Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

You may have to increase your End Amps; it has to include the value of any loads drawing while charging. This is the tricky part; making allocation for that amount.

Also, if the 2 Hours comes up first that is what shuts Absorb down. The default values I believe are 1 hour minimum and 2 hours maximum, with End Amps set at zero.

Yes it is under the advanced menu and a pretty straightforward pushing of +/- and select to change the selection and numbers.

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

northerner wrote: »

Mine are the high capacity (L16H-AC). That was my first EQ so that may explain it? But it's strange that the newer bank sg's were low. I had fully charged that bank and cycled them quite a few times prior to merging with older bank of 4. I now have both banks at the same sg, but still a bit low.

They say that the plates in new batteries are hard and need 100-150 cycles to develop pores and soften. That could be one reason why newer batteries are harder to charge.

The other could be that newer Trojan batteries have more water-saving additives, which makes charging harder.

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Surfpath wrote: »

Thanks again NorthGuy for your update. I hope to add to the "RE" research in the coming weeks.

That would be interesting to compare. I think you bought your batteries somewhere around the same time as I did. Mine are time-stamped J2.

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

ChrisOlson wrote: »

I don't think that's terrible. I service the bank every three months here and check water once a month. We use about 10 gallons a year in twenty four Rolls T12-250's. But they don't don't use much in the winter - in fact none at all. As of today I haven't added any water to them since back in November.

In winter I can only do absorptions once a week/10 days, and only with generator. So, I probably won't need much water in witer neither, and end up with water usage similar to yours. Time will tell.

ChrisOlson wrote: »

But your batteries are a little more stubborn than mine. I can run mine without full charges for a week to 10 days and get them up to 1.255 in one good day and 3 hours @ 62 volts.

Mine would only go to about 1.225 after 3 hours at 62V, even if they were charged a day before. Hopefully, they soften a bit with time and will be closer to yours.

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

NorthGuy wrote: »

In winter I can only do absorptions once a week/10 days, and only with generator. So, I probably won't need much water in witer neither, and end up with water usage similar to yours. Time will tell.

I hope you've budgeted for frequent battery replacement. If you only manage an Absorb cycle once a week your batteries will be spending a lot of time in a low state of charge and will sulphate prematurely.

You really should consider investing more money in panels instead so you can at least get up to peak charge current in the short daylight hours even if they still aren't long enough for full Absorb.

Failing that, Bulk with the gen early every three days until the current drops, then hope the panels can do a finish charge.

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot wrote: »

I hope you've budgeted for frequent battery replacement. If you only manage an Absorb cycle once a week your batteries will be spending a lot of time in a low state of charge and will sulphate prematurely.

Many people belive in cycling batteries between 50 and 80% and only taking them to full charge once a week.

In fact, that is how Trojan recommends using the batteries in their manual:

"A full charge is recommended at least every three nominal charge throughputs. A charge throughput is when a battery is taken from the end of charge, is discharged, and then taken to the end of charge again. A nominal charge throughput is reached when the sum of the discharge currents corresponds to the nominal capacity of the battery."

I hope that such usage will not have any adverse effect on battery life. At least I couldn't find any evidence to the contrary.

Cariboocoot wrote: »

You really should consider investing more money in panels ...

I do.

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

NorthGuy wrote: »

Many people belive in cycling batteries between 50 and 80% and only taking them to full charge once a week.

Something that might not be clear: that's 50 to 80 State Of Charge, not Depth Of Discharge (the reciprocal). They do not recommend taking your batteries below 50% SOC.

"A full charge is recommended at least every three nominal charge throughputs. A charge throughput is when a battery is taken from the end of charge, is discharged, and then taken to the end of charge again. A nominal charge throughput is reached when the sum of the discharge currents corresponds to the nominal capacity of the battery."

Yes: that translates to "fully recharge the battery at least every three days" as far as off-grid RE is concerned.

I hope that such usage will not have any adverse effect on battery life. At least I couldn't find any evidence to the contrary.

