Single power tool battery

[bump]

No comment on DOGE or the US, I'm interested in what the thoughts are here for the idea of a single power tool battery that is shared across manufacturers. I rather like the idea in the same way that portable devices are pretty much all USB-C now.


For ref https://www.protoolreviews.com/doge-mandates-power-tool-manufacturers-use-same-battery/

 

[Richiew]

Check the date on the article and the tag at the bottom.

 

[Jelly_Sheffield]

Check the date on the article and the tag at the bottom.

Shame, it would actually be a massive benefit to users to have a single uniform standard.

It would however be very off brand for the ultra libertarian brand of capitalism the US is getting all excited about though.

 

[gaz1]

the issue stands is which battery companies size do you play with

the same can be said with the car batterys as well as well as the electric cars as that also needs the same through out the industry

you will always find the same argument on the connections per power tool as they all want there own its also the same with the electric cars

 

[bump]

Check the date on the article and the tag at the bottom.

Damn, though given some of the other madness I wouldn't have been surprised. After all Armando Iannucci has given up writing satire.

 

[Jelly_Sheffield]

the issue stands is which battery companies size do you play with

the same can be said with the car batterys as well as well as the electric cars as that also needs the same through out the industry

you will always find the same argument on the connections per power tool as they all want there own its also the same with the electric cars

Which is why (just like with USB-C, or going back further the implementation of BS1363 plug), it's only achievable through regulation.

Companies don't want to give up a (perceived) commercial advantage, even through it would likely be in both their and the consumer's interest to do so in the long run.

Ultimately all the batteries use the same standard cells, mostly from the same 3 or 4 manufacturers.

Despite what manufacturers might claim when lobbying to prevent a regulator imposing one standard, the various 3D-printed adapters have proved there's not really any "secret sauce" to the battery packs of a certain voltage that stops them being compatible with another battery of the same voltage.

 

[Erie Fred]

The Cargo Container or Conex box had the same growing pains when starting out.
A committee was formed, and a standard was developed.

No politicians were harmed in any way.

 

[Jelly_Sheffield]

The Cargo Container or Conex box had the same growing pains when starting out.
A committee was formed, and a standard was developed.

No politicians were harmed in any way.

That was when companies still had rational leadership though...

I do think any attempt at this kind of standardisation should be a case of the regulator gathering the relevant companies in a room and giving them a date by which they have to collectively agree on a standard which will then go into force.

But they wouldn't do that of their own free will anymore.

 

[Erie Fred]

That was when companies still had rational leadership though...

I would suggest you read the book "The Box",
all about the container.

https://www.amazon.com/Box-Shipping-Container-Smaller-Economy/dp/0691136408

 

[Craig-SM]

You can't really compare the phone USB-C legislation to one battery to power them all (tools). The phones have their own battery sizes and capacities etc that are as different as the handsets themselves. The cable connection is just a means of getting power to the phone to recharge it. If we had standardisation on the battery it would slow development and even hinder it when the battery standard had to be changed for higher output etc as it would take forever and a day to decide the specs with every manufacture trying to get their needs met.

 

[fizzy]

The Cargo Container or Conex box had the same growing pains when starting out.
A committee was formed, and a standard was developed.

No politicians were harmed in any way.

The problem is that if they were to stick to a universal battery size/standard then in a few years time people would be moaning about the lack of progress when people in other countries can buy a battery 3x better!

 

[Jelly_Sheffield]

If we had standardisation on the battery it would slow development

I don't agree.

Almost all 18V power tool batteries can be interchanged between brands using DIY 3D printed (and increasingly injection moulded Chinese) adapters with not apparent loss of functionality to the tools.

The same appears to be true for 36V, but that market hasn't been as thoroughly explored by hardware hackers yet.

Because ultimately all the battery is a very simple subassembly... For all the marketing BS it does one very well understood thing, according to pretty much immutable principles.

If control over the battery pack was so critical to product development, we wouldn't see convergent development to the point of being basically fungible (but for the proprietary connectors).

even hinder it when the battery standard had to be changed for higher output etc as it would take forever and a day to decide the specs with every manufacture trying to get their needs met.

It would take them as long as they are willing to waste collectively not putting a new better product on the market... This would not be all that long.

Ultimately it would force them to compete on functionality, quality and price; rather than deliberately locking consumers into a decision.

That would likely improve development as it reduces wasted effort on duplication of development in an area which is basically a solved problem.

In my experience of design and engineering, it's very rare that a constraint is an immutable barrier to getting the end result you want if it was achievable in the first place. Whilst a lack of constraints often makes the design process longer, and more expensive.

