Battery analysis using a 3-battery configuration gives acceptable results.
But the same analysis for a 2-battery configuration gives lots of zeroes in the batt_annual_charge_energy, batt_annual_discharge_energy and other output variables. LK files attached.

The 3battery script gives the following result:
[ 6694.57, 6681.41, 6669.19, 6656.1, 6644.09, 6632.22, 6621.02, 6610.46, 6599.98, 6589.87, 6597.16, 6583.9, 6571.53, 6559.71, 6548.62, 6537.52, 6524.22, 6511.54, 6498.89, 6482.25, 6494.04, 6476.61, 6459.39, 6443.02, 6427.03 ]
[ 6563.07, 6541.77, 6527.72, 6514.61, 6501.17, 6488.46, 6475.46, 6462.4, 6448.98, 6436.68, 6457.17, 6442.74, 6427.34, 6413.91, 6400.17, 6387.26, 6371.41, 6354.13, 6333.36, 6310.64, 6342.77, 6321.61, 6303.17, 6283.93, 6261.54 ]

While the 2battery script returns the values below - not sure if the numbers are correct.
Thank you for checking this out.

[ 25.814, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 6033.01, 5874.5, 5742.03, 5619.59, 5486.05 ]
[ 29.0689, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 3.54411, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 5789.5, 5612.32, 5473.48, 5341.57, 5196.36 ]

3batt.lk.txt
2batt.lk.txt