Vertical installation might also help with hail damage mitigation. Anybody experienced with using vertical installation in regions where hail storms are more frequent?
Inbuild sand, dust and snow mitigation reduces maintenance. Improved temperature handling, avoiding water/icing damage and moss growth adds to expected system lifetime. ,@@paxundpeace9970
just install vertical panels where you would put up a fence. solar panel fences are going to be cheaper than good wood fences. may not be in the best location, but since they are doing the job of a fence the installation is basically free.
Yes, solar panel fences are a good option, but due to weather conditions like rain, snow, wind, etc., if they start getting tilted to the surface, that problem can reduce the lifespan of solar panels, cables etc.
Just complimenting the duck curve of horizontal panels to capture more energy during dawn and dusk should be enough to push the optimum arrangement of new PV towards more vertical in areas where horizontal is already well established.
more of a two hump camel output once in the morning and once in the afternoon. should also happen with vertical panels facing east to capture morning and west to capture afternoon sun.. no solar output during the noon time sun. sounds odd .. have seen where some are using the vertical panes to do fences rather than taking up roof tops
2.5% increase, based in The Netherlands research, is not HUGE. If you change the mounting of solar panels, the best increase in generation is to follow the sun mechanism, which is an estimated 40% increase. And the cost of those mechanisms is not really worth the investment, according to some other researchers.
Sometimes we need to choose what really serves the purpose of a solar energy generation system rather than blindly run after getting maximum energy generation output... Below are 2 scenarios with solar generation systems., The choice is yours :) A. Safe, Steady, Less maintenance, Compromised energy generation (Through parallel to surface horizontally installation setup)... This will hold true for vertical installation setups except for the compromised energy generation part, which is claimed higher in this video, which is great news!) B. Compromised safety, Unsteady, Higher/frequent maintenance, Highest energy generation (Through horizontally tilted to surface installation setup)
I wish it were true, but I tested a 400 watt Trina panel in the vertical position and at 45° to ground and found the angled position was actually producing more power. sigh
it would be interesting to see this tested more places arund the world i live in scandinavia and my thought was that i cant apply this research to where i live or to the equator a dude on youtube also tested this very well, if i remeber correct it was in ohio so that is pretty much the same as nl
Yeah, my system gets snow cover for sometimes weeks at a time here in Michigan, a time when I need the power the most. Bifacial vertical South facing installation is my next system, little chance of snow cover for long, and no hail damage.
There is a building on which the solar panels are vertical along the full height of the building. I noticed that other buildings were following suit soon after. They must have realized that they were more efficient and less maintenance costs. This must have improved their ROI. So instead of installing the panels on the roof, I may want to try placing them vertical in my yard. No need to worry about snow accumulation nor frequent cleaning nor bird droppings. As long as they get enough exposure to the sun, then I should see an improvement over the traditional methods.
More shadow makes more power. The snow don't build on 70 degree panels in winter. The panels run cooler more vertical. Roofs are hot. Sun is lower in winter so don't need to be horizontal. And the full moon effect. Ever notice full moon looks bigger at moon rise and moon set. A vertical panel catches same effect in the sun. Making it look bigger at sunrise and sunset. Which if you look at the power curves of vertical panels it matches such times. A lot of little things come together to make the power boost.
That is true. Horizontally fixed panels are less efficient for 2 reasons 1. They heat the surface below them which radiates back and 2. There is less air circulation under the panels.
This might be a better approach especially for Floating Photovoltaics installation in Germany, where panels are allowed to cover a maximum of 15% of the whole lake and at the same time maintain a 40m distance from the shore. With vertical installation, it means that it will still be possible to install panels in small lakes and also compared to horizontal more panels will be installed in a small area.I’m just worried about shading effect that comes with such installation.
shading would be posible to avoid, more or less, but some sort of vertical tracker rack would be needed for that
5 หลายเดือนก่อน +2
They are talking bifacial panels that can take advantage of reflected light and the bent light that passes through the materials of the light facing side.. I saw some experiments where they used clean white stones and 600 watt reflective panels that were angled to reflect light toward the vertical panels on both faces.. The energy collection was certainly superior to a single face panel but not as good as 2 single faced 300 watt panels oriented at an optimal angle to the Sun..
I am going to give vertical solar panel mounting a try. I currently have a 6' Privacy fence on the north side of my property that is never shaded by any trees. A rarity! I also have a 3' path of sun bleached sea shells along the base of the fence that reflect an unbelievable amount of light. I will be adding a wider path of shells for more sun reflection and I will also be experimenting with adding a white section of fence to reflect on the rear of the bi facial panels. I am looking at vertical mounted panels with a slight adjustable angle to adjust for seasonal solar angle and fine tune the reflection angle. Should be a great project with a lot of (Raspberry Pi) data to analyze for fine tuning and project modifications. Oh, and a lot of Central Florida sun!
