JK BMS CAN bus comms now possible for inverters that support Goodwe and Pylontech batteries

[cjdell]

Confirmed working on Solis!

Specifically the RHI-3.6K-48ES-5G. I had to switch to a different CAN transceiver (TI SN65HVD230). Something about the Solis and many other newer inverters only accepting the 3.3V CAN and not the 5V CAN of the TJA1050. I think Uksa007 also mentioned that he had switched to a TI part.

The SN65HVD230 is a native 3.3V part so it doesn't require the 4.7K resistor on the RX. Also it is powered by 3.3V so don't connect it to 5V!

Thank you Sleeper85 for continuing this project. Had been using it without issue with my Growatt SPF5000ES for the last year and plan to continue doing so with the Solis!

 

[Sleeper85]

Confirmed working on Solis!

Specifically the RHI-3.6K-48ES-5G. I had to switch to a different CAN transceiver (TI SN65HVD230). Something about the Solis and many other newer inverters only accepting the 3.3V CAN and not the 5V CAN of the TJA1050. I think Uksa007 also mentioned that he had switched to a TI part.

The SN65HVD230 is a native 3.3V part so it doesn't require the 4.7K resistor on the RX. Also it is powered by 3.3V so don't connect it to 5V!

Thank you Sleeper85 for continuing this project. Had been using it without issue with my Growatt SPF5000ES for the last year and plan to continue doing so with the Solis!

Interesting, I take note of all that.

What CAN IDs do you use with the Solis?

The PYLON 1.2 standard alone or with other extra IDs?

 

[cjdell]

Interesting, I take note of all that.

What CAN IDs do you use with the Solis?

The PYLON 1.2 standard alone or with other extra IDs?

To be honest I just took a fresh clone of the repo this time. Everything is default at the moment.

 

[Sleeper85]

To be honest I just took a fresh clone of the repo this time. Everything is default at the moment.

By default is PYLON 1.2.

 

[ChrisG]

Which is the recommend JK BMS to buy (not new model) for all this to work? Looking at JK B2A20S20P and there are two options. One standard the second for a few $ more with HEAT+CAN.

 

[Paulfrench35]

@ChrisG B2A20S2P works perfecly.

 

[ChrisG]

@ChrisG B2A20S2P works perfecly.

So the standard one without heat+can?

 

[Paulfrench35]

Yes !

 

[ChrisG]

Yes !

Thanks, just pull the trigger on 6 of them.

 

[Sleeper85]

Thanks, just pull the trigger on 6 of them.

Attention! the standard BMS is OK but this project only works with one BMS connected to the inverter.
This is not code with multi-bms interfaces like uksa007 sells.

 

[ChrisG]

Attention! the standard BMS is OK but this project only works with one BMS connected to the inverter.
This is not code with multi-bms interfaces like uksa007 sells.

Thanks and understood. So I couldn't hook multiple to a VenusOS Pi? Understood not daisy chained but one per USB?

 

[Sleeper85]

Thanks and understood. So I couldn't hook multiple to a VenusOS Pi? Understood not daisy chained but one per USB?

I'm not a Victron expert, if you have several CAN bus inputs on the Pi Venus OS like the board shown by Andy a little while ago. Maybe it's possible to connect several BMS seen as independent batteries. To test, I can't confirm that it will be OK.

Why not buy the new JK BMS in order to communicate the batteries together and have a single CAN link to Victron?

 

[Sleeper85]

Something about the Solis and many other newer inverters only accepting the 3.3V CAN and not the 5V CAN of the TJA1050.
The SN65HVD230 is a native 3.3V part so it doesn't require the 4.7K resistor on the RX. Also it is powered by 3.3V so don't connect it to 5V!

Thanks for the info, I added it in the README.

