Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar]

Thanks Sky! 

I can think of a few other uses in a fire if I needed
something less destructive than a common fire extinguisher. Please let us
know if you hear more and costing info.   
Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
"we
go where powerlines don't"
http://members.sti.net/offgridsolar/ [1]
e-mail
offgridso...@sti.net [2]
text 209 813 0060

On Wed, 10 Feb 2021 14:59:00
-0500, Sky Sims  wrote:   I don't see any indications that MLSD is making
solar safer. It's increasing system cost and maintenance expense but the
safety benefits haven't revealed themselves to me yet. Adding all the extra
components increases the risk of failure in the system and increases the
time our technicians have to spend on the roof. This extra time on the roof
reduces overall safety for the installers. Also as per lussers' law, the
system is only as reliable as the least reliable component times the
reliability of all the other components in the system. By doubling the
number of connections with MLSD we're increasing the likelyhood of system
failure and exposing ourselves to a potential for increased downtime and
lower productivity, this means a technician may have to spend more time on
the roof dealing with maintenance issues and less time bringing more
production online. Additionally, any potential safety benefit from MLSD
hinges on the product performing properly, and if that product fails (which
we see regularly) then it could create a false sense of safety for the
people and firefighters that makes them less safe than they would be if the
MLSD was not present at all. 
With that said, I recently became aware of a
product called PVSTOP that looks like it may be a real solution to the
concerns for firefighter safety in the event of a fire, that actually
guarantees the panels are de-energized. Apparently it's been used in
australia for some time now. It's fairly inexpensive and the cost will
likely come down further as they continue to achieve economies of scale.
https://www.pv-stop.com/ [3]   Your thoughts are appreciated, Sky Sims
https://EcologicalSystems.org [4] 732-462-3858 f)732-462-3962 "Just an old
wrench" 
  On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:55 AM jay  wrote:  HI Andrew,   I've
been pondering your comments, and I hope you can elaborate on why you don't
think MLPE has anything to do with firefighter safety?  And I guess I lump
into the firefighter safety, homeowner safety as well.As to the code
meeting. I have it on pretty good info that a very senior member of the the
NEC was pushing MLPE. It is true that the string inverter OEM's pushed back
hard and that is why for the first time(?) a code rule had a 2 year delay
in implantation of the NEC 2017.   Thanks   jay   peltz power   

  On Feb
4, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Solar Energy Solutions  wrote: 
  Dear All,  
I apologize for letting this conversation get a little stale before being
able to comment further.   Before I reply, I would like to say I don't
believe MLSD has anything to do with firefighter safety. If being on
dangerous roofs was really a concern, steep roofs, slate roofs, metal roof,
wet metal or shake roofs and snow on roofs would get the same kind of
scrutiny as solar on roofs. I can only guess and think that some HUGE solar
hating utility company devised this whole firefighter safety thing. It is
also my understanding none of the string inverter folk turned up to the
code development meetings where MLSD was determined and you can guess who
was. But much of this is only rumor and the dark thoughts of a solar bozo. 
I HATE the hassle and maintenance issues of MLSD. I loved string inverters
and hated to see them go. So far as I can tell the US is the only place on
planet Earth to make String inverters all but illegal. This said... a
picture is worth a thousand words. All of the attached photos of systems
had the wire management done very well. If you look at the metal roof photo
you can see a small hole in it from the arc. I have many more photos of
different squirrel damaged systems. Ground Fault protection has saved the
inverters, but not the roofs.   I don't really like the idea of squirrel
guards. It seems like I may be creating another problem down the road that
I can't really imagine. Debris build up could be an issue. Rainwater could
back up from a damn and get under shingles and into the cavity of the
house. For me the easiest thing that could be done is for some kind of a
bittering agent to be part of the wires so that one little lick would send
a critter looking for a better food source.Your Friendly Neighborhood
Solar Man, https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0
[7] Fire 2.JPG [8]

FIRE 2.JPG

 Shared with Dropbox 

   
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0 [9]Fire
3.JPG [10]

FIRE 3.JPG

 Shared with Dropbox 

Fire 4.JPG [11]   


FIRE 4.JPG

 Shared with Dropbox 

Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg
[12]

FIRE 5 VOLTAIR THE CULPRIT.JPG

 Shared with Dropbox 

  Metal
Roof Squirrel 

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Sky Sims]

I don't see any indications that MLSD is making solar safer. It's
increasing system cost and maintenance expense but the safety benefits
haven't revealed themselves to me yet. Adding all the extra components
increases the risk of failure in the system and increases the time our
technicians have to spend on the roof. This extra time on the roof reduces
overall safety for the installers. Also as per lussers' law, the system is
only as reliable as the least reliable component times the reliability of
all the other components in the system. By doubling the number of
connections with MLSD we're increasing the likelyhood of system failure and
exposing ourselves to a potential for increased downtime and lower
productivity, this means a technician may have to spend more time on the
roof dealing with maintenance issues and less time bringing more production
online. Additionally, any potential safety benefit from MLSD hinges on the
product performing properly, and if that product fails (which we see
regularly) then it could create a false sense of safety for the people and
firefighters that makes them less safe than they would be if the MLSD was
not present at all.
With that said, I recently became aware of a product called PVSTOP that
looks like it may be a real solution to the concerns for firefighter safety
in the event of a fire, that actually guarantees the panels are
de-energized. Apparently it's been used in australia for some time now.
It's fairly inexpensive and the cost will likely come down further as they
continue to achieve economies of scale. https://www.pv-stop.com/

Your thoughts are appreciated,
Sky Sims
https://EcologicalSystems.org 
732-462-3858  f)732-462-3962
"Just an old wrench"

On Fri, Feb 5, 2021 at 11:55 AM jay  wrote:

