using multiple amp clamps, we observed each inverter splitting the load equally. 33%/33%/33% +/- 2%. We had read elsewhere that inverters would tip in progressively as the demand increased but that not what we experienced.
I could be wrong but i assume its pretty difficult to get accurate voltage readings using a clamp at 3.4 volts. I think the application for this would be more 24VAC to 600VAC. I really want one bc i deal with a lot of motors and drives and the voltage is never perfect bc of bad power factor and other factors. Usually im just verifying if i have voltage +/- 5% or making sure power is off before working on it.
hey brother.. ive been replaying your vids on this setup for weeks now learning and taking notes.. Thanks for uploading this!!! but, i have a question im hoping you can answer regarding these same inverters,.. when wired 3 x in parallel single phase, and the 5-10-15 kw load is applied as you did, does the master inverter max out and THEN start requesting more power from the slaves? or is the load distributed equally between the 3 automatically
Great setup. Something with victron inverters that often trips people up is they are measured in kva not watts and I believe the power factor is 0.8, so a victron 48/5000 actually only puts out around 4000 watts
Yes, exactly. The continuous power output of an MP II 5000 is 4000 watts. It shuts off relatively quickly at 7000 watts, but it can sustain 5600 watts for a relatively long time but at only 86% efficiency, although I'm not sure for how long.
This is an amazing setup. You are so lucky to be able to test all of this on the bench first to build confidence for final your implementation. As you have invested so much, i would recommend extending your warranty (Victron provide extended warranty called 5+5). I've applied this to all my equipment. Hope you make another video of your final implementation on your boat.
That is one hell of a setup. What is the purpose of it? Will it power a building, or power a boat, etc? Or is it just for testing purposes? Also, can I ask what bus bars those are (brand/ model #)?
While I am a relative novice in this field, I would argue that load sharing across multiple inverters will allow individual inverters to last longer before failure (service life). As well, if one fails (regardless of inverter/ brand), then you still have power across two or one inverter (if two fail), compared to no power at all. If a single high power inverter fails, you are dead in the water (in perhaps mission critical applications). In addition there are size and weight concerns if you are installing a single high power inverter yourself vs. multiple smaller, lighter, more compact inverters.
@@Sovereign_Citizen_LEO not quite. When the MPII's are wired in parallel, if one inverter goes offline for any reason then all inverters in that parallel group go offline - one would have to reconfigure the wiring and programing of the inverter to fall back to one inverter working.
Im curious why you went with LiFePO4 for the starting batteries. I will admit, my boat is significantly less complicated, but I maintained a maintenance free sealed lead acid as a separate start battery. I am also curious why you went with such a large engine start batt. Was that for redundancy in the event of a failed house bank?
Hi there. At the beginning of the project my plan was to go with a mixed chemistry design approach, similar to what you mentioned you have done for your boat. I spent many hours working with the professional engineer that has designed the system on whether to use all LiFePO4. As we evaluated the design goals of the system, including power capability, safety, back up and redundancy and a slew of other design considerations, the use of these CALB 230 cells is a good fit for this application. I was able to max out the amount of kWHs available to the boat and along with the ability to parallel the two systems together without having to use different battery charging and management techniques actually makes for a simpler and more robust design. Hope this explanation helps.
That is a BEAST of a system fair play those are some amps gettign smashed!! One thing I will say I've noticed on my Victron 24v inverters are they see to lose 25+% of the power in or power out due to inneficiency - the other system I have with an RS48/6000 is SOOOOOOO much more efficient it's quite bonkers. I'd like to do a test etc for people to actually see the difference as I believe most people don't realise they're throwing away between quarter and a third of their power use with the older kit's poor roundtrip efficiency?
@@Sailing_SY_Meltemi Resistive loads are the easy way to test and present a very unrealistic load. Unless you are using resistive heating only on your inverter (WOFTAM) then not proving much. Put real-life load simulation that means the use of reactive loads. You know, the ones that show the difference between high-frequency and low frequency inverters and the real currents needed to feed them.
@@bentheguru4986Grüße ich nutze Victron Multi RS Solar und fahre mit einem Gesantwirkungsgrad von 93%. Bei 5kW Lasten liegt der Multi RS bei 95% Wirkungsgrad.
@@Sailing_SY_MeltemiMotors are *inductive* loads. Do you have a refrigerator onboard? Fresh water pump? Air Conditioning? Bilge Pump? Microwave? ie Real world loads ...
Hi there. All of these Victron and REC-BMS components will be installed in my boat. I have a few hundred dollars into wiring and circuit breaker boxes to be able to tie into the grid in the hangar that will not be reused. Plus, some of the test equipment was purchased to make it easier to test and generate the data I needed.
Victron low frequency, transformer based inverters are so much more advanced and longer lasting than the low budget EG4 6000XP inverters that everyone else seems to be hyping.
Low frequency transformer inverter is an old style almost vintage, definitely not advanced, that would be the case for "transformerless" high frequency models. However, victron has higher endurance for lower efficiency. It's a tradeoff
I bought the 378fc as an industrial apprentice. My initial impressions of the tool were not that great especially considering the price but it is growing on me. It does work if you use it for its intended purpose.
Great point. However, the person that talked me into buying my own unit has one that is much more accurate measuring DC voltage at low levels than mine. Something has changed in their design.
Did it all work well when you ran up? I couldn't get the REC & Wakespeed to work properly on the Cerbo's CAN port even with speeds set to match - possibly I never tried changing speed of the REC though. Ended up setting up the WS500 pulley ratios and alt temp when connected to CAN port and moved over to the BMS port so WS500 controlled by REC, so no data displayed on the Cerbo/Touch. Would be great if your system works since looks like the new Cerbo doesn't have a BMS port.👍
Yes, I changed the speed on the REC-BMS to 250 kbs and everything appears to be working as expected. I used the REC WiFi module to access the REC-BMS. The only trick is that you need to reboot the REC-BMS after changing the CAN bus speed.
Glad you sorted it out. When in your other vid the battery showed up in the BMS.CAN port but not the VE.CAN I was wondering if your REC was set to the right baud rate. BMS.CAN is 500 and VE.CAN is 250. Just getting started with a similar setup.
@@Sailing_SY_Meltemi Thanks! I have been wanting to upgrade my house bank for some time, but have been a bit less than enthused by the "drop in" solution as it is not very elegant. I narrowed it down to the WS500 (which on my sailboat is the primary non grid charging source) with victron equipment. I had been looking at some of the victron communication capable batteries, but they did not appear to integrate as tightly as I'd like. The Rec BMS solution makes it an elegant centrally controlled system: as it should be! Thanks for posting your video.
Thanks for the reply. I had not realized this. I sent the unit back and Fluke admitted to a design problem with the 378/377, but would not say exactly what it was. They ended up taking a new unit, sending it through their mfg/repair process and returning the brand new unit to me.
Bill - if you hold the camera horizontally, we could see all 3 meters side by side rather than 1 at a time. Darwin didn't favor that variant of human evolution with 2 eyes in a vertical column as opposed to side by side. I'm the idiot who specified Bill get the fluke 377 for accurate (100's of As) large current measurements I could trust. I tested my (old) 377 against an HP 6.5 digit DVM that is NIST cal'ed 2023 and *my* 377 is dead nuts on, to 0.1V which is as close as it gets. Admittedly, it's for indication measurements, but there is something different in his just recently made 377 than my several years old 377. Since we're just looking at stable DC values, a low pass filter shouldn't affect them. It's concerning that if the meter can't measure it's easiest (most meter-native) function of x1 DCV, low range - then how far off will the scaled measurements (ex x100 DCV) be?
