The Cycle Satiator, universal charger for the enthusiasts

justin_le said:

Marc S. said:

The new Satiator Software Suite v1.013 doesn't run on my MacBook Pro 13" (2009) and OS-X 10.8.5 (all updates)
It just doesn't start. Either with the FW v1.0013 in the 'Satiator Software Suite Files' folder of the app or without.

Click to expand...

OK thanks, we only actually have one mac device on hand with which to compile and test the MacOS build so we'll look into this. Can other Mac user's comment on their ability to run or not run the latest software?

Click to expand...

What version of OS-X do you use?

I've just tried OS-X 10.6.8 (same hardware, booted from a external FW drive) but the Satiator Software Suite v1.013 behaves the same as on OS-X 10.8.5: The app icon does these little expanding animation, like the app is launching, but then nothing happens.

Trying to lauch Satiator Software Suite v1.008 on OS-X 10.6.8 gives an error message: 'incompatible OS-X version' blablabla...

What is the maximum inside temp the Satiator can operate without damage? My 72 model rising to around 46c with 72v battery pack. pretty hot.

8)

General_Lee said:

What is the maximum inside temp the Satiator can operate without damage? My 72 model rising to around 46c with 72v pack charge! pretty hot.

8)

Click to expand...

46c (114.8F) is not very hot at all for power electronics. Considering that it uses passive air cooling with no fan, I would say it is running quite cool.
I would not even start worrying about there being something wrong with it until the case was at 60C (140F).

edit:
If it still bothers you, a small fan pointed at it will make a large difference in temperature.

MrDude_1 said:

General_Lee said:

What is the maximum inside temp the Satiator can operate without damage? My 72 model rising to around 46c with 72v pack charge! pretty hot.

8)

Click to expand...

46c (114.8F) is not very hot at all for power electronics. Considering that it uses passive air cooling with no fan, I would say it is running quite cool.
I would not even start worrying about there being something wrong with it until the case was at 60C (140F).

edit:
If it still bothers you, a small fan pointed at it will make a large difference in temperature.

Click to expand...

When it reached this temps, I begin to see in the lower LCD screen à little bit wet (humidity).
Maybe after many charge, this humidity will disappear. I has unit that doesn't pass 1psi leakage test, possible reason too.

General_Lee said:

MrDude_1 said:

General_Lee said:

What is the maximum inside temp the Satiator can operate without damage? My 72 model rising to around 46c with 72v pack charge! pretty hot.

8)

Click to expand...

46c (114.8F) is not very hot at all for power electronics. Considering that it uses passive air cooling with no fan, I would say it is running quite cool.
I would not even start worrying about there being something wrong with it until the case was at 60C (140F).

edit:
If it still bothers you, a small fan pointed at it will make a large difference in temperature.

Click to expand...

When it reached this temps, I begin to see in the lower LCD screen à little bit wet (humidity).
Maybe after many charge, this humidity will disappear. I has unit that doesn't pass 1psi leakage test, possible reason too.

Click to expand...

Ah. if your unit is not sealed, its probably trapped humidity. In that case, heat is probably a good thing to get it dried out.
Thats one of the reasons hes hesitant to sell a "almost fully sealed" unit to the general public... :lol:

Ah. if your unit is not sealed, its probably trapped humidity. In that case, heat is probably a good thing to get it dried out.
Thats one of the reasons hes hesitant to sell a "almost fully sealed" unit to the general public... :lol

Click to expand...

Yep but for me it's ok, I never use my charger in rain, always in the dry condition and inside.

Maybe, if I release the little vent on the side, it can help, I will try it.

General_Lee said:

What is the maximum inside temp the Satiator can operate without damage?

Click to expand...

It's got it's own temperature sensor in there, and will power-limit itself to stay in a safe range. If it's too hot, it'll shutdown if it has to, till it cools off.

On version 1.008 48V model, after charge complete you can only see Ah not Wh. During the charge the display will cycle through both. I would like Wh to always be displayed, as part of the screen saver text too.

