AGM vs Flooded Bulk Times

Mex
I agree with you
I used My First set of AGM Telco surplus batteries hard
And charged via volt meter and occasional amp readings
They lasted five years
Generator IN the morning solar all day, generator at supper time
The gas saving's more than PAID for this set of AGMs

This set is getting charged all the way full more often than once a week..like the previous set
But I need to cut back to doing 70 > 90 and reduce fuel consumption
Get 5 years instead of 6 or 7 years, efficiency save fuel money

Rolls for wet not for re-branded batteries.

Concorde said "no" to their offer to re-brand the Lifeline. Exclusivity defines with ultimate contrast the difference between their batteries and lesser absorbed glass mat units. Imagine that, a thickest plate truly deep cycle battery offering the highest recommended recharging rate per ampere hour capacity. My 31 standard eats 107 amperes and does not even warm to the occasion.

The "recommended" rate will make the R&S battery live say 5% longer. Pencil out a cost scenario and see whether generator wear-out, run-time and fuel costs justify the five percent. Engineers are purists. Reaching for the theoretical superlative. Gaining an MEE plus an MBA created quite a conflict. It took me a while to sort things out at college. Put at odds, a Chemistry Professor would gleefully strangle an Economist. Throw in a professor of "electronology" and Kosovo, might have looked like a Mr. Rogers program.

It really isn't funny, each would gladly sacrifice the wishes and perspective of the others in near sacred homage to his own discipline.

And friends and family nearly screamed in frustration at my absolute refusal to acquiesce to merge with sanctimonious corporate fiefdom mentality.

A destiny of death or death row. Perhaps a continuance of my great-great Uncle Erwin's obstinate genetic refusal of parroting politic non compos mentis.

The realization of a common-sense conclusion does not require a PhD. Disassociate yourself from the issue and examine it from a clinical perspective.

Or from the second dimension - What is more important to you...efficiency...or theoretical perfection? They are not the same animal.

Then you have Lifeline: "The charging current during the Bulk stage should be set as high as practical; higher current levels mean faster recharge time. Due to the low impedance design, Lifeline batteries can tolerate in-rush current levels as high as 5C (500A for a 100Ah battery)."

My two Lifelines could take over 1000A bulk charge according to them and are being held back by my weenie 125A charger.

Ok, here is the specs for a Surrette 6v AGM that has 415AH at the 20 hr rate.

Recommended charging amps 80a
Maximum charging amps 140a

Not entirely sure how to compare that with two as a 12, but would still be 415AH, so that max of 140/415 = 34% charging rate. Not that much higher than my cheapo AGM with the 27% charging rate spec.

http://rollsbattery.com/wp-content/uploads/batteries/S6-460AGM.pdf

Hookah grade specification. Balderdash. Unprintable derisive expletive deleted sneering.

Once again an individual has fallen for plastic pen protector pasty white flesh squinty eyeballs behind thick lens idealism.

At 14.4 volts bulk and I mean if you have to throw a loop around your service drop transformer to power a Mosler safe sized charger to get 14.4 volts

Do it...

What do I need to do to get this across (?) Once engineers come up with a design then make it practical for production, their SOLE PURPOSE in administration is to ensure design specifications remain viable in product output. Think uniformity.

But bean counters look at engineer's pay stubs and whisper to the comptroller...

"We pay him -that- much for doing -what-?

Visions of pink slips haunt battery company engineer's dreams. So they invent, create, manipulate, and ooooooo, re-invent their wheels...anything but the pink slip.

"Da ideal voltage is 14.2226009 at 22.309c EXACTLY!"

"Da ideal charge current is 20.008 amperes at 15.838c EXACTLY"

"If dey don't do dat, da battery look bad and profits suffer!"

My phone would ring "X's" secretary would be on the line. "Could a meeting be scheduled for say next Tuesday at 10:00AM?"

Obviously things had gotten out of hand.

I would get a pallet of batteries dropped off. Comparative tests would be run and unicorns and gremlins would dissolve in the mist. Those folks knew I could give a **** about politik and that my tolerance for spiels was 0.00%

I can only hope "this" reply has made an impression. Cause I'm getting a little weary playing the part of an endless loop.

