Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel?
A couple more thoughts... 5a/24v load on 600w of panel... That puts you at 5 hours of full sun, per day, just to cover the load. Unless you are close to the equator, that doesn't leave much for increasing the charge on the batteries. If you go even a few days without full sun, it will take quite some time for the batteries to recover. If you do go ahead and add more panels, and switch to a mppt controller, I'd wire those in series as well, to 72v or 96v nominal. Most mppt controllers can handle 150v, but you don't want to get too close to that, as panel output can easily exceed their nominal rating. There are now mppts that can handle 600v, but I have no experience with those. Regarding tracking arrays, I wouldn't consider them unless space is at a huge premium, and the site is easily accessible for repair. You will almost certainly get a better bang for your buck by spending the money on additional panels, rather than trackers. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Robert Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 10:57 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel? Eric has the idea spot on, I'll follow up with what a lot of off-gridders around here in N. Nevada had tutored me on. That is the losses and controlling them. Number one with a bullet is loss from throwing electrons down wires.. You know it from poe losses and it's a 100 times worse in solar applications. The biggest gain through using serial panels is in reduction of current loss through the wires between the panels and to the charge controller. You would have to have monster wires to be as efficient as 3 amps down reasonably sized wires at 120 volts as 15 amps at 24. And as you go from the charge controller to the batteries and you eat away your 5 amps ( at 24 Volts? That is Big ) you still have 10 amps between the controller and your batteries. Get Very Large Cables, as large as the controller will accept. MPPT controllers are the ticket unless you have tracking arrays, in which case the guys here go back to pwm for better results. I haven't figured out why, they just show me the numbers that show it. MPPT controllers running in serial also have the advantage that you can mix and match your panels without losing the output of your large panels into the small ones.. Lastly we angle our panels in the winter to the lowest sun angles as that is when the transit is shortest and the need the greatest. Robert On 11/19/2013 09:18 PM, Eric Flanery wrote: I'd replace the controller with a mppt model, wire the panels in series (to 48v nominal), and leave the battery bank at 24v. Decoupling the panel voltage from the charging voltage let's you start charging a bit earlier, and keep charging a bit longer; plus mppt is a bit more efficient than pwm. Most importantly, it let's you double your panels (which is your best bet overall), without having to increase the gauge of your wiring. --Eric Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note(r) 3 Original message From: Mike Lyon Date:11/19/2013 8:29 PM (GMT-08:00) To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel? And it has about a 5 amp load... On Nov 19, 2013, at 20:23, Gary Garrett ggarr...@nidaho.net wrote: You probably need more Sun, or less load. It sounds like you have it wired correctly. The panels should tilt south about the same angle as your Lattitude. Up here on the canadian border we are at 48 degrees lattitude so the panels tilt about 45 degrees. In the summer they lay flat. Gary On 11/19/2013 7:43 PM, Mike Lyon wrote: So i'm trying to figure out what i need more of, voltage or current? I have 2x, 300 watt, 24vdc panels. I currently have them wired in parallel to a Morningstar SS20L-24 which in turn is hooked up to 4 banks of 2x 12vdc deep cycle batteries (for a 24vdc system). I plan on replacing these batteries soon with UB4Ds or something similiar. What would be best to keep these beasts charged? The solar panels wired in series or parallel? Thanks, Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http
Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel?
