16 minutes ago, superdiy said:

If the load on any one of the inverters is more than what the panels (connected to that inverter) can supply at that point in time, that inverter will switch over to battery and use battery only - not partly battery and partly solar PV. As Plonkster has explained, the other inverters should then try to compensate for the drop in the battery voltage (on the DC bus) and start charging the batteries by using the PV connected to each of the other inverters.

But then it does mean that I will be losing 1860 watts from my total 5580 solar power watts (when for example phase 1 has a load 3000 watts). The other two phases will battle to keep the batteries full (if for example phase 2 has a load of 1500 watt and phase 3 has a load of 1000 watts). Then the surplus of phases 2 and 3 will only be 1220 watts to try and keep the battery full, that is being drained at a rate of 3000 watts (by phase 1). This will mean more cycles. Correct me if I am wrong? 

All the appliances are 220V

15 minutes ago, SBBS said:

But then it does mean that I will be losing 1860 watts from my total 5580 solar power watts (when for example phase 1 has a load 3000 watts). The other two phases will battle to keep the batteries full (if for example phase 2 has a load of 1500 watt and phase 3 has a load of 1000 watts). Then the surplus of phases 2 and 3 will only be 1220 watts to try and keep the battery full, that is being drained at a rate of 3000 watts (by phase 1). This will mean more cycles. Correct me if I am wrong? 

All the appliances are 220V

Yes, you will be losing. If it was a true hybrid inverter the PV and battery will be combined. Unfortunately the Axpert is not a hybrid and therefor switches over to another source if the current source cannot supply the required load.

Depending on how exactly the inverters handle the draw from battery / charge the battery / DC bus thing, it might mean more "shallow" cycles.

With all 220V appliances the load will never be balanced.

Are you still connected to the grid since you mention "switch over to battery" and not "switch over to grid"?  If not, it will make more sense to re-configure the inverters to run in parallel instead of in 3 phase. The inverters will then split the load equally between them and each inverter will draw exactly the same from each set of pv panels and you will not have the wasted pv and more battery cycling as described above.

7 minutes ago, SBBS said:

But then it does mean that I will be losing 1860 watts from my total 5580 solar power watts (when for example phase 1 has a load 3000 watts). The other two phases will battle to keep the batteries full (if for example phase 2 has a load of 1500 watt and phase 3 has a load of 1000 watts). Then the surplus of phases 2 and 3 will only be 1220 watts to try and keep the battery full, that is being drained at a rate of 3000 watts (by phase 1). This will mean more cycles. Correct me if I am wrong? 

All the appliances are 220V

and if for example phase 2 also go greater than 1860 watts, then that phase will also switch to battery, and the solar for phase 2 will also be "inactive". So are then then back at the point made earlier in the day, that I need to add more solar panels to increase the solar capacity to "way more" than 5580 watts (18 x 310 watt panels), even if my load across the three phases will only be max +- 4000 watts (maybe 5000 watts).

A figure was mentioned earlier that 3000 watts per phase (that is 9000 watts solar) to cater for +- 4000 watts (maybe 5000 watts) ??

12 minutes ago, SBBS said:

But then it does mean that I will be losing 1860 watts from my total 5580 solar power watts (when for example phase 1 has a load 3000 watts). The other two phases will battle to keep the batteries full (if for example phase 2 has a load of 1500 watt and phase 3 has a load of 1000 watts). Then the surplus of phases 2 and 3 will only be 1220 watts to try and keep the battery full, that is being drained at a rate of 3000 watts (by phase 1). This will mean more cycles. Correct me if I am wrong? 

All the appliances are 220V

You are wrong (pun intended ;)) if the batteries are all connected to a busbar, to the three inverters - then the batteries will still be charged from all three sources. 

 

Ideally you should balance your 3 phases as close as possible (i.e. move some plugs / lights / appliances around till the 3 phases use about the same energy), then split your panels evenly across the 3 inverters, and install the parallel comms cables so the phases will sync. 

These inverters can handle max. 3000W (4000W on the new models) of PV, per inverter, so there's no point in having all the panels on a single inverter. You could, however max out the "heavy usage" inverter with PV, but then the other two will most likely draw all it's energy from batteries the whole time - which is why you actually want PV on all 3 inverters. 

@SBBS, I suggest you either get more solar panels and max out your PV capacity, or if you really don't want / need that many solar panels, get a hybrid 3 phase like the Infinisolar instead. It will work the way you want it to and probably save you some headaches in the  future

17 minutes ago, superdiy said:

Yes, you will be losing. If it was a true hybrid inverter the PV and battery will be combined. Unfortunately the Axpert is not a hybrid and therefor switches over to another source if the current source cannot supply the required load.

Depending on how exactly the inverters handle the draw from battery / charge the battery / DC bus thing, it might mean more "shallow" cycles.

