It doesn’t need much interpretation, it’s quite clear. The only thing I didn’t quite understand was the difference between “DIY” and “customer”. Isn’t DIY a customer?
That said, I wanted to add that the issue I raised is not about “being too complicated”. The answers that treated the issue as if I were talking about a personal difficulty I had in understanding the documents actually created a straw man fallacy to counter my criticism and suggestion. The problem I pointed out was not that something was “too complicated” and “difficult to understand”, it was actually almost the opposite, it was about parts that were oversimplified, without communicating the complexity involved. Treating it as if there were only one type of LiFePO4 battery for 48V systems is oversimplifying, it is ignoring the complexity of the existence of two types of LiFePO4 batteries for 48V systems. It’s not that the message is correct, but complicated for those who don’t have the knowledge to understand, it’s that the message is wrong, it gives a logically wrong idea, it is poorly defined, poorly specified. It is different from being complicated for those who do not have the necessary technical knowledge.
As an experienced electrical engineer, I too had difficulty in understanding some formulations in the ESS instllation manual. This is partly because various battery types are included, and the manual tries to catch them all. And it is also because the manual has been updated over the last 8 years by deletimg and adding sections.
It is safe t assume that today 90% of the ESS installtions are using LFP batteries.
And Lead-acid is even not recommended (in the manual).
Despite this, the “battery life” function is specifically designed to keep the lead acid batteries always topped up. Whereas for lithium LFP, keeping them over 95% SOC, or over 3,50 V per cell would actully shorten their lifetime.
My suggestion to Victron is to write a newspecific ESS manual (or chapter) for LFP with all the proper setting and battery life function explained. And aditionally another manual (or chapter) for LA.
NB: I am available to Victron to make a proposal for this
Even the official ship installers like from Oechies, Royal vd Leun and the people i know from Verhoef EMC here in the Netherlands don’t know about ESS possibilities of victron systems. They think it’s only about batteries and shore power. I don’t trust official installers for that reason.
This is exactly my experience. The installers (even the foremen) go to a training(s), survive it and basically with a help of support they find a way to (more or less) efficiently install 1 set of products (1 invertor, 1 battery, …) in 1 configuration. Anything more you ask from them or any details you’d like to know, they’re unable to provide it.
Of course, this is NOT situation of every installer, I’m sure there are some great ones out there. But pretty much situation of a average installing team.
And even talking to “geeks” in some of the better companies (like the one I bought my battery from), you can see that there’s a limit to their knowledge; so while this is can be very valuable and helpful, you always need to verify everything yourself.
To be clear, I don’t blame Victron’s documenation. Though I think it’s old-fashioned style is a factor, I think the situation on the market is the main reason (too many people who shouldn’t do it, but happen to have some basic electrical formal education in combination of market being hungry).
Maybe we need to differentiate to the market the installers are selling their products. I am sure that Harold Halewijn with his company “hetslimmehuis” and off-grid centrum and probably many more know all that is needed for home installations.
The problem is with the variety of possibilities with victron equipment. A ship installer needs very different information than a home battery installer. On a sailboat or RV there are many different possibilities and customer needs.
That’s why i suggested a straight forward home battery package with all that is needed for home installations including battery, cable, breakers and simple setting with a small manual.
That’s why this argument that choosing equipment, installing it and configuring it is something for “trained professionals who know what they’re doing” makes no sense. And well-explained documents are also important, even for those who have good knowledge, experience and training. Victron has a lot of very good and well-explained documentation, but it can also improve and detail a lot of things better. Having examples of use cases, of sets of equipment for certain applications, is something that can be very interesting and useful and serve as a basis for the person to understand what they want or need and assemble their system. Some of this has already been said in some documents, but I think there could be more. I see that Victron representatives try to help in the preparation of a project by focusing too much on things that are not so important. The first thing I see them saying is that the person needs to make an exact survey of what they intend to use in the electrical installation. But no one knows this exactly, and knowing exactly is not necessary to assemble a system! The most interesting approach is not this one that is so specific and detailed. For example, for an RV, you could have system capacity categories and take a more general approach, such as: “with a 2 kVA inverter you can use it for such things (small or medium power), if you also want to use such things (higher power), now or be prepared to use them in the future, you will need a 5 kVA inverter”. You could have a document just about applications, with the design of a large system including all Victron equipment and in each position of the system all the model options with explanations about the main advantages and disadvantages of each model, which equipment is necessary or optional for certain types of application, etc. This is information that Victron already has, but which is not explicit and gathered. Victron already has it because I understand that every model of equipment that Victron decides to manufacture is designed to meet a certain application or need! Victron does not create a model without knowing what that model will be used for, with those specific characteristics! Of course, the applications of each model are infinite and can be used in many situations that Victron never even imagined, but knowing what applications and needs were initially thought of for the model also helps to think about these other uses and applications.
