Reading latest release notes for RS systems:
Looks like meter is supported only in dual tracker MultiRS. Any plans for single tracker? I actually have 3phase system on single trackers and have new meter
Looks like meter is supported only in dual tracker MultiRS. Any plans for single tracker? I actually have 3phase system on single trackers and have new meter
If you need future feed-in and extended support of RS ecosystem it is better to plan swapping to Dual Tracker hardware.
Sorry for hijacking the topic Yevhenii, but Andrii @podarok , now that youâve experimented with the beta firmware for a while, do you know what do they refer in the change log to:
Fix drawing less power from the grid than needed in âkeep batteries chargedâ and âoptimized rechargeâ modes.
and with:
Fix priority solar in the ESS mode âkeep batteries chargedâ
Thank you and sorry.
So you are saying that RS single tracker will not support feed in? They are still massively selling in Ukraine, update will cost like buying new ones. Itâs smells like story with Microsoft and Lumia phones
My 2 cents about feed-inâŚ
Sorry for barging in again.
The part responsible for feed-in is the inverter part (HV DC to AC) that itâs identical in both units.
Only the trackers part is different, but trackers are âinjectingâ into the internal HV DC bus, before inverter.
So, in my opinion, both units could be able to inject into grid.
Not to mention that it looks that the firmware is released in sync for both dual and single tracker, so I donât think that they think of discontinuing the single tracker unit, nor depriving it of new features⌠Itâs too new.
1 Like
Thatâs exactly my thought. The sell both versions as future proof. So I expect both versions have relevant features, otherwise so many clients going to be so much frustrated
1 Like
Hi @evgeniy.labunskiy & @alexpescaru
Sorry but this part is completely the opposite to what I have written into the Multi RS manual since release.
There were many more limitations on first release as well, including 3 phase, and generators, and we have always done our best to add features and support as we can.
However it is not possible to know in the beginning what challenges lie ahead for grid code compliance. We do our absolute best to set off on the right track, but this process takes years, while also changing even as we go.
We were not waiting for grid approvals to finalise before releasing Multi RS when it was already suitable in so many off grid applications, so we had to launch with that uncertainty. This was known, and I made sure to document it clearly myself in the manual.
Now to the point; As well as the extra MPPT, there was also a change in the AC input relay circuit between the single tracker and dual tracker Multi RS models.
This means we can not support AC input feed-in on the single tracker model, nor the grid meter (as the point is to allow energy to flow back through the AC input).
There are still some ESS features for the single tracker model, see here for more details.
2 Likes
Thanks for the clarification.
But let me understand betterâŚ
Generally speaking, the feed-in capability requires a certain input relay configuration, right?
And in the moment of the Multi RS single tracker model market release, that configuration was for sure known, because in that moment a lot of Multiplus 2 devices already had the feed-in approval.
So the knowledge was there.
The fact that the Multi RS single tracker model doesnât have that relay configuration from the start, it seems a major, intentional or not, omission, that in the long term have hindered the life of the product. In other words a step back.
And for sure itâs not a white ball as marketing and image is concerned, for thousands of units sold and therefore for thousands of users âŚ
Of course, not advertised means not available.
But, boy, all your nice products in that moment had the feed-in ability and the users, for sure, didnât even thought about thatâŚ
And when I think about that a friend of mine was on the verge of purchasing what he was though to be an opportunity in regard to some Multi RSes single tracker. For sure it will look now more carefully on the market.
Unfortunately there is nothing general about grid code certification and compliance around the world or else it would be easily done and ready on day one.
Regulators are constantly changing their rules, such as how long the relays must hang on, how quickly the relays must react, what self tests are performed before making a connection, how they behave (at a low hardware level) when there is a fault detected, and what conditions are met before they trigger those conditions.
There is a lot we can do in preparation, and in firmware, but until we receive our reports from the testing agencies for all the various code compliances we cannot be sure they will be accepted, and in this case despite our best efforts they werenât.
There is no malice or malintent of Victronâs end, for every reason we would rather have a single hardware platform that doesnât require changes to conform with a truely bizarre array variation of requirements, it would make everything much easier for us and our customers.
Victron doesnât want to sell the same product to the same customer over again, we want that customer to be so happy with Victron that he tells his friends and they get one as well.
If there is any good news we are a company of continuous improvement and this did finally reach a changing point.
The grid code compliance issue (even for MultiPlus-II in some markets) has been a continuous load on the engineering teams, and in the time since the release of the single tracker Multi RS model, there is now a far improved process internally with dedicated specialist to help navigate and co-ordinate all the various requirements.
I finally have some hope that the amount of time we are needing to explain grid approval delays to the world is coming to an end.
2 Likes
Thanks again for the explanation.
I was talking strictly from that relay(s) point of view that somehow, like youâve said, got missed on the hardware.
You have to admit that the level of happiness will vary a lot between the following two situations:
- When you say from the beginning that you donât support grid codes - which is a reality at that moment - and later if you do implement it the user will jump up and down and say: wow, what a great company, look they implemented even that.
