Hi Watts = 107.5%!

Re: Hi Watts = 107.5%!

Good on ya Marc... all relative too...;)

I have been observing somewhat opposite readings between the XBM and the MX.
Been blaming some adequate but undersized wiring for the (loss) lower XBM Amps vs the MX but now am wondering after SGs comment that there is a discrepancy in the MX amperage readouts. Will have to investigate further.

Eric

Re: Hi Watts = 107.5%!

At 0f (-18C) I routinely get ~230 watts out of 200 watt panels, add in some edge of cloud and it can bump a bit higher. (That's cold panels, and reflection off of miles of frozen lake covered with snow!

Gets colder, gets even better.

Tony

PS I know we had a long engineering discussion about my description of how much it put out at -40. I haven't actually done a real analysis since I have redone my system. Next winter perhaps.

Re: Hi Watts = 107.5%!

Its called a standard for a reason

1000 watts meter squared irradiance with the panel cells at a temperature of 25C is the criteria used by all manufactures to rate the power rating of the pv panel.

Panels are "flash" tested to prevent the heat from raising the cell temperature during the test. Mitsubishi is no better than Evergreens or probably a dozen other manufactures for that mater, the listed wattage is identical for the same test, that's why they have the test.

Without doubt, its the quality of the measurements or the equipment used is what effects what people see there PV producing power wise. You need to know the cell temperature, the irradiance at the cell ( to correct for sun angle error ) a way to verify true vmp and account for all loses in the load and measurement equipment to make a statement that one is better than another. I own all the above as part of my business and its near full time job to keep it all calibrated for accurate results.

If someone is making a statement Mitsubishi is better than Kyocera, Sharp, Evergreen ect, its more likely due to the variance in the measuring, not the true performance of the PV panel

Outback, as an example, knows this and chooses to sell equipment that makes the end user feel good about there choice to by the controller ( higher listed power harvest than actual ). One can argue the merits of this approach, me being an engineer have the opinion it deceptive at best, but that doesn't make it good or bad, just how I see things.

In cool or edge of cloud events it common to have greater than STC conditions and get more than STC power. The lower the cell temperature or the greater the irradiance, the higher the output. Edge of cloud in my location regularly shows 1100-1350 vs the standard of 1000 ( watt/meter/squared ) or 35% peak intensity on the pyranometer

Put a panel in snow country and you could get 1.5X the rated output between the cold temperatures and reflection off the snow

Re: Hi Watts = 107.5%!

Which Bluesky did SG test? The link refers to Windsun's comment about a discontinued model. How does the current line of BS controllers stack up relative to their hype?


Tony

Re: Hi Watts = 107.5%!

The XW inverter have I beleive has 3 different sleep modes that bring the tar loss down below 8 watts as speced, the 45 watts is the inverter active and idle, not surpising for a 6kw box, the Outback is similar, just scales to the size

As for products and testing, only the Outback FX series is still being sold, the SW and SW+ are long retired from being manufactured and sold. Since its been 4 years since the CEC/Sandia/UL requirements why hasn't Outback improved the design or updated the true operational power the inverter can handle in the marketing material? ... that where my concerns or comments are.

Re: Hi Watts = 107.5%!

I really tried to switch over to Outback. Their CC was the best for Offgrid. The inverters were less than 1/2 the weight. It all became clear when I started having trouble with a few of my early Outback customers.

I was happy that the Outback CC allowed me to run greater distances with less loss. A very fine buck converter was all I needed but fan problems and the ridiculous amount of tweaking/sweeping with no power made one of my customers a little "crazy" Outback did a beta to try and fix it but.....

One of my customers with an SW told another with an Outback that they could run their whole SW4048 on a 1000 watt Honda. We tried it on the Outback and it worked until the water pump pressure switch cycled. The generator dropped and it was back to the battery. This is where I learned about load support and the bidirectional nature of the SW's and now the XW. The SW would happily use it's battery while still connected to the little honda when the well pump cycled. I assume this support feature is what allowed the old SW to grid tie (Help SG)
but I remember very little about that stuff. I do know that the 5 second surge rating is what is important for the happiness of an expensive deep well pump.

To sum it up I will buy whoever builds the best! I do not want fans running except for extreme conditions. Relays should be used intelligently and not trying to prove that they will last by cycling. I want equipment that I can take nap with and not get disturbed by noise. I did a review of the XWCC and it was on the Arizona web store for a month in Jan 09. They dropped it for whatever reason but as SG said previously it is by far the best at this point in time.

Re: Hi Watts = 107.5%!

the XW MPPT60 works very well. It however has tons of relay clicking morning at wake up and night when it is going into lo light. In my extensive testing here it appears The XW doesnt harvest as much as the MX60 or the Classic but it is real close and it works. It doesn't have all the quirks the outback FM series has. I have not pushed it to its limits amperage wise but i suspect it will be fairly warm with no fans but i guess thats ok as long as it holds up well over the long haul.

Xantrex has long made the best inverter in my book I loved the SW+ line and the XW is no slouch