[RE-wrenches] TPM Search

[Kent]

Ray,

Thanks for the clarification on the photo. Years ago Solar World stopped 
making modules with the metal strip on the frame for back mounting; 
folks complained and they brought back the provision for back mounting. 
But as you say the frames are very thin these days and the module area 
is huge - especially compared to the 75 watt modules I started with.

Kent Osterberg
Blue Mountain Solar


On 3/10/2024 1:14 AM, Ray Walters via RE-wrenches wrote:
>
> That's just distortion in the image, from when I zoomed and cropped 
> it.  Its module frame direct to the 2" angle aluminum support rail. 
> Nothing in between.  High winds ripped two other modules completely 
> off the rack leaving all the hardware still attached with a bit of 
> module frame still under the washers .
>
> This is on a mountain top in Wyoming.   Believe me, when I tell you 
> that bottom mounting is no longer a safe method with today's big 
> modules, at least not in high wind situations (> 90 mph).  I measured 
> the thickness of the module frame, and its about 1/2 the thickness of 
> an old Siemens SP75 that I compared it to.  These were Solar World 
> modules, but I've noticed most modules today have significantly less 
> robust frames than the old days.
>
> More surface area to catch the wind + thinner metal = failure at high 
> enough wind speed.
>
> BTW, the rack is a DPW high wind model, both the rack and the 4" pole 
> didn't budge at all, just the modules themselves.  I've had a second 
> system, same configuration have similar damage in a wind storm just 
> last year.  Its just on the top modules, not all of them.  I have 
> quite a few MT Solar racks with the top down mounting, and no 
> losses.   I've been  suspicious of top down module racking; and I was 
> quite satisfied with actual bolts and hardware to hold modules in 
> place.  But its just not true anymore.    I added 3/4" angle stainless 
> steel to reinforce the attachments on the top modules.
>
>
> Ray Walters
>
> On 3/9/2024 12:44 PM, Kent via RE-wrenches wrote:
>>
>> Ray,
>>
>> It appears that there is something between the module frame and rail 
>> that may have introduced the frame crack. Perhaps as it was 
>> tightened, and not due to the wind. What is the light material that 
>> looks like it is sandwiched between the module and rail?
>>
>> Kent Osterberg
>>
>> On 3/8/2024 4:23 PM, Ray Walters via RE-wrenches wrote:
>>>
>>> Here's another mount at the edge of failure, from the same system. 
>>> Hardware is tight.  Like many, I had lots of love for good ol' 
>>> fashion bottom mounting vs top mount, until this happened about 5 
>>> years ago.
>>>
>>> This is how we learn.
>>>
>>>
>>> On 3/8/2024 5:15 PM, Ray Walters via RE-wrenches wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I've had several modules pull off of bottom mount racking in high 
>>>> winds, but never top mount racking.  Newer modules have much 
>>>> thinner frames, but are much more surface area than the old days.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ray Walters
>>>> Remote Solar
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 3/8/2024 3:50 PM, Kent via RE-wrenches wrote:
>>>>> and for the life of me I don't understand the logic of of a top 
>>>>> mount clamp on a TPM.
>>>>>
>>>>> Kent Osterberg
>>>>> Blue Mountain Solar
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20240311/34f73c17/attachment-0001.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Hardware Upgrade close.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 39644 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org/attachments/20240311/34f73c17/attachment-0001.jpg>