On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 6:29:08 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
mike news 2017 04:10:42 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 5/17/2017 6:12 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Thanks very much for taking the time to put all this information
together, tomorrow morning when I have more energy, I will scour all
of it.
That wouldn't happen if you had battery backup!
Classic! ROTFL ;-)

Which is ironic on the face of it, as Trader initially said grid tie
can't run without the grid.

Now you're lying. YOU first gave us the specific example you were
talking about:


"He has no battery bank, so, during the nighttime, and on very cloudy
days, he'd require the grid to make up the difference. If he elects
to install a large enough battery bank, he wouldn't require the grid
during the evenings or when it's cloudy outside. "

I replied to that, IN CONTEXT. You ruled out batteries and I replied
to that. Still waiting for you to show us all the install app notes,
all the eqpt suppliers, all the solar install companies offering
grid tied solar with no batteries, where the house is powered when
the grid is down. It would be one great selling point. Where oh where
are they all? Instead, I gave you exactly the opposite, half a dozen
explaining why it won't work.

Not if it's a residential solar system, which is what we are
talking about here and it complies with the NEC. NEC limits
the maximum voltage to 600V. And you claim to be installing
these?

When this setup was installed, according to a true RMS FLUKE
meter, it was generating over a thousand volts, DC. granted,
that's with both 'strings' and no load present on either of them.


Well then it's in violation of the NEC.

No, it's not. It's a two string array. I was measuring the combined
voltage from both strings. I did say BOTH strings and no load
present on either of them, Didn't I. Why, yes, Yes I did...

Reading comprehension, right?

No, BS comprehension. Who the hell cares what the combined voltage
of a solar array is if it's not INSTALLED THAT WAY? That's like me
saying I have 1200V in my house, because I can add the voltage drops
across ten 120V loads.

I'm not an electrician. I didn't consult the NEC. Regulations
can sometimes sound odd to address a particular situation. On the
few occasions I've consulted the building inspector, his opinions
were different, more lax, than my interpretation of the words written
in the NEC.

A few comments:
In your house, you have 120V x 1.4 x 2 P-P. But the center of that
is near ground. You can never touch more than 120V x 1.4 peak volts
relative to ground. This doesn't prevent you sticking both fingers
into a 240V socket that runs your dryer...don't do that. Still just
as dead, but you never experienced anything greater than ~170 V peak
relative to ground.

Dunno how the code is interpreted, but, if you have two 600V panels
connected in series inside your box, you have 1200V outside
your box and on the panels. You might be able to skirt this like
inside your house. Ground the center point of the 1200V where the
panels connect together. Then
you'll never have more than 600V to ground anywhere on the wiring.



You obviously have no idea about what I wrote about. Yet, you
continue, and call me the troll? Laughable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_engineering

Cripes.. You could be almost anything, such a wide brush...

So, I will ask for my own clarification.. What do you specialize
in?

Don't wanna tell me? Are you still in college to become an electrical
engineer or something?

Still waiting for those examples of grid tied solar that powers
the house with the grid down and no batteries.

I already answered that for you. While it wasn't using batteries, it
was using something which emulated a small bank, as long as the PV
arrays were up and going.

There is no magic. You can't get more instantaneous power out of the
emulator than you can get out of the panels WITHOUT STORAGE of some kind.
Capacitors are a form of storage. The energy stored in a cap is
proportional
to the square of the voltage. You can store 400x the energy in a cap
at 1000V than you can at 48V. Problem is that high voltage capacitor
banks big enough to be useful are expensive...probably more expensive
than a 48V battery.
You could make an argument that a 1200V panel will put out 48V
at lower insolation than a 600V panel. But, at low currents available,
it won't do you much good. And component expenses for the higher voltage
and increased losses will probably exceed any gains.

I've had many discussions over the years with people who took a concept
they didn't fully understand, extrapolated it into a region where it
didn't apply and believed they'd invented something.
In every case, they hadn't invented a new branch of physics. They were
just plain wrong. They'd neglected something very important and
their system didn't do what they thought.

Under conditions of high insolation, you certainly can run your house
without a grid or storage, until the peak load exceeds the currently
available power. Then it's over in an instant. Let me rephrase...
The peaceful consumption of energy is over in an instant.
The thrashing of the voltage coming out of your 120VAC socket can
continue until the sun goes down or something catches fire.

You can't build a practical solar house that most people would accept
without the grid or local storage or some other energy source, like diesel
or natural gas or pumped water or...
Energy out of a system can never exceed the energy in.
Without storage, instantaneous power out can not exceed
power in. Solar is ill-suited to applications without storage
or replacement (the grid).

