N.E.S.E. the no solder module

leesafur said:
tylerwatts said:
Agniusm that looks like energy storage though, not high current. Would 2 8p modules in parallel be comfortable with 400A output? I am wondering about a pack similar size also.

cheers
Tyler

Hi Tyler, The answer to your question is it depends. It depends on what battery and BMS you are using. The above picture of the green batteries is mine and I was surprised to see it when it showed up in a google search lol. What you see there is 9-15s8p 63v batteries. Soon to be 15 batteries.. I paused building them last year as it was just to hot on the boat coming into summer (I'm a fulltime liveaboard) to keep printing them. Each battery has its own 40 amp BMS that's tied to a huge busbar that you cant see. Each 18650 cell that I'm using has a standard discharge rating of 0.2c which works out to be 590mA. That works out to be .59amps X 8=4.72amps X the 9 batteries = 42.48amps standard discharge. That's 2,676 watts of power without anything breaking a sweat. The maximum output is a totally different story! Maximum discharge current is (2c 5900mA) 5.9amps X 8=47.2amps X 9=424.8amps X 60volts =25,488 watts! The most my system has peaked is 414amps and the BMS's will peak to 540amps for 5s. The system is fully automatic and will simply start the generator if we are pulling more than 5,000 watts for more than 2 minutes. So... yeah.. I guess you could call it both, a energy storage system with high current. Short of spending 10 times as much and buying Battle Born Batteries this was the safest solution for me. The N.E.S.E system is a sound product that has changed everything todo with boating for us.
Lee
Hi Lee
Thanks for the background and fascinating use case. I was actually asking about the rating of the NESE hardware over the cells. I.e. if I built 8-10-12p modules of high output cells what max current could the NESE hardware handle comfortably before melting housings or seeing significant voltage drop. Particularly I'm considering how scalable the modules are for say building large motorcycle or small car packs of 20-30kwh and 100kw continuous or higher 5min rated outputs. And would I have to run a 400v system @250A to keep current down or could I run 160v say demanding 625A and possibly 30s bursts to 800A. Therefore rather than cells being the max discharge bottleneck would the NESE hardware start to be a concern?

I am aware that the hardware was improved not too long ago and rated to handle higher currents so I guess what is real world experience now showing? Does having lots of uncooled cells with potentially high current output in a densely packed battery assembly present a significant problem for the NESE system? And has anybody found a practical way for cooling potentially? Air channels in the modules or even interconnected water galleries that lock together when you stack modules maybe?

I apologise, I'm thinking aloud about the practicalities and challenges I'm likely to face on my desired builds, hypothetically.

cheers
Tyler

 
Tyler, its not viable to build a cooled pack out of NESE. I would not even consider such big packs as there are car batteries you could use for quiet cheaper.
So for passive pack you would want to go with as many cells as is needed to keep the pack from overheating. Cells themselved dictate so NESE modules would not melt. If they melt, your cells are at over 70C and that is far from good for your cells. I melted mine while testing modules loaded with 6 sony vtc5a at over 200A reaching ~90C.
Modules are scalable as in you parallel them. I would test my cells were they are at, at desired load in terms of heating up, then size the pack accordingly.
 
Well not water cooled, wondering what the limit of an uncooled pack might be, as Agnasium said, need a bigger battery with low current draw to mitigate high heat build up, in summary.

cheers
Tyler

 
Yes, preventing heat from being generated internally in the first place, if practical is far far better than needing cooling solutions.

Lower C-rates and capacity utilisation can extend also lifespan by 3x 5x or more

drastically lowering annual running costs
 
john61ct said:
Yes, preventing heat from being generated internally in the first place, if practical is far far better than needing cooling solutions.

Lower C-rates and capacity utilisation can extend also lifespan by 3x 5x or more

drastically lowering annual running costs
How have your NESE kits worked out?
 
john61ct said:
Yes, preventing heat from being generated internally in the first place, if practical is far far better than needing cooling solutions.

Lower C-rates and capacity utilisation can extend also lifespan by 3x 5x or more

drastically lowering annual running costs
Of course, but the weight and volume are then the problem and as I mentioned motorcycles it's then not feasible.

cheers
Tyler

 
tylerwatts said:
john61ct said:
Yes, preventing heat from being generated internally in the first place, if practical is far far better than needing cooling solutions.

