KendallP wrote:
BFL13 wrote:
As you know, all the load/charging should be across the whole bank and not split among battery sets ("tapping")
Actually, I don't know that, B.
I know it's ideal.
But I'm not sure the physics bears that out. So long as heavy interconnects are used, the power should seek the path of least resistance. As the nearest bank builds, the further bank(s) will have less resistance. Connecting to the nearest bank... which is connected to the latter bank(s) by 4-0 cable... is akin to connecting to one big bank. Is it not?
You and I agreed on this same physics 15 years ago when forum members were all aghast at the idea of using batteries of different capacities in parallel.
Mr Wiz explained why tapping is not such a good thing, but I can't remember the details.
I would be worried the high draw of the inverter would first make for a large voltage drop on the first pair of 6s and trip the inverter alarm before the other pair of 6s could get in enough support. The amps flow between the pairs depends on the voltage diff between them so it can be slower than the discharge rate from the inverter. (That could be bogus, but actual electrical guys can jump in)
That first pair would take more punishment over time too for that reason.
LFPs cost a bunch and might not be anywhere near worth it in that application. You already get a goodly discharge rate allowance with four 6s, so that LFP advantage goes away. You want lots of AH but you already have enough with four 6s. IMO LFP is for rigs with room for say only two batts and you want to run the inverter for the MW. Like that. Lots here like them a lot for their own applications.
You also want to consider your own age and your rig's age to see if you will ever get to use all those thousands of deep cycles you are paying through the nose for.
