How much Solar v Batteries? What do you have?

[WotEver]

43 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

Rather than continually saying the chemistry doesnt allow faster charging, why not consider the facts that people who actually use this kit see a benefit.

Because it is important that folk appreciate that an AtoB can only help in one or more of the following circumstances...

• Where the alternator has a low voltage regulator
• Where split charge diodes are used 
• Where the alternator cabling is such that there is a voltage drop between alternator and batteries
• When the batteries are less than around 70% charged. 

Once the SoC reaches around 70% it is not possible to substantially speed up the final absorption phase of the charge because this is dictated by the battery chemistry, not the charge source.  This isn't something that I simply like saying, it is a fact.  

 

[WotEver]

48 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

It is a fact that we got more amps into our batteries with the Sterling unit. 

I've never suggested otherwise. If your installation fits one or more of the scenarios I listed above then the AtoB will certainly speed up the early charge stages slightly, but it won't do much once the batteries reach 70-80% SoC. 

Have a read of this article:

http://www.smartgauge.co.uk/controllers.html

[WotEver]

32 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

"500% more efficient"? Another technically meaningless term in my view! Charges five times quicker, I think Sterling claim. Also meaningless. I think they should say "charges in 20% of the time", which makes much more sense.

Not only incorrect use of units but more importantly it's missing the important words "up to" which even Charles Sterling uses in his marketing bumph. I presume you've seen the video where he uses a low voltage alternator and skinny cables to demonstrate how the charging voltage increases with the AtoB? 

[peterboat]

Back on thread I have 900watts of solar and 1500 AH of full traction batteries in the winter I still require the whispergen twice daily to top up the batteries. I have a washer, dishwasher etc but a Rayburn for the winter takes care of cooking hot water central heating etc.

Now with regular cruising in the winter the batteries are fully charged which as Mikes knows is a must.

The only changes I will make on the new boat are GTP batteries and about 2 KW of solar I will have another whispergen for charging, and hot water, central heating, along with another Rayburn as they are so cheap and work so well.

The new boat will be electric drive and going back to the broads where it came from, as Norfolk has the most sun hours in the country according to the tinternet [and much cheaper license fees]

So to the OP it is doable but in the winter care has to be taken to charge "proper batteries" to full as often as possible [this has worked for my battery bank over the last 13 years]

[WotEver]

38 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

... my expensive ones lasted five months when I looked after mine almost correctly, but not quite...

I suspect that the huge difference with Dr Bob is that he did his initial powered charge 1st thing in the day, which would have brought the batteries up to around 70-80% SoC and then solar & wind would top them up to close to 100% throughout the rest of the day. 

[Dr Bob]

3 hours ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

A few peripheral knit-pickings...

1) I can't help myself. I've held off saying this until now as I'm like a cracked record on this. I think you're using the wrong units here: "It is a fact that we got more amps into our batteries." I think you should be saying "It is a fact that we got more amp-hours into our batteries". This is important as new readers will struggle (as I did when I first started learning in depth about battery charging) to understand  why amps are being quoted when it ought to be amp-hours. 

2) "500% more efficient"? Another technically meaningless term in my view! Charges five times quicker, I think Sterling claim. Also meaningless. I think they should say "charges in 20% of the time", which makes much more sense.

3) Like you, I find battery charging has sublime aspects never quite explained by the technicians. I'm staggered your cheapo batteries lasted five years when my expensive ones lasted five months when I looked after mine almost correctly, but not quite, just as you did. And the anecdotes here about how gel batteries take so much more abuse than wet lead acid never seem to be fully explained either by applying conventional battery chemistry knowledge

1) Agreed

2) Agreed. I used 500% as that is what Sterling say.....

3) It is interesting that most of my friends with Sailing Boats who were also live aboards (so Yachts from 35-45 ft) were not changing batteries that often. 4-5 years seemed the norm. Our set up was pretty typical with 400Ahrs and only a very small inverter - fridge was 12V and electrical appliances (hair driers, curling tongues, coffee machines etc) only used on shore power. The main drain on power were the chart plotter (circa 4Ahr), fridge (3-4Ahr when on - I think), anchor light and tricolour at the top of the mast plus the only big draw was the anchor windlass which drew 80Ahr if I remember correctly. Some  boats had a Girlie Button which also took big power.  Only the biggest, heaviest boats had a washing machine!!!!! On this forum it seems the norm that batteries last a very short time. Could it be that it is the use of big inverters (2KW and above) that is killing the batteries? It will be interesting to see how mine last as our One Pot and Coffee maker are both taking 1.2KW and Washing machine that keeps tripping when the wife does a 30deg wash - told her to do cold washes for now.

[Dr Bob]

2 hours ago, WotEver said:

I suspect that the huge difference with Dr Bob is that he did his initial powered charge 1st thing in the day, which would have brought the batteries up to around 70-80% SoC and then solar & wind would top them up to close to 100% throughout the rest of the day. 

Not quite right but not far off. Yes typically the motor would be run first thing to get us out of a marina or off an anchorage, but the solar was a panel that had to be taken off when sailing so maybe only used every other day. Wind/water gen, used only when sailing fast enough.

I will be guided by what you say on our SoC but if it was only typically 80% then there is no way the bank would have lasted 5 years. I was paranoic about keeping it above 'My' 80% and it went below only on a few occasions, once on a North Sea race from Aberdeen to Stavanger where we couldnt run the engine and likely we went to 50% SoC (by amps out and voltage at rest) and another couple of 2 day races when it went below 'my' 80%. On a sailing yacht with no inverter it was pretty easy to see the voltage at rest as a lot of the time when racing everything was turned off.

