Are the eve Double Hole cells anodized and need to be sanded off?

[EastFalcon]

Does anyone know if this is required if using double hole cells?

I have some 280K and they have these terminals, I did not sand them to remove the anodizing.

 

[sunshine_eggo]

Doesn't matter either way.

Aluminum forms a protective oxide extremely quickly.

Anytime connections are made to aluminum, the surface oxide layer should be removed with the connection made immediately thereafter. When attaching my 56' of Aluminum bus bars to 294 cells (588 holes), I aggressively buffed the bus bars with scotchbrite and applied NO-OX-ID A-Special to provide a corrosion barrier. Then I made the connection and torqued the 5mm thread to 48 in-lb (5.4 Nm).

 

[Bleedingblue]

Doesn't matter either way.

Aluminum forms a protective oxide extremely quickly.

Anytime connections are made to aluminum, the surface oxide layer should be removed with the connection made immediately thereafter. When attaching my 56' of Aluminum bus bars to 294 cells (588 holes), I aggressively buffed the bus bars with scotchbrite and applied NO-OX-ID A-Special to provide a corrosion barrier. Then I made the connection and torqued the 5mm thread to 48 in-lb (5.4 Nm).

How many watt hours is your battery bank? 294 cells is a lot. Lol I have 160 in mine. 96-280ah and 64-305AH

 

[sunshine_eggo]

How many watt hours is your battery bank? 294 cells is a lot. Lol I have 160 in mine. 96-280ah and 64-305AH

Only 23kWh at this time. Have another 23kWh to deploy.

Built from NMC plug-in-hybrid Panasonic cells:

NMC Bank, Bus Bars and Batrium Love

It has been years in the making, but I finally have the NMC battery poised for deployment... (okay, only half, but still). Summary: 7X Ford Fusion/C-Max Energi PHEV batteries, 7.6kWh rated per pack. Each battery: 84S 25Ah 3.7V NMC cells. Four subpacks of 21S in series Packs have tested...

diysolarforum.com

 

[Bleedingblue]

Only 23kWh at this time. Have another 23kWh to deploy.

Built from NMC plug-in-hybrid Panasonic cells:

NMC Bank, Bus Bars and Batrium Love

It has been years in the making, but I finally have the NMC battery poised for deployment... (okay, only half, but still). Summary: 7X Ford Fusion/C-Max Energi PHEV batteries, 7.6kWh rated per pack. Each battery: 84S 25Ah 3.7V NMC cells. Four subpacks of 21S in series Packs have tested...

diysolarforum.com

Cmax cells? I see those used in car audio all the time. I think the C rating on them is extremely high. Just a small bank around 100AH at 12V or 16v is able to power a 20k watt system no problem with around a 300 amp alternator

 

[Alkaline]

I have some 280K and they have these terminals, I did not sand them to remove the anodizing.

Highly Doubt EVE would be anodizing their terminals, that would make no sense and be foolish as it would drastically lower electroconductivity.

Doesn't matter either way.

Aluminum forms a protective oxide extremely quickly.

? one of the most ridiculous statements ever posted on these forums, not surprising coming from you ?.

Anodizing is the intentional build up of aluminum oxide which reduces electroconductivity. http://www.chemprocessing.com/page.asp?pageid=1&#:~:text=Aluminum Anodizing is an electrochemical,and is resistant to wear.

Comparing anodizing to the normal oxidation that happens from moisture/air is beyond comprehension ?.

All this is a moot point though, as again highly doubt EVE would go through the trouble to anodize their terminals.

BTW that video is a joke, I would contact ANDY from off grid garage, see if what is being claimed is real.

 

[Skypower]

There are two kinds of two hole terminals out there from what I’ve seen. Neither are anodized. Both are machined from billet. One is shiny and tapped through and the other has a sand blast finish with Heli coil holes. The latter needs a bit more buffing with Scotch bright. All aluminum terminals should have the oxidation removed just before assembly. No power tools, by hand, the surface needs to be flat. The thick chunky buss bars are not flat! It’s better to use standard or even better, the four hole flexible buss with good flat washers that almost touch each other.

 

[sunshine_eggo]

Highly Doubt EVE would be anodizing their terminals, that would make no sense and be foolish as it would drastically lower electroconductivity.

? one of the most ridiculous statements ever posted on these forums, not surprising coming from you ?.

LOL... grind that axe buddy. I'd be willing to bet your posts rank higher on that list than mine. Your noise to data ratio is still astoundingly high.

Anodizing is the intentional build up of aluminum oxide which reduces electroconductivity. http://www.chemprocessing.com/page.asp?pageid=1&#:~:text=Aluminum Anodizing is an electrochemical,and is resistant to wear.

