ECO-Worthy 5000W to Pytes V5 BMS RS485 Communications

[SolarUKWM]

Hi all, new recruit to the Solar Forum here!

I'm in the process of setting up an Ecoworthy 5000W/48V All-In-One (apparently an SRNE-HF rebadge) with Pytes V5' server rack batteries.

Having read the supplied manuals, then downloaded manuals for several different similar models to piece together the missing information (undocumented settings!) ... I wanted to post what I found worked for this combination, and to sanity check that this is correct.

At the Ecoworthy AIO:
Parameter 32: Changed default SLA to BMS to allow the BMS to control charging current, and enable hidden BMS related settings
Parameter 33: BMS Protocol, change default WoW to PAC (PACE) as this is the dual-BMS used in the Pytes V5'
Parameters 39, 58-62: These new parameters appear for setting SOC based maximum/minimum points as per the SRNE-HYP series manual.

At the Pytes V5':
Set the undocumented "ADD" DIP switches to 101000 (that's 1 and 3 ON) for "SRNE" protocol mode to match the inverter's original type.

Finally: The comms cable ...

The Ecoworthy uses an RS485 link. It provides +5v/0v on pins 1/2 respectively, and RS485A/B on pins 7/8.

The Pytes RS485 port allows for RS485 on pins 1/2 OR 7/8 -- note these appear to be shorted together internally (1 to 8, 2 to 7) from continuity testing.

Therefore: Using a regular all-wired network patch lead here would send 5V from the inverter (1,2), to the battery (1,2), and then back up (7,8) to the inverter. I don't want to do that, right?

I have cobbled together a junk CAT-5 lead adapter which connects ONLY pins 7-7 and 8-8, ignoring possible CAN bus pins (4,5) and grounds (3,6).

This allows the two to communicate.

Q: Is it acceptable to leave it at that, and make a custom lead with just those two conductors, no GND, no screen?

When it is working: You gain an extra (undocumented) page on the settings, right after standard page 1 "Input Battery/Output AC" voltages.

You get page 1a: "Battery Voltage according to BMS" and "State of charge%"

When it's not working: If BMS is enabled [in 32] then a wrong protocol/DIP address/wiring gets you an "Error 58" on the display of the Ecoworthy, and the "LI" icon flashes to complain about battery comms. If [32] is set at SLA still, I don't think you get any feedback on whether you're right, wrong, or otherwise! At least it felt like that until I blundered into that option.

I hope this helps someone looking for info on one or both of these items.

Mike.

 

[marionw]

Hi all, new recruit to the Solar Forum here!

I'm in the process of setting up an Ecoworthy 5000W/48V All-In-One (apparently an SRNE-HF rebadge) with Pytes V5' server rack batteries.

Having read the supplied manuals, then downloaded manuals for several different similar models to piece together the missing information (undocumented settings!) ... I wanted to post what I found worked for this combination, and to sanity check that this is correct.

At the Ecoworthy AIO:
Parameter 32: Changed default SLA to BMS to allow the BMS to control charging current, and enable hidden BMS related settings
Parameter 33: BMS Protocol, change default WoW to PAC (PACE) as this is the dual-BMS used in the Pytes V5'
Parameters 39, 58-62: These new parameters appear for setting SOC based maximum/minimum points as per the SRNE-HYP series manual.

At the Pytes V5':
Set the undocumented "ADD" DIP switches to 101000 (that's 1 and 3 ON) for "SRNE" protocol mode to match the inverter's original type.

Finally: The comms cable ...

The Ecoworthy uses an RS485 link. It provides +5v/0v on pins 1/2 respectively, and RS485A/B on pins 7/8.

The Pytes RS485 port allows for RS485 on pins 1/2 OR 7/8 -- note these appear to be shorted together internally (1 to 8, 2 to 7) from continuity testing.

Therefore: Using a regular all-wired network patch lead here would send 5V from the inverter (1,2), to the battery (1,2), and then back up (7,8) to the inverter. I don't want to do that, right?

I have cobbled together a junk CAT-5 lead adapter which connects ONLY pins 7-7 and 8-8, ignoring possible CAN bus pins (4,5) and grounds (3,6).

This allows the two to communicate.

Q: Is it acceptable to leave it at that, and make a custom lead with just those two conductors, no GND, no screen?

When it is working: You gain an extra (undocumented) page on the settings, right after standard page 1 "Input Battery/Output AC" voltages.

You get page 1a: "Battery Voltage according to BMS" and "State of charge%"

When it's not working: If BMS is enabled [in 32] then a wrong protocol/DIP address/wiring gets you an "Error 58" on the display of the Ecoworthy, and the "LI" icon flashes to complain about battery comms. If [32] is set at SLA still, I don't think you get any feedback on whether you're right, wrong, or otherwise! At least it felt like that until I blundered into that option.

I hope this helps someone looking for info on one or both of these items.

Mike.

You are correct in that several of the ECO-Worthy inverters have power on pins 1&2. This power is for the WIFI dongle and definitely should not be connected to any RS485 port. All that is required is pins 7&8 on the inverter connected to whatever pins the battery RS485-RJ45 requires. Many batteries use pins 1&2 as well as pins 7&8.
So for you pins 7&8 (only) from the inverter to pins 7&8 on the battery should work with no issues.

 

[SolarUKWM]

Thanks for that confirmation -- and it does _appear_ to work as it is! It's just that I looked up RS485, which is a differential interface, and checked "does it need a ground?".

The answer seemed to be "theoretically no, practically YES, if the two units can end up at very different potentials".

So: Batteries and Inverter are chassis-grounded to each other. But that's not necessarily the same ground as the interfaces etc. or the negative of the battery.

The battery RS485 interface has ground on p3 and p6 (allegedly) but I see no continuity between them, or anything else, so that could be a red herring.

For completeness: At least the battery to battery "Port 0 to Port 1" link cables appear to be normal, fully wired "patch leads" according to MK I eyeball and my CAT-5 cable tester. So those are easy to replace/extend!

 

[marionw]

Thanks for that confirmation -- and it does _appear_ to work as it is! It's just that I looked up RS485, which is a differential interface, and checked "does it need a ground?".

The answer seemed to be "theoretically no, practically YES, if the two units can end up at very different potentials".

So: Batteries and Inverter are chassis-grounded to each other. But that's not necessarily the same ground as the interfaces etc. or the negative of the battery.

The battery RS485 interface has ground on p3 and p6 (allegedly) but I see no continuity between them, or anything else, so that could be a red herring.

For completeness: At least the battery to battery "Port 0 to Port 1" link cables appear to be normal, fully wired "patch leads" according to MK I eyeball and my CAT-5 cable tester. So those are easy to replace/extend!

I have never connected the ground in any of my RS485 to USB converters, just the B- and A+ and over 150ft of cat5 have never had an issue.

 

[SolarUKWM]

I have never connected the ground in any of my RS485 to USB converters, just the B- and A+ and over 150ft of cat5 have never had an issue.

Excellent, I only have to make it about 3 metres maximum, so I should be good!