[WotEver]

6 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

Could it be that it is the use of big inverters (2KW and above) that is killing the batteries?

That, coupled with inadequate charging. 

Yotties tend to be quite frugal with their consumption and have both solar and wind generation, both of which work far better offshore than in a ditch. 

[Alan de Enfield]

21 minutes ago, WotEver said:

far better offshore than in a ditch. 

AND - DON'T YOU START - NaughtyCal is in enough trouble !!!

[WotEver]

2 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

AND - DON'T YOU START - NaughtyCal is in enough trouble !!!

[rusty69]

26 minutes ago, WotEver said:

Yotties tend to be quite frugal with their consumption and have both solar and wind generation, both of which work far better offshore than in a ditch. 

We can easily go weeks on end with one battery and a 30W panel on our sailing boat. No fridge usage though (although it has got one) ,and summer uk only. Suspect it is very different in the Winter (depending of course what part of the world the yacht is kept)  

[nb Innisfree]

Up to 5 times faster = up to 5 times faster than worse case scenario = a really crap setup i.e thin cables, old fashioned alternator regulator, poor connections, split charge diodes etc etc. 
Charles does paint a wonderful picture of electrical bliss, getting the last ounce out of his adverts. Can't blame him really as he does tell the truth, it's just that some gullible buyers only take in the bits they want to believe and re-broadcast half truths. 

[MtB]

2 hours ago, nb Innisfree said:

Up to 5 times faster = up to 5 times faster than worse case scenario = a really crap setup i.e thin cables, old fashioned alternator regulator, poor connections, split charge diodes etc etc. 

 

Nope, sorry, still doesn't make logical sense. 

Ok in the worst case scenario it takes 10 hours to charge the batteries. Hour many hours would "five times faster" be? 

Are you claiming two hours?

Before you can evaluate "faster", you have to evaluate "fast", in order to multiply it by five. And "fast" is a subjective judgement as any fule kno, so it cannot be defined with a number. Therefore "five times faster" is a logical nonsense. 

[cereal tiller]

17 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Nope, sorry, still doesn't make logical sense. 

Ok in the worst case scenario it takes 10 hours to charge the batteries. Hour many hours would "five times faster" be? 

Are you claiming two hours?

Before you can evaluate "faster", you have to evaluate "fast", in order to multiply it by five. And "fast" is a subjective judgement as any fule kno, so it cannot be defined with a number. Therefore "five times faster" is a logical nonsense. 

Charles Sterling is brusque and also rather clever,I generally tend to understand him.

[rusty69]

8 minutes ago, cereal tiller said:

Charles Sterling is brusque and also rather clever,I generally tend to understand him.

Oh hang on, that's Charles Xavier. 

[cereal tiller]

Just now, rusty69 said:

Oh hang on, that's Charles Xavier. 

No,it's Paddy Picardo Stooart

[rusty69]

2 minutes ago, cereal tiller said:

No,it's Paddy Picardo Stooart

Le cute arse

[nb Innisfree]

26 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

Nope, sorry, still doesn't make logical sense. 

Ok in the worst case scenario it takes 10 hours to charge the batteries. Hour many hours would "five times faster" be? 

Are you claiming two hours?

Before you can evaluate "faster", you have to evaluate "fast", in order to multiply it by five. And "fast" is a subjective judgement as any fule kno, so it cannot be defined with a number. Therefore "five times faster" is a logical nonsense. 

I'm saying worse case scenario would take considerably longer than best case, it could be at least 5 times slower. I'm not claiming 2 hours but what I will claim is that best case charging to 100% SoC  takes at least 24 hrs (theoretically 100% as it's impossible to get to a true 100%)

Therefore Sterling's claims can't be disproved. 

[cereal tiller]

3 minutes ago, rusty69 said:

Le cute arse

Derriere ektchew-alley yold Chepp.don't be so "Vacance de la Mer"

Edited July 17, 2017 by cereal tiller

[rusty69]

Just now, cereal tiller said:

Derriere old Chepp.don't be so "Vacance de la Mer"

Ok, Le Cute Derriere of Borg

[MtB]

25 minutes ago, cereal tiller said:

Charles Sterling is brusque and also rather clever,I generally tend to understand him.

Well you seem to be the only one 

Could you enlighten me please? What DOES he mean by "up to five times faster" As little as two hours when ten would have otherwise been the case?

Or something else?

Numbers please!

[cereal tiller]

Just now, Mike the Boilerman said:

Well you seem to be the only one 

Could you enlighten me please? What DOES he mean by "up to five times faster" As little as two hours when ten would have otherwise been the case?

Or something else?

Numbers please!

Half of Ten,simple.

If you Drive a Vehicle at 50 MPH you will get there,wait for it............ 5 times faster.

[MtB]

1 minute ago, cereal tiller said:

Half of Ten,simple.

If you Drive a Vehicle at 50 MPH you will get there,wait for it............ 5 times faster.

 

Nope, I'm still lost...

[nb Innisfree]

10 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

Well you seem to be the only one 

Could you enlighten me please? What DOES he mean by "up to five times faster" As little as two hours when ten would have otherwise been the case?

Or something else?

Numbers please!

Why 10?

[WotEver]

So the equation for "Five times faster" looks like...

5 x fast = 

??? 

It makes no sense.

Does he mean "As little as one fifth of the time"?  If so, why didn't he say so?  It couldn't be that a nonsense claim can't be disproved could it?