diy solar

diy solar

EVE280 high C rates anyone?

From the sound of it, I don't think you have any reason to be hugely disappointed, or at least not more than a few % disappointed.

I think there is a big gap between being disappointed in your purchase and acknowledging and documenting shortcomings or misrepresentations. And being reasonably upset/frustrated.


This is true, so most people testing at well below 0.5C or 1C should be getting more than 280 not less.


One reason why it matters (beyond the obvious, getting what you paid for) is that if for instance you plan to use 85% (95-10) of your capacity to maximize cycle life, now imagine your lowest capacity cell is 10% less than its siblings. Meaning your pack (without any bandwidth limiting) is limited to 90% of nominal capacity from the get go, but you planned to only cycle between 95% and 10% to maximize cycle life, if you want to stick to that, your new 95-10% range is 95-10% of 90%.

Using a 100Ah pack as an example:
100Ah nominal, with a 90Ah weak cell = 90Ah usable capacity
Applying a 95-10% bandwidth to your pack now = 76.5Ah usable capacity due to the weak cell.
This roughly the same % capacity loss as would occur if you planned to use all 100Ah

A lot of people erase the undercapacity in their minds in the fuzzy math of limiting themselves to 80% SOC or so (I thought that way for a long time too, it wasn't until I drew it out visually that I understood my error). But the capacity loss whether your bandwidth is 100% or 80% is the same, its just less visible in the 80% example. Since the buffers kinda 'absorb the missing capacity' mentally.

Is this making sense? This is the way I think about it, but I'm glaringly aware of my ability to get shit wrong :)

All that said, a few % isn't usually a huge deal in practice, most people think of the capacities of the Lishen and EVE and ETC cells pretty interchangeably I think, even though they differ by a few %.



More even wear rates, and more potential usable capacity are what come to mind

One thing I've been thinking about lately--and I'm not 100% sure i've got it right but I'm going to throw it out there and see what the consensus is--is that one issue with mismatched (capacity) cells is that the cell that is already the lowest capacity is going to be cycled marginally harder than the rest, meaning more wear, meaning slightly accelerated degradation/capacity loss, sortof a slow gradual vicious cycle.

Of course if the difference in capacity is small, or the use case is very gentle/low intensity, or the pack is seldomly cycled all the way to near zero, its maybe not a big enough deal to even care about. And that describes the situation for most of us.

But I am curious, in theory does my thinking hold up?
Dzl, all of your theories are true.
But this is also true. It is cheaper to buy more cells than it is to try to squeeze all of the amp hours out of cells.
 
Batteries get more cycles if you use less capacity so that is another reason more batteries is cheaper.

More batteries is cheaper than using high amps too.
 
I don’t think I’ve ever seen this posted on the forum so I’ll put it here.

A series of tests to determine grade A vs grade B which we likely get.

Be forewarned, one of the tests takes 28 days to complete.

 
I have 7 or 8 LiFePO4 batteries of different Ah ratings and ages. Some commercial and some DIY.

To be honest I have never tested any of them and I still see great value.

Even my 6 year old batteries aren't a problem yet for my applications and they have not lived an easy life as I was quite ignorant of proper care that long ago. Only slightly less ignorant now!

I just offered the above link for those interested in testing to the most precise degree. That topic seems to have a lot of interest lately for a large group of people.

That group obviously does not include me :cool:
 
What is more likely to happen is we will get similar results to Cinergi when we start using higher C rates

Don't forget, I'm getting 270Ah with 15 amp discharge rates. So the high-C rate is a red herring.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
Dzl, all of your theories are true.
But this is also true. It is cheaper to buy more cells than it is to try to squeeze all of the amp hours out of cells.

How do I get 10% more capacity in a 2p16s 48v configuration buy using a few more cells?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
How do I get 10% more capacity in a 2p16s 48v configuration buy using a few more cells?
You can't but I am making four 16S batteries and I only plan to use 70% of the capacity and they will only see 50A max.
The batteries will last longer. I don't need as much special equipment to deal with high amps. And I am less likely to start a fire.
That is my reasoning. I'm not very experienced but that is my plan.
 
I don't blame you if you demand to have your cells replaced. I'm just saying that I don't plan to have mine replaced even though mine are probably the same as yours.
If it is determined that our cells are worse than what other people have received, then I would expect some replacements. But I don't have any reason to think my cells are different than everybody else.
I don't even have any proof that genuine EVEs get full capacity and I wouldn't be surprised if they don't.
 
EVE tests their cells at 1C charge and discharge rates although they rate the standard at .5C rates.
But even EVE has failed to give support to buyers that have purchased these in the grey market. I knew that going in so I never expected these grey market cells to perform up to that standard. I did expect the size and the screw thread size to meet the spec. I have not been disappointed.

I also don't feel I am leaving anything on the table. I paid $120 per kWh for a pack that had 80 percent usable capacity. That means per usable capacity I paid $150 per kWh.
 
I'm not sure if this forum inspired unrealistic expectations or if the cells have changed recently.
From all the reading I did around here, I expected to get 280Ah too.
I am working on that right now. I have 4 EVE 280s sitting unused on a shelf that I received from Craig 6 months ago that he tested out to 280Ahs per cell. Not quite a time machine, and statistically insignificant, but it's the best direct comparison I can make.

