connecting batteries in parallel or series, myth and theory

[[email protected]]

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

| Lead by its nature is contaminated, with lead. And yes I have recycled
| tonnes of batteries as I have replaced tonnes of batteries for many
| people.

So pure lead is contaminated with lead. Now that's a weird way to think
about things. But I'm not surprised it's coming from you.


| So lets look at waynes assertion. My first set of batteries was a
| parallel string set up. Learned a lesson from that. Followed by three
| sets of second hand batteries, well, there was not the cash to do
| better at the time. Big crime according to wayne. Still they got me
| through to where I could buy a single string of batteries at the
| correct Ah capacity. Listen to wayne and you too can do what I did.

All this proves is that you are having better luck with a single string.
But based on your apparent knowledge, it is all about luck. You didn't
try any of the known methods to deal with issues involving two parallel
strings?

 

[[email protected]]

| Equalization should be done based on the hydrometer readings
| of your cells being out of whack. As a scheduled activity most
| advice I've seen suggests once every six months. These types of
| routine equalization only last 1-3hrs. Any time you are so severely
| overvolting the batteries you NEED to be closely monitoring the
| batteries, especially the temperatures, and MUST suspend charging
| until they return to normal temperatures, before continuing the
| equalization. (The equalization process stresses and shortens the
| lifespan of a battery, just not nearly as much as allowing the sulfide
| buildup.)

I'd be interested in what effect would come of more frequent, but short term,
charging pulses at an equalization level, done only when the batteries are
topped off at 100%. Instead of 1-3 hours, maybe a couple minutes, then wait
an hour, then two more minutes, and repeat this maybe a couple times each
day when there has been some recent period of less than 100% charge.

I'm considering what I might do to automate the whole system. Part of that
is what I might be able to do to have the computer measure the batteries for
the specific gravity and temperature, as well as the usual voltage between
charge pulses, and the current during a charge pulse.


| You should never have a battery so badly sulfated that you need
| to try any equalization over a couple hours. But if someone gave
| you some (from their neglected system), you could try a long term
| equalization, monitoring closely and suspending charging as
| required ( I would rig a thermal shutdown and restart, and do the
| job outside the house or garage, in a shed.) These "recovered"
| batteries would have a shortened lifespan as a result of the
| process, but if you got them for free or cheap enough, it might be
| worth the trouble.

Or maybe short pulses followed by a cooling rest, repeated some number of times.

 

[[email protected]]

| If the situation becomes chronic then you need to
| redesign your setup. ( This might involve adding
| storage capacity and could well involve adding a
| matching parallel string to your existing setup, it
| would not mean any disaster is more likely. )

What about, with 2 battery strings/banks, flipping the charge between them
so neither spends too much time below 100%? Of course one problem with this
is that it means a lot of cycles on both. That and since the process would
not be 100% efficient, you'd be driving the discharge level further down, or
need to supplement with some external power. What I am thinking, though, is
if your external power level would take a long time to bring a bank up to 100%,
maybe it would be of benefit for a bank that has been low for a while to drive
it back to 100% using the other bank for now (hoping that maybe full external
power will be back up higher once the 2nd bank needs to get recharged).

If linear accumulation of time discharged is the issue, as opposed to how long
each discharge period is, then this would not work.

 

[[email protected]]

In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
| On Aug 19, 5:25 pm, [email protected] wrote:
|> In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
|>
|> | Lead by its nature is contaminated, with lead. And yes I have recycled
|> | tonnes of batteries as I have replaced tonnes of batteries for many
|> | people.
|>
|> So pure lead is contaminated with lead. Now that's a weird way to think
|> about things. But I'm not surprised it's coming from you.
|
| Are you really that thick? Lead is a serious contaminant in the
| environment. Surprised you don't know that.

But in the contex of a lead plate, it is not a contaminate. Lead is
what is supposed to be there.


|> | So lets look at waynes assertion. My first set of batteries was a
|> | parallel string set up. Learned a lesson from that. Followed by three
|> | sets of second hand batteries, well, there was not the cash to do
|> | better at the time. Big crime according to wayne. Still they got me
|> | through to where I could buy a single string of batteries at the
|> | correct Ah capacity. Listen to wayne and you too can do what I did.
|>
|> All this proves is that you are having better luck with a single string.
|> But based on your apparent knowledge, it is all about luck. You didn't
|> try any of the known methods to deal with issues involving two parallel
|> strings?
|
| Nonsense. It proves that I am right about parallel strings. I also
| tried most of the geewizzery that every one seems to thing is going to
| solve the inherent problems of parallel strings of batteries for home
| power systems.

