The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
maintain the time-of-clock.
What have others done for a battery?
Steve
Battery for RCM6700
Started by ●August 16, 2012
Reply by ●August 16, 20122012-08-16
On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
instrument.
bob
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> maintain the time-of-clock.
> What have others done for a battery?
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
instrument.
bob
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> maintain the time-of-clock.
> What have others done for a battery?
>
> Steve
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
Reply by ●August 16, 20122012-08-16
That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
span we want with a reasonable size battery.
Steve
--- In r..., "Moore, Robert" wrote:
>
> On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> instrument.
>
> bob
> --
> Robert K Moore, PhD
> Designer, Macular Metrics
> Robert_Moore@...
> 401-226-6888
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>
> > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > What have others done for a battery?
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
span we want with a reasonable size battery.
Steve
--- In r..., "Moore, Robert" wrote:
>
> On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> instrument.
>
> bob
> --
> Robert K Moore, PhD
> Designer, Macular Metrics
> Robert_Moore@...
> 401-226-6888
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>
> > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > What have others done for a battery?
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Reply by ●August 16, 20122012-08-16
I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power
to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
battery . . .
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>
> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>
> Steve
>
> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
> wrote:
> >
> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> > instrument.
> >
> > bob
> > --
> > Robert K Moore, PhD
> > Designer, Macular Metrics
> > Robert_Moore@...
> > 401-226-6888
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >
> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > > What have others done for a battery?
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
battery . . .
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>
> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>
> Steve
>
> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
> wrote:
> >
> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> > instrument.
> >
> > bob
> > --
> > Robert K Moore, PhD
> > Designer, Macular Metrics
> > Robert_Moore@...
> > 401-226-6888
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >
> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > > What have others done for a battery?
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
Reply by ●August 16, 20122012-08-16
I do recall the manual saying something about cycling the power to get
better RTC current draw performance,
5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
a possibility to explore
I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
Phil
On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
> **
> I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power
> to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
> battery . . .
>
> bob
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>
>> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
>> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>>
>> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
>> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
>> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
>> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
>> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
>> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
>> > instrument.
>> >
>> > bob
>> > --
>> > Robert K Moore, PhD
>> > Designer, Macular Metrics
>> > Robert_Moore@...
>> > 401-226-6888
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>> >
>> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring
>> a
>> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
>> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
>> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
>> > > What have others done for a battery?
>> > >
>> > > Steve
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> --
> Robert K Moore, PhD
> Designer, Macular Metrics
> R...@brown.edu
> 401-226-6888
>
>
>
better RTC current draw performance,
5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
a possibility to explore
I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
Phil
On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
> **
> I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power
> to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
> battery . . .
>
> bob
>
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>
>> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
>> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>>
>> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
>> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
>> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
>> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
>> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
>> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
>> > instrument.
>> >
>> > bob
>> > --
>> > Robert K Moore, PhD
>> > Designer, Macular Metrics
>> > Robert_Moore@...
>> > 401-226-6888
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>> >
>> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring
>> a
>> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
>> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
>> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
>> > > What have others done for a battery?
>> > >
>> > > Steve
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >
>> >
>>
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
> --
> Robert K Moore, PhD
> Designer, Macular Metrics
> R...@brown.edu
> 401-226-6888
>
>
>
Reply by ●August 16, 20122012-08-16
I haven't calculated the life for your hardware. In my app using the
OP7200
and the battery I mentioned I calculated the life at > 15 years. My real
intent was to keep the end user from ever opening the instrument.
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Phil D wrote:
> I do recall the manual saying something about cycling the power to get
> better RTC current draw performance,
> 5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
> an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
> period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
> a possibility to explore
> I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
> suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
>
> Phil
>
> On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
>> **
>> I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power
>> to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
>> battery . . .
>>
>> bob
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>>
>>> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
>>> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>>>
>>> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
>>> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
>>> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
>>> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
>>> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same
>>> pinout
>>> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
>>> > instrument.
>>> >
>>> > bob
>>> > --
>>> > Robert K Moore, PhD
>>> > Designer, Macular Metrics
>>> > Robert_Moore@...
>>> > 401-226-6888
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high,
>>> requiring a
>>> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
>>> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
>>> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
>>> > > What have others done for a battery?