> HI Andrew,
>
> I’ve been pondering your comments, and I hope you can elaborate on why you
> don’t think MLPE has anything to do with firefighter safety?
> And I guess I lump into the firefighter safety, homeowner safety as well.
>
> As to the code meeting.  I have it on pretty good info that a very senior
> member of the the NEC was pushing MLPE.  It is true that the string
> inverter OEM’s pushed back hard and that is why for the first time(?) a
> code rule had a 2 year delay in implantation of the NEC 2017.
>
> Thanks
>
> jay
>
> peltz power
>
>
>
> On Feb 4, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Solar Energy Solutions <
> solarenergysoluti...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> I apologize for letting this conversation get a little stale before being
> able to comment further.
>
> Before I reply, I would like to say I don't believe MLSD has anything to
> do with firefighter safety.  If being on dangerous roofs was really a
> concern, steep roofs, slate roofs, metal roof, wet metal or shake roofs and
> snow on roofs would get the same kind of scrutiny as solar on roofs.  I can
> only guess and think that some HUGE solar hating utility company devised
> this whole firefighter safety thing.  It is also my understanding none of
> the string inverter folk turned up to the code development meetings where
> MLSD was determined and you can guess who was.But much of this is only
> rumor and the dark thoughts of a solar bozo.
>
> I HATE the hassle and maintenance issues of MLSD.  I loved string
> inverters and hated to see them go.  So far as I can tell the US is the
> only place on planet Earth to make String inverters all but illegal.  This
> said... a picture is worth a thousand words.  All of the attached photos of
> systems had the wire management done very well.  If you look at the metal
> roof photo you can see a small hole in it from the arc.  I have many more
> photos of different squirrel damaged systems.  Ground Fault protection has
> saved the inverters, but not the roofs.
>
> I don't really like the idea of squirrel guards.  It seems like I may be
> creating another problem down the road that I can't really imagine.  Debris
> build up could be an issue.  Rainwater could back up from a damn and get
> under shingles and into the cavity of the house.  For me the easiest thing
> that could be done is for some kind of a bittering agent to be part of the
> wires so that one little lick would send a critter looking for a better
> food source.
>
> Your Friendly Neighborhood Solar Man,
>
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0
> Fire 2.JPG 
>
> Fire 2.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0
> Fire 3.JPG 
>
> Fire 3.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> Fire 4.JPG 
>
> Fire 4.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
> 
> Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[SES]

Dear Wiliam and all,

I am a strong proponent for MLSD.

Smiles,

Andrew Koyaanisqatsi
President
Solar Energy Solutions, Inc.
The BRIGHT CHOICE
Since 1987, helping you and your Portland neighbors
move towards an environmentally sustainable future.
503-238-4502
www.SolarEnergyOregon.com

On Feb 6, 2021, at 8:38 PM, William Miller  wrote:

> Dear Friendly Neighborhood Solar Man:
>  
> I read this email below several times and looked carefully through all of the 
> photographs.  I could not let this message go without comment.  See below:
>  
> The pictures make exactly the case you are arguing against.  Extinguishing 
> this fire in the daytime without MLSD would be much more dangerous than with 
> MLSD. 
>  
> Your logic that you don’t like squirrel guards also makes no sense because 
> squirrel guards, if installed properly, would have prevented this event 
> absolutely. 
>  
> Furthermore, I don’t accept the argument that roofs can be dangerous so let’s 
> not bother doing anything to try and make them a bit less dangerous.
>  
> What also makes no sense is the adoption of MLSD requirements is some kind of 
> conspiracy.  You offer that as a rumor without any evidence to the contrary.  
> Letting that go without comment serves to infer that some of us on this forum 
> might agree with the assertion.  That is how conspiracy theories thrive.  I 
> need facts, not conjecture.  I imagine others here might agree.
>  
> Seatbelts are a hassle.  Fall protection harnesses are a hassle.  Safety 
> procedures in general are a hassle.  That is no reason to blow them off.  I 
> try to adapt and get proficient at the procedures so they are a bit less of a 
> hassle and then enjoy the reduction in workplace hazards that those 
> procedures provide.
>  
> All in all, the entire logic you present makes no sense.  No disrespect 
> intended.
>  
> Most Sincerely,
>  
> William Miller
>  
> Miller Solar
> 17395 Oak Road, Atascadero, CA 93422
> 805-438-5600
> www.millersolar.com
> CA Lic. 773985
>  
>  
> From: RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-boun...@lists.re-wrenches.org] On 
> Behalf Of Solar Energy Solutions
> Sent: Thursday, February 4, 2021 11:49 AM
> To: re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
> Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown
>  
> Dear All,
>  
> I apologize for letting this conversation get a little stale before being 
> able to comment further.
>  
> Before I reply, I would like to say I don't believe MLSD has anything to do 
> with firefighter safety.  If being on dangerous roofs was really a concern, 
> steep roofs, slate roofs, metal roof, wet metal or shake roofs and snow on 
> roofs would get the same kind of scrutiny as solar on roofs.  I can only 
> guess and think that some HUGE solar hating utility company devised this 
> whole firefighter safety thing.  It is also my understanding none of the 
> string inverter folk turned up to the code development meetings where MLSD 
> was determined and you can guess who was.But much of this is only rumor 
> and the dark thoughts of a solar bozo.
>  
> I HATE the hassle and maintenance issues of MLSD.  I loved string inverters 
> and hated to see them go.  So far as I can tell the US is the only place on 
> planet Earth to make String inverters all but illegal.  This said... a 
> picture is worth a thousand words.  All of the attached photos of systems had 
> the wire management done very well.  If you look at the metal roof photo you 
> can see a small hole in it from the arc.  I have many more photos of 
> different squirrel damaged systems.  Ground Fault protection has saved the 
> inverters, but not the roofs.
>  
> I don't really like the idea of squirrel guards.  It seems like I may be 
> creating another problem down the road that I can't really imagine.  Debris 
> build up could be an issue.  Rainwater could back up from a damn and get 
> under shingles and into the cavity of the house.  For me the easiest thing 
> that could be done is for some kind of a bittering agent to be part of the 
> wires so that one little lick would send a critter looking for a better food 
> source.
>  
> Your Friendly Neighborhood Solar Man,
>  
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0
> Fire 2.JPG
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Fire 2.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0
> Fire 3.JPG
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Fire 3.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
> Fire 4.JPG
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Fire 4.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
> Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg
> Shared with Dropbox
> Metal Roof Squirrel damage.J

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[jay]

HI Andrew,

I’ve been pondering your comments, and I hope you can elaborate on why you 
don’t think MLPE has anything to do with firefighter safety?  
And I guess I lump into the firefighter safety, homeowner safety as well.  

As to the code meeting.  I have it on pretty good info that a very senior 
member of the the NEC was pushing MLPE.  It is true that the string inverter 
OEM’s pushed back hard and that is why for the first time(?) a code rule had a 
2 year delay in implantation of the NEC 2017.

