When in Parallel the inverters doesn’t work well when using setting pyl you have to set all inverters to use and setup everting manually for your battery. When in pyl and parallel the inverters will give you errors and they will not charge write. I had this problems on pylontech, dyness and freedom won battery

On 2022/05/16 at 3:34 AM, Coulomb said:

On 2022/05/15 at 8:54 PM, birdibird said:

but their system now 2 times had a bug that suddenly the batteries were not being charged anymore.

It it's when the battery is 100% charged then it's expected that the battery doesn't get charged, but there is a bug in many of the latest firmwares such that solar doesn't help power the loads either. Does that sound the same?

No, the solar was powering the loads but not charging the batteries.

 

On 2022/05/16 at 3:34 AM, Coulomb said:

On 2022/05/15 at 8:54 PM, birdibird said:

They also had code 71 in the screen of one of the inverters (the one with the pyl bms setting and the RS485 cable to the Dyness pack). ... (sounds like the code 69 message they cancelled out in newer display firmwares)

Except that it's kind of opposite to 69: 69 says the battery is full, don't charge; 71 says the battery is empty, don't discharge.

71 doesn't really imply if battery is empty, does it?... It wasn't empty anyway as it was 58%

 

On 2022/05/16 at 3:34 AM, Coulomb said:

On 2022/05/15 at 8:54 PM, birdibird said:

In the graph below you see we cold restarted the inverters in the evening and charging started again.

Was the reset about 6pm, when the solar stopped following load, or just before 7pm, when solar charging jumped up? I'm guessing the former, with the sun coming out from  light clouds before 7pm. Impressive to have sun till 8:30pm, BTW. Even with daylight saving (so it's really 7:30pm as the sun moves relative to the earth).

Do you know what the battery SoC would have been at 6pm? It looks like the battery was at near 100% since the start of the graph (9am), since the solar power tracks the load. But if it wasn't 100%, then that's the problem, right?

 at 18.15 my acquaintance restarted, but one inverter gave code 81 so she restarted both again at 18.43. That's why you see then suddenly more solar power at that time.

We are in Spain on summertime, but the time zone is wrong here. If you look at the maps Spain actually should be in the same time zone as England, but Franco preffered to be on the same time as Berlin back in the days..... 😉 So it is actually 6.30pm..... (That's also the reason Spanish people have lunch at 2 - 3 pm, lol)

The SoC was 58% at that moment.

 

On 2022/05/16 at 3:34 AM, Coulomb said:

I'd be interested to know the results of your test. It's possible that the problem is actually in the removable display firmware, since BMS interaction is probably involved.

I flashed both inverters back to 45.07, but left them on display 12.13.
We noticed the bug started after a use which exceeded the solar power.
As small test on the 45.07 firmware with an electric oven yesterday afternoon showed the batteries kept being charged also after the peak use and also this morning there was a peak of 4.52kW use while the PV power was 2.31kW and afterwards Solar kept charging the batteries.
Let's see what happens.

Edited May 17, 20224 yr by birdibird

On 2022/05/16 at 6:21 AM, Dirkie said:

When in Parallel the inverters doesn’t work well when using setting pyl you have to set all inverters to use and setup everting manually for your battery. When in pyl and parallel the inverters will give you errors and they will not charge write. I had this problems on pylontech, dyness and freedom won battery

Thanks, I will keep an eye on it

3 hours ago, birdibird said:

No, the solar was powering the loads but not charging the batteries.

Ah, I'm starting to see a pattern.

3 hours ago, birdibird said:

71 doesn't really imply if battery is empty, does it?... It wasn't empty anyway as it was 58%

Ah. I should have said 71 usually implies an empty battery, because at least one of the cells is so low in voltage it must not be discharged any further. But if you're at 58%, that implies a badly unbalanced battery.

The fact that it's sometimes not charging (and now they're removed the warning 69 to tell you what's happening) possibly means that some cells must not be further charged.

So you might have a badly unbalanced battery (if more than one module, one module might be unbalanced compared to the other(s)), or you might have a low capacity cell. Presuming that the battery isn't years old, that would imply a faulty battery.

3 hours ago, birdibird said:

We noticed the bug started after a use which exceeded the solar power.
As small test on the 45.07 firmware with an electric oven yesterday afternoon showed the batteries kept being charged...

If I understand you correctly, so far it looks like 45.07 is good, and 90.28 is bad? If so, that's really convenient, because there is only one real difference between these two firmwares, so if your results continue the same, we can for once pinpoint a bug to a single line of code!

I note that the 90.xx firmwares are (according to some sources, I'm not sure where I stand on this) supposed to be experimental in some sense. If so, it may be that an engineer said in effect "customer, try this, I doubt it will fix your problem but I want to rule something out", or similar, so perhaps 90.28 was never meant for public release. If only there were release notes. Release notes are a software engineering tradition for a reason... 🙄

Oops. Now that I check, I see that the only difference involves what I think of as the discharge-allowed-flag. I would think that this flag would be set most of the time, unless the battery is very nearly empty.

