Problems with a new solar install

[Gavin A]

GAVIN A ....are you saying that you would ignore the manufacturers instructions and install 2.5mm cable because you did some calculations !!

scroll down the page a little and you'll see a section specifically stating that cable losses should be less than 1%, and a diagram showing the volt drop for different lengths of different CSA cables, which I referenced earlier.

OK so the diagram is for the 3300TL, but as I said, that's more appropriate here anyway as the system isn't going to be outputing significantly more than the panels rated output very often / at all.

Not that we'd be using 2.5mm2, I'm just pointing out that it's not dangerous to do so, and looks to be somewhere in the region of within manufacturers recommendations and below the 1% max volt drop MCS recommend. Certainly too close for me to want to call it so definitely over the internet as being undersized.

 

[whinmoor]

Assuming that the first photo was taken at about 10 or 11am, I'd say that the top right panel would suffer from shading for a period of time every morning. You need to reduce the effect of this by using a twin-tracker.

A 6-4 split on the Samil is far from best practice. It really needs a 5-5 but the shading will really affect output in the morning.

Get them to swap the Samil for a Power One 3.0 as suggested above.

 

[Gavin A]

I've done some more digging and reading of spec sheets and MCS standards - if I have anything wrong, please shout as my speciality is Electronic Engineering, not electrical...



From the spec sheet for the "DC isolator" (here, page 11), the maximum voltage for purely resistive loads is 300V. For mixed loads, it is 250V or 600V for two poles in series.

The panels have a rated load voltge of 54.7V and an OC voltage of 64.9V, giving a total of 273.5V, 324.5V open circuit, if the pannels are connected as two strings of five or 328.2V, 389.4V open circuit, if the pannels are connected up as they said (6+4). From this, two poles in series are required?

It looks to actually be an AC rated isolator to me from the code, which would be a concern and you'd definitely be within your rights to demand that be swapped out. Hard to say if the DC version would be ok with the links removed or not, could be, could not be, I'd want to check with the manufacturers.

From the MCS PV installation guide (here, page 44) the recommended voltage drop is 1%. Using an online calculator, a 15m run of 2.5mm^2 seems to give a voltage drop of about 2% at the peak AC output current of the inverter.

sunny design puts it at 1.13% with an equivalent inverter at 15m, or 0.98% at 13m. So it's borderline at best, but not actually a safety issue.

This loft has plenty of ventiation as appropriate gaps were left when top-up insulation was done.

maybe so, but a small bit extra isn't going to hurt in itself.

It's a common misconception that felt is there primarily to stop rain getting in - it's not, its main purpose is to prevent wind blown snow getting through into the loft, and help prevent the tiles getting sucked off. Water proofing is a secondary function, but really if it gets to the point that the felt has water running down it then you need to be fixing the tiles sharpish anyway or the battens will have rotted and you'll have to strip the lot instead of replacing the one original broken tile.

 

[heliosfa]

Assuming that the first photo was taken at about 10 or 11am, I'd say that the top right panel would suffer from shading for a period of time every morning.

THe first photo was taken at 12:16. Shading at 10:18 in the morning can be seen in new piccy, taken just before installation started. The return calculations were done by the company with no shading.




One of their "maintenance engineers" has been back once to fix the AC cabling issues and was asked to check the rest of the cabling for any other issues. So they have had an opportunity to identify and fix some of the issues. I also had to remind this "maintenance engineer" to isolate parts of the system before he started undoing cables and he had all of the covers off before isolating the main AC - I think this goes some way to justifying not having them back? I would rather not have to deal with a fried contractor in my cupboard under the stairs...


When they did the install, they cut the seals on both the main fuse and the normal meter (both were sealed by the local network operator about 3 weeks ago as they did a meter swap). As I understand, SSE permit the seals to be removed as long as the person doing it is a member of one of the trade bodies, that the person removing the seals contacts SSE before doing so and that temporary seals (issued by SSE) are put in place. Both the meter and the fuse have been left unsealed and the original installer would not contact SSE - he told me to do it.

When I mentioned this to the company's "contracts manager" he just said that they were allowed to cut the seals as they can't work live, but he would contact the DNO to tell them that the seals were cut and needed replacing.

 

[heliosfa]

Doing some more reading (not good, the more I read, the more I dispair...) what should the initial survey have consisted of? What happened with mine seemed to be mainly the sales lady taking photographs and spending more time talking about what the different panels were and how the Sunpoweres were the best.