Thanks

jay

peltz power



> On Feb 4, 2021, at 12:49 PM, Solar Energy Solutions 
>  wrote:
> 
> Dear All,
> 
> I apologize for letting this conversation get a little stale before being 
> able to comment further.
> 
> Before I reply, I would like to say I don't believe MLSD has anything to do 
> with firefighter safety.  If being on dangerous roofs was really a concern, 
> steep roofs, slate roofs, metal roof, wet metal or shake roofs and snow on 
> roofs would get the same kind of scrutiny as solar on roofs.  I can only 
> guess and think that some HUGE solar hating utility company devised this 
> whole firefighter safety thing.  It is also my understanding none of the 
> string inverter folk turned up to the code development meetings where MLSD 
> was determined and you can guess who was.But much of this is only rumor 
> and the dark thoughts of a solar bozo.
> 
> I HATE the hassle and maintenance issues of MLSD.  I loved string inverters 
> and hated to see them go.  So far as I can tell the US is the only place on 
> planet Earth to make String inverters all but illegal.  This said... a 
> picture is worth a thousand words.  All of the attached photos of systems had 
> the wire management done very well.  If you look at the metal roof photo you 
> can see a small hole in it from the arc.  I have many more photos of 
> different squirrel damaged systems.  Ground Fault protection has saved the 
> inverters, but not the roofs.
> 
> I don't really like the idea of squirrel guards.  It seems like I may be 
> creating another problem down the road that I can't really imagine.  Debris 
> build up could be an issue.  Rainwater could back up from a damn and get 
> under shingles and into the cavity of the house.  For me the easiest thing 
> that could be done is for some kind of a bittering agent to be part of the 
> wires so that one little lick would send a critter looking for a better food 
> source.
> 
> Your Friendly Neighborhood Solar Man,
> 
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0 
> 
> Fire 2.JPG 
> 
>   
> Fire 2.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
>  
> https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0 
> 
> Fire 3.JPG 
> 
>   
> Fire 3.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
>  
> Fire 4.JPG 
> 
>   
> Fire 4.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
>  
> Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg 
> 
> 
>   
> Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg
> Shared with Dropbox
>  
> 
> Metal Roof Squirrel damage.JPG 
> 
> 
>   
> Metal Roof Squirrel damage.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
>  
> 
> Shadow of scorched squirrel on metal roof.JPG 
> 
> 
>   
> Shadow of scorched squirrel on metal roof.JPG
> Shared with Dropbox
>  
> 
>  
> Andrew Koyaanisqatsi
> President
> Solar Energy Solutions, Inc.
> The BRIGHT CHOICE
> Since 1987, helping you and your Portland neighbors
> move towards an environmentally sustainable future.
> 503-238-4502
> www.SolarEnergyOregon.com 
> 
> 
> On Friday, January 29, 2021, 8:15:28 PM PST, Ray  wrote:
> 
> 
> I totally agree; where else does the NEC allow loose single conductor cables 
> to run unprotected? outdoors?  All because the module manus and industry in 
> general has made no effort, zero, to accommodate any type of electrical 
> industry standard K/Os for conduit, or TEK 90 (great stuff BTW).   If we 
> hadn't gone this wacky direction, starting about 15 years ago, we probably 
> wouldn't be having this 

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Solar Energy Solutions]

Dear All,
I apologize for letting this conversation get a little stale before being able 
to comment further.
Before I reply, I would like to say I don't believe MLSD has anything to do 
with firefighter safety.  If being on dangerous roofs was really a concern, 
steep roofs, slate roofs, metal roof, wet metal or shake roofs and snow on 
roofs would get the same kind of scrutiny as solar on roofs.  I can only guess 
and think that some HUGE solar hating utility company devised this whole 
firefighter safety thing.  It is also my understanding none of the string 
inverter folk turned up to the code development meetings where MLSD was 
determined and you can guess who was.    But much of this is only rumor and the 
dark thoughts of a solar bozo.

I HATE the hassle and maintenance issues of MLSD.  I loved string inverters and 
hated to see them go.  So far as I can tell the US is the only place on planet 
Earth to make String inverters all but illegal.  This said... a picture is 
worth a thousand words.  All of the attached photos of systems had the wire 
management done very well.  If you look at the metal roof photo you can see a 
small hole in it from the arc.  I have many more photos of different squirrel 
damaged systems.  Ground Fault protection has saved the inverters, but not the 
roofs.

I don't really like the idea of squirrel guards.  It seems like I may be 
creating another problem down the road that I can't really imagine.  Debris 
build up could be an issue.  Rainwater could back up from a damn and get under 
shingles and into the cavity of the house.  For me the easiest thing that could 
be done is for some kind of a bittering agent to be part of the wires so that 
one little lick would send a critter looking for a better food source.
Your Friendly Neighborhood Solar Man,
https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0Fire 2.JPG

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Fire 2.JPG

Shared with Dropbox
 |

 |

 |

https://www.dropbox.com/s/3g5c57nqke9x7b2/Fire%201.JPG?dl=0Fire 3.JPG

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Fire 3.JPG

Shared with Dropbox
 |

 |

 |

Fire 4.JPG

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Fire 4.JPG

Shared with Dropbox
 |

 |

 |

Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Fire 5 Voltair the culprit.jpg

Shared with Dropbox
 |

 |

 |

Metal Roof Squirrel damage.JPG

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Metal Roof Squirrel damage.JPG

Shared with Dropbox
 |

 |

 |

Shadow of scorched squirrel on metal roof.JPG

| 
| 
| 
|  |  |

 |

 |
| 
|  | 
Shadow of scorched squirrel on metal roof.JPG

Shared with Dropbox
 |

 |

 |


 Andrew KoyaanisqatsiPresidentSolar Energy Solutions, Inc.
The BRIGHT CHOICE
Since 1987, helping you and your Portland neighbors
move towards an environmentally sustainable future.503-238-4502
www.SolarEnergyOregon.com  

 On Friday, January 29, 2021, 8:15:28 PM PST, Ray  
wrote:  
 
  
I totally agree; where else does the NEC allow loose single conductor cables to 
run unprotected? outdoors?  All because the module manus and industry in 
general has made no effort, zero, to accommodate any type of electrical 
industry standard K/Os for conduit, or TEK 90 (great stuff BTW).   If we hadn't 
gone this wacky direction, starting about 15 years ago, we probably wouldn't be 
having this conversation, because there would be much less reason for MLSD. 
 
 
I could see whips of TEK 90 that plugged into polarized 2 pole quick connects 
mounted integrally to a J box on the back of each module. 
 
 

 Ray Walters
Remote Solar
303 505-8760 On 1/29/21 8:10 PM, Hilton Dier wrote:
  
 There’s a buried-in-plain-sight issue here that has bugged me for years. 

