diy solar

diy solar

EVE matched cells, some cells drops very fast

If I'm reading correctly Highvolt paid an extra $4 per cell to get 280ah cells and he still not getting "ALL" cells at 280ah. He's getting 278ah cells, the weakest cell sets the capacity for all in the battery pack.
That remains to be seen. Let's hope so when he receives the cells and tests. them.

Is the average DIYer properly top or bottom balancing and if they are capacity testing the entire cells voltage range.
I think most of us do a proper top balance. I am 100% certain I did. I didn't capacity test each cell but it obvious I have a weak cell. I still get 272ah's from the pack so I am not complaining. That's 97% capacity. And I have tested the whole voltage range that I possibly can before the BMS's HVD and LVD kicks in.

In the big scheme once the cells are made into pack and the pack put in to service with proper safe guards in place and it the system is used within the limitations of said system life should be great .
I agree. I am getting 248ah's usable capacity between the knees, or what I refer to as the sweet spot of my cells, when the cells start to drift around 20mv's or so at the top and the bottom.

If you're buying economy priced cells just knock off 10 or so ah in to your figures. Just my opinion. ;)
That's a good way to look at it. But it does not dismiss that suppliers are advertising these cells as Grade A, and clearly they are not. Some of the EVE cells have tested as low as 265ah's and that might not be acceptable to some.
 
The issue as I see it is with the resellers not the country. By EVE's own standards a cell must be greater than or equal to 280Ah to be considered a Grade A 280Ah cell. The test method (outlined in the latest LF280 datasheet) tests at (A) 25*C, (B) 0.5C charge to 3.65 (C) 1C Discharge to 2.5

There are many things that are ambiguous but this is not one of them.
Yes the test conditions are unambiguous, however if you scrole down the datasheet further to electrical performance, then normal discharge at 0.33CA =100% capacity, 0.5CA is > or = to 98% capacity.....so for me, most of these are checking out to spec if they at least meet 98%.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
Marketing aside (terms like grade A),
Cell grade is not a marketing term, but it is frequently used as one and watered down to the point that a reseller (or a consumer) saying a cell is grade A is nearly meaningless in my eyes.

I think we all know at this price we are buying the old (previous model) cells that the EV manufacturers reject and the vendor does not want to put their brand and warranty on.
You would think, but the resellers, the Xuba megathread, and to a lesser extent the first month or two of the original group buy thread, gave a lot of people the impression they were buying Grade A cells, and many people assumed they were buying matched cells as well. A couple even believed Xuba was the authorized reseller for EVE.

I see you joined in October, not sure how long you participated before joining, but you joined right around the time, more people started capacity testing and the awareness started to shift to a more reasonable place. If you had joined 3 or 6 months earlier you would see a lot of people repeating with confidence that they are A grade cells (some people still say this), and much less awareness that they are not matched cells.

If you spend any time answering questions in the beginner section, you will come across many people to this day that are under this impression. Sometimes making dangerous assumptions based on this misunderstanding "I have grade A matched cells can I get by without a BMS? "...do I need to balance if they were matched by Xuba?"

They have not been matched or balanced. I'm personally OK with one cell that achieves 99.6% of its rated capacity, while some of the cells have achieved slightly more. Sure, I would have liked them all to get to 285Ah but at the price I don't feel ripped off or mislead. Will see how they go with a capacity test once assembled.
I think this is the right mindset. Discount stuff (batteries and otherwise) is usually discounted for a reason. But if the discount is greater than reason (or the reason doesn't apply to your situation) the discounted second tier product can be a great value. And if you are skeptical and temper your expectations upfront there is a greater chance of having your expectations met or exceeded.

So while I think you can rightly feel not 'ripped off' if you get 99.5% or even 95% capacity, because you expected it was a possibility, and I think you can rightly feel you got a good deal even, I also think this is because you had realistic expectations up front. People are justified in feeling mislead (by the resellers, by other forum membes), particularly the early group buyers where the reseller's explicitly claimed that all cells had been capacity tested and matched, but outside of the group buy as well where resellers claimed the cells were Grade A (a cell by definition cannot be both Grade A and under rated capacity). People that bought under those assumptions, have a right to feel mislead. Though personally I would consider 1 or 2% within the margin of error for any single test (but the proof for me is in the repeatable <280Ah capacity tests by different people with different test equipment in different test conditions).