Should I have seen any of the calculations they were meant to have done? especialy as the roof is hipped and they should be consulting a structural engineer (page 72 of the MCS guide).

 

[MCS Renewables]

Your return on investment figures are based on the SAP calculation which includes shading analysis, orientation and roof pitch.
Yours is the chart covering Zone 3. ( page 98 of the PV guide)

Without this SAP calculation you have been miss sold which is another RECC issue .

To sum up there is more wrong with your project than right, from initial sale to completed installation and you need REAL and NAPIT to audit your entire Project !

 

[heliosfa]

OK, I have done yet-more digging and the cable that they have used, Pesco H05VV-F, is designed as a light-duty, oil-resistant appliance cord that can be used for fixed-appliances. It is not UV resistant and outdoor installation is NOT permitted.

I have also had a call this morning from their accounts department and I think he realises that there are some major issues with this install. More on this later.

 

[Silly Sausage]

This is probably of no help whatsoever...
If this had happened to me, I wouldn't pay them a penny and I'd insist that they come and remove the whole lot.

 

[JulianC]

They cut the seals on both the main fuse and the normal meter

Other issues notwithstanding, why've they cut the seals on the import meter?? From the pics, I see no reason why the original tails from the meter to the consumer unit couldn't be diverted into Henleys and new tails run in from there. You might want them to get this rectified asap, before allegations of meter tampering start emanating from your energy supplier.

 

[heliosfa]

Other issues notwithstanding, why've they cut the seals on the import meter?? From the pics, I see no reason why the original tails from the meter to the consumer unit couldn't be diverted into Henleys and new tails run in from there. You might want them to get this rectified asap, before allegations of meter tampering start emanating from your energy supplier.

Agreed, if the original sparky had taken some time to stop and think before cutting seals, he could have made his life a lot easier and would not have had to cut the seals. It would have also meant that the install would have been more compliant (no 16mm^2 tails) and the second site visit to fix it would not have been needed.

On the flip side, the fact that he didn't think and left the meter area in such an appalling state is what made me dig deeper and find the other issues so I am kind of glad he did something very obviously wrong.

As for accusations of meter tampering, I don't think my energy supplier will say that when I give them the next reading as I am significantly above my predicted usage at the moment due to experimenting with Bitcoin mining...

 

[MCS Renewables]

Hi
Just been told some interesting things about the "project" lot.

You may need to get the serial numbers of your PV modules and phone them through to Sunpower to make sure that they are what they claim to be.

This company is going to be well known to RECC so keep going, ignoring whatever promises they make.

 

[heliosfa]

Hi
Just been told some interesting things about the "project" lot.

You may need to get the serial numbers of your PV modules and phone them through to Sunpower to make sure that they are what they claim to be.

This company is going to be well known to RECC so keep going, ignoring whatever promises they make.

What is the easiest way to get the serial numbers, bearing in mind that the panels are up and I have no documentation regarding them.

I take it that if the modules are not what they appear to be, there could be problems with their eligibility for FiT?

 

[MCS Renewables]

And the top 100 .......in at number 92 ....

Companies Court Winding Up List 28.10.13

 

[Gavin A]

OK, I have done yet-more digging and the cable that they have used, Pesco H05VV-F, is designed as a light-duty, oil-resistant appliance cord that can be used for fixed-appliances. It is not UV resistant and outdoor installation is NOT permitted.

I have also had a call this morning from their accounts department and I think he realises that there are some major issues with this install. More on this later.

I obviously gave them far too much credit then.

 

[SRE]

I see UK Solar Savings are on the list too - those shiny suits must cost fortune!

 

[solarsavings]

I see UK Solar Savings are on the list too - those shiny suits must cost fortune!

Oh, poor Omar what will he do now

 

[heliosfa]

Sorry to bring this up again, but I don't think it was answered and I don't want to be putting anything in my complaints that is completely wrong!

In the inverter installation manual, it states that an "MCB with rated fault current of 30 mA≤Ifn≤300 mA should be installed between inverter and grid."

Does this mean an RCD/RCBO/ To my untrained mind it does as normal breakers don't have a fault current rated in mA...

 

[MCS Renewables]

Page 16 of the installation manual does require 30mA protection.
So you need an RCBO or RCD in this circuit.

