Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

That is correct, And, if this is the behavior, please send a ticket into cust...@packetflux.com with the serial number and your address and we'll arrange an exchange. I'd like to see what is causing this. On Thu, May 11, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Bill Prince wrote: > To be 100%

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

Yeah, I think the box for one of the midnight solar charge controllers contained some warning about it causing lumpy oatmeal or something similar... I can't put my hand on the sheet right now, but it was big and obvious and funny. FYI, I will be releasing a standalone product which will pull the

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

On the base unit, the - side of both DC inputs are tied together. It is designed that way, since it was designed to be powered from two positive sources. If you are connecting two -48VDC busses to the base unit by connecting 'common or return' to the + input on each, and the -48VDC bus to the -

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

I think we've determined that this particular SiteMonitor is defective. One last test we did after my post was we had all the breakers off (battery, load, panel), and when we connected battery to the SiteMonitor PWR2, all the loads fired up. This is with the load breaker still turned off.

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

[image: Inline image 1] On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 8:41 AM, <ch...@wbmfg.com> wrote: > blasphemy > > -Original Message- From: Sorin Esanu > Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 9:49 PM > To: af@afmug.com > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 &

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

blasphemy -Original Message- From: Sorin Esanu Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2017 9:49 PM To: af@afmug.com Subject: Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2 We’ve experienced this exact same behaviour last week. It seems like PWR1 and PWR2 are acting like one now

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

Yes, neg48 plant. I’ll send the requested info. Thank you! > On 10 May 2017, at 16:32, Forrest Christian (List Account) > wrote: > > If we're still selling the same version of a product, we warranty it. We > regularly replace things which are far older. I like to

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

If we're still selling the same version of a product, we warranty it. We regularly replace things which are far older. I like to see the in field failures so I can roll the lessons learned into the next generation of products. Just send an email info cust...@packetflux.com with the serial (mac

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

We’re monitoring A and B of our DC power plant. It is wired directly into the GMT fuses panel, A and B sides. This particular unit was installed over 1 year ago, close to 2 years. If your offer is still valid, let me know the procedure. Thanks! > On 10 May 2017, at 10:32, Forrest Christian

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

Can you let me know more about your setup? Is this the unit you bought in November? (In case this is something which has gone weird with a batch, and somehow not caught by our test procedures). If you've got a defective one, we'll swap it, paying shipping both ways. On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 9:49

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

Which charge controller are you using? On the base unit the following pins are tied together: PWR1 - PWR2 - One side of the switch input. The remaining pins are all reasonably isolated from each other, with varying amounts and types of isolation. For instance, PWR1+ and PWR2+ have no direct

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

We’ve experienced this exact same behaviour last week. It seems like PWR1 and PWR2 are acting like one now. We are in process of replacing all the SiteMonitor II devices with Tycon TPDIN-Monitor-WEB2, which can monitor more things and it’s a lot smarter. > On 10 May 2017, at 01:31, Bill Prince

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

lt;mailto:part15...@gmail.com>> To: "Motorola III" <af@afmug.com <mailto:af@afmug.com>> Sent: 5/9/2017 6:31:30 PM Subject: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2 I think I have a SiteMonitor II with a problem, as I always thought that the two power

Re: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

The only thing that comes to mind is a short through ground. -- Original Message -- From: "Bill Prince" <part15...@gmail.com> To: "Motorola III" <af@afmug.com> Sent: 5/9/2017 6:31:30 PM Subject: [AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & P

[AFMUG] SiteMonitor II: Independence of PWR1 & PWR2

I think I have a SiteMonitor II with a problem, as I always thought that the two power sensors (PWR1 and PWR2) were independent of each other, and should have a pretty high impedance between then. We set up a new solar site, and put our load on PWR1 and the batteries on PWR2. As soon as we hook