|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 14:24:50 GMT
UP TO 10% inaccurate during charge. If it was always 10% inaccurate it would be a simple matter to correct it! Plus, it gets more accurate with repeated cycles.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 14:22:01 GMT
I have amended the wording slightly for the Float section. Lemme know if anyone thinks it requires further amendment.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 14:08:09 GMT
Hence my suggestion of adding a caveat about chargers with a float voltage of 13.2V or thereabouts. To the best of my knowledge you are incorrect in stating that the current is limited when in Float. I have never seen that documented - can you point me to anything that states this? The voltage is lowered and because of this the current drawn by the battery is very low. However it is the same as absorption in so far as that current isn't restricted. It will supply whatever the battery requires, which won't be much at such a low voltage. As I've repeatedly stated, I'm happy to amend the OP to correct any errors (hence my suggestion of the caveat) but I remain to be convinced that (for a charger with 13.6V float) it is fundamentally incorrect as it currently stands No I cannot give you any documentation only experience of watching chargers go from 20 amps or so on absorption to less than 1 amp on float. Cycle the charger and back to 20 amps or so. Some chargers the float does actually finish off the charging but in these the voltage actually reduces and is not static. Other it is purely a maintenance mode. Difficult depends on the charger etc. Tony it is up to you I have given you my thoughts. It does concern me that people will think they can leave batteries to charge on float, but it is your article. I would prefer it called a maintenance mode and take out the implication that it is like absorption. But I don't want to offer poor advice. This is why I keep suggesting a caveat. Oh sod it, I'll just put one in. If you read the whole post you'll see that the general gist of it is to NOT allow the charger to go into Float ever unless you're on a landline.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 13:56:11 GMT
Thanks for the replies. I have solar and a wind turbine. Will the guage give an accurate figure for energy going into the batteries, or is it just show state of charge? reason I ask, I have an ammeter wired into the wind turbine circuit, would be good to get rid of it, free up the space for the smartguage. No the SG will only give the SoC. It doesn't know about current or energy. I'd try to keep an ammeter but it would be better if it showed the current going in / out of the batteries, rather than the turbine output. That way you can use it to determine when the batteries are fully charged, something which the SG is not that accurate at (it is much better for getting SoC during discharge). Absolutely this. With a SmartGauge to show accurate SoC during discharge and an ammeter showing when the batteries are at nearasdammit 100% during charging you are sorted.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 13:52:39 GMT
Hence my suggestion of adding a caveat about chargers with a float voltage of 13.2V or thereabouts. To the best of my knowledge you are incorrect in stating that the current is limited when in Float. I have never seen that documented - can you point me to anything that states this? The voltage is lowered and because of this the current drawn by the battery is very low. However it is the same as absorption in so far as that current isn't restricted. It will supply whatever the battery requires, which won't be much at such a low voltage. As I've repeatedly stated, I'm happy to amend the OP to correct any errors (hence my suggestion of the caveat) but I remain to be convinced that (for a charger with 13.6V float) it is fundamentally incorrect as it currently stands No I don't think current in float is limited per se, but what happens with chargers such as our own Mastervolt one is that if a high current is demanded, the charger goes out of float and back to absorb. There is a setting for what that current is. I think this hints at the difficulty. Float mode is whatever the charger manufacturer designs it to be, and they are by no means all singing from the same hymn sheet Completely agree. Now if we could all agree on a suitable re-wording or caveat for the Float section that would be even better.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 13:49:47 GMT
As for Gibbo's knowledge I do not know yet he seems very quiet at the moment. Trust me, there's nothing wrong with Gibbo's knowledge. He's quiet right now because he has other priorities at present.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 13:46:49 GMT
Tony's bit was accurate enough for most people to understand and work with so why complicate it? I completely agree, and said so earlier.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 13:42:49 GMT
Please re-read the OP. I do not believe that I suggest any of the above. If I do then I'll happily edit it to remove the confusion. Unless my eyes are getting worse you wrote "3. Float Stage. This is similar to the Absorption Stage inasmuch as the voltage is constant, but the voltage is now reduced to around 13.6V (again, preset according to battery type and internal chemistry) in order to treat the battery gently and slowly bring it to a fully charged state. You treat it as a charging stage not as a maintenance mode, that is there to keep the battery where it is. Which I suppose is my point. It is not an absorption stage, both voltage and current are reduced, limited, and controlled. Hence my suggestion of adding a caveat about chargers with a float voltage of 13.2V or thereabouts. To the best of my knowledge you are incorrect in stating that the current is limited when in Float. I have never seen that documented - can you point me to anything that states this? The voltage is lowered and because of this the current drawn by the battery is very low. However it is the same as absorption in so far as that current isn't restricted. It will supply whatever the battery requires, which won't be much at such a low voltage. As I've repeatedly stated, I'm happy to amend the OP to correct any errors (hence my suggestion of the caveat) but I remain to be convinced that (for a charger with 13.6V float) it is fundamentally incorrect as it currently stands
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:59:02 GMT
I don't know what will eventually happen to TB, but for now there are interesting discussions going on as well as welcoming new members - there is a bit of historical stuff about CDWF, that I hope will go away. I agree 100% on both points. 😀
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:55:46 GMT
What I said quoting from memory and what was understood was that in bulk the battery took all the charge it could and as the charge rose the voltage rose until it reached the safe level for the battery, then it changed to absorption. That was what I was trying to get over and got over, that in bulk the battery took as much charge as it could get. Now we both know that depends on the charger and its output. Have a charger with an output of 30amps and a battery discharged by 100Ah and it will swallow all the charge it can get. Have a battery with a discharge of 20Ah and it will not go to bulk. In the context I was dealing with a boat using its batteries fully an idea of what was happening was needed not a purely technical description as that would not have worked, as N proved when he wrote that pure technical description. Again, ? ? ? What has anything of that got to do with CW's approach to debate, which is what you quoted above.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:39:50 GMT
But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined. So  how do we stop CW happening here, because it will eventually, unless we find a way of having these chats that is not perceived as nasty. Well, for a start we don't have an idiot fluffy bunny in charge. Secondly, nowhere in this thread have I been 'nasty' as far as I can recall, I've simply been discussing the issues.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:34:56 GMT
But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined. I am sorry that is not what I said. Your off so have a good day ? ? ?
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:32:53 GMT
Whatever their intent the function will be to do both. Depends on the battery and other things. I know where you are going but I suggest the brush is too broad. Because it gives the idea that a Float mode will charge my batteries correctly. I could go away leaving my partly charged batteries on float mode and the charger will get all that nasty sulphate off and take them up to full charge. I do not believe it would or could. Rather I think some of the problems with batteries on boats is a charger that have an absorption that turns off way before the battery is on full charged and the goes to float. The float fails to shift the sulphate and it hardens and the cycle of replacements short life batteries starts again. Please re-read the OP. I do not believe that I suggest any of the above. If I do then I'll happily edit it to remove the confusion.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:30:51 GMT
Now a question to all. How much of this thread would have survived and how many modques, ban or suspension would have been issued on CW? But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:04:34 GMT
But now we come back to voltage. If the charger sets float at 13.6V as many do then it IS the third stage of the charging cycle. Interesting point what is the manufacturers intent, to charge or hold Whatever their intent the function will be to do both.
|
|