You will have about 23 watts of standby power consumption with the AC200 on along with the AC and DC ports switched on. You will have less with just the power button on but will still consume power. If you press the large “remaining battery percent” portion in the middle of the screen, it will show the amount of current draw at a given moment. If you take 58 (Battery voltage) X the amp draw showing in the display you will get an idea of the power being drawn in watts at that moment. Take the watts being drawn and times it by the hours of being on do get a good idea of what the percentage of loss will be over a given time.
for example…58 (battery volts) X .3 (amps being drawn) = 17.4 watts per hour…
17.4 watts per hour x 12 hours = 209 watt hours consumed. 209 watt hours consumed / 1700 watt hour capacity = 12% overhead loss or 88% capacity left after 12 hours. This is just an example of calculation…not what actual expectations are.
I see with the unit on, nothing connected, DC and AC off I get 53.1V X .3 amps = 15.93 Watts per hour
The DC on adds .1 amps and the AC on adds .7amp.
The DC on and the AC on seem perfectly normal to draw that power, no questioning that. The ability to run and regulate these seems normal.
It just seems that the 16 Watts per hour of overhead to run the screen and BMS seems high. You could run and charge a ipad with that much power. I have a Jackery 1000 that once charged uses almost nothing when the AC and DC are off and stays at 100% for days without the screen on, but can be turned on in a moment.
I am just wondering if its the screen staying on with the light that’s push that draw up? Is there some sort of sleep mode that I dont know how to put it in when turned on?
There is no sleep mode that I am aware of that turns the screen off. I don’t think the screen is using that much power, but the overall circuitry. I was thinking I saw 27 total watts with the AC and DC on but under no load but I could be mistaken. There is a post in the facebook group that shows screen shots of each screen load. If you search for standby watts you may find it. If I have time tonight, I will get mine out and do the same screens for comparison with yours.
Ben, here is what my fully charged AC200 reads with regards to standby battery drain: (I am concerned that your voltage was reading so low. Was it almost empty when you took those readings?)
AC200 on…AC and DC off…57.8 Volts… (.1 amps) = 6 standby watts consumed.
AC200 on…DC On and AC off…57.8 Volts… (.2 amps) = 12 standby watts consumed.
AC200 on…DC off and AC on…57.8 Volts… (.3 amps) = 17 standby watts consumed.
AC200 on…DC on and AC on…57.8 Volts… (.4 amps) = 23 standby watts consumed.
It appears the unit consumes 6 watts just being on.
DC output on = 6 watts additional
AC Inverter on = 11 watts additional
Everything on with no load = 23 watts.
Standby Battery drain with no load.
AC-200 would go from full to 0 in approx. 250 hours just with the screen on.
AC-200 would go from full to 0 in approx. 125 hours with being on and the DC activated
AC-200 would go from full to 0 in approx. 88 hours with being on and the AC activated
AC-200 would go from full to 0 in approx. 65 hours left on with the AC and DC left on
1-Your battery voltage of 53 volts seems about 5 volts low to be at a 95% state of charge. BUT…your have an AC200P and mine is the AC200 with different battery chemistry. Your battery type (AC200P is Lifpo4 and mine is LI. You are also at a lower temp than I was due to mine being at room temperature.
2-Your standby current draw is considerably higher than mine. But again, we have two different machines but I would not think the battery type would affect the standby current draw.
Could someone else out there with a Bluetti AC200P check their same screens as shown above and report back the voltage and standby wattage current you are seeing? The screens are accessed by pressing the large %remaining numeral in the middle of the home screen.
Thank you so much. Can you send the same pics after a full recharge? I am interested in the battery voltage differences in the AC200 and the AC200P and also the standby amp draw. If the amp draw is the same at full charge, it appears that the AC200P has significantly higher standby power consumption in all modes than the AC200 has which does not make sense at this point.
Any other AC200 and AC200P owners want to chime in on their readings under the same circumstances?
You are seeing the same thing as me with the AC200P, 16 Watts just to turn the unit on, I would expect the same draw for standby on between the units.
I will reach out to their support.
My thinking of why this is too high is this:
If this is a standby solar generator you want to leave with solar panels to charge.
6W24h=144w overhead a day to stay on seems ok.
16W24=384W overhead a day to ston on seems excessive.
Not wrong in thinking this am I?
I agree, that is why it would be great to hear from a bunch of AC200 owners and a bunch of AC200P owners giving the same observations on their units. Maybe the AC 200 is showing faulty power usages after they changed the battery chemistry or maybe it’s nothing other than a meter that’s not accurate
Assuming my AC200 is not unusual, it appears that the standby consumption of the AC200P is greater than that of the AC200. I would like to see several examples of AC200’s first though to have a better cross section.
It should not. Eco mode just turns the system off after being idle for a certain number of hours to not permit the battery to drain if accidently left on. I do not know why the standby power consumption would be different with just a change in battery chemistry. The fully charged and operating voltage is about 4.5 to 5 volts higher on the AC200 vs AC200P.