
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RAS_Prime" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rasprime+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rasprime/52f04e79-93c9-4d54-9497-b6f136adda78n%40googlegroups.com.
Hi John and everyone,
Great discussion — and you’re absolutely right that storage practices can significantly affect lithium battery lifespan, especially over long winters.
For LiFePO4 batteries, the general rule is to avoid full charge during long-term storage. As you mentioned, keeping them around 40–60% state of charge (SOC) is ideal. Unlike SLA batteries, which prefer full charge to prevent sulfation, lithium chemistries age more slowly when partially charged.
Here are a few quick pointers based on our lab and field data at CM Batteries:
Storage Charge Level: Anywhere between 40%–60% SOC is fine — don’t stress about hitting exactly 50%. The key is simply not to store at 100%.
Temperature: Cooler environments (ideally 10–25 °C / 50–77 °F) slow down chemical aging. Just avoid freezing conditions or very high humidity.
Recharging Cycle: If stored longer than 6 months, check voltage and top up slightly if it drops below 13 V for a 12.8 V pack.
Chargers: SLA chargers can work with LiFePO4 packs that include a proper BMS, though they may not fully charge the pack (typically 90%), which is actually safer for storage.
We recently published a detailed guide that goes deeper into this topic — covering optimal voltage ranges, storage environments, and safety tips:
👉 Comprehensive Guide: How to Store LiFePO4 Batteries
So, in short — yes, discharging to around half is the right approach. It doesn’t need to be precise, and you don’t need any special “discharging assistant” unless you’re managing large packs for aviation or industrial applications.
Hope that helps clarify things, and happy (and safe) flying next season!
Best regards,
Elena Huang
From my reading, it's not the cycles loss we should be concerned
about, but the capacity loss. I asked Google this question: "what
is the capacity loss of lifepo4 batteries when stored at 100% soc
for 6 months?"
The answer in part was:
Storing a LiFePO4 battery at 100% state of charge (SOC) for six months will result in a capacity loss of approximately6-10% at room temperature (around25°𝐶or77°𝐹), with the loss increasing significantly in higher temperatures. While LiFePO4 batteries are generally robust, a full charge accelerates degradation, and the optimal storage SOC is between 40-60%.Capacity loss breakdown
- Room temperature (
25°𝐶or77°𝐹): Around 10% loss over one year, so roughly 5% loss over six months is a reasonable estimate, considering the self-discharge rate.- High temperature (
40°𝐶or104°𝐹): Storage at this temperature while fully charged is particularly damaging, with a potential loss of 20% per year, translating to approximately 10% over six months.- Low temperature (
0°𝐶or32°𝐹): This is the best-case scenario, with only a 3% loss per year, meaning approximately 1.5% loss over six months.
I do keep my 12v, 200AH rather motorhome (which is kept outside) battery at ~60% during the winter, because replacing is much more expensive than the 20AH glider batteries. That's easy to do, and what the manufacturer recommends.
Eric
--
Thanks for using RAS_Prime!
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "RAS_Prime" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to rasprime+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rasprime/81cfe76d-c25d-4f31-bf4d-a84c18856972%40gmail.com.
Permanent capacity loss: "Storing a LiFePO4 battery at 100% state of charge (SOC) for six months will result in a capacity loss..."
Eric
You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the Google Groups "RAS_Prime" group.
To unsubscribe from this topic, visit https://groups.google.com/d/topic/rasprime/xCCWzmCXya0/unsubscribe.
To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to rasprime+u...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rasprime/CAHMZmEfoKxgdP%2BjJU64aymXqb%3DHtWoyRXwKgOx1gPxx%3Dm-R%3DJg%40mail.gmail.com.
First Link: Table 3 refers to "Li-ion", so I don't think they mean to include LiFePO4 cells: "Table 3: Estimated recoverable capacity when storing Li-ion..."
Second Link: it does say LiFePO4 cells, but 35% sounds more like
Li-ion, and that is what your first link shows for Li-ion.
So, I'm sticking with Google on this one 🙂
Eric
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rasprime/c133f103-f658-41ca-9cf0-b85fc3816b02n%40googlegroups.com.
I find Google AI useful, but I'll look for source confirmation of
any results I want to act on. It does list some of it's sources on
the right side of the page, so I might start there. It does get
some things wrong, but I also get some things wrong when I go
searching on my own, and the Google AI is often a good
counterpoint to my efforts.
Eric
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/rasprime/8cbd188a-3080-4768-8b35-2b3ae719df0an%40googlegroups.com.
You don't have to be nerdy to predict the raw data could be very, very noisy! What was he trying to measure? Did he try to process the data; e.g., averaging it over time periods of a few seconds to a few minutes, or even the entire tow? Doing that could reveal some interesting results.
Eric
One of the more "scientific" members in our club (Read: Nerdy) once hooked a strain gauge to the towplane with a laptop to record the pull of the glider during tow. I don't remember the numbers exactly, but the variation in data was absurdly scattered due to rope elasticity, surging, slack and maneuvering. Nobody could draw any reasonable conclusions from the graph.
On Thursday, November 27, 2025 at 7:34:33 AM UTC-7 Moshe Braner wrote:
Oops, I searched (on Google, but without "AI") for LiFePO4 explicitly, missed the fact that that first link was for "lithium ion". But this is exactly why you should not trust the "AI" summary, since it is not any better at following your search intent. There was a hilarious discussion at our club recently about how strong is the pull on the rope in an aerotow while climbing, and one person asked some "AI" 'bot, and the "answer" was detailed including the formulas etc - and completely missed the fact that the question included a climb. (In case you wonder, the pull is roughly 25 pounds level, and 100 pounds climbing.)
.com.