All theoretical so cant give exact numbers/actually calculate efficiency which might make this an impossible question.
However I'm trying to understand in theory which of these approaches would result in the most efficient way of getting hydro power into a battery. (ignoring cost at the moment)
Option 1: (MPPT Route: The way I'm more familiar with):
Hydro generator configured to output 3 phase power. This is passed through a bridge rectifier to get DC power, then into an MPPT controller which charges battery. Integrated into Victron system either as a solar charge controller or using shunt on battery side to show generation as hydro.
Option 2: (less familiar but would work battery-less):
Hydro generator configured as single phase power. With dynamic load controllers to ensure frequency output is kept at a constant 50hz. Most likely integrated into victron system as a generator or maybe AC coupled PV. The inverter/charger would then would then charge the battery.
In my head system 1 has the benefit of 3 phase generation, however does have bridge rectification and buck converter (in mppt) so 3 steps...
Whereas system 2 has the disadvantage of producing single phase/less efficient rectification but doesnt need the additional buck conversion.
As a guess I'd say option 1 is typically the more efficient route (purely in terms of energy conversion) because you've got benefit of 3 phase production and the MPPT buck conversion i would've thought is pretty efficient.
(In my area i also anticipate it to be the cheaper of the two as finding reliable/affordable frequency control systems seems far harder than a hydro supported mppt although i did say ignore cost for now)
However option 1 does need a battery to "work". Whereas option 2 could just be directly used.
Is there any major aspect of each option I'm missing understanding/not fully appreciating or are my guesses along the right lines?
