How would you handle this situation? [RE-wrenches]
Joel Davidson
joeldavidson at earthlink.net
Thu Apr 18 15:04:16 PDT 2002
Manufacturer support? Every industry except the PV has a professional
association that funds tests, studies, consumer education, etc. One of my
cynical friends said that the only reason multi-billion dollar energy companies
and multi-national corporations have PV divisions if for green publicity to
whitewash the adverse environmental impact of their core businesses. Of course,
I don't subscribe to that dark vision.
Chuck Whitaker wrote:
> Well, it won't be ready soon enough or Joel, I 'm sure ;-), but we (Ward and
> I are primary authors) should have a SAND report out this summer, which will
> be submitted to SCC21 to begin a PAR. Like your NEC guide, it's always
> better to have a document to start from, and we felt we could get something
> in place via a SAND document well before we could get IEEE moving.
>
> That said, one thing we will need is industry encouragement and support. I
> can't see DOE (funding this development work) taking any risks right now so
> if this topic isn't well supported or worse, if the manufacturers come out
> against something like this (too costly) then we will be dead in the water.
>
> A related issue is that this type of testing must eventually be required by
> someone. PVUSA, UPVG, CEC, have all had a hand in instituting standards by
> requiring them and having enough clout to make the mfgs do it. Even if they
> LIKE the test standard, the mfg's will have little incentive to do it if
> they don't see everyone else doing it, and everyone will only do it if the
> folks with the money say they must do it.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: John Wiles [mailto:jwiles at nmsu.edu]
> > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 2:11 PM
> > To: Chuck Whitaker; Joel Davidson; Bill Brooks
> > Cc: Ward Bower; Jim Dunlop; Jeff Newmiller
> > Subject: RE: How would you handle this situation? [RE-wrenches]
> >
> >
> > Chuck:
> >
> > How is that IEEE Standard on Inverter testing coming? Lost in
> > the DR forest?
> >
> >
> >
> > At 13:29 -0700 4/18/02, Chuck Whitaker wrote:
> > >But you STILL won't be able to compare the results from Xantrex
> > with those
> > >from AEI, SMA, etc. if they don't do the same test. I can
> > guarantee, left
> > >to their own devices, they will test (or have tests performed by a 3rd
> > >party, or two or 5!) in a way that presents their product in the most
> > >favorable light. In my mind, the procedure is more important
> > right now than
> > >who performs it...
> > >
> > >btw - since the Wrenches gatekeeper has determined that I am not
> > qualified
> > >to be on their list, would you please post this for me.
> > >
> > >Thanks
> > >
> > >Chuck Whitaker
> > >
> > >> -----Original Message-----
> > >> From: Joel Davidson [mailto:joeldavidson at earthlink.net]
> > >> Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 1:19 PM
> > >> To: RE-wrenches at topica.com
> > >> Cc: Ward Bower; Jim Dunlop; John Wiles; Jeff Newmiller; Chuck Whitaker
> > >> Subject: Re: How would you handle this situation? [RE-wrenches]
> > >>
> > >>
> > >> Bill and all,
> > >> This is a good idea for the long-term, but we need objective
> > >> performance testing
> > >> right now. I could buy equipment with confidence if
> > manufacturers provided
> > >> performance tests results from independent organizations like
> > >> Endecon, FSEC,
> > >> NOSE, ASU, Sandia, Terra Labs, Wylie Labs, etc. For example,
> > >> Xantrex could hire
> > >> two independent companies to test their newly released XR2500
> > and post the
> > >> unedited results on the web to dispel rumors. The same goes for
> > >> AES, Vanner,
> > >> SMA, Heart, etc. Independent testing costs money, but the results
> > >> can be a great
> > >> marketing tool that has a greater impact full page color ads
> > of clouds and
> > >> mountains and suns and children.
> > >>
> > >> Bill Brooks wrote:
> > >>
> > >> > Wrenches,
> > >> >
> > >> > This is a very interesting thread, but I think there is a
> > >> better way to deal
> > >> > with this very large problem. My strong feeling is that we need
> > >> independent
> > >> > standards for performance and qualifications of inverters.
> > This group of
> > >> > standards needs to cover many issues. From a performance
> > point of view,
> > >> > there is currently no standard for how to perform
> > efficiency tests on
> > >> > inverters or how to test the effectiveness of maximum power
> > >> point tracking
> > >> > on the inverter.
> > >> >
> > >> > Incidentally, I have mentioned briefly in the past about a
> > >> project we are
> > >> > getting ready to start with the California Energy Commission.
> > >> It will be the
> > >> > first step in establishing consumer guidelines for products and
> > >> systems in
> > >> > the PV world. The idea is to use a format similar to
> > Consumer Reports to
> > >> > rate PV systems. The only way this is going to be
> > successful is if the
> > >> > dealers, installers, and manufacturers embrace the process and
> > >> allow it to
> > >> > provide the benefit I think we all know it could provide.
