I84RiS

Agree that they should share the current proportionally, but what I have noticed from experimenting with different brand LFP batteries (all 100A) in the same system is that there are differences between them resulting in different discharge and charge rates between the different brands.
During charging, one battery might reach 100% SOC while a different brand is still on 95%. In this case the full current is passed to the remaining battery which might (or might not) exceeds the recommended charge current. The same happens during discharge.
I used to manage this with SA by tapering down the charge and discharge currents at certain SOC levels.
Here is a recent example, yellow and red are different brands to blue and green (so 3 different brands in 1 system). All have PACE BMS. I am reading the data into SA through the RS485 B port on the 1st battery. Dip switches were set slave 1, slave 2, slave 3 and slave 4 (no master). It does not matter is which order I connect the 4 batteries to the busbar, the result is always the same. 

Agree that they should share the current proportionally, but what I have noticed from experimenting with different brand LFP batteries (all 100A) in the same system is that there are differences between them resulting in different discharge and charge rates between the different brands.
During charging, one battery might reach 100% SOC while a different brand is still on 95%. In this case the full current is passed to the remaining battery which might (or might not) exceeds the recommended charge current. The same happens during discharge.
I used to manage this with SA by tapering down the charge and discharge currents at certain SOC levels.
Here is a recent example, yellow and red are different brands to blue and green (so 3 different brands in 1 system). All have PACE BMS. I am reading the data into SA through the RS485 B port on the 1st battery. Dip switches were set slave 1, slave 2, slave 3 and slave 4 (no master). It does not matter is which order I connect the 4 batteries to the busbar, the result is always the same. 

Agree that they should share the current proportionally, but what I have noticed from experimenting with different brand LFP batteries (all 100A) in the same system is that there are differences between them resulting in different discharge and charge rates between the different brands.
During charging, one battery might reach 100% SOC while a different brand is still on 95%. In this case the full current is passed to the remaining battery which might (or might not) exceeds the recommended charge current. The same happens during discharge.
I used to manage this with SA by tapering down the charge and discharge currents at certain SOC levels.
Here is a recent example, yellow and red are different brands to blue and green (so 3 different brands in 1 system). All have PACE BMS. I am reading the data into SA through the RS485 B port on the 1st battery. Dip switches were set slave 1, slave 2, slave 3 and slave 4 (no master). It does not matter is which order I connect the 4 batteries to the busbar, the result is always the same. 

Agree that they should share the current proportionally, but what I have noticed from experimenting with different brand LFP batteries (all 100A) in the same system is that there are differences between them resulting in different discharge and charge rates between the different brands.
During charging, one battery might reach 100% SOC while a different brand is still on 95%. In this case the full current is passed to the remaining battery which might (or might not) exceeds the recommended charge current. The same happens during discharge.
I used to manage this with SA by tapering down the charge and discharge currents at certain SOC levels.
Here is a recent example, yellow and red are different brands to blue and green (so 3 different brands in 1 system). All have PACE BMS. I am reading the data into SA through the RS485 B port on the 1st battery. Dip switches were set slave 1, slave 2, slave 3 and slave 4 (no master). It does not matter is which order I connect the 4 batteries to the busbar, the result is always the same. 

8 Cells is a 24V battery, not a good idea to connect a 24V battery in parallel with a 48v battery. 
Some "48V" batteries have 15 cells and some have 16 cells, you can't mix them due to the different operating voltages. 
A 16-cell LiFePO4 battery typically has a nominal voltage of 51.2 volts. This is because each individual LiFePO4 cell has a nominal voltage of around 3.2 volts, and 16 cells multiplied by 3.2 volts equals 51.2 volts. 
Key points about 16-cell LiFePO4 batteries:
Nominal Voltage: 51.2 volts
Full Charge Voltage: Around 57.6 volts (depending on the specific battery)
Discharge Cut-off Voltage: Around 48 volts 
A 15-cell LiFePO4 battery typically has a nominal voltage of 48 volts as each cell in a LiFePO4 battery is considered to have a nominal voltage of 3.2 volts, so 15 cells in series would equal 48 volts (15 x 3.2 = 48). 
Key points about a 15-cell LiFePO4 battery:
Nominal voltage: 48 volts
Per cell voltage: 3.2 volts
Application: Often used in systems requiring a 48 volt power supply 
I disagree with @I84RiS on the max charging amperage of the batteries. The power absorption of the batteries will be higher when they are in parallel than each of them individually so you can set to the max charge amperage of the larger battery quite safely as the current will be spread across the batteries proportionally to their capacity. i.e. If you have a 200Ah and 100Ah in parallel and give it 30A, 20A will be absorbed by the 200Ah and 10A by the 100Ah. 
 
