Thread: Low cost BMS
View Single Post
Old 12-04-2011, 05:31 PM   #59 (permalink)
harlequin2
EcoModder
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 181
Thanks: 0
Thanked 33 Times in 20 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaerin View Post
Here's my thinking on a BMS. Each cell should be able to be switched out completely. So, for instance, there are 2 MOSFETS on each cell, one to enable output (Connect from + to out) and the other to disable output and short the cell (Connect from - to out). This will ensure that, upon error or failure, the entire pack doesn't die, the voltage just drops by one cell's worth. This can continue until the entire pack (or at least the majority of it) has dropped out, or a low voltage condition forces a stop. When charging, this means the cell is charged to full and dropped out completely (a signal could be issued to the charger to drop input voltage by one cell's worth) to continue charging the rest of the cells, so every single cell is charged to completely "full".

This would give both top and bottom balancing. It would have the entire pack's entire capacity available for use, and would give a better "ratcheting down" of available power to let you know you're nearing the end of your range, rather than a sudden drop off a cliff.

However, it would mean that series strings would need to be widely paralleled, as the MOSFETs would severely limit the available current. Alternatively, small relays could be used. But no matter the switching system, it's that switch that would be the limiting factor, unfortunately.
Yes, "unfortunately" is the word.
My car draws a peak current of just over 600A and has 45 cells, so to do what you suggest would require 90 switches each capable of carrying 600A. Preferably with zero voltage drop!
Might be a bit difficult......
It is certainly a possibility for charging though, as the current is more like 15 or 20 A. But still, 90 x 20A relays at about $10 each?
__________________
Sometimes I sits and thinks and sometimes I just sits.

Last edited by harlequin2; 12-04-2011 at 05:34 PM.. Reason: correction
  Reply With Quote