And I modified the schematics like this:

3.3V CAN BUS

              RS485-TTL               RS232-TTL                CAN BUS (3V3)
┌──────────┐            ┌──────────┐             ┌────────────┐              ┌──────────┐
│          │<TX------RX>│16      23│<TX-------TX>|            |              |          |
│  JK-BMS  │<RX------TX>│17      22│<RX-------RX>| SN65HVD230 |<---CAN H --->| Inverter |
│          │<----GND--->│   ESP32  │<----GND---->|    CAN     |<---CAN L --->|          |
│          │     5V---->│VIN    3V3│<---3.3V---->|            |              |          |
└──────────┘            └──────────┘             └────────────┘              └──────────┘


5V CAN BUS

              RS485-TTL               RS232-TTL                CAN BUS (5V)
┌──────────┐            ┌──────────┐             ┌────────────┐              ┌──────────┐
│          │<TX------RX>│16      23│<TX-------TX>|            |              |          |
│  JK-BMS  │<RX------TX>│17      22│<RX--4K7--RX>|  TJA1050   |<---CAN H --->| Inverter |
│          │<----GND--->│   ESP32  │<----GND---->|    CAN     |<---CAN L --->|          |
│          │     5V---->│VIN    VIN│<----5V----->|            |              |          |
└──────────┘            └──────────┘             └────────────┘              └──────────┘

 

[ChrisG]

I'm not a Victron expert, if you have several CAN bus inputs on the Pi Venus OS like the board shown by Andy a little while ago. Maybe it's possible to connect several BMS seen as independent batteries. To test, I can't confirm that it will be OK.

Why not buy the new JK BMS in order to communicate the batteries together and have a single CAN link to Victron?

I needed a new BMS for new packs, wanted active balancing integrated so chose the previous version. Looks like the new one still has several issues, even with the latest firmware. Also got them for $100/each, not sure if that is a great price but seemed to be. Integration is not a MUST, more of a nice to have. Voltage and SOC via shunt has worked fine for a long time.

 

[uksa007]

Meh open source = open wounds.

Been there done that seen too many fights and drama.

Closed sourced, fairly price, with proper support wins in my opinion.

All those wanting open source have no idea on what do with it they just like the way it sounds. All they do is bug the original developer and ask, plead, and then demand changes all for free.

No thanks.

Yep you are totally right.

Too many people that caused me to stop supporting this open source, as they:

• Complain about everything
• Want everything for free
• Don't provide any financial support
• Want many hours of support for free, to help build hardware/firmware which they have no experience with.
• Generally have no clue

If they weren't so busy complaining about everything they would see that it is me who:

• Spent 1000's of hours researching how inverter communications work.
• Spent 1000's of hours writing code and testing.
• Spent 1000's of hours designing PCB, sourcing parts
• Manufactures the Boards.
• Provides support

If they spent five minutes they would see that Syssi code is simple serial reading
And if they bothered to check his licence allows for all kinds of use.

 

[uksa007]

This project is based on that of syssi who also certainly spent a lot of time programming the part concerning the communication with JK-BMS but I think that syssi will not receive any $ earned by uksa007.

A project based on another open-source project must cite its sources.

uksa007 added the CAN part but without the components developed by syssi (and perhaps other people) these applications would be nothing.

So he takes the work that other people have offered to the community and then sells it.

What bothers me the most in this story is that at the beginning he starts the project in the philosophy of an open-source project with a diagram with the components to assemble etc. and then afterwards, without saying anything, he completely changes direction.

So regarding prices, a simple small board with an ESP32 and 5 components sells for more than a BMS!

I'm not the only one who finds this crazy.

uksa007 is not clear at all and doesn't get it right.

I use Solar Assistant which is a great application, I paid for a lifetime license for $50 and I receive upgrades with new features every month (beta tester program).

Do you really think that I will pay $50/month to become a beta tester of the uksa007 application?

Finally, I'm not against paying to support the work carried out but not under the current conditions.

The cost to build and manufacture a product is not the cost of the raw materials.
There is significant cost in labour to build the product, manage the inventory (import taxes), packing and shipping, payment processing fees, and provide support
Not to mention the 1000's of hours research and development that went into the code, and its continual improvement.

There is no ongoing subscription required.

If you bothered to check syssi licence is permissive:

 

[elusivesd]

Yep you are totally right.

Too many people that caused me to stop supporting this open source, as they:

• Complain about everything
• Want everything for free
• Don't provide any financial support
• Want many hours of support for free, to help build hardware/firmware which they have no experience with.
• Generally have no clue

If they weren't so busy complaining about everything they would see that it is me who:

• Spent 1000's of hours researching how inverter communications work.
• Spent 1000's of hours writing code and testing.
• Spent 1000's of hours designing PCB, sourcing parts
• Manufactures the Boards.
• Provides support

If they spent five minutes they would see that Syssi code is simple serial reading
And if they bothered to check his licence allows for all kinds of use.


