Marv,

What would be a (or more) reason(s) that the module manufacturer wouldn't want 
to be on your approved list (and sell more modules)?

Thank you,

Bill Loesch
Solar 1 - Saint Louis Solar

  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Marv Dargatz 
  To: RE-wrenches 
  Sent: Monday, May 10, 2010 4:59 PM
  Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] Enphase performance


  Marco,

  Sorry, I missed that question in the previous e-mail.

  A couple of points about the compatibility list:

  1.  We include only modules that have passed our internal math check for 
compatibility over the temperature range of the inverter.

  2.  If the module manufacturer objects to being on the compatibility list, we 
will not include them.

  Sunpower has objected, so they are not on the list.

  Zhejiang Wanxiang Solar Co. Ltd is also shown as compatible with the M210.

  The list is only a guideline.  Any module that falls within the voltage spec 
over the expected operating temperature range of the installation, and does not 
exceed the inverter DC input short circuit current rating is certainly a valid 
combination, and the inverter is fully warranted.  Notice that module power 
rating is not a factor here.

  I hope this helps.



See ya!

Marv
707 763-4784  x7016


  Marco Mangelsdorf wrote: 
    So why is the Enphase 210 just limited "officially" to the Sanyo line?



    Thanks,

    marco



    Dana, Marco, Wrenches,

    In most locations, if the interest is in maximum lifetime energy 
production, it does make sense to use modules with STC power ratings 
significantly higher than the inverter max power rating.

    This is explained in the whitepaper located at:

     
http://www.enphaseenergy.com/downloads/Enphase_White_Paper_Module_Rightsizing.pdf

    Remember, under most real world conditions the module will not produce STC 
rated power.  The inverter WILL produce maximum rated power plus some small 
percent to allow for the CEC max power test methods.  Also, the module will 
produce less power every year (under the same conditions) and the inverter will 
produce its' max rated power for its' entire lifetime.

    By the way, this all applies to string, central, or microinverters.  Of 
course, micros still retain the advantages of dealing with mismatch, partial 
shading/soiling, etc.

    Bottom line is, the "perfect" match will depend on your particular 
installation.




See ya! Marv707 763-4784  x7016

    Dana Brandt wrote: 

    Something to remember is that my simulation was for a specific location in 
Washington. The answer might be different for your location and weather 
patterns.

    I agree that it seems wrong to have the inverter rating 20% less than the 
array nameplate. Typically, I would consider that sort of pairing a poor 
design. You're right that there will certainly be some clipping - especially 
with cloud-edge effects. The real question in my mind is not whether the 
inverter will ever clip the output of the array, but what's the real impact of 
that on energy generation on an annual basis. This is what lead me to do the 
modeling simulations which indicated the effect is negligible when taken in the 
context of the total annual production. Compared to the whole year's sun, there 
just isn't that much energy in high production spikes like cloud edge effects 
that the inverters will clip - at least not around here. 

    One thing to consider is that if you go with smaller modules you need more 
inverters. You might compare the cost of the additional inverters to the value 
of the 0.2% energy loss from clipping over the lifetime of the system. 

    Dana


    Dana Brandt
    Ecotech Energy Systems, LLC
    www.ecotechenergy.com
    d...@ecotechenergy.com
    360.510.0433



    On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:36 AM, Marco Mangelsdorf <ma...@pvthawaii.com> 
wrote:

    I just don't understand why going over 20 percent of module nameplate to 
nameplate inverter rating makes any sense.



    I regularly see 120-130 percent of nameplate amperage coming off of the 
array on our office due to edge of cloud.



    So I have to disagree with Dana in this instance.  I see this a bad design 
especially since lower output mods are so readily available these days.



    And what's up with the Enphase 210?  Doesn't it say on their latest 
compatibility list (March 2010) that it's only good for the Sanyo line?  What's 
up with that especially since I know that one other manufacturer is signing off 
on using the Enphase 210 with their 210-watt module, apparently with Enphase's 
approval?



    Marv-why is your Enphase 210 only listed for use with the Sanyo line when 
there's a growing number of 210+ watt mods out there these days?



    Thanks,

    marco



    I've been concerned about pairing higher wattage modules (~230W) with the 
190W Enphase fearing a lot of clipping and power loss when the modules are at 
full power. 

    I did some modeling of this setup in PVSYST and found that the expected 
loss from the inverter being underpowered is 0 - 0.2% annually depending on the 
assumptions. The modeling was for northwestern Washington State. A fifth of a 
percent seems pretty negligible to me and is easily offset by removing module 
mismatch from the equation. So, I'm convinced that matching modules in the 230W 
range with the 190W Enphase inverters is a good design.

    I recently installed 4kW of 230s with the Enphase 190s and have seen their 
output as high as 199W. 

    Dana


    Dana Brandt
    Ecotech Energy Systems, LLC
    www.ecotechenergy.com
    d...@ecotechenergy.com
    360.510.0433

    On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:48 PM, Chris Worcester <ch...@solarwindworks.com> 
wrote:

    Do the Enphase inverters clip the output power to their rating like other 
manufacturer's? So a M190 can only put out 190 watts max? I have had this 
question for a bit now on system performances using Enphase in designs during 
our cold spring and fall days.