Edit: So I'm expecting you to find 90.28 and 45.07 to behave the same, unless your battery's BMS is telling the inverter to stop discharging. On the other hand, if you do find a difference and the battery BMS should be allowing discharge, then I'm misunderstanding this flag.

Edited May 17, 20224 yr by Coulomb

On 2022/05/17 at 3:43 PM, Coulomb said:

Ah, I'm starting to see a pattern.

Ah. I should have said 71 usually implies an empty battery, because at least one of the cells is so low in voltage it must not be discharged any further. But if you're at 58%, that implies a badly unbalanced battery.

The fact that it's sometimes not charging (and now they're removed the warning 69 to tell you what's happening) possibly means that some cells must not be further charged.

So you might have a badly unbalanced battery (if more than one module, one module might be unbalanced compared to the other(s)), or you might have a low capacity cell. Presuming that the battery isn't years old, that would imply a faulty battery.

If I understand you correctly, so far it looks like 45.07 is good, and 90.28 is bad? If so, that's really convenient, because there is only one real difference between these two firmwares, so if your results continue the same, we can for once pinpoint a bug to a single line of code!

I note that the 90.xx firmwares are (according to some sources, I'm not sure where I stand on this) supposed to be experimental in some sense. If so, it may be that an engineer said in effect "customer, try this, I doubt it will fix your problem but I want to rule something out", or similar, so perhaps 90.28 was never meant for public release. If only there were release notes. Release notes are a software engineering tradition for a reason... 🙄

Oops. Now that I check, I see that the only difference involves what I think of as the discharge-allowed-flag. I would think that this flag would be set most of the time, unless the battery is very nearly empty.

Edit: So I'm expecting you to find 90.28 and 45.07 to behave the same, unless your battery's BMS is telling the inverter to stop discharging. On the other hand, if you do find a difference and the battery BMS should be allowing discharge, then I'm misunderstanding this flag.

Sorry, it took some time to update this thread.

After the downgrade to 45.07 there were no problems anymore.

@CoulombHi bro... 
could you please share here some links  or just tell me where to get 45.07 (and other firmwares in general).
been searching the whole week with no downloadable files all over the internet.

By the way, my case here is: I received a max-7200 that was giving warning 32 once or twice a day, then it comes to show up more frequently( every 15 minutes), so I'll give it a try by reflashing the firmware.

thanks in advance.

@CoulombHi bro... 
could you please share here some links  or just tell me where to get 45.07 (and other firmwares in general).
been searching the whole week with no downloadable files all over the internet.

By the way, my case here is: I received a max-7200 that was giving warning 32 once or twice a day, then it comes to show up more frequently( every 15 minutes), so I'll give it a try by reflashing the firmware.

thanks in advance.

23 hours ago, abdkhan said:

please share here some links  or just tell me where to get 45.07 (and other firmwares in general).

The latest firmware I know of in that series is 45.11, available from this forum: https://powerforum.co.za/topic/13849-axpert-max-72-firmware/?do=findComment&comment=131763 .

As for firmware in general, Voltronic don't want them to be too easily available, mainly because of the clone manufacturers. So we grab them when we can.

23 hours ago, abdkhan said:

I received a max-7200 that was giving warning 32 once or twice a day, then it comes to show up more frequently( every 15 minutes), so I'll give it a try by reflashing the firmware.

I doubt that firmware will solve that issue. It sounds like either slow opto couplers, or noise. If it's worse when PV is connected and providing higher power, then it may be that the capacitor mod will help, even though it's the MKS IVs that have this problem worse. Actually, MAXs aren't included in the long list of affected models, either.

Good luck, those problems are hard to track down.

Hi Coulomb.

I have 2* OG 7.2 in parrallel running on U1 69:02 & U2 12:16

Can I update a third inverter that runs U1 90:28 & U2 12:13 to

the same as the other two U1 69:02 & U2 12:16 to run in par with them?

Reason why , I don't want to risk them , rather the single one.

Regards Willlie

On 2025/03/04 at 1:52 AM, WNLHD2 said:

Can I update a third inverter that runs U1 90:28 & U2 12:13 to

the same as the other two U1 69:02 & U2 12:16 to run in par with them?

No, the on running 90.28 has a '2809 DSP; the others have a '28066 DSP. So the reflash tool will fail if you try.

I have posted elsewhere my recommendations; I just wanted to make clear that they can't all be running 69.xx firmware, and don't need to be.

On 2025/03/03 at 5:52 PM, WNLHD2 said:

Hi Coulomb.

I have 2* OG 7.2 in parrallel running on U1 69:02 & U2 12:16

Can I update a third inverter that runs U1 90:28 & U2 12:13 to

the same as the other two U1 69:02 & U2 12:16 to run in par with them?

Reason why , I don't want to risk them , rather the single one.

Regards Willlie

But if I am correct you can put them all 3 in parrallel even if they have different firmware I dit it with OG 10