To recap for those unfamiliar, I've been balancing and testing my recently acquired Basen cells in 4S packs:
  • Top balancing to cell voltage of 3.65V.
  • Constructing packs managed by an Overkill Solar 4S 120A BMS
  • Charge current of 30A, discharge current of ~60A.
  • Using a TF03K battery monitor for pack capacity measurements.
  • The room has been at a consistent 68F (20C) during all charging and discharging.
  • I haven't done any cell-level capacity tests as I don't think those are useful data points for me in practice.
  • The three Basen packs have yielded 265Ah, 274Ah, and 274Ah in the first round of tests. (More details: balancing setup, 1st pack, 2nd pack, 3rd pack.)
  • In the case of the 274Ah pack tests, my inverter shut down when it hit 11V. Only the 265Ah result was due to BMS cell level low voltage protection (2.5V).
I'm top balancing the Craig cells now and will perform the same pack-level capacity test using the same procedures and equipment.
 
Well if a supplier has 1,000 or so B grade cells to shift and a potentially big buyer comes knocking, but is clearly going to carefully test the first few shipments, then it makes sense to send out some A grade cells first before swapping to B grade once the orders are coming thick and fast.
 
I just want to thank everyone for the recent influx of testing and investigative work. I hope it's clear that I'm not particularly upset about these cells; as others have said, they provide a good value. All I want to accomplish here is to establish what's reality for these cells for everyone reading and researching these cells so they are better informed.
 
Here is my take on it.
I ordered 280 amp hours. I don't care if they were used new gold plated or made of dung. I ordered 280 amp hours as advertised. If they do not meet that spec they are wrong. End of story.
Change the description to the capacity of the exact product it's not rocket science.
 
But even EVE has failed to give support to buyers that have purchased these in the grey market. I knew that going in so I never expected these grey market cells to perform up to that standard. I did expect the size and the screw thread size to meet the spec. I have not been disappointed.

I also don't feel I am leaving anything on the table. I paid $120 per kWh for a pack that had 80 percent usable capacity. That means per usable capacity I paid $150 per kWh.
Hello Ampster, I agree with you and I feel I got a great value as well. But there are several of us posting in this thread that bought from Michael in the group buy thread. Michael was told by Basen the cells were all capacity tested. I am not sure anyone expected the cells to be capacity matched even though Michael was told by Basen they would be.

When I received my cells I was really happy there was not any damage. That was the first thing I looked for. Then I noticed deformities with two of my cells. Aussiesim best describes it here and he received his cells from Xuba:

(1) EVE LF280 arrived damaged. | DIY Solar Power Forum (diysolarforum.com)

After I top balanced I tested the pack. 272ah's was a bitter sweet moment for me. I was hoping to get 280ah's based on what Michael was told by Basen, but knew I would be satisfied with better than 270ah's. Some people have cells that test at only 265ah's or less so I feel fortunate. But I feel bad for them. This was no fault of Michaels. Basen is totally to blame. Basen lied.

I think the point some of us are making is to not expect the full capacity from these cells. Suppliers are advertising them as Grade A 280ah cells. They clearly are not and while we know they are grey market cells, I am not so sure beginners would understand that unless they research the threads, and hopefully they will as EVE cells might be available again soon. It will be interesting to see capacity tests with the newer batches.

I am hoping the Lishen's will fair better. They are advertised as 272ah cells. The suppliers that have tested them, if you can believe them, claim they test better than 280ah's. And one forum member tested a cell and it exceeded 285ah's. Of course more testing needs to be done before we really know what the deal is with those cells.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
One thing I've been thinking about lately--and I'm not 100% sure i've got it right but I'm going to throw it out there and see what the consensus is--is that one issue with mismatched (capacity) cells is that the cell that is already the lowest capacity is going to be cycled marginally harder than the rest, meaning more wear, meaning slightly accelerated degradation/capacity loss, sortof a slow gradual vicious cycle.

Of course if the difference in capacity is small, or the use case is very gentle/low intensity, or the pack is seldomly cycled all the way to near zero, its maybe not a big enough deal to even care about. And that describes the situation for most of us.

But I am curious, in theory does my thinking hold up?
It's logical that could be the case if doing full cycles on the pack. But if staying in the sweet spot between the knees I think the weakest cell would age the same as the rest. I could be wrong.
 
Last edited:
Probably but I will never be able to test at the high C rates he has.

(not directed at you). My C rates appear to have no impact now that I'm further along in my testing. Cells that I've not used in a battery and/or put under high C rates are testing the same. Here's my results so far (11 cells):

268
269
270 x 3
271
273 x 2
278
280
281
 
I have 20 280eve cells on the way ..And personally I don't care if cells are 262;267 or 280ah ..I still think they are great value compared to AGM s In my country
 
I have 20 280eve cells on the way ..And personally I don't care if cells are 262;267 or 280ah ..I still think they are great value compared to AGM s In my country
If that's acceptable to you then fine. It's not acceptable to me for a supplier to make false claims. And we need to start calling them out. It's bad enough to order directly from a supplier and receive lower than advertised capacity. It's even worse when we are told our cells have been capacity tested and they come up short.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
Back
Top