> > >> >
> > >> > Right now we are playing a game of "things that suck" and
> > "things that
> > >> > work", but I think this fundamentally misses the point. There
> > >> needs to be
> > >> > objective benchmark against which systems and inverters are
> > >> rated so that
> > >> > more of an apples-to-apples comparison can be made. The PV
> > industry is
> > >> > running to recently introduced products far too quickly
> > without enough
> > >> > information to truly make a good decision. Expecting everyone
> > >> to do their
> > >> > own testing is silly and will keep our industry in the dark ages.
> > >> >
> > >> > All products today have aspects of their performance that could
> > >> be improved.
> > >> > However, when one product clearly outperforms another we latch
> > >> onto it and
> > >> > don't focus on how to improve all the competing products.
> > We settle for
> > >> > non-optimal performance because we have never seen excellent
> > >> performance.
> > >> >
> > >> > With the support of all the PV industry we hope to make a
> > difference by
> > >> > setting up some of these benchmarks that will serve the PV
> > > > world for decades
> > >> > to come. Wish us luck and we will be calling on the Wrenches
> > > > for feedback to
> > >> > make this process as effective as it can be.
> > >> >
> > >> > Bill.
> > >> >
> > >> > Bill Brooks
> > >> > Endecon Engineering
> > >> >
> > >> > Office:
> > >> > 873 Kells Circle
> > >> > Vacaville, CA 95688
> > >> > 707-332-0761 (Voice)
> > >> > 707-451-7739 (Fax)
> > >> > billb at endecon.com (email)
> > >> >
> > >> > Head Office:
> > >> > 347 Norris Court
> > >> > San Ramon, CA 94583
> > >> > 925-552-1330 (Voice)
> > >> > 925-552-1333 (Fax)
> > >> > www.endecon.com
> > >> >
> > >> > -----Original Message-----
> > >> > From: jay peltz [mailto:jay at asis.com]
> > >> > Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2002 7:42 AM
> > >> > To: RE-wrenches at topica.com
> > >> > Subject: Re: How would you handle this situation? [RE-wrenches]
> > >> >
> > >> > Joel,
> > >> >
> > >> > One comment. Here on this site, I would prefer that you
> > mention what
> > >> > equipment. Its how I keep up as to whats hot and whats not.
> > >> >
> > >> > thanks,
> > >> >
> > >> > jay
> > >> >
> > >> > peltz power
> > >> >
> > >> > Joel Davidson wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > One year ago, a customer bought 2 line-tie inverters. The
> > >> customer is a
> > >> > > knowledgeable engineer and was unhappy with the
> > inverters' performance
> > >> > > so he got a different brand inverter to compare
> > performance. The other
> > >> > > brand performs much better. The customer and I are convinced
> > >> that the 2
> > >> > > inverters he bought have design flaws and can not perform
> > to spec. The
> > >> > > customer wants to return the inverters for a full refund. How
> > >> would you
> > >> > > handle this situation?
> > >> > >
> > >> > Matt Lafferty wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Joel / Wrenches:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > First of all, Joel, you are on the right track in
> > providing "after the
> > >> > sale"
> > >> > > service. This mirrors the last 1-1/2 + years we have spent
> > >> dealing with a
> > >> > > similar issue. We aren't done with it yet. May go on
> > for a very long
> > >> > time,
> > >> > > in fact. Be glad you only have the one Customer. We have
> > >> about 50, not
> > >> > to
> > >> > > mention the ones we own.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I personally believe in maintaining integrity in backing up
> > >> our projects,
> > >> > > even when the issue isn't related to something we "did
> > wrong". The
> > >> > goodwill
> > >> > > generated is priceless, even when the Customers are screaming
> > >> with venom!
> > >> > >
> > >> > > As far as returning the inverters, I believe the manufacturer
> > >> should pick
> > >> > up
> > >> > > the tab &, as you suggest, do the testing. A full credit to the
> > >> > > distributors is in order if the testing proves the
> > inverters cannot
> > >> > perform
> > >> > > as advertised.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Regarding "peak power": This is the tree manufacturers hide
> > >> behind. Some
> > >> > > just hide behind it more than others. We all know that PV
> > >> generates in
> > >> > > "real time" according to all the variables existing at that
> > >> time. In a
> > >> > lab,
> > >> > > at STC or other favorable conditions, the inverter may
> > >> produce the 2500
> > >> > > Watts as advertised. There has to be a "Standard Test
> > Condition" for
> > >> > rating
> > >> > > purposes or else there would be no way to benchmark
> > performance and
> > >> > ratings.
> > >> > > If, under their tests, the results honestly show the inverter
> > >> delivers and
> > >> > > won't honor the refund request, then you have another
> > thing to think
> > >> > about.
