This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.
Both sides previous revision Previous revision Next revision | Previous revision Next revision Both sides next revision | ||
opinion:frater_secessus:charging_faster [2020/05/13 12:10] frater_secessus [charging faster isn't always better] |
opinion:frater_secessus:charging_faster [2020/11/04 16:23] frater_secessus [lead-acid] |
||
---|---|---|---|
Line 11: | Line 11: | ||
**Lead batteries** have a **maximum amount of current** they will accept, typically [[electrical: | **Lead batteries** have a **maximum amount of current** they will accept, typically [[electrical: | ||
- | ** Deep-cycled lead batteries have a lengthy [[electrical: | + | ** Deep-cycled lead batteries have a lengthy [[electrical: |
However: | However: | ||
Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
* charging AGM at C/5 (min rate) resulted in the battery being 77.4% " | * charging AGM at C/5 (min rate) resulted in the battery being 77.4% " | ||
- | Note that the **using 2x the charging current only sped up the whole process by 12 minutes (3.6%)** due to Vabs starting earlier but taking longer. Getting to Vabs faster could be [[electrical: | + | Note that the **using 2x the charging current only sped up the whole process by 12 minutes (3.6%)** due to Vabs starting earlier but taking longer. |
- | Also note that for simple, timer-based Absorption configurations((like 180 minutes)) | + | * **Getting to Vabs faster** could be [[electrical: |
+ | * **Getting to Vabs slower** could be preferable on timer-based Absorption configurations((like 180 minutes)), as slower charging regiment would reduced the required | ||