micro-inverters or optimizers when shading is major issue ?

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Ampster
    replied
    Originally posted by RShackleford
    You know anything about this IQ8 technology supposed to be released soon ? I saw some vague claims about support of multi-mode.
    Only what their press releases say and what others have said on this forum.

    Leave a comment:


  • RShackleford
    replied
    Originally posted by nwdiver

    The article you cited is from 2017... before the -41s were released. I don't understand why the Fs don't work...
    The comment thread goes thru until this past July. If interested, I'd encourage people to read the whole thing; lots of conflicting info.

    Leave a comment:


  • SunEagle
    replied
    Originally posted by bcroe
    I try to avoid moderation by cutting off much of any link, why repeat it. Bruce Roe
    A post with more than one weblink is usually flagged for Moderation.

    Leave a comment:


  • nwdiver
    replied
    Originally posted by RShackleford
    I don't get that from the quote at all, or from any other part of that comment thread, except maybe the very last thing (from a Mike who also seems to work there): "please be advised that the Sunny Boy US-41 will support the SPS functionality, but only when used with the TS4-O and -S. The TS4-F in combination with the Sunny Boy US-41 will not support the SPS functionality." But it's still unclear if you have to omit the RCK for SPS to work, thereby possibly disabling rapid shutdown.

    The lack of clear communication, about what is and isn't possible, by this company is ridiculous.


    The article you cited is from 2017... before the -41s were released. I don't understand why the Fs don't work...

    Leave a comment:


  • RShackleford
    replied
    Originally posted by nwdiver
    I think that's in relation to the old -40 inverters. TIGO communication is integrated into the -41 so SPS will now work with the S and the O TS4s but not the 'Fs' for some reason.
    I don't get that from the quote at all, or from any other part of that comment thread, except maybe the very last thing (from a Mike who also seems to work there): "please be advised that the Sunny Boy US-41 will support the SPS functionality, but only when used with the TS4-O and -S. The TS4-F in combination with the Sunny Boy US-41 will not support the SPS functionality." But it's still unclear if you have to omit the RCK for SPS to work, thereby possibly disabling rapid shutdown.

    The lack of clear communication, about what is and isn't possible, by this company is ridiculous.



    Leave a comment:


  • bcroe
    replied
    I try to avoid moderation by cutting off much of any link, why repeat it. Bruce Roe

    Leave a comment:


  • nwdiver
    replied
    Originally posted by RShackleford
    Argh, flagged for moderation again. All I was trying to do was figuring out how to edit my post so the quotation from the link could be smaller, or different color or font.

    Look at this bit of double-speak at a comment thread at SMA website (http://www.smainverted.com/sma-redef...comment-132444) appearing to come from an SMA person:
    Hi Andrew, thanks for your question. When the TS4 platform is used for selective deployment and TS4-R-O units are attached only to modules with shade impact, the Secure Power Supply function will still work. In this case, SMA’s Rapid Shutdown System will also still function as needed to meet code requirements.

    When the TS4 platform is used specifically for Rapid Shutdown, the shutdown signal will be sent to all TS4 units, and in this case, Secure Power Supply will no longer work.

    Does that make ANY sense to anybody ? I think SMA/Tigo is doing a very poor job of explaining the interaction between rapid-shutdown and secure-power, and not really owning up to the fact that SPS may not work for many installations.
    I think that's in relation to the old -40 inverters. TIGO communication is integrated into the -41 so SPS will now work with the S and the O TS4s but not the 'Fs' for some reason.

    Leave a comment:


  • solar pete
    replied
    Hi R Shackleford, I think I was trying to approve you post while you were trying to edit it, all good now, cheers

    Leave a comment:


  • RShackleford
    replied
    Argh, flagged for moderation again. All I was trying to do was figuring out how to edit my post so the quotation from the link could be smaller, or different color or font.

    Look at this bit of double-speak at a comment thread at SMA website (http://www.smainverted.com/sma-redef...comment-132444) appearing to come from an SMA person:
    Hi Andrew, thanks for your question. When the TS4 platform is used for selective deployment and TS4-R-O units are attached only to modules with shade impact, the Secure Power Supply function will still work. In this case, SMA’s Rapid Shutdown System will also still function as needed to meet code requirements.

    When the TS4 platform is used specifically for Rapid Shutdown, the shutdown signal will be sent to all TS4 units, and in this case, Secure Power Supply will no longer work.

    Does that make ANY sense to anybody ? I think SMA/Tigo is doing a very poor job of explaining the interaction between rapid-shutdown and secure-power, and not really owning up to the fact that SPS may not work for many installations.

