AEVA Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > General > The Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - PIP-4048MS inverter
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

PIP-4048MS inverter

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 7891011 65>
Author
Message
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2015 at 3:44pm
Do you have any control over the absorb time? Or is it back to the stock PIP rules. Time to reach absorb V = time at absorb V (min 15min max 8hr) ?

55.5V absorb and 53.5v float is my vote. It's what am setting with as my initial starting point numbers for float and absorb on my charge controllers and (400AH calb grey cells)

The contactors on my BCU pull the pin at 4v pr cell high and 2.5v pr cell on the low side.

Hope it all works out in the end.

Kurt

Edited by offgridQLD - 20 January 2015 at 3:47pm
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2015 at 4:06pm
Originally posted by offgridQLD offgridQLD wrote:

Do you have any control over the absorb time? Or is it back to the stock PIP rules. Time to reach absorb V = time at absorb V (min 15min max 8hr) ?

That's right. We've been over the protocol manual with a fine toothed comb and there is no way to even find out if you are in float mode or not, let alone control which mode you are in. Can't even find a clear statement of what makes it return to bulk, from float.

My manual, which I need a microscope to read, says
"T1 = 10* T0, minimum 10mins, maximum 8hrs"

I read that as "absorb time is 10 times bulk time", which is insane. Where do you get that they are equal (which is sane).

Quote 55.5V absorb and 53.5v float is my vote. It's what am setting with as my initial starting point numbers for float and absorb on my charge controllers and (400AH calb grey cells)

The contactors on my BCU pull the pin at 4v pr cell high and 2.5v pr cell on the low side.

Hope it all works out in the end.

Kurt

Thanks for that. I will weigh up those numbers with whatever others may suggest. and with what I know already.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2015 at 4:52pm
" Where do you get that they are equal (which is sane)."

Well I just took the liberty to assume the (*) wasn't referring to multiply and it was the more commonly used in basic charge controllers..... time to reach absorb = time at absorb with some min / max limits as listed.

Like you say how it reads in the pocket size manual is crazy.

Kurt

Edited by offgridQLD - 20 January 2015 at 4:54pm
Back to Top
T1 Terry View Drop Down
AEVA Member
AEVA Member


Joined: 30 September 2010
Location: Mannum SA
Status: Offline
Points: 615
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote T1 Terry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2015 at 6:22pm
From what I remember, the absorption time is a minimum ?? mins, I thought it was 20 mins but it could be 10 mins in your version, absorption time was equal to the time charge begins till absorption voltage is reached, absorption voltage and bulk voltage are the same. I set absorption voltage at 3.45v per cell and cut the solar/240vac if a cell hit 3.6v for X mins, depends on the load as to how long it takes to drag the high cell back to 3.3v, this is the high voltage for a full cell under load, then resume charging and reset the timer circuit. Each time the charge stops and then resumes the clock is reset for the absorption mode, so it progressively gets shorter till the float stage is reached before a cell reaches 3.6v. The whole game starts again the next time the sun comes up. Float voltage of 3.4v or 3.35v per cell is sufficient to hold the battery close enough to fully charged for the remainder of the solar day.
I know it sounds far too simple, but it does work

T1 Terry

Edited by T1 Terry - 20 January 2015 at 6:24pm
Green but want to learn
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2015 at 8:05pm
The cavalry arrived a few hours ago, in the form of Coulomb, bearing many headlight bulbs in cups with clip leads and a dual lab power supply. Bless his heart. He has the new battery close to balanced now.

Thanks heaps for those numbers, Terry. Can you tell me what the maximum charge current is, compared to battery capacity, in systems where you're using those voltages?

I note Kurt's numbers agree fairly well with yours, at 3.47 V absorb and 3.34 V float.

Terry, I was going to ask you what voltage your cell balancers turn on at, but I seem to remember you don't use them. Is that right? And yet you must have individual cell voltage monitoring since you say you shut off charge when any cell goes over 3.6 V. Is that right? What do you do about any cell going undervoltage? What voltage setting do you use for that?
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2015 at 8:11pm
Kurt, what voltage do your balancers turn on at?