I'm still searching for any condition which does not have an adverse affect on battery life. They seem to have a choice of dying sooner than expected, or dying even sooner than that.

northerner

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot wrote: »

I'm still searching for any condition which does not have an adverse affect on battery life. They seem to have a choice of dying sooner than expected, or dying even sooner than that.

I'm going one step further and searching for an alternative to the lead acid battery!:p

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot wrote: »

Something that might not be clear: that's 50 to 80 State Of Charge, not Depth Of Discharge (the reciprocal). They do not recommend taking your batteries below 50% SOC.

Of course. That's 50 to 80% SOC. 80% SOC is where absorption starts. If I understand this correctly, the idea is to avoid absorptions.

Cariboocoot wrote: »

"A full charge is recommended at least every three nominal charge throughputs. A charge throughput is when a battery is taken from the end of charge, is discharged, and then taken to the end of charge again. A nominal charge throughput is reached when the sum of the discharge currents corresponds to the nominal capacity of the battery."

Yes: that translates to "fully recharge the battery at least every three days" as far as off-grid RE is concerned.

"Nominal charge throughput" is 100% of C₂₀. If you cycle between 50-80% SOC, you use 30% of C₂₀ per cycle. Three "nominal charge throughputs" will occur after (100*3)/30 = 10 cycles. So, that would be once per 10 days.

Cariboocoot wrote: »

I'm still searching for any condition which does not have an adverse affect on battery life. They seem to have a choice of dying sooner than expected, or dying even sooner than that.

Yes, those batteries are always looking for an excuse to die sooner

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

It is my opinion that a charge cycle is daily discharge followed by charging, regardless of SOC at start or finish. Nor would I count on Absorb beginning at exactly 80% SOC.

But that's my opinion. Everyone is free to treat their batteries as they see fit. It's not my money you're spending.

BB.

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

The usual recommendation (originally by Mr. Surrette per poster Dave Sparks) was >90% state of charge at least 2x per week.

I have read other suggestions that 50-80% State of charge with a full charge every week or two--that may be an outlier--But some folks have suggested that in other forums.

-Bill

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

There are lots of different, often conflicting, recommendations. Lots of discussions. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any reseach that would compare different regimes over long periods of time. It would be interesting to set up a controlled experiment and see what it comes to. That, however, would take lots of time and money. This is probably why nobody is doing that.

Anyway, how about the water usage? 12-18 gallons/year for 32kWh battery bank. Is that normal?

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

NorthGuy wrote: »

There are lots of different, often conflicting, recommendations. Lots of discussions. Unfortunately, I couldn't find any reseach that would compare different regimes over long periods of time. It would be interesting to set up a controlled experiment and see what it comes to. That, however, would take lots of time and money. This is probably why nobody is doing that.

Anyway, how about the water usage? 12-18 gallons/year for 32kWh battery bank. Is that normal?

In my experience that would be just a little on the high side. But I tend to look at it in terms of how much each cell is using month-to-month, not gallons per year. Typically it would be 1/3 of a cup. 1/2 perhaps for an upper level, which is about in line with what you are seeing. There are a lot of things that will vary this.

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot wrote: »

In my experience that would be just a little on the high side. But I tend to look at it in terms of how much each cell is using month-to-month, not gallons per year. Typically it would be 1/3 of a cup. 1/2 perhaps for an upper level, which is about in line with what you are seeing. There are a lot of things that will vary this.

Thank you, Coot.

It'm probably somewhere around 3/4 of a cup per month per cell. However, the cells are big, twice the size of L-16, or three times the size of T-105.

I know there are lots of things that can affect it. I'm just trying to figure out if the results I'm getting are more or less reasonable.

I would've probably had better luck if I started with Golf Cart batteries ... Much less loss in case of the bank death too.

gww1

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Where there might have been an actual study.

I have read other suggestions that 50-80% State of charge with a full charge every week or two--that may be an outlier--But some folks have suggested that in other forums.

