Old thread but I thought I would post here for anyone considering Frey cells.
My Frey representative reached out recently and I took the opportunity to ask about the relative high IR of the Frey cells (both AC 1KH & on an a voltage drop basis).
I provided a link to this forum thread, so they had a chance to review the thread.
My contact asked Frey's internal technical team for a response.
With Frey's permission, I have posted the response below.
A few items worth mentioning:
Customer service is very good at Frey and it's a very good sign they responded to my request. These cells are designed for industrial applications with thick walled, self supporting cell cases and M10, nickel-plated copper terminal lugs with 20foot/ lb torque spec. They are not designed to compete with an EVE or CALB on perfomance, but have other qualities that make them a good solution for a high vibration, mobile application.
Frey Response:
1.Frey cells' cover and lugs are connected by riveting, which is different from the welding process used in other batteries like EVE or CALB. This difference results in a larger resistance value, but it does not affect the large magnification discharge.
2.Frey cell 100Ah has a smaller capacity with higher height, which means that just like you said,its structure that lead to the resistance value bigger.
3.the resistance value(in our tech spec) test is conducted using an AC internal resistance meter, and the resulting value is the AC internal resistance.
4.I saw that there's one user said about the copper foil,at present,we use 0.8μm,EVE or CALAB must use around 0.6μm.
So there are some items which may be lost in translation, but it seems the terminal's physical connection to the internal foil causes some resistance in the cells.
Also, cell foil thickness is perhaps 20% more than some of the well know competitors, which may also contribute to a slightly higher IR.
So far, my cells have been flawless and seem to have been well matched by FREY.
MP