The upside is that I think the forum is slowly returning to a more reasonable and realistic place, I think we lost that skepticism and awareness of the tradeoffs and our uncertain and limited information for a while, but the pendulum is beginning to swing back towards the center.

Sorry this is more longwinded than I meant it to be (Who woulda thunk... Dzl writing way more than is necessary to convey a point that couldve been made in a few sentences... Surely that has never happened before ?)

Point was, I think your skepticism and measured expectations are a good approach, and I think you will likely be satisfied with your purchase (along with the majority of other buyers) B grade cells can be a good value despite the uncertainty of quality, if you are willing to accept the risk/tradeoffs and are aware of them when you make the purchase. But people also have a right to feel mislead if explicit claims made by the resellers (or others) are verifiably not true.
 
Think about this for a moment, if these cells (meaning any reseller) just lowered by 5ah and still sold them at the same price. Folks would be creaming in their tighty whiteys saying how they got an extra 1 or 2 ah out of the cells but instead the resllers claim a higher amount and folks go crazy trying to find the couple of ah hiding in the chemistry they purchased when capacity testing them.
I definitely agree. I think that if the resellers just marketed them accurately people would still be rushing to buy them, they would be an even better value (the same value + whatever value the customer adds for honesty).

If they were acknowledged these to be Grade B cells, and guaranteeing something like ~95% capacity or higher, I think they would be very popular. Especially if one of the more established, more trusted sellers (Luyuan for instance) led the way.

The problem who is going to be the first reseller to do this. Early on, 2 resellers did acknowledge they were B grade cells. Almost nobody bought from them, and that info was basically buried early on, the sellers that got popular were the sellers that told us what we wanted to hear. I think more than we want to admit, we contribute to the problem. On the one hand we crave honesty and transparency, on the other hand we want to believe we are buying A grade cells at B grade prices.


If I'm reading correctly Highvolt paid an extra $4 per cell to get 280ah cells and he still not getting "ALL" cells at 280ah. He's getting 278ah cells, the weakest cell sets the capacity for all in the battery pack.
Yeah, this struck me as weird too. Particularly considering that the 4 worst cells were already eliminated, and that the discharge was 20A (or 0.07C which should be very accomodating to capacity test results)

Is the average DIYer properly top or bottom balancing and if they are capacity testing the entire cells voltage range.
Is some cases no, in some cases yes, I think any individual test should not be considered evidence on its own, but many tests from many people showing the same trend is meaningful. Further, because most people can't achieve anywhere near a 1C discharge, the testing we do should theoretically skew high, not low (assuming the full range is tested).

The aggregate capacity test results gain more significance when you consider some of the testers go further and individually capacity test cells, or individually capacity test their weak cell which eliminates any chance of an improper balance skewing results.


In the big scheme once the cells are made into pack and the pack put in to service with proper safe guards in place and it the system is used within the limitations of said system life should be great .

If you're buying economy priced cells just knock off 10 or so ah in to your figures. Just my opinion. ;)
(y)
 
Yes the test conditions are unambiguous, however if you scrole down the datasheet further to electrical performance, then normal discharge at 0.33CA =100% capacity, 0.5CA is > or = to 98% capacity.....so for me, most of these are checking out to spec if they at least meet 98%.

This is a good point, I have seen this apparent contradiction as well but have never looked into it.

On the one hand, EVE clearly states in the datasheet how capacity is determined and what the test conditions are for determining minimum capacity.

On the other hand they go on to seemingly contradict that with the portion you quoted. I have a feeling it is an issue of misunderstanding on mistranslation but honestly I don't know, I think I will look into it a bit further, see if other datasheets have similar sections that may be more clear. Because as it stands now, I'm not sure how to reconcile those two sections.
 
This is a good point, I have seen this apparent contradiction as well but have never looked into it.

On the one hand, EVE clearly states in the datasheet how capacity is determined and what the test conditions are for determining minimum capacity.

On the other hand they go on to seemingly contradict that with the portion you quoted. I have a feeling it is an issue of misunderstanding on mistranslation but honestly I don't know, I think I will look into it a bit further, see if other datasheets have similar sections that may be more clear. Because as it stands now, I'm not sure how to reconcile those two sections.
I think if cells are within 98% capacity, folks have 9 capacity tests to run before complaining..3 each 0.33CA, 0.5CA & 1CA discharges respectively.