This is why "requirements engineering" and "systems engineering" are so important to complex projects and products.

 

[Memmeddu]

Shame, it would actually be a massive benefit to users to have a single uniform standard.

It would however be very off brand for the ultra libertarian brand of capitalism the US is getting all excited about though.

I've choosen Makita as battery platform, what you're talking about already exist
But not a single one
Cas which uses Metabo batteries
Bosch and Fein use the same battery and so on

 

[hotponyshoes]

If there was one standard power tool battery would there be any incentive for anyone to actually make it?
The only thing they would be able to compete on would be the sales price so they either all end up getting made in China or get corners cut in production in a race to the bottom.
You might get manufactures making branded versions of the standard but with better features like tabbless cells, tougher rubber cases, wireless charging.. but then your getting back to individual competing products again.. especially when one decides to increase the a/h capacity.

There are various attempts at 'standard' battery systems already. Metabo have CAS (cordless alliance system) Bosch have Power For All, same battery connection shared across a range of manafactures. However, I'm pretty sure all the manafactures are owned by the same respective parent groups so it's more of a market capture move than any consumer or environmental motivated thing.
I expect I could start making cordless tools myself as an independent and possibly licence the right to use bosch or metabo batterys but I don't know if I would pay a licence fee when I could just change the case design slightly and slap some generic cells in my bespoke housing.

I can see why manafactures would be reluctant to give up the uniqueness. I've got a collection of mainly bosch and metabo cordless tools. The majority of them have only been purchased as I am already invested in that battery platform. I've got several tools of which I know a better version is available but I've not bought the better one because it would cost more if I need battries as well.
It's not just the cost either. I've got a few different tools where there was no bosch/metabo version available, but things I don't need to charge regularly.
My kitchen worktop permanently houses 3 different chargers and that's 2 more than I would like there.

I wouldn't actually want one standard battery myself either.
I'd want at least 2.. 12v and 18v. I'd be happy enough to skip 36v as the metabo tools that take 2x18v work fine for my uses.

But, In 18v, I'd not want anything less than 8a/h for the grinder as use at least 2 of them a day already.
I don't want anything over 2a/h for the drill as one of them lasts me over a week and 8a/h in that wears my wrist out...

I'd really like to keep both the compact 3a/h in the 12v for accessing tight spots, and, keep the 6a/h for the longer jobs.
So the minimum I would be happy with is 4 different types!

 

[Craig-SM]

@Jelly_Sheffield sorry, I disagree. Festool batteries wide and slim but forced to use a common shape battery would be more square and the ergonomics of the tool are gone, never mind the bluetooth aspects built into some of the batteries. You may not get a loss of functionality. The only thing you would ultimately achieve is lots of the same tools with different logos on and slightly different clothing. It would be like Nissan and Renault, equally as bland.
What format do you have for 36V, single batteries or tandem? Are the batteries internal or external, sealed or vented, as again all these affect the ergonomics of a tool

Ceenr have had a multi platform battery for a while and it's never really taken off as most of the time it make the tool awkward.

 

[Jelly_Sheffield]

If there was one standard power tool battery would there be any incentive for anyone to actually make it?

Yeah, battery manufacturers.

The only thing they would be able to compete on would be the sales price so they either all end up getting made in China or get corners cut in production in a race to the bottom.

This is effectively already where we are in terms of manufacturing.

Basically every brand uses the same designs of cell from the same handful of far eastern manufacturers, in more or less the same arrangement, but for the mechanical design of the connection.

The small differences in battery chemistry for premium batteries from the likes of Milwaukee don't matter to the connection standard.

I can see why manafactures would be reluctant to give up the uniqueness. I've got a collection of mainly bosch and metabo cordless tools. The majority of them have only been purchased as I am already invested in that battery platform. I've got several tools of which I know a better version is available but I've not bought the better one because it would cost more if I need battries as well.

This is exactly it, it serves their needs very well, but acts as a barrier to consumer choice, and reduces the drive to compete on quality or functionality.

Which in turn allows the big 3 players to capture a disproportionate amount of new entrants by offering extremely cheap deals on kits of 2 common first tools, two batteries and a charger (often cheaper than the two batteries alone would be at RRP).

Having secured that customer, they can then act as rentiers because having bought into that brand, their customers are heavily disincentivised to switch due to cost.

If I could justify the expense there's quite a few tools where I know Milwaukee, DeWalt, or Ingersol Rand would be far better than the Makita I do use, but I am locked in by cost.