2.5% more power from vertical bi-facial panels vs traditional layout, once you factor in lower cost of maintenance due to lower heat generation. video was clear... but 2.5 could be a rounding error to me... sides, vertical installs not practical on regular homes... more suited to open fields or roof of skyscrapers. maybe fencing
@@jeffjwatts Got any published reports to back your assertion? If the mounting poles are stout enough, I wouldn't think the panels themselves would be damaged by high winds.
More northern regions dont have the heat related issues and Solar performs much better in our cooler climate. Bifacial panels work very well for those dark winter periods when we are hoping for 2 solar hours a day. Chilled bifacial panels increase harvest when snow reflects light to the back of the panels. Here in South Central Alaska during the Winter Solstice, the ideal panel angle is 7 degrees of tilt. With our long summer days when the sun is high in the sky, we might use a 47 degree tilt.
Here in Michigan my roof panels are sometimes covered with snow for weeks at a time, a time when I need the power the most. Vertical wouldn't have this issue nearly as much, and if they are bifacial you have the added benefit behind them.
This is a USA problem. $2 per watt goes to the sales organization sourcing the customer. In Australia and France the market is more mature the cost of installation and components is $1.10 per watt.
white frp makes a great reflective uv proof base under bifacial solar panels . no paint completely weatherproof. I am going to use it on my container roof with tilting panels
I have vertical mount, snow and dirt never sticks rains washes almost all dirt. I can make a 3.6kw array out of 2x4 ,36 of them, only 3 pcs have to be cut and screw together, and you can mount huge panels solo. My 2.8 array makes 780w full overcast. In winter with sun and snow the 2.8 makes 3.5kw, in summer 2.8 makes 1.8kw with no reflective, eg. white rock, but I still generate 2x what I could use per day. South facing, east west is a waste. The albedo gains plus south sun works best for me. Like most of the commenters figured out, how many vertical windows have you seen damaged in a hailstorm? The part of risky costly install of vertical does not apply in my yard.
I suspect bifacial vertically mounted solar panels will show up MOSTLY as solar fencing along highways, private property lines, etc. There's PLENTY of unused land where these would make sense. If you combined vertically mounted solar fencing WITH solar roofs even the hottest desert property could have both shade and huge solar power output potential... I don't think we're likely to see TALL walls of solar like is speculated on in the end of the video... Structurally and economically it would make little sense I suspect...But anything under 6' to 8' which is a standard height? Not only plausible but likely...
I wonder if you were to cover the ground with a white heavy plastic level, of course 20‘ x 40‘ and put vertical solar panels on it would you get more because white is UV reflective?
why not compare to laying flat. see if it is actually better in your situation. I bought a single 100 watt panel some 8-10 years ago. I found it produced such little power, it will never pay for itself. today the cost is half what it was back then, so it might be worth trying with another single new panel and see what the real world results look like.
I could not agree more. I have power stations because I rent. I physically move my panels throughout the day. In summer here in Fl. I put my panels vertical b/w the hours of 4 pm to 8 pm and 7 am to 11 am. I get more production in those hours because its longer times and panels are much cooler.
That is a very bold claim that is trivially simple to validate with an equally trivial "empirical" study. Place two arrays side-by-side and measure wattage from each. Nothing wrong with vertical PV panels, if the owner can justify them, rather than the taxpayer, but as Richard Feynman might say: it doesn't matter what you wish your study says...
I did this same test with one Jinko 400 watt panel, I measured the Voltage and Amps in the exact vertical position, but I found that I got about 3 Amps more if I tilted the panels back toward the ground surface - about 45° (I live at Latitude -27°). I would love if this vertical mounting were true, but is it only true for bifacial panels.
If the panels are mounted at the proper angle in reference to the sun and not just "on a roof" and there is plenty of ventilation space behind the panels, then no. I don't agree. Each installation has it's own issues. Wind load would be a very big factor for vertical installations.
@@gareon54 like any mounting just depends upon how one mounts them landscape or portrait and how they are fastened to the ground .. Being a sailor for a very long time I can tell you wind is a lot more powerful than most folks realize
Totally wrong concept, for the experiment take a single panel and put an ammeter on it while changing the angle to the sun's rays, when the sun falls perfectly perpendicular you have the highest efficiency/current/amperage.