I was reading the manual for the charger and there is a line that I don't understand. It implies there is no benefit to limiting the charge level on LiFePO4, but everything I have read says otherwise?

One of the key benefits of the Cycle Satiator is its ability to let you easily control the charge level of your battery. It is now well known that most lithium chemistries (with the exception of LiFePO4) can see drastic improvements in calendar and cycle life when they are not held at the nominal full charge voltage of 4.2 V/cell but are charged to a lower voltage instead.

Cycle life for CALB cells which are LiFePO4.

I've just tried the new Satiator Suite v1.014 with OS-X 10.8.5

Finally the Satiatore Suite works again with (my older version of) OS-X and I was able to update the Satiator 608 from v1.008 to the current firmware.
(the previous Satiator Suite v1.013 wouldn't even start)

Side note:
With the old v1.008 firmware still on the Satiator, the new Satiator Suite v1.014 would crash every time I tried to connect to the Satiator. Both when clicking the 'connect' button or when going through the Satiator Suite menu. (there is a note on the Satiator page not to do that!)

Slightly disconcerning behaviour if one plans a multi week tour, starting next week... *gulp*

With a small leap of faith and trusting Justins customer service would save my bakon if I'll brick the Satiator, I continued by following the update procedure on the Satiator info page: http://www.ebikes.ca/product-info/cycle-satiator.html#downloads

The firmware update went without issues. All good, everything works, the Satiator is currently charging my battery.

Scottydog said:

I was reading the manual for the charger and there is a line that I don't understand. It implies there is no benefit to limiting the charge level on LiFePO4, but everything I have read says otherwise?

One of the key benefits of the Cycle Satiator is its ability to let you easily control the charge level of your battery. It is now well known that most lithium chemistries (with the exception of LiFePO4) can see drastic improvements in calendar and cycle life when they are not held at the nominal full charge voltage of 4.2 V/cell but are charged to a lower voltage instead.

Cycle life for CALB cells which are LiFePO4.

Click to expand...

I can tell you from experience, that if you drain a CALB cell (under load) to anywhere near 100% DOD it will die - the heat will boil the solvent and the cell will puff and ooze juice. Not good.

Scottydog said:

I was reading the manual for the charger and there is a line that I don't understand. It implies there is no benefit to limiting the charge level on LiFePO4, but everything I have read says otherwise?

Click to expand...

If you can show me an actual paper and study to this effect I'd be happy to revisit that statement, but everything I have seen so far that is substantiated with firsthand data (ie not random people or websites spouting their "knowledge") suggests that with LiFePO4 cells you only get a cycle count increase in inverse proportion to the depth of the cycles so that the total watt-hours taken over the life of the pack is more or less the same. That is, you'll get roughly double the cycles if you only do 50% discharges, or 5 times the cycles if you just do 20% discharges. That's the same total energy output meaning you aren't gaining anything at the end of the day, just wasting more time connecting and disconnecting your pack to a charger.

Have a read of my posts on this thread here, which are based on a pretty detailed study of A123 LiFePO4 cells:
https://endless-sphere.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=1142875#p1142875

I haven't done any firsthand testing myself on LiFePO4 cells, and will gladly sing a different tune if pointed to evidence that is contrary to to the paper above.

-Justin

justin_le said:

If you can show me an actual paper and study to this effect I'd be happy to revisit that statement, but everything I have seen so far that is substantiated with firsthand data (ie not random people or websites spouting their "knowledge") suggests that with LiFePO4 cells you only get a cycle count increase in inverse proportion to the depth of the cycles so that the total watt-hours taken over the life of the pack is more or less the same. That is, you'll get roughly double the cycles if you only do 50% discharges, or 5 times the cycles if you just do 20% discharges. That's the same total energy output meaning you aren't gaining anything at the end of the day, just wasting more time connecting and disconnecting your pack to a charger.

Click to expand...

Ah... that is a slight difference, not something I had considered, I'll have to read up more on that. Though that graph from the CALB page doesn't show a straight, but a curve suggesting otherwise.