In the bad old days we had to hard wire into J-boxes on the backs of modules. A 
pain, but it meant that, if necessary, we could install conduit from the module 
to the combiner box. Now we have convenient pigtails.

 However, we are stuck with #10 PV wire hanging under the module from the box 
to the nearest attachment point. There are all sorts of trays and wire 
management systems, but there’s always that one loop of wire hanging in the 
open. 

I know that the module industry has near zero margins as a commodity market. 
Perhaps one manufacturer could differentiate themselves by making a module with 
either 1) armored pigtails, or 2) provision for some kind of conduit starting 
at the J box.

I’m thinking of all the various back covers installers have to improvise on 
ground mounts. I’m thinking of squirrels and ice dams. 

Why can’t there be a module with the equivalent of Teck 90 cable on it?

Maybe I’m just being naive. 

Hilton 

Hilton Dier III
Renewable Energy Design
Missisquoi River Hydro LLC
 
 ___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. 

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Kirpal]

Good day!
With regards to Outback and MLSD we have used without a problem the Fire
Raptor system.  We have done 3 installations so far.  It is very
time consuming to say the least with wire management being the key
culprit.  We also use SolarEdge frequently and have found the Fire Raptor
system to be significantly more time consuming (2-3x).  The installation is
straightforward and pretty easy to integrate with Outback Inverters and FM
100's. The Fire Raptor instal manual is close to useless.  Brad at AEE
provided us with a variety of really good and easy to follow wiring
diagrams which give flexibility depending on install preferences and
equipment used. We have had no troubles since installation at any of the
sites. I am happy to share the diarams - pm me if interested.
My thoughts regarding their offering is that they are significantly over
priced for what they provide.  The wiring provided is clumsy at best.
Plenty of room for refinement and improvement in their offerings - but it
does provide us with a way to meet code requirements and keep our
inspectors happy for our roof mounted solar connected to our Outback based
balance of system.
The MLSD requirements for off grid systems sure have done a good job of
making safety expensive!  It helps drive the arguement for gound/pole mount
systems  - which i prefer anyway!
 I welcome info about any other system that may be available.

Sunny Regards,
Kirpal Khalsa
Oregon LRT#25
Oregon Solarworks LLC
www.oregonsolarworks.com
541-299-0402


>
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown (Solar Energy Solutions)

[Connell Christopher]

Hello Andrew,

I find your opinion on needing Rapid Shutdown. Critters chewing on wires is the 
reason why they implemented article 690.11 of the NEC, arc fault detection. 

What does module level shut down do? Well mostly nothing, especially in energy 
storage systems. In standard grid-tie systems IF the inverter detects the arc, 
the inverter will shut down. Most Rapid shutdown solutions are PLC solutions, 
so the inverter trips off, and then the voltage gets reduced to less than 80v 
within the array boundary (rapid shutdown activated). 80v is still high enough 
for a sustainable arc to occur that can melt MC4s. 

If the same rapid shutdown topology is for an energy storage system, rapid 
shutdown won't occur (an inverter error keeps RSD active, due to Energy 
storage). So in reality the rapid shutdown devices doesn't do a thing. 


Sustainable regards,
Chris Connell




-Original Message-
From: RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-boun...@lists.re-wrenches.org] On Behalf 
Of re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org
Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 4:53 PM
To: re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
Subject: [GREY] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 14, Issue 28

Send RE-wrenches mailing list submissions to
re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/listinfo.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
re-wrenches-ow...@lists.re-wrenches.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: 
Contents of RE-wrenches digest..."


When responding to posts within the Digest, be sure to restore the Subject: 
line to the original, and please edit out any extraneous lines from the quoted 
message.
 

Today's Topics:

   1. MLSD module level shutdown (s...@ecologicalsystems.biz)
   2. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Solar Energy Solutions)
   3. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Kristopher Schmid)
   4. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (frenergy)
   5. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar)
   6. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Ray)
   7. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar)


--

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:09:48 -0500
From: s...@ecologicalsystems.biz
To: re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
Cc: Melissa Ann MacCarthy 
Subject: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown
Message-ID:

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8

So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to our 
industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation 
standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this requirement was 
rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact on the 
industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd installed 
by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to do with the 
quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due to premature 
failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This is a serious 
issue costing the industry time and resources and making our installers less 
safe. It just doesn?t really accomplish the intended goal of the requirement. 
I?m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently became 
aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a more sensible 
approach to this requirement. 

Your thoughts are appreciated,
Sky Sims
Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
?Just An Old Wrench?

--

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 19:56:08 + (UTC)
From: Solar Energy Solutions 
To: "re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org"

Cc: Melissa Ann MacCarthy 
Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown
Message-ID: <536449831.235766.1611950168...@mail.yahoo.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Dear All,
I have been an outspoken critic of module level shutdown for all the reasons 
folks do.? However, I have come around.? We have witnessed too many systems 
where rooftop wiring has been chewed up by critters... mostly squirrels.? We 
have seen everything from residential fires to holes in metal roofs caused by a 
DC arc.?? I never thought I would see the day when I would not only be thinking 
MLSD is a good idea but advocating for it.

Smiles,
?Andrew KoyaanisqatsiPresidentSolar Energy Solutions, Inc.
The BRIGHT CHOICE
Since 1987, helping you and your Portland neighbors move towards an 
environmentally sustainable future.503-238-4502 www.SolarEnergyOregon.com  

On Friday, January 29, 2021, 11:25:28 AM PST, s...@ecologicalsystems.biz 
 wrote:  
 
 So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to our 
industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation 

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[drake . chamberlin]

Is MLSD required in Europe or other parts of the world? What is their 
track record for safety?


---
On 2021-01-29 14:09, s...@ecologicalsystems.biz wrote:

So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to
our industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and
installation standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels
like this requirement was rolled out far too quickly without enough
forethought to its impact on the industry. We are constantly going out
and fixing problems with mlsd installed by other contractors.
Thankfully the problems have nothing to do with the quality of the
installations. The problems are almost all due to premature failure of
the products or some inherent defect in them. This is a serious issue
costing the industry time and resources and making our installers less
safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended goal of the
requirement.
I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently
became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a
more sensible approach to this requirement.

Your thoughts are appreciated,
Sky Sims
Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
“Just An Old Wrench”
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try 
the other:

https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown (Solar Energy Solutions)

[Chris Sparadeo]

Hi Chris,

Point taken. However, module level rapid shut down was also implemented for
the safety of first responders as well. So regardless of GT or ESS
configuration, when the rapid shut down device is initiated, the situation
is intrinsically safer for a first responder.