>>> > >
>>> > > Steve
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Robert K Moore, PhD
>> Designer, Macular Metrics
>> R...@brown.edu
>> 401-226-6888
>>
>
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
and the battery I mentioned I calculated the life at > 15 years. My real
intent was to keep the end user from ever opening the instrument.
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Phil D wrote:
> I do recall the manual saying something about cycling the power to get
> better RTC current draw performance,
> 5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
> an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
> period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
> a possibility to explore
> I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
> suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
>
> Phil
>
> On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
>> **
>> I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power
>> to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
>> battery . . .
>>
>> bob
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>>
>>> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
>>> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>>>
>>> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
>>> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
>>> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>>>
>>> Steve
>>>
>>> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
>>> wrote:
>>> >
>>> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
>>> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
>>> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same
>>> pinout
>>> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
>>> > instrument.
>>> >
>>> > bob
>>> > --
>>> > Robert K Moore, PhD
>>> > Designer, Macular Metrics
>>> > Robert_Moore@...
>>> > 401-226-6888
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>>> >
>>> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high,
>>> requiring a
>>> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
>>> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
>>> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
>>> > > What have others done for a battery?
>>> > >
>>> > > Steve
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > > Yahoo! Groups Links
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> > >
>>> >
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Robert K Moore, PhD
>> Designer, Macular Metrics
>> R...@brown.edu
>> 401-226-6888
>>
>
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
Reply by ●August 17, 20122012-08-17
We use a super capacitor to provide the clock battery voltage, it is
recharged when the unit is powered up and saves us having to worry about
battery replacements.
Brian
From: r... [mailto:r...] On
Behalf Of Moore, Robert
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 5:13 PM
To: r...
Subject: Re: [rabbit-semi] Re: Battery for RCM6700
I haven't calculated the life for your hardware. In my app using the OP7200
and the battery I mentioned I calculated the life at > 15 years. My real
intent was to keep the end user from ever opening the instrument.
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Phil D wrote:
I do recall the manual saying something about cycling the power to get
better RTC current draw performance,
5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
a possibility to explore
I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
Phil
On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power to
the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the battery
. . .
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
span we want with a reasonable size battery.
Steve
--- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
wrote:
>
> On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> instrument.
>
> bob
> --
> Robert K Moore, PhD
> Designer, Macular Metrics
> Robert_Moore@...
> 401-226-6888
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>
> > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > What have others done for a battery?
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
recharged when the unit is powered up and saves us having to worry about
battery replacements.
Brian
From: r... [mailto:r...] On
Behalf Of Moore, Robert
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2012 5:13 PM
To: r...
Subject: Re: [rabbit-semi] Re: Battery for RCM6700
I haven't calculated the life for your hardware. In my app using the OP7200
and the battery I mentioned I calculated the life at > 15 years. My real
intent was to keep the end user from ever opening the instrument.
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Phil D wrote:
I do recall the manual saying something about cycling the power to get
better RTC current draw performance,
5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
a possibility to explore
I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
Phil
On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power to
the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the battery
. . .
bob
On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
span we want with a reasonable size battery.
Steve
--- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
wrote:
>
> On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> instrument.
>
> bob
> --
> Robert K Moore, PhD
> Designer, Macular Metrics
> Robert_Moore@...
> 401-226-6888
> On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
>
> > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > What have others done for a battery?
> >
> > Steve
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
>
Yahoo! Groups Links
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
--
Robert K Moore, PhD
Designer, Macular Metrics
R...@brown.edu
401-226-6888
Reply by ●August 17, 20122012-08-17
5-years is not that long. How long does the battery in your PC last?
If you had to replace the battery in your PC every 3-months or so,
would that be a problem? Besides, our products are sealed and not
meant to be opened by customers. Like Apple products. Open it and
your warranty is void.
The Rabbit is Ethernet enabled, but our customers keep our products
on private networks that have no access to the outside world. You
wouldn't want some hacker shutting down your satellite TV broadcast
would you? People get real upset when their TV goes off the air.
Rechargeable is also not an option. One, you have to open the box,
which is a no-no. Two, our customers fear the possibility of
explosion.
Accurate time and date is important for the logs we maintain.
It's looking more and more like we are going to have to use a separate
clock device to get reasonable battery life. Something like a PCF8563.
It uses 400na over a temperature range of -40C to +85C. Using a .4AH
lithium coin battery, we can get better than 10-years of life.