2.1a is much more reasonable! But I would still suggest adding another panel (or two), switching to mppt, and stringing all the panels in series. Typically, we have an outside PE do the actual designs; but for rough estimating purposes, I like to go by these 'rules of thumb' (probably overkill for most applications): Maximum one hour of full sun to support one day's load. (total panel wattage = 24x total load wattage) Maximum of 10 days of full sun to fully recharge the battery bank from the LVD point. (total panel wattage = battery bank watt hours / 30, figuring 3 hours per day going to replenish batteries) Target runtime of 30 days to LVD with no charging. (battery bank watt hours = 720x total load wattage) For two DragonWave HCs, this led us to 8x 300 watt panels (in two parallel strings of four series panels each), and 24x 200 amp-hour batteries (in six parallel strings of four series batteries each). --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2013 8:27 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel? First off, thank you all for all of the wonderful input! Secondly, i went back and re-calc'd the load. It's actually 2.1 amps @ 24vdc (not 5 amps as i previously stated). What are the formulas (or websites) folks are using when sizing out solar systems? Thank You, Mike On Nov 20, 2013, at 7:18, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.com wrote: A couple more thoughts... 5a/24v load on 600w of panel... That puts you at 5 hours of full sun, per day, just to cover the load. Unless you are close to the equator, that doesn't leave much for increasing the charge on the batteries. If you go even a few days without full sun, it will take quite some time for the batteries to recover. If you do go ahead and add more panels, and switch to a mppt controller, I'd wire those in series as well, to 72v or 96v nominal. Most mppt controllers can handle 150v, but you don't want to get too close to that, as panel output can easily exceed their nominal rating. There are now mppts that can handle 600v, but I have no experience with those. Regarding tracking arrays, I wouldn't consider them unless space is at a huge premium, and the site is easily accessible for repair. You will almost certainly get a better bang for your buck by spending the money on additional panels, rather than trackers. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Robert Sent: Tuesday, November 19, 2013 10:57 PM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel? Eric has the idea spot on, I'll follow up with what a lot of off-gridders around here in N. Nevada had tutored me on. That is the losses and controlling them. Number one with a bullet is loss from throwing electrons down wires.. You know it from poe losses and it's a 100 times worse in solar applications. The biggest gain through using serial panels is in reduction of current loss through the wires between the panels and to the charge controller. You would have to have monster wires to be as efficient as 3 amps down reasonably sized wires at 120 volts as 15 amps at 24. And as you go from the charge controller to the batteries and you eat away your 5 amps ( at 24 Volts? That is Big ) you still have 10 amps between the controller and your batteries. Get Very Large Cables, as large as the controller will accept. MPPT controllers are the ticket unless you have tracking arrays, in which case the guys here go back to pwm for better results. I haven't figured out why, they just show me the numbers that show it. MPPT controllers running in serial also have the advantage that you can mix and match your panels without losing the output of your large panels into the small ones.. Lastly we angle our panels in the winter to the lowest sun angles as that is when the transit is shortest and the need the greatest. Robert On 11/19/2013 09:18 PM, Eric Flanery wrote: I'd replace the controller with a mppt model, wire the panels in series (to 48v nominal), and leave the battery bank at 24v. Decoupling the panel voltage from the charging voltage let's you start charging a bit earlier, and keep charging a bit longer; plus mppt is a bit more efficient than pwm. Most importantly, it let's you double your panels (which is your best bet overall), without having to increase the gauge of your wiring. --Eric Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note(r) 3 Original message From: Mike Lyon Date:11/19/2013 8:29 PM (GMT-08:00) To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel? And it has about a 5 amp load... On Nov 19, 2013, at 20:23, Gary Garrett ggarr...@nidaho.net wrote: You probably need more Sun, or less load. It sounds like you
Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel?
I'd replace the controller with a mppt model, wire the panels in series (to 48v nominal), and leave the battery bank at 24v. Decoupling the panel voltage from the charging voltage let's you start charging a bit earlier, and keep charging a bit longer; plus mppt is a bit more efficient than pwm. Most importantly, it let's you double your panels (which is your best bet overall), without having to increase the gauge of your wiring. --Eric Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note® 3 Original message From: Mike Lyon Date:11/19/2013 8:29 PM (GMT-08:00) To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Solat panels: series or parallel? And it has about a 5 amp load... On Nov 19, 2013, at 20:23, Gary Garrett ggarr...@nidaho.net wrote: You probably need more Sun, or less load. It sounds like you have it wired correctly. The panels should tilt south about the same angle as your Lattitude. Up here on the canadian border we are at 48 degrees lattitude so the panels tilt about 45 degrees. In the summer they lay flat. Gary On 11/19/2013 7:43 PM, Mike Lyon wrote: So i'm trying to figure out what i need more of, voltage or current? I have 2x, 300 watt, 24vdc panels. I currently have them wired in parallel to a Morningstar SS20L-24 which in turn is hooked up to 4 banks of 2x 12vdc deep cycle batteries (for a 24vdc system). I plan on replacing these batteries soon with UB4Ds or something similiar. What would be best to keep these beasts charged? The solar panels wired in series or parallel? Thanks, Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum.
