Not discussed thus far is the extent to which L3 [Lithium Life Loss] wreaks havoc on the reliability of the output displayed by the BMS that was calibrated to the original nominal capacity.
. . . I have largely ignored . . . [most measurements] . . . in favor of that one magic number displayed in the biggest, most convenient font - the percent SOC.
L3 destroys the accuracy of the percent SOC readout, and recalibrating it to the reduced effective battery capacity is not as easy as theory suggests. The drift is somehow far larger than what my intuition says it should be, leading to the following maddening result: Right at the point where my reduced battery capacity requires me to monitor the SOC more closely than ever, my ability to do so is thwarted . . .
We have been faced with the same basic question - - we programmed (both) of our battery monitors to 500ah . . . now the pack only has 415ahs - - What to do?
Our first inquiry was: Does it matter? “Does it really destroy the accuracy of the percent SoC” in a meaningfull way? If one knows that - - rather than 1 to 100 - - the real SoC range is 17 to 100, don't they still have a pretty good picture of the status of charge of their battery? Of course the displayed number is not the actual SoC percentage - - yet, knowing that our bottom is 17, we can ignore the fact that the displayed number is not a percentage, as we still know where we are within the battery's range.
In the end, at least so far, we’ve elected to do nothing. These monitors do exactly the same as they did on Day 1 - - they reset to 100% when the pack is fully charged and they accurately decrement the AH’s used, the Watt-Hours used, the pack voltage, currents in and out . . . everything the same, even though our actual capacity is now only 415ahs. The only thing these monitors don’t accurately report . . . is the amount of charge remaining. But, as noted, we really know how much we have left - - we know the number of AH’s used, and we know that we started with 415AHs. Or, again, we look at those SoC numbers knowing that 100 is FULL and 17 is EMPTY.
We could, of course, reprogram our monitors to this lesser capacity. It makes sense. But it didn’t seem necessary as long as we remember that when our displays says we’re down to “17%” - - we’re actually at zero.
If there’s some distortion in tracking/linearity - - we haven’t noticed it. And the fact that one of our monitors (the Victron 712) provides, in addition to State of Charge, an accounting of AH’s used - - this is an accurate measure of energy removed from the pack and is immune from discharge non-linearity.
This prompts us to respond to Davydd’s post at #33 where he comments: “I thought it [Lithium Life Loss] was imperceptible after 6 years of ownership. It was the same general percent usage overnight and charged back up in the same amount of time.”
Of course! Davydd could have had a 50% Lithium Life Loss and he would have noticed no change in his instrumentation. He’s using the same power each night. The instrument is properly ‘decrementing' his AH’s used and State of Discharge (albeit, the SoC number would have been highly inaccurate). Regardless of the actual health of his battery - - those overnight numbers wouldn’t change - - Davydd would not have noticed a problem until he tried to discharge his batteries below the 50% SoC level at which point he’d be ‘dead in the water’. Davydd, having a very similar system to ours, we’d have loved it had someone actually measured your actual capacity at the time of sale.