-Bill

part of a discussion from a differrent forum

according to sandia labs test results the optimum charge/discharge regime
for a flooded lead acid battery is known as the 50/80 regime

wherein you discharge to 50% soc, then recharge to 80% soc, cycling
within this region for 7 to 10 days, on the last day you recharge to 100%
the result is more kwatt/hrs output over the batteries lifespan and the highest charge efficiency which equates to lowest fuel costs if you are using an engine drive generator to recharge them with.

they did exhaustive testing to come to this conclusion and it has long been a regime i have promoted, for any installation that relies on an engine generator to recharge a significant amount of the time. also it is well documented that you get the most bang for your dollar invested in the battery bank, as measured in kw/hrs over the life of the battery bank, no matter what the charging source is.

bob g

Maby helps?
gww

westbranch

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

look at this type, http://www.mpoweruk.com/flow.htm

and these from Oz http://redflow.com/

dont be misled by the home page, they have as small as 5kw units

ChrisOlson

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot wrote: »

It is my opinion that a charge cycle is daily discharge followed by charging, regardless of SOC at start or finish. Nor would I count on Absorb beginning at exactly 80% SOC.

'coot, batteries don't necessarily live their lives on a 24 hour cycle like humans do. Heavy duty deep cycle batteries are perfectly happy if they get fully charged every week to 10 days and cycle them somewhere above 50% SOC in between. We've been running every battery we ever had since 2002 that way.

Even the cheap 125 ah boat batteries from Farm & Fleet that we used to use were perfectly happy with that treatment. We bought 16 of those Group 29 RV/Marine deep cycle batteries in 2002 for $74 each and they lasted 9 years. At the end of 9 years two of them had dead cells but the other 14 still had about 70% of their original capacity. And those batteries were LUCKY if they got fully charged every 10 days for their whole life. Plus we ran them totally dead many, many times in the 9 years we used them. I lost count of the number of times I had to get up at 3:00 in the morning to start the generator because the power went out due to under-voltage for the inverter. Those batteries were made by Johnson Controls.
--
Chris

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

As the French say: "à chacun son".

ChrisOlson

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot wrote: »

As the French say: "à chacun son".

If I was French I'd be educated and I'd know what that means. But I'm Norwegian and Norwegians are known for thick sculls
--
Chris

gww1

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

I remeber reading a post from Chris O. where he exsplained how during low re production days the batteries would keep discharging for several days and then the wind would pick up or he would start a generator and the batteries would fully charge. Is this daily charging because some charge was going into the battery even while it was discharging? Or is it a single discharge and recharge cycle that took several days to complete? Or is it some where inbetween?
Cheers
gww

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

"To each their own"; a reflection on the highly individualistic nature of different solar electric power systems, if not battery installs in general.

Vic

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

NorthGuy,

RE your water useage, the amount of water used depends a lot upon the average DOD.

The main banks here use about two gallons about every two months. Perhaps in the range of 14-ish gallons per year. These banks are 1280 Ah nominal at 48 V, but are not cycled very deeply, unless intentionally not charged for about four successive days.

One bank has HydroCaps the other does not, and little noticeable difference in water use twix the two.. The Vabs is 58.1 V, but this is probably a bit too high. We use EA on each bank to terminate Absorption, FWIW. Good Luck, Vic

ChrisOlson

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

gww1 wrote: »

I remeber reading a post from Chris O. where he exsplained how during low re production days the batteries would keep discharging for several days and then the wind would pick up or he would start a generator and the batteries would fully charge. Is this daily charging because some charge was going into the battery even while it was discharging? Or is it a single discharge and recharge cycle that took several days to complete? Or is it some where inbetween?

I've always looked at it as a long continuous discharge. The batteries start out full. On day one you draw them down to 75% and get enough incoming to get them to 90% On day two you draw them down to 70% and enough incoming to get them back to 85%. And it just keeps going until one day you get enough power to recharge them again to 100% - or the generator takes over and fixes it.

The batteries run at a net deficit every day for most days. Then you catch them up one way or another. Incidentally that's how we run our boat and RV batteries too. Our boat batteries are 6 years old this year (assuming they make it thru another summer of use). Most people only get 3 years out of their boat batteries. But I have removed them from the boat, hook them in series and hook them up to our house bank every winter since they were new. They use a little bit of water being charged at too high of a voltage on the house bank. But I believe that working them all thru the winter instead of letting them set around on a maintainer is what has saved them in the long run and gotten them as old as they are - and they still test good on a load test.
--
Chris

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Vic wrote: »

RE your water useage, the amount of water used depends a lot upon the average DOD.

