connecting batteries in parallel or series, myth and theory

[krw]

DIAC = DiIode for Alternating Current

The manufacturer calls it a diode:

http://www.st.com/stonline/products/literature/ds/7488/db3.pdf

Nah, I am counting connection points to the device. They may, or may not
have leads at the connection point - many rectifiers (and many other
diodes ) do not.

So, a resistor is a diode? A capicator?

 

[Palindrome]

So, a resistor is a diode? A capicator?

Rather like ears, what is between the two of them is rather important
too.

 

[Palindrome]

It still is NOT a diode in the sense that you are defining
a diode.


You aren't making sense.

Your lack of understanding is your problem, not mine.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

That simply is not true. In fact, "signal diodes" are
often used as rectifiers.

Yes. Many a power supply oscillator front end has simple 1N4001 signal
diodes in them.

 

[krw]

Rather like ears, what is between the two of them is rather important
too.

Ok, I gotta ask... What is *your* definition of "electrode"?

 

[Palindrome]

Ok, I gotta ask... What is *your* definition of "electrode"?

Let's see if we can agree on something. How about, "A diode is not a
rectifier, by definition"? and "All diodes are not rectifiers"? Which
was the whole point of this little diversion.

 

[Archimedes' Lever]

Your lack of understanding is your problem, not mine.

Well, it is obvious to me what is between all the ears here. This
thread is hilarious.

I am with Floyd, as usual.

Rectification is an action... a process... the result of an event
which is the result of an action within a discreet device element in a
circuit. It is the specific function of that device which allows it to
be described as a rectifier, so "rectifiers" are usually larger, higher
power elements utilized in power sections of circuits or power supplies
themselves. When we perform rectification in a small signal circuit, we
do not always refer to that particular implementation as "rectification",
even though it likely has to be doing just that.

Rectification is also needed in the small signal realm, and the uses of
this action therein has grown quite diverse, as has the descriptive terms
used for the devices and their actions within a circuit. Look at a "pin
diode" for example.

A diode, by specific definition at the time it was coined, was a two
pole device (aside from heaters) which had an action within a circuit
known as rectification. That was the tube days. Today's "diode" is
typically a single PN junction of doped semi-conductor material in a
package with two leads, the function of which is STILL rectification.

 

[Palindrome]

So counting connections isn't a way to define a diode.

And a 5-layer device with two leads isn't a diode, even if
it acts like one in some ways and even if they name it with
a phrase that includes the word diode.

Yer lerning.

I certainly am. A DIAC isn't a diode. Fine. Enjoy .. backs away
slowly, smiling reassuringly.

 

[Palindrome]

Well, it is obvious to me what is between all the ears here. This
thread is hilarious.

I am with Floyd, as usual.

Rectification is an action... a process... the result of an event
which is the result of an action within a discreet device element in a
circuit. It is the specific function of that device which allows it to
be described as a rectifier, so "rectifiers" are usually larger, higher
power elements utilized in power sections of circuits or power supplies
themselves. When we perform rectification in a small signal circuit, we
do not always refer to that particular implementation as "rectification",
even though it likely has to be doing just that.

Rectification is also needed in the small signal realm, and the uses of
this action therein has grown quite diverse, as has the descriptive terms
used for the devices and their actions within a circuit. Look at a "pin
diode" for example.

A diode, by specific definition at the time it was coined, was a two
pole device (aside from heaters) which had an action within a circuit
known as rectification. That was the tube days. Today's "diode" is
typically a single PN junction of doped semi-conductor material in a
package with two leads, the function of which is STILL rectification.

It may indeed "typically" be that - but it is not exclusively that.

If you too are in the "A DIAC is not a diode". Fine. Enjoy.

