diy solar

diy solar

6 EG4 rack batteries SOC issue

I'd accept that if it was displayed as 1..6 or 1..5.

Omitting the zero. 1.0.5 or 1.0.6. And the upgrade 1.1.0
Most software and firmware companies have adopted "semantic versioning" which is what you are describing with the 1.0.5, 1.0.6, (major.minor.patch_or_build) etc. But at the end of the day, in this firmware naming convention In order from lowest version to highest, it's 1.5, 1.6, 1.10
Yes exactly. The way software is usually built you increase each number individually.

I have plenty of software at work on like version 2.437.0 and you definitely don't need to preallocate zeroes to get to more digits.
 
Major Version . Minor Version . Release . Sub-Release . Vendor Change . . . As a general rule, a Major version change indicates the entire API may have changed. A minor version change indicates additional features, and/or clarification of the API. A release change is a bugfix. API = Application Programming Interface, the way the code talks to other programs/devices. The numbers are distinct/positional. IP addresses represent a 32 bit unsigned binary number x.x.x.x Each number represents 8 bits with a value between 0-255, 10.8.1.1 < 10.108.1.1 numerically, lexically 1.1.... < 1.8... It can however be confusing. Microsloth sorts ip addresses lexically on it's DNS servers. Effing annoying. 10.1.x.x , 10.10.x.x ,10.100.x.x ,10.2.x.x, sh*t. With most things IT numbers separated by '.' indicate positional order not lexical, so 1.100 > 1.25 unless you are referring to an actual real number. YMMV.
 
Ok, I still have a problem.
Rack battery #2 refuses to charge up to where the other 5 are
It's setting in the 40% SOC now and the other 5 are 90% + SOC
I need to get Signature Solar to have a look at my system.
 
Ok, I still have a problem.
Rack battery #2 refuses to charge up to where the other 5 are
It's setting in the 40% SOC now and the other 5 are 90% + SOC
I need to get Signature Solar to have a look at my system.
Check wire torque, check for faulty crimps.

What bulk voltage are you charging the batteries at?

Please post cell data of the batteries when the other batteries are full...but the one is reporting 40%
 
Most software and firmware companies have adopted "semantic versioning" which is what you are describing with the 1.0.5, 1.0.6, (major.minor.patch_or_build) etc. But at the end of the day, in this firmware naming convention In order from lowest version to highest, it's 1.5, 1.6, 1.10
This make more sense to me
1.0.5 or 1.0.6 to 1.1.0
 
Major Version . Minor Version . Release . Sub-Release . Vendor Change . . . As a general rule, a Major version change indicates the entire API may have changed. A minor version change indicates additional features, and/or clarification of the API. A release change is a bugfix. API = Application Programming Interface, the way the code talks to other programs/devices. The numbers are distinct/positional. IP addresses represent a 32 bit unsigned binary number x.x.x.x Each number represents 8 bits with a value between 0-255, 10.8.1.1 < 10.108.1.1 numerically, lexically 1.1.... < 1.8... It can however be confusing. Microsloth sorts ip addresses lexically on it's DNS servers. Effing annoying. 10.1.x.x , 10.10.x.x ,10.100.x.x ,10.2.x.x, sh*t. With most things IT numbers separated by '.' indicate positional order not lexical, so 1.100 > 1.25 unless you are referring to an actual real number. YMMV.

In post #1, I posted the screen shot of BMS test program showing all 6 batteries
Battery #2 is circled in red

I have it set at 57.5 currently
I think it was a 56.5 before?
 
This make more sense to me
1.0.5 or 1.0.6 to 1.1.0
Note what other have posted is accurate as well.

Seems that its not uncommon for developers to us 1.10 as a newer version when compared to 1.5
 
In post #1, I posted the screen shot of BMS test program showing all 6 batteries
Battery #2 is circled in red

I have it set at 57.5 currently
I think it was a 56.5 before?
That photo shows 53volts. 53 volts isn't even close to being fully charged. 53v is 80% at best.
 
