Jump to content

Recommended Posts

39 minutes ago, Achmat said:

My plan it to eventually be completely off grid. For that I will need 21kwh of batteries at a minimum. At that size battery bank the C rating becomes a non issue. 

I don't think you are understanding what I'm saying. Small battery banks the C rating should be a consideration especially if your inverter output is higher than the capacity of your battery bank. I only have 3 pylontechs currently on my 8kw sunsynk so I know the limitation of the 0.5C rating. Currently they only get me to 3am. Doubling the capacity should see me through the night making the C rating limitation irrelevant at that size battery bank. 

 

130 Kitson batteries.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 241
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

If I were Hubble I would would pay Leshen to stop posting.  Literally destroying the reputation of a up and coming brand talking smack. Unfortunately for now, the damage is already done. 

Hi Community, Seems the forum is decending into just degrading brands and negative commenting which is very unfortunate, as the powerforum is a great wealth of knowledge for power backup and sola

Good day guys. Just a quick post with some pictures on what the popular Pylontech batteries look like on the inside vs the latest Hubble battery. Big difference on the quality. Some corrosion alr

Posted Images

44 minutes ago, Achmat said:

I only have 3 pylontechs currently on my 8kw sunsynk so I know the limitation of the 0.5C rating. Currently they only get me to 3am

So with 3*3.5kW pylontechs you should get a 4kW draw from the batteries = 83A, which is what I get occasionally. 

Are you feeding your entire house using 8kW Sunsync with no grid input (off-grid), then yes the 1c vs 0.5C will make a difference.

However, the entire purpose of having a hybrid grid-tied inverter is to cater for additional power when your PV+Battery is inadequate, so in reality the 1C vs 0.5C makes little difference because what your battery+PV cannot provide the grid will!

The 1C vs 0.5C is only really an issue when you are off grid....And who in his right mind requires an off-grid setup to provide 8kW of power, you will in any case require a massive battery bank so again the 1C vs 0.5C argument is a non issue.

"Currently they only get me to 3am" is that because you have a massive drain on them and require more capacity or because the 1C charge rate is an issue?

Link to post
Share on other sites
59 minutes ago, Leshen said:

You will need 4 x UP5000, 6 x US3000 and 8 x US2000 for the same instantanoeus power output of 2 x 5.5 kWh Hubble’s or BSLB. The average homeowner in South Africa cannot afford a 21kwh battery bank to solve a simple manufacturing issue. 

The average homeowner in South Africa doesn't need 5kw of instantaneous power during a night time grid outage / loadshedding

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Boerseun said:

look at the spec sheet on the 5.5 KW AM2  Full CAN Comms and it works with the Riot Cloudlink  the 4.8 x100 model is more for your Axpert Clone Range 

I wasn't actually aware of the AM2. Anyone know how big the price difference is between the X100 and AM2?

Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Brani said:

I would have doubled up those cables here, as you are supposed to carry 148A from each bank, and 21-25mm2 is not enough. There is an extra terminal on each bank that could be used.

That's an interesting idea.

So the additional terminals on each bank would go to the same place???

It seems to me that this could be problematic???

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, PaulinNorthcliff said:

That's an interesting idea.

So the additional terminals on each bank would go to the same place???

It seems to me that this could be problematic???

All the red (positive) terminals are basically like a Busbar, it doesn't matter from which side it comes. I assume those go to the inverter, so yes they must go to the same place. Likewise for black(negative). This will not change anything on your system, only double up your current carrying capacity of your cables.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Leshen said:

That’s one example. What about an 8kw Sunsynk with 2 x 4.8kwh Pylontechs. You will only get 4.8kw which is very easy to exceed. So guess what happens during a grid outage at night, the inverter will go into fault mode and shut down. See the attached picture of an 8kw Inge inverter which keeps going into fault mode with 2 x 4.8kwh 0.5C batteries. The only way to get around that is to have more batteries, that’s not the solution, the solution is for other popular manufacturers to produce 1C batteries. What do you think will happen with pricing if Pylontech produce an actual 1C battery? That’s where the Hubble’s are better. 

