Stretch wrote:


Nick just likes to reinvent the wheel, whilr ignoring all advances is
safety made along the way.

How is describing an old CR psu reinventing anything?


When we are dealing with milliamps or
microamps in the charging circuit, efficiency hardly seems an issue.

We know that isnt so. All those household appliances on standby drawing
milliamps nedes a whole power generating station to supply.
The CR supply uses less money and materials in construction too. In
this case it also saves battery replacements
- more material and energy waste
- lives saved as a result of the battery still being available to work


Now on a battery only system, efficiency has an effect on battery
life.

He is using a non-rechargible battery that will be ruined by his
recharging scheme. At these current levels, it won't blow up or catch
fire, it just won't work when he needs it.

I wasnt aware that microamp charging would damage non rc cells. Is this
true, can you offer a reference?


It is a goofy thing to do
for a once a yerar or twice a year battery change.

whats goofy about saving lives?


Strange way to gain efficiency.

in what way is it strange?


Reinventing what has already been
invented is rarely cost effective.

there is no reinvention here


You can buy something off the shelf
that works for less than you can cobble together some kludge that will
not work reliably.

not so. Go ahead and give us a link to one thats cheaper than this.


And for a smoke detector, reliability is
EVERYTHING!!!

Yes, and my one complaint about Nicks application sits here. If either
mains or battery fails, his detector wont sound. Imho if youre going to
the trouble of running mains to the detector it makes more sense to pay
the small extra and ensure it will sound if either mains or battery is
alive.

That issue can be solved simply by making the CR pass enough i to power
the alarm during sounding.


NT