I took a fresh screen shot of BMS Test
The readings have changed to what you see in this screen shot
pack #2 is the one showing a low SOC compared to the other 5
 

Attachments

  • Battery.png
    Battery.png
    433.7 KB · Views: 15
I took a fresh screen shot of BMS Test
The readings have changed to what you see in this screen shot
Post another screenshot when the batteries reach 56.5v or higher.

Edit, to delete the bulk question...as i see your response above.
 
Post another screenshot when the batteries reach 56.5v or higher.

Edit, to delete the bulk question...as i see your response above.
I'll do that tomorrow morning after the batteries have had a grid charge between at 1am and 6am
There is some solar here today, but not enough to do a full charge
 
Better results this morning after a full grid charge last night
Battery pack #2 has come back up to 100%
One of the changes I made as per one of the suggestions above was raising the charge voltage to 57.5

The overall SOC of the 6 batteries has been going down slowly over the last 4 months

Here is a fresh BMS test screen shot from this morning
Pack 2 has come back up to 100%
Also a screen shot of powerview showing the grid charge last night
 

Attachments

  • Battery2.png
    Battery2.png
    429.3 KB · Views: 6
  • Powerview2.png
    Powerview2.png
    34.7 KB · Views: 6
Better results this morning after a full grid charge last night
Battery pack #2 has come back up to 100%
One of the changes I made as per one of the suggestions above was raising the charge voltage to 57.5

The overall SOC of the 6 batteries has been going down slowly over the last 4 months

Here is a fresh BMS test screen shot from this morning
Pack 2 has come back up to 100%
Also a screen shot of powerview showing the grid charge last night
Thank you for the update. I'm glad the batteries are finally reporting full.

I've found that 56.5 or 56.6 is the magic number when the BMS flips to reporting 100%

@Markus_SignatureSolar FYSA
 
Thank you for the update. I'm glad the batteries are finally reporting full.

I've found that 56.5 or 56.6 is the magic number when the BMS flips to reporting 100%

@Markus_SignatureSolar FYSA

Thanks
I think it was set at 56.5 before I started trying to figure out why the SOC was slowly going down over a four month period.
So should I reduce my charge voltage down from 57.5?
 
Last edited:
Thanks
I think it was set at 56.5 before I started trying to figure out why the SOC was slowly going down over a four month period.
So should I reduce my charge voltage down from 57.5?
If the "latest recommendation" from the battery manufacturer is 57.1v, then try that number.

Otherwise, the recommendation is up to 58.0v
 
Thanks
So should I back my charge voltage down from 57.5?


Thanks
I think it was set at 56.5 before I started trying to figure out why the SOC was slowly going down over a four month period.
So should I reduce my charge voltage down from 57.5?
I let my battery BMS manage the charging. LP4 BMS (v3.26) request upto 58.4v. So you are good with anything from 56.5 - 57.5.

(When using the LP4 COMM HUB you can adjust charge voltage.)

I've found that the newest LP4 firmware manages battery voltage and cells much better than previous versions.
 
I let my battery BMS manage the charging. LP4 BMS (v3.26) request upto 58.4v. So you are good with anything from 56.5 - 57.5.

(When using the LP4 COMM HUB you can adjust charge voltage.)

I've found that the newest LP4 firmware manages battery voltage and cells much better than previous versions.

Thanks for your help on solving my issue
I ordered a EG4 Chargeverter | 48v 100A Battery Charger today to use with my Generator in case of long term power outage
 
I was not aware of the issue of generators damaging my Sol-Ark because of dirty power.
I have a 5500 watt Troy bilt 120/240vac generator that has been converted to propane.
I think it damaged my well pump years ago during a long power outage.
If I ever need it, I'll have another way to charge my Eg4 battery stack using the EG4 Chargeverter
 

diy solar

diy solar
Back
Top