I had another battery manufacturer's BMS contactor weld shut due to an inrush current problem with another brand of inverter. That was "fun." It seems strange that this issue of cap loading hasn't been addressed. Hopefully it will be.
To clarify the SOC not drifting... Are you saying in an off-grid system you can reliably use the Sol-Ark SOC to trigger generator start and charging parameters without causing discrepancies in SOC on the battery meter itself and balancing is not a problem? If so, I'm comfortable with that I think. Jason On Sun, Jan 31, 2021, 3:45 PM Jeff Clearwater <[email protected]> wrote: > Hey Jason, > > I've installed a few systems now using Fortress eVaults. I like them as > they are a nice 18.5 KW increment and the BMS seems hardy - nice interface > screen showing SOC on each battery. > > However, call Fortress and discuss the status of their closed loop > communications (and talk to Sol-Ark about it too). The tech at Fortress > told me that less than 4 eVaults the closed loop communication is more > trouble than it's worth between batteries. That appears to be because they > simply have not employed a soft-start resistor and the batteries shut down > when exposed to cap loading during inverter start-up. They said relying on > the individual battery BMSs works fine. I've found that to be true so far > - no drift in SOC from battery and Sol-Ark. > > Their eFlex system is supposed to be totally closed loop communication > between batts and with a Sol-Ark. It's a bit of a small increment for > large systems but may be worth it. > > I imagine they will offer an upgrade for eVaults or a new model soon with > full closed loop. Sol-Ark tech said they were still working with them on > that. > > Hope that helps! > > Best, > > Jeff > > Jason Szumlanski <[email protected]> > January 31, 2021 at 11:27 AM > I'm seeing a lot of pictures of LiPO battery systems and people are > mounting equipment above them like load centers, inverters with > disconnects, and other serviceable enclosures. Some of these battery > systems are 24 inches deep or more. This seems to violate NEC 110.26 > requirements for the other serviceable equipment, but the pictures are > proudly displayed as models of success. Even slender Tesla Powerwalls stick > out significantly when stacked 2 or 3 deep and would be more than 6 inches > deeper than a standard load center. Sure, the battery cabinets make great > places to rest tools while working, but does anyone else see this as > problematic? > > Jason Szumlanski > Florida Solar Design Group > > > _______________________________________________ > List sponsored by Redwood Alliance > > List Address: [email protected] > > Change listserver email address & settings: > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org > > There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the > other: > https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ > http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org > > List rules & etiquette: > http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm > > Check out or update participant bios: > http://www.members.re-wrenches.org > > >
_______________________________________________ List sponsored by Redwood Alliance List Address: [email protected] Change listserver email address & settings: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other: https://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/ http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules & etiquette: http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out or update participant bios: http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