Lower C-rates and capacity utilisation can extend also lifespan by 3x 5x or more

drastically lowering annual running costs
Of course, but the weight and volume are then the problem and as I mentioned motorcycles it's then not feasible.

cheers
Tyler
Not completely true. If you would compare Nissan leaf module which quiet often is used in motorcycle conversions you will notice the difference. Here is my comparison:
Nissan leaf module is 2365cm³ in volume, holds 474Wh of energy and weighs 3800g.
NESE 8P module is 246cm³ in volume, holds 86wh of energy and weighs 506g (122g module and 384g cells).
If we take 6 modules, it will take up 246x6=1476cm³ in volume, hold 86x6=516Wh of energy and weigh 506x6=3036g
So the fair comparison is
NESE 516Wh vs 474Wh LEAF - NESE stores 9% more energy
NESE 3036g vs 3800g LEAF - NESE is 20% lighter
NESE 1476cm³ vs 2365cm³ LEAF - NESE takes up 40% less space
 
agniusm said:
tylerwatts said:
john61ct said:
Yes, preventing heat from being generated internally in the first place, if practical is far far better than needing cooling solutions.

Lower C-rates and capacity utilisation can extend also lifespan by 3x 5x or more

drastically lowering annual running costs
Of course, but the weight and volume are then the problem and as I mentioned motorcycles it's then not feasible.

cheers
Tyler
Not completely true. If you would compare Nissan leaf module which quiet often is used in motorcycle conversions you will notice the difference. Here is my comparison:
Nissan leaf module is 2365cm³ in volume, holds 474Wh of energy and weighs 3800g.
NESE 8P module is 246cm³ in volume, holds 86wh of energy and weighs 506g (122g module and 384g cells).
If we take 6 modules, it will take up 246x6=1476cm³ in volume, hold 86x6=516Wh of energy and weigh 506x6=3036g
So the fair comparison is
NESE 516Wh vs 474Wh LEAF - NESE stores 9% more energy
NESE 3036g vs 3800g LEAF - NESE is 20% lighter
NESE 1476cm³ vs 2365cm³ LEAF - NESE takes up 40% less space
That is correct but it does not consider power requirements, therefore related to heat. So we said before we are forced to have higher capacity/storage to lower C output levels and reduce IR heat generation. If I want a smaller ~5-10kWh pack but capable of 5-10C peaks/short term output then cooling is likely required or temperature monitoring to protect battery from thermal runaway etc which will surely limit output after a short time.

@agniusm this is certainly no criticism of your product, it is fantastic. I want to be clear I fully support and endorse the N.E.S.E. modules.

This is rather a design constraint for the target solution. Tesla would not require battery cooling if they limited power outputs but their design requirements stipulated cooling was required to achieve performance targets.

Let's not spoil this thread with further discussion on this, not for my benefits at least.

cheers
Tyler

 
tylerwatts said:
That is correct but it does not consider power requirements, therefore related to heat. So we said before we are forced to have higher capacity/storage to lower C output levels and reduce IR heat generation.

If I want a smaller ~5-10kWh pack but capable of 5-10C peaks/short term output then cooling is likely required or temperature monitoring to protect battery from thermal runaway etc which will surely limit output after a short time.

@agniusm this is certainly no criticism of your product, it is fantastic. I want to be clear I fully support and endorse the N.E.S.E. modules.

This is rather a design constraint for the target solution. Tesla would not require battery cooling if they limited power outputs but their design requirements stipulated cooling was required to achieve performance targets.

Let's not spoil this thread with further discussion on this, not for my benefits at least.

cheers
Tyler

Not spoiling for sure. Its good info and I haven't done a comparison myself.
In regards to power, it would be on par with leaf module at 300A roughly (3 modules in parallel or 72ah). This estimate covers for the heating.

I have done calculations with sony vtc6. 3000mah cell @ 48g per piece. These are 30A rated cells so they would stay cool enough. Total of them would be capable of 720A(24P)
 
Never mind. JCT (Hans)has no skin in the game. Just blather from a virtual “expert”with zero experience with most of the bits commented on.

tylerwatts said:
john61ct said:
Yes, preventing heat from being generated internally in the first place, if practical is far far better than needing cooling solutions.