But your suggestion will only give the "best result" at that time, on that one day of the year, NOT the whole day with the sun at vastly different angles let alone the different azimuth angles in different seasons. The only way is to compare the two systems over a whole year. Vertical mount has less dust and snow accumulation and also runs much cooler (= higher efficiency). Pus will survive hail.
Vertical installation might also help with hail damage mitigation. Anybody experienced with using vertical installation in regions where hail storms are more frequent?
More important is probably that they allow effective east west orientation to allow peak Performance at the morning and evening.
Inbuild sand, dust and snow mitigation reduces maintenance.
Improved temperature handling, avoiding water/icing damage and moss growth adds to expected system lifetime. ,@@paxundpeace9970
just install vertical panels where you would put up a fence. solar panel fences are going to be cheaper than good wood fences. may not be in the best location, but since they are doing the job of a fence the installation is basically free.
Yes, solar panel fences are a good option, but due to weather conditions like rain, snow, wind, etc., if they start getting tilted to the surface, that problem can reduce the lifespan of solar panels, cables etc.
Add digging a trench to run wires from however far the fence is to your batteries and controllers.
Any recommendations for solar panel clips that would work with posts for a chain link fence?
Just complimenting the duck curve of horizontal panels to capture more energy during dawn and dusk should be enough to push the optimum arrangement of new PV towards more vertical in areas where horizontal is already well established.
the main drawback might be the windload: fine for fieldmounting, but not on roofs.
more of a two hump camel output once in the morning and once in the afternoon. should also happen with vertical panels facing east to capture morning and west to capture afternoon sun.. no solar output during the noon time sun. sounds odd .. have seen where some are using the vertical panes to do fences rather than taking up roof tops
The major undoing of bifacial is low production at the peak in fixed position.
i would love to see what a vertical tracker rack could add to all this
2.5% increase, based in The Netherlands research, is not HUGE. If you change the mounting of solar panels, the best increase in generation is to follow the sun mechanism, which is an estimated 40% increase. And the cost of those mechanisms is not really worth the investment, according to some other researchers.
Sometimes we need to choose what really serves the purpose of a solar energy generation system rather than blindly run after getting maximum energy generation output... Below are 2 scenarios with solar generation systems., The choice is yours :)
A. Safe, Steady, Less maintenance, Compromised energy generation (Through parallel to surface horizontally installation setup)... This will hold true for vertical installation setups except for the compromised energy generation part, which is claimed higher in this video, which is great news!)
B. Compromised safety, Unsteady, Higher/frequent maintenance, Highest energy generation (Through horizontally tilted to surface installation setup)
I wish it were true, but I tested a 400 watt Trina panel in the vertical position and at 45° to ground and found the angled position was actually producing more power. sigh
You are right
True
It is for short time. You have to calculate for long time. Like 3 month or 6 month
@@SERGIO-cr6uy Within minutes of each test, same sun irradiance. I think vertical panel orientation is more relevant for Bi-Facial panels...
Is your panels bifacial?
Thanks
Latitude of Netherlands is 50-54 N. So being vertical there means the panels are at an angle of approximately 52 degrees to the Sun.
it would be interesting to see this tested more places arund the world
i live in scandinavia and my thought was that i cant apply this research to where i live or to the equator
a dude on youtube also tested this very well, if i remeber correct it was in ohio so that is pretty much the same as nl
Yeah, my system gets snow cover for sometimes weeks at a time here in Michigan, a time when I need the power the most. Bifacial vertical South facing installation is my next system, little chance of snow cover for long, and no hail damage.
There is a building on which the solar panels are vertical along the full height of the building. I noticed that other buildings were following suit soon after. They must have realized that they were more efficient and less maintenance costs. This must have improved their ROI. So instead of installing the panels on the roof, I may want to try placing them vertical in my yard. No need to worry about snow accumulation nor frequent cleaning nor bird droppings. As long as they get enough exposure to the sun, then I should see an improvement over the traditional methods.
More shadow makes more power. The snow don't build on 70 degree panels in winter. The panels run cooler more vertical. Roofs are hot. Sun is lower in winter so don't need to be horizontal. And the full moon effect. Ever notice full moon looks bigger at moon rise and moon set. A vertical panel catches same effect in the sun. Making it look bigger at sunrise and sunset. Which if you look at the power curves of vertical panels it matches such times. A lot of little things come together to make the power boost.
That is true. Horizontally fixed panels are less efficient for 2 reasons 1. They heat the surface below them which radiates back and 2. There is less air circulation under the panels.
This might be a better approach especially for Floating Photovoltaics installation in Germany, where panels are allowed to cover a maximum of 15% of the whole lake and at the same time maintain a 40m distance from the shore. With vertical installation, it means that it will still be possible to install panels in small lakes and also compared to horizontal more panels will be installed in a small area.I’m just worried about shading effect that comes with such installation.
