Hello, I own some Ablerex MARS 3000 (MS3000RT) UPS. Following the thread here : http://osdir.com/ml/monitoring.nut.user/2006-04/msg00091.html I would have the following issues : 1. The battery charge displayed seems wrong : It always shows 100.0 - even when the battery is disconnected for replacement. 2. Battery voltage 2.29 is also static ...and wrong. The initial assumption of being the voltage per unit seems wrong : the ups uses 8 x 12V batteries. 8*12 = 96V , same as battery.voltage.nominal: which is correct. The initial poster seems to have more credible results at least regarding the battery.charge: variable, however in my case the value is wrong. System params : #upsc Ablerex2 battery.charge: 100.0 battery.voltage: 2.29 battery.voltage.nominal: 96.0 driver.name: megatec driver.parameter.pollinterval: 2 driver.parameter.port: /dev/ttyUSB0 driver.version: 2.2.0- driver.version.internal: 1.5.4 input.frequency: 50.0 input.voltage: 227.1 input.voltage.fault: 190.0 input.voltage.maximum: 230.6 input.voltage.minimum: 216.5 output.voltage: 221.3 output.voltage.nominal: 220.0 ups.beeper.status: disabled ups.delay.shutdown: 0 ups.delay.start: 2 ups.load: 95.0 ups.mfr: Ablerex ups.model: MS3000RT MS02035C ups.serial: unknown ups.status: OL ups.temperature: 55.8 Any ideea about the cause of the anomalies ? Thank you in advance. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/pipermail/nut-upsuser/attachments/20090310/6d267c4e/attachment.htm
Citeren Snoopy Great <great.snoopy op gmail.com>:> I own some Ablerex MARS 3000 (MS3000RT) UPS. > Following the thread here : > http://osdir.com/ml/monitoring.nut.user/2006-04/msg00091.html > I would have the following issues : > 1. The battery charge displayed seems wrong : It always shows 100.0 - even > when the battery is disconnected for replacement.The battery charge is calculated from the battery voltage reported by the UPS. If this voltage is still present with batteries disconnected, there is nothing we can do about this.> 2. Battery voltage 2.29 is also static ...and wrong. The initial assumption > of being the voltage per unit seems wrong : the ups uses 8 x 12V batteries. > 8*12 = 96V , same as battery.voltage.nominal: which is correct.Again, the battery voltage shown is reported by the UPS. We can't do anything about that if it is static, complain to the vendor instead. Newer versions of NUT will allow you to specify a multiplication value for the battery voltage, so that it will match the total string voltage. This won't help though, if the reported value is static.> The initial poster seems to have more credible results at least regarding > the battery.charge: variable, however in my case the value is wrong.[...]> Any ideea about the cause of the anomalies ?This is a limitation of your UPS. We can't do anything about that. Best regards, Arjen -- Please keep list traffic on the list
Citeren Snoopy Great <great.snoopy op gmail.com>:> Well, the value should not be static, could it be a data parsing error ?No.> 1. Manuel has the same ups model, and the charge level showed by nut is not > constant. However he seems to be running the initial version from svn.Maybe he read the man page for this driver (or was advised by someone on this list) to setup the 'battvolts' parameter for this UPS. If you didn't configure that, chances are that it will always report 100% charge, since it might fail to determine the battery low and high levels. The UPS doesn't report these and the driver may fail to correctly guess them. See the man page where this is explained.> 2. I have 2 identical UPS, I think it's quite improbable that both are > defective and send a constant value for both charge level and voltage.The UPS doesn't report the charge level, the Megatec/Q1 protocol doesn't have support for that (yet). It can only report battery voltage at the moment. From that, a charge is estimated. Since this only uses the reported battery voltage, this is notoriously unreliable.> 3. The original ups software seems to show variable values for those > parameters, but this point I'll have to test a little later (the ups is in > production, and it's a little harder to > make experiments changing the software and/or disconnecting the main power > supply to force ups in OB mode). > > Is there any chance something else changed between Manuel's version and mine > that could explain the misreading ?NUT version? It might also help to upgrade to the latest NUT version and try out the 'blazer_ser' driver. Make sure to read the man page for it, since in some cases it needs some help in setting the right parameters for your UPS. If you feed it the right parameters, it will also do a much better job in guesstimating charge left while running on battery. And looking at the data you provided, it will at least do a better job in determining the number of cells in the battery. Best regards, Arjen -- Please keep list traffic on the list