View attachment 186942

I don't think anybody here was downplaying your contribution, or claiming your efforts were trivial. Though, I hate to be the one to point out that it seems this is exactly what your are claiming in regards to syssi's "simple serial reading" work, yet still valuable enough to start your repo on a fork of theirs. Even syssi's work would be meaningless without the work of esphome, homeassistant, and all related open source contributions. I am a software developer myself, so yes, I have spent the 5 minutes (and more) to fully understand what is happening from a code perspective.

I'm not sure why the license was brought up as well... did someone claim that you were not allowed to continue down your path for licensing reasons? However you choose to continue your project, is completely up to you. Since you brought it up... per the Apache 2.0 license, all copies of the source, or derivative works, must be provided a copy of the license. I see you have removed the LICENSE file from the repo with the purge, so you might want to check on that to remain compliant... Yes, it is permissive, but read the rest of the first sentence.

Back to the point of open source - as you can see from the continuation of the thread, people in general tend to build and share collaboratively. You can choose to leverage these open contributions in the form of a commercial product for sale, as many companies do, that is your choice. Or you can continue down a closed path, that is your choice as well. Nobody is forcing you one way or the other.

Once again, thank you for your contributions. I'm sure those who prefer a more polished, commercial solution, will continue to support you. On the same note, the more hands-on members of the community will continue down a parallel path to also provide an open solution. Neither one is more correct than the other, everyone has their preference.

 

[uksa007]

I don't think anybody here was downplaying your contribution, or claiming your efforts were trivial. Though, I hate to be the one to point out that it seems this is exactly what your are claiming in regards to syssi's "simple serial reading" work, yet still valuable enough to start your repo on a fork of theirs. Even syssi's work would be meaningless without the work of esphome, homeassistant, and all related open source contributions. I am a software developer myself, so yes, I have spent the 5 minutes (and more) to fully understand what is happening from a code perspective.

I'm not sure why the license was brought up as well... did someone claim that you were not allowed to continue down your path for licensing reasons? However you choose to continue your project, is completely up to you. Since you brought it up... per the Apache 2.0 license, all copies of the source, or derivative works, must be provided a copy of the license. I see you have removed the LICENSE file from the repo with the purge, so you might want to check on that to remain compliant... Yes, it is permissive, but read the rest of the first sentence.

Back to the point of open source - as you can see from the continuation of the thread, people in general tend to build and share collaboratively. You can choose to leverage these open contributions in the form of a commercial product for sale, as many companies do, that is your choice. Or you can continue down a closed path, that is your choice as well. Nobody is forcing you one way or the other.

Once again, thank you for your contributions. I'm sure those who prefer a more polished, commercial solution, will continue to support you. On the same note, the more hands-on members of the community will continue down a parallel path to also provide an open solution. Neither one is more correct than the other, everyone has their preference.

Every single product/software is based on work by someone else, if the eg IEEE didn't make the standards no one would have standards for anything, nothing would work.

Syssi code saved me a couple of hours work, not having to write my own serail reading code, had I know it was going to going be perceived that I just stole someone's work and put lipstick on it, I would have just written it myself, but then everyone would complain that I used ESPhome, or IEEE standards. You can't make everyone happy.

If you don't support the open source version high likelihood of many unhappy people as they can't get it to work, which has a negative impact on your name and hardware product.

Better in my opinion to offer just one solution, which I believe solves all the problems for everyone:
Hence the Hardware Interface kit was born.
Removed frustration for the user trying to build hardware/firmware, as many have little to no electronics and coding experience.
The user ends up with a professional board, as opposed to hacked together modules which are unreliable at best.
I don't spend all my time trying to support people building hardware and compiling firmware, breaking the code, etc.
It is build and tested, plug and play.
Win Win.
Yes it cost money, life is not alway free.

 

[ChrisG]

So, if we can get back to the real topic of integrations. What is the benefit of the normal JK B2A20S2P vs B2A20S2P Heat+CAN in the context of either branch of code here. Doesn’t seem like there is but want to confirm.

 

[uksa007]

So, if we can get back to the real topic of integrations. What is the benefit of the normal JK B2A20S2P vs B2A20S2P Heat+CAN in the context of either branch of code here. Doesn’t seem like there is but want to confirm.

The Heat+CAN mode has Heat output and CAN(not used as it is proprietary JK protocol)

Both will work, if you need the heat function get the Heat version if not, get the non Heat version.