Just to easy your mind. Winston, Sinopoly and Thundersky were all the one company to begin with so the manufacturing process is similar. Winston Chung left to open Winston battery company after a disagreement about who owned the LYP adaption of the LFP formula that improved the lower temperature stability for 0*C down to -30*C ... not absolutely sure if the two temperatures refer to exactly the same charging and discharging ability but that is the major difference.cruiserxxx wrote: ↑Tue Sep 11, 2018 7:44 pm Was reading thru the specs on my batteries and noticed this warning:
9.3.8 Do not use Lithium ion cell with the primary batteries or secondary batteries whose capacity or kinds
or maker is different. If do that, the cell will be discharged or charged excessively in use. And it may cause the
generating heat, smoke, rupture or flame because of the abnormal chemical reaction in cells.
The LFP and LYP chemistries work together without any issues, this was the very first testing we did almost 8 yrs ago and started the whole thing of not believing anything that we hadn't proved to be true. This combination is still running in the Mazda battery pack and we had to use it yesterday after it sitting for the last 6 mths. The house battery is also the start battery and there was no problems at all. The solar and fridge has been running unattended for the 6 mths and all that was still doing what it was supposed to do so that part also proved itself.
The biggest problem the whole lithium technology faces is nonsense published by "experts" who don't understand that lithium ion actually involves some 30 odd different chemical compositions, so blanket statements about one chemistry doesn't cover all lithium chemistries.
That kind of thinking is a carry over from lead acid technology where the only real differences were lead plate thickness and the chosen form for the electrolyte used, liquid in free form, liquid in an absorbed glass mat, Gel and the newest crystal format. They are all the same lead acid chemical battery so they all basically follow the same rules.
Lithium chemistry is not like that, only two chemistries are stable throughout their possible voltage range without catching fire or exploding, lithium ferrous that includes LFP and LYP, and lithium titanate also known as LTO. LTO is used for pace maker batteries and other small sized batteries that must have a very long cycle life. The cost difference is still quite large but now maybe only 3 times more expensive than lithium ferrous rather than 10 times back when they first appeared commercially. The 2 chemistries are not even the same voltage per cell, so they would require a serious study into their recharging and battery management for a large scale system like an RV or off grid house.
I'll let someone else spend the $30,000 just for the R&D stock if they think they might go into designing and building off grid systems using LTO chemistry. The cycle life would be the selling point, over 30 yrs and constantly being updated, sort of a Tesla Powerwall that never needed to be replaced. The only large format cells at the moment are still in the laboratory build and test stage to prove they can actually be scaled up to a large format design. This is the point most of the "latest and greatest" new battery concepts fail, they can't even make it to the hearing aid battery size without serious problems arising resulting in total cell failure after only a short cycle life.
The lithium ferrous format will remain the chemistry of choice for the RV market for quite some time yet, at least the next 10 yrs. is not longer.
T1 Terry
Some is stored as frozen methane under the permafrost and because that is rapidly melting a lot is being released into the atmosphere, and that is a bit of a worry because that speeds up the warming blanket even faster.