I am reading through the "scientific" paper by Zinniker:
http://www2.ife.ee.ethz.ch/~rolfz/batak/ICBR2003_Zinniker.pdf... and starting to realize how poor the methodology is. For example, the main premise of their measurement of "battery capacity" remaining is as follows (see pages 9 and 10):
The test setup is shown in Fig. 8. The Olympus C3040 Camera (courtesy of
Olympus Europe) is equiped with 4 AA-Batteries under test. Every 20
seconds, a foto with full flash power in VGA-Resolution (in order to have
enough capacity on the SM storage card) and display on is made (the
RM-1 IR-remote control is connected to a pulse generator).
As soon as the battery voltage drops under 4V, the camera shuts off and
the number of fotos taken can be determined. After a pause of 12 to 24
hours, the batteries are discharged with 120mA constant current to 0.9V
in order to find their remaining capacity. From this rest capacity, an
equivalent number of Fotos is estimated (measurements during the test
showed, that for one foto an average current of 690mA can be
estimated ). Results are shown in Fig. 9.
So basically they are measuring until the camera stops functioning well.... Likely an issue with the remaining voltage dropping due to need to supply a certain high current demanded by charging the flash. But then, they measure the remaining capacity of the battery by draining it through a VERY SMALL (in comparison) current draw until they get to 0.9 V per cell to estimate the amount of capacity that was wasted in the battery. How is that arbitrarily decided? Really?
Not to mention the Olympus C3040 is a 14 year old digital camera:
http://www.dpreview.com/reviews/olympusc3040zAnd the Zinniker paper itself is 12 years old.... Dated circa 2003. Choosing one device with crappy scientific method and extrapolating this to using Batteriser as some universal product unleashed on the public for a huge variety of devices in 2015.... that's just incompetence at the highest level.
I'm not an electrical engineer, but isn't that a GROSS FLAW in the methodology of seeing what is actually remaining in a battery? And even so, wouldn't just adding a boost converter also be dependent on current draw required, even though the voltage increases, how are they simultaneously providing the necessary current supply?
I mean, I could show a battery drawing 10mA current and watching it last even longer before the voltage drops. Why not 50mA? Why not 100mA? Why not 200mA? Why not 500mA? Each one will have a different time until voltage drops to 0.9V per cell. And why 0.9 V per cell? So I believe the "remaining capacity" measurement is completely flawed. And that still doesn't answer the question of how you can simultaneously boost voltage and current at the same time. There is a trade-off between the two, that's why you get a voltage drop in the first place when you have higher current draw.