Lower C-rates and capacity utilisation can extend also lifespan by 3x 5x or more

drastically lowering annual running costs
Of course, but the weight and volume are then the problem and as I mentioned motorcycles it's then not feasible.

cheers
Tyler
 
agniusm said:
tylerwatts said:
That is correct but it does not consider power requirements, therefore related to heat. So we said before we are forced to have higher capacity/storage to lower C output levels and reduce IR heat generation. If I want a smaller ~5-10kWh pack but capable of 5-10C peaks/short term output then cooling is likely required or temperature monitoring to protect battery from thermal runaway etc which will surely limit output after a short time.

@agniusm this is certainly no criticism of your product, it is fantastic. I want to be clear I fully support and endorse the N.E.S.E. modules.

This is rather a design constraint for the target solution. Tesla would not require battery cooling if they limited power outputs but their design requirements stipulated cooling was required to achieve performance targets.

Let's not spoil this thread with further discussion on this, not for my benefits at least.

cheers
Tyler
Not spoinling for sure. Its good info and i haven't done comparison myself.
In regards to power, it would be on par with leaf module at 300A roughly(3 modules in parallel or 72ah). This estimate covers for the heating. I have done calculations with sony vtc6. 3000mah cell @ 48g per piece. These are 30A rated cells so they would stay cool enough. Total of them would be capable of 720A(24P)
Thank you Agniusm [emoji3526][emoji106]

cheers
Tyler

 
agniusm said:
Forgot to mention, 21700 tabs are redone and now have larger area

799a992e1c49a1dce233e7fd514ccebe14234236.jpeg

where to buy?
 
agniusm said:
Anyone knows what happened with vruzend? I see all the threads are deleted/removed?
The V2.1 kit is still available AFAIK. I've emailed Micah a couple times (2020 and recently), but he never replies. My recent email was encouraging him to offer a 10s3p 21700 V2.2 kit.

I've been using a V2.1 kit for my 2020 experimental 10s3p 30Q build. I had to replace nine of the 30Q '141' cells because of high self-discharge with '6T' cells. So far have 250+ cycles on twenty-one '141' cells and 125+ cycles on nine '6T' cells. My take away so far is that IMR unknowingly shipped me both Grade A & B '141' cells. Hopefully all 9 of the replaced '6T' cells are Grade A (won't know for sure until disassembling pack and testing all the cells again in November), but so far AOK.

The great advantage of the Vruzend V 2.1 kit is for eperimenting (ease of assembly and disassembly). Also excellent for a beginner to wrap their mind around parallel, series, current flow, attaching balance leads, etc. I can split my 10s3p into 5s6p for bulk charging with my RC 2s-6s Balance Charger with p-group voltage readouts during charging as well as checking IR of each p-group. Use JST-XH 5s Y-cable (p-group voltage readouts) and 5s Deans Y-cable (2amp charge).

The Vruzend V.2 kit would serve as a great high school science teaching/learning build project for gals as much as guys (the dos and don'ts as well as answering all the - WHYs). The kit had it's drawbacks, but definitely served a useful niche; especially for beginners.

Think Micah got his fill of those that belittled his kit as "crap". Thus a 21700 kit may not be a top priority ... as much as i would be one of the first to buy one if in the pipeline.
 
An all new vruzend design will be released, soon I think. Covid was a business crushing event everywhere.
 
Wow!!

https://www.tec-divesysteme.com/en/p/suex-xjoy-14


agniusm said:
Another underwater battery:
Suex_Xjoy_Li-ion1.jpg

Suex_Xjoy_Li-ion2.jpg

Suex_Xjoy_Li-ion3.jpg

unnamed.png

image001.png
 
agniusm said:
Anyone knows what happened with vruzend? I see all the threads are deleted/removed?

Threads should not be being deleted. That would lose information; the whole purpose of this forum is to accumulate and store information on such things for future use.

There are still Vruzend topics, though I don't know if they are the specific ones you're looking for:
https://endless-sphere.com/forums/search.php?keywords=vruzend&terms=all&author=&sc=1&sf=titleonly&sr=topics&sk=t&sd=d&st=0&ch=300&t=0&submit=Search
Those are only the ones with it in the title.
 
I heard from the vruzend creator a few months ago. He mentioned a new version but it appears it derailed. A shame really.
 
Back
Top