The main banks here use about two gallons about every two months. Perhaps in the range of 14-ish gallons per year. These banks are 1280 Ah nominal at 48 V, but are not cycled very deeply, unless intentionally not charged for about four successive days.

Thanks Vic.

I discharge mine to about 50% SOC (give or take), so I would guess, for my levels of discharge, my water consumption is in-line with yours.

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

gww1 wrote: »

Where there might have been an actual study.

Thanks gww. I found sandia web site. They have publications on their Web site, but I couldn't find the one which would describe these battery tests. Perhaps, you may have a reference?

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

NorthGuy wrote: »

Thanks gww. I found sandia web site. They have publications on their Web site, but I couldn't find the one which would describe these battery tests. Perhaps, you may have a reference?

Someplace on the forum are posts by another Bill regarding these tests. I believe one of the posts contains the sad information that for some reason Sandia remove the test info from their web site. Possibly because it was now too out of date to be relevant?

BB.

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

From BillBlake. Sandia link is dead (can't find a good one at the moment).

BillBlake wrote: »

"A Study of Lead-Acid Battery Efficiency Near Top-of-Charge and the Impact on PV System Design"

<snip> These tests indicate that from zero SOC to 84% SOC the
average overall battery charging efficiency is 91%, and
that the incremental battery charging efficiency from
79% to 84% is only 55%.

This is particularly significant in PV
systems where the designer expects the batteries to
normally operate at SOC above 80%, with deeper
discharge only occurring during periods of extended bad
weather. In such systems, the low charge efficiency at
high SOC may result in

a substantial reduction in actual available stored energy because

nearly half the available energy is serving losses

rather than charging the battery.

Low charging efficiency can then result in the battery
operating at an average SOC significantly lower than the
system designer would anticipate without a detailed
understanding of charge efficiency as a function of SOC.

<snip> The impact of low charge efficiency at high states of
charge has the greatest potential impact on systems
where high energy availability is needed.

Such systems usually utilize large batteries to ensure energy

availability during the longest stretches of bad weather.


This may not provide the energy required if the PV array is
insufficient to provide a recovery charge for batteries at
90% SOC and above, where charge efficiency is very low.


Charge efficiencies at 90% SOC and greater were
measured at less than 50% for the battery tested here,
requiring a PV array that supplies more than twice the
energy that the load consumes for a full recovery charge.


Many batteries in PV systems never reach a full state of
charge, resulting in a slow battery capacity loss from
stratification and sulfation over the life of the battery.

<snip> Notice also that the overall
efficiency shows high values, with full charge represented
by approximately 85% efficiency, a commonly used value
for battery charge efficiency.


More importantly, notice the dramatically lower efficiencies

for the increments above about 80% state of charge,

where most values are below 60% efficiency,

and full charge is represented by less than 50% efficiency.

(Actually, full charge, resulting in 100Ah output has not been

reached in the testing to date.
The greatest output was 96.5Ah, which resulted from
116Ah input. An attempt to achieve 100Ah output will be
made as part of the conclusion of this testing.)

<snip> It is generally understood that battery charge
efficiency is high (above 95%)


at low states of charge and that this efficiency drops off near

full charge.

However,actual battery charge efficiencies are often stated as
though efficiency is linear across all states of charge, with
general guidance that it drops off at higher states of
charge. Details concerning actual charge efficiency as a
function of state-of-charge (SOC) would be very useful to
PV system designers ......

<snip> INTERMEDIATE FULL CHARGE CYCLES

An observation early in the testing required a change
in the test procedure. The original intent had been to
perform several partial charge/discharge cycles in
sequence. For example, charge to 68Ah input, discharge,
then charge to 68Ah input and so on until the four
complete cycles at 68Ah input were complete.


Then fully charge and discharge the battery before proceeding

with the next level.