When T1 Terry confirmed that float_time = Min(Max(10min,absorb_time),8h)
Coulomb suggested the apparent "10*" might actually be "1.0*" but you'd need an electron microscope to see the decimal point.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 January 2015 at 8:31pm
They start to shunt from 3.6v (up to a max of two amps) though I am treating balancing as one would a EQ charge in the old lead acid days and scheduling that periodically (yet to be determined time intaval days-weeks and for how long each time will be determined After a few trial runs ( just long enough to bring the cells back in line)

Yes I know not as easy with the PIP as it doesn't have a EQ feature.

Kurt

Edited by offgridQLD - 20 January 2015 at 8:34pm
Back to Top
T1 Terry View Drop Down
AEVA Member
AEVA Member


Joined: 30 September 2010
Location: Mannum SA
Status: Offline
Points: 615
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote T1 Terry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 January 2015 at 6:05am
If/when we encounter a cell constantly going high, we charge the lowest cell to the same 3.6v. We are trialling an automated system but it takes mths to collect any data as these conservative charging rates seem to over come the cell run away issue. Charging current can be 1 amp to 100 amps, just depends on the weather conditions at the time. we monitor 4 cells in each group and control the charging for that group, 4 cells in series take mths if not yrs to go out of balance by more than 0.05v, we ignore any thing smaller than that as it's never the same cell in a group that goes high much under that so 0.05v became the "take notice" point.
I have chosen to do mostly 12v systems as a lot of my interest is in the RV game, some 24v systems for those with 24v charging systems in their vehicles.
we just use the trusty cell loggers for cell monitoring, a number of companies producing them now, 2.8v is absolute min cell voltage, but we use battery SOC monitoring to activate alarms and secondary charging systems if available at preset depth of discharge, we have even successfully set up a system that controls the 240v charging between set SOC levels, eliminating the need to cell voltage control the mains charger, but we still run the cell over voltage cut off as a secondary back up system, belt and braces logic, but that's what I worked with throughout my original trade so it stuck.

T1 Terry
Green but want to learn
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 January 2015 at 7:20am
What I find interesting is how out of balance your cells (measure) is usually in proportion to how how much you push the upper and lower limits of SOC.

Is it not the case that the big flat area of SOC in between the two knees upper & lower can mask imbalance thats present and perhaps growing?

That said, Why are imbalance discrepancies the evil villain? My thinking is as the end result would be ever diminishing usable capacity scope as each end of the usable upper and lower SOC range within the cutoff voltage limits narrowed.

I guess this only becomes a issue if the discrepancy's start to creep into and become measurable within the range that you are cycling the battery.Though perhaps by the time they do things could be very out of whack. Think one cell 65% soc the other 40%...? as your using voltage and its a very flat line.

4 cell 12v packs i guess are more forgiving with balance then a 16 cell 48v bank.

My 16 x 400ah Calbs will be online this long weekend so will see how it pans out.

Kurt




Edited by offgridQLD - 21 January 2015 at 7:25am
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21 January 2015 at 7:25am
Thanks for all that, Terry. At present we're going with your 3.45 Vpc (55.2 V) for absorb and 3.375 Vpc (54.0 V) for float. All praise and no blame.

We're setting our 0.8 A balancers to turn on at 3.325 V. Disconnecting charge sources if any cell goes over 3.625 V. Back on again when all cells drop below 3.375 V. System shut-down if any cell goes over 3.775 V.

Still working out low voltage settings.

Originally posted by T1 Terry T1 Terry wrote:

Charging current can be 1 amp to 100 amps, just depends on the weather conditions at the time.

Sure. But how many amp-hours is the battery?
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 January 2015 at 9:22am
Originally posted by offgridQLD offgridQLD wrote:

What I find interesting is how out of balance your cells (measure) is usually in proportion to how how much you push the upper and lower limits of SOC.

Is it not the case that the big flat area of SOC in between the two knees upper & lower can mask imbalance thats present and perhaps growing?

Quite correct. Except that we've seen there are two flat areas (40% to 65% SoC and 78% to 90% SoC) with a ramp between them, according to figures 2 and 3 of this paper that Johny found.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~hpeng/publications/DSCC2013_Weng.pdf
So there is a small possibility of detecting imbalance on that 68% to 75% ramp, as well as above 95% and below 35%.