How would you 'legally' define a WISP? What would make Comcast 'not a WISP', if they are delivering Internet over Wireless? If it's that they also deliver Internet over another medium, would we (and many other providers) also be excluded because we also deliver Internet over cable and fiber? If it's that they also provide TV service, then what about those of us that also run transport, hosting, development, and infrastructure services (examples among doubtless myriad others). Not that I wouldn't love some protected spectrum, I'm just having a hard time imagining anything that would prevent Comcast and the like from using it, while not also excluding quite a few of us. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Matt Hoppes Sent: Friday, November 15, 2013 8:04 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. Yes and no... I mean... yeah it's a pain to those of us trying to use the spectrum... but then again so is Comcast. This is exactly why there needs to be some sort of WISP only spectrum... with laws carefully written so Comcast can't just say they are a WISP. Matt Hoppes Director of Information Technology Indigo Wireless +1 (570) 723-7312 On 11/15/13, 11:02 AM, Robert wrote: Spectrum trashers At least if there's no traffic on them there shouldn't be much noise.. On 11/15/2013 06:26 AM, Zach Mann wrote: He's talking about these... (see attached) On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 8:01 AM, Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com wrote: I'm not talking about the ones in peoples homes, I'm talking about the ones the cable carrier hangs on the lines outside runing through the city on every corner clear LOS to every tower around. Scott Carullo Technical Operations 855-FLSPEED x102 *From*: Brian Webster bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com mailto:bwebs...@wirelessmapping.com *Sent*: Friday, November 15, 2013 8:24 AM *To*: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. One good thing about the higher bands and the noise floor is that free space loss works to your advantage. That being that a 5 GHz indoor Omni home AP router signal will fall off as an interference source as a much shorter distance than a 2.4 GHz device will. The laws of physics work in your favor. Thank You, Brian Webster www.wirelessmapping.com http://www.wirelessmapping.com www.Broadband-Mapping.com http://www.Broadband-Mapping.com *From:*wireless-boun...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] *On Behalf Of *Scott Carullo *Sent:* Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:52 PM *To:* Matt Hoppes; sc...@brevardwireless.com mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com; WISPA General List *Subject:* Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. Hard to tell, noise floor is noise floor which keeps creeping up - we all know things work better when its quiet. This used to worry me a lot when I saw it coming, but then I realized it was already there and I had no idea until I just happened to scan on some radios (I don't usually install the stuff). I'm not worried any more, if its not one thing it will be another any way. Thats what gives us the edge every day, flexibility. We will work around it, we always do. I figure a high gain antenna on a tower with a good directional CPE will continue to work fine. Their omni low gain antenna can't compete with a 20-30db directional one. Still sucks though, you drive down the street and see one after another running 5Ghz just knowing there probably isn't 3 connections in the whole city to them Scott Carullo Technical Operations 855-FLSPEED x102 *From*: Matt Hoppes mhop...@indigowireless.com mailto:mhop...@indigowireless.com *Sent*: Thursday, November 14, 2013 6:43 PM *To*: sc...@brevardwireless.com mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com sc...@brevardwireless.com mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com, WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Cc*: WISPA General List wireless@wispa.org mailto:wireless@wispa.org *Subject*: Re: [WISPA] Comcast asking FCC for more 5GHz spectrum. Are you seeing any impact from them? On Nov 14, 2013, at 18:03, Scott Carullo sc...@brevardwireless.com mailto:sc...@brevardwireless.com wrote: Yeah, won't matter either way with a 5Ghz AP on
Re: [WISPA] MPLS / Mikrotik Assistance Needed
