You are not authorized to post a reply.
|
 Prev Next
|
| Author |
Messages |
|
TechGromit
Registered Users
Posts:231
 |
| 07/14/2008 12:13 PM |
|
I've always read that solar panels should be facing South, (North in the southern Hemisphere). Even better, solar panels that track the sun can get between 10% to 40% better efficiency, even the angle is important, the right angle on a fixed solar panel can get another 4% effciency. But not all of us have the land or the ideally facing structure to take full advantage of the optimal conditions. Sure you can angle the panels toward the sun on mounts, but frankly I'm sure everyone would agree it looks like crap on your house. So the question needs to be asked, if your facing your panels North, East or West how much of the ideal effciency are you losing? I'm sure the answer would be vary on the direction the panel is facing, the angle its at and even your location in the northern hemipshere, but does anyone know a ball park figure of how much your sacrificing when not going with the Dr. Pepper crowd of facing your panels south?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brock
Registered Users
Posts:209
|
| 07/15/2008 2:08 AM |
|
When we got our panels I had them aimed due west, since our house had and east west pitch. After about a month I did the tilt to get them to south west and saw about 30% increase. I could have really over tilted them due south, but we lived behind a ridge to our south east so we never saw sun until 10:30 am mid summer. If I had to guess I would say for 90* off or east or west you would loose about 40% compared to due south.
Also you want them to tilt to your latitude in summer and your latitude plus 15 in winter. Most people just split it and mount them your latitude +7.
You can also maximum point power track (MPPT) them as well witch usually gets you another 20%-30% for a fixed array, although this is for battery systems, grid tied inverters already have MPPT built in.
I have heard the if you take the cost of trackers for solar panels and use that same money by adding another panels or three you end up with the same power and a LOT more reliability, but if you are tight on space it is likely worth it. |
|
Green Bay, WI. - geothermal heated indoor pool with a small solar setup |
|
|
TechGromit
Registered Users
Posts:231
|
| 07/15/2008 8:35 AM |
|
Posted By Brock on 07/15/2008 2:08 AM
I have heard the if you take the cost of trackers for solar panels and use that same money by adding another panels or three you end up with the same power and a LOT more reliability, but if you are tight on space it is likely worth it.
With one tracker per panel, I would agree with you but,
http://www.solarhome.org/ProductImages/zomeworks/L_461.gif
Something like this where it holds 10 to 16 panels on one mount would be ecomonically feasible.
|
|
|
|
|
Brock
Registered Users
Posts:209
|
| 07/15/2008 12:49 PM |
|
I don't know those are still pretty pricy. I am in no way against trackers, I just like things with fewer moving parts ;)
|
|
Green Bay, WI. - geothermal heated indoor pool with a small solar setup |
|
|
|
| You are not authorized to post a reply. |
|
|
|
ActiveForums 3.6