65222D55-8B31-4CBE-9451-7CE609655666.jpeg

And this my friends is a prime example !!!!
In 5 , 6 , 8 , 10 years time when you approach Pylontech and say listen my battery is not performing . They will accept the unit for warranty . Inspect the Logs and come back with Your batteries exceed max Rated current draw and there fore we cannot offer you a warranty . Its happened already .!

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Zimnismoboy34 said:

And this my friends is a prime example !!!!
In 5 , 6 , 8 , 10 years time when you approach Pylontech and say listen my battery is not performing . They will accept the unit for warranty . Inspect the Logs and come back with Your batteries exceed max Rated current draw and there fore we cannot offer you a warranty . Its happened already .!

Can you expand on where this has happened?

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, calypso said:

Classy...

My classiness was a mere response to your initial post. Instead of highlighting facts, you decide to respond with an emotional outburst.

Maybe Pylontech can pay for you to do Electricity 101, that way you can post something of substance so that someone who isn't part of a fan club can learn something from.

Its similar to Victron 8kw vs a Sunsynk 8kw, the Sunsynk is better in many aspects to a Victron but the Victron fan club will never admit it. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Leshen said:

My classiness was a mere response to your initial post. Instead of highlighting facts, you decide to respond with an emotional outburst.

Maybe Pylontech can pay for you to do Electricity 101, that way you can post something of substance so that someone who isn't part of a fan club can learn something from.

Its similar to Victron 8kw vs a Sunsynk 8kw, the Sunsynk is better in many aspects to a Victron but the Victron fan club will never admit it. 

When there is money involved it always becomes a personal matter ... 
Thats the issue ! It then moves from personal to emotional and anger tends to become the center of attention .

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Leshen said:

My classiness was a mere response to your initial post. Instead of highlighting facts, you decide to respond with an emotional outburst.

Maybe Pylontech can pay for you to do Electricity 101, that way you can post something of substance so that someone who isn't part of a fan club can learn something from.

Its similar to Victron 8kw vs a Sunsynk 8kw, the Sunsynk is better in many aspects to a Victron but the Victron fan club will never admit it. 

I'm trying to figure out if you're very pro-Hubble or very anti-Pylon?

Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Speedster said:

I'm trying to figure out if you're very pro-Hubble or very anti-Pylon?

It could also be both, FYI. 😋

However, IMO the arguments Leshen makes seem to be based on the facts available, so if you feel strongly that his opinion is incorrect, then the onus is on you to present better evidence.

Can't we all just get along, united in our mutual hatred of Eskom :D

 

Back to the tech though: 

Does anyone have insight into the test methods used to determine the cycle life figures, with some more comprehensive data to share on both batteries? I see the manufacturer themselves are following this thread, so if they're confident of the values in their brochure then sharing results here would be a very easy way to show the superiority of your product.

To my mind, they HAVE to use accelerated testing methods or extrapolation, since testing a 9000 cycle battery would take... let see... 1C... 9000 cycles... the maths says... 375 days, minimum. Maybe it was done, but yeah no yeah, I don't see it happening. So my preference would be for a battery that's been on the market for at least a few years over a new-to-market, just because I believe they would have to be running product tests in parallel with actually releasing the battery. Would love to know if this is true or not.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

It could also be both, FYI. 😋

However, IMO the arguments Leshen makes seem to be based on the facts available, so if you feel strongly that his opinion is incorrect, then the onus is on you to present better evidence.

Can't we all just get along, united in our mutual hatred of Eskom :D

 

Back to the tech though: 

Does anyone have insight into the test methods used to determine the cycle life figures, with some more comprehensive data to share on both batteries? I see the manufacturer themselves are following this thread, so if they're confident of the values in their brochure then sharing results here would be a very easy way to show the superiority of your product.

To my mind, they HAVE to use accelerated testing methods or extrapolation, since testing a 9000 cycle battery would take... let see... 1C... 9000 cycles... the maths says... 375 days, minimum. Maybe it was done, but yeah no yeah, I don't see it happening. So my preference would be for a battery that's been on the market for at least a few years over a new-to-market, just because I believe they would have to be running product tests in parallel with actually releasing the battery. Would love to know if this is true or not.

