I note in Tony's article a predicted failure mode for this battery is a short circuit. So, we are very lucky so far in that it appears to be open circuit or has developed a high internal resistance. Regarding different battery chemistries that are suitable for the ISS. - I see in some of the videos produced by the crew that there are a large number of commercial cameras on board for Earth observation. Presumably these are powered by conventional Lithium Ion battery packs. Not exactly rated for the job, but it does show there is more than just Silver/Zinc onboard although there could be a maximum energy limit to the capacity to avoid fire / explosion. (e.g. there's a 100W/hr limit to some cubesat launches)

Thanks....and still enjoying ARISSat-1

David G0MRF

-----Original Message----- From: Trevor . [email protected] To: amsat-bb [email protected] Sent: Sun, 14 Aug 2011 20:54 Subject: [amsat-bb] Re: Thinking about ARISSat-2

--- On Sun, 14/8/11, Burns Fisher [email protected] wrote:

This obviously requires additional electronics; in particular the battery can't be on the main power bus; we want to be able to isolate it to prevent it charging on every orbit. But that might be good anyway...the ability to isolate the battery might be desirable when the battery does die for good.

Presumably if RSC Energia provide the resources to launch ARISSat-2 it'll be the spare ARISSat that was delivered to Moscow along with ARISSat-1 that will be going up ?

I guess due to it's current location there'd be little opportunity to make changes to the circuitry ?

I've been very impressed by the Slow Scan TV pictures from the satellite. Including SSTV was a good move both in terms of educational outreach and for promoting Amateur Satellites to the wider Amateur Radio community.

73 Trevor M5AKA

_______________________________________________ Sent via [email protected]. Opinions expressed are those of the author. Not an AMSAT-NA member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program! Subscription settings: http://amsat.org/mailman/listinfo/amsat-bb

Thanks, Phil. That's pretty interesting, although I still do wonder about keeping within spec. I especially wonder about Ag/Zn where there is that chemistry change in the middle of the charge cycle; what is the result of perhaps never crossing chemistry change threshold with shallow cycles? I certainly don't know.

One of the ARRISat papers I read talked about Ag/Zn being safe when shorted. I suppose that 'safe' is for the battery itself. You would still have a lot of current going through whatever caused the short.

I was also intrigued when you mentioned super-caps in a previous posting. The enormous cycle life is really useful...it seems like just keeping the IHU ticking over would be really useful, even if we had no up/downlink capability during eclipse. And of course we could think about having them as a backup after the 'standard' battery died.

Interesting to think about...

BTW, you may not remember, but we exchanged email many years ago; we were both on one of the USENET boards (sci.space.columbia?) I asked if I could join AMSAT before I got my ham ticket. You were kind enough to encourage me. Well, I did join AMSAT a year or 2 ago, and just this spring got my general ticket too. So thanks for the encouragement even if it was a few decades before I acted on it :-)

Burns, W2BFJ

On Sun, Aug 14, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Phil Karn [email protected] wrote:

On 8/14/11 11:31 AM, Burns Fisher wrote:

...

What about another strategy? Suppose we did exactly what the battery was spec'ed for: Deep cycles.

Almost every type of battery does better with shallow cycles than deep cycles. So this is almost certainly true for Ag/Zn as well. These batteries just aren't designed for many cycles.

There is a company (Z-power) working on a Ag/Zn battery with a decent cycle life, intended for use in laptops. They claim the price of silver isn't an impediment because laptop li-ion batteries are also expensive and the silver in their batteries can be reclaimed and reused indefinitely. One advantage they keep citing is the increased safety of a battery with a water-based electrolyte. But newer li-ion batteries have also been developed with different positive plate materials that greatly reduce the inherent fire hazard of these batteries.

I don't know what the recent run-up in precious metal prices has done to their business plans.

I would like to investigate super/ultracaps for spacecraft use. Their energy densities are low (a Maxwell ultracap the size of a D-cell battery holds about 0.35 watt-hour) but their cycle lives are extremely high: about 500,000 for a 20% degradation in capacity. These could still run a satellite computer through a LEO eclipse, eliminating one of the major problems with a modern satellite whose battery has failed.

If a few of these caps could be flown, it might also be possible to run a low power, efficiently coded telemetry beacon through eclipse.

But of course the caps would have to be safety rated. They do contain small amounts of potentially hazardous materials, but then again so do Ag/Zn batteries: their electrolytes consist of a strong lye (KOH) solution. It's hard to understand why these batteries would be approved but not NiCd and NiMH as they also use KOH in H2O as their electrolytes. If stored energy is considered a hazard, they could always be launched discharged and charged after deployment.

-Phil