Shading is not a concern, Reflection off the water will void any shade from modules.
shading would be posible to avoid, more or less, but some sort of vertical tracker rack would be needed for that
They are talking bifacial panels that can take advantage of reflected light and the bent light that passes through the materials of the light facing side.. I saw some experiments where they used clean white stones and 600 watt reflective panels that were angled to reflect light toward the vertical panels on both faces.. The energy collection was certainly superior to a single face panel but not as good as 2 single faced 300 watt panels oriented at an optimal angle to the Sun..
I am going to give vertical solar panel mounting a try. I currently have a 6' Privacy fence on the north side of my property that is never shaded by any trees. A rarity! I also have a 3' path of sun bleached sea shells along the base of the fence that reflect an unbelievable amount of light. I will be adding a wider path of shells for more sun reflection and I will also be experimenting with adding a white section of fence to reflect on the rear of the bi facial panels. I am looking at vertical mounted panels with a slight adjustable angle to adjust for seasonal solar angle and fine tune the reflection angle. Should be a great project with a lot of (Raspberry Pi) data to analyze for fine tuning and project modifications. Oh, and a lot of Central Florida sun!
I miss the days when people were told the truth and not bamboozled by presentation that don’t give out complete information.
Thanks for your feedback
2.5% more power from vertical bi-facial panels vs traditional layout, once you factor in lower cost of maintenance due to lower heat generation. video was clear... but 2.5 could be a rounding error to me... sides, vertical installs not practical on regular homes... more suited to open fields or roof of skyscrapers. maybe fencing
2.5% annual gain? Worth the price for a small solar array?
High wind speeds should also be considered
Vertical panels would take more damage during high wind conditions.
@@jeffjwatts Got any published reports to back your assertion? If the mounting poles are stout enough, I wouldn't think the panels themselves would be damaged by high winds.
More northern regions dont have the heat related issues and Solar performs much better in our cooler climate.
Bifacial panels work very well for those dark winter periods when we are hoping for 2 solar hours a day. Chilled bifacial panels increase harvest when snow reflects light to the back of the panels.
Here in South Central Alaska during the Winter Solstice, the ideal panel angle is 7 degrees of tilt. With our long summer days when the sun is high in the sky, we might use a 47 degree tilt.
Here in Michigan my roof panels are sometimes covered with snow for weeks at a time, a time when I need the power the most. Vertical wouldn't have this issue nearly as much, and if they are bifacial you have the added benefit behind them.
Installers are charging too much to install PV panels. They are pricing themselves out of business. Greed never wins.
This is a USA problem. $2 per watt goes to the sales organization sourcing the customer. In Australia and France the market is more mature the cost of installation and components is $1.10 per watt.
I charge 2.25 a watt
Educate yourself and do your own installation.
It takes effort, but it's worth learning and then you can do it for future homes as well
@@s.lionelmcauley4455What is per Watt costing of Soalr in Australia including cost of panels+Installation ?
white frp makes a great reflective uv proof base under bifacial solar panels . no paint completely weatherproof. I am going to use it on my container roof with tilting panels
Are you comparing with HORIZONTAL or INCLINED panels?
I have vertical mount, snow and dirt never sticks rains washes almost all dirt. I can make a 3.6kw array out of 2x4 ,36 of them, only 3 pcs have to be cut and screw together, and you can mount huge panels solo. My 2.8 array makes 780w full overcast. In winter with sun and snow the 2.8 makes 3.5kw, in summer 2.8 makes 1.8kw with no reflective, eg. white rock, but I still generate 2x what I could use per day. South facing, east west is a waste. The albedo gains plus south sun works best for me. Like most of the commenters figured out, how many vertical windows have you seen damaged in a hailstorm? The part of risky costly install of vertical does not apply in my yard.
This is outstandingly excellent and cool. It
I suspect bifacial vertically mounted solar panels will show up MOSTLY as solar fencing along highways, private property lines, etc. There's PLENTY of unused land where these would make sense. If you combined vertically mounted solar fencing WITH solar roofs even the hottest desert property could have both shade and huge solar power output potential... I don't think we're likely to see TALL walls of solar like is speculated on in the end of the video... Structurally and economically it would make little sense I suspect...But anything under 6' to 8' which is a standard height? Not only plausible but likely...
It was amazing video. In the whole video we did not see any actual vertical installations even for testing purpose 😂
As Panel prices drop then double sided vertical panels installed E/W could be a real help in peak hours!!
