[RE-wrenches] Solar World Wind Damage

Fri Jan 13 15:50:27 PST 2017

SnapNrack makes a snap on channel for the REC module as part of their
rail-less system. I expect it would be a little pricey to buy full lengths
of it, assuming they'd sell it that way. One can ask.

Brad
AEE Solar

On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 7:10 PM, William Miller <william at millersolar.com>
wrote:

> Ray:
>
>
>
> Great thread.  Thanks for starting it.
>
>
>
> An idea crossed my mind (and there was plenty of room in there):  If one
> could find a sturdy aluminum channel that happened to fit firmly over your
> module frame, one could use it along the long access, or maybe even the
> short access, of the module frame to reinforce it.  Bottom mounted, the
> fasteners would go through a hole in the module frame and the aluminum
> channel.  The outside channel could stiffen up a module pretty
> significantly.
>
>
>
> Now the above idea may not be practical, especially if you can’t find the
> right channel, but I would not be surprised if this idea maybe someone else
> on the list come up with a related idea that might be better.
>
>
>
> William
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [image: Gradient Cap_mini]
> Lic 773985
> millersolar.com <http://www.millersolar.com/>
> 805-438-5600 <(805)%20438-5600>
>
>
>
> *From:* RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Ray Walters
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 12, 2017 6:40 PM
> *To:* RE-wrenches <re-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [RE-wrenches] Solar World Wind Damage
>
>
>
> Yep, the old modules were heavier, had a thicker frame, and most
> importantly: much less total surface area.   The old 75 w modules were less
> than 7 sq ft, compared to almost 18 sq ft of a new 60 cell module.  2-1/2
> times the forces on even thinner metal.
> Not that I want to go back to the good ol' days, but I think the industry
> got a little too thin on the frame, or at the least, we need a beefier
> hardware solution for bottom mounted arrays on open frames in high wind
> locations.  I'll send a pic of our fix, once we try it.
>
>
> R.Ray Walters
>
> CTO, Solarray, Inc
>
> Nabcep Certified PV Installer,
>
> Licensed Master Electrician
>
> Solar Design Engineer
>
> 303 505-8760 <(303)%20505-8760>
>
> On 1/12/2017 6:01 PM, Dana wrote:
>
> Bottom side bolt up. But they were 1995 Solarex remember the weight of
> those frames!
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------------
>
> Dana Orzel - Great Solar Works, Inc - C - *208.721.7003
> <(208)%20721-7003>*
>
> NABCEP # 051112-136 : Idaho PV Licence # 028374
>
> E - *dana at solarwork.com <dana at solarwork.com>*  - Web - www.solarwork.biz
>
> "Responsible Technologies for Responsible People since 1988"
>
> *P* Please consider the environment before printing this email.
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org
> <re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org>] *On Behalf Of *Ray Walters
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 12, 2017 5:22 PM
> *To:* RE-wrenches
> *Subject:* Re: [RE-wrenches] Solar World Wind Damage
>
>
>
> Chris & Dana;
>
> Our site is a mountain in Wyoming and does have some focusing effects, so
> maybe 170 mph is possible.  Are your arrays using top down clamps?  I think
> that is apparently stronger, also possibly the 2011 Sanyos look to have
> beefier frames.  However,  I looked at their spec sheet and they're only
> rated at 60 PSF (less than the SWs).  From my measurements here of Solar
> World 4.0 frames, I'm seeing a flange thickness of approx 1.3 mm, while an
> old Siemens SP 75 has 1.8 mm thick metal.
> I'm coming up with a fix for the Solar Worlds: 3/4 x 3/4 Stainless steel
> Angle fits just inside the lip of the module, and will distribute the
> forces more evenly.  The question then is, are we just going to lose the
> glass next?  Anyone have a currently available module that is beefier?  I
> may recommend we swap the whole array out, if we are indeed exceeding the
> design of the Solar Worlds.
>
> Thanks,
>
>
> R.Ray Walters
>
> CTO, Solarray, Inc
>
> Nabcep Certified PV Installer,
>
> Licensed Master Electrician
>
> Solar Design Engineer
>
> 303 505-8760 <(303)%20505-8760>
>
> On 1/12/2017 2:39 PM, Chris @ The Oasis wrote:
>
> Wrenches:  We have a  ~70KW ground mounted array on the Rocky Mountain
> front near Choteau, MT.  Springs winds are not unusual with 150 to 175 MPH
> gusts.  The system was installed in 2011 (with Sanyo 215W modules).  No
> problems yet; we certainly over-engineered the racks, knowing what high
> winds there are!
>
>
>
> Chris Daum
> Oasis Montana Inc.
> 406-777-4309 <(406)%20777-4309>
> 406-777-0830 <(406)%20777-0830> fax
> www.oasismontana.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org
> <re-wrenches-bounces at lists.re-wrenches.org>] *On Behalf Of *Ray Walters
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 12, 2017 2:16 PM
> *To:* RE-wrenches
> *Cc:* Sefchick, Steve
> *Subject:* Re: [RE-wrenches] Solar World Wind Damage
>
> Hi Bill;
>
> Solar World customer support did come through yesterday with flying
> colors.  They got hit by a big storm in the North West.  Right now though,
> they are saying that we exceeded the 64 PSF rated  loading to the back of
> the module. I've pointed out that that would correspond to over 170 mph
> winds, so I'm not quite ready to concede the warranty.   Their engineering
> team is reviewing my information.
> As always, the Wrench list experience is invaluable.  Are 170 mph winds
> possible, outside of a tornado or hurricane?
>
> *Whether or not Solar World stands by their product in this extreme
> situation, I definitely stand by my installations.* I'm taking a snow cat
> up to replace and reinforce the modules next week, then hopefully get a
> little help from my supply chain after.  My repair costs will be many times
> the cost of one replacement module anyway.
>
> Yes, the 33 mm vs 31 mm refers to the module thickness.  I don't have a
> version 2.5 frame to check the flange metal thickness, and it is
> conspicuously absent from the specs.  I have a good micrometer, and I will
> compare metal thicknesses of several module brands, because with all the
> cost cutting, many module manus seems to be using thinner metal lately.  As
> Jay pointed out, we're bolting much bigger modules down with much weaker
> flanges, and the same hardware we used on a 75 w module, so its not
> entirely surprising to start seeing high wind failures.
>
>
> R.Ray Walters
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
>
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
> Change listserver email address & settings:
>
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
> List-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/maillist.html
>
>
>
> List rules & etiquette:
>
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
>
>
> Check out or update participant bios:
>
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches at lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change listserver email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List-Archive: http://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.
> org/maillist.html
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out or update participant bios:
> www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20170113/7ec33d2c/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image003.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 1460 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20170113/7ec33d2c/attachment-0004.jpg>