> > >> > > How to satisfy your customer, without bankrupting yourself,
> > >> if he can be
> > >> > > satisfied at this point.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > The best I can offer at this moment is this: Consider this
> > >> experience in
> > >> > > its entirety in the future. What inverter are you going
> > to select or,
> > >> > just
> > >> > > as importantly, NOT select for this type of application
> > in the future?
> > >> > (Of
> > >> > > course we are all dying to know!!! ;-) ) And, Don't Quit on
> > >> Commitment to
> > >> > > Integrity!
> > >> > >
> > >> > > -Matt Lafferty
> > >> > > pvpro at attbi.com
> > >> > >
> > >> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > >> > > From: "Joel Davidson"
> > >> > > Subject: Re: How would you handle this situation? [RE-wrenches]
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > 1) The customer chose the inverters and I agreed with
> > his choice.
> > >> > > > 2) The customer bought the 2nd inverter to expand his
> > PV system. I
> > >> > bought
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > 2nd inverter from another distributor because the 1st
> > >> distributor could
> > >> > > not give
> > >> > > > a delivery date and the 2nd distributor had an inverter
> > in stock.
> > > > > > > 3) Yesterday, both distributors contacted the manufacturer
> > >> and we await
> > >> > a
> > > > > > > response.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Back to the original question, but this time put
> > yourself in this
> > >> > > customer's
> > >> > > > place.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > You buy an inverter that is specified to deliver 2500 watts. The
> > >> > inverter
> > >> > > never
> > >> > > > delivers over 2300 watts of power and has other problems
> > >> that adversely
> > >> > > affect
> > >> > > > energy production. You visit another site with the same
> > >> inverter and see
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > same under-performance and hear about the same other
> > problems. You
> > >> > > substitute
> > >> > > > another brand 2500 watt inverter and the 2nd inverter
> > delivers 2500
> > >> > watts.
> > >> > > You
> > >> > > > re-test the 1st inverter with 32 each 120 watt PV modules,
> > >> but it still
> > >> > > does not
> > >> > > > deliver over 2300 watts. You conclude that the inverter can
> > >> not perform
> > >> > as
> > >> > > > specified. The inverter is under warranty so you call the
> > >> manufacturer.
> > >> > > "They
> > >> > > > said they changed the spec and hadn't even publish or
> > put it online
> > >> > > yet...when I
> > >> > > > mentioned that my unit would never run over 2300 watts
> > >> (this is when I
> > >> > > purposely
> > >> > > > feed 32 panels into it to prove the unit wasn't running at
> > >> spec) they
> > >> > > claimed
> > >> > > > 2500 was "peak" power what ever that means" (customer's
> > >> exact words).
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > If I were the manufacturer, this is how I would resolve
> > >> this situation.
> > >> > > Send the
> > >> > > > customer return shipping cartons, pay for the shipping
> > and test the
> > >> > > inverters.
> > >> > > > If the inverters produce 2500 watts, return the inverters to the
> > >> > customer
> > >> > > with
> > >> > > > the test results. Charge the expense for 2-way shipping and
> > >> testing to
> > >> > > customer
> > >> > > > service. If the inverters do not produce 2500 watts, first
> > >> credit the
> > >> > > > distributors who will credit the retailer so the retailer
> > >> can refund the
> > >> > > > customer's money. Next, change the inverter specifications.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > What do you all think?
> > >> >
> > >> > - - - -
> > >> > To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com
> > >> >
> > >> > Archive of previous messages:
> > http://www.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/
> > >> >
> > >> > List rules & etiquette:
> > http://www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquete.htm
> > >> >
> > >> > Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/index.html
> > >> >
> > >> > Hosted by Home Power magazine
> > >> >
> > >> > Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
> > >> >
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> > If I can provide further information, please do not hesitate to call,
> > e-mail or fax me.
> >
> > John
> >
> > John C. Wiles, Program Manager
> > Southwest Technology Development Institute, New Mexico State University
> > 505-646-6105 505-646-3841 (FAX) http://www.NMSU.Edu/~tdi/pv.htm
> > SWTDI/NMSU
> > 1505 Payne Street-Campus
> > Box 30001/MSC 3 SOLAR
> > Las Cruces, NM 88003
> >
> >
- - - -
To send a message: RE-wrenches at topica.com
Archive of previous messages: http://www.topica.com/lists/RE-wrenches/
List rules & etiquette: http://www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/etiquete.htm
Check out participant bios: www.mrsharkey.com/wrenches/index.html
Hosted by Home Power magazine
Moderator: michael.welch at homepower.com
==^================================================================
This email was sent to: michael.welch at homepower.com
EASY UNSUBSCRIBE click here: http://topica.com/u/?bz8Qcs.bz9JC9
Or send an email to: RE-wrenches-unsubscribe at topica.com
T O P I C A -- Register now to manage your mail!
http://www.topica.com/partner/tag02/register
==^================================================================
More information about the RE-wrenches
mailing list