LG300N1T-G4 -- T for Transparent?

[ncs55]

Were on the same page, thanks for not hanging up. I see where the gap was, sorry. I was just reading the bifacial specs.

[DanKegel]

Well, yeah. The efficiency is due to the NeoN 2 stuff. Even the existing Neon 2 cells were bifacial, to take advantage of light bouncing off the opaque backsheet. So all they did with the new ones was open a window, as it were.

Thanks to adoublee for posting a link to the UK site. I don't know why they aren't on the US site yet.

[ncs55]

No, lets communicate I want to understand, I think I do. Both are cello just the different backing. And compared to before cello the coefficients are better, as a comparison to each other. Correct? We can work the problem better as a team.

[DanKegel]

Sorry, not sure why we're not communicating.

I posted both the bifacial and monofacial 300 data sheet links to show how similar they are; both are LG Neon 2, and both claim the same temperature coefficients, which are better than the old LG Neon panels.

If it's still confusing, let's just forget it, I'm sure it'll be clear in retrospect sometime.

[ncs55]

Are you checking the posted links? Because your first link brings up the same data sheet as the link I posted earlier. The urls posted by both of us are exactly the same. what is your point here? We sell the non bifacial ones, same modules available and as everyone else are selling, which has a different spec sheet than the bifacial ones, as you pointed out.

[DanKegel]

Well, here's the bifacial LG 300:

http://www.lg-solar.com/downloads/products/LG-NeON-2/LGE-Data%20Sheet-LG300N1T-G4-EN-03.2016.pdf

'LG NeON™ 2 BiFacial has an enhanced performance warranty. The annual degradation has fallen to 0.6%/yr from 0.7%/yr of the previous LG NeON™ module.'

and here's a similar non-bifacial LG 300:

http://www.lg.com/us/commercial/documents/lg-commercial-solar-spec-neon2-lg300n1c-g4-041516.pdf

'LG NeON™ 2 has an enhanced performance warranty. The annual degradation has fallen from -0.7%/yr to -0.6%/yr.'

I'm pretty sure the bifacial panel is just the normal LG Neon2 panel but with a translucent/transparent backsheet.

But hey, what do I know, I'm just looking at spec sheets and reading random posts, I haven't seen one in person.

Which LGs have you been selling?

[ncs55]

It says Bi facial. The LG's we have been selling have a different spec sheet. I'm not sure if I understand your post??

[DanKegel]

I think that's just common copy to all the Neon 2 datasheets.

[ncs55]

Looking at the data sheet it seems that the efficiency is due to more than just being bi facial. They have better temp coefficients because the cells are a different chemistry, (claimed) and the 12 multi wire buss bar, Plus they are claiming less degradation although not by much. They look interesting, wonder what the price point will be? It appears to be like the Panasonic HIT. http://www.lg-solar.com/downloads/pr...EN-03.2016.pdf

[adoublee]

The UK page indicates transparent backsheet. Still useful but not as robust in my opinion if this is a US product.

www.lg-solar.com/uk/products

[adoublee]

Can't say I'm 100% sure the back is glass in these photos or on the shipping product. These must have some type of preliminary version as the wiring was...innovative.

[DanKegel]

Glass on glass? My impression was that it wasn't glass-on-glass, but glass-on-translucent-plastic. The weight is the same as the normal LG panels, I think.

Agreed, normally one wouldn't use these on a sloped residential roof; reverse tilt mounts are uncommon for good reason.

[DanKegel]

The datasheet says the backside is about 92.5% as effective as the front side.

[DanKegel]

most panels are parallel to a roof surface, and usually not more than about 6" or less off the deck, and often less or (hopefully not) flush mounted with no more than an inch or two clearance. Please explain to me how any enhancement will occur under such conditions.

As you know, these panels are for applications where they're mounted well up off a high albedo surface, tilted. For instance, on a flat roof (many of which are very white here in Los Angeles).

I'm not sure why you think they're being pitched for flush mounted applications.

[Willaby]

I'd be curious as to the output from the backside only, as if they were mounted flipped. AZ has a lot of flat roof architecture whereby tilt mounts might allow more light from behind, many with white, highly reflective surfaces (as ncs55 commented). designed to reduce heat anyway.