All it proves is you did parallel strings the wrong way N-1 times.

 

[[email protected]]

On Aug 18, 11:48 pm, [email protected] wrote:
//thesolar.biz/Battery_charging_article.htm[/url]

Notice the chart with the traditional three stage charging
table.
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.

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?

Poetic license.

More like a Freudian slip.

Your loads, time run, watt hours are what exactly?

A more appropriate question would be "what are your controller
settings?". 28.8 bulk and absorption, 1 hour absorption (usually lasts
longer due to interruptions by loads), and 27.2 float. See how easy
that is? Apparently it's harder for quacks who are embarrassed by what
their tinkering reveals.

You see, after ten+ years you are behind the game.

I already get the bulk of my home energy needs from sun and wind, and
have been doing so since day one. After a couple decades, you're still
getting about 20X less. How much longer before you catch up? In
particular, when do you plan to modify your infamous deezine so that
loads over a few hundred watts, such as "cloths washing", don't
require hiking out to the "workshop" to start a generator? And when
can we expect to hear that you've stopped burning propane for
refrigeration and water heating? Or is that stuff strictly for those
who are "behind the game"?

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

| The design of sophisticated micro-processor controlled
| charge controllers/chargers is a little beyond my pay
| grade. Before attempting to create your own you might
| thoroughly research what is available, there may be one that
| is already operating in a similar manner. (If not you can
| risk your own battery bank for a year or two testing that
| idea out, then post here with your results. )

Unfortunately, when it comes to the firmware controls, it's hard to get real
information to make judgements. Most people don't know programming and so
much accept whatever the manufacturer decides to put in there. That means
for people like me, the information I want (the source code of the firmware)
isn't going to be available.

 

[[email protected]]

I also
tried most of the geewizzery that every one seems to thing is going to
solve the inherent problems of parallel strings of batteries for home
power systems.

Good. Please describe all of this "geewizzery". Should be a comedy
goldmine.

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

| If you had it setup to provide some redundancy, that might
| make some sense, I don't know. Why don't you just get a
| good stable setup working, before trying to design something
| new?

You mean, just do what someone else does, the way they do it, first, and
see if that succeeds or fails?


| For an initial design you would be sizing for a single
| string with the highest capacity cells you can afford. The
| addition of a parallel string for greater capacity, is just an
| affordable way to increase your capacity, when it turns out
| that your initial capacity wasn't enough. If you were rolling
| in dough, you could totally replace your existing battery bank
| and inverter, with a new larger capacity single string. There
| is no need to avoid the parallel string in that situation, as long
| as good normal maintenance practices are followed.

The finances of the future are not predictable. I need to be flexible.

 

[[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

He's very clear about that, in one of previous battery wisdumb
demonstrations, he asserted that "When charging, the gas given off is
Hydogen Sulphide"
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/1c82f8d7690f85db

and where this gas ends up?

Sounds like a straight line.

| "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.

I can't resist 2 straight lines in a row.... the lead may have gone to
his head.

Wayne

 

[[email protected]]

Batteries can and
will give off Hydrogen Sulphide under high charge rates.

The quote is clear - the struckcheral editar wrote that "the" gas is
"hydogen" sulphide. How dare you dispute an expirt on both riting and
baterys!

Wayne

 

[krw]

| The design of sophisticated micro-processor controlled
| charge controllers/chargers is a little beyond my pay
| grade. Before attempting to create your own you might
| thoroughly research what is available, there may be one that
| is already operating in a similar manner. (If not you can
| risk your own battery bank for a year or two testing that
| idea out, then post here with your results. )

Unfortunately, when it comes to the firmware controls, it's hard to get real
information to make judgements. Most people don't know programming and so
much accept whatever the manufacturer decides to put in there. That means
for people like me, the information I want (the source code of the firmware)
isn't going to be available.

Do you demand circuit diagrams for every IC you use too? GL1?
Doping profiles? In this case there is very little difference
between "hardware" and "firmware".