 

[[email protected]]

In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
| On Aug 16, 1:44 am, [email protected] wrote:
|> In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
|>
|> | On Aug 15, 1:21 pm, [email protected] (Floyd L. Davidson) wrote:|> [email protected] wrote:
|>
|> |> >> They can do things like ensuring that one bank does not cross change another.
|> |> >> They can allow separate chargers for each bank.
|> |>
|> |> >A diode is not a rectifier.
|> |>
|> |> Why is anyone bothering to talk to you?
|> |>
|> |> And I'll point out that the above is just the worst
|> |> example, not the only one.
|> |>
|> |> --
|> |> Floyd L. Davidson <http://www.apaflo.com/floyd_davidson>
|> |> Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska) [email protected]
|> |
|> | Gee Floyd, looks like you have been taking lessons from Tweedledum. I
|> | never said;
|> |
|> |> >> They can do things like ensuring that one bank does not cross change another.
|> |> >> They can allow separate chargers for each bank.
|>
|> How _not_ saying those 2 things somehow making your other statement more
|> correct?
|>
|> Have you even considered how to wire rectifiers in series with each battery
|> string to ensure the current only flows in one direction with respect to where
|> that rectifier is connected? Wired one way, the rectifier allows the string
|> to discharge into a load at the other end of the connection (but it cannot be
|> charged from that point). Wired the other way, the rectifier allows the string
|> to be charged from a source at the other end of the connection (but it cannot
|> discharge into a load at that point).
|
| The very first battery bank I ever set up was a parallel string affair
| and I did just that. Total waste of time.

And I presume you would never, ever, do that (install a parallel string) again,
even though you don't know any of the physic behind it, simply relying on your
experience of the end results of the way you did it, without really knowing if
the problems were from the parallel aspect or the way you did it.

 

[[email protected]]

| I think another key point is how often the batteries are fully recharged as
| well. In Neon John's use of a golf cart, I would bet that he recharges the
| thing every day or so depending on how much he uses it. Recharging from
| grid power through a dedicated charger is pretty straight forward and not at
| all hard to get a full charge overnight.
|
| But a solar installation may not have quite that luxury. A partial
| discharge each day for a couple of days, followed by only a partial recharge
| might be more problematic. A couple of cloudy days, and although the
| batteries are not fully discharged, the chances are that one sunny day will
| *not* put back all the charge.

In cases of a long period of autonomy, once the energy flow is back, but you
do not know how long it will stay back, is it better to grab all you can and
charge fast, or stick to the slow charge, knowing that if the energy quits
before a full recharge, you could be discharging again from a point of not
having gotten back to full charge. Part of the question is what is the effect
on a battery/cell of sitting for some length of time at less that full charge,
even if not discharging.


| Seems that type of duty is a lot harder on a battery than even 'typical'
| golf cart usage.
|
| Unless of course you want to buy a lot more solar cells so you *can*
| recharge the battery in one sunny day ;-)

But is that wise?

I could average out what my typical sun/wind energy input is over a long period
of time, like a year, and what my usage would be, and size the PV arrays and
windmills to provide all the energy I need, plus a reserve. But that does not
size the batteries. If the batteries might need a quicker charge because the
effect of sitting for time in a low charge state is worse than a fast charge,
then I have to up the energy input size to deal with the batteries.

And of course all this is done statistically, since we cannot reliably predict
how long these periods of energy availability and unavailability will be, as
the Earth warms up and changes its weather and climate patterns around rather
significantly in some places.

 

[[email protected]]

You have no experience. Nuff said

My personal experience is getting >95% of my home energy from solar
and wind, and choosing a first set of batteries that's lasted 13 years
so far. Beyond that, I live in an area that has thousands of
off-gridders, and I take every opportunity to visit. I've probably
seen >100 off-grid installations, such as the one I mentioned above.
Some are really low-budget and many have had multiple owners. Even so,
I've never personally seen, or even heard of anyone, who's been
through as many batteries as you have. 5 sets is a record as far as I
know, and that's assuming that 5 is the real number and not another of
your prevarications. Considering that and your penchant for posting
nonsense about batteries (samples available here
http://www.citlink.net/~wmbjk/tbfduwisdumb.htm), it's a mystery why
you'd expect anyone to accept battery advice from you.