They have

100% DOD = 2200

50% DOD = 5800

25% DOD = 15000

Will have to look for more info!

Scottydog said:

Ah... that is a slight difference, not something I had considered, I'll have to read up more on that. Though that graph from the CALB page doesn't show a straight, but a curve suggesting otherwise.

Click to expand...

No, it shows exactly the curve you would expect, which is a 1/X like plot with the supposed cycle count going asymptotic as you approach 0% discharges. Naturally you would have infinite cycles if your depth of discharge was zero. A much more interesting and meaningful way to portray this data would not be to show cycle life on the 'Y' axis, but instead show the product of cycle life times the depth of discharge, IE total cycle lifetime energy.

They have
100% DOD = 2200
50% DOD = 5800

Click to expand...

ie, to first order roughly double the cycles at 50% DOD

25% DOD = 15000

Click to expand...

And again, roughly another doubling in cycles when you go from 50% to 25%. But what makes their data especially suspect is that the graph itself only has 2 data points that they call "Test Result", at 100% and at 80%. Everything after that is a red plot called "Analog Result" which I can only assume is a bad translation for extrapolated results.

If you look at these two actual data points, they have 2200 cycles at 100% DOD and 2700 cycles at 80% DODs. Now if we multiply the 2700 cycles by the 80% value to normalize the results for total energy, we have only 2160 equivalent full cycles from the battery in this 80% regime. So what their actual test data shows it that you get slightly less total energy out of the pack by discharging to 80% instead of just doing 100% discharges.

The right way to look at the test data on that graph is to say, gee, I'm slightly better off running the battery all the way down though 100% charge/discharge cycles than trying to limit it to 80%.

Cool Justin,

I was expecting that they would have 100% DOD = 2200, 50% DOD = 4400 and 25% DOD = 8800 if there was no advantage to partial charging. I'll read what you have said a few times to understand better.

I noticed the analog result vs test result thing.

Will have to look at a similar graph showing the expectation for the 18650 and similar cells? I'll have to find one and see the differences.

The interesting thing is it would appear this understanding regarding this chemistry is not well understood them? I have noticed on a few forums, where persons are using GBS, CALB etc cells the users are careful regarding limiting DOD to "maximize" lifespan. If this is the case they are oversizing their battery banks needlessly if they are doing so with concern to limit DOD and maximize lifespan when using that chemistry?

Just comparing the "analog" LiFePO4 image to one listed for li-ion. What should we be looking at?

p.s... Should really ask outside of this post as I realise it's dedicated to the Satiator. Hope to get mine at some point soon!

Scottydog said:

Just comparing the "analog" LiFePO4 image to one listed for li-ion. What should we be looking at?

Click to expand...

I've updated that graph with a red line that shows the theoretical cycle count which would have the same total energy output as the 80% point. This graph shows 3000 cycles at 80% DOD, so at 50% DOD the same energy would require 3000 * 80/50 = 4800 cycles etc. If the actual test data is above this red line, then it means you have a benefit to doing lower depth discharge cycles. The problem with this graph you linked to in isolation is that we have no idea how they determined what the cycle life limit was, and whether it was top cycled, bottom cycled, or cycled around the 50% point. So you can't really make an informed decision from a random graph taken from a shopify page and we have no idea if the blue line was drawn by someone in photoshop or the compilation of years of cycle life testing from an R&D facility.

p.s... Should really ask outside of this post as I realise it's dedicated to the Satiator. Hope to get mine at some point soon!

Click to expand...

Well it's related enough since part of the point of the Satiator is to give people the power to control their charge levels when cycling batteries, with the intent of increasing the pack longevity, and so an understanding of that is relevant to making most use of the device.