Quote That said, Why are imbalance discrepancies the evil villain? My thinking is as the end result would be ever diminishing usable capacity scope as each end of the usable upper and lower SOC range within the cutoff voltage limits narrowed.

I guess this only becomes a issue if the discrepancy's start to creep into and become measurable within the range that you are cycling the battery.Though perhaps by the time they do things could be very out of whack. Think one cell 65% soc the other 40%...? as your using voltage and its a very flat line.

Yes. But loss of available battery capacity is not the only problem caused by imbalance. The more serious issue comes when your end-of-charge and end-of-discharge voltages are determined only by looking at the overall battery voltage. When in absorb mode at 55.2 V (3.45 Vpc) at 60 amps into 16 cells having a 1 milliohm internal resistance, if one cell had 10% more charge than the others, it would go to 3.69 V while the other 15 cells are still at 3.43 V. This will do some (minor) damage to the high cell.

Quote 4 cell 12v packs i guess are more forgiving with balance then a 16 cell 48v bank.

Absolutely right -- and something many people fail to appreciate until it's pointed out. The same 10% imbalance scenario with 4 cells charging at 13.8 V (3.45 Vpc) would result in 3 cells at 3.43 V and one cell at 3.51 V. No big deal.

Then consider 218 cells in series, as we have in MeXy. With 217 cells at 3.43 V and one, a violently-venting molten mess at 7.79 V, dissipating 467 watts. Still only averaging 3.45 V per cell, still only 10% imbalance. So with large numbers of cells, there is no way you can base end of charge on overall cell voltage. With 4 cells you can get away with it. With 16 cells it's marginal, and you must have some means of regular balancing to prevent it getting to 10% SoC imbalance.

One correction of my previous message. I plan to turn on the 0.8 A balancers at 3.375 V which is the average cell voltage in float mode.

Edited by weber - 22 January 2015 at 9:25am
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 January 2015 at 9:42am
The installation has been postponed to Tuesday.

I made one tiny but necessary change to the BMS bootstrap loader code yesterday morning, tried to upload it, and the whole thing fell in a screaming heap. You can get some pretty subtle bugs when you use a bootstrap loader to upload its own replacement. But Coulomb found it after many hours of investigation. Had I written some code differently about 6 months ago, or had I set it to do an immediate update rather than wait for me to type a command to do so, it would not have happened.

Unfortunately this meant we didn't get to fix another known problem that would have caused contactors to chatter instead of turning off cleanly, and I didn't get to finish making the cover for the monolith, which I probably would never have got finished in any case.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
T1 Terry View Drop Down
AEVA Member
AEVA Member


Joined: 30 September 2010
Location: Mannum SA
Status: Offline
Points: 615
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote T1 Terry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 January 2015 at 9:51am
Terminal voltage is only for use on the primary control circuit, cell voltage is for the secondary cell protection circuit. as long as the cell remain reasonably within balance, the system runs on the primary control only, once it's out of balance it runs on the primary until the upper stages of charge are reached, then the secondary system takes control until a balance is again reached.
No matter how many cells there are in series, broken up into sets of 4 and each individually charge controlled, by either passing the current through the cell group or bypassing the cell group, the pack stays very close in balance.
Sure. But how many amp-hours is the battery?


Works with 100Ah 12v batteries through to 1200Ah 24v battery packs and 100Ah 48v battery packs, though the set up of the 48v pack failed due to incorrect placement of the SSR's and the voltage took them out.
Life is a never ending learning process, you know you've learnt something when you recognise a repeated mistake before it fails :lol:

T1 Terry
Green but want to learn
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 January 2015 at 10:31am
Originally posted by T1 Terry T1 Terry wrote:

Charging current can be 1 amp to 100 amps, just depends on the weather conditions at the time.

Originally posted by Weber Weber wrote:

Sure. But how many amp-hours is the battery?

Originally posted by T1 Terry T1 Terry wrote:

Works with 100Ah 12v batteries through to 1200Ah 24v battery packs and 100Ah 48v battery packs...

So you're putting 100 amps into 100 Ah batteries in some cases?

What I'm trying to find out here is what is the maximum C-rate, from a PV array, at which you have successfully used that 3.45 Vpc absorb voltage.

It matters because charging current will causes a voltage rise due to internal resistance, particularly in winter, that may prevent the battery from taking the full current available from the array, at 3.45 Vpc, at any state of charge above 40%.