 

[[email protected]]

In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
| On Aug 20, 12:59 am, [email protected] wrote:
|> In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
|>
|> | On Aug 19, 5:25 pm, [email protected] wrote:
|> |> In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
|> |>
|> |> | Lead by its nature is contaminated, with lead. And yes I have recycled
|> |> | tonnes of batteries as I have replaced tonnes of batteries for many
|> |> | people.
|> |>
|> |> So pure lead is contaminated with lead. Now that's a weird way to think
|> |> about things. But I'm not surprised it's coming from you.
|> |
|> | Are you really that thick? Lead is a serious contaminant in the
|> | environment. Surprised you don't know that.
|>
|> But in the contex of a lead plate, it is not a contaminate. Lead is
|> what is supposed to be there.
|
| Ah but the context as stated by you was recycling when you said;
|
| "He should recycle his leftover lead, if it's not too terribly
| contaminated.
| Sounds like he probably has a lot of it. "
|
| In the context of recycling "LEAD" is the contaminate.

No. In that context, anything NOT lead, in the lead, contaminates the lead,
and would have to be removed before recycling the lead into making new lead
plates for new batteries ... not considering the trace elements generally
added to the plates for various reasons.

What do you think happens to the old battery when you trade in your bad car
battery to buy a new one? Do you think they're just taking it off your hands
so you don't have a dead weight laying around? No. They send it to a battery
recycler, or a battery manufacturer, that pays for them by weight, which is
an approximation to how much lead they can recover from them for whatever the
purpose is.


|> |> | So lets look at waynes assertion. My first set of batteries was a
|> |> | parallel string set up. Learned a lesson from that. Followed by three
|> |> | sets of second hand batteries, well, there was not the cash to do
|> |> | better at the time. Big crime according to wayne. Still they got me
|> |> | through to where I could buy a single string of batteries at the
|> |> | correct Ah capacity. Listen to wayne and you too can do what I did.
|> |>
|> |> All this proves is that you are having better luck with a single string.
|> |> But based on your apparent knowledge, it is all about luck. You didn't
|> |> try any of the known methods to deal with issues involving two parallel
|> |> strings?
|> |
|> | Nonsense. It proves that I am right about parallel strings. I also
|> | tried most of the geewizzery that every one seems to thing is going to
|> | solve the inherent problems of parallel strings of batteries for home
|> | power systems.
|>
|> All it proves is you did parallel strings the wrong way N-1 times.
|
| No, it means that you will learn an expensive lesson. You have been
| fishing for someone to tell you what you want to hear and found wayne.

I have found out there are ways to mitigate the issues of parallel batteries
and strings. Apparently you never did; not even recently.

 

[[email protected]]

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

|> >But would he know exactly what gas these bubble contain
|>
|> He's very clear about that, in one of previous battery wisdumb
|> demonstrations, he asserted that "When charging, the gas given off is
|> Hydogen Sulphide"http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/1c82f8d7690...
|
| True, despite your usual quoting out of context. Batteries can and
| will give off Hydrogen Sulphide under high charge rates.

How high a charge rate are you talking about? Specific numbers, please.

 

[[email protected]]

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

|> >> Batteries can and
|> >>will give off Hydrogen Sulphide under high charge rates.
|>
|> > The quote is clear - the struckcheral editar wrote that "the" gas is
|> > "hydogen" sulphide. How dare you dispute an expirt on both riting and
|> > baterys!
|>
|> > Wayne
|>
|> Looking at an internal gas chart there is no H2S evolved in an overcharge
|> situation or a heavy discharge situation. There is O, H, CO2 and a dab of N
|> from the cell but no H2S.
|>
|> http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0101/Nelson-0101.html
|>
|> et alia
|>
|> --
|>
|> Don Thompson
|>
|> Stolen from Dan: "Just thinking, besides, I watched 2 dogs mating once,
|> and that makes me an expert. "
|>
|> There is nothing more frightening than active ignorance.
|> ~Goethe
|>
|> It is a worthy thing to fight for one's freedom;
|> it is another sight finer to fight for another man's.
|> ~Mark Twain
|
| Just more of waynes dodgy science. If you can smell rotten eggs then
| you have hydrogen sulphide.

Searching the internet for cases where lead-acid batteries can give off
hydrogen sulfide, I find virtually nothing. There's more about using
H2S for recycling the chemistry of a battery.

I don't know all the chemistry possible. Given that there is H's and S's in
the broth, getting H2S is not out of the question. But how? Electrolysis
would give just H and O. Maybe an arc is needed to get H2S. I guess if you
get an arc between plates, then you do have a very high rate of "charge".

The question to answer, then, is why/how does H2S get produced instead of
just H and O, and under what exact chemical condition?