I’m not suggesting that there aren’t issues with current 690.12
requirements in regards to actual real life safety, however the RSD is in
theory something of value and does do a thing.

Kindly,

-Chris

On Sat, Jan 30, 2021 at 8:47 PM Connell Christopher <
connell.christop...@fronius.com> wrote:

> Hello Andrew,
>
> I find your opinion on needing Rapid Shutdown. Critters chewing on wires
> is the reason why they implemented article 690.11 of the NEC, arc fault
> detection.
>
> What does module level shut down do? Well mostly nothing, especially in
> energy storage systems. In standard grid-tie systems IF the inverter
> detects the arc, the inverter will shut down. Most Rapid shutdown solutions
> are PLC solutions, so the inverter trips off, and then the voltage gets
> reduced to less than 80v within the array boundary (rapid shutdown
> activated). 80v is still high enough for a sustainable arc to occur that
> can melt MC4s.
>
> If the same rapid shutdown topology is for an energy storage system, rapid
> shutdown won't occur (an inverter error keeps RSD active, due to Energy
> storage). So in reality the rapid shutdown devices doesn't do a thing.
>
>
> Sustainable regards,
> Chris Connell
>
>
>
>
> -Original Message-
> From: RE-wrenches [mailto:re-wrenches-boun...@lists.re-wrenches.org] On
> Behalf Of re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org
> Sent: Friday, January 29, 2021 4:53 PM
> To: re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
> Subject: [GREY] RE-wrenches Digest, Vol 14, Issue 28
>
> Send RE-wrenches mailing list submissions to
> re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/listinfo.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> re-wrenches-requ...@lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> re-wrenches-ow...@lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than
> "Re: Contents of RE-wrenches digest..."
>
>
> When responding to posts within the Digest, be sure to restore the
> Subject: line to the original, and please edit out any extraneous lines
> from the quoted message.
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>1. MLSD module level shutdown (s...@ecologicalsystems.biz)
>2. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Solar Energy Solutions)
>3. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Kristopher Schmid)
>4. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (frenergy)
>5. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar)
>6. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Ray)
>7. Re: MLSD module level shutdown (Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar)
>
>
> --------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:09:48 -0500
> From: s...@ecologicalsystems.biz
> To: re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
> Cc: Melissa Ann MacCarthy 
> Subject: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown
> Message-ID:
> 
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
>
> So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to our
> industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation
> standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this requirement
> was rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact on
> the industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd
> installed by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to do
> with the quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due to
> premature failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This is
> a serious issue costing the industry time and resources and making our
> installers less safe. It just doesn?t really accomplish the intended goal
> of the requirement.
> I?m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently
> became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a more
> sensible approach to this requirement.
>
> Your thoughts are appreciated,
> Sky Sims
> Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
> ?Just An Old Wrench?
>
> --
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2021 19:56:08 + (UTC)
> From: Solar Energy Solutions 
> To: "re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org"
> 
> Cc: Melissa Ann MacCarthy 
> Subject: Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module leve

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Ray]

I totally agree; where else does the NEC allow loose single conductor 
cables to run unprotected? outdoors?  All because the module manus and 
industry in general has made no effort, zero, to accommodate any type of 
electrical industry standard K/Os for conduit, or TEK 90 (great stuff 
BTW).   If we hadn't gone this wacky direction, starting about 15 years 
ago, we probably wouldn't be having this conversation, because there 
would be much less reason for MLSD.


I could see whips of TEK 90 that plugged into polarized 2 pole quick 
connects mounted integrally to a J box on the back of each module.


Teck 90 Armoured Power & Control Cable 600V CSA FT4 HL ...Llt M10 
Bayonet Lock Molding Waterproof Cable 2 Pole ...


Ray Walters
Remote Solar
303 505-8760

On 1/29/21 8:10 PM, Hilton Dier wrote:

There’s a buried-in-plain-sight issue here that has bugged me for years.

In the bad old days we had to hard wire into J-boxes on the backs of modules. A 
pain, but it meant that, if necessary, we could install conduit from the module 
to the combiner box. Now we have convenient pigtails.

  However, we are stuck with #10 PV wire hanging under the module from the box 
to the nearest attachment point. There are all sorts of trays and wire 
management systems, but there’s always that one loop of wire hanging in the 
open.

I know that the module industry has near zero margins as a commodity market. 
Perhaps one manufacturer could differentiate themselves by making a module with 
either 1) armored pigtails, or 2) provision for some kind of conduit starting 
at the J box.

I’m thinking of all the various back covers installers have to improvise on 
ground mounts. I’m thinking of squirrels and ice dams.

Why can’t there be a module with the equivalent of Teck 90 cable on it?

Maybe I’m just being naive.

Hilton

Hilton Dier III
Renewable Energy Design
Missisquoi River Hydro LLC
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

[RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Hilton Dier]

There’s a buried-in-plain-sight issue here that has bugged me for years. 

In the bad old days we had to hard wire into J-boxes on the backs of modules. A 
pain, but it meant that, if necessary, we could install conduit from the module 
to the combiner box. Now we have convenient pigtails.

 However, we are stuck with #10 PV wire hanging under the module from the box 
to the nearest attachment point. There are all sorts of trays and wire 
management systems, but there’s always that one loop of wire hanging in the 
open. 

I know that the module industry has near zero margins as a commodity market. 
Perhaps one manufacturer could differentiate themselves by making a module with 
either 1) armored pigtails, or 2) provision for some kind of conduit starting 
at the J box.

I’m thinking of all the various back covers installers have to improvise on 
ground mounts. I’m thinking of squirrels and ice dams. 

Why can’t there be a module with the equivalent of Teck 90 cable on it?

Maybe I’m just being naive. 

Hilton 

Hilton Dier III
Renewable Energy Design
Missisquoi River Hydro LLC
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Jay]

I agree with the MLPE concept. 
It is safer, period. There are no high voltage ground faults, series or 
parallel. 

Fire danger is significantly reduced from just a single module. 
The danger to firefighters is almost 0 with MLPE. Probably greater danger 
slipping on them than shock. 

But other advantages are as we go faster ( hopefully) with installs they have 
to be safer for less educated/trained  installers. People working on a roof 
long after it’s been installed. Etc. micros for example are totally plug and 
play. 
Sure us grey beards can do it, but this product ( solar) needs to be just like 
every other appliance. Easy, cheap, reliable and safe to replace/install .