With all 220V appliances the load will never be balanced.

Are you still connected to the grid since you mention "switch over to battery" and not "switch over to grid"?  If not, it will make more sense to re-configure the inverters to run in parallel instead of in 3 phase. The inverters will then split the load equally between them and each inverter will draw exactly the same from each set of pv panels and you will not have the wasted pv and more battery cycling as described above.

The Axpert does combine PV and battery or what am I missing, does it work different if it is setup in 3 phase.

The only hybrid thing it cant do is combine grid with pv and batts

 

21 minutes ago, superdiy said:

Yes, you will be losing. If it was a true hybrid inverter the PV and battery will be combined. Unfortunately the Axpert is not a hybrid and therefor switches over to another source if the current source cannot supply the required load.

Depending on how exactly the inverters handle the draw from battery / charge the battery / DC bus thing, it might mean more "shallow" cycles.

With all 220V appliances the load will never be balanced.

Are you still connected to the grid since you mention "switch over to battery" and not "switch over to grid"?  If not, it will make more sense to re-configure the inverters to run in parallel instead of in 3 phase. The inverters will then split the load equally between them and each inverter will draw exactly the same from each set of pv panels and you will not have the wasted pv and more battery cycling as described above.

Yes it is still connected to the grid, but the whole intention of having the solar panels (and as much as 18 of them), was to use as "little as possible from the grid" (at least during day time when there is full sun), and to cycle the batteries as "little as possible", intention was to keep the batteries full (during the day when there is full sun), and only cycle then when the sun is low, or during the evening. Now it seams I am screwed and either have to consider another Inverter or more solar panels.

2 minutes ago, SBBS said:

Yes it is still connected to the grid, but the whole intention of having the solar panels (and as much as 18 of them), was to use as "little as possible from the grid" (at least during day time when there is full sun), and to cycle the batteries as "little as possible", intention was to keep the batteries full (during the day when there is full sun), and only cycle then when the sun is low, or during the evening. Now it seams I am screwed and either have to consider another Inverter or more solar panels.

Sure, and you can easily achieve this as long as you work within the limits of your system. In your case the Axperts, setup the way they are, give you limited energy per phase. As suggested already, you either need to connect them in parallel, or use a 3phase inverter which can utilize all the PV energy at once

1 minute ago, SilverNodashi said:

Sure, and you can easily achieve this as long as you work within the limits of your system. In your case the Axperts, setup the way they are, give you limited energy per phase. As suggested already, you either need to connect them in parallel, or use a 3phase inverter which can utilize all the PV energy at once

I am familiar with the parallel option (only what I have read from the manuals), but if I connect the three inverters in parallel, how will I cater for the 3 phases? 

 

As you can see I am "exploring" all option not to need to change the inverter, or to increase solar capacity unnecessarily  So can someone please comment on the statement from Viper_ZA earlier?

@SBBS, I think you not following the discussion, or is it me?

Anyway, the 3 Axperts you have is fine, no issues there. The only problem is that they cannot work from a common PV setup. Each inverter needs to have it's own PV strings.

Now due to the common and shared DC bus or battery bank for a better name, the 3 Axperts will still "share" the PV between them, so you not going to loose anything. In actual fact, you should gain a little bit.

The axpert will only switch to mains if the battery bank is low, not when there is no PV.

With the Axpert, you either run on batteries or mains, not both. Only a true Hybrid can do that.

43 minutes ago, Wetkit said:

@SBBS, I think you not following the discussion, or is it me?

Anyway, the 3 Axperts you have is fine, no issues there. The only problem is that they cannot work from a common PV setup. Each inverter needs to have it's own PV strings.

Now due to the common and shared DC bus or battery bank for a better name, the 3 Axperts will still "share" the PV between them, so you not going to loose anything. In actual fact, you should gain a little bit.

The axpert will only switch to mains if the battery bank is low, not when there is no PV.

With the Axpert, you either run on batteries or mains, not both. Only a true Hybrid can do that.

Just to add batteries and PV does combine if the PV cannot supply enough on it's own as this seems unclear to some people

Hi Wetkit. Thank you for your reply. I have already agreed in one of my previous posts that I must split up the solar panels per inverter will do that soonest. 

As far as the rest of the discussion is concern about the if I need to get more solar panels (or another inverter) ...... If it looks like I am confused, then I must admit I am confused.

Some of the previous people that posted comments say that the Inverter can not share a 3000 watt load on one inverter between solar and battery. And some other people had comment that it can share the solar and battery on the same inverter (if the load on a specific inverter is bigger than the solar capacity on that specific inverter). For the sake of not repeating the whole previous discussion in this comment to you, all I need to clarify is the following.