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

|> After a few days of no available solar/wind energy, I would expect the SOC
|> of a battery bank to be lower than usual (if less than a few days of no
|> available solar/wind energy is usual). And I would expect that when the
|> energy becomes available, again, it can take at least a few days to get
|> back to 100% SOC.
|>
|> So is the issue a matter of how _long_ the bank sits at below 100% SOC,
|> even
|> if it doesn't go below 50% SOC?
|
| If lead sulfate sits for enough time on the plates it will crystallize. It
| is hard for you to convert it back to spongy lead and sulfuric acid. Most of
| the time it is just lost capacity. It doesn't mater if the charge level is
| 80% or 20%. If the battery never gets close to 100% charge, and the sulfate
| isn't disturbed , it will start to crystallize. You could hold a battery
| bank on float at 90% SOC and the 10% that is locked up in sulfate will
| crystallize after a while.
|
| It you get up to 95% regularly in a cyclic application, then usually all the
| sulfate will get cycled to acid once In a while. The thickness in sulfate
| and lead build up isn't exactly even across the working surface, so at 95%
| SOC all the sulfate on any one surface is sometimes consumed during
| charging, leaving a little more on a different part of the plate. During the
| next charging cycle there may be plenty left on that part of the plate but
| spot two that had some left last time is completely sulfate free. But if you
| only get to 85% charge or lower on a cyclic application then there is
| sufficient sulfate thickness that the lowest levels of sulfate will not get
| disturbed long enough to allow it to crystallize. And that capacity is
| permanently lost.
|
| That is why you do a EQ charge once in a while to make sure you get all the
| sulfate converted to acid, down to the deepest levels, to prevent it from
| crystallizing.
|
| It doesn't mater if the bank is cycled down to 10% SOC, as long as it is
| fully recharged in time enough to prevent any deeply locked up sulfate from
| crystallizing.

This is the kind of scientific info I want to learn about.

Would a system that at least tries, and periodically could achieve (when there
are enough days of sun and wind and rain), 100% charge back on the batteries,
because it is sized to have enough energy source to do it, be good enough to
minimize the PbSO4 crystalization? How many days below 100% begins to give
you concern?

Would anything like high voltage pulses be able to break into the crystals?

 

[krw]

Let's see if we can agree on something. How about, "A diode is not a
rectifier, by definition"? and "All diodes are not rectifiers"? Which
was the whole point of this little diversion.

Give examples of diodes that are not rectifiers.

 

[[email protected]]

In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:

| The very first battery bank I ever set up was a parallel string affair
| and I did just that. Total waste of time.

And I presume you would never, ever, do that (install a parallel string) again,
even though you don't know any of the physic behind it, simply relying on your
experience of the end results of the way you did it, without really knowing if
the problems were from the parallel aspect or the way you did it.

George says that he would never use paralleled batteries again because
the practice led to failure. And yet we know from his other writings
that he's on his 5th set of batteries, and that others get longer life
out of the very thing he rails against - paralleled GC batteries.
Therefore, the failures must be due to at least some other issues.
Here are some clues in his own words: "I float my 840Ah batteries at
15 volts(PL40) This makes the batteries bubble quite well"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/0d5d8096959e852f
"I will tell you that the reason I subvert my regulators three stage
default setting..."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/ba4505d846af1553

It seems that George always knows best, and believes that the
manufacturer's recommendations don't apply to self-titled "power
consultants". Instead, he prefers to invest in a proper 3-stage
controller, but "subvert" its features. Neither does he believe in
reducing voltage for float, even though he claims that his batteries
are fully charged most days by noon. Which would mean that they spend
many hours most days "bubbling quite well" at >10% higher voltage than
recommended. Not that I take his word about anything, it's far more
likely that he's chronically short, and raised the voltage limits in
order to prevent the controller throttling supply.

As well, George believes that there's hidden capacity in some
batteries. The maker of his batteries specifies a low-voltage cut-out
of 11.5V.
http://www.batteryenergy.com.au/downloads/3.5.6.00 Suncycle Operation and Maintenance Manual.pdf
Yet recently in one his infamous deezine demonstrations, George
recommended discharging the subject batteries well below 10.8V in
order to hide his errors at applying Peukert's exponent.

