connections for? EcityP Smart S5-13 BMS
- Thread starter Canoe
- Start date
nlhaines
100 W
I just got this BMS in the mail and I'm a little confused about how to hook it up.
So I think I connect "B-" to the "b-" wire from the JST connector. I connect the + end of the charger OR the + end of the load (i.e. controller) to P+. The negative end of the charger connects to "C-" and the negative end of the load (i.e. controller) connects to "P-".
Can anybody confirm this for me? I'm quite unsure and don't want to ruin anything. Does anybody have pictures of everything hooked up? I would greatly appreciate any help.
So I think I connect "B-" to the "b-" wire from the JST connector. I connect the + end of the charger OR the + end of the load (i.e. controller) to P+. The negative end of the charger connects to "C-" and the negative end of the load (i.e. controller) connects to "P-".
Can anybody confirm this for me? I'm quite unsure and don't want to ruin anything. Does anybody have pictures of everything hooked up? I would greatly appreciate any help.
friendly1uk
1 MW
nlhaines
100 W
friendly1uk said:
I'm confused because In your diagram is looks like the charger, controller, and battery are permanently wired to the BMS. Why would you have the controller and charger connected at the same time?
friendly1uk
1 MW
There is no need to disconnect the controller while charging. The only connection/disconnection you need make is plugging and unplugging the charger. That is of course unless you wish to leave the controller on the bike and walk off with the battery. In which case another plug would be required.
This is how my latest pack is wired. It stays on the bike.
View attachment 1
Another allowing the controller and battery to split. It is the same as the bmsb drawing, but laid out how I would physically wire it.
Thus, you keep the cells and bms together, and may separate the charger and the controller. Though there is no electrical need to isolate the controller while charging. It just makes getting the pack off the bike easier.
This is how my latest pack is wired. It stays on the bike.
View attachment 1
Another allowing the controller and battery to split. It is the same as the bmsb drawing, but laid out how I would physically wire it.
Thus, you keep the cells and bms together, and may separate the charger and the controller. Though there is no electrical need to isolate the controller while charging. It just makes getting the pack off the bike easier.
nlhaines
100 W
friendly1uk said:
Yeah, I definitely want to be able to detach the battery from the controller. When I was talking about connecting the pack to the charger OR the controller, I didn't mean exclusive or, I just meant one or both could be detached at any given time.
friendly1uk
1 MW
I hope I have boosted your confidence then pal 
The connection order is not widely published. It has caused a few losses. The charger point is not adequately protected against short circuits either. Checking it regularly is not a high enough priority in the software, though that can be adjusted if you have the pc link. Good boards other than that.
If your not using the full 13s capability then it's worth checking they assembled it properly. The top cell needs connecting to vcc via a resistor which is often not done. The board is made with it connected to 13, but when 13 is not used the board needs altering. I have not seen bmsb do this.
I don't quite recall the job. I think it is R1. The board has what look like test points along the ballance plug that enable 13 to be easily hooked to the new highest cell. Number 12 when I got a 12s board.
The connection order is not widely published. It has caused a few losses. The charger point is not adequately protected against short circuits either. Checking it regularly is not a high enough priority in the software, though that can be adjusted if you have the pc link. Good boards other than that.
If your not using the full 13s capability then it's worth checking they assembled it properly. The top cell needs connecting to vcc via a resistor which is often not done. The board is made with it connected to 13, but when 13 is not used the board needs altering. I have not seen bmsb do this.
I don't quite recall the job. I think it is R1. The board has what look like test points along the ballance plug that enable 13 to be easily hooked to the new highest cell. Number 12 when I got a 12s board.
nlhaines
100 W
friendly1uk said:I hope I have boosted your confidence then pal
The connection order is not widely published. It has caused a few losses. The charger point is not adequately protected against short circuits either. Checking it regularly is not a high enough priority in the software, though that can be adjusted if you have the pc link. Good boards other than that.
If your not using the full 13s capability then it's worth checking they assembled it properly. The top cell needs connecting to vcc via a resistor which is often not done. The board is made with it connected to 13, but when 13 is not used the board needs altering. I have not seen bmsb do this.
I don't quite recall the job. I think it is R1. The board has what look like test points along the ballance plug that enable 13 to be easily hooked to the new highest cell. Number 12 when I got a 12s board.
I definitely have some clarity and confidence now that your drawings confirm what I was thinking.
I haven't seen anything about this modification anywhere else. I too have the 12s version. Is there information about this somewhere? What is vcc? Are you saying I just solder a connection between the "test point" for 13 and 12?
friendly1uk
1 MW
This bms uses the oz890 cpu. The oz890 thread is almost all about this configuration. There was a link on page one showing the data sheets where the info lay. My board failed to switch on. I then linked the B12 test point to the B13 one. Hit 'reset' and the board started to work.