    Sincerely,

    Chris Worcester

    Solar Wind Works
    NABCEP Certified PV Installer
    Phone: 530-582-4503
    Fax: 530-582-4603
    www.solarwindworks.com
    ch...@solarwindworks.com
    "Proven Energy Solutions"



    From: re-wrenches-boun...@lists.re-wrenches.org 
[mailto:re-wrenches-boun...@lists.re-wrenches.org] On Behalf Of Mark Westbrock
    Sent: Friday, May 07, 2010 10:33 AM
    To: RE-wrenches
    Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] Enphase performance



    The over-reporting of energy that Randy refers to below was much higher 
than any discrepancy based on monitoring resolution.  We have a pyranometer at 
the site, and Enphase reported energy production as high as 38% higher that 
predicted from irradiance data, as well as 38% higher than the string inverter 
portion of the same system.  Individual microinverters showed instantaneous 
power output as high as 285 W from a nominal 190 W unit.

    Enphase explained that there was a software glitch that was resulting in 
"double counting".  It took them over two months to correct this issue, time 
which is lost from our experimental comparison of string vs. microinverter.  
They indicated that this seemed to be an isolated situation, but I wonder how 
many Enphase customers are reporting miraculous performance from their system 
without verifying via another meter.

    Screen shot of a day's power production of 22 M190 microinverters (nominal 
4180 watts AC):

    Error! Filename not specified.

    Mark 

Mark WestbrockNABCEP Certified Solar PV InstallerNM ER-1J Journeyman 
ElectricianPositive Energy, Inc.office: 575-524-2030cell: 
575-640-2432westbr...@positiveenergysolar.comwww.positiveenergysolar.com

    We definitely experienced an overstatement. 



    We have a client who installed 5kW on a string inverter and 5kW on enphase 
and it is that side-by-side comparison that enabled us to positively identify a 
problem. There was a significant overstatement of output. We finally got a 
Enphase person who told us it was a software glitch. The problem appears to be 
fixed.  They explained to us that our problem was isolated without giving us a 
detailed explanation of what happened.  Since that problem was fixed, we have 
seen no difference in output between a string inverter and enphase.



    Randy

    Kirpal Khalsa wrote: 

    This same issue has come up over the years for us......first with PV 
Powered inverters and then noticed in Fronius as well......We have noticed in 
most of our grid tied systems that are connected thru a "revenue grade meter" 
for Oregon Energy Trust production reporting, that the inverter always has a 
higher performance than indicated on the "utility grade meter".  We have seen 
the discrepency  as high as 10%.   Over time this adds up to significant kWh 
differences.  In our experience the inverter always has the higher kWh 
reporting, we have attributed this to the inverter wanting to report a good 
production number, to boost their efficiency claims......maybe even more than 
is accurate.....I have asked PV Powered and Fronius about this and their line 
is that to put a "revenue grade meter" into the inverter would be cost 
prohibitive......interesting as the readily available revenue grade meters are 
only $30-$60.   I would gladly pay that much extra if I didn't have to wire in 
an additional meter.  
    I don't think this problem is unique to the Enphase units (i haven't 
installed any of these), I think all inverters should be required to install 
the revenue grade meters to give accurate reporting of actual production.   
Similar to how states have a "weights and scales" accuracy certification, 
energy consumption and production meters should be similarly calibratable.  

    -- 
    Sunny Regards,
    Kirpal Khalsa
    NABCEP Certified Solar PV Installer
    Renewable Energy Systems
    www.oregonsolarworks.com
    541-218-0201 m
    541-592-3958 o

 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

           _______________________________________________List sponsored by 
Home Power magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Options & 
settings:http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org 
List-Archive: 
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules & 
etiquette:www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant 
bios:www.members.re-wrenches.org   
    _______________________________________________
    List sponsored by Home Power magazine

    List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

    Options & settings:
    http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

    List-Archive: 
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

    List rules & etiquette:
    www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

    Check out participant bios:
    www.members.re-wrenches.org



    No virus found in this incoming message.
    Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
    Version: 9.0.819 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/2864 - Release Date: 05/09/10 
08:26:00


    _______________________________________________
    List sponsored by Home Power magazine

    List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

    Options & settings:
    http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

    List-Archive: 
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

    List rules & etiquette:
    www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

    Check out participant bios:
    www.members.re-wrenches.org







 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------

   _______________________________________________List sponsored by Home Power 
magazine List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org Options & 
settings:http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org 
List-Archive: 
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org List rules & 
etiquette:www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm Check out participant 
bios:www.members.re-wrenches.org   
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Home Power magazine

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Options & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out participant bios:
www.members.re-wrenches.org

  

------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  List sponsored by Home Power magazine

  List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

  Options & settings:
  http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

  List-Archive: 
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

  List rules & etiquette:
  www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

  Check out participant bios:
  www.members.re-wrenches.org

_______________________________________________
List sponsored by Home Power magazine

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Options & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List-Archive: http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out participant bios:
www.members.re-wrenches.org

Reply via email to