The issue/hassle with fixing/replacing MLPE under a flush roof array is an 
issue with installation design.  If it’s designed to repair easily it becomes 
much faster. For example, installing jumpers so the MLPE are all along the edge 
for easy accessibility without removing modules. 

Better integration with how they are physically attached to racking would make 
this easier. I’m thinking 90 degree brackets vs top bolts. 


I agree they are too expensive and too many issues with communication, they 
seem to fail too often and all that. 
But  I’m still an advocate for them. 

Offgrid is a whole other ballgame. And that lack of reliability becomes a 
massive problem. 


But just my opinion 

Jay








> On Jan 29, 2021, at 3:29 PM, Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar 
>  wrote:
> 
> Hi Ben,
> 
> Dave had to go on a service call up into the high county. No cell ! I
> expect him back before dark. Probably will get back in the AM
> 
> Thanks, Ingrid
> 
> Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
> "we go where powerlines don't"
> http://members.sti.net/offgridsolar/
> e-mail offgridso...@sti.net
> text 209 813 0060
> 
>> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:32:30 -0800, Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
>>  wrote:
>> Hi Sly,
>> 
>> The small part of the industry ( Offgrid ) mostly uses ground mounting
>> and is not using MLSD. On some new offgrid homes I use rapid shutdown at
>> MPPT level to get the permit if the AHJ can't be reasoned with. The
>> Schneider rapid shutdown has a nice 600 vdc disconnect in it,  that is
>> useful later if the homeowner decides to abandon the extra electronics
> that
>> can affect reliability.
>> 
>> We also protect the area under and near the modules to guard against a 
>> rare defect from causing a wildfire.
>> 
>> I would like to hear what Outback is doing for this also from you guys
>> please?  FRIDAY !!!
>> 
>> 
>> Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
>> "we go where powerlines don't"
>> http://members.sti.net/offgridsolar/
>> e-mail offgridso...@sti.net
>> text 209 813 0060
>> 
>>> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:09:48 -0500, s...@ecologicalsystems.biz wrote:
>>> So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to
>> our
>>> industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation
>>> standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this
>> requirement
>>> was rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact
>> on
>>> the industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd
>>> installed by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to
>> do
>>> with the quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due
>> to
>>> premature failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This
>> is
>>> a serious issue costing the industry time and resources and making our
>>> installers less safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended
>> goal
>>> of the requirement. 
>>> I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently
>>> became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a
>> more
>>> sensible approach to this requirement. 
>>> 
>>> Your thoughts are appreciated,
>>> Sky Sims
>>> Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
>>> “Just An Old Wrench”
>>> ___
>>> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>>> 
>>> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> Change listserver email address & settings:
>>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try
>> the
>>> other:
>>> https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
>>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>>> 
>>> List rules & etiquette:
>>> http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>>> 
>>> Check out or update participant bios:
>>> http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
>> ___
>> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>> 
>> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> Change listserver email address & settings:
>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try
> the
>> other:
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
>> 

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Sky Sims]

Ray,
That's a great point it seems like people are really concerned about
squirrels and I simply don't understand how adding more components and more
potential points of failure helps to address a potential rodent attack, If
anything it seems like MLSD just increases the amount of risk of damage
from animals. Your suggestion of exempting systems from the MLSD
requirement if they implement a rodent guard of some sort seems like a
reasonable middle ground that the industry has a lot of experience with
already.

Sky Sims
https://EcologicalSystems.org 
732-462-3858  f)732-462-3962
"Just An Old Wrench"

On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 5:26 PM Ray  wrote:

> Yes, I would like more info too.  I'm all about safety, but it needs to be
> based on reality not theory.  For instance, would string level shut down
> have stopped the arcs you mentioned?  Also, I second the screening.  Even
> if MLSD stops the fire, the rodents have still won the day by taking out
> part of the array.  How about an exemption from MLSD for systems below a
> certain voltage, and having animal guard in place, and those would still
> have string level shut down.
>
> Ray Walters
> Remote Solar
> 303 505-8760
>
> On 1/29/21 3:58 PM, frenergy wrote:
>
> Andrew,
>
> If these are the only two examples of justification of MLSD
> and not knowing the details of the examples you've cited, I suggest there
> is a more effective, equal in labor to apply, less expensive, durable
> solution.  For the squirrel problem, an alternate solution is one of the
> available edge of array screen products.  Not only does it stop the
> squirrels but it works for mice, leaves, pine needles, etc.
>
> Can you enlighten us about the cause of the resi fires that
> were caused from the lack of MLSD's?  Poor wire management? And was the
> hole in the metal roof caused by the squirrel having lunch on the wiring?
>
> I feel it worth diving into this deeper for a variety of
> reasons.
>
> Bill
>
> Feather River Solar Electric
> Bill Battagin, Owner
> 4291 Nelson St.
> Taylorsville, CA 95983
> 530.284.7849
> CA Lic 874049www.frenergy.net
>
> On 1/29/2021 11:56 AM, Solar Energy Solutions wrote:
>
> Dear All,
>
> I have been an outspoken critic of module level shutdown for all the
> reasons folks do.  However, I have come around.  We have witnessed too many
> systems where rooftop wiring has been chewed up by critters... mostly
> squirrels.  We have seen everything from residential fires to holes in
> metal roofs caused by a DC arc.   I never thought I would see the day when
> I would not only be thinking MLSD is a good idea but advocating for it.
>
> Smiles,
>
> *Andrew Koyaanisqatsi*
> *President*
>
>
> *Solar Energy Solutions, Inc. The BRIGHT CHOICE *
> *Since 1987,*
> * helping you and your Portland neighbors move** towards an
> environmentally sustainable future.*
>
> *503-238-4502 www.SolarEnergyOregon.com
>  *
>
>
> On Friday, January 29, 2021, 11:25:28 AM PST, s...@ecologicalsystems.biz
>   wrote:
>
>
> So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to our
> industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation
> standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this requirement
> was rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact on
> the industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd
> installed by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to do
> with the quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due to
> premature failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This is
> a serious issue costing the industry time and resources and making our
> installers less safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended goal
> of the requirement.
> I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently
> became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a more
> sensible approach to this requirement.
>
> Your thoughts are appreciated,
> Sky Sims
> Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
> “Just An Old Wrench”
> ___
>
> --
>
>
>
> 
>  Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> 
> <#m_6982181657532053563_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> ___
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change listserver email address & 
> settings:http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the 
> 

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Solar Energy Solutions]

Dear All,
I have been an outspoken critic of module level shutdown for all the reasons 
folks do.  However, I have come around.  We have witnessed too many systems 
where rooftop wiring has been chewed up by critters... mostly squirrels.  We 
have seen everything from residential fires to holes in metal roofs caused by a 
DC arc.   I never thought I would see the day when I would not only be thinking 
MLSD is a good idea but advocating for it.