 
 

Is this still avail? I need 6 pleaze
0812360665

The CT is important for other functions as well, by example if you want to use PV to supply power to items on the non essential circuit you can do so with the CT correctly set up.
Normally the items that use the most power are on the non essential circuit therefore having the ability to use PV to power these items is a major cost saver ito energy cost and getting the most out of the inverter
It might be that your CT is pointing the "wrong way", but it the numbers displayed on the inverter is correct then ir is very likely that the two wires connecting the CT to the inverter have also been swapped around, so it might appear to be the wrong way around but in actual fact it is not.

What is meant by this statement?
The word "plugged" seems to tell me that your wife plugged the inverter output into one of the electrical sockets in the house while the grid supply was still present?

It is a 2 step process, first apply for permission to instal. 2nd apply for final approval once permissions is obtain and installation completed. Do you already have the permission to install since the system has presumably been commissioned already.
Don't think you have a choice. As part of the formal approval process you will be contacted to have a new meter installed in any event so why not do it now. The meter works well and does not suffer form nuisance tripping. I have tested mine by pushing 1000watts to 1500watts back into the grid for a few seconds (when the CoCT technicians where on premises right after they installed it) and it did not trip.

Are you fully off grid?
If not, then go with one larger inverter as apposed to two smaller inverters. 
You don't not need the redundency if you still have a utility supply. Should the inveter fail, all you need to do is switch over the change over switch and you are good to go.
Things to consider if you do decide on two smaller inverter as opposed to one larger one.
Paralelling inverters leads to additional complexities and ineffencies. Make very sure both are on the same firmware. Additional AC and DC wires causes additional ineffencies. Monitoring gets trickier, battery communication and set up is more complex.
By adding a 2nd inverter you are doubling you likelihood of having a failure.
An inveter can use anything between 75w to 100w to power itself. For 10 hours overnight that adds up to a lot. Multiply that but two if you want to paralell inverters. 
One larger inverter is usually more cost effecient (cheaper) compared to two smaller inverters. 
If you are offgrid with no utility supply it makes sense to go with 2 smaller inverters.

Are you fully off grid?
If not, then go with one larger inverter as apposed to two smaller inverters. 
You don't not need the redundency if you still have a utility supply. Should the inveter fail, all you need to do is switch over the change over switch and you are good to go.
Things to consider if you do decide on two smaller inverter as opposed to one larger one.
Paralelling inverters leads to additional complexities and ineffencies. Make very sure both are on the same firmware. Additional AC and DC wires causes additional ineffencies. Monitoring gets trickier, battery communication and set up is more complex.
By adding a 2nd inverter you are doubling you likelihood of having a failure.
An inveter can use anything between 75w to 100w to power itself. For 10 hours overnight that adds up to a lot. Multiply that but two if you want to paralell inverters. 
One larger inverter is usually more cost effecient (cheaper) compared to two smaller inverters. 
If you are offgrid with no utility supply it makes sense to go with 2 smaller inverters.

Limit to Load, if it works like the Deye Zero Export to Load, uses an internal CT to measure loads flows in and out of the various terminals. It can’t distinguish non-essential loads from the grid. Only the essential and smart loads get measured. Everything in and out of the grid terminals is just import and export because no external CT is used.
With Limit to Load not checked it’s probably the same as the Deye Zero Export to CT which uses internal CTs to measure loads on the 3 terminals and an external CT to measure non-essential loads. The inverter knows how much power its sending out on the grid terminals and it knows how much power is going to the grid via the external CT, so it can calculate how much is consumed by non-essential loads.

This might be to low to turn on the MPPT or it might drop in and out of the MPPT range as the elements (heat, clouds) impact the PV panels. If the input voltage is to low to turn on the MPPT zero curent will be produced (meaning zero watts even though there is 129v)
What is the MPPT range printed on the labels on the side of the inverter?
What is the panel specs (VOC, VMP etc)?
 

I agree with you, the numbers make no sense. I am guessing that the inverter is being fed data from the CT that it cannot correctly interpret.

Yes I totally agree. Your post seemed to sugest pylontech would try to get out of it. Often the supplier does, but if you go direct to pylontech they often instruct the supplier to replace them.