I wonder if you were to cover the ground with a white heavy plastic level, of course 20‘ x 40‘ and put vertical solar panels on it would you get more because white is UV reflective?
The 2.5% advantage doesn't seem like much. Is this for fixed position operation, or for tracking operation?
They are not tracking . Tracked monofacocial in east west arrangements can yield much more.
Does this only apply to Bi-facial panels. What about normal one sided solar panels???
bi-facial only... so when sun passes over head... the other side catches the light.
I am experimenting with pv plates at my house and all the pv plates i have installed so far are vertically fixed.
would love to see pictures of your installation
why not compare to laying flat. see if it is actually better in your situation. I bought a single 100 watt panel some 8-10 years ago. I found it produced such little power, it will never pay for itself. today the cost is half what it was back then, so it might be worth trying with another single new panel and see what the real world results look like.
The importance of. Vertical installation is that produces less during peak hours but more earlier and late afternoon.
Trcking monofacoal panels mounted east _west gives more power than fixed bifacial panels. Giving more power throughout
@@sethsipakati6818 that is correct in Dominican Republic a lot of people are placing it that way
I could not agree more. I have power stations because I rent. I physically move my panels throughout the day. In summer here in Fl. I put my panels vertical b/w the hours of 4 pm to 8 pm and 7 am to 11 am. I get more production in those hours because its longer times and panels are much cooler.
with a solar tracker you can change that
we just need solar trackers for vertical systems
Solar tracker are more expensive than just more panels, having more panel help in cloudy days.
I wonder if the ground was white would it reflect more and stay cooler.
as the sun orientation moves, there's less and less irradiance on the vertical panels, so this is simply wrong.
The comparison and angles precision of Wind Force in different locations, would have to be thorough. Sounds Good though, Thank you for the Video
Verticle Solar Mounting, is less vulnerable to hail stones, or not vulnerable at all.
This is not true for countries on the border of equator
As a electrical engineer For 40 years this makes absolute sense to me
Vertical mounts is 1000% cheaper than a top of pole mount so in snow country this is bigger than 2.5% because of the savings on mounting them
That is a very bold claim that is trivially simple to validate with an equally trivial "empirical" study. Place two arrays side-by-side and measure wattage from each.
Nothing wrong with vertical PV panels, if the owner can justify them, rather than the taxpayer, but as Richard Feynman might say: it doesn't matter what you wish your study says...
I did this same test with one Jinko 400 watt panel, I measured the Voltage and Amps in the exact vertical position, but I found that I got about 3 Amps more if I tilted the panels back toward the ground surface - about 45° (I live at Latitude -27°). I would love if this vertical mounting were true, but is it only true for bifacial panels.
If horizontal pv panels had liquid cooling tubes on the back, they could be cooled and still receive greater irradiance.
Do you agree with the researchers to change all solar panels to be vertical?
no leave the panels that are installed alone.. only new installations as space permits.
No the infrastructure required for forces such as high winds negates any gains.
If the panels are mounted at the proper angle in reference to the sun and not just "on a roof" and there is plenty of ventilation space behind the panels, then no. I don't agree. Each installation has it's own issues. Wind load would be a very big factor for vertical installations.
@@gareon54 like any mounting just depends upon how one mounts them landscape or portrait and how they are fastened to the ground .. Being a sailor for a very long time I can tell you wind is a lot more powerful than most folks realize
Which researches? Can you post a link to a research? You could have made this all up.
hope more research in this topic
Totally wrong concept, for the experiment take a single panel and put an ammeter on it while changing the angle to the sun's rays, when the sun falls perfectly perpendicular you have the highest efficiency/current/amperage.
But your suggestion will only give the "best result" at that time, on that one day of the year, NOT the whole day with the sun at vastly different angles let alone the different azimuth angles in different seasons.
The only way is to compare the two systems over a whole year. Vertical mount has less dust and snow accumulation and also runs much cooler (= higher efficiency). Pus will survive hail.
heat.
Om going vertical with my new jackery 500×2 .if I ever get my jackery 5000 I ordered over a month ago grrrrrr
My 200 watt panels produce best at 45 degree vertically.
I will try 90 degree angel tomorrow, and see the numbers
Misleading title too much hue ad cry for mere 2.5% still useless for rooftops as hailstorm will rip apart sopar panels
Taking too long to get to the point. I give up
Sorry for that. The video is devided in many chapters, so you may go directly to your interested part.
you cant go comparing bifacials with normal systems.. bait bait
soon we will no longer have single sided, everything will be bifacial. they work better everywhere you would put single sided panels.
@@scottmcshannon6821 Not where most people put them - on roofs.
I don't agree.