--- In r..., Phil D wrote:
>
> I do recall the manual saying something about cycling the power to get
> better RTC current draw performance,
> 5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
> an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
> period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
> a possibility to explore
> I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
> suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
>
> Phil
>
> On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power
> > to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
> > battery . . .
> >
> > bob
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >
> >> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> >> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
> >>
> >> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> >> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> >> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> >> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> >> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> >> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> >> > instrument.
> >> >
> >> > bob
> >> > --
> >> > Robert K Moore, PhD
> >> > Designer, Macular Metrics
> >> > Robert_Moore@
> >> > 401-226-6888
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring
> >> a
> >> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> >> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> >> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> >> > > What have others done for a battery?
> >> > >
> >> > > Steve
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
If you had to replace the battery in your PC every 3-months or so,
would that be a problem? Besides, our products are sealed and not
meant to be opened by customers. Like Apple products. Open it and
your warranty is void.
The Rabbit is Ethernet enabled, but our customers keep our products
on private networks that have no access to the outside world. You
wouldn't want some hacker shutting down your satellite TV broadcast
would you? People get real upset when their TV goes off the air.
Rechargeable is also not an option. One, you have to open the box,
which is a no-no. Two, our customers fear the possibility of
explosion.
Accurate time and date is important for the logs we maintain.
It's looking more and more like we are going to have to use a separate
clock device to get reasonable battery life. Something like a PCF8563.
It uses 400na over a temperature range of -40C to +85C. Using a .4AH
lithium coin battery, we can get better than 10-years of life.
--- In r..., Phil D wrote:
>
> I do recall the manual saying something about cycling the power to get
> better RTC current draw performance,
> 5 years is a long time to want the RTC to survive is a rechargeable 3V not
> an option is it realistic that the product will be un-powered for this
> period and require the correct time? as this is a network device NTC may be
> a possibility to explore
> I use a 3V lithium ion that i calculated as 72 days RTC time which is
> suitable for my application as real time isn't essential
>
> Phil
>
> On 16 August 2012 20:39, Moore, Robert wrote:
>
> > **
> >
> >
> > I noticed somewhere in the 6700 manual a REQUIREMENT that you cycle power
> > to the 6700 AFTER attaching the battery. This affects the drain on the
> > battery . . .
> >
> > bob
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 1:45 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >
> >> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> >> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
> >>
> >> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> >> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> >> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
> >>
> >> Steve
> >>
> >> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert"
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> >> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> >> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> >> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> >> > instrument.
> >> >
> >> > bob
> >> > --
> >> > Robert K Moore, PhD
> >> > Designer, Macular Metrics
> >> > Robert_Moore@
> >> > 401-226-6888
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring
> >> a
> >> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> >> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> >> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> >> > > What have others done for a battery?
> >> > >
> >> > > Steve
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
> >> > >
Reply by ●October 2, 20122012-10-02
Hey Steve,
I just noticed this post now.
We raised the high RCM6700 VBat problem with Digi back in March and this was confirmed as a hardware problem. Initially the fix (new modules) was expected around July, but now they are saying "Christmas".
As a back-stop, we added a separate SPI RTC chip that draws about 2uA and are using a 1000mAh battery (Renata CR2477) (with a jumper to VBat) on sites that are usually powered, with short periods on battery.
I've had to convert all our data storage to flash, with ring buffers to avoid "wearing out" the flash.
This itself has lots of side-issues (e.g. Needing to mount/dismount the flash to commit the flash table, which lives in battery-backed RAM).
Regards,
Mario
--- In r..., "seecwriter" wrote:
>
> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>
> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>
> Steve
>
> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert" wrote:
> >
> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> > instrument.
> >
> > bob
> > --
> > Robert K Moore, PhD
> > Designer, Macular Metrics
> > Robert_Moore@
> > 401-226-6888
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >
> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > > What have others done for a battery?
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
I just noticed this post now.
We raised the high RCM6700 VBat problem with Digi back in March and this was confirmed as a hardware problem. Initially the fix (new modules) was expected around July, but now they are saying "Christmas".
As a back-stop, we added a separate SPI RTC chip that draws about 2uA and are using a 1000mAh battery (Renata CR2477) (with a jumper to VBat) on sites that are usually powered, with short periods on battery.
I've had to convert all our data storage to flash, with ring buffers to avoid "wearing out" the flash.
This itself has lots of side-issues (e.g. Needing to mount/dismount the flash to commit the flash table, which lives in battery-backed RAM).
