So now I have a solar PV system how do I make the most of it???

don0301

gone very quiet in here.....

everyone building bomb shelters?

don0301

sly_dog_jonah wrote: »

So it look's like you've already hit your maximum instantaneous output a month before the optimal sun elevation.

My sundance worked, my SoloPV briefly showed >3.6kW when the sun peeked out just after noon. Couldn't get a photo in time before it dropped to 3.33kW though.

I'm sure I read somewhere that a solar panel will only give peak output for 3% (timewise) of the year in the UK. Dunno if that's true or not.

So, if that's the case, there are other more important factors to consider when matching panels to inverter I guess.

John_Pierpoint

don0301 wrote: »

gone very quiet in here.....

everyone building bomb shelters?

Only 3084 watt peak today.
but 13.6 kWh so might be near to my post Valentine's day record of 15.0 kWh.
EDIT: 13.9 (only) at close of play at some time after 17:00.
Specification:
600V absolute maximum input voltage.
120 - 530V Full power MPPT voltage range symmetrical (ie two MPPT trackers strapped together??)
190 - 530V.. "..... "....... "....... "......... ".. A- ..."........ (@3kW) ie two strings
..90 - 530V.. "..... "....... "....... "......... "..."..... "........ (@0.75kW)
(I think this latter asymmetrical spec might be aimed at those trying to extend the low light performance ??)

grahamc2003

EricMears wrote: »

Find this rather astonishing :-



Along with (probably) a vast majority of solar panel owners, my inverter is tucked away in the attic in order to be as close as possible to panels (just like another page of the manual suggests). How on earth would I ever know if one of the status lights flashed four times - or even four hundred ?

I would hope that there is some sort of safety device to anticipate & prevent such damage to the inverter !

I have no idea - perhaps you should address your question to sma - I'm only the messenger quoting their manuals. I didn't write a requirement to flash green at once per second four times on overvoltage - better than doing nothing I expect, just in case anyone sees it (e.g. the installer on a badly designed/wired system).

How do you propose the inverter guards against a too high dc voltage? According to sma themselves, who design, make and test the things so I expect should know, if you stick too high a DC voltage on the dc side, there's a danger of explosions. Not sure why some find that hard to believe, but each to their own.

Kernel_Sanders

Barter wrote: »

...maybe, when the South East has had us all pay for a pipeline so they can import water from the North West,

I read once that his could be achieved using the canal network. Not sure if that would involve every lock being permanently manned, though (or womanned...)

John_Pierpoint

"Thermally protected DV side varistor" ?? What ever that may be !

John_Pierpoint

Kernel_Sanders wrote: »

I read once that his could be achieved using the canal network. Not sure if that would involve every lock being permanently manned, though (or womanned...)

Essex already gets its water from the Great Ouse.

(and South Essex gets its water from Chelmsford sewage works)

Martyn1981

grahamc2003 wrote: »

I have no idea - perhaps you should address your question to sma - I'm only the messenger quoting their manuals. I didn't write a requirement to flash green at once per second four times on overvoltage - better than doing nothing I expect, just in case anyone sees it (e.g. the installer on a badly designed/wired system).

How do you propose the inverter guards against a too high dc voltage? According to sma themselves, who design, make and test the things so I expect should know, if you stick too high a DC voltage on the dc side, there's a danger of explosions. Not sure why some find that hard to believe, but each to their own.

Ok, I'll take another punt at this for you.

I posted (#1687) why the industry considers undersizing in northern Europe (doesn't mean they all do, just why some consider it beneficial).

You then posted (#1694) that undersizing is not a good idea, and suggested that it could lead to exploding inverters.

As others have explained, an inverter is chosen to match array size and therefore voltage. As more panels are added the voltage could become too much, so they are connected in multiple strings, or a larger/more suitable inverter is chosen. Whatever the decision, the installers will always bear the relevant voltages in mind. Thus preventing to much voltage on the DC side, and therefore too much wattage for the inverter to handle.

Undersizing an inverter, does not mean it allows too much DC voltage. Going back to the original discussion about Don's inverter (sorry Don to talk behind your back), but I'm willing to bet good money that he has 2 strings of panels, thus halving the maximum voltage his panels could deliver in series. All such factors are considered when the array and inverters are chosen and MATCHED.

I feel you are unnecessarily scaremongering!

Mart.

Martyn1981

Kernel_Sanders wrote: »

I read once that his could be achieved using the canal network. Not sure if that would involve every lock being permanently manned, though (or womanned...)

Many winters ago I worked for the Welsh Office, water regulations side. During the droughts in 1995ish (?) one proposal came forward. Only a bare bones idea, but plausible, to take water from the large Welsh reservoirs for Thames Water.

Many reservoirs are already linked to maintain water levels, so add some more connections, move the water across Wales and into the Severn. Next abstract from the Severn and use the canal network to get across to the Thames, then abstract as and where needed. Simples!

Or fix the leaks?

Mart.

davidanddeirdre

Re overvoltages and inverters, presumably if there is a lightening strike anywhere near one's panels it could get a bit hairy not only for the panels but the inverter as well. Does anyone have any knowledge of this eventuality having actually occurred in the UK?
I have checked that my house buildings insurance would cover repair.