The system I'm working on has max PV charging current of 60 amps and uses 180 Ah cells, so that's 0.33C. If you're successfully using that 3.45 Vpc absorb voltage through winter, with 100 A into 100 Ah cells (1C) then I needn't worry.

You're using mostly Winston, is that right?
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 22 January 2015 at 10:31am
"broken up into sets of 4 and each individually charge controlled "

So Terry, your saying you have two separate 12v chargers on your 24v 8 cell banks?


Your secondary system being cell level motoring with balancing ? what are the voltage limits befor the secondary system kicks in?


The key point I guess is how good is the manufacturing process / consistency of the Calb/Winston cells. That's the one thing we cant change and as long as your interconnections are up to scratch . Most likely the only reason they go out of balance. How much and how long it takes is on average with our kind of assuage is the key bit of info.

There was a saying...

Can you measure it and prove it's true? yes it's true and measurable. Will it matter and effect me in the real word? probably not.

Could this be the case with cell balancing. We all use shock tactic examples of what could happen (as we know cell imbalance to be true and measurable)But the shock tactic examples of one cell at 60% and another at 40% SOC. Are these examples to extreme and would this really happen and how many years would that take with healthy cells.

Just pondering really.

Kurt

Edited by offgridQLD - 22 January 2015 at 10:40am
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 11:45am
Originally posted by offgridQLD offgridQLD wrote:

The key point I guess is how good is the manufacturing process / consistency of the Calb/Winston cells. That's the one thing we cant change and as long as your interconnections are up to scratch . Most likely the only reason they go out of balance. How much and how long it takes is on average with our kind of assuage is the key bit of info.

I eventually figured out that was meant to be "our kind of usage" but only after I rejected "our kind of sausage".

Series interconnections can't have any effect on cell SoC balance, no matter how bad they are. In a series circuit, whatever charge goes through one part goes through all parts. SoC imbalance is purely due to differences in internal self-discharge (affected by temperature and history), and differences in the current consumption of cell monitoring units. Both of which are typically 1 to 5 milliamps.

Quote There was a saying...

Can you measure it and prove it's true? yes it's true and measurable. Will it matter and effect me in the real word? probably not.

Could this be the case with cell balancing.

With a 16 cell or more battery? Good luck with that.

Quote We all use shock tactic examples of what could happen (as we know cell imbalance to be true and measurable)But the shock tactic examples of one cell at 60% and another at 40% SOC. Are these examples to extreme and would this really happen and how many years would that take with healthy cells.

Who is "we" white man? My example only involved a 10% SoC imbalance, and showed that this would begin to cause damage in a 16 cell pack, although not a problem in a 4 cell pack, and utterly disastrous in a 218 cell pack.

It doesn't really matter how many years it takes. If I'm building systems with more than 4 cells, for other people, some of whom wouldn't know an amp-hour from a aardvark, I won't be around when it happens, so I have to build in balancing.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 12:21pm
Sorry yes I used the 20% SOC imbalance example and as you said your example was 10%. I wasn't trying to say cell balancing wasn't unnecessary ever and agree a automated balancing setup is a good move for customers system and will have the same on my system. But just questioning how much inballance we would really be dealing with when the cells are being cycled as they would in a typical offgrid system. How long would it take before say a 5% inballance was created (9ah) on a 180ah cell.

" SoC imbalance is purely due to differences in internal self-discharge (affected by temperature and history), and differences in the current consumption of cell monitoring units. Both of which are typically 1 to 5 milliamps"

When you say 1-5ma I would assume then if the cells where being charged or held at float for 12hrs you could have 5ma x 12 = 60mah a day or 420mah a week gap growing. That's about 20 weeks to see 5% inballance.

Or am I looking at that totally wrong?


I'm thinking about the option between a short balance every day and for me anyhow with fixed V ballancing units its a excursion to a higher voltage each day) or a gap between of X number of days then potentially a longer time balancing time. In the end I guess it could work out to be the same time spent at the higher voltage anyhow.

I will find out starting from tomorrow when I install my cells on the house.(wish it would stop raining) I think I will set up a dayly balance to start with end then extend it out and see how much time it takes to even things out after a day or two gap between balancing and work up or down from there.