 

[[email protected]]

| If you are replying to my post, I would appreciate it if
| you wouldn't snip all of my reply. If you meant to be
| replying to the same post I was, be more careful next
| time.

He was replying to my reply to your post. I snip things. The reason for
quoting is NOT to make extra copies of someone else's post available.
Instead, quoting is to "finger point" at the part of the post I am writing
about specifically. I tend to try to leave about a paragraph so some
amount of context is retained. But if someone wants to see the entire
post I am replying to, they need to access that post itself.

 

[[email protected]]

In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
| On Aug 20, 1:04 am, [email protected] wrote:
|>
|> | If you had it setup to provide some redundancy, that might
|> | make some sense, I don't know. Why don't you just get a
|> | good stable setup working, before trying to design something
|> | new?
|>
|> You mean, just do what someone else does, the way they do it, first, and
|> see if that succeeds or fails?
|
| For fucks sake, that is exactly what you are setting out to do.

Please keep the language clean. The computers here can be accessed by
kids as young as 6. I block porn. Do I need to start blocking you, too?

No, actually I'm not setting out to simply mimic what someone else does.
I had something in mind that no one has apparent ever done before, but
with some good information I've found here (not what you've given, as
your info just chalks up one more vote against paralleling anything),
I've modified by ideas. I haven't given out what these ideas are, yet.
I might. Or I might not. It will be a new thread if I do.

 

[[email protected]]

| No, I mean that it's best to build a known practical
| design, before attempting to create a modification
| to that design. The point being that, done properly,
| it will work/succeed. It is only your modification
| where there is a need to "see if that succeeds or
| fails". (See below)
|
| I'm beginning to get the impression that you actually
| have no intention of building a viable system, and that
| this is a purely "intellectual" endeavor, for your personal
| entertainment.

The impression is off. I intend to be a viable system. But I do intent to
jump directly to a different design (which has already changed as a result
of info others have posted in this thread).


| If that's the case: then the ideas you presented in your
| last post display a great lack of understanding, of the
| basic physics involved, and can't work.

If something I suggest can't work, I'd like to know which that is, and to the
extent possible, why. The "why" part might lead to a variation of design that
perhaps could work. There are things I still don't know about batteries. But
based on the experience reports here, it seems clear that if I install some
battery system, and replace it a few times, and end up with a massive single
cell string system, I still won't know anything about any of this. So just
building and having and running a conventional system is not a very good way
to learn. My approach is to learn as much of the science as I can, then plan
my approach to experiments, and actually try things.

 

[Herbert John \Jackie\ Gleason]

Please keep the language clean. The computers here can be accessed by
kids as young as 6. I block porn. Do I need to start blocking you, too?

If retarded parents are letting their kids onto Usenet, then the kid and
the parent deserve every fucking thing they get for subjecting children
to adult forums where folks do things such as the use of profanity.

Block away, you fucking idiot. You'd be better off learning how to
block the kids from media they have no business in at that age.

That IS why they call it parentage. YOU are supposed to regulate what
they get access to, not regulate one group or member of the group because
you are too goddamned lazy to block the kid from access completely.

There are 43,000 groups, and you actually think that your individual
filter is going to keep a kid from seeing cussing on Usenet.

I had you pegged as being a bit smarter than that.

 

[[email protected]]

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

|> | In the context of recycling "LEAD" is the contaminate.
|>
|> No. In that context, anything NOT lead, in the lead, contaminates the lead,
|> and would have to be removed before recycling the lead into making new lead
|> plates for new batteries ... not considering the trace elements generally
|> added to the plates for various reasons.
|>
|> What do you think happens to the old battery when you trade in your bad car
|> battery to buy a new one? Do you think they're just taking it off your hands
|> so you don't have a dead weight laying around? No. They send it to a battery
|> recycler, or a battery manufacturer, that pays for them by weight, which is
|> an approximation to how much lead they can recover from them for whatever the
|> purpose is.
|
| Again you have demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge.

