Unbelievable - while I have a general disdain for vehicular chargers, I got hold of a Schumacher SP6 powersports charger which so far, seems to be charging LiFeP04 properly.
Problem - with Schumachers, they are heavily patent-protected to the point that voltages and algorithms are unknown, and may leave you guessing trying to figure out the algorithm.
This is what I know so far:
* You must select Lithium or lead acid upon startup. Lithium here means LiFeP04, NOT any other lithium chemistry!! Don't be hasty and be sure to read the ENTIRE scroll - or you may make the wrong selection!
* Page 3, section 2.8 in the first few safety pages that nobody reads, shows that it is meant to support 22-59ah LFP vehicular batts in the lithium mode.
* At first glance, it looks like a 6A CC/CV charger, which absorbs at 14.2v. Ok cool. Not published, so you have to pull out your measuring gear like I did.
My battery is a 40ah 4S GBS bank. Manually balanced for so-called "top balance" non-critical use with no balance boards by initially charging each cell individually, LVD's and whatnot are in place. This topic is covered ad-infinitum elsewhere.
Unlike most lead-acid chargers which may have their absorb voltage wisely set low to 14.0-14.2 for a "fake" gel setting when charging LFP, the Schumacher SP6 correctly continues full-bore 6A bulk right up to the 14.2v absorb point. Many lead-acid based chargers shoe-horned into charging LFP (usually a BAD idea), sense that anything over about 13.8v with the battery still allowing for a full-charge current bulk will safely cut back the charging current sensing that something is wrong. They don't know you have swapped chemistries from lead-acid to LFP and um, smartly go into a lower-current charge thinking your lead-acid battery is wack.
This differs from the standard absorb with lead acid, where the battery actually sets the charge-current tempo, not the charger when it reaches absorb. But, I have seen Pb cc/cv chargers cut back early on sensing that something is wrong in the universe not knowing the owner is using the wrong chemistry!
What I believe is that what the Pb-based "smart" chargers / solar controllers do when presented with an LFP instead, is think that the lead-acid battery has gone into thermal runaway, and instead of doing the classic cc/cv routine, cut back absorb current prematurely as a safety measure thinking it is still dealing with lead-acid.
The average user who shoe-horns a Pb controller might not even be aware of this, unless he compared it to charging with a lab-power supply set to the same values for cc/cv, and then wondered "why does my lab supply go balls-out all the way into absorb, when my solar controller / Pb charger seems to cut back charge current early?" The Aha-moment strikes!
Basically all I'm saying is that the SP6 seems to have been designed for LiFeP04 in mind, and not as a cheap shoe-horn of Pb algorithms. I think they put some thought into it.
I have noticed that a few times it has done a double-absorb of sorts - charging to 14.2v CV, doing some absorb, backing off to 14.1v for a little absorb, and back up again at 14.25v absorb. My source AC voltage was measuring steady during this time, so regulation seems to be good.
The problem for me is that with unpublished patented algorithms, I am placing my sole trust in the Schumacher engineers to do LFP right without question. I have a hard time with that.
After about 10 cycles now, watched over like an eagle especially during the LFP's absorb (monitoring each cell during this process to make sure none is lower than 3.525 and no higher than 3.6v, all seems ok. (voltage under charge is NOT the same thing as voltage under rest, and means nothing capacity wise either).
While I can't swear to it, and haven't put fine-grained measuring gear on it (aside from Fluke's), the secondary absorbs *may* be an attempt to pseudo-balance the bank - perhaps not exactly, but within reason. Yeah, we'll see if that happens - I'm watching that trend.
Keeping an eye out on it - I have no problem immediately recycling stuff that is just a Pb rehash under another name, but I think the SP6's Lithium (LiFeP04 ONLY) seems to have actually been designed by someone who knows I'll be watching like a hawk. So far so good - at least in the 6A category for 22-59ah capacities. (I'd have no problem extending that to a more practical 20 - 60ah capacity battery support).
