ice57
New Member
- Joined
- May 8, 2021
- Messages
- 11
Sharing some experiences I've had over the last two months with Daly BMS that led me to switch (at considerable cost) to JK BMS.
First, my experience applies only to the 48v16s 300A LiFePO4 model of the Daly BMS, although it could be a predictor of their other models.
The status reporting of the units either via their bluetooth-enabled iOS app or via UART to a Solar Assistant instance was erratic from the start. I had had two BMS in production with two battery banks for about a year, but felt I could never trust what the status reporting was telling me. Especially as one battery bank had substantially better capacity behavior than the other, both banks being built from the same batch of cells.
I was planning the addition of a third bank, purchased a third identical BMS from Daly and noticed when installed that this third BMS behaved even differently (better) than the first two. At my request, Daly sent me a firmware update. I applied it successfully to one of the older BMS, but when I tried to apply it to the second one it failed and 'bricked' the unit. Daly support eventually went dark on me as I had requested help with the bricked unit. The one with the successful firmware update was now even more erratic than before and was reporting known-faulty information on the status of SOC and MOS charge/discharge switches. Eventually that battery bank was unusable with the Daly BMS.
Since then, I've implemented three JK BMS (200A units) for my three battery banks and my off-grid system is working extremely well. The status reporting of the JK's through Solar Assistant match up perfectly with the battery information from my MPP Solar inverters (never the case with the Daly BMS) so I can trust what they report. The JK's have integrated active balancing, necessary with the daily/hourly stress on the battery banks, so the cells stay well balanced and the banks stay relatively even capacity throughout each cycle. Very pleased with the performance of the JK BMS.
First, my experience applies only to the 48v16s 300A LiFePO4 model of the Daly BMS, although it could be a predictor of their other models.
The status reporting of the units either via their bluetooth-enabled iOS app or via UART to a Solar Assistant instance was erratic from the start. I had had two BMS in production with two battery banks for about a year, but felt I could never trust what the status reporting was telling me. Especially as one battery bank had substantially better capacity behavior than the other, both banks being built from the same batch of cells.
I was planning the addition of a third bank, purchased a third identical BMS from Daly and noticed when installed that this third BMS behaved even differently (better) than the first two. At my request, Daly sent me a firmware update. I applied it successfully to one of the older BMS, but when I tried to apply it to the second one it failed and 'bricked' the unit. Daly support eventually went dark on me as I had requested help with the bricked unit. The one with the successful firmware update was now even more erratic than before and was reporting known-faulty information on the status of SOC and MOS charge/discharge switches. Eventually that battery bank was unusable with the Daly BMS.
Since then, I've implemented three JK BMS (200A units) for my three battery banks and my off-grid system is working extremely well. The status reporting of the JK's through Solar Assistant match up perfectly with the battery information from my MPP Solar inverters (never the case with the Daly BMS) so I can trust what they report. The JK's have integrated active balancing, necessary with the daily/hourly stress on the battery banks, so the cells stay well balanced and the banks stay relatively even capacity throughout each cycle. Very pleased with the performance of the JK BMS.