Re: [RE-wrenches] Sunny Island AC-Coupled system integration with Fortress E-Vault

Hey Michael, Sorry to hear about your problems. We have gone through several SMA SI issues that can be very difficult to narrow down but found most of the time the issues are founded on miss understanding the affects that different set points have on the over all system operation. In your

Re: [RE-wrenches] Sunny Island AC-Coupled system integration with Fortress E-Vault

William, The charge controllers could operate in open loop, while the SMA did close the loop. Open loop works really well for charge controllers. I question if the closed loop communication was really working correctly if the SI is reporting 50% SOC when the batteries are reporting 95%… The SI

Re: [RE-wrenches] Sunny Island AC-Coupled system integration with Fortress E-Vault

Hi William, That’s an interesting idea to have close loop comms with two separate manufacturers at the same time. In theory I think this could work, but unfortunately, I don’t think SMA and Schneider share the same protocol # for the eVault. I believe SMA uses protocol #2 and Schneider uses #5.

Re: [RE-wrenches] Sunny Island AC-Coupled system integration with Fortress E-Vault

I would tear all the sunny boys and sunny islands out and install two 15 kW Sol-Arks,  problem solved. DC coupled. I've done this several times now for existing clients (mostly connected to the grid) but it is so much cleaner and more compact and effective.Michael D NelsonMD Electric & Solar,

[RE-wrenches] Sunny Island AC-Coupled system integration with Fortress E-Vault

Friends: This situation is as yet unresolved. It is complicated enough I created a web page to describe the scenario so I did not have to explain it over and over. I submitted this to