> > Ah, your confusion is that "Boost" doesn't increase the voltage being
> > used, it increases the current to a level great enough to start the
> > vehicle even when there is a dead battery loading down the electrical
> > system. See <https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07DM34RLH>. At 250 amps you can
> > pretty much start any vehicle, even one where the vehicle's battery has
> > close to zero internal resistance.
>
> No.

yes.

the above description is correct.

> This is charging the battery, not starting the car. When the battery is
> sufficiently charged, the battery is connected back to the car, and you
> try to start it.

some people do disconnect the battery, usually because it's easier to
charge it indoors where there are mains outlets, however, that's
optional and has nothing to do with what you describe.

> Second.

there is no first, let alone second. stop digging.

> To increase the amps going to the battery, you have to increase the
> voltage given by the charger. There is no other way. Of course, the
> transformer and rectifier must be able to maintain the voltage at the
> current that results.

nope. that is completely wrong.

> Stop going round what I said. It is exactly what I said, a lead-acid
> charger that provides a *brutal voltage* to the battery to charge it
> very fast.

so fast that the battery is destroyed in the process, possibly more if
it explodes.

> Maybe you don't use this method over in your country. Maybe they decided
> it is not worth it, because it destroys batteries and cars if misused.
> Even if not.

lead acid batteries do not care what country they're in.

charging is based on electrical theory, not geography.

[nospam]

In article <t5gm6v$pr6$1...@dont-email.me>, sms

<scharf...@geemail.com> wrote:

> >
> > To increase the amps going to the battery, you have to increase the
> > voltage given by the charger. There is no other way. Of course, the
> > transformer and rectifier must be able to maintain the voltage at the
> > current that results.
>
> That is untrue.

yep, it's completely wrong.

> If anything increasing the voltage decreases the
> current. But the reality is that the voltage on battery chargers is
> regulated so it does not exceed the maximum safe voltage.

that is not the reality.

lead acid battery chargers regulate the *current*, at least for the
initial bulk charge phase.

> For charging
> lead-acid batteries you'd be hard-pressed to find any high-current
> charger that goes over 15 volts for a 12 volt battery.

actually, it's very common to go above 15v as part of a restoration
cycle (see link below).

> The "boost"
> setting increases the current so the car can be started from the
> charger, which isn't possible from a charger that is supplying only 2
> amps or 10 amps (the two common settings on small chargers).

small chargers are generally 1-4 amps. the smallest ones are 1/2a for
trickle/maintenance charging.

> > Stop going round what I said. It is exactly what I said, a lead-acid
> > charger that provides a *brutal voltage* to the battery to charge it
> > very fast.
>
> Sorry, but what you have stated makes no sense, including your belief
> that the only way to increase the current to the battery can only be
> achieved by increasing the voltage. Constant voltage/constant current
> (CVCC) is the best way to charge lead-acid batteries, CV is the
> second-best way.

the best way is multistage, initially constant current (bulk), followed
by constant voltage (absorption), and finally with a trickle charge to
keep it topped off (float).

one example:
<https://www.motorcycle.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/022514-CTEK-
battery-charger-3-chart-633x360.jpg>

> > Maybe you don't use this method over in your country. Maybe they decided
> > it is not worth it, because it destroys batteries and cars if misused.
> > Even if not.
>
> It is not used in any country.

correct.

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 11 May 2022 11:50:15 +0200, "Carlos E.R."
<robin_...@es.invalid> wrote:

>It is exactly what I said, a lead-acid
>charger that provides a *brutal voltage* to the battery to charge it
>very fast.

Nope. Applying momentary high voltage to a lead-acid battery is one
way to break up the layer of lead sulfide that has coated the plates
because the battery sat around too long in a discharged state.
Momentarily "zapping" the battery does a tolerable job of breaking off
the lead sulfide. However, if donw too much or too often, such as
trying to charge the battery at excessive voltages and currents, the
lead sulfide will fall to the bottom of the plate frame and eventually
produce a short between plates.

High voltage or current charging can also cause problems is the 6
cells of the typical lead acid battery are not equalized. Presumably,
if such a "brutal" overcharge is necessary, it's a fair assumption
that at least one of the cells is at a very low voltage point and
possibly shorted. I've managed to boil off the electrolyte and
produce hydrogen gas doing that when I was young and stupid.


--
Jeff Liebermann je...@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

[Jeff Liebermann]

On Wed, 11 May 2022 17:38:16 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <je...@cruzio.com>
wrote:
(...)

A bit more.

Most of todays "lead acid" batteries are really lead calcium
batteries. They're mostly the same but with some subtle differences:
"Difference Between Lead Acid and Calcium Batteries"
<https://www.differencebetween.com/difference-between-lead-acid-and-calcium-batteries/>

There are also differences between "gel cells" and AGM batteries. Most
of today VRLA batteries are AGM batteries:
"What is the Difference Between AGM and GEL Batteries"
<https://www.differencebetween.com/what-is-the-difference-between-agm-and-gel-batteries/>

When following advice on charging and discharging a battery, make sure
that the advice applies to the specific type of battery, and not
something else.