Hi Scott, Assuming you are referring to this thread: http://forum.mikrotik.com/viewtopic.php?f=14t=78755 We have run into many issues with MPLS on x86 boxes, related to MTU, and found a few workarounds (none ideal)... Placing a 'shim' VLAN, or two, between the physical ethernet interface and MPLS often seems to help. This does impact performance, but not as badly as running MPLS directly on the ethernet. This only ever seems to be necessary at the interfaces of x86 boxes, and whatever they attach to. Using only L2VPN/VPLS (no IP-over-MPLS or L3VPN), setting the MPLS MTU at 1492 or lower, and letting VPLS FAR handle fragmentation (it does a much better job than IP fragmentation, and is almost transparent to the end user). Again, this impacts performance, as it nearly doubles the number of frames that your transport links must carry. Move the MPLS boundary back, so that the x86 boxes are not participating. For us, this often required extra hardware. Also, make sure you are testing from and to boxes that are not participating in MPLS. I.e. test CE to CE, not PE to PE, or PE to CE; also, test UDP in addition to TCP. For some reason x86 boxes acting as PE routers often show far worse TCP performance than their actual forwarding performance. I've had some paths with x86 PEs that are easily able to move 300+Mbps CE to CE; but when testing between the PEs, the test maxes out at 5-6Mbps. Good luck. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Scott Carullo Sent: Monday, November 11, 2013 7:45 AM To: wireless@wispa.org; us...@wispa.org Cc: Carullo, Scott Subject: [WISPA] MPLS / Mikrotik Assistance Needed Good morning. We are in need of anyone who has deployed MPLS across a WISP network of decent size to help us resolve a few issues we are having with our MPLS implementation. We have about 50 routers / towers involved, fairly meshed. I love and appreciate free advice that can help. I am willing to pay consultant(s) as well. My only problem to date - I can't seem to entice anyone into helping us - paid or otherwise. If you know how to implement MPLS on Mikrotik routers or know someone who does, please contact me, we would really appreciate some assistance. Scott Carullo Technical Operations 855-FLSPEED x102 [http://www.flhsi.com/files/emaillogo.jpg] ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers
We use the MorningStar TriStar MPPT-60. ModBus over TCP was a bit of a pain to get working; but once it is setup, it works great. We did have a problem where the units would revert to their default IP addresses, months later, for no apparent reason. All other settings stuck. We worked around this by just letting them keep their default IP, and re-mapped it via NAT at the router. No problems on the charging side, and the custom cutoff feature is awesome. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 7:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers What is everyone using? -Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers
The MPPT-45 doesn't have an Ethernet interface, so you would need an additional device to bridge ModBus. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:35 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers I'm looking at the MPPT-45... On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: We use the MorningStar TriStar MPPT-60. ModBus over TCP was a bit of a pain to get working; but once it is setup, it works great. We did have a problem where the units would revert to their default IP addresses, months later, for no apparent reason. All other settings stuck. We worked around this by just letting them keep their default IP, and re-mapped it via NAT at the router. No problems on the charging side, and the custom cutoff feature is awesome. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 7:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers What is everyone using? -Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers
Since the price difference between the 45 and the 60 is only ~$100, it seemed well worth it. An Ethernet-ModBus bridge would cost nearly that much, and we wanted to avoid extra complexity. Having the extra controller capacity also allows us to add a few extra panels in the future, if needed, without significant re-wiring. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:38 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers Yeah, that's the downside :( On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: The MPPT-45 doesn't have an Ethernet interface, so you would need an additional device to bridge ModBus. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:35 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers I'm looking at the MPPT-45... On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: We use the MorningStar TriStar MPPT-60. ModBus over TCP was a bit of a pain to get working; but once it is setup, it works great. We did have a problem where the units would revert to their default IP addresses, months later, for no apparent reason. All other settings stuck. We worked around this by just letting them keep their default IP, and re-mapped it via NAT at the router. No problems on the charging side, and the custom cutoff feature is awesome. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 7:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers What is everyone using? -Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826tel:408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers
I think they are actually the same physical size, and use the same case. Perhaps the heat sink is larger. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:48 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers Good point. I may go that route instead. I was just looking at the footprint of it, The 60 looks much larger... On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: Since the price difference between the 45 and the 60 is only ~$100, it seemed well worth it. An Ethernet-ModBus bridge would cost nearly that much, and we wanted to avoid extra complexity. Having the extra controller capacity also allows us to add a few extra panels in the future, if needed, without significant re-wiring. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:38 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers Yeah, that's the downside :( On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: The MPPT-45 doesn't have an Ethernet interface, so you would need an additional device to bridge ModBus. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:35 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers I'm looking at the MPPT-45... On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: We use the MorningStar TriStar MPPT-60. ModBus over TCP was a bit of a pain to get working; but once it is setup, it works great. We did have a problem where the units would revert to their default IP addresses, months later, for no apparent reason. All other settings stuck. We worked around this by just letting them keep their default IP, and re-mapped it via NAT at the router. No problems on the charging side, and the custom cutoff feature is awesome. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 7:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers What is everyone using? -Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826tel:408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826tel:408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers
I don't know, ours are mounted inside shipping containers, with towers on the corners to support the panels, turbines, and radios. We needed that much space inside for the batteries anyway. All the circuitry is epoxy-coated (the terminals are not, obviously), and the cases seem fairly tight, so it seems plausible; but we never investigated direct outdoor mounting. I'd give MorningStar a call on that one. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:56 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers Trying to figure out if they are waterproof. Would make life much easier if I could mount it outside... On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:54 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: I think they are actually the same physical size, and use the same case. Perhaps the heat sink is larger. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:48 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers Good point. I may go that route instead. I was just looking at the footprint of it, The 60 looks much larger... On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: Since the price difference between the 45 and the 60 is only ~$100, it seemed well worth it. An Ethernet-ModBus bridge would cost nearly that much, and we wanted to avoid extra complexity. Having the extra controller capacity also allows us to add a few extra panels in the future, if needed, without significant re-wiring. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:38 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers Yeah, that's the downside :( On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:36 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: The MPPT-45 doesn't have an Ethernet interface, so you would need an additional device to bridge ModBus. --Eric From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 9:35 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: Re: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers I'm looking at the MPPT-45... On Fri, Nov 8, 2013 at 9:32 AM, Eric Flanery eflan...@fsr.commailto:eflan...@fsr.com wrote: We use the MorningStar TriStar MPPT-60. ModBus over TCP was a bit of a pain to get working; but once it is setup, it works great. We did have a problem where the units would revert to their default IP addresses, months later, for no apparent reason. All other settings stuck. We worked around this by just letting them keep their default IP, and re-mapped it via NAT at the router. No problems on the charging side, and the custom cutoff feature is awesome. --Eric -Original Message- From: wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org [mailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.orgmailto:wireless-boun...@wispa.org] On Behalf Of Mike Lyon Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 7:55 AM To: WISPA General List Subject: [WISPA] Network enabled solar controllers What is everyone using? -Mike ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826tel:408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826tel:408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826tel:408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.orgmailto:Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless -- Mike Lyon 408-621-4826 mike.l...@gmail.commailto:mike.l...@gmail.com http://www.linkedin.com/in/mlyon ___ Wireless mailing list Wireless@wispa.org http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