Reading many of the comments here, it often feels like people are mostly looking for someone to blame — first the manufacturers, then the installers. I’ve worked in both areas and know from experience why companies limit access to certain configuration options: to ensure systems are set up safely and correctly by trained professionals.
Much of the debate reveals a lack of technical understanding. For example, discussing whether a 48V battery should show exactly 48V is like arguing over a 12V car battery showing 12.6V — it’s basic knowledge and not worth a drawn-out argument.
Personally, I’m grateful that companies like Victron are willing to engage with open-source technologies and provide flexible interfaces. It’s disappointing to see them subjected to harsh criticism that, in many cases, stems from a lack of understanding. If this continues, Victron may be forced to rethink its distribution and openness — something I sincerely hope won’t happen.
This link to this set of documents is interesting. I’ll take a closer look at them to try to get some information that might be useful to me, but that wasn’t exactly what I was talking about. For those who are trying to understand what to use, what is necessary, what each piece of equipment is for, this set of documents is complicated, and it’s hard to find your way around so many documents. It might help a little for those who already have a good idea of what to use or have already decided what to use, but even in these cases there could still be more detailed information in these documents (for example, explaining in more detail what some pieces of equipment shown in the schematics are for but are not absolutely necessary). Perhaps these documents would be more useful if there were another, broader document that brought together the information contained in all these more specific schematics.
I think you misunderstood the purpose of the comments here. The purpose is not to blame anyone. Your understanding is a very defensive stance and closed to criticism and the possibility of improvements. The purpose is to contribute so that Victron’s excellent products can be better used, and their features better understood. When I mentioned the limitations of installers here, it was not to blame them, but to counter the argument that the documents are for them and not for end users, and that end users should not want to do the installation and configuration themselves. It was precisely to counter your understanding that having less accessible information is better for the best use of the equipment, so that “only professionals” can install and configure the equipment.
Once again, you did not understand what was discussed. In fact, you are demonstrating a lack of technical understanding by comparing the issue of a 48V battery with a 12V battery. There are no 12V LiFePO4 batteries on the market with different numbers of cells, and therefore with very different nominal voltages, as is the case with 48V batteries. This is basic knowledge, but few have it, as you have just demonstrated, and so it would be important for Victron to consider this fact and explain it in the documents.
Only constructive criticism was made here, by people who, despite the criticism made here, chose to use Victron products and will probably continue to use them regardless of how the criticism is received. Criticism made by those who have enough technical knowledge to be able to see some flaws in the documents and possibilities for improvement, a vision that many “professional technicians” cannot have.
It’s not a manufacturer’s job to teach battery basics. If you’re working with Lithium-Batteries or similar technologies, it’s your responsibility to understand their physical and chemical properties. Photovoltaic systems are far too complex for casual end-users. Either you invest the time to become an expert — and then start building — or you hire someone who already is.
Mocking the term “professional technicians” by putting it in quotation marks reflects an arrogance that completely ignores the fact that most of these people spend years training before they’re allowed to work on real projects. And just to be clear: this isn’t about whether I understand the topic. After 40 years in this industry, I can say with confidence that I know more than enough to speak up here.
No one said it was Victron’s responsibility to teach the basics about batteries. The issue here was not about teaching the basics about batteries, it was about inaccurate information, about providing a standard configuration for 16S LiFePO4 batteries without saying so, treating it as if there were only 16S LiFePO4 batteries for 48V systems and there were no 15S. This knowledge is not that basic, it is not just technical knowledge, it is also knowledge about the battery market, knowledge that few have, including “professional technicians”, as you demonstrated you do not have when comparing it to the voltage of a 12V battery. And what is arrogant is not putting the term “professional technician” in quotes, arrogant is someone calling themselves a “professional technician” and saying that someone does not have basic knowledge about something when in fact it is the “professional technician” who does not have this knowledge.
