PD or Iota for my upgrade?

BFL13 wrote:
Iota converters have their 14.8 but they say that is to get the batts to 14.6 before the Iota drops to 14.2 for the Iota Vabs.

I don't know much about the Iota charge algorithm, but it would seem very odd to me if they drop to 14.2 at the start of the absorption stage. Usually absorption is constant voltage.

The battery voltage will eventually be very close to converter voltage once batteries are full, but I meant that if you want battery voltage to be at 14.8 from the beginning of the Absorption Stage, then converter Vabs needs to be higher than 14.8.

Optimally, you would use a charger with a remote voltage sensor at the battery and stay in bulk until you reached 14.8 (or whatever the battery mfg recommended)at the battery. Using fat short cables is how we simulate that without having a remote voltage sensor.

It sounds like you are saying Iota tries to solve this issue by charging at 14.8 (at the charger = less at the battery), then dropping the voltage as it ends the bulk charge and goes into absorption, but I'm not sure how it would detect this point.

I an unclear if Trojan wants that or just for the batts to reach 14.8 by the time they are full and then go to Float.

They expect to charge to 14.8v at the battery each day - with either short/fat cables or a remote voltage sensor. Once that voltage is achieved at the battery (temp compensated), it is supposed to be held until current drops to the recommended level.

I use short fat cables converter-battery and you can see the spread between converter and battery voltages during Bulk and then during Absorption in those ugly graphs. I got the same with the Paramode converter I had. So I don't think it is some sort of wiring issue why there is such a wide spread in the voltages, but anything is possible in this business :)

Hmmmm. I need to look at your graphs more closely. If the cables are short and fat, there should be minimal voltage drop, unless the connectors are causing trouble.