Not according to my 'tests' :-(
Not so, here is the improvement which is nil:
View attachment 1049160
Unfortunately I changed two things when I did my last 80% - 87% SlowFox Charge!
A: I only charged 7% (80% - 87%)
B: I drove of immediately after reaching 87%
My previous two 'balancing attempts' were:
A: I charged 13% (80% - 93%)
B: I turned on Camp mode and used that to drain a few hours off, before leaving
Some other interesting findings are:
1:
- When I used Camp Mode to reduce the stress at 93% SoC, my SMT Nominal Capacity fell from 65,2 kWh to 64,4 kWh after first test and fell further to 63.4 kWh after second test!!!
- When i drove immediately after reaching 87%, then during my drive SMT Nominal Capacity grew to a new record of 65,4 kWh
That suggest that some vampire Drain is not taken into the Total Capacity :-(
That would explain why my Nominal Capacity is 65,4 kWh despite my weakest Brick having 220,2 Ah, which should give something like 3,7 V x 222,2 Ah x 6 Bricks/Module * 14 Modules = 68,4 kWh (Q: Why 3,7 Volts and not 3,6 Volts, which is average of 3,0V and 4,2V? Because energy is less at the low voltage and the BMS confirms I have 49,5% energy left when voltage is 3,675 V and I have 50,4% Left when voltage is 3,714 V. So half the energy appears to be below 3,7 Volts
2:
- After my first Balancing, my Minimum CAC improved by 0,3 Ah and my Maximum CAC stayed unchanged (ImBalance fell from 4,3 Ah to 4,1 Ah, so some rounding errors in here)
This - to me - suggest that CAC is 'calculated' with the Voltage swing currently possible
After Balancing my weakest Brick 54 can go slightly lower in minimum Voltage, because it is still not the 'terminating' brick (Which is still Brick #12) The high CAC Bricks have not been blead and are still the 'EndOfDrive' bricks and so have unchanged possible voltage swing and CAC.
Makes sense of course! Calculating that brick 7 WOULD have even more than the current 224,2 Ah (around 225,8 Ah) if it was charged to 4,2 V instead of the current 4,14V is true, but adds no value.