I also read something, somewhere in this forum, that as the individual done more testing, their figures came up, the more cycling they done, but i dont understand the mechanism for this happening?
Any idea's how this could be possible?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
I think if cells are within 98% capacity, folks have 9 capacity test to run before complaining..3 each 0.33CA, 0.5CA & 1CA respectively.
Well, that is only if people are actually testing above 0.33C (92A) which is not what I have observed.

From what I have seen most everyone tests below 0.5C and most are testing at like 0.2, 0.1, or 0.05C. No need to test the higher C-rates if the ultra low C-rate doesn't meet capacity.

I also read something, somewhere in this forum, that as the individual done more testing, their figures came up, the more cycling they done, but i don't understand the mechanism for this happening?
Any idea's how this could be possible?
Yeah I recall one (or maybe two) people saying this. I don't understand the mechanism for this either but I am willing to accept it might exist, I'm not knowledgeable enough to say one way or the other, but I don't recall seeing any reputable resources mentioning this phenomenon.

I would be very curious to learn more.

Some people say there is some amount of memory effect with LFP (and some people vehemently say this is not true), I don't know one way or other, but if true it might explain this phenomenon to a degree. That said, I don't feel there is sufficient evidence to believe this phenomenon exists yet, one or two people on a forum saying it exists is pretty shaky (from my recollection it was mentioned, not demonstrated with testing). I would still like to learn more about it though and accept that it could be possible.
 
I like the parallel step method outlined in the marinehowto article:
Code:
    Parallel Step-Method Top Balance:

    0- Verify cells are at similar SOC/voltage, prior to wiring them in parallel.
    1- Wire the cells in parallel
    2- Set the power supply to 3.40V and 80% or less of the rated amperage (80% to not burn it out)
    3- Turn on power supply and charge cells to 3.400V
    4- When current has dropped to 0.0A at 3.400V turn off the power supply & set it to 3.500V
    5- Turn on power supply and charge cells to 3.500V
    6- When current has dropped to 0.0A at 3.500V turn off the power supply & set to 3.600V
    7- Allow current to drop to 0.0A (or very close) at 3.60V
    8- Done, pack is balanced.

The advantages of doing it in steps are (1) less time spent at or near 3.65V, (2) makes it easy to be present and attentive during the last phase (3) gives you a few steps to catch a mistake.

I also suggest you read the great resources filterguy has put together on the topic of balancing
explanation-for-beginners-of-top-and-bottom-balance
top-balancing-lifepo4-cells-using-a-low-cost-benchtop-power-supply
It seems like many people coming to the forum with individual cell issues were too impacient to follow the steps to properly top balance before assembling their battery packs and then have a lot of brain damage trying to fix their aberrant cells after the fact. Also seems like many have not watched the videos or read the wonderful resources here and also charge at really high charge rates. An ounce of prevention with these expensive batteries is well worth a pound of cure...pardon my soapbox please and thank you all that always pitch in to bail us out.
 
Well, that is only if people are actually testing above 0.33C (92A) which is not what I have observed.

From what I have seen most everyone tests below 0.5C and most are testing at like 0.2, 0.1, or 0.05C. No need to test the higher C-rates if the ultra low C-rate doesn't meet capacity.
Yes, i see your point. I thought it was folks testing under the 'standard test conditions of 0.5CA' and then complaining they didnt get 100%. (y)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dzl
Yes, i see your point. I thought it was folks testing under the 'standard test conditions of 0.5CA' and then complaining they didnt get 100%. (y)
I still believe it should hit the rated capacity at 0.5C (even though I do not understand the apparent contradiction later in the document). Too bad we didn't have this question when Ghostwriter was in contact with the engineers at EVE, it would've been great to get this cleared up.

But yeah, of all the capacity tests I have seen, Cinergi's was the only at or near 0.5C that I can remember, and if I recall, he has since verified his results with tests at lower C rates.

For defining minimum rated capacity the document is pretty clear in my eyes:
Minimum Capacity: 280.0Ah @ 0.5C discharge | Discharge current 0.5C with 2.5V cut off. (25±2)°C

But I do not understand how to interpret the second section you pointed out.

Interestingly, the datasheet for the new model (LF280N) contains the same section on electrical performance, but does not contain the contradiction that is present in the older model datasheet (at .33C, 0.5C, and 1C capacity should all be > 100% for the new model). I briefly checked the CALB SE200 and Lishen 272 datasheets, they do not contain the contradiction either.
 