If you look at the event log you will notice that the there are a number of overvoltage alarms where the highest cell voltage is above 3650mV while the lowest is around 3400mV (at the same time). One should also question how the BMS allows a cell to reach 3834mV.
There are also a number of items on the event log where the lowest cell voltage is around 3000mV while the highest cell voltages 3250mV (at the same time).
Unfortunately the data does not indicate which cell or cells is/are overvolting
Not to sure what the pack overvoltage level is on these batteries but highest pack voltage per the data was 53.295V which seems ok ? (so the overvoltage is/was not caused by a pack over voltage but rather a cell overvoltage event)
My take on this data is that there is /was likely a runner cell in this pack causing the overvoltage alarms (ie there is/was one or more weaker cells compared to the others that would reach 3650mV on charge well before the other cells and 3000mV under load also well before the other cells). If you have a runner cell your charge voltage (on your inverter) really becomes irrelevant to control this (unless you charge a very low voltages).
Unfortunately (for you) and fortunately (for Pylontech) you have no way to proof that this was the case from the start. But, given that there is only 391 cycles (does this look correct given the 6272 OV times) on this battery it is more likely than not that when you purchased this batery that this was indeed the case.
I think they are taking you for a ride and hiding behind their T&C. Unfortunately runner cell are part and parcel of pre packaged battery packs with integrated BMSes and should actually be treated as latent defects.

AC circuit breakers are designed for alternating current, while DC circuit breakers are designed for direct current. They are not interchangeable.
The speed at which the contacts pull apart is much faster in a DC breaker, the gap between contacts is larger, usually there is an ark shield and an air escape path to help extinguish the arc when disconnecting under load.
People underestimate the dangers of DC current. The Arc that will be created when that AC breaker gets pulled under load will be significant. 
If anything has to happen and the insurance company picks this up, that become a very expensive exercises

To completely isolate the inverter you have to remove all 3 power sources, utility, pv and battery. 

Soc was likely already at 0% given the voltage reading, explaining the suddend drop/correction in SOC just before 4am when current was pulled from the battery.
In other words the 80% SOC reading was incorrect. When last did you charge to 100% and left the cells to balance ?

Is this in SA, if so which municipality? 
More details about the installation might be useful?

A lot of information here, do you have access to individual cell voltages? This would be the best place to start.
The only way for one battery to discharge into another is if there are voltages differences, SOC differences also hints at this.
Check your cable connections and your DC fuses on the battery line for solid connections and any hint of overheating.
Have you tried using (charge and discharge) the batteries without interbattery communication as well as communication to inverter, just to rule out any communication issue?
Perhaps also try charging then without communication (using LA setting with correct V paramater for you battery) at a modest Amp setting, or manually throttle (aggresively) the amps as the SOC reaches 80%. Let it charge to 100% and leave it for a day or two to get the cells to top balance.
This is all just really a guessing game, you need to see what the individual cells are doing.

A lot of information here, do you have access to individual cell voltages? This would be the best place to start.
The only way for one battery to discharge into another is if there are voltages differences, SOC differences also hints at this.
Check your cable connections and your DC fuses on the battery line for solid connections and any hint of overheating.
Have you tried using (charge and discharge) the batteries without interbattery communication as well as communication to inverter, just to rule out any communication issue?
Perhaps also try charging then without communication (using LA setting with correct V paramater for you battery) at a modest Amp setting, or manually throttle (aggresively) the amps as the SOC reaches 80%. Let it charge to 100% and leave it for a day or two to get the cells to top balance.
This is all just really a guessing game, you need to see what the individual cells are doing.

So this behaviour is pointing to one ( or more) cells reaching the low voltage cut off limit well before the other cells. 
The BMS (assuming you are using communication between the inverter and battery) would be reporting the pack voltage to the inverter, which in your case approximate 37%SOC. If you have a faulty cell, the voltage off this specific cell falls so fast at the lower SOC levels that it reaches the low cell voltage cut off point (which caused the BMS to instantly report a 0% SOC) while the other cells (the non faulty ones) are still at or close to a voltage level that approximated  37% SOC level.
From experience, no amount of cell balancing will correct this. You likely have a cell (or more) that needs replacing. 

So this behaviour is pointing to one ( or more) cells reaching the low voltage cut off limit well before the other cells. 
The BMS (assuming you are using communication between the inverter and battery) would be reporting the pack voltage to the inverter, which in your case approximate 37%SOC. If you have a faulty cell, the voltage off this specific cell falls so fast at the lower SOC levels that it reaches the low cell voltage cut off point (which caused the BMS to instantly report a 0% SOC) while the other cells (the non faulty ones) are still at or close to a voltage level that approximated  37% SOC level.
From experience, no amount of cell balancing will correct this. You likely have a cell (or more) that needs replacing. 

No, not correct.