[RE-wrenches] Module Datasheets

[Matt Lafferty]

Wrenches,
 
If you are anything like me, you've spent a big part of your PV career being
P*#%ed Off at manufacturers for the arcane content and format of their
Datasheets. They have refused to agree on a standard set of info, and order
of presentation. I understand how the simple-minded marketing peeps want it
that way...The harder it is for the user to actually compare products on
their primary merits, the less likely it is that they will do it. I also
understand that translation into Plain English and US Wrench Culture is
difficult, but there aren't that many "r"s in "PV Module".
 
I'd like to toss out some thoughts and solicit feedback on the topic. Some
of you have heard this from me for years now. Here's the 2009 Version.
 
General thoughts:

*	The data should be complete and clearly visible on the Datasheet...
You shouldn't have to dig through the fluffy crap on the front of the sheet
to find technical details. Front of sheet = {Pretty Pictures}. Back of sheet
= Stuff I need to select your module and design an entire system with. 

*	All relevant "Model Numbers" should be clearly identified. When
there are variations of a model, say for instance different connectors, it
only makes sense to include all variations on a single sheet. 

*	They should all abide by IEC 61836 conventions for Symbols (Voc,
Vpmax, Isc, Ipmax, etc). 

*	Max System Voltage 

*	Series Fuse Rating 

*	Bypass Diode 

*	Cell Type / Technology (Also need to standardize these symbols) 

*	For US modules, dimensions should be in inches and weight should be
in pounds. Metric values can be in parentheses AFTER the inches & pounds, of
course. Sorry Canada. 

*	Dimensions should follow LxWxH convention 

*	Temperature coefficients should be stated for Voltage (Voc & Vpmax),
Current (Isc & Ipmax), and Power. They should all use a single convention,
vis a vis a hard coefficient or percentage, but not a mix. My vote is that
the standard convention be percentage. I imagine a couple of you engineers
will disagree, but you're wrong. ;-) 

*	Power tolerance should be stated. 

*	Module lead data, if applicable. Gauge, Type, Length, Connector Type
and Model. 

*	For J-Box equipped modules, Qty & size of KO's in J-Box. 

*	Static Wind or Snow Load should be stated. 

*	All certifications should be stated 

*	Min/Max Temp 

*	Shipping info. Pallet dims, weight, qty. Single module shipping
weight & dims. 

*	Approved Equipment Grounding data. Size & Qty of attachment points,
Whether or not hardware is included. 

*	Warranty. 

*	Clear, dimensioned drawings. Include Section. (Inches first, please)


*	Grounding attachment points shown on drawing(s). 

*	There should be a standard convention for order of data
presentation... i.e. Pmax, Voc, Vpmax, Isc, Ipmax, Max System Voltage... We
can sort out what that should be, but it should be the same for everybody. 

*	In this day and age, it's ludicrous that we don't have a central,
publicly accessible online database of this data. I believe it should be
funded by module mfrs and administered by a non-partisan, respected
organization... Hey NABCEP! Anybody who wants to talk more about achieving
this, please let me know.

I would like to send a shout-out to Sanyo for their recent HIT-Power
datasheets. They don't comply with every item I mention above, but they are
well presented and thorough. Like, everything I need to know in order to
select and design with this module is here and I can read it and, frankly, I
trust it. Can't say the latter about every product out there. "Oh. Did we
forget to point out that +/- 10% means -10% but that's just the power
characteristic, so your effective Pt-minus is really more like -12%?" 
 
In addition to being a top quality product, I believe Sanyo has set a good
starting-point example for others to model their datasheets after. Oh my,
what a lesson building an Ark can be!
 
Here's a link to an example:
http://us.sanyo.com/dynamic/product/Downloads/HIT%20Power%20215N-12887676.pd
f (Just over 1MB so I couldn't attach)  For the purists on the list, I'M NOT
ADVERTISING so don't bug Michael with comments to that effect. If you feel
the need to vent, send it to me directly. 
 
Check it out for yourselves. Compare it to what you're used to using. What's
good about each? What could be better? How do we drive this message home to
Mfrs? 
 
All comments welcome. On or off-list.
 
-Matt Lafferty; Janitor
 
 
 
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20090508/6df15386/attachment-0002.html>