Question 1: If the inverter can share the load between solar and battery on the same inverter (if the load on a specific inverter is bigger than the solar capacity on that specific inverter) , then I do not need to get more solar panels.

Question 2: If the inverter can not share the load between solar and battery on the same inverter (if the load on a specific inverter is bigger than the solar capacity on that specific inverter) , and the other 2 phases need to keep the batteries charged then I do need to get more solar panels.

However, I will go with the comment that Viper_za had made (that it can) .... because it is what I want to hear ... lol... then I will not need to add more panels

43 minutes ago, SBBS said:

However, I will go with the comment that Viper_za had made (that it can) .... because it is what I want to hear ... lol... then I will not need to add more panels

Mine does it with my single Inverter config on SBU mode (option 1 in the settings ) so I really don't see why this wont be the case in a 3phase config

Out of the manual

Solar energy provides power to the loads as first priority. If solar energy is not sufficient to power all connected loads, battery energy will supply power to the loads at the same time. Utility provides power to the loads only when battery voltage drops to either low-level warning voltage or the setting point in program 12.

On 21/04/2016 at 7:25 AM, Mart-Mari said:

1) The system tripped regularly. I was not trained what to do when this happened and the installer lives too far to help.

2) Alarms went off at any given time and for no reason. I did not know what to do when this happened.

3) Sparks came out of the battery charger switches. Black burn marks were visible around the sparks. It was expected of me to push these switches up and down and to cope with the sparks and burning smell.

4) When the system tripped, it did not switch over to Eskom - in other words the BYPASS function did not work.

5) There was a weird smell in my garage that disappeared after they removed the batteries.

6) The batteries could not carry the load for more than a couple of hours when Eskom was off.

7) I did not have a separate Eskom switch in order to switch over manually when the system stopped working.

8) The system caused tension in my family and we could not go on holiday because the system was way too unreliable.

Welcome back Mart-Mari

23 hours ago, SilverNodashi said:

Just look at the advice given on this forum and many other DIY / self learn type forums, and you'll see why installation like this even take place. Most of the technical mistakes listed are "simple mistakes", but probably stem from bad advice given by people who think they know what they're talking about. 

The  client is not supposed to be the one making technical decisions. The client provides the specs of what he/she wants and the installer designs a system to suit the clients needs.

23 hours ago, SilverNodashi said:

also want to add: Some of the points listed above are more of a personal opinion than regulation. For example, using Royal batteries isn't against any regulation, it's purely just a low end piece of equipment and is generally more suited for stand-by use than off-grid use. 

..... but the client does not know this. It is up to the installer to provide options/scenarios and guide the client. If the client plums for the cheapest option then fine, but at R150k plus this is definitely not a "cheapest option system". Is there an accredited Solar Installer Association? This one individual has done more damage to the industry than a bus load of Mikes and Silvers could restore confidence in clients. If the system you install needs no input from the client - fine but if the client needs to check on things and switch on an off various items etc client training is then required. I don't blame Mart-Mari for being as mad as a snake. 

1 hour ago, SBBS said:

Question 1: If the inverter can share the load between solar and battery on the same inverter (if the load on a specific inverter is bigger than the solar capacity on that specific inverter) , then I do not need to get more solar panels.

Yes, I think you've got it :-)

Lets use a simple example with just two inverters. Lets say one of the inverters is running at 3kw, but there is only 1.5kw solar coming in on the mppt of that inverter. Well, then it is going to use 1500w solar and 1500w battery. This will drop the voltage of the battery.

Now add the second inverter/mppt into the picture. If you also have 1.5kw solar coming in on this second inverter, and only a 500w load, then that inverter will push 1000W into the battery, attempting to lift the voltage of the battery.

Your net discharge on the battery is therefore only 500W and all the solar is being used.

1 hour ago, Chris Hobson said:

Welcome back Mart-Mari

The  client is not supposed to be the one making technical decisions. The client provides the specs of what he/she wants and the installer designs a system to suit the clients needs.

..... but the client does not know this. It is up to the installer to provide options/scenarios and guide the client. If the client plums for the cheapest option then fine, but at R150k plus this is definitely not a "cheapest option system". Is there an accredited Solar Installer Association? This one individual has done more damage to the industry than a bus load of Mikes and Silvers could restore confidence in clients. If the system you install needs no input from the client - fine but if the client needs to check on things and switch on an off various items etc client training is then required. I don't blame Mart-Mari for being as mad as a snake.

Thank you Chris. I am not mad but rather disappointed. All my expectations were shattered. Being a female also did not help much. I really trusted this guy. There was a newspaper article about it yesterday and maybe somebody will find the info valuable. When I feel much better I'll get a new system, a proper one this time.

http://www.netwerk24.com/Nuus/Algemeen/leraar-dok-op-vir-lewensgevaarlike-sonkragstelsel-20160421

18 hours ago, SilverNodashi said:

...Some of the points listed above are more of a personal opinion than regulation. For example, using Royal batteries isn't against any regulation, it's purely just a low end piece of equipment and is generally more suited for stand-by use than off-grid use.