Do you really think that you are the only one who realizes that there are variations for the LiFePO4 batteries around the magic figure of 16 cells?
If, from your words, you had difficulty understanding this, does that mean that everyone will have difficulties understanding?
And therefore you keep having the urge to point this out?
Imagine that most of the people that you believe “don’t understand” or “don’t have the knowledge” and somehow opposed you, in fact managed to configure their systems without the need of somebody tell them how things are…
Because they know for sure how to read not Victron manuals, but the battery specification and/or battery manual.
Or because they know how to use a multimeter and read a battery voltage and divide that voltage with the cell voltage for that SOC and voila, they find out if the battery has 15 or 16 or whatever number of cells and configure the system accordingly…
We have a saying in my country… No offense… If two or more say that you are drunk, you go to bed.
Do you really like to antagonize everybody on the same subject, over and over, or do you really like to hear yourself about something, and I quote you, “so obvious and simple”?
PS:
Please forgive me, no offense.
All the above are somehow rhetorical things, you don’t need to respond, but I have the feeling that you won’t resist…
Peace man!
No, I’m definitely not the only one who knows this. Where did you see me saying I’m the only one who knows? I just said that many people don’t know, including many “professional technicians”, such as those who compare this issue of LiFePO4 batteries for 48V systems with the fact that a 12V battery voltage is not exactly 12V. Maybe I’m the only one who cares about other people who may have some difficulty due to the lack of precision in the information present in Victron’s documents and tools, and then maybe I’m the only one who has dedicated my time and efforts to help both Victron improve its materials and other people who may have their lives made easier by having access to more precise information.
Did I say it was hard for me to understand this? Or did I say that I could have more easily found out about the existence of LiFePO4 batteries on the market with different cell numbers if Victron’s material had been written more correctly and precisely? Do you see the difference between one thing and the other? If I didn’t say that I had difficulty understanding, I don’t think that everyone will have difficulty understanding. The issue is not about difficulty understanding. It’s about knowledge about the market that few people have, and not about something that few people can understand. I’m glad I have this concern for others and this initiative to help Victron write about this more accurately! What I don’t understand is your need to fight against this possibility of improvement to make the documentation more correct and precise and thus make everyone’s life easier! I’ve asked more than once, and you who are on this crusade against improving the documentation don’t answer me, I think you’ll continue without answering me: What’s the problem with Victron specifying that the default parameter option available for LiFePO4 batteries in 48V systems is for 51.2V, 16S batteries? And what’s the problem with adding another option for 48V, 15S batteries?
Anyone who compares this issue of the existence of 15S and 16S LiFePO4 batteries for 48V systems with the fact that 12V batteries do not have a nominal voltage of 12V has demonstrably missed the point, it is not my assumption. And anyone who managed to configure it correctly for a 15S battery achieved the same thing I did, also without anyone’s help. The only difference is that I realized that other people may have problems with this, and I was not negligent, I cared about the issue and I was not selfish in keeping the knowledge I discovered on my own just for myself.
I’m sure many people know how to do this, just as I did. But I know that even those who know how to do this may not do it, may not know that there are LiFePO4 batteries for 48V systems with different numbers of cells, and may think that if Victron has made an option available that just says “LiFePO4 batteries” without any other specifications, the system will be properly configured by selecting that option. This does not mean that they do not know how to read the battery manual or that they do not know anything about how batteries are built and charged.
It would be a very strange way to do it and very error prone…
And we have a name for this “argument”: ad populum fallacy. Furthermore, the number of people who are against improving the documents is much smaller than the number of people who found raising this issue useful. It’s just that you are much louder and more insistent than those who agree with what I’m saying.
I don’t like to antagonize anyone. You seem to like it, insisting on speaking out against such a simple and obvious criticism and suggestion for improvement.
If you, for no reason at all, insist on opposing the technical improvement of Victron’s documents and tools, why should I not respond to your fallacies and distortions?
guystewart
(Guy Stewart (Victron Community Manager))
57
I think this one has run its course for productive info.