All things considered, it's no surprise that Ghinius George Ghio holds
the record for most dead batteries, and the cause has little or
nothing to do with parallel strings.

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

Yep, just what my regulator does.

It was *designed* to do a proper 3-stage charge, but you "subverted"
that functionality in favor of single-stage. That was a dumb idea,
although not quite as senseless as holding the record for dead
batteries and pretending to be knowledgeable about battery
maintenance.

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

How about because I'm right. Parallel batteries in a system use for
home power is a waste of time and money.

LOL That "ignore my undeniable foolishness, believe what I claim"
position seems to be your answer for everything. Here's a clue for
you: the market for home power is in a stage of unprecedented
expansion. And yet you, the self-titled "power consultant", after
decades of trying to make a living in the trade, are still getting
more than 95% of your home energy from anything-but-solar, still need
to start a generator for even minor loads like laundry, and still need
to find another career to bungle. The joke is that there's so much
work out there that even a screw-up ought to be able to find a niche.
But it takes a true Renaissance nitwit to write a ton self-busting
foolishness into a permanent, searchable, public archive.

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
| On 17 Aug 2008 20:05:35 GMT, [email protected] wrote:
|
|>In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
|
|>| The very first battery bank I ever set up was a parallel string affair
|>| and I did just that. Total waste of time.
|>
|>And I presume you would never, ever, do that (install a parallel string) again,
|>even though you don't know any of the physic behind it, simply relying on your
|>experience of the end results of the way you did it, without really knowing if
|>the problems were from the parallel aspect or the way you did it.
|
| George says that he would never use paralleled batteries again because
| the practice led to failure. And yet we know from his other writings
| that he's on his 5th set of batteries, and that others get longer life
| out of the very thing he rails against - paralleled GC batteries.
| Therefore, the failures must be due to at least some other issues.
| Here are some clues in his own words: "I float my 840Ah batteries at
| 15 volts(PL40) This makes the batteries bubble quite well"
| http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/0d5d8096959e852f

But would he know exactly what gas these bubble contain, and where this gas
ends up?


| "I will tell you that the reason I subvert my regulators three stage
| default setting..."
| http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/ba4505d846af1553
|
| It seems that George always knows best, and believes that the
| manufacturer's recommendations don't apply to self-titled "power
| consultants". Instead, he prefers to invest in a proper 3-stage
| controller, but "subvert" its features. Neither does he believe in
| reducing voltage for float, even though he claims that his batteries
| are fully charged most days by noon. Which would mean that they spend
| many hours most days "bubbling quite well" at >10% higher voltage than
| recommended. Not that I take his word about anything, it's far more
| likely that he's chronically short, and raised the voltage limits in
| order to prevent the controller throttling supply.
|
| As well, George believes that there's hidden capacity in some
| batteries. The maker of his batteries specifies a low-voltage cut-out
| of 11.5V.
| http://www.batteryenergy.com.au/downloads/3.5.6.00 Suncycle Operation and Maintenance Manual.pdf
| Yet recently in one his infamous deezine demonstrations, George
| recommended discharging the subject batteries well below 10.8V in
| order to hide his errors at applying Peukert's exponent.
|
| All things considered, it's no surprise that Ghinius George Ghio holds
| the record for most dead batteries, and the cause has little or
| nothing to do with parallel strings.

He should recycle his leftover lead, if it's not too terribly contaminated.
Sounds like he probably has a lot of it.

 

[[email protected]]

| Also, for batteries that have become severely sulfated, I have been told by
| one of their tech support people that a prolonged equalization (as in days
| to weeks), along with careful monitoring of temperature and fluid levels,
| can often recover a severely sulfated battery. He stated he had done this
| personally.

So one would at least need some kind of redundancy system, to do this, if they
are off-grid.

 

[[email protected]]

Again you are lying. Yes I changed the parameters of my programmable
regulator.

Why would a struckcheral editar choose the word "subvert" instead of
"change" when he last described his modifications?

It's still a three stage regulator. It just does it to
different voltages.

So the float voltage is 15, and the other stages, which are normally
substantially higher, are what exactly?

Wayne