AGM vs Flooded Bulk Times
PT keeps asking whether AGMs will spend more time in Bulk at the same charging rate. I found a good example where that can be measured, using ah64id's test with his PD4655 on his pair of Lifeline...
Forum Discussion
Charge Efficiency Factor normally is somewhere between 86% - 88% for s good 5% antimony flooded battery. CEF ranges between 92% - 94% for a good absorbed glass mat battery.
Vigorish, Louie the Louse lends 100 bucks and demands X in return. It is a good way to display an example between the two technologies.
Given your narrow band trial, is there any way the flooded battery can be equivalent to the saturated mat battery at lower SOC? Of course not. So then we are faced with discovering the difference between the two at higher states of initial start point charging. Let's make a smaller diameter hoop: Time a controlled voltage charge between 90% SOC and 100% SOC. The skewing here is a stupid microchip cannot differentiate between chemistries. So what do you use (?) 14.4 volts for the flooded or inverse 14.8 for the saturated mat (?)
Is it not one of the purposes of this forum to identify and correct Mad Max design faults of one-algorithm-fits-all battery chargers? I have significant "ithues" with environmental bashing creation of unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted CO2 emissions. This is aside from insane waste of resources to replenish generator fuel reserves. Loser! Excessive Generator Run Time / Loser! Destroying optimum battery life (needless manufacturer energy cost) / Loser! Needless destruction of generator lifespan / Loser! Generator fuel costs.
So reality screams.
I am unfortunate. I hear the screams. I am a coward because I devote planning to minimize the effects of mismanagement of energy. Poor Mex.
Vigorish, Louie the Louse lends 100 bucks and demands X in return. It is a good way to display an example between the two technologies.
Given your narrow band trial, is there any way the flooded battery can be equivalent to the saturated mat battery at lower SOC? Of course not. So then we are faced with discovering the difference between the two at higher states of initial start point charging. Let's make a smaller diameter hoop: Time a controlled voltage charge between 90% SOC and 100% SOC. The skewing here is a stupid microchip cannot differentiate between chemistries. So what do you use (?) 14.4 volts for the flooded or inverse 14.8 for the saturated mat (?)
Is it not one of the purposes of this forum to identify and correct Mad Max design faults of one-algorithm-fits-all battery chargers? I have significant "ithues" with environmental bashing creation of unnecessary, unneeded and unwanted CO2 emissions. This is aside from insane waste of resources to replenish generator fuel reserves. Loser! Excessive Generator Run Time / Loser! Destroying optimum battery life (needless manufacturer energy cost) / Loser! Needless destruction of generator lifespan / Loser! Generator fuel costs.
So reality screams.
I am unfortunate. I hear the screams. I am a coward because I devote planning to minimize the effects of mismanagement of energy. Poor Mex.
