Solar-Tite 384

[GGnn]

Hi everyone, I'll start by explaining my situation:
I'm a belgian student currenlty involved in a development aid project to install a 'cheap' off-grid PV-system in Senegal, Thi

[tops]

you're not the first one who wants to find this answer;

http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/showthread.php?4619-Solar-Tite-384-encapsulant

http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/showthread.php?5442-Who-is-the-manufacturer-of-Solar-Tite-384

hope you're having better luck

[GGnn]

Yeah, aparantly there are only 4 sellers on the entire internet . The one I bought my test sample from, Adidas212121 now doesn't even sell it anymore on eBay.
Currently selling:

• Amazon: levelsdey
• eBay : easysaledallas
• eBay : Pckassociates
• Solarworld

And greensolarguy used to sell it. I'm logging my events and send alot of emails trying to contact these people. When I complete my research I'll post it here.

[cheapo]

Great to know

This is an overdue test. I think many people here might doubt your "40 days in the chamber is the same as 20 years" but it is still a meaningful test. Others have claimed that Solar-tite has inconsistent setting times. Probably a problem with many small manufacturing companies. I often wondered if it was not just repackaged Sylgard, but your study's claim of superiority disproves my presumption.

Thank you and please keep us posted.

[GGnn]

Climate Chamber

This is an overdue test. I think many people here might doubt your "40 days in the chamber is the same as 20 years"

I understand your doubt, but if you are interested in the accuracy of these test, U can read the following link. http://tuvamerica.com/services/photo...standingPV.pdf . The test Soltech uses is called the DH1000.

20 years is of course under the assumptions that you install these panels in a standard environment, given the dependability of their lifetime on the 'moisture percentage' and temperature. (I'm dutch by origin but I think you understand what I mean)

I have all the results now, you can download them here: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/15386244/Test%20results.pdf . The abcis denotes the actual days in the climate chamber, up to you to make on assumption of their lifetime within your local climate based on the above.
Just some extra information: The EVA panels are hard to DIY, as many on this forum already know. The second attempt was succesfull, the EVA 'stringed' (dutch: vernetten) for up to 86%. Stil it's results were depressing. But it can be explained by the assumption that the EVA wasn't conserved properly and the acetyleen evaporated.

Hope you're satisfied by the answer and kind regards

Glenn

[cheapo]

Thank you

More than satisfied by all your efforts.

Like most test results, questions are both answered and created.

My initial (pre-final graph) suspicions came from your "40 days equal 20 years" claim.

The US military (don't worry, I am not being political) has a test for waterproof glue that requires lengthy immersion in boiling water. Tar on a roof can be waterproof for 50 years but may be instantly useless at 90 C . If a rope breaks at 1000 kilos, it can probably hold 999 kilos for years but will break instantly at 1001 Kilos. My point is that a "climate chamber" that exaggerates environmental conditions has to be suspect.

The conclusions are still useful. The fact that Solar-tite can take the abuse is meaningful. Previous to reading your conclusions, I was wondering if it was a scam, a poor imitation of Sylgard, or just repackaged Sylgard.

Final graph questions: Why did the Sylgard drop the fastest and then level off better than all but the Solar-tite? What sort of damage can be done that quickly and then stop? A single defective cell might explain it.

Please understand, that I don't expect you to be able to answer such questions as you have already done more than I will on this subject.

Your initial post had Sylgard down to 30% after 10 years. Was that a typo? (typing error)

Everyone here should appreciate your doing such tedious, time consuming, and expensive research, but until we know why the results are what they are, we don't know how important the conclusions are to our individual situations.

[GGnn]

If a rope breaks at 1000 kilos, it can probably hold 999 kilos for years but will break instantly at 1001 Kilos. .

Creep renders that comparison wrong, but I do get your point. The Sylgard declines to 70%, no typo but an inversion error (declined 30%). I have decided to go for solar-tite 384. I will build 6 solar panels of 18V polycristalline with it and will try to report the production as good as possible for my succesors next year and post the result on this forum. I have already noticed that the curing time is relatively short if u add a 1:10 ratio. A lower ratio solves this.
I have also noticed the fishyness of solar-tite but wat alternative do I have? I must make my own panels and as the test results show, other encapsulants are no good. ok, Sylgard stabilizes but costs 3 times more and draws the efficiency of the panels down to 70% in no time. Maybe my succesors will test more methods but I have a feeling my economical study (ie Is it cost effective to build your own panels) will turn out negative.