    Leave a comment:


  • nwdiver
    replied
    Originally posted by bcroe

    I will leave that experiment to someone else. I will not be trenching in wiring for each string for
    the 200 to 400 feet to the inverter location. As it is I use a clamp on DC ammeter to make sure
    all is well some sunny days. If/when they do die, I have an identical spare inverter set bought
    at closeout price. Whiz bang features on newer models I perceive as a threat to simple and
    reliable operation.

    I have thought about building some optimizers for certain sections. But so far the chain saw
    and careful location have preempted electronic intervention. Bruce Roe
    Oh... you combined the strings at the array? Yeah... that won't work then

    Leave a comment:


  • bcroe
    replied
    Originally posted by nwdiver

    Ah... that makes sense. If your inverters die it would be interesting to see the change in production if each string had its own channel. I've got an old SMA inverter with 3 parallel strings. My production drops off a lot in the evenings when 3 panels get shaded around ~5pm. I effectively end up with 2 strings of 14 and a string of 11 so the 11 unshaded panels do ~nothing where as if they had their own channel they would do ~something.

    I helped design a 27kW ground mount on 2 old 11.4kW Fronius inverters. 4 Strings per inverter. ~November - February the front array shades the rear array a bit in the mornings and evenings. Once a single panel gets shaded the rest of the string pretty much drops out.

    The ~23kW array with 6 independent strings actually 'lost' a panel in a bad wind storm. The other ~65 panels carried on just fine. It also gets some shade from nearby trees in the evenings... production barely budges since only the shaded panels are effected.

    IMO string level optimization is where it's at. Even optimizing a single module is technically 'string level' it's just a string of ~60 or 72 cells instead of ~800 cells. I just don't see much of a benefit optimizing every ~60 or 72 instead of the full ~800... You really only run into issues when you try to run parallel strings... and even then it mostly works unless there's shade.
    I will leave that experiment to someone else. I will not be trenching in wiring for each string for
    the 200 to 400 feet to the inverter location. As it is I use a clamp on DC ammeter to make sure
    all is well some sunny days. If/when they do die, I have an identical spare inverter set bought
    at closeout price. Whiz bang features on newer models I perceive as a threat to simple and
    reliable operation.

    I have thought about building some optimizers for certain sections. But so far the chain saw
    and careful location have preempted electronic intervention. Bruce Roe

    Leave a comment:


  • nwdiver
    replied
    Originally posted by bcroe

    There are 2 inverters 6 years old (single MPPTs). Running about 360VDC at 42A total summers, up to
    420VDC winters. Bruce Roe
    Ah... that makes sense. If your inverters die it would be interesting to see the change in production if each string had its own channel. I've got an old SMA inverter with 3 parallel strings. My production drops off a lot in the evenings when 3 panels get shaded around ~5pm. I effectively end up with 2 strings of 14 and a string of 11 so the 11 unshaded panels do ~nothing where as if they had their own channel they would do ~something.

    I helped design a 27kW ground mount on 2 old 11.4kW Fronius inverters. 4 Strings per inverter. ~November - February the front array shades the rear array a bit in the mornings and evenings. Once a single panel gets shaded the rest of the string pretty much drops out.

    The ~23kW array with 6 independent strings actually 'lost' a panel in a bad wind storm. The other ~65 panels carried on just fine. It also gets some shade from nearby trees in the evenings... production barely budges since only the shaded panels are effected.

    IMO string level optimization is where it's at. Even optimizing a single module is technically 'string level' it's just a string of ~60 or 72 cells instead of ~800 cells. I just don't see much of a benefit optimizing every ~60 or 72 instead of the full ~800... You really only run into issues when you try to run parallel strings... and even then it mostly works unless there's shade.
    Last edited by nwdiver; 10-21-2019, 06:24 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • bcroe
    replied
    Originally posted by nwdiver
    On 1 MPPT? Jeeze... what's the voltage and current?
    There are 2 inverters 6 years old (single MPPTs). Running about 360VDC at 42A total summers, up to
    420VDC winters. Bruce Roe

    CombAug18.JPG
    Last edited by bcroe; 10-21-2019, 06:10 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • nwdiver
    replied
    Originally posted by bcroe

    There are 12 strings operating here. The thought is that they are arranged so a whole string
    gets shaded at a time, at day extremes. Bruce Roe
    On 1 MPPT? Jeeze... what's the voltage and current?

    Leave a comment:


  • bcroe
    replied
    Originally posted by nwdiver
    There's no reason to ever have parallel strings on a residential system with current inverter options. I don't think anyone makes an inverter with 1 MPPT channel anymore. All the new inverters I've seen have 2-4 channels.
    There are 12 strings operating here. The thought is that they are arranged so a whole string
    gets shaded at a time, at day extremes. Bruce Roe

    Leave a comment:

Working...