The lesson on that front, to repeat in general terms:

• Unless people can present test data that clearly demonstrates otherwise, I will continue to say that there is no benefit to even attempting partial DOD cycling with LiFePO4 packs.The increase in cycles you may get is to first order completely offset by the reduced energy from each cycle.
• If you are using normal Lithium-ion chemistries, then reducing your full charge voltage and the time the pack spends at the full charge voltages will increase your cycle and calendar life, far above and beyond what would be needed to compensate for the reduced energy per discharge.

Hi Justin,

I've seen videos on the 7205 version that can reach 103 VDC. Is the 7205 simply a software change that can be downloaded or is it a totally different model. If it is a different model, where can I buy the 7205?

Cheers,
Joe

Like E Bike-E said:

Hi Justin,

I've seen videos on the 7205 version that can reach 103 VDC. Is the 7205 simply a software change that can be downloaded or is it a totally different model. If it is a different model, where can I buy the 7205?

Cheers,
Joe

Click to expand...

Hi Joe,

Beta version available here:

http://www.ebikes.ca/shop/ebike-parts/chargers/satiator7205.html

Regards,

Jason

Justin,

Are there plans to monitor cell voltage and provide cell balancing anywhere in the future? Maybe support CAN/i2c/whatever streams from other cell monitors?

I trust the Satiator to not burn down my house when charging - but without a balancing option I'm still stuck with questionable means to monitor, more than balance, weird cells like those from a Leaf/Volt/etc?

The Satiator is already compatible with BMS systems for balancing. After completing the charge (when current drops below the setpoint) it continues to put out the set voltage, this allows the BMS to continue and use the voltage to balance the cells. If at any time a cell goes overvoltage it is the responsibility of the BMS to disconnect from the charging source and handle the bleeding of excess voltage.

There doesn't need to be a complex interface between the BMS and the Satiator, and with the lack of standardization in the marketplace it is unlikely that anything like that would be contemplated, I suspect.

adriftatsea said:

Justin,

Are there plans to monitor cell voltage and provide cell balancing anywhere in the future?

Click to expand...

This gets asked a lot but there are no plans to do this on the Satiator. I'm really firm in the belief that all cell management and balancing etc. belongs inside the battery's BMS circuit, which all lithium batteries should have, and not in the charger or controller. A battery should then present itself as just a + and - power source for a vehicle, and user visible cell monitoring needn't exist, because
a) all the cells are always at the same voltage anyways, and
b) if there is any cell anomaly, then the BMS will terminate further charge/discharge from the pack as required.

I trust the Satiator to not burn down my house when charging - but without a balancing option I'm still stuck with questionable means to monitor, more than balance, weird cells like those from a Leaf/Volt/etc?

Click to expand...

If you need to monitor your cell voltages, then the appropriate device for that is cell monitor and/or BMS board, and it has the additional benefit of monitoring not only during charging, but also during discharge, in storage etc. I'm presuming that in these weird cell packs you aren't hooking up a BMS circuit but are running them direct? I know a lot of DIY pack builders are reluctant to add a BMS, since it is a bit of a pain to do, but it's the right thing to do too.

Alan B said:

There doesn't need to be a complex interface between the BMS and the Satiator, and with the lack of standardization in the marketplace it is unlikely that anything like that would be contemplated, I suspect.

Click to expand...

Bingo as well. In the interest of component interchangeability and long term product support, the fewer communications and interfaces between EV components the better.

Hi Justin,
I am using one of your 72V Satiator's for my Stealth Bomber which has a custom built battery pack of Li Ion (Samsung) cells in a 21S7P configuration. Works great.
Looks like this: http://www.fareinc.com/Alex-Battery/index.html

Your web site shows the 72 Satiator is out of stock. http://www.ebikes.ca/shop/ebike-parts/chargers/satiator7205.html

Will the 72V be available again?

Jim

Is there any problem using the Satiator to bench test a BBS02 motor? If I set up an SLA profile of say 54V, connect the Satiator to the BBS02 through the battery connector, and force start the charge can I then safely power up the LCD, test the throttle, brake cutoffs, view the programing of the controller, etc.? I am not intending to put the motor under any load, of course. Thanks.

I don't see any reason it wouldn't work.