Kurt

Edited by offgridQLD - 23 January 2015 at 12:41pm
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 12:52pm
Your calculation of 20 weeks for a 5% imbalance would only be true if there was a difference of 5 mA between cells. That's unlikely. If most cells have self-discharge plus CMU consumption = 5 mA and one has only 4 mA, it's only the difference of 1 mA that matters.

And you seem to be assuming that self-discharge and CMU consumption only happen on charge. But they happen 24 hours a day.

1 mA for a year is 9 Ah. And I expect you could get away without balancing for the first year with a new pack, all from the same batch. But then again, you just might be unlucky.

The difference in consumption between CMUs tends to be a lot greater than the difference in self-discharge between new cells, which is one reason why some people say you're better off without CMUs. But I'd prefer to have CMUs that balance on every full charge. Then the difference in their consumption will be irrelevant. It's not like there is anywhere else you can use the solar energy the resistors burn off, when the cells are already fully charged.

In your case, when your CMUs can only balance at 3.6 V, I think balancing once a month would be fine. But it may take a few consecutive days to get the initial balance.

Edited by weber - 23 January 2015 at 12:54pm
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
T1 Terry View Drop Down
AEVA Member
AEVA Member


Joined: 30 September 2010
Location: Mannum SA
Status: Offline
Points: 615
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote T1 Terry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 5:27pm
Originally posted by weber weber wrote:


So you're putting 100 amps into 100 Ah batteries in some cases?

What I'm trying to find out here is what is the maximum C-rate, from a PV array, at which you have successfully used that 3.45 Vpc absorb voltage.

It matters because charging current will causes a voltage rise due to internal resistance, particularly in winter, that may prevent the battery from taking the full current available from the array, at 3.45 Vpc, at any state of charge above 40%.

The system I'm working on has max PV charging current of 60 amps and uses 180 Ah cells, so that's 0.33C. If you're successfully using that 3.45 Vpc absorb voltage through winter, with 100 A into 100 Ah cells (1C) then I needn't worry.

You're using mostly Winston, is that right?

Mostly Winston cells, I did fit a few systems with Sinopoly cells, but the majority are Winston cells.
The system of stopping the charging for a set length of time if a cell reaches 3.6v eliminates any issues with high CA charge rates, it sort of becomes a very slow pulse charge if the acceptance rate is not up to the charge rate. One of the things we found was the faster the charge, the better the cells remained in balance, it's the slow trickle charge at the very top end of charging that seems to cause the most run aways.

T1 Terry
Green but want to learn
Back to Top
T1 Terry View Drop Down
AEVA Member
AEVA Member


Joined: 30 September 2010
Location: Mannum SA
Status: Offline
Points: 615
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote T1 Terry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 5:47pm
Originally posted by offgridQLD offgridQLD wrote:

"broken up into sets of 4 and each individually charge controlled "

So Terry, your saying you have two separate 12v chargers on your 24v 8 cell banks?


Your secondary system being cell level motoring with balancing ? what are the voltage limits befor the secondary system kicks in?


The key point I guess is how good is the manufacturing process / consistency of the Calb/Winston cells. That's the one thing we cant change and as long as your interconnections are up to scratch . Most likely the only reason they go out of balance. How much and how long it takes is on average with our kind of assuage is the key bit of info.


Kurt

The systems use 12v nom. solar panels, the negative for the "B" set (12v to 24v nom) is tied to positive terminal of the "A" set (0v to 12v nom.) By cutting the positive on the "A" solar the "A" battery stops charging, but the "B" battery continues to charge. By cutting the neg on the "B" solar the "B" battery stops charging, but the "A" battery could continue charging if required.
3.6V in any cell in the 4 cell pack sets the secondary system into action, at any other time the charging is left to the primary control.
Mains charging is SOC controlled, start at 20% SOC and stop at 80% SOC, no run-aways within this range, but either secondary circuit can cut the mains supply if a high cell voltage is detected. This was required as a safety in case the SOC was incorrect or lost due to a temp disconnection of the meter.
As far as dirty connections, they show up on a log graph as a quite obvious tell tale, high voltage when charging and immediate low voltage under load equals a high resistance some where within that cell group. We use multiple smaller capacity cells in parallel to build up to the Ah required, then series connect these packs. The advantage is the differences in production tolerance's are balanced out across a number of cells, this really helps with maintaining a balanced pack.

