The terminal voltage of the two batteries in series will be 7.4V. Assuming a continuous discharge, you will pull slightly less than 850mAh out of the series string, at which point the 1000mAh cell will force the 850mAh cell into reverse bias. The result will be at best a forever dead 850mAh cell and more likely leakage or possibly real mayhem like fire or explosion.
Long story short, when making a series pack, use cells of the same capacity, chemistry, and part number and use a battery management system to ensure that individual cells stay within normal limits.
The article you've referenced is just the tip of the iceberg.
I think that you'll be better off ignoring all these terminology caveats about SOCs, and stick to the very simple definition of ASIC being a chip which is designed and manufactured for a specific application. If you adopt this definition, then any chip which went through all the following steps is an ASIC:
- Architectural specification for a single task
- Micro-architectural specification
- RTL coding
- Synthesis
- Place and rout
- GDSII files sent to fab (sometimes referred as "Tape-out")
- Custom masks preparation
- Fabrication
Please note that the text marked bold in #1 is very important - it is the only part which differentiates ASICs from, say, FPGAs (FPGAs go through exactly the same steps, but their architecture and micro-architecture aims to achieve versatility over a wide range of applications).
Surely, I lied - I oversimplified the ASIC design flow and made it look like ASICs and FPGAs are almost identical, but this is the only definition I can think of which does not require too deep understanding of concepts and does not rise additional questions.
Why do I think that you should not use the term SOC? Well, it is because it is not well defined and is interpreted differently in different places/circumstances/groups/etc.
For example: for years Intel manufactured a standalone CPUs and chips called "chipset" (chipset mainly contained the logic which "bridged" between CPU and memory/graphics/peripherals). These were two distinct chips containing digital/analog/mixed signals modules, various IOs, memories etc... Both were enormously complex. Nowadays there is a new trend - the functionality of both CPU and chipset is no longer separated, but reside on the same chip. These chips are referred to as SOCs by Intel (the latest was Bay-Trail if I'm not mistaken). Why do they call it SOC? Well, they had to give a name to a new micro-architectural approach, why not SOC? Surely, there is motivation behind this name, but this motivation is Intel specific. If you call your disk array controller a SOC in front of Intel engineers there is a good chance they will not understand you.
In summary:
Call your project ASIC (if it fulfills all the above criteria). Leave all this SOC terminology to Intel, ARM and co. to handle and use.
Best Answer
"Ramping" up or down is a utility grid term for how quickly a generator can add power to the grid, or reduce its output when demand reduces.
Steam generating plant cannot ramp fast - it can take hours, up to days for some nuclear plants to reach full power again after a shutdown. Other plant - especially hydro - can ramp up as fast as you can turn a tap.
There's nothing stopping battery storage reaching full power instantly, which makes it "fast ramping" -valuable for stabilising a grid in the presence of variable load - or sudden changes in generating capacity if a plant shuts down.
This allows better - and cheaper - frequency control.