It was seen early in the testing that this was not going to work,

as the capacity resulting from 68Ah input dropped with each

succeeding cycle when no full charge cycles were performed between

partial charge cycles.

Therefore a full charge and discharge cycle was
added between each partial charge/discharge cycle.

This result has important implications to operational
PV systems. That is, if a battery is partially charged for
several consecutive cycles (for example, the array is
marginally sized and there is a series of less than full sun
days in the winter) the useable battery capacity decreases
each cycle, even though the same amount of energy has
been presented to the battery each day.

This is the result of battery inefficiencies,

electrolyte stratification,

and sulfate buildup

during these partial charges.

An associated full charge, with its attendant gassing,

is needed to destratify the electrolyte and remove the
residual sulfate.

This sulfate buildup can become a problem if this pattern

continues for several months.

In the short term it can be reversed by a full "equalizing"
type charge, which,

in most cases is not possible in small PV systems.

Battery equalization requires a PV charge controller that has been

specifically designed to include this function.

At low charge rates (for example, less than C/40)

equalization may not be possible because of charging time limitations.

In any case, this reduction in
useable capacity will impact availability and should be understood.

http://photovoltaics.sandia.gov/docs/PDF/batpapsteve.pdf

---

<snip from my esteemed research partner>


The benefit of "Finish Charging" Looms
in many corridors.

Tying up a Generator or Solar Panels to try and struggle a charge
into something that no longer has it's arms open
may be old news thinking one of these days.
Best to tie the Panels up at a HIGH acceptance Level.

Many people have different numbers but once in a while you see some
dramatic numbers. That Zapp Works Ni-Fe Spec. page shows self discharge
numbers that rival the finest high tech AGM Batteries.

These fellows talk of 20 - 40% per month?

Who is the closest?

http://www.mpoweruk.com/specifications/comparisons.pdf

---

Another important Cornerstone Report leading up to new conclusions.


Bill Blake

-Bill

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

BB. wrote: »

From BillBlake. Sandia link is dead (can't find a good one at the moment).

I found the full documment attached to this thread.

It merely says that at higher SOC battery efficency is small. I think that is more or less obvious because of two factors:

1. You charge at much higher voltages, so to put in the same AH, you need more energy
2. If bubbling takes place, part of the AH that you put in is used for bubbling

You can keep high efficiency at higher SOC if you charge at lower currents and below gassing voltages. But that, obviously will not be good for batteries. Also, whatever efficiency you gain in batteries, you'll lose much more in your energy source (solar or generator) trying to keep charging currents so low.

Obviously, from the efficiency standpoint, cycling for a while at lower SOCs and then taking to full charge once in a while is much better.

However, the paper does not really say how this might affect the battery life.

Cariboocoot

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Keep in mind that this is most important for generator charging. As far as the panel charging is concerned, they are going to try and bring the batteries up to 100% every day if they can. If they succeed, all the better. If not, the main requirement is to be above that point where sulphation accelerates. This is why in bad weather a quick, early bulk up with the gen is a good idea; the panels may manage the rest on their own.

NorthGuy

Re: Trojan Industrial batteries not working

Cariboocoot wrote: »

Keep in mind that this is most important for generator charging. As far as the panel charging is concerned, they are going to try and bring the batteries up to 100% every day if they can. If they succeed, all the better. If not, the main requirement is to be above that point where sulphation accelerates. This is why in bad weather a quick, early bulk up with the gen is a good idea; the panels may manage the rest on their own.

In the summer time I will just let sun do the work. If I get absorption and go to float every day, that's excellent. If I only get it once a week it's fine. If I don't get it for longer than this, I would need to do it with generator. Also, if at any day, I am below 70% SOC buy sunset, I'll run the generator to top to 80% (or wherever absorption starts).

In the winter time (I mean mid-winter), the sunny period is too short. I can't make it longer. Most of the days, I'll need to run a generator at the sunset to finish bulk. On the very best days I can pre-charge with generator and let the sun do the absorption. Otherwise, I have to do the whole absorption with the generator. I can do that every week, but I certainly cannot do it every day.

That's the plan.