With power pole convenience who gives a **** how many hours recharging takes. Maintain the protocol for AGM minimum charging tolerance.

When a generator starts up it's a whole new ball game.

Read and listen to the genuine experts of the battery industry: TROJAN, ROLLS & SURRETTE, CONCORDE. If other manufacturer's data agrees with these folks - good on them.

It's when a bicycle manufacturer insists on 11.366 MPH for ultimate mechanical lifespan is when my eyebrows rise and my upper lip curls back.

My single 100AH AGM batt is not in the 5er where I could easily run this test using the Trimetric.

As far as faster charging, its spec says charge at 27 amps, so that is no advantage over a flooded battery in that regard. It is not a Lifeline!

Charge Method (Constant Voltage)
Cycle Use (Repeating Use)
Initial Current 27 A or similar
Control voltage 14.5 - 14.9
Float Use (Control Voltage) 13.6 - 13.8

It could well be that it would still recharge faster than a 100AH Wet using a 27% charge rate just from holding the 27 amps to a higher SOC than the Wet. Don't know. Huge PITA to haul it out of the TC and set up a trial set-up in the 5er. :(

It was PT's question, but when he first asked it, I suggested he run his own darn test since he has all the necessary gear to do that. No such luck! Oh well, he is owed something for looking up a bunch of stuff over the years. :) But not to the extent of hauling out my AGM from the TC and all that. Sorry! :)

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.

All of this is why I love that I now have a meter that is an ampHr counter, not just volt meter and amps flow
I do wish it was also DC kWH counter
Yesterday T-Day, we stated the day down 150 amp hrs 78.x percent SOC
Solar only returned 82.13 amp hrs aka 1089.1 watt hrs
Minimal generator for breakfast etc.. Dinner from Boston Market
So
This morning charge at 65 SOC, down 235 amp hrs

Generator has been running for 65 minutes
Started at 58 amps now at 48 amps voltage is reading 13.68 (the pd was doing 65 amps, 7 amps overhead loads)
And 50 amp hrs has been returned to the bank , 185 more amp hrs to go
Have to shut down and do some errands
Will need to attach the adjustable power max to the batteries when we get back
This is the lowest I've brought these batteries down

MEXICOWANDERER wrote:
To arrive at true quiescient voltage connect to 3-1/2 digit DMM when there is no movement upward or downward in the hundreths column for two minutes the starting voltage has stabilized.

Again I say total time to traverse 50% - 100% state of charge is significantly quicker in an AGM battery. Period. No ambiguities. Skewing of data happens via methedology not physics. Charge acceptance is higher at 50% through 99%. Verify static using impedence comparisons.

Wet batteries demand 14.8 for shortest charge time. The Lifeline recommendation is 14.4 all decided at normal 25c cell temperature.

Charge resistance increases in a flooded battery as fill passes 70%. You need to compare I curves at recommended constant E not the reverse.

Mex, that is clear, thanks.

The problem is though, that we are using "current limited" chargers, so it doesn't matter if the battery could accept more amps, the amps number is fixed at that level so it is not a variable for this exercise.

PT wants to know if the lower R of an AGM, which ought to mean it will accept more amps at a higher SOC, but at the same voltage, will keep the full amps flowing until that higher SOC is reached, which will make for a faster recharge than if it had started tapering earlier.

So far we have one test that shows it will and one that shows it is the same.

To arrive at true quiescient voltage connect to 3-1/2 digit DMM when there is no movement upward or downward in the hundreths column for two minutes the starting voltage has stabilized.

Again I say total time to traverse 50% - 100% state of charge is significantly quicker in an AGM battery. Period. No ambiguities. Skewing of data happens via methedology not physics. Charge acceptance is higher at 50% through 99%. Verify static using impedence comparisons.

Wet batteries demand 14.8 for shortest charge time. The Lifeline recommendation is 14.4 all decided at normal 25c cell temperature.

Charge resistance increases in a flooded battery as fill passes 70%. You need to compare I curves at recommended constant E not the reverse.

Finish off at 80% SOC by impressing 20% of rated ampere hpur capacity in the form of I across both batteries. What do you see? This is a rude introduction into the field of charge rejection or reluctance.

Yes fooling woth the speedometer can allow one car to get there faster :)