T1 Terry    
Green but want to learn
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 8:17pm
"it's the slow trickle charge at the very top end of charging that seems to cause the most run aways."

Wouldn't that just be that you can only really measure the inballance at the top and the bottom of the cells SOC. So the slow trickle of current at v absorb is not causing the inballance just making it visible/mesurable as all the cells reach full at different times.

Kurt
Back to Top
T1 Terry View Drop Down
AEVA Member
AEVA Member


Joined: 30 September 2010
Location: Mannum SA
Status: Offline
Points: 615
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote T1 Terry Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 9:03pm
When the charge rate is low, the first cell full will run away every time if the control is measuring terminal voltage only.
An attempt to explain the way I see it, the terminal voltage is set at say 14v, if all the cells are at 3.5v at same time, the charge will simply stop till the voltage drops below 14v, then a small amount of current is added to raise the voltage back up to 14v if it drops slightly. The cell that is 100% charged will immediately increase it's voltage, you can't get anything more in so the voltage goes up.. to say 3.55v, this means the other cells must be lower than 3.5v for the total to still add up to 14v. This process repeats until either a secondary control stops the charging for a period or the cell will be damaged.
When the charge rate is higher this voltage creep in a single cell doesn't seem to occur as the charge period is very short compared to the period of no charging, the battery may only be 99% full, but does it really make any difference if there is ample current available to replace anything used from the battery? Unlike an EV, the battery isn't charged then drained, it's connected to the charging device (solar) all day, then drained over night, if that 1% is a make or break for the over night capacity the numbers have not been done correctly and a larger capacity pack is required, not a charging regime that will get in that last 1%

T1 Terry
Green but want to learn
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 9:31pm
That charging method isn't used because we want every last drop of capacity. It's used because there is no reliable way to tell her if there is a inballance between the cells unless you charge them until you reach the upper knee and find out as they all reach that state at different times.

As mentioned a few times just because you don't see cell level voltage discrepancies below the knee doesn't mean you are avoiding them or don't have them they are just hidden in the flat voltage that lifepo4 cell have over the bulk of there SOC.

Kurt



Edited by offgridQLD - 23 January 2015 at 9:32pm
Back to Top
offgridQLD View Drop Down
Senior Member
Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: 23 July 2013
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2075
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote offgridQLD Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 9:33pm
The above was not taking into account the smaller less pronounce knee at 78% SOC mentioned earlyer.

Kurt

Edited by offgridQLD - 23 January 2015 at 9:41pm
Back to Top
weber View Drop Down
Admin Group
Admin Group
Avatar

Joined: 23 January 2009
Location: Brisbane
Status: Offline
Points: 2477
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote weber Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 January 2015 at 9:48pm
The monolith just successfully completed its first discharge test with the customer's cells. Starting with a full battery and with all charge sources turned off, it took just over 13 hours of running our 4 person household, from 9:35 am to 10:49 pm, when the IMU shut off the source contactor due to a smoothed undervoltage stress of 12. We consumed around 6.7 kWh of AC energy. The design daily energy for the customer's two-person off-grid household is 3 kWh.

The battery is nominally 180 Ah at 52 V = 9.36 kWh. The cutoff was based on lowest cell voltage, corrected for IR drop, and was designed to correspond to 80% DoD.

The last reading, 15 minutes before cutoff, showed the lowest cell at 3.200 V, highest cell 3.218 V, total battery voltage 51.2 V, at 15 amps discharge.

It did reveal one software bug. The coulomb counter said the DoD was 166.9% at 15 minutes before cutoff. I think I may need another right shift somewhere. Presumably that was 83.5% DoD. Relative to the nominal 180 Ah that's 150.2 Ah. Multiplied by 52 V that gives 7.81 kWh of DC energy. So the efficiency was something like 6.7/7.8 = 86%.
The average AC load was 6700/13 = 515 W. So the loss amounts to 84 watts, most of which is the standby power consumption of the PIP plus the DC-DC, IMU and contactors.

All as expected, or better, (apart from the magic 167% DoD).
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 7891011 65>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.03
Copyright ©2001-2015 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.281 seconds.