Recomendation for settings

[FNG]

You will not find any battery in the lead-acid camp that high, Try setting it for 90 or 92%

[carmelo]

Ok.

I will doing a few changes this weekend.

1. Change my PV array from 2 strings of 4 to 3 strings of 3, since I was able to get ahold of a 9th PV. This should take me to acceptable parameters based on the attached results using the sizing tool. Will this make my system more efficient since I am decreasing volts and increasing amps? My cable run from PVs to combiner box is only about 30 feet.

2. Will adjust the battery efficiency to 92% and all the CC parameters to:
a. Absorb 28.8 v
b. Float  27.3
c. Absorb time 4 hours and using ending amps and whizbang
d. Ending Amps 5.6 amps
e. -3 mv for temperature compensation

[Vic]

Ok.

I will doing a few changes this weekend.

1. Change my PV array from 2 strings of 4 to 3 strings of 3, since I was able to get ahold of a 9th PV. This should take me to acceptable parameters based on the attached results using the sizing tool. Will this make my system more efficient since I am decreasing volts and increasing amps? My cable run from PVs to combiner box is only about 30 feet.

2. Will adjust the battery efficiency to 92% and all the CC parameters to:
a. Absorb 28.8 v
b. Float  27.3
c. Absorb time 4 hours and using ending amps and whizbang
d. Ending Amps 5.6 amps
e. -3 mv for temperature compensation

Hi carmelo,

Great that you have found that additional PV.   Was it also an SW 240?  If not what are its specs?

YES,   the Classic be more efficient,  than with your previous strings of four SW 240s.   There has been an increase in power production,   due to the added PV.   AND,   there is no chance that the Classic will reach the HyperVOC point,  where it would cease operation during coolest weather.  The Classic could easily run a but cooler with strings of three PVs,  verses the previous strings of four,   even with the increased power production from the added ninth PV.   Using strings of three PVs  IS a better configuration.

I have attached the new configuration (the one you posted,  had no data).

Your new charge parameters seem OK,   for now.   Many folks say that new AGM batteries will have a charge efficiency of 94 - 95%.   But 92%  is a fine place to start.   You will be able to dial this in,   as necessary as the batteries cycle,   and you are able to monitor how this setting works.

Regarding the EA of  5.6 WbJr Amps,   you will need to watch the rate-of-change of Wb current, near the end of Absorb.   For the Flooded LA battery systems that we have setup,   the ideal Wb EA setting is in the very flat part of the current curve  --  one where one begins to wonder if that EA value will ever be reached.

AGM batteries,   generally,   seem to like relatively long Absorbs.   Because one cannot measure the actual SOC of sealed batteries cannot be easily measured (like using a Hydrometer on Flooded LA batteries),   erring a bit on the side of a bit longer-than-necessary Absorb,   is considerably better than using an Absorb that is too short IMO.

Good luck with the new setup,   please let us know how the system is performing,   Vic

[Westbranch]

94 % is possibly a better value to use, there are lots of places that will lower the efficiency of the battery, internal connections and all.  Give that number a try and see how it fits.... you may end up in between 94 and 98 or not, trial and error..