CTL1616 endurance test

Thread: CTL1616 endurance test

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 14
  1. #1
    Member eurocopter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    600

    CTL1616 endurance test

    I was curious about real performance of CTL1616 battery under heavy backlight use, so I did a little test using 3036 module widely used in many 55xx and 56xx watches.
    Every day I activated backlight 300 times, 3 groups of 100 at a time, with few hours between them.
    100 activations can be done easily in 2 minutes 45 seconds so it doesn't take much time. For those who don't know, backlight duration is fixed to 1.5 seconds.
    I started with battery fully charged. I believe, as the watch normally lives in a room with plenty of indirect sunlight. But to top it off, it spent a week under direct desert sunlight, submerged about 15cm in the pool to allow stable temperature of 30°C/86°F.
    After that the watch was not exposed to light throughout the test, so the battery had no opportunity to recharge.
    Below are the results.

    day 1
    100 100 100 H

    day 2
    100 100 100 H

    day 3
    100 100 100 H

    Over night, battery level dropped to M

    day 4
    M 100 100 100 M

    day 5
    100 100 100 M

    day 6
    100 100 100 M

    day 7
    100 100 100 M

    day 8
    100 100 100 M>CHG>M

    after last set of 100 illuminations at day 8, the watch shortly dropped from M to level 4 (flashing CHG, otherwise display empty), but this only lasted couple minutes and went back to M

    day 9

    starting at M, I wanted to see L symbol instead of watch going directly to CHG so I did some groups of 50 illuminations. ">" symbol is battery level change in short time (couple minutes)

    M 50 L>M, 50 CHG>M, 100 CHG>M, 50 M, 50 M>L

    At night the level changed to M
    I also wasn't sure how to trigger the flashing LMH mode that indicates heavy continuous battery use so I used illumination without splitting into groups. Luckily, the battery was weaker so it took 290 illuminations on first and then only 170 on second attempt.

    day 10

    M 50 M>CHG>M, 50 M>L>M, 290 flashing LMH>M, 170 flashing LMH+CHG>CHG


    Since then, the watch did not recover in 72 hours from CHG so this marks the end of test.
    You can also see the undocumented indicator - flashing LMH + flashing CHG at once.
    It took 3260 illumination activations and no light, to deplete the battery to level 4 CHG.
    What's next? Recharge in the pool, or freezer test to see level 5, that we already had before?






  2. #2
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    18

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    I think this was more of an endurance test for YOU than for the battery!

    The solar watch manuals say that each EL activation requires 5 minutes of 'sunlight through a window' to offset the energy used by it. That means it should take 271 hours to recharge??? (3260 activations * 5 minutes per activation, divided by 60 minutes in an hour)

    I always thought that was a huge over-estimation by Casio, I guess I was right.

  3. #3
    Member zapiao's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    G-SHOCK
    Posts
    361

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    Last edited by zapiao; August 8th, 2010 at 09:38.
    Pulsar - 5M42 Kinetic
    Seiko - 5M42 Kinetic
    Casio - Protrek PRG 70
    Casio - Protrek PRG 100
    Casio - AL-190W
    Casio - G-Shock GW-7900-1ER

  4. Remove Advertisements
    WatchUSeek.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Kendal, Cumbria, UK - a wet place!
    Posts
    423

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    I think your test puts to bed the posts where members are worrying about how long their solar will stay charged etc.

    That's an impressive performance by the watch and yourself; I admire your slightly mad dedication to the test!
    Current watches:

    Casio GW-2000B
    Casio G-7710
    Rolex Explorer

  6. #5
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    TLV
    Posts
    1,360

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    Interesting test.
    Indeed the gshock took it well.
    G9100BP - GLX5600 (*4) - G5600 (*3) - GLS5600 - GWM5600 - G7710 - G2500 (*2) - SGW100

  7. #6
    Member pritch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    898

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    The CTl1616 always impressed me with me its capacity - it's the durability of an older cell that worries.

    Even ones I've kept as well charged as possible seem to be failing me lately.
    55 watches. 30 Casios. Appalling bank balance!

  8. #7
    Member under-wear-taker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Coimbra,Portugal
    Posts
    286

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    I have my solar pathfinder frozen in water since monday at -18º celcius and its working fine...is it true that cold affects batterys?
    - Casio Protrek PRW-1500-1VER -

  9. #8
    Member tribe125's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    29,513

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    Thread copied to 'Articles'.
    I used to list my watches here until I realised it ruined people's Google searches...

  10. #9
    Member J.D.B.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    3,329

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    Thank you for that work, sir!
    HOORAY for SCIENCE and direct observation! DATA is KEY!

    Josh

  11. #10
    Member under-wear-taker's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Coimbra,Portugal
    Posts
    286

    Re: CTL1616 endurance test

    - Casio Protrek PRW-1500-1VER -

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

    Posting Permissions

    • You may not post new threads
    • You may not post replies
    • You may not post attachments
    • You may not edit your posts
    •