Friends all good day. Not to repeat myself, here is the link Sudden loss of AC200MAX charge on a topic that describes my and most people’s problem with losing the AC200MAX charge.
I want to share with you the experience of using AC200MAX (two months) after switching from BMS 1017.02 firmware to the new BMS 1017.03 firmware. Let me remind you that my AC200MAX is constantly charged by two solar panels of 100 W each (connected in series).
I must say right away that the AC200MAX was charging and discharging (the station was calibrated).
Here’s what I was able to find out:
When solar panels are connected in series to AC200MAX - it works normally (for example: AC200MAX is off (night, no sun) the sun is rising (AC200MAX starts to receive solar energy) AC200MAX turns on by itself, as written in the AC200MAX user manual.
If the solar panels are connected to the AC200MAX using the parallel connection method, then under the same conditions (which I wrote about above), the AC200MAX will not turn on. You have to turn it on manually (by pressing the mechanical power button), which is contrary to the AC200MAX user manual.
AC200MAX started to charge more slowly than before the upgrade from BMS 1017.02 firmware to the new BMS 1017.03 firmware.
After updating from BMS 1017.02 firmware to new BMS 1017.03 firmware, when AC200MAX is turned on (standby mode), no electrical appliances are connected (no power consumption), AC200MAX keeps discharging (losing power). Specifically, in my case, 6% - 7% of the charge energy is lost (disappears) per day (24 hours).
I ask the Bluetti team to analyze and study my observations in detail and give constructive answers.
I ask all those who are not indifferent to take part in the discussion and solution of our joint issues and problems.
All together will help Bluetti make our stations the best in the world!
Sincerely, Ruslan Mishyn.
Here is my constructive answer…if the unit is in standby there is no such thing as “no power consumption”. If the AC200 Max is not turned fully off when not powering a load, the power consumption you noted is normal.
@Ruslan_Mishyn The solar panels connected to the ac200max are best connected in series. If the actual voltage of the parallel solar panels is lower than the voltage range for activating the AC200MAX, it will not activate our machine.
Is the loss of 6%-7% every 24 hours in the case of turning on AC or DC? Have you turned on the ECO mode? If not, turn on ECO mode
Please tell me what is the actual voltage to turn on the station, issued from solar panels? In the instruction manual, you did not indicate that it is better to connect solar panels using the consistent connection method.
The station was turned on with the DC charging mode enabled, consumers (telephone, clock, other electronics, etc.) were not connected. But I also observed when the station was turned on (was in standby mode) and all modes (DC and AC) were turned off (not activated), it also consumed (consumes) 6-7% of energy per day (24 hours). I believe that in standby mode without connected electrical appliances, 6-7% is a very large energy loss.
Do you think that in the 21st century a modern device without power consumption and with disabled modes (AC and DC) in standby mode can consume 6-7% of its energy? This is a lot for the power indicator (the green light is a mechanical on / off button). This is a device for 2000 euros, not 20 euros, and it should not work like that! Energy consumption in my case is 6-7%, I can boil a kettle (2 liters of water) and dry my hair with a hairdryer! And it turns out I’m losing this energy just like that!
Describe your problem in detail here in this thread, we will look for solutions together. In order for the Bluetti team to fix the bugs, they need to know the prevalence (how common) and the nature of the bugs!
For the problem that PV charging can’t be turned on when connect in parallel, I will contact Bluetti technicians to check if it can be corrected via a firmware upgrade. For the self-consumption of the AC200MAX, attached for your reference.
I tested mine when brand new (after calibration), and also after a few months. So, I don’t think the age affects it. Or, did you mean the battery should be old for this data to hold?
What conditions are those?
I’m not sure what those conditions could be, since having a stable temperature room and measuring time to discharge is what’s dominantly needed – this doesn’t need special equipment or overly-specific conditions…
I think the factor of 2x is a very large factor that isn’t consistent with lab condition changes.
It’s like a car manufacturer saying 40 mpg, and it only gets 20 mpg in reality.
It’s not about answering questions! You understand that if users (buyers) initially knew how great the energy losses of the station are, they might not buy this product! For example, I would definitely think about it!
The power consumption chart given by Bluetti in the replies above a very clear about the consumption. A large invert and large capacity DC output require large standby power to remain on. If the unit is simply turned off, there is no consumption. If you want a comparison, take a large semi truck or dump truck and idle it in your driveway overnight while at the same time idle a moped under the same conditions and see which one will consume the most idle fuel consumption. Big things require big power.
@Scott-Benson I’m not sure I understand your reply.
“The power consumption chart given by Bluetti in the replies above a very clear about the consumption”
Yes, I’m aware, and I was responding to that chart above. I don’t assume everything said to me is accurate – hence doing my own tests.
Bluetti made a claim about efficiency, which is part of the performance of a system, and part of its selling point. I believe that claim to be inaccurate, and should be a question to understand.
For example, people buy certain all-in-one solar inverters based on idle power consumption, as certain idle power consumption is a non-starter for their application. Would you consider that an overblown concern?
Just to check, do you mean that you’d be okay with half the gas mileage on your vehicle than expected, just because your “vehicle is large”?
I would be disappointed or want that spec to be clarified for others, so that they have more accurate information.