Thank you for your interest and information cheepo, now I have to get back to study for my upcoming exams


Glenn

[GGnn]

Final graph questions: Why did the Sylgard drop the fastest and then level off better than all but the Solar-tite? What sort of damage can be done that quickly and then stop? A single defective cell might explain it.
.

No, that is not the case. We've put a infrared camera upon the panels after each flashtest and all the cells showed heat leakage throughout, resulting from the corrosive effect of moisture penetration. (Except Solar-Tite, were the heat was distributed among the tabwire. This was the case for all the panels before testing.)
So if only one cell would be broken, a hotspot would be spotted upon one of the cells. I can not explain why and I'm not planning to do more test to find it out either. I would sleep alot better if we switched Sylgard and Solar-Tite by accident but this can't be the case because Sylgard turns out less elastic than Solar-Tite after curing. I have never seen a more fishy product than this encapsulant. I hope I'm wrong off course.

Glenn

[Jose Olcese]

Hi, I'm just starting in building my own solar panels and I'm kind of shocked with the results of the chamber tests.
I was planning to use a flexible resin to encapsulate cells without letting it flow between the cell and the glass (only sealing from the back)
I live in Argentina and it's almost impossible to get materials like slygard or solar-tite which can encapsulate the whole cell.
Any ideas?

Thanks
Jose

[inetdog]

Content missing.

Hello Mods,

The first post appears to have lost some weight. Would it be possible to restore its content? Or is enough of the information still in the offsite results link?

[cheapo]

longwolf's solution

Hi, I'm just starting in building my own solar panels and I'm kind of shocked with the results of the chamber tests.
I was planning to use a flexible resin to encapsulate cells without letting it flow between the cell and the glass (only sealing from the back)
I live in Argentina and it's almost impossible to get materials like slygard or solar-tite which can encapsulate the whole cell.
Any ideas?

Thanks
Jose

Jose

Another contributor, Longwolf, has had some luck encapsulating cells with Clear Seal, made by Liquid Nails. Basically a clear waterproof sealant, similar to silicone, although they claim "clearer than silicone". He dilutes it with paint thinner (I think, I should reread it, and you should find his thread on it before taking my word for it). Others have had some luck with epoxy. The trouble is that encapsulants that are made for other purposes may cause problems. Epoxy may yellow over time and may be too rigid, cracking the cells. Longwolf mentions that his Clear Seal may never harden between the cell face and the glass, and Clear Seal may corrode electronics over time.

I have only contributed to two threads so far. This one, and http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/showth...s&goto=newpost

In that thread, I made the point that air to glass surfaces reflect 4% of light. If you do not encapsulate the front, you will have 2 extra air-glass surfaces, (the back of the panel glass to the air space, and the air space to the front of the cell) so you will lose 8% efficiency. Such may not be that important to you, and (as I mentioned repeatedly in the "Cost analysis of glass types" thread, you can always build a larger panel with any money saved from less than ideal materials.

Good luck and please keep us informed.

edit:

Here is "Possible encapsulant" link

http://www.solarpaneltalk.com/showthread.php?1986-Possible-encapsulation-material

[danpohlod]

'cheap' off-grid PV-system

I'm having the same problem in Brazil, Sylgard 184 is way too expensive and there is no solar tire in here
if we just paint with a good quote o f regular silicone and add some resin on top of that silicone to make stronger leaving the cells in strait contact with the glass.. may work?

[vic1omar]

Bought this solar tite 384 encapsulant on ebay and encapsulated my first ever panel. Mixed the two solutions. The problem is that its been about a month since I encapsulated my cells and the encapsulant is still sticky to the touch. The panel has been sitting outside on 100F degree weather. What's happening, have I been sold a fake. Or is this normal.