Hi there, four independent experts said the Royal batteries should be covered. They did not say Royal batteries are against any regulation. Personal opinions were not part of any report that I received because all the reports were done objectively.

The sparks experienced seem to be due to switch of battery isolators under load which should not be done except in an emergency. Lack of communication with the client.

On 21 April 2016 at 10:07 AM, SilverNodashi said:

I would still expect to have seen the right equipment being quoted in the reports, by the experts. Surely the experts would then have said 2x 4Kw inverters and 3x battery banks? It sounds to me like Mart-Mari is being taken for a ride, yet again.

I had 2 X Mercer Inverters and yes, I was for taken for a ride for the second time. Quite correct.

I must say I'm a little unhappy that they just HAD to mention that the installer was a dominee... as if that has anything to do with the matter.

(I know this is off topic and all, and I also understand that given practice-what-you-preach requirements and all we probably agree the man SHOULD have known better... but I still hate the fact that the paper just had to mention this).

The man is subcontracting the work out so he has not got a cooking clue either has to that the installers' word for it. He should quit now before he ruins himself financially. 

1 minute ago, Chris Hobson said:

The sparks experienced seem to be due to switch of battery isolators under load which should not be done except in an emergency. Lack of communication with the client.

See the burn mark in the battery charger switches on this pic. This is where is sparks came from. It scared the living daylight out of me each time I was told to operate these switches. 

Serious off topic marker, but philosophy is another thing I enjoy. Skip if you don't like :-) This is what Chesteron wrote on it in circa 1918.

Quote

"These can be called the essentials of the old orthodoxy, of which the chief merit is that it is the natural fountain of revolution and reform; and of which the chief defect is that it is obviously only an abstract assertion. Its main advantage is that it is the most adventurous and manly of all theologies. Its chief disadvantage is simply that it is a theology. It can always be urged against it that it is in its nature arbitrary and in the air. But it is not so high in the air but that great archers spend their whole lives in shooting arrows at it--yes, and their last arrows; there are men who will ruin themselves and ruin their civilization if they may ruin also this old fantastic tale. This is the last and most astounding fact about this faith; that its enemies will use any weapon against it, the swords that cut their own fingers, and the firebrands that burn their own homes. Men who begin to fight the Church for the sake of freedom and humanity end by flinging away freedom and humanity if only they may fight the Church. This is no exaggeration; I could fill a book with the instances of it. Mr. Blatchford set out, as an ordinary Bible-smasher, to prove that Adam was guiltless of sin against God; in manoeuvring so as to maintain this he admitted, as a mere side issue, that all the tyrants, from Nero to King Leopold, were guiltless of any sin against humanity. I know a man who has such a passion for proving that he will have no personal existence after death that he falls back on the position that he has no personal existence now. He invokes Buddhism and says that all souls fade into each other; in order to prove that he cannot go to heaven he proves that he cannot go to Hartlepool. I have known people who protested against religious education with arguments against any education, saying that the child's mind must grow freely or that the old must not teach the young. I have known people who showed that there could be no divine judgment by showing that there can be no human judgment, even for practical purposes. They burned their own corn to set fire to the church; they smashed their own tools to smash it; any stick was good enough to beat it with, though it were the last stick of their own dismembered furniture. We do not admire, we hardly excuse, the fanatic who wrecks this world for love of the other. But what are we to say of the fanatic who wrecks this world out of hatred of the other? He sacrifices the very existence of humanity to the non-existence of God. He offers his victims not to the altar, but merely to assert the idleness of the altar and the emptiness of the throne. He is ready to ruin even that primary ethic by which all things live, for his strange and eternal vengeance upon some one who never lived at all. "

 

5 minutes ago, Mart-Mari said:

See the burn mark in the battery charger switches on this pic. This is where is sparks came from. It scared the living daylight out of me each time I was told to operate these switches. 

I have one of these as well. I also use it as an emergency isolator. It should not make sparks under normal operation, unless it is defective. You should only pull it under load in extreme circumstances. That burn mark looks more or less normal for such an emergency situation.

It is not a switch. It is a fuse holder. If you switch it under load, it will make a large spark.

13 minutes ago, plonkster said:

I must say I'm a little unhappy that they just HAD to mention that the installer was a dominee... as if that has anything to do with the matter.

(I know this is off topic and all, and I also understand that given practice-what-you-preach requirements and all we probably agree the man SHOULD have known better... but I still hate the fact that the paper just had to mention this).

Yes but on the other side, this was the reason why I trusted him and believed what he said to me.