Talk:Nickel–cadmium battery

Conflicting discharge info?

Under Battery Characteristics, Comparison to other batteries, Advantages: "...tolerating deep discharge for long periods. In fact, NiCd batteries in long-term storage are typically stored fully discharged."

Under Problems with NiCd, Cell reversal: "Another potential problem is reverse charging. This can occur...when a battery of several cells is fully discharged."

Don't suppose anyone can tell us which is correct? (The link to the Cell reversal source material (Ref 4) is giving me a 404 error.) -Keyesc (talk) 04:26, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Actually both are correct. For storage: we can store them discharged, they won't spontaneously reverse charge themselves during storage. And during use: we can use a "pack" of cells until one weak cell is discharged and then can go into reverse charge due the the other cells forcing current in backwards. HumphreyW (talk) 04:50, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

The terms 'anode' and cathode'

The terms 'anode' and 'cathode' are too vague to be used to describe specific electrodes in a rechargeable battery. The 'anode' is the electrode from which conventional current flows into an electrochemical cell. In a rechargeable battery, the anode during discharge becomes the cathode during charging (and vice versa), hence the source of he vaguary. The author of the article may be mislead by the common (and incorrect) belief that the anode is always the positive electrode. See the intro section of anode or cathode for more information. 86.179.167.116 (talk) 16:27, 22 December 2010 (UTC)

Why Nickel and Cadmium?

It would be nice to have an explanation of just why nickel and cadmium, of all elements, make a good rechargeable battery. Thanks! -- 77.7.139.126 (talk) 00:58, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

It's a good question. Wikipedia technology article often have what, sometimes when, but rarely talk about why. This Popular Science story from 1948[1] makes it sound like Jungner was systematically trying different combinations of materials to improve on the nickel-iron battery. --Wtshymanski (talk) 20:28, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

There seem to be various versions of the story concerning nickel-cadmium batteries. The version that I most often see (or variations thereof) is that Jungner developed the nickel cadmium-battery in 1889, and then set about trying to find a cheaper metal to replace the cadmium (where the main cost was in the processing). Jungner tried (among others) iron, both on its own, and in various combinations with cadmium. Although iron was the most promising alternative he nevertheless found it wanting and settled on an iron-less formulation. It is not clear whether Edison independently invented the nickel-iron battery or stole it (like the light bulb and the phonograph). DieSwartzPunkt (talk) 16:58, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Problem with NiCd - risk of damage to equipment if left to leak

A further problem with NiCd batteries is the risk of damage to equipment if batteries are left in situ whilst equipment is not in use (for periods over a year). Over a long time the Potassium Hydroxide tends to leak out and is corrosive, leading to damage (eg to copper wiring). Problem similar to alkaline battery leaks. John a s (talk) 00:06, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I was suprised not to see any mention of this in the article. Old synthesizers such as the Korg Polysix or the Roland CR78 are infamous for having their NiCd batteries leak all over the circuit boards and ruin everything!--feline1 (talk) 10:30, 8 May 2012 (UTC)

Anyone can edit Wikipedia, so feel free to include something suitable (with appropriate references naturally). 86.156.154.237 (talk) 13:07, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Chemical reason for memory effect?

What is the chemical reason for the memory effect? I'm guessing some kind of "crystallization" ("-type"?) phenomenon of the electrolyte itself (and/or only part of he electrolyte being crystallized, leading to the "voltage-drop-and-then-rise-again" effect?) Jimw338 (talk) 19:08, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

Safety of "top-up" charge

Forcibly causing a battery to be overcharged to a point when gassing of hydrogen and oxygen seems rather dangerous. No citation is given for a "top-up" charge. I recommend elimination of this discussion unless further explanation of the benefit and and safety precautions are cited. This same discussion occurred in the course of discussion of lead-acid batteries and was subsequently removed. --96.244.244.244 (talk) 00:37, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Many incorrect, yet cited contents

While wiki does not require correctness, it requires verifiability through reliable sources. Since the parts that are uncited are obviously wrong, I have removed it. I've pruned things that are clearly wrong or can't make sense. NiCd battery needing "slightly different" voltage is incorrect. The voltage for NiCd is 1.25v nom, lead acid is 2v. LA is charged by voltage limiting while NiCd terminated by time, -dV or 0delta temp.Cantaloupe2 (talk) 17:35, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Memory effect: real or an urban myth?

The Memory effect section seems to contradict itself by first describing the phenomenon and then saying that the original paper was retracted and that it's an urban myth. Well, which is it? It can't be both. It can't be real AND an urban myth. If it's real, the references to the GE paper and urban myth should be deleted. If it's an urban myth it should be mentioned at the top of the section, not at the end.

Memory effect: my thoughts

It appears when the article was written that 2 different battery types were confused NIMH (Nickel Metal Hydride) and NICD (Nickel Cadmium) So some of the article refers to NIMH and other parts refer to NICD. Primarily the "Memory Effect" applies to NICD not NIMH but created article conflict as a result. wizbang_fl 22:16, 17 April 2015 (UTC)

Electrochemistry

Please add the actual half-reactions and voltages, so we can see how the potential is developed. 71.139.161.30 (talk) 21:49, 3 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Nickel–cadmium battery. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.pluginhighway.ca/PHEV2007/proceedings/PluginHwy_PHEV2007_PaperReviewed_Valoen.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.gpbatteries.co.uk/downloads/technical_handbooks/GP_NiCd_Technical.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120325171702/http://www.inobat.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf_09/Absatz_Statistik_2008.pdf to http://www.inobat.ch/fileadmin/user_upload/pdf_09/Absatz_Statistik_2008.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120321012709/http://www.epbaeurope.net/statistics.html to http://www.epbaeurope.net/statistics.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:52, 24 May 2017 (UTC)

Dead Links

Most of the links in the "Notes" section are dead, including all the links referenced in the "Popularity" sub-section. 74.95.43.249 (talk) 20:09, 26 May 2017 (UTC)