Hello everyone,
I’ve been experiencing an issue with my SolarFlow 2400 AC for several weeks and I’m wondering if this is a known limitation or a bug that could be fixed.
My Setup
∙ SolarFlow 2400 AC (firmware v1.0.15) with AB3000X battery
∙ SolarFlow 800 Pro (working correctly)
∙ Microinverter connected to the off-grid socket of the 2400 AC
∙ Zendure 3ct as smart meter
∙ HEMS/Zenki enabled with dynamic pricing configured (manual input, low price at night, normal price during day)
∙ SOC minimum set to 20%
The Problem
1. Standby consumption issue: Even with SOC minimum set to 20%, the 2400 AC slowly drains overnight due to standby consumption (25W). After a few hours, the battery drops to 18-17%.
2. Bypass instead of charging: The next morning, when my microinverter produces solar power (e.g., 800-1000W on the off-grid socket), the 2400 AC stays in bypass mode instead of charging the battery back to the SOC minimum.
3. Result: The solar surplus is injected into the grid instead of being used to charge the battery. The battery remains stuck below 20%.
4. Manual workaround works: If I manually remove the device from HEMS, do a manual charge to get above 20%, then re-add it to HEMS, the system works correctly again until the next overnight drain.
Expected Behavior
When the battery is below SOC minimum AND there is solar surplus available from the off-grid microinverter, I would expect the system to:
1. Use part of the solar power to supply the house
2. Use the remaining surplus to charge the battery back to SOC minimum
3. Then resume normal smart matching operation
What I’ve Tried
∙ Configured dynamic pricing with low price at night, normal price during day
∙ Updated to firmware v1.0.15
∙ The 800 Pro respects the SOC minimum correctly, only the 2400 AC has this issue
Questions
1. Is this a known limitation of the 2400 AC when using a microinverter on the off-grid socket?
2. Is there a setting I’m missing to enable “charge from off-grid solar when below SOC minimum”?
3. Is this behavior expected, or is it a bug that could be addressed in a future firmware update?
Thank you for any help or insights!