RV Voltages too high while charging
I have a problem and have been wrapping my head around this for a few days. I have four 100w Solar panels, and a Morningstar RJ-45 programmable charge controller wired to batteries. I have Four In...
Forum Discussion
"One can sit around and argue ideal voltages all day long, but the best value for each battery will be different"
Convince a 5% or 2.75% antimony battery of that...any difference will be insignificant to the point of being ludicrous.
Different alloys, hyridization or extremely different plate construction (automotive versus extremely dense industrial) are valid reasons to adjust absorbsion voltage SLIGHTLY. Perhaps a .4 volt total range.
TIME SPENT AT ABSORBSION VOLTAGE LIMIT is only 500-times as important as determining where in the .4 of a volt absorbion voltage band the battery must spend for most efficient rapid charging.
Like the Chambers Brothers screamed T I M E
Alters the formula
And I'll clue you that T I M E has more of a real effect on voltage than voltage does on time.
So WHY did I pick 14.8 volts as an optimum voltage potential at 20c?
Around 500 to a thousand trial and errors, using exact time, kWh and .1 of a gram weight scales to measure water loss. And a hydrometer, and autopsying sediment chambers of car jar, Golf car, and L-16 batteries. Damned tough to try arguing past reality.
For badly poisoned batteries, reduce maximum voltage to 14.4 and time spent there accordingly. Usually when that much antimony transfers the battery is obviously objectionably depleted capacity wise.
I did not invent electro-chemical physics. I am a slave to it just like everyone else.
But when I tore down batteries with X-amount of kWh activity spent with say a 15.1 volt absorbsion value limit and found 3-times the plate shed in the sediment chamber which agreed with 80% lifespan compared to same lot batteries with a 14.8 volt absorbsion limit, it tends to make an impression.
This fact is EXACTLY where the boys in the battery OEM labs did NOT spend time and find out facts versus hyperbole. Conjecture and assumption are poor substitutes for evidence and facts gathering.
Chemistry is weird science. TIME enters the picture. Absolutely nothing substitutes for time when chemistry and electricity reach optimum levels. Reach the optimum electro level FIRST then determine the time element. Too small a voltage potential molests the time level beyond usefulness. Too great a voltage potential molests the plates/electrolyte (needlessly) themselves.
Convince a 5% or 2.75% antimony battery of that...any difference will be insignificant to the point of being ludicrous.
Different alloys, hyridization or extremely different plate construction (automotive versus extremely dense industrial) are valid reasons to adjust absorbsion voltage SLIGHTLY. Perhaps a .4 volt total range.
TIME SPENT AT ABSORBSION VOLTAGE LIMIT is only 500-times as important as determining where in the .4 of a volt absorbion voltage band the battery must spend for most efficient rapid charging.
Like the Chambers Brothers screamed T I M E
Alters the formula
And I'll clue you that T I M E has more of a real effect on voltage than voltage does on time.
So WHY did I pick 14.8 volts as an optimum voltage potential at 20c?
Around 500 to a thousand trial and errors, using exact time, kWh and .1 of a gram weight scales to measure water loss. And a hydrometer, and autopsying sediment chambers of car jar, Golf car, and L-16 batteries. Damned tough to try arguing past reality.
For badly poisoned batteries, reduce maximum voltage to 14.4 and time spent there accordingly. Usually when that much antimony transfers the battery is obviously objectionably depleted capacity wise.
I did not invent electro-chemical physics. I am a slave to it just like everyone else.
But when I tore down batteries with X-amount of kWh activity spent with say a 15.1 volt absorbsion value limit and found 3-times the plate shed in the sediment chamber which agreed with 80% lifespan compared to same lot batteries with a 14.8 volt absorbsion limit, it tends to make an impression.
This fact is EXACTLY where the boys in the battery OEM labs did NOT spend time and find out facts versus hyperbole. Conjecture and assumption are poor substitutes for evidence and facts gathering.
Chemistry is weird science. TIME enters the picture. Absolutely nothing substitutes for time when chemistry and electricity reach optimum levels. Reach the optimum electro level FIRST then determine the time element. Too small a voltage potential molests the time level beyond usefulness. Too great a voltage potential molests the plates/electrolyte (needlessly) themselves.