Hikoki/Metabo HPT do a ¾ impact wrench that puts all the other manufacturers to shame in terms of size and performance... But because they don't have the same range of tools or market penetration, it's been unable move the needle on sales.

@Jelly_Sheffield sorry, I disagree. Festool batteries wide and slim but forced to use a common shape battery would be more square and the ergonomics of the tool are gone

But they could still have whatever battery shape they like (if they deemed it worthwhile to make their own batteries still, being festool they probably would).

All that's required is to have a specific agreed connector and latch, which would constrain only a tiny portion of the form factor, the part which inevitably ends up buried inside the tool anyway.

That's exactly like the standardisation of USB C

never mind the bluetooth aspects built into some of the batteries.

I don't understand how standardising the battery connector would impact on a wireless communication protocol.

But then I also don't understand why a battery needs Bluetooth to begin with.

The only thing you would ultimately achieve is lots of the same tools with different logos on and slightly different clothing. It would be like Nissan and Renault, equally as bland.

Are there really meaningful differences in most of the core products at the moment?

I would argue not, If you buy a drill in red, teal, yellow, black & green, grey & red, green, blue, or neon green it will still weigh about so much, and drill holes in much the same way.

- Metabo HPT/Hikoki, Bosch, etc. don't really have a stand out product, or much market presence,
- DeWalt has nothing unique either, but stands out with sheer market power, being a very big name,
- Makita makes a few niche industrial tools, but only really stands out mostly by market power, as another big name.

There's then two differentiation strategies:

Cost,
- Ryobi makes everything a bit more affordably than everyone else,
- but that strategy is losing ground to "Fakita" and "Milfakee" as the Chinese OEM's start to sell decent products on an existing battery platforms directly,

Specialisation,
- Milwaukee has really invested in developing the widest possible range of speciality tools for specific trades, but the core products are still basically fungible with every other brand.
- Ingersoll-Rand makes the same range of manufacturing focused specialist assembly tools and absolutely massive impact wrenches as they offer in air-power.
- Hilti and Festool have really focused on unique products for a specific trade and optimising their other products for the trade who would buy into the system because of those unique products.
- Metabo (not HPT, the German one) makes truly excellent angle grinders, and thoroughly mediocre everything else.

So a common battery connector would change basically nothing in terms of the individual companies marketing and product development strategies.

But would:
- open the door for some of the under-represented brands to find a specialism if they wanted,
- allow consumers to mix and match to get the best tool (and best battery pack ergonomics) for each of their needs.

What format do you have for 36V, single batteries or tandem?

Dual battery 36V tools are a just a special case of 18V tools for connector purposes...

It would also be possible to have a shared mechanical connection standard for 18V/36V which uses a different pin arrangement for the two voltages, so the tool side connector determines which is used.

That would enable all dual 18V battery tools to also run on a single 36V battery, and allow an 18V tool to use a 36V battery as a double capacity battery (as per Hikoki's implementation).

Are the batteries internal or external, sealed or vented, as again all these affect the ergonomics of a tool

As per my above comment the design details past the connector doesn't really matter for standardisation.

The manufacturer is then free to go wild with all manner of designs and form factors for the pack itself in a quest to sell their own "special-sauce" batteries to the people to whom it will make enough difference to pony up.

If the desire/need is there, including data pins as an optional feature in a standard would be easy, and could even use an existing industrial communication protocol to avoid conflict over what pinout to use, and take advantage of mass manufactured IC's.

The reality is that a standardisation attempt would most likely end with:
- 12V using an inserted connector to allow for the tiny "magazine style" batteries that justify 12V tools (a la Milwaukee)
- 18V and 36V would end up with a slide on type (similar to Milwaukee, Makita, DeWalt, Hikoki, Festool, Ingersoll, et al), quite possibly a shared standard for both voltages.

 

[MetalMonkey]

I don't agree.

Almost all 18V power tool batteries can be interchanged between brands using DIY 3D printed (and increasingly injection moulded Chinese) adapters with not apparent loss of functionality to the tools.

The same appears to be true for 36V, but that market hasn't been as thoroughly explored by hardware hackers yet.

Because ultimately all the battery is a very simple subassembly... For all the marketing BS it does one very well understood thing, according to pretty much immutable principles.

If control over the battery pack was so critical to product development, we wouldn't see convergent development to the point of being basically fungible (but for the proprietary connectors).

I don't think that it is entirely that simple - while you can adapt different batteries to different tools in terms of the basic power connections - sometimes there is a little more going on in terms of signalling between battery and tool (torque test channel and tool scientist have some videos on this). I doubt this would be difficult to resolve if a common battery platform was ever mandated but there are a number of other considerations.