Some people say there is some amount of memory effect with LFP (and some people vehemently say this is not true),
It's not the same type of memory effect that we saw with nicads. From what I have seen on google the memory effect does exist with LifePo4 especially when used in EV applications. For our applications I don't think it's anything to worry about. Anyone is welcome to google it. It could all be a myth.
 
Cell grade is not a marketing term, but it is frequently used as one and watered down to the point that a reseller (or a consumer) saying a cell is grade A is nearly meaningless in my eyes.

You would think, but the resellers, the Xuba megathread, and to a lesser extent the first month or two of the original group buy thread, gave a lot of people the impression they were buying Grade A cells, and many people assumed they were buying matched cells as well. A couple even believed Xuba was the authorized reseller for EVE.

I think you would find that the resellers will quickly say the cells are A- or some such. Logically if a cell met all specs it would not be sold as grey market - there is an almost unlimited demand so why wouldn't EVE sell themselves? Even the resellers are selling them as fast as they can get them in the door by the truckload so they are not going to change their approach unless it increases their profit margins.

I've purchased enough times from that part of the world to suspect how things would go. Westerners are preconditioned to believe marketing but those with some experience tend to consider price as a direct measure of quality. You are not going to get a Tesla Powerwall for 25% of the price.

This is all pretty academic based upon people's perception of if they are being marketed to or lied to. Most consumers would not even bother to test the capacity of a low cost battery purchased and installed in a vehicle etc. as Will is doing. -0.6% on spec is just not relevant. Ever buy a 2.0 liter car and discover it is in fact only 1.96l? Or that the fuel consumption and pollution figures only apply if it is hooked up to a test stand :ROFLMAO:
 
I'm currently testing each of my 36 EVE 280 cells at 15 amps. Results so far (23 of 36):

270
278
276
280
280
270
271
270
278
269
268
281
272
274
273
276
270
277
280
277
273
273
275

Varying C rates hasn't changed the capacity I'm getting.
 
I just saw an interesting video in which a VP with Panasonic Energy North American talked about the formation stage of producing cells. She is involved in running the manufacturing of cells at the Tesla Gigafactory. She only talked about what a time consuming process it was to put cells through the many cycles to do that process. This is for cells that are less than 10 Ahrs. I can imagine how much longer it would take to do 280 Ahr cells for EVE and how much more efficient it would be for them to unload the cells that only meet a minimum spec.
I think this is where the grey market cells we see are coming from. As I have said many times it is about managing expectations. I am happy with the performance I am getting out of these cells. If I was building an EV I would probably go with higher end matched cells.
 
I am sure you will like it. The 18 amp version came out soon after I received the 12 amp version. It comes with a temp. sensor too which I taped to the top of the power supply.

As I recall setting to 3.4 volts dropped the current quite a bit. You will find this out. What you could do is set it to 3.65 volts while you are attending it. And shut of power going into the cells when you can't be around to watch. As long as the power supply is left on it will keep tracking the total amp hours and watt hours going into the cells. You will see all of this once you put it together. I found the instructions to be very helpful.

I did test it on my Valence batteries before I started my top balance. So if you have a battery you can test it on for peace of mind that would be good.

One other thing...get the clock battery. Especially if you got the wifi board. You want to put the battery in because the wifi board covers it up and it can be tricky to remove for the battery install as I found out.
Hello,
Ho yes, thanks, the battery is a CR1220, though it was included. Yes I would do something like that and stop charging for a night or so if I can't be awake when interesting things happened .
Seems the RD6018 got a power limiter function that is not present in other model, I dunno when it will be useful to me, but still..it's here.
 
I'm currently testing each of my 36 EVE 280 cells at 15 amps. Results so far (23 of 36):

270
278
276
280
280
270
271
270
278
269
268
281
272
274
273
276
270
277
280
277
273
273
275

Varying C rates hasn't changed the capacity I'm getting.
Had they all been sold as 272's you would be delighted. As 280's, there are a fairly high number below 98% capacity. I'll be interested to see your final tally. How much have you varied the C rates?
 
I am sure you will like it. The 18 amp version came out soon after I received the 12 amp version. It comes with a temp. sensor too which I taped to the top of the power supply.