One area I do have a lack of knowledge about is just what kind of idiocy
you might come up with next. But in this case you clearly have not idea
what it is that might contaminate lead.


|> |> |> | So lets look at waynes assertion. My first set of batteries was a
|> |> |> | parallel string set up. Learned a lesson from that. Followed by three
|> |> |> | sets of second hand batteries, well, there was not the cash to do
|> |> |> | better at the time. Big crime according to wayne. Still they got me
|> |> |> | through to where I could buy a single string of batteries at the
|> |> |> | correct Ah capacity. Listen to wayne and you too can do what I did.
|> |> |>
|> |> |> All this proves is that you are having better luck with a single string.
|> |> |> But based on your apparent knowledge, it is all about luck. You didn't
|> |> |> try any of the known methods to deal with issues involving two parallel
|> |> |> strings?
|> |> |
|> |> | Nonsense. It proves that I am right about parallel strings. I also
|> |> | tried most of the geewizzery that every one seems to thing is going to
|> |> | solve the inherent problems of parallel strings of batteries for home
|> |> | power systems.
|> |>
|> |> All it proves is you did parallel strings the wrong way N-1 times.
|> |
|> | No, it means that you will learn an expensive lesson. You have been
|> | fishing for someone to tell you what you want to hear and found wayne.
|>
|> I have found out there are ways to mitigate the issues of parallel batteries
|> and strings. Apparently you never did; not even recently.
|
| Really! The first and foremost method is to use a single string of the
| correct Ah rating.

And of course you will always be saying this over and over and never back
it up with specific scientific reasoning.


| Now you can tell us your new discoveries. Of course they won't be new,
| they won't be yours and they won't be effective in cost or
| application.

I don't have any new discoveries. What makes you think that?


| Been there, done it.

How many different ways did you connect up batteries in parallel?
How many different ways are there to connect batteries in parallel?

 

[[email protected]]

In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
| On Aug 20, 4:30 pm, [email protected] wrote:
|> In alt.engineering.electrical [email protected] wrote:
|>
|> |> >> Batteries can and
|> |> >>will give off Hydrogen Sulphide under high charge rates.
|> |>
|> |> > The quote is clear - the struckcheral editar wrote that "the" gas is
|> |> > "hydogen" sulphide. How dare you dispute an expirt on both riting and
|> |> > baterys!
|> |>
|> |> > Wayne
|> |>
|> |> Looking at an internal gas chart there is no H2S evolved in an overcharge
|> |> situation or a heavy discharge situation. There is O, H, CO2 and a dab of N
|> |> from the cell but no H2S.
|> |>
|> |>http://www.tms.org/pubs/journals/JOM/0101/Nelson-0101.html
|> |>
|> |> et alia
|> |>
|> |> --
|> |>
|> |> Don Thompson
|> |>
|> |> Stolen from Dan: "Just thinking, besides, I watched 2 dogs mating once,
|> |> and that makes me an expert. "
|> |>
|> |> There is nothing more frightening than active ignorance.
|> |> ~Goethe
|> |>
|> |> It is a worthy thing to fight for one's freedom;
|> |> it is another sight finer to fight for another man's.
|> |> ~Mark Twain
|> |
|> | Just more of waynes dodgy science. If you can smell rotten eggs then
|> | you have hydrogen sulphide.
|>
|> Searching the internet for cases where lead-acid batteries can give off
|> hydrogen sulfide, I find virtually nothing. There's more about using
|> H2S for recycling the chemistry of a battery.
|>
|> I don't know all the chemistry possible. Given that there is H's and S's in
|> the broth, getting H2S is not out of the question. But how? Electrolysis
|> would give just H and O. Maybe an arc is needed to get H2S. I guess if you
|> get an arc between plates, then you do have a very high rate of "charge".
|>
|> The question to answer, then, is why/how does H2S get produced instead of
|> just H and O, and under what exact chemical condition?
|
| Search
|
| Intelec2001.pdf

By that name, I found such a paper. The conclusion seems to be that H2S
is produced on the negative terminal during charging or overcharging. The
concentration during float is on the order of 1 ppm. H2S is then absorbed
back on the positive terminal maintaining the low concentration. Voltage
levels higher than float voltage apparently can cause the H2S to outgas at
a faster rate than it can be absorbed. The experiments did not study the
effect of electrolyte temperature, so it is still possible for temperature
to be an influencing factor. These levels do not pose a human toxic hazard
but can be a problem for certain metals in the escaping gas.

So why didn't _you_ just summarize this to explain your statement, and then
point at the paper to support the summary? I never said H2S could not be a
product of this chemistry. Even before reading this paper it was obvious to
me that it could as the elements could balance out to do it. But two big
questions were under what conditions, and why was it not normally produced.
The answer is that it is reabsorbed. But reaction rates are critical and
are effected by voltage.