BFL13 wrote:
I don't know why you would think I was missing that if you read my post.
because you keep asking the same question over and over after several have ansered it already. either there is something your missing, or you just gaming people and stiring the **** intentionaly.
BFL13 wrote:
Yes about the charging efficiency difference. Note that varies with SOC in both cases, but perhaps in different ways. IR changes with SOC.
yes it does vary, but with the FLA it is a huge swing, with LFP it is a tiny swing and can almost be concidered non existant. this accounts for a lot of the difference right there.
BFL13 wrote:
FLA Bulk Stage lasts to a certain SOC at a particular voltage depending on the charging rate. It will go into the 90s SOC at a low rate and can start tapering at 60% SOC at a high rate. My "ugly graph" shows how that works. We have the info for a 25% charging rate close enough (AGMs almost the same as FLA)
.
I have not seen your ugly graph, it isn't in this thread. but I wonder if part of the issue is that they are using C rate charging to compare different battery types.
not once in that article did I see what the 20 hour rate was of each battery (unless I missed that) but looking at that article it shows that FLA took 4 hours to get through the first stage I think because it would only handle up to a .25C rate and wouldn't accept any more, where the LFP would accept the 0.4C rate happily and was charged to 97% in 1 hour. that to me shows that the internal resistance is a huge factor between the two batteries. My interpatation could also be wrong as this example lacks a lot of information, the battery capacitys, the charger amprage, how the chargers were set up etc.
after all it is a sales piece not a scientific study.