Regards,
Mario
--- In r..., "seecwriter" wrote:
>
> That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
>
> We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> span we want with a reasonable size battery.
>
> Steve
>
> --- In r..., "Moore, Robert" wrote:
> >
> > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> > instrument.
> >
> > bob
> > --
> > Robert K Moore, PhD
> > Designer, Macular Metrics
> > Robert_Moore@
> > 401-226-6888
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> >
> > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > > What have others done for a battery?
> > >
> > > Steve
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
Reply by ●October 3, 20122012-10-03
Mario,
We just did the same thing, we added a separate RTC chip to our
motherboard that should last over 10-years on the battery. On boot-up
I set the Rabbit clock from the off-board clock so I can continue to
use the DC built-in features for time.
Thanks,
Steve
--- In r..., "mario_wtbbh" wrote:
>
> Hey Steve,
>
> I just noticed this post now.
>
> We raised the high RCM6700 VBat problem with Digi back in March and this was confirmed as a hardware problem. Initially the fix (new modules) was expected around July, but now they are saying "Christmas".
>
> As a back-stop, we added a separate SPI RTC chip that draws about 2uA and are using a 1000mAh battery (Renata CR2477) (with a jumper to VBat) on sites that are usually powered, with short periods on battery.
>
> I've had to convert all our data storage to flash, with ring buffers to avoid "wearing out" the flash.
>
> This itself has lots of side-issues (e.g. Needing to mount/dismount the flash to commit the flash table, which lives in battery-backed RAM).
>
> Regards,
> Mario
> --- In r..., "seecwriter" wrote:
> >
> > That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> > 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
> >
> > We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> > far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> > span we want with a reasonable size battery.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > --- In r..., "Moore, Robert" wrote:
> > >
> > > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> > > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> > > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> > > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> > > instrument.
> > >
> > > bob
> > > --
> > > Robert K Moore, PhD
> > > Designer, Macular Metrics
> > > Robert_Moore@
> > > 401-226-6888
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> > >
> > > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > > > What have others done for a battery?
> > > >
> > > > Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
We just did the same thing, we added a separate RTC chip to our
motherboard that should last over 10-years on the battery. On boot-up
I set the Rabbit clock from the off-board clock so I can continue to
use the DC built-in features for time.
Thanks,
Steve
--- In r..., "mario_wtbbh" wrote:
>
> Hey Steve,
>
> I just noticed this post now.
>
> We raised the high RCM6700 VBat problem with Digi back in March and this was confirmed as a hardware problem. Initially the fix (new modules) was expected around July, but now they are saying "Christmas".
>
> As a back-stop, we added a separate SPI RTC chip that draws about 2uA and are using a 1000mAh battery (Renata CR2477) (with a jumper to VBat) on sites that are usually powered, with short periods on battery.
>
> I've had to convert all our data storage to flash, with ring buffers to avoid "wearing out" the flash.
>
> This itself has lots of side-issues (e.g. Needing to mount/dismount the flash to commit the flash table, which lives in battery-backed RAM).
>
> Regards,
> Mario
> --- In r..., "seecwriter" wrote:
> >
> > That's not a bad choice. But it's half the capacity I need for a
> > 5-year life, unless I'm over thinking this.
> >
> > We may have to go to a separate time-of-day clock device that uses
> > far less current than the RCM6700's 120ua in order to get the life
> > span we want with a reasonable size battery.
> >
> > Steve
> >
> > --- In r..., "Moore, Robert" wrote:
> > >
> > > On the OP7200 I used a AA 3.6 VDC lithium battery (Saft LS14500CBA or
> > > equivalent) accessible from the outside of the instrument case using a
> > > Bulgin 122-BX0011/1 . . . I'm assuming the RCM6700 has the same pinout
> > > for this. My biggest concern was to keep the end-user from opening the
> > > instrument.
> > >
> > > bob
> > > --
> > > Robert K Moore, PhD
> > > Designer, Macular Metrics
> > > Robert_Moore@
> > > 401-226-6888
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Aug 16, 2012 at 12:31 PM, seecwriter wrote:
> > >
> > > > The battery current draw for the RCM6700 seems rather high, requiring a
> > > > large battery to maintain the clock for 5-years.
> > > > Can anything be done to reduce the battery current? I'm just rying to
> > > > maintain the time-of-clock.
> > > > What have others done for a battery?
> > > >
> > > > Steve
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