As I recall setting to 3.4 volts dropped the current quite a bit. You will find this out. What you could do is set it to 3.65 volts while you are attending it. And shut of power going into the cells when you can't be around to watch. As long as the power supply is left on it will keep tracking the total amp hours and watt hours going into the cells. You will see all of this once you put it together. I found the instructions to be very helpful.

I did test it on my Valence batteries before I started my top balance. So if you have a battery you can test it on for peace of mind that would be good.

One other thing...get the clock battery. Especially if you got the wifi board. You want to put the battery in because the wifi board covers it up and it can be tricky to remove for the battery install as I found out.
Riden 6012w or 6018w - buy one ---- yes, I found out you have to buy the clock battery - not included; you have to buy a power cord for the power supply - not included; you have to buy the banana post leads with an alligator clamp on the other end - not included; (I bought 20 amp capable silicone ones. buy the better ones;) assemble it. it works great with good accuracy. I have the Riden 6012w which means wifi. I ordered the 6018w with a 1200 watt power supply.. it is on its way. somewhere on a boat ride but it has been shipped. probably after Christmas before I get to assembly the 6018w. I really like the Riden 6012w so had to order the 6018w as the upgrade to the solar power shed.
we are having a white Christmas here at pilgrimvalley in South Dakota....yea ....ho ho ho! snowed about 5 inches today.:)
 
I think you would find that the resellers will quickly say the cells are A- or some such. Logically if a cell met all specs it would not be sold as grey market - there is an almost unlimited demand so why wouldn't EVE sell themselves? Even the resellers are selling them as fast as they can get them in the door by the truckload so they are not going to change their approach unless it increases their profit margins.

I've purchased enough times from that part of the world to suspect how things would go. Westerners are preconditioned to believe marketing but those with some experience tend to consider price as a direct measure of quality. You are not going to get a Tesla Powerwall for 25% of the price.

This is all pretty academic based upon people's perception of if they are being marketed to or lied to. Most consumers would not even bother to test the capacity of a low cost battery purchased and installed in a vehicle etc. as Will is doing. -0.6% on spec is just not relevant. Ever buy a 2.0 liter car and discover it is in fact only 1.96l? Or that the fuel consumption and pollution figures only apply if it is hooked up to a test stand :ROFLMAO:
yes, Chinese tools do not equal high-quality German tools. this was quite obvious when buying tools in Bolivia South America. the USA made tools were definitely of higher quality than the cheap china imports. you do not get a Mercedes for the same price as a Yugo. these 280Ah cells are at bargain prices right now for the DIY solar people. likely a few duds here and there. I have been buying the Lishen 280Ah cells but probably the same as the 272Ah ones, although they did have both in the same advertisement at slightly different prices. sorry for the soapbox but be happy for the low prices of today for the better LiFePO4 batteries.
Merry Christmas -- it is a white Christmas in South Dakota --- we received 5 plus inches of snow and still snowing ---ho ho ho. :)
 
yes, Chinese tools do not equal high-quality German tools. this was quite obvious when buying tools in Bolivia South America. the USA made tools were definitely of higher quality than the cheap china imports. you do not get a Mercedes for the same price as a Yugo. these 280Ah cells are at bargain prices right now for the DIY solar people. likely a few duds here and there.
(y)
I have been buying the Lishen 280Ah cells but probably the same as the 272Ah ones, although they did have both in the same advertisement at slightly different prices.
To the best of my knowledge there is no 280Ah Lishen cell, Lishen produces a cell rated at 272Ah, which the resellers are sometimes marketing as a 280Ah cell (it is common for some manufacturers to de-rate capacity slightly to account for the initial capacity drop in the first couple hundred cycles, and other factors). So 272Ah cells may test at or above 280Ah initially, it is too early to say conclusively (the first capacity test I have seen for the Lishen's showed cells ranging from ~274-284 I think). What we can say conclusively is they are rated for 272 Ah, the manufacturer considers them 272 Ah, and we should in my opinion use the manufacturers stated capacity from the datasheet when talking about these cells, any additional capacity is icing on the cake.

This screenshot of the EVE cycle life curve shows one of the reasons why some manufacturers like CALB and Winston and possibly Lishen de-rate actual capacity:
Screenshot_2020-12-23 EVE LF280N-72174 Specification pdf.png
You can see in the first few hundred cycles there is a considerable capacity loss that then flattens out considerably.
 
Back
Top