Sun hours

[SunEagle]

With an array 10' high, I guess footers would have to have a pretty big footprint. Bruce

Or made of very heavy material like concrete or containers filled with water.

[bcroe]

I believe I have seen some type of flat roof rack mounting that used weighted "footers" that sat on the roof surface where additional weight like sand bags could be added. I would think ballast or rock would work the same as long as it met "up lift" wind load calculations.

With an array 10' high, I guess footers would have to have a pretty big footprint. Bruce

[SunEagle]

Is there any such thing a a ballasted ground mount? Was thinking about another trial mount here. There are a dozen tons of rock
piled up here from previous foundation digs. Bruce Roe

I believe I have seen some type of flat roof rack mounting that used weighted "footers" that sat on the roof surface where additional weight like sand bags could be added. I would think ballast or rock would work the same as long as it met "up lift" wind load calculations.

[J.P.M.]

Is there any such thing a a ballasted ground mount? Was thinking about another trial mount here. There are a dozen tons of rock
piled up here from previous foundation digs. Bruce Roe

Don't see why not. But my guess is it would still require some anchorage against long term creep or seismic movement, although probably/maybe not as robust as a foundation. I could probably make one work from a design/safety standpoint. That's not to say it would be practical, cost effective or pretty.

[bcroe]

Is there any such thing a a ballasted ground mount? Was thinking about another trial mount here. There are a dozen tons of rock
piled up here from previous foundation digs. Bruce Roe

[bcroe]

The April/May/June quarter of my 2016/17 KWH year shows production up 8% from last year, from 95.6 to 103.3 KWH per day. I
am crediting this partly to fewer rainy days, and somewhat reduced shading at day extremes. I expect an increase of at least as
much can be obtained by moving panels to less shaded positions.

KWHs banked for winter are up nearly 17%, 73.3 vs 63.1 KWH per day. I suppose its due to much warmer weather this spring.
That level may not continue, because the air has been running a lot in these 90+ deg days. Work has continued slowly despite
the heat and very high humidity; all the space I need is cleared and unshaded. Bruce Roe

[ButchDeal]

Yes it doesn't change the default. You can select a region of the graph and zoom it to scale as well ( though also not permanent)

[bcroe]

Second bullet.... Random site in image....

Or were you talking about the daily view? If so click on the word efficiency to turn it off

I was doing daily. That does temporarily turn it off, thanks. But they don't rescale energy to fill the page (my real objection)
anyway, and next time its right back. Bruce Roe

[ButchDeal]

I tried all the buttons at the top, but none listed a way to turn off EFFICIENCY. Bruce Roe

Second bullet.... Random site in image....

Or were you talking about the daily view? If so click on the word efficiency to turn it off

[bcroe]

I tried all the buttons at the top, but none listed a way to turn off EFFICIENCY. Bruce Roe

[ButchDeal]

Turn off eficiency if you don't want it.

[bcroe]

I don't really understand my graph on PVOUTPUT, under SUN HOURS. Sometimes they show a sun symbol on that EFFICIENCY
curve. It plots the number of KWH per KW capacity. Today the array managed 9 KWH/KW capacity, but it did't rate a SUN. How
much more can an array put out in a day?

I'm also not pleased that they keep changing the KWH scale, and its scaled so it never goes up up more than half the space. I scale
plots to fill the page. Of course they do it so that it never overlaps the EFFICIENCY curve (that I don't need), entirely above KWH. Bruce Roe

[bcroe]

With heavy clipping, it becomes more complicated.

Exactly

tools like TMY files can help narrow down the range of likely possibilities.

My "tool" here is dependent on clear weather. But it includes things a pure simulation might miss, like temp or shade. Bruce

[sensij]

If its cloudy, it doesn't matter which way the panels face. Sunny, I'm already in clipping at noon, so more south facing panels
won't contribute. Anyway best daily sun here frequently isn't around noon. So I'll try to even out power, to minimize clipping
and maximize my "sun day". Tilt to vertical is in the plan for the snow months only. Bruce Roe

At the end of the year, one azimuth will have outgenerated any of the others. Most likely, that ideal azimuth is something very close to south, unless the cloud patterns are very strong and consistent. The outperformance of a south facing panel is not just during noontime, and even with some clipping, south can still outperform east or west (over the course of the year). With heavy clipping, it becomes more complicated. Certainly, over short periods of time, east or west could be better, but tools like TMY files can help narrow down the range of likely possibilities.

[bcroe]

I hope that if you have the terrain / space for it, you aren't overthinking yourself out of simply putting as many panels facing south as possible. 3 east + 1 west might make sense off-grid, or *severely* inverter limited, but otherwise, putting them south will surely generate the most over the course of the year (especially with adjustable tilt).

If its cloudy, it doesn't matter which way the panels face. Sunny, I'm already in clipping at noon, so more south facing panels
won't contribute. Anyway best daily sun here frequently isn't around noon. So I'll try to even out power, to minimize clipping
and maximize my "sun day". Tilt to vertical is in the plan for the snow months only. Bruce Roe