I didn't check the two I just installed, as it seems many of these boards are out there and non are done as the manufacturer stated. They seem to work. However only one of the four I have used has worked without first pressing reset. Well, I say pressing... You ground the rstd test point for a moment. The ground beside it is ideal. It's in the group where voltage level leds can be fitted.
Perhaps don't concern yourself with the resister mod unless it refuses to work after a reset. The resistor is connecting the main live to the top of cell 12 ideally, but in service the main live is connected to the top of 12 by a big red wire anyway. R1 only serves a purpose when the board has main power but the balance wires are not yet connected. What I think happens is we connect the main power to the board. At this point the chip looks at the not yet present cells and it's opinion? is altered by this R1. Then worse case scenario, the board trips. You connect the balance and rather than instant gratification, you have to press reset. If so, that is less bother than the resistor mod.
The oz890 thread might be a good read for you. It's centered around hacking the data port, but there is plenty of other useful information.
I didn't check the two I just installed, as it seems many of these boards are out there and non are done as the manufacturer stated. They seem to work. However only one of the four I have used has worked without first pressing reset. Well, I say pressing... You ground the rstd test point for a moment. The ground beside it is ideal. It's in the group where voltage level leds can be fitted.
Perhaps don't concern yourself with the resister mod unless it refuses to work after a reset. The resistor is connecting the main live to the top of cell 12 ideally, but in service the main live is connected to the top of 12 by a big red wire anyway. R1 only serves a purpose when the board has main power but the balance wires are not yet connected. What I think happens is we connect the main power to the board. At this point the chip looks at the not yet present cells and it's opinion? is altered by this R1. Then worse case scenario, the board trips. You connect the balance and rather than instant gratification, you have to press reset. If so, that is less bother than the resistor mod.
The oz890 thread might be a good read for you. It's centered around hacking the data port, but there is plenty of other useful information.
Hi all,
I read all of this post and it would be interesting to connect with I2C and change some setting.
So for my story, I have same trouble with my two BMS.
I buy 2 of this Smart BMS from "bmsbattery" since 1 year, but when I plug the charger on my 48v 15A lipo battery,
the bms disconnect and voltage shut down at 22-27volt.
The charge don't start more than one or two second then the bms short-cut.
But I can run my bike with the bms connected and it work.
I have an ecitypower charger 48v 4A 240w from "bmsbattery" too.
You have to know after 1 warranty change for a similar trouble "BmsBattery" after sales service don't answer me...
Maybe anyone can help me ???
(sorry for my bad english I'm french)
I read all of this post and it would be interesting to connect with I2C and change some setting.
So for my story, I have same trouble with my two BMS.
I buy 2 of this Smart BMS from "bmsbattery" since 1 year, but when I plug the charger on my 48v 15A lipo battery,
the bms disconnect and voltage shut down at 22-27volt.
The charge don't start more than one or two second then the bms short-cut.
But I can run my bike with the bms connected and it work.
I have an ecitypower charger 48v 4A 240w from "bmsbattery" too.
You have to know after 1 warranty change for a similar trouble "BmsBattery" after sales service don't answer me...
Maybe anyone can help me ???
(sorry for my bad english I'm french)
dnmun
1 PW
it sounds like the battery is out of balance and it has one cell hitting the HVC and turning off the BMS charging port. you have to measure cell voltages while it is charging and post them up on a thread about your problem. you should find the high cell right away if you look for it. if you post up the voltages in your own thread we can show you how to make the battery balance if you can do stuff yourself.
friendly1uk
1 MW
There is a slight possibility the current on the charger is too high. The board is 5 amp, but iirc over reads about 20%. The default settings could be to shut down for this over current event.
What is the packs charge level? is it full? lol
Edit.. Charger voltage could also be to high. Above your chosen value. That would surely trigger a 'full stop' event
What is the packs charge level? is it full? lol
Edit.. Charger voltage could also be to high. Above your chosen value. That would surely trigger a 'full stop' event
Thank you for your helpfull,
The battery is hobbicity lipo bat balanced & not full disharged.
I will recheck it.
I Try to decrease the charger voltage already with the screw in the charger but it doesn't work and now I have one wonky charger
Because I set the 3 screw in the charger to try to shut down voltage.
Fortunately I baught twice charger & bms.
Do I have to create my own tread for my trouble ?
The battery is hobbicity lipo bat balanced & not full disharged.
I will recheck it.
I Try to decrease the charger voltage already with the screw in the charger but it doesn't work and now I have one wonky charger
Because I set the 3 screw in the charger to try to shut down voltage.
Fortunately I baught twice charger & bms.
Do I have to create my own tread for my trouble ?
and not fully charged (max cell) near BMS OverVoltage Threshold as well, I assume?chayr said:
chayr said:I Try to decrease the charger voltage already with the screw in the charger but it doesn't work and now I have one wonky charger
Because I set the 3 screw in the charger to try to shut down voltage.
Is the symptom that the charge will start & stop every 8s for 2s (watch charger LED) ?
Then try to reduce the charge current (Poti VR1 typically on bmsb chargers).