Smiles,
 Andrew KoyaanisqatsiPresidentSolar Energy Solutions, Inc.
The BRIGHT CHOICE
Since 1987, helping you and your Portland neighbors
move towards an environmentally sustainable future.503-238-4502
www.SolarEnergyOregon.com  

On Friday, January 29, 2021, 11:25:28 AM PST, s...@ecologicalsystems.biz 
 wrote:  
 
 So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to our 
industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation 
standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this requirement was 
rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact on the 
industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd installed 
by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to do with the 
quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due to premature 
failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This is a serious 
issue costing the industry time and resources and making our installers less 
safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended goal of the requirement. 
I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently became 
aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a more sensible 
approach to this requirement. 

Your thoughts are appreciated,
Sky Sims
Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
“Just An Old Wrench”
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

  ___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar]

Hi Ben,

Dave had to go on a service call up into the high county. No cell ! I
expect him back before dark. Probably will get back in the AM

Thanks, Ingrid

Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
"we go where powerlines don't"
http://members.sti.net/offgridsolar/
e-mail offgridso...@sti.net
text 209 813 0060

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 13:32:30 -0800, Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
 wrote:
> Hi Sly,
> 
>  The small part of the industry ( Offgrid ) mostly uses ground mounting
> and is not using MLSD. On some new offgrid homes I use rapid shutdown at
> MPPT level to get the permit if the AHJ can't be reasoned with. The
> Schneider rapid shutdown has a nice 600 vdc disconnect in it,  that is
> useful later if the homeowner decides to abandon the extra electronics
that
> can affect reliability.
> 
> We also protect the area under and near the modules to guard against a 
> rare defect from causing a wildfire.
> 
> I would like to hear what Outback is doing for this also from you guys
> please?  FRIDAY !!!
> 
> 
> Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
> "we go where powerlines don't"
> http://members.sti.net/offgridsolar/
> e-mail offgridso...@sti.net
> text 209 813 0060
> 
> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:09:48 -0500, s...@ecologicalsystems.biz wrote:
>> So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to
> our
>> industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation
>> standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this
> requirement
>> was rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact
> on
>> the industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd
>> installed by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to
> do
>> with the quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due
> to
>> premature failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This
> is
>> a serious issue costing the industry time and resources and making our
>> installers less safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended
> goal
>> of the requirement. 
>> I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently
>> became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a
> more
>> sensible approach to this requirement. 
>> 
>> Your thoughts are appreciated,
>> Sky Sims
>> Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
>> “Just An Old Wrench”
>> ___
>> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>> 
>> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> Change listserver email address & settings:
>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try
> the
>> other:
>> https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
>> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>> 
>> List rules & etiquette:
>> http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>> 
>> Check out or update participant bios:
>> http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
> ___
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
> 
> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
> 
> Change listserver email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try
the
> other:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List rules & etiquette:
> http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> 
> Check out or update participant bios:
> http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Ray]

Yes, I would like more info too.  I'm all about safety, but it needs to 
be based on reality not theory.  For instance, would string level shut 
down have stopped the arcs you mentioned?  Also, I second the 
screening.  Even if MLSD stops the fire, the rodents have still won the 
day by taking out part of the array.  How about an exemption from MLSD 
for systems below a certain voltage, and having animal guard in place, 
and those would still have string level shut down.


Ray Walters
Remote Solar
303 505-8760

On 1/29/21 3:58 PM, frenergy wrote:


Andrew,

            If these are the only two examples of justification of 
MLSD and not knowing the details of the examples you've cited, I 
suggest there is a more effective, equal in labor to apply, less 
expensive, durable solution.  For the squirrel problem, an alternate 
solution is one of the available edge of array screen products.  Not 
only does it stop the squirrels but it works for mice, leaves, pine 
needles, etc.


            Can you enlighten us about the cause of the resi fires 
that were caused from the lack of MLSD's?  Poor wire management? And 
was the hole in the metal roof caused by the squirrel having lunch on 
the wiring?


            I feel it worth diving into this deeper for a variety of 
reasons.


Bill

Feather River Solar Electric
Bill Battagin, Owner
4291 Nelson St.
Taylorsville, CA 95983
530.284.7849
CA Lic 874049
www.frenergy.net
On 1/29/2021 11:56 AM, Solar Energy Solutions wrote:

Dear All,

I have been an outspoken critic of module level shutdown for all the 
reasons folks do.  However, I have come around.  We have witnessed 
too many systems where rooftop wiring has been chewed up by 
critters... mostly squirrels.  We have seen everything from 
residential fires to holes in metal roofs caused by a DC arc.   I 
never thought I would see the day when I would not only be thinking 
MLSD is a good idea but advocating for it.


Smiles,
**Andrew Koyaanisqatsi**
*President*
**Solar Energy Solutions, Inc.
/The BRIGHT CHOICE/
**
*Since 1987,**helping you and your Portland neighbors
move**towards an environmentally sustainable future.*
**503-238-4502
www.SolarEnergyOregon.com  **


On Friday, January 29, 2021, 11:25:28 AM PST, 
s...@ecologicalsystems.biz  wrote:



So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow 
to our industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and 
installation standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels 
like this requirement was rolled out far too quickly without enough 
forethought to its impact on the industry. We are constantly going 
out and fixing problems with mlsd installed by other contractors. 
Thankfully the problems have nothing to do with the quality of the 
installations. The problems are almost all due to premature failure 
of the products or some inherent defect in them. This is a serious 
issue costing the industry time and resources and making our 
installers less safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended 
goal of the requirement.
I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I 
recently became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on 
bringing a more sensible approach to this requirement.


Your thoughts are appreciated,
Sky Sims
Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
“Just An Old Wrench”
___


--

 
	Virus-free. www.avast.com 
 



<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>

___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar]

Hi Sly,

 The small part of the industry ( Offgrid ) mostly uses ground mounting
and is not using MLSD. On some new offgrid homes I use rapid shutdown at
MPPT level to get the permit if the AHJ can't be reasoned with. The
Schneider rapid shutdown has a nice 600 vdc disconnect in it,  that is
useful later if the homeowner decides to abandon the extra electronics that
can affect reliability.

