Mitsubishi i-MiEV BMS
Posted: Mon Aug 17, 2020 7:15 pm
Hi,
I have a complete i-MiEV batterypack around for testing purposes, and was trying to get the SimpBMS running on it. Unfortunately currently getting some weird behaviour. I have been trying different things, but as an Arduino-beginner might be in need for some tips.
After startup, the BMS starts 'finding' the modules. Most modules are correctly monitored, except for module 6 & 12 (the only 4-cell modules). After about 10 seconds when the SOC-calculation is done (see "/// SOC SET ///"), all cell voltages turn negative.
Below the console output (search for "///" to find the SOC calculation point), and a screenshot of the present CAN-bus data. CAN-bus data stays steady, no lost messages. Using a MCP2551 CAN transceiver, oscilloscope displays clean signal at pin 4 of the Teensy. MCP2551 gives 5V at the RXD line, but imho the Teensy 3.2 should be 5V tolerant.
Tried with the most recent .HEX of Tom's Github as well as a recompiled version with the updated ADC library (modified the adc->adc0 calls), same behaviour.
What am I doing wrong ?
I have a complete i-MiEV batterypack around for testing purposes, and was trying to get the SimpBMS running on it. Unfortunately currently getting some weird behaviour. I have been trying different things, but as an Arduino-beginner might be in need for some tips.
After startup, the BMS starts 'finding' the modules. Most modules are correctly monitored, except for module 6 & 12 (the only 4-cell modules). After about 10 seconds when the SOC-calculation is done (see "/// SOC SET ///"), all cell voltages turn negative.
Below the console output (search for "///" to find the SOC calculation point), and a screenshot of the present CAN-bus data. CAN-bus data stays steady, no lost messages. Using a MCP2551 CAN transceiver, oscilloscope displays clean signal at pin 4 of the Teensy. MCP2551 gives 5V at the RXD line, but imho the Teensy 3.2 should be 5V tolerant.
Tried with the most recent .HEX of Tom's Github as well as a recompiled version with the updated ADC library (modified the adc->adc0 calls), same behaviour.
What am I doing wrong ?