Hehe. That's a good point. I'm all for facts, but he seem's to be zooming in onto one fact (C number) which is insignificant in most use cases. There are other factors which he's simply ignoring, such as price and guaranteed cycle life. Also, Pylontech's are doing fantastically well in those independant trials taking place in Aus as well as in other international reviews. I haven't seen one credible independent review of the Hubble's as yet. Not saying they're bad battteries, just that there's a lot of info still missing. Pylon is now a tried and tested brand and that counts for something.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Speedster said:

Hehe. That's a good point. I'm all for facts, but he seem's to be zooming in onto one fact (C number) which is insignificant in most use cases. There are other factors which he's simply ignoring, such as price and guaranteed cycle life. Also, Pylontech's are doing fantastically well in those independant trials taking place in Aus as well as in other international reviews. I haven't seen one credible independent review of the Hubble's as yet. Not saying they're bad battteries, just that there's a lot of info still missing. Pylon is now a tried and tested brand and that counts for something.

What solar system do you have, battery setup with inverter?

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, ThatGuy said:

To my mind, they HAVE to use accelerated testing methods or extrapolation, since testing a 9000 cycle battery would take... let see... 1C... 9000 cycles... the maths says... 375 days, minimum. Maybe it was done, but yeah no yeah, I don't see it happening. So my preference would be for a battery that's been on the market for at least a few years over a new-to-market, just because I believe they would have to be running product tests in parallel with actually releasing the battery. Would love to know if this is true or not.

Yes, that's why the AU testing is a good indication of what can be expected from a battery.  The Pylontechs were measured and came out at a much lower cycle than advertised, as did most of the batteries tested.

The Hubble and Bull people should have their batteries tested, simple, then we can make an informed decision as to what a "good deal" is....

Advertising is cheap talk until the batteries are tested and their performance confirmed. In fact a regulator should force this ........

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, FixAMess said:

So with 3*3.5kW pylontechs you should get a 4kW draw from the batteries = 83A, which is what I get occasionally. 

Are you feeding your entire house using 8kW Sunsync with no grid input (off-grid), then yes the 1c vs 0.5C will make a difference.

However, the entire purpose of having a hybrid grid-tied inverter is to cater for additional power when your PV+Battery is inadequate, so in reality the 1C vs 0.5C makes little difference because what your battery+PV cannot provide the grid will!

The 1C vs 0.5C is only really an issue when you are off grid....And who in his right mind requires an off-grid setup to provide 8kW of power, you will in any case require a massive battery bank so again the 1C vs 0.5C argument is a non issue.

"Currently they only get me to 3am" is that because you have a massive drain on them and require more capacity or because the 1C charge rate is an issue?

Yes in feeding my whole house from the sunsynk but still connected to the grid so in hybrid mode. I do however want to get my grid usage to zero eventually and the only way to do this would be to increase my battery bank to 6 pylontechs. 

The 0.5C discharge was only an issue once during a very early morning load shedding slot before the sun came up. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, FixAMess said:

Yes, that's why the AU testing is a good indication of what can be expected from a battery.  The Pylontechs were measured and came out at a much lower cycle than advertised, as did most of the batteries tested.

The Hubble and Bull people should have their batteries tested, simple, then we can make an informed decision as to what a "good deal" is....

Advertising is cheap talk until the batteries are tested and their performance confirmed. In fact a regulator should force this ........

100% Agree. I expect all batteries will have a cycle life lower than the "best guestimate" shown in the marketing toiletpaper, so the only way to know if the "specs" are comparable would be to know the test method, sample size and confidence level of result. I'd love for a manufacturer to step in and tell us why this can't be published, but I expect we'll stay disappointed since the quick turnaround to market doesn't warrant long-term testing for them.   

Short of that, the best criteria is other's experience with the batteries, or alternatively, price vs. risk!

(Actually I think my numbers were off, since even if they automated the process they'd have to discharge the batteries too... so 9000 cycles would actually take at least 2 years if they could charge up in 1 hour and discharge in 1 hour.)

Link to post
Share on other sites

image.thumb.png.2aa1ae8eafaf502744425119e6b38e5d.pngI would like if they could provide a graph rather with cycles and DOD. Neither 100% DOD, nor 50% DOD are real-world use-cases and you can't really estimate anything if you only have those two values. Also, is there a standard whereby "cycles" are measured? e.g. 80% capacity left after stated number of cycles. Or does everyone just use their own definition?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...