A lot of the bare tools and kits are offered at attractive pricing to lure you in and lock in brand loyalty. I doubt they are "lost leaders", but shall we say they are heavily incentivised.
If this retention incentive is removed, then you would expect the tool prices to increase as a result. Brands would only be competing on the sale of individual tools rather than trying to get you into a platform.

I imagine that might work well for some customers, but for those of use that are happy to stick to one brand, already have a couple of batteries and trying to pick up a wide variety of skins in tool deals, it would be all round bad news.

I would also question how much development would be done.
As an example Milwaukee have stuck with the 18v platform, continually pushing higher capacity batteries as more demanding tools are released.
Others have opted to go for higher voltages, different platforms and a variety of engineering solutions. Both approaches have pros and cons and have opened up different directions for innovation.

If a single 18v platform was mandatory, manufacturers would be limited in what innovations they can/would make, both from a compliance and business case.

There are certainly advantages to be had from standardisation.
On the other hand that is pretty much what we have now within the automotive and appliance markets - the same product/platform offered under a dozen different brands at multiple price points with a few minor tweaks and different marketing strategies to give customers the illusion of choice.

I'm not so sure that's really such a good thing.

 

[Barking Mat]

Check the date on the article and the tag at the bottom.

Even says April Fools Day at the bottom.

 

[chunkolini]

I would suggest you read the book "The Box",
all about the container.

https://www.amazon.com/Box-Shipping-Container-Smaller-Economy/dp/0691136408

I actually bought and read that
Interesting as a read once book

 

[MetalMonkey]

Yeah, battery manufacturers.

If you are proposing breaking the manufacturing out into "Power Tools" and "Batteries", you can expect the price of both to rise significantly as a result.

But they could still have whatever battery shape they like (if they deemed it worthwhile to make their own batteries still, being festool they probably would).

But why would they? Currently you have different sectors of the market chasing different strategies.

For example - if you want insanely powerful 18v tools, Milwaukee have some of the largest capacity batteries out there - because their marketing strategy is to be the most powerful.
Other manufacturers might prioritise ergonomics, smoothness, or cost when offering their packs.

If you are going to have a standardised platform there would be no sense in offering a million different options.
You will get a handful of standard battery options, and anything else will be specialised and therefore expensive.

Are there really meaningful differences in most of the core products at the moment?

I would argue not, If you buy a drill in red, teal, yellow, black & green, grey & red, green, blue, or neon green it will still weigh about so much, and drill holes in much the same way.

But there are a lot more options that just a drill.
Most brands have positioned themselves in certain sectors.
For example if you are a chippie, 99% of the time you will have Makita tools, and they offer the smoothest impact drivers around. If you are flush then Festool and Mafell for their niche products such as tracksaws and jigsaws.
Milwaukee will likely be found in mechanics toolboxes possibly sharing space with or edging out some of the snapon impacts and ratchets.
Metabo HPT/Hikoki nailers are the gold standard even for those already on another platform (incidentally the same tool are starting to be offered on both Metabo and Hikoki/Metabo HPT platforms as they are owned by the same company).

Under represented and specialist brands already have a choice of two universal battery systems- the Bosch AmpShare and the Metabo Cordless Alliance System.
What all these brands offer, depends a lot on what sector you work in.
If all you need is an impact driver and a drill, then of course they will all look pretty much the same.

Dual battery 36V tools are a just a special case of 18V tools for connector purposes...

It would also be possible to have a shared mechanical connection standard for 18V/36V which uses a different pin arrangement for the two voltages, so the tool side connector determines which is used.

That would enable all dual 18V battery tools to also run on a single 36V battery, and allow an 18V tool to use a 36V battery as a double capacity battery (as per Hikoki's implementation).

The Hikoki backwards compatible 18/36 implementation is very clever, and one of the reasons why I chose that platform - however there are also legitimate reasons for not doing this.
For example it limits the battery architecture to using specific configurations and number of cells.

And then we get onto the subject of even higher voltage batteries to power larger machinery and garden equipment - would exemptions be put in place or would the standard limit manufactures to only use existing architecture?.
While on paper it might seem simple and logical, when you actually start implementing things it is never that easy.

That's why when anything is standardised, we always end up with at least half a dozen.
As the saying goes - the great thing about standards, is there are so many to choose from.

The reality is that a standardisation attempt would most likely end with:

Lots of complication, confusion and extra cost to the consumer. I suspect.

Honestly, I agree with the sentiment - one platform is a nice idea in theory but I think the variety does seem to drive competition and I also appreciate the fact that currently nobody can nick "borrow" my batteries.