- To say / use, like Iâve marked below, a lot of ânot yetâ and therefore, naturally, raise the users level of hope (why?, one could wonder) and then, when you confirm that will not be available, the reaction will be: well, what a disappointmentâŚ
Which would / could be desirable?..
Sorry, no offense, I am just playing the devilâs advocateâŚ
The relays themselves were both there, they arenât missing, but they are only a part of a complete supporting circuit that needed a hardware change.
I chose the most technically accurate and precise language I could find to match the reality of the situation at the time.
We did not know if the current hardware would be able to support grid codes. Maybe it could, maybe it couldnât.
The same ânot yet knownâ language was also applied to generator support, and 3 phase support. Both of those were successfully implemented with the existing hardware.
We also had a reasonable expectation based on our experience with MultiPlus-II that it would get support, but we couldnât confirm it one way or the other.
This was not a marketing exercise, it was a technical document to give a decision maker the best information we had. I still stand by the statement as I wrote it, it was as accurate and precise as possible in an unknowable situation.
Remember at that time there was no 2nd model. To write the Multi RS does not and will not support grid codes would only raise more questions as to why not?
And then I would have to explain anyway that of course it would eventually support them, but not yet. So how is anyone better off by being vague in the first place?
3 Likes
Since we are on the topic of Multi RS, @guystewart , I have a small request for you.
Iâm always interested in new products and new developments of Victron products. The Demo Library from VictronConnect has been extremely valuable in making purchasing decisions for me and making recommendations to others, just as you said the quote above.
It looks like the demo emulation of the Multi RS is a bit out of date, I canât see anything related to ESS and I am interested in keeping up to date with development.
Could you please ask Victron to update the VictronConnect Demo Library, especially the Multi RS emulation?
Thanks!
Thanks for the reminder, Will do, itâs a valuable tool, but a constant process to keep it fresh with all the changes across the range.
It helps selling products.
It helps educating users.
1 Like
As far as I know they never sold with any feed-in features announced.
So this is a different story of expectations.
1 Like
This is a question to Ukrainian dealers, usually with confused information and understanding what they are selling. I donât think Victron did anything wrong - Dual Tracker is a successor of a Single Tracker
No matter which brand you are on - if you need non existing feature - youâd need to get a new hardware.
1 Like
This question deserves a dedicated topic for not confuse Single/Dual tracker models
Thank you for your answer! Let me a bit clarify what I told. Disclaimer: I donât make the company responsible, I want the company to make better communication. This is of course my responsibility for what I bought and used. I just want to describe to you my position as a customer.
As @alexpescaru mentioned, there is a lot of âyetâ wording. Yet means the temporary state, Victron many times communicated that they are working on âmaking MultiRS as a fully functional ESS systemâ. This might be a wrong use of wording, maybe cause you guys are not native speakers or so, but this âyetâ made a different feeling from the product. There was no strict NO in communications. Victron never communicated at the professional website, that future updates would be related only to the new version of MultiRS with 2 trackers.
From a simple customer perspective, I read it as the following: we made a new generation of inverters/charges with integrated solar controllers and now we are investing in their capacity, stay tuned. Iâve become an owner of Victron by chance, the was a mess on UA inverter market in 2022 and the reseller suggested buying MultiRS. I was very happy with the device and this summer I decided to extend the system to 3 phases, add solar, etc. My decision was based on belief (and this is my problem of course) that if I need a feed into the grid, you will do it sooner or later (many communications about this happened in various discussions like here or here). And this belief was based on your progress in MultiRS development (you added MANY features, like 3 phase support). I bought 2 single tracker models just cause they were available, I donât need 2 trackers and there was no difference mentioned anywhere in docs or posts about future differences and updates, otherwise, I would sell MultiRS and buy 3 Multipluses and RS for solar.
So Iâm asking you guys to be more precise in your communications about plans, support, and updates. Remember, many people here are buying your products as they are enthusiasts, not cause someone suggested to them. Many people buy cause they read your forums, and docs, watching videos and in the end, they build the system by themself.
Chapter - Limitations
Section - Full ESS is not supported
Content - It is not yet known if the current hardware revision will be able to support grid codes, or ESS, via a firmware update in the future." - Multi RS manual
The purpose of that conditional sentence was that there was potential that it would be possible with the current hardware version, but also potential that it would not be possible and require a hardware revision.
I am a native English speaker, to me still in spite of the criticism in this thread that sentence is clear, complete and as accurate as I could make it at the time.
I had no agenda to over-sell the Multi RS on features it didnât yet support. Only to answer questions that I was getting as efficiently as possible with what we knew at the time.
We were working on ESS support, but we didnât know what changes would be required yet (if any), either in hardware or firmware.
2 Likes
Guy, again, Iâm not blaming anyone, this is of course my responsibility. As a customer Iâm a bit frustrated, this is true. Let us close this topic on a high note, you have good products, itâs a fact. I did not write this post to get your excuse or so, I just want to have more data (meaning more description on changes in products, future support etc) to make a proper decisions
1 Like