I'm only barely informed, but If there is actually Coulomb counting (which I'm still not convinced there is), I'm pretty sure it would need awareness of current in and current out, if it can't see all current, it can't accurately count coulombs. Right?
This sounds a lot more like an active balancer than a BMS (if all you want is a device to monitor cell voltages and balance the pack). And an active balancer would be a much more powerful balancer than most FET based BMS which often have very low balance current like 35-150 mA. I believe ISDT is the brand that a lot of people here buy, I have no experience.
In my view, if a device cannot act autonomously to protect or manage the battery, it really shouldn't be (and generally isn't) called a BMS. I think it can be part of a broader battery management system, but not a BMS in and of itself.
But I don't think its a good idea to forego a BMS unless you are experienced enough to really understand what you are doing, and will actively and consistently manage/monitor your system, or your system is for learning purposes and you don't mind potentially screwing up.
Edit: There is at least one person here using a BMS the way you are wondering about (balance only--no protection or management), but this person knows the risks, is confident they know what they are doing, and actively monitors their system. I'm not sure what the advantage of this approach is over an active balancer (which would be cheaper and have higher balancing current) or using the BMS for protection and management as it is intended.
BMS like devices that provide cell monitoring and balancing but don't offer disconnect (FET or otherwise)?
This sounds a lot more like an active balancer than a BMS (if all you want is a device to monitor cell voltages and balance the pack). And an active balancer would be a much more powerful balancer than most FET based BMS which often have very low balance current like 35-150 mA. I believe ISDT is the brand that a lot of people here buy, I have no experience.
In my view, if a device cannot act autonomously to protect or manage the battery, it really shouldn't be (and generally isn't) called a BMS. I think it can be part of a broader battery management system, but not a BMS in and of itself.
But I don't think its a good idea to forego a BMS unless you are experienced enough to really understand what you are doing, and will actively and consistently manage/monitor your system, or your system is for learning purposes and you don't mind potentially screwing up.
Edit: There is at least one person here using a BMS the way you are wondering about (balance only--no protection or management), but this person knows the risks, is confident they know what they are doing, and actively monitors their system. I'm not sure what the advantage of this approach is over an active balancer (which would be cheaper and have higher balancing current) or using the BMS for protection and management as it is intended.
Last edited: