Paralleling 3 batteries in a balanced setup
Would like to open a discussion on paralleling 3 batteries in a balanced method. There seems to be only one option that is mentioned on the forum. I have suggested a second method that may be easier i...
Forum Discussion
Bumpyroad wrote:
“I thought that the "best" would be to hook all +s to a large buss bar with as short a cable as possible of equal lengths and do the same for the -s. your first diagram seems to mimic that.”
First diagram does mimic that. It is balanced. I'm saying that the second diagram is also balanced.
Bumpyroad wrote:
“don't know what advantage your second diagram gives other than makes it look more complex.”
12thgenusa wrote:
“If one were to assume you could wire as in method 2 with equal length wire, what would be the reason for doing so over the much simpler method 1?”
piantuna wrote:
“Even if the second way were balanced what would be the benefit?”
smkettner wrote:
“^^^ and no mention of bus bar. Just attach at each end of the stack.”
And smkettner wins the gold star! Diagram 2 really is simpler to implement.
With diagram 1 you need a connection point for all the cables from the + battery outputs and a connection point for all the – battery outputs. These connections are sometimes done using bus bar, not so easy to implement.
With diagram 2 you wire them as doughere writes:
“Jumper the 3 pos together (one to the next to the next), jumper the 3 neg together (one to the next to the next). Take pos from one end of string, take neg from opposite end of string.” This is the most common way to wire them. However they are not balanced (if you are into balanced wiring). To balance the wiring all that is need is to add another cable of equal length and size across the cable already there from battery one to battery two + connections. Also another cable from battery two to battery three negative connection. You can use the same bolts so there are no more connections needed to balance three batteries.
VintageRacer – I don't agree with your analysis. You may be correct, that is why I started this thread, to get feedback and discuss it.
wa8yxm wrote:
“-GC2+-GC2+ = 3 group 24 in parallel
That said, Balancing is a tad over rated”
Agreed balancing is over rated! But if you want balance what if you have six GC2 batteries?
hershey wrote:
“Is there really a "real world" need to go to such an extreme to balance the setup?”
I don't think so but a lot of others do so I'm trying to make it easier.
MEXICOWANDER wrote:
“Of course with the slightest bit of infintesimal corrosion all this theory turns to mouse-milk.”
One star for that, it is true. Could have been two stars if you mentioned that is a problem no matter what method you use to connect batteries.
I'm disappointed that with your experience and knowledge that you choose not to give a more useful critique.
Still need more useful feedback on method 1 vs method 2.
“I thought that the "best" would be to hook all +s to a large buss bar with as short a cable as possible of equal lengths and do the same for the -s. your first diagram seems to mimic that.”
First diagram does mimic that. It is balanced. I'm saying that the second diagram is also balanced.
Bumpyroad wrote:
“don't know what advantage your second diagram gives other than makes it look more complex.”
12thgenusa wrote:
“If one were to assume you could wire as in method 2 with equal length wire, what would be the reason for doing so over the much simpler method 1?”
piantuna wrote:
“Even if the second way were balanced what would be the benefit?”
smkettner wrote:
“^^^ and no mention of bus bar. Just attach at each end of the stack.”
And smkettner wins the gold star! Diagram 2 really is simpler to implement.
With diagram 1 you need a connection point for all the cables from the + battery outputs and a connection point for all the – battery outputs. These connections are sometimes done using bus bar, not so easy to implement.
With diagram 2 you wire them as doughere writes:
“Jumper the 3 pos together (one to the next to the next), jumper the 3 neg together (one to the next to the next). Take pos from one end of string, take neg from opposite end of string.” This is the most common way to wire them. However they are not balanced (if you are into balanced wiring). To balance the wiring all that is need is to add another cable of equal length and size across the cable already there from battery one to battery two + connections. Also another cable from battery two to battery three negative connection. You can use the same bolts so there are no more connections needed to balance three batteries.
VintageRacer – I don't agree with your analysis. You may be correct, that is why I started this thread, to get feedback and discuss it.
wa8yxm wrote:
“-GC2+-GC2+ = 3 group 24 in parallel
That said, Balancing is a tad over rated”
Agreed balancing is over rated! But if you want balance what if you have six GC2 batteries?
hershey wrote:
“Is there really a "real world" need to go to such an extreme to balance the setup?”
I don't think so but a lot of others do so I'm trying to make it easier.
MEXICOWANDER wrote:
“Of course with the slightest bit of infintesimal corrosion all this theory turns to mouse-milk.”
One star for that, it is true. Could have been two stars if you mentioned that is a problem no matter what method you use to connect batteries.
I'm disappointed that with your experience and knowledge that you choose not to give a more useful critique.
Still need more useful feedback on method 1 vs method 2.