We also protect the area under and near the modules to guard against a 
rare defect from causing a wildfire.

I would like to hear what Outback is doing for this also from you guys
please?  FRIDAY !!!


Dave Angelini Offgrid Solar
"we go where powerlines don't"
http://members.sti.net/offgridsolar/
e-mail offgridso...@sti.net
text 209 813 0060

On Fri, 29 Jan 2021 14:09:48 -0500, s...@ecologicalsystems.biz wrote:
> So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to
our
> industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation
> standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this
requirement
> was rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact
on
> the industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd
> installed by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to
do
> with the quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due
to
> premature failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This
is
> a serious issue costing the industry time and resources and making our
> installers less safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended
goal
> of the requirement. 
> I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently
> became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a
more
> sensible approach to this requirement. 
> 
> Your thoughts are appreciated,
> Sky Sims
> Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
> “Just An Old Wrench”
> ___
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
> 
> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
> 
> Change listserver email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try
the
> other:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
> 
> List rules & etiquette:
> http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
> 
> Check out or update participant bios:
> http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[frenergy]

Andrew,

            If these are the only two examples of justification of MLSD 
and not knowing the details of the examples you've cited, I suggest 
there is a more effective, equal in labor to apply, less expensive, 
durable solution.  For the squirrel problem, an alternate solution is 
one of the available edge of array screen products.  Not only does it 
stop the squirrels but it works for mice, leaves, pine needles, etc.


            Can you enlighten us about the cause of the resi fires that 
were caused from the lack of MLSD's?  Poor wire management? And was the 
hole in the metal roof caused by the squirrel having lunch on the wiring?


            I feel it worth diving into this deeper for a variety of 
reasons.


Bill

Feather River Solar Electric
Bill Battagin, Owner
4291 Nelson St.
Taylorsville, CA 95983
530.284.7849
CA Lic 874049
www.frenergy.net

On 1/29/2021 11:56 AM, Solar Energy Solutions wrote:

Dear All,

I have been an outspoken critic of module level shutdown for all the 
reasons folks do.  However, I have come around.  We have witnessed too 
many systems where rooftop wiring has been chewed up by critters... 
mostly squirrels.  We have seen everything from residential fires to 
holes in metal roofs caused by a DC arc.   I never thought I would see 
the day when I would not only be thinking MLSD is a good idea but 
advocating for it.


Smiles,
**Andrew Koyaanisqatsi**
*President*
**Solar Energy Solutions, Inc.
/The BRIGHT CHOICE/
**
*Since 1987,**helping you and your Portland neighbors
move**towards an environmentally sustainable future.*
**503-238-4502
www.SolarEnergyOregon.com  **


On Friday, January 29, 2021, 11:25:28 AM PST, 
s...@ecologicalsystems.biz  wrote:



So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to 
our industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and 
installation standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels 
like this requirement was rolled out far too quickly without enough 
forethought to its impact on the industry. We are constantly going out 
and fixing problems with mlsd installed by other contractors. 
Thankfully the problems have nothing to do with the quality of the 
installations. The problems are almost all due to premature failure of 
the products or some inherent defect in them. This is a serious issue 
costing the industry time and resources and making our installers less 
safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended goal of the 
requirement.
I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently 
became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a 
more sensible approach to this requirement.


Your thoughts are appreciated,
Sky Sims
Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
“Just An Old Wrench”
___


--



--
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

Re: [RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[Kristopher Schmid]

Sky,

I, for one, totally agree.  While I agree with the need to keep
firefighters safe, it seems to me that rules regarding solar conduit would
serve the same purpose; required labeling of rooftop conduit beyond the
array boundary, required distance below roof deck for attic conduit, etc.
I am sure that there is a fair amount of lobbying by SolarEdge and Enphase
to keep the rapid shutdown rules unchanged and retain their market share.
While MLPE have their place in the industry, they should not be the only
viable choice for a roof mounted array.


Shine On!

Kris Schmid
Legacy Solar, LLC
137 West 1st Avenue
Luck, WI 54853
www.legacysolar.com
715-653-4295
NABCEP Certified PV Installation Professional
Licensed Wisconsin Master Electrician
BSEE


On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 1:25 PM  wrote:

> So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to our
> industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation
> standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this requirement
> was rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact on
> the industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd
> installed by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to do
> with the quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due to
> premature failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This is
> a serious issue costing the industry time and resources and making our
> installers less safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended goal
> of the requirement.
> I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently
> became aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a more
> sensible approach to this requirement.
>
> Your thoughts are appreciated,
> Sky Sims
> Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
> “Just An Old Wrench”
> ___
> List sponsored by Redwood Alliance
>
> List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org
>
> Change listserver email address & settings:
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the
> other:
> https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
> http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org
>
> List rules & etiquette:
> http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm
>
> Check out or update participant bios:
> http://www.members.re-wrenches.org
>
>
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org

[RE-wrenches] MLSD module level shutdown

[sky]

So far the module level shutdown requirements have been a real blow to our 
industry. The reliability and cost from a maintenance and installation 
standpoint has been very hit or miss so far. It feels like this requirement was 
rolled out far too quickly without enough forethought to its impact on the 
industry. We are constantly going out and fixing problems with mlsd installed 
by other contractors. Thankfully the problems have nothing to do with the 
quality of the installations. The problems are almost all due to premature 
failure of the products or some inherent defect in them. This is a serious 
issue costing the industry time and resources and making our installers less 
safe. It just doesn’t really accomplish the intended goal of the requirement. 
I’m curious how other wrenches are dealing with this issue. I recently became 
aware of fixMLSD.com which appears to be focused on bringing a more sensible 
approach to this requirement. 

Your thoughts are appreciated,
Sky Sims
Https://EcologicalSystems.biz
“Just An Old Wrench”
___
List sponsored by Redwood Alliance

List Address: RE-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org

Change listserver email address & settings:
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/options.cgi/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

There are two list archives for searching. When one doesn't work, try the other:
https://www.mail-archive.com/re-wrenches@lists.re-wrenches.org/
http://lists.re-wrenches.org/pipermail/re-wrenches-re-wrenches.org

List rules & etiquette:
http://www.re-wrenches.org/etiquette.htm

Check out or update participant bios:
http://www.members.re-wrenches.org