Comparing anodizing to the normal oxidation that happens from moisture/air is beyond comprehension ?.

The only person making this comparison is you. I'm simply stating that if you're going to make an electrical connection with aluminum, you should remove the existing oxide layer.

Maybe you should work on what is said, not what your brain twists it into because of your bias.

 

[Alkaline]

LOL... grind that axe buddy. I'd be willing to bet your posts rank higher on that list than mine. Your noise to data ratio is still astoundingly high.


The only person making this comparison is you. I'm simply stating that if you're going to make an electrical connection with aluminum, you should remove the existing oxide layer.

Maybe you should work on what is said, not what your brain twists it into because of your bias.

You can take a paper towel with some vinegar and effectively remove any oxidation form a non anodized surface. It will not work with an anodized surface, only way to clear anodizing would be scrap, sand if off.

I'll stand by my posts vs yours any day I don't rely on sycophants and posts counts as measure of accuracy which is clearly what you do, not to mention the poor judgement you show left and right, still upset about ghostwriter aren't you ? Or how about the previous hill you stood when you proclaimed no such thing as grade A or B.

 

[sunshine_eggo]

You can take a paper towel with some vinegar and effectively remove any oxidation form a non anodized surface. It will not work with an anodized surface, only way to clear anodizing would be scrap, sand if off.

I'll stand by my posts vs yours any day I don't rely on sycophants and posts counts as measure of accuracy which is clearly what you do, not to mention the poor judgement you show left and right, still upset about ghostwriter aren't you ? Or how about the previous hill you stood when you proclaimed no such thing as grade A or B.

I'm not upset about anything. Your rants are more amusing than anything else. I hate to disappoint you, but I think about you a lot less than you think about me.

 

[EastFalcon]

Highly Doubt EVE would be anodizing their terminals, that would make no sense and be foolish as it would drastically lower electroconductivity.

Do you know this for a fact or it is your assumption?

 

[Skypower]

Do you know this for a fact or it is your assumption?

It’s well known in the electronics industry that anodizing is an excellent insulator. In fact, they hard black, grey or green anodized heat sinks and mount high voltage components in direct contact with thermal paste and no concern for shorting to it. You should see what happens to a carbide end mill in short order when cutting it when an engineer wants a change?. Clear anodized is also hard, an insulator, not quite as thick and no color dye. Also those mounts would have to be masked or machined clear of anodize in order to welded to the battery terminal post. Anodize welds like crap. In other words, it’s not impossible that someone anodized it, but they’d have to be a complete moron.

 

[Skypower]

There is a possibility that the mounting surface is the bar stock surface(from the manufacturer). If that’s the case then there is a heavy clear oxide finish and that would cause issues if not vigorously removed. The lower surface is of course machined and prepped for welding. Mine are definitely machined all around. As a side note, Eve may have made the cells but there’s a good chance that another vendor made and welded the mounts on. It could be different vendors did different things.

 

[Sleeper85]

I currently have LF280K cells purchased from two different Alibaba suppliers.

We can see the difference between the terminals, glossy vs matte.

Measured with the YR1035+ tester
I measure an average of 0.10 mΩ from the terminal with both terminal models.
I have no problem measuring the voltage on the matte terminal provided by Amy (Luyuan) unlike what we see in this video.

Right now I'm wondering what the difference is between these two terminals ?
Is it necessary or not to sand and apply NO-OX-ID ?

What type of aluminum is used ?

This post from @Svalbard talks about 1060 aluminum but is that really the case ?

EVE 280Ah with different terminals directly from EVE Energy- any experience?

I just get an offer directly from EVE Energy for 16 280Ah Cells with the terminals shown on the picture. I would like their 304Ah cells, but they do not weld themselves so then I have to order from Amy at Luyuan instead (with normal studs). That is no problem, however, I got interested in the...

diysolarforum.com

This video talks about no longer using Noalox or other with the new aluminum alloys because it is no longer necessary.

So I don't know what to do or not to do anymore ?


1) Cells purchased from Quishou ( glossy )

Would be soldered by Alibaba resellers.




2) Cells purchased from Amy Wan - Luyuan Technology ( matte with helicoil )

Would be welded by the EVE factory.




Thank you for your opinions.