Perhaps you you should start listing what is right with your installation !

 

[heliosfa]

Perhaps you you should start listing what is right with your installation !

The brand of the panels? not saying I have the right model as I didn't get a chance to check in that much detail...

 

[heliosfa]

Right, the complaints have been made and the report forwarded to the installer. Lets see what happens next...

 

[marc8]

Hi Heliosfa

looks like you may want to think about downloading Guide to PV on the MCS website this is free & will take you through the whole system from there i would say you have everything you need.
including RCD protection for system ECT.

hope it helps, i down loaded & printed just the other day 121 pages but worth the read.

 

[heliosfa]

looks like you may want to think about downloading Guide to PV on the MCS website this is free & will take you through the whole system from there i would say you have everything you need.

Thanks Marc - the MCS installation guide was very useful in preparing the complaint that was submitted.

 

[heliosfa]

Just to give a quick update: I have just had a NAPIT inspection where an "Independent Assessor" chosen by the company also attended. I wont go into too much detail at the moment but both agree that there are some significant issues that need resolving and it has been suggested that the system is left isolated till then.

I will give more updates as I get them.

 

[Earthstore]

Thank you for the update, I would believe that some will be interested in how you get this resolved and it may well help others in the future too.

 

[MCS Renewables]

And well done to NAPIT as well for getting an assessor/engineer to site to conduct an installation inspection .

I for one have been very critical of the MCS registration bodies and REAL so it's good to hear that at least NAPIT responds to customer complaints.

 

[dansk]

I had my NAPIT CPS audit yesterday and he told me reliably NAPIT are clamping down internally and with regards to complaints etc, so it seems to be starting.

 

[heliosfa]

OK, So I have just had a call from an electrician from the Company who wants to attend next week to "handle" the electrical issues:

• He will change the DC Isolator as a courtesy, as apparently the AC isolator they use is rated for 1000V.
• He will uprate the 2.5mm AC cable drop to 4mm.

Apparently, he won't be securing the cables under the panels as this is not required by the MCS regs (and DC cables are not covered by the wiring regs - I think this assettion is wrong, can anyone confirm please?) and the cables are double insulated.

• No mention was made regarding the missing RCD.
• No mention was made re. DC cable entry.
• No mention was made regarding missing documentation.

NAPIT have not provided me with a copy of the report, so I have no idea what is in it but what this guy was saying does not correspond to the issues pointed out by the NAPIT inspector and the company's own "independant assesor" who attended the inspection.

 

[MCS Renewables]

I would refuse to let them on site until you get a copy of the report from NAPIT.

I thought Project Solar we're going to totally remove your system and get it reinstalled properly !

 

[heliosfa]

I have emailed NAPIT asking for a copy again, I will call on Monday though.

as for rectification - you are correct, that was what was talked about with them and what their "independent assessor" said would happen.

ill get onto NAPIT tomorrow and see what is what.

just back to the cables under panels, any comments on them being outside the scope of building/wiring regs? The reason for not clipping them up is (apparently) it is very very difficult to do when attaching the panels.

 

[heliosfa]

OK, I have just received a copy of the findings from the NAPIT report and they broadly corespond to the issues that we identified here and that were in my report.

The differences:

• Report has identified that the tails to the PV DB are undersized and should be 25mm like rest of installation,
• The cable entry on the botom of the solar DB has been made too large and exceedes IP2X,
• Potentially missing a rotary AC isolator that can be locked off with a standard padlock (Depending on DNO),
• AC Cable unclipped in places in the loft,
• DC cables unsupported below inverter,
• Missing load, fixing and structural calculations,
• Company making reference to SAP calculations and old SAP disclaimer than than the new system,
• Inverter position in loft is probably appropriate as loft should be cooler with PV fitted,
• After inspection, weather sealing of brackets does not appear to be an issue.

The dangling DC cables have been picked up in the findings, so obviously should be corrected.

 

[pwboston]

The DC cables are unsupported below the inverter in the report. No mention of under the panels.

I doubt they will do anything with the ones under the panels.

 

[heliosfa]

The DC cables are unsupported below the inverter in the report. No mention of under the panels.

I don't think I was completely clear - the report from NAPIT mentions un-suppoirted DC cables below the inverter IN ADDITION to DC cables and connectors below the modules being unsupported. Report from NAPIT mentions BS 7671 522.8.4 and 522.8.5 as being the applicable sections of the wiring regs (despite being a member of the IET, I haven't shelled out on the wiring regs so I don't know what these points are).