A problem with Charge Overcurrent protection is indeed likely, when OFF after 2s and "4A".
I can confirm that default Charge Overcurrent Setting "5A ordered" (default) may effectively be very near 4A in some cases.
The Charge OC threshold value in the OZ890 chip can be only changed in steps of about 1.25A (=5mV / Rshunt_CpinChargeDirection~4mOhm).
Depending on Current Offset Correction and Rs calibration spread it can thus come near 4A. On one of the last BMSes after detailed calibrations I got effectively with delivered settings and Rs / I calibration measured:
RsChargeCpin = 4.12mOhm
RsDischargePpin = 2.97mOhm
Charge OC Threshold: 4.84 A
OC Delay : 1984 ms
ChargeOC Release Delay : 8 s
(OV/UV Delay Time is yet also 1 Scan Cycles = 1 .. 2 Seconds by delivery default usually)
bgt
100 W
Having 4 of these BMS boards I figured out how to balance my Lifepo4 cells. Just make the "OverVoltage TH"=14.........1 volt higher then your highest measured cell. 1 off my Lifepo4 cells was 3730mv so I put this value at 3850mv. Now it balances ok. You can feel the "bleeding" resistors getting warm. I have put my "OV Release"=15 at 3750mv. If "OverVoltage" is reached it switches balancing off. You can see this in the scanning page at "Fet Disable"=26 and see a 1 i.o 0 in the "view"page. My charger switches off at 43.2V anyway so there is no problem overcharging it. (36V Lifepo4 battery).
Also have 55= BleedDeltaVol at 9.6mv.
Idle bleeding is on as is PEC
Also have 55= BleedDeltaVol at 9.6mv.
Idle bleeding is on as is PEC
Where can I place a safety fuse in the system without killing the OZ890 chip in the case of a blown fuse?
As I understood the application note, the first connections to be connected must be battery - and the battery +.
Then B0, B1, B2... B13. Another sequence will kill the chip (I think...).
A blown between battery + and power supply of the OZ890 probably cause some problems...
The remaining connections B1, B2... B13 from battery to the chip will "supply" the chip over the substrate diodes on the chip.
Maybe this is the reason for dying OZ890.
How can I use a safety fuse without risking the OZ890 to be killed?
As I understood the application note, the first connections to be connected must be battery - and the battery +.
Then B0, B1, B2... B13. Another sequence will kill the chip (I think...).
A blown between battery + and power supply of the OZ890 probably cause some problems...
The remaining connections B1, B2... B13 from battery to the chip will "supply" the chip over the substrate diodes on the chip.
Maybe this is the reason for dying OZ890.
How can I use a safety fuse without risking the OZ890 to be killed?
crossbreak
1 MW
i put the fuse to the B+ pole directly. I put a thin B+ lead to the BMS power, that is unfused. No need to fuse the chip itself
I never did understand why there should be no connection on the board from B13 to B+? It is physically connected anyway? This just kills the OZ890 if the B+ plug is pulled out first/plugged in after the balancer.
think it makes no difference if you plug them in all at once or one after another? Why should it? I have no electronics background but i really cant see any reason?
I never did understand why there should be no connection on the board from B13 to B+? It is physically connected anyway? This just kills the OZ890 if the B+ plug is pulled out first/plugged in after the balancer.
think it makes no difference if you plug them in all at once or one after another? Why should it? I have no electronics background but i really cant see any reason?
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2012
- Messages
- 61
what about using 2 of those bms's in series? Finding a bms that does 18s and 20s is hard...
thanks
thanks
crumly said:Does anyone knows, what DN1 and U4 and U7 are for components?
rolf_w said:
No idea about DN1 - but U4 and U7 should be transistors.
Why do you ask - or in other words - what are you trying to do?
Depends on what you want to do achieve.altermontrealiste said:
You can do the balancing for 18/20s - maybe even LV/ HV / over current cutoff on the bms connected to the
lower half of your battery pack since that is done on the low side (fets cutoff minus).
I have no idea about what chemistry you are looking for - but e.g. 20S LiFePo4 are available.
friendly1uk
1 MW
I don't see why full functionality of two boards in series would be a problem. Both boards would need fets that take full pack voltage and the charger control circuits could be mingled with optical isolation and a comparitor. I think the fets should be addressed by mingling there output by the same means, to drive external fets that can take a lot more power to aid more people here.
Why don't you think lvc would work on the top pack? Am I missing something in my permanently drunken state
Why don't you think lvc would work on the top pack? Am I missing something in my permanently drunken state
friendly1uk said:I don't see why full functionality of two boards in series would be a problem. Both boards would need fets that take full pack voltage and the charger control circuits could be mingled with optical isolation and a comparitor. I think the fets should be addressed by mingling there output by the same means, to drive external fets that can take a lot more power to aid more people here.
Why don't you think lvc would work on the top pack? Am I missing something in my permanently drunken state
Can you do a quick drawing?