 

[Alkaline]

Better be careful with the QSO that doesn't have a steel helicoil like the official EVE one

 

[Skypower]

I do not recommend any anti oxidant products that contain any metals (zinc) like OX-Gard or Noalox on our Lifepo4 terminals and busses/lugs. While these may be excellent in utility power panels, I’ve noticed issues on two separate occasions on two different batteries.
Upon disassembly I found discoloration and fine pitting on the aluminum terminals and buss or lug side. No increase of resistance was yet seen but it appears be some sort of galvanic activity was taking place. I highly recommend the use of NO-OX-ID “A-special” between the contact surfaces. No discoloration after 9 months.
Using the same device as the OP, I pulled out some spares and just ran a few tests. These are the shiny machine finish, no Helicoils. Test points lower flat surface to top of flexible buss between the bolts or nuts. Test ONE; mounting surfaces(terminals/buss bottoms) just wiped with acetone, supplied bolts torqued to 6Nm and the range was .04 to .03= Excellent
Test TWO mounting surfaces quickly buffed by hand with Scotch Bright 5-8 seconds and dust carefully blown off(Never use a power tool like a Dremel to clean terminals). Grub screws, smooth flat bottom nut and large flat washer torqued to 6Nm yielded .03= Excellent. Test THREE; Clean lug to clean terminal .06= Excellent. Test FOUR; buffed mounting surfaces .04= Excellent.
As for reference, when the probes are used on a clean common surface of the terminal 1/2” apart, I get a reading of .03 , for all intensive purposes, it just doesn’t get any better.
My surprise is how conducive this lot is right out of the box from Eel battery. Edit had one too many zeros in the results?

 

[RCinFLA]

I usually see about 0.05 milliohm per clean single lug tie down, so 0.03 milliohms for two is in ballpark.

I would not put too much faith in the YR1035+ accuracy at that resistance. At that range it uses about 50 mA @ 1 kHz drive.
0.03 milliohm x 50 mA rms is 1.5 microvolts drop at 1 kHz. Meter uses a narrow bandwidth 1 kHz bandpass filter to improve the signal to noise ratio to read such low voltage. It's like a radio receiver for 1 kHz tone.

I use a 500A/50mV high quality current shunt, which is highly accurate 0.1 milliohm resistor, to check the meter calibration.

Having larger diameter, strong (thick) top flat washers helps distribute force across terminal surface and prevents dimpling of bus bars under smaller screw head that reduces surface contact area.

 

[Skypower]

I can’t speak for the YR 1035+ accuracy, however it does give me a reference value that helps me spot a ringer. It has caught several bad situations like trapped debris and concave surfaces on a solid buss bar. It also helped me realize that there’s gain in something as simple as polishing the inside of lug barrel before crimping. It may not be accurate to the level of a professional instrument but definitely shows potential for improvement. Another good tool for finding bad connections is a good voltage meter the has resolution to .xxxx with a constant load probing around junctions will also find a “ringer”. The advantage of YR 1035 is it’ll show an issue before it’s in service. The disadvantage is when it’s in service and noise is in the circuit the YR is useless.

 

[RCinFLA]

I can’t speak for the YR 1035+ accuracy, however it does give me a reference value that helps me spot a ringer. It has caught several bad situations like trapped debris and concave surfaces on a solid buss bar. It also helped me realize that there’s gain in something as simple as polishing the inside of lug barrel before crimping. It may not be accurate to the level of a professional instrument but definitely shows potential for improvement. Another good tool for finding bad connections is a good voltage meter the has resolution to .xxxx with a constant load probing around junctions will also find a “ringer”. The advantage of YR 1035 is it’ll show an issue before it’s in service. The disadvantage is when it’s in service and noise is in the circuit the YR is useless.

For about $35, it is money well spent.

 

[Sleeper85]

@Skypower @RCinFLA and other, thanks for your response.

Concerning the YR1035+ tester, it is clearly written in the doc that it is not precise below 0.3 mOhm. So measuring a single cell or a bus bar is not precise but as Skypower said it gives a reference.

On the other hand, measuring the resistance of the complete pack should give a value close to reality.




Concerning the cells provided by QSO with the glossy terminal without helicoil.

I assembled this pack for the first time with the bus bars (non-flexible) delivered with the cells and 3 months later I assembled this pack in a box with flexible bus bars as in the photos below. The only thing I did was scrub the terminals and bus bars with 96% pure alcohol before assembling them.



In both cases, I measured the IR for the entire pack between the "-" and "+" terminal (before connecting the BMS).

Here are the results :

• QSO 8S pack with classic bus bar: 3.86 mΩ
• QSO 8S pack with flexible bus bar: 1.87 mΩ

To understand the table below, the measurement of the IR of the bus bars between the cells (0.02 mΩ) was made between the "+" cell 1 and the "-" cell 2 from the EVE unwelded terminal as indicated by the pink line in the photo below. This is to take into account the entire bus bar including the welded terminal.




Below is my measurement table with the flexible bus bars.





Based on the total internal resistance of the battery and the bus bars I tried to estimate the "real" internal resistance of the cells. (value in mΩ)




All this without having rubbed the termials with “Scotch-Brite” or applying NO-OX-ID...

So the big question remains, is it really necessary to sand with “Scotch-Brite” and put NO-OX-ID ?