So the jury is still out for me on this one, but I'm not immediately recycling it. It might be a keeper - at least for my GBS 40ah LiFeP04 bank.
Problem - with Schumachers, they are heavily patent-protected to the point that voltages and algorithms are unknown, and may leave you guessing trying to figure out the algorithm.
This is what I know so far:
* You must select Lithium or lead acid upon startup. Lithium here means LiFeP04, NOT any other lithium chemistry!! Don't be hasty and be sure to read the ENTIRE scroll - or you may make the wrong selection!
* Page 3, section 2.8 in the first few safety pages that nobody reads, shows that it is meant to support 22-59ah LFP vehicular batts in the lithium mode.
* At first glance, it looks like a 6A CC/CV charger, which absorbs at 14.2v. Ok cool. Not published, so you have to pull out your measuring gear like I did.
My battery is a 40ah 4S GBS bank. Manually balanced for so-called "top balance" non-critical use with no balance boards by initially charging each cell individually, LVD's and whatnot are in place. This topic is covered ad-infinitum elsewhere.
Unlike most lead-acid chargers which may have their absorb voltage wisely set low to 14.0-14.2 for a "fake" gel setting when charging LFP, the Schumacher SP6 correctly continues full-bore 6A bulk right up to the 14.2v absorb point. Many lead-acid based chargers shoe-horned into charging LFP (usually a BAD idea), sense that anything over about 13.8v with the battery still allowing for a full-charge current bulk will safely cut back the charging current sensing that something is wrong. They don't know you have swapped chemistries from lead-acid to LFP and um, smartly go into a lower-current charge thinking your lead-acid battery is wack.
This differs from the standard absorb with lead acid, where the battery actually sets the charge-current tempo, not the charger when it reaches absorb. But, I have seen Pb cc/cv chargers cut back early on sensing that something is wrong in the universe not knowing the owner is using the wrong chemistry!
What I believe is that what the Pb-based "smart" chargers / solar controllers do when presented with an LFP instead, is think that the lead-acid battery has gone into thermal runaway, and instead of doing the classic cc/cv routine, cut back absorb current prematurely as a safety measure thinking it is still dealing with lead-acid.
The average user who shoe-horns a Pb controller might not even be aware of this, unless he compared it to charging with a lab-power supply set to the same values for cc/cv, and then wondered "why does my lab supply go balls-out all the way into absorb, when my solar controller / Pb charger seems to cut back charge current early?" The Aha-moment strikes!
Basically all I'm saying is that the SP6 seems to have been designed for LiFeP04 in mind, and not as a cheap shoe-horn of Pb algorithms. I think they put some thought into it.
I have noticed that a few times it has done a double-absorb of sorts - charging to 14.2v CV, doing some absorb, backing off to 14.1v for a little absorb, and back up again at 14.25v absorb. My source AC voltage was measuring steady during this time, so regulation seems to be good.
The problem for me is that with unpublished patented algorithms, I am placing my sole trust in the Schumacher engineers to do LFP right without question. I have a hard time with that.
After about 10 cycles now, watched over like an eagle especially during the LFP's absorb (monitoring each cell during this process to make sure none is lower than 3.525 and no higher than 3.6v, all seems ok. (voltage under charge is NOT the same thing as voltage under rest, and means nothing capacity wise either).
While I can't swear to it, and haven't put fine-grained measuring gear on it (aside from Fluke's), the secondary absorbs *may* be an attempt to pseudo-balance the bank - perhaps not exactly, but within reason. Yeah, we'll see if that happens - I'm watching that trend.
Keeping an eye out on it - I have no problem immediately recycling stuff that is just a Pb rehash under another name, but I think the SP6's Lithium (LiFeP04 ONLY) seems to have actually been designed by someone who knows I'll be watching like a hawk. So far so good - at least in the 6A category for 22-59ah capacities. (I'd have no problem extending that to a more practical 20 - 60ah capacity battery support).
So the jury is still out for me on this one, but I'm not immediately recycling it. It might be a keeper - at least for my GBS 40ah LiFeP04 bank.
Comment