I doubt they will do anything with the ones under the panels.

The report from NAPIT states that "..all identified issues must be rectified...", given that these are an identified issue, they must be rectified.

 

[pwboston]

Im going by your statement that they arent removing the system and refitting. To secure those cables means just that basically. They are going to have to scaffold and remove the panels etc.

 

[heliosfa]

Im going by your statement that they arent removing the system and refitting. To secure those cables means just that basically. They are going to have to scaffold and remove the panels etc.

Exactly, which is what they originally said they were going to do to fix this. I am just waiting to hear back from NAPIT on something and I will be contacting the company to discuss as all I have heard since the NAPIT visit is this contact with one of their maintenance electricians.

 

[heliosfa]

OK, more updates time - Two of their guys have been onsite since about 10am this morning and have just left for the evening. To their credit, these two were not rushing and were taking time and care with their work.

What they have done today:

• Replaced drop from loft with 4mm T&E, run in black conduit down outside of property and secured with cleats.
• Added dual-pole, rotary isolator between the "Solar DB" and the Generation Meter (The lack of this isolator was picked up by NAPIT as being a requirement of some DNOs who want a method of locking isolation with a standard padlock)
• Added all requisite labeling EXCEPT for the "Solar PV on Roof" warning required by the MCS Guidelines. This was not in the pack they had so they are going to try and get one for tomorrow.
• Replaced 2.5mm run from AC isolator in loft to inverter with 4mm flex.
• Replaced the single AC isolator used for DC with 2x isolators (I have not checked if these are DC or AC yet).
• Run DC cables down the wall in flexible conduit & secured with cleats as clips were not holding into wall.
• "fixed" the unused hole in the underlay with torch-on felt repair & sealant. They have done the same for the cable pass through the felt.
• Replaced the "Solar DB" cover as the cable entry hole in the bottom was too large.
• Actually carried out string & electrical testing.

Tomorrow they are going to secure the cables under the panels and check how the cable passes under the tiles I believe. My current concern is they have no scaf/ready-deck with them. The guy who was here today says he doesn't use them as they "give a false sense of safety", so it looks like they are intending to use ladders again... :S

 

[Ian-LS]

They are breaching health and safety regulations if they do this. Which can have a huge fine associated with it. It doesn't surprise me that they are cutting corners still.....

 

[Earthstore]

They are breaching health and safety regulations if they do this. Which can have a huge fine associated with it. It doesn't surprise me that they are cutting corners still.....

Added to this, which is of great importance, if you allow this and sombody gets hurt then you are jointly liable, something that I did not believe when I was informed until somebody showed me the legislation.

 

[heliosfa]

Added to this, which is of great importance, if you allow this and sombody gets hurt then you are jointly liable, something that I did not believe when I was informed until somebody showed me the legislation.

I was under that impression- have you got a link to/name of the relevant legislation? Just to give me something solid to stand on...

I am leaning towards telling them that they aren't going up and lifting panels off without the kit mentioned in the HSE guidance. In all honesty, I am surprised that they are letting this happen due to the fuss I made about the original team doing it.

I suppose the next step is working out how to say (diplomatically) that they aren't going up without harnesses, etc. without sounding like a wally. Any suggestions from anyone?

 

[Gavin A]

ladders and roof ladders could be ok if it were short duration work - ie if they can access the cables from the top and cable tie to the rail, which is possible - as would harnesses.

If they actually have to start lifting each panel to access the cables that would probably be the point where I'd think scaf would be needed.

You'll probably find they can access the cables from the top of the panels, and are basically using the top of the panels for support, which will maybe look more dangerous than it actually is.

There is also the issue with harnesses that they do create an additional trip hazard, and will be pretty awkward while working along the top of the panels, which is a valid concern, so personally if it were just retying the cables from the top, I'd probably opt for doing it without harnesses myself.

Hard to know for sure without actually assessing the job on site, but I'd not be so quick to judge on it tbh.

 

[Earthstore]

https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&r...=wsyYiLexF0LI_xVM3iKIJQ&bvm=bv.60157871,d.ZGU

Not sure if this will work
It does... 94 pages, page 8 states that you must make sure that the company you employ are competent....