Maybe I missed that part. What exactly "emulates" a small battery bank?
Seems logical that one would just use a small battery bank, which by
the way is exactly what the install instructions call for. Do you always
have to reinvent the wheel?




If it was possible, all the solar install companies would be
hawking it.

Already discussed that too. Perhaps you should consider switching
over to a real usenet client so you can keep better track of replies?

Still waiting for the examples of all the installs, links to all the
app notes from eqpt suppliers on how you can have grid tied solar
and power the house with the grid down and no batteries.


far, you can't produce one. And I provided you the install manual
for the hybrid inveerter that you cited, where it only shows
installs with a battery bank and where it specifically says it
must be used with a battery bank.

OR! A device which can use the arrays to emulate a battery bank.
Are you sure you're an electrical engineer?

Are you sure you know WTF you're talking about? You simply claimed
that he had a system that was grid tied, that powered the house without
a battery bank when the grid is down. Only now are you bringing up
this "emulation" thing. Nuff said. And if this "emulation" thing is
true, why emulate a small battery bank instead of just buying one?


I thought I was going to
be able to learn something useful from you, but, so far, I've learned
nothing new from you. I'm not impressed.


Some people are incapable of being educated. Still, I've provided you
with a lot info here, like the fact that you can't find examples of
what you claim, which is eqpt companies or solar companies hawking
grid tied solar that powers the house when the grid is down, without
batteries. Ever hear of clouds? I also educated you on the fact that
1000V in residential solar systems, which you claim too, is a violation
of NEC. Now of course you claim it's not actually wired that way,
so then of course it's just a BS number.

and, evidently, you
don't even understand what my modbox is doing, despite devices VERY
CLOSE TO IT already on the market, right now! Have you seen the
extremely small portable jump starter kits that will fit in your
glovebox? They typically run on a 5000MA lithium battery pack
producing less than 12volts usually, and, are somehow able (as if it
were magic) to provide 12volts DC at 400amps (or more) to jump start
your car. Obviously the battery pack they're using doesn't have
400AMPS on it to help you out, but, with some electronics in a very
small physical package, it's able to come up with it.

You're making a guess and extrapolating it and it still doesn't
make the argument.

If your car is in good shape and the battery is good, it will
start in a second or two. If you left your lights on and ran the
battery down slightly, the jump starter can replenish the surface charge
in a few seconds to the point that much of the starting current is
will still coming from the car battery, not the jump starter.

If your battery is DEAD, you probably won't start most cars from
the handheld battery.

No, there aren't electronics that manufacture 400Amps out of thin air.

But that's irrelevant.
It's a battery; it's storage.
Your system doesn't use either.


My modbox is very close to one of those in design principle, except
that it outputs 48volts DC (under load!) at 120+amps with variable
input power from approx 800 to 1200 volts, DC (with approx 3amps!) In
other words, it's emulating a small battery bank.

48V x 120A = 5760W out
1200V x 3A = 3600W in

My math disagrees.
And when a cloud goes by, the system will crash as soon
as the output power required exceeds the input power available
from the panels because you have no storage.

Your box adds cost, losses and does nothing to fix the
power problem. System reliability goes down as the voltages go up.
You are NOT emulating a battery bank because you have no storage.
You have a presumably regulated power supply at 48V output that still
has all the issues
that comes with unreliable solar.
You have gained cost and complexity. You may have reduced wiring
losses, but that's a whole different argument that doesn't address
the unreliability of solar without storage.

There is no free lunch.

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 2:11:25 PM UTC-4, mike wrote:


A few comments:
In your house, you have 120V x 1.4 x 2 P-P. But the center of that
is near ground. You can never touch more than 120V x 1.4 peak volts
relative to ground. This doesn't prevent you sticking both fingers
into a 240V socket that runs your dryer...don't do that. Still just
as dead, but you never experienced anything greater than ~170 V peak
relative to ground.

Dunno how the code is interpreted, but, if you have two 600V panels
connected in series inside your box, you have 1200V outside
your box and on the panels. You might be able to skirt this like
inside your house. Ground the center point of the 1200V where the
panels connect together. Then
you'll never have more than 600V to ground anywhere on the wiring.


This is simple. In the beginning of this thread, Diesel told us that
the install he was talking about, the one that was grid tied, no
batteries, but provided power to the house when the grid was down,
used a Conext-XW hybrid inverter. I already provided a link to the
install manual that says it must be used with a battery bank, which
is contrary to what Diesel was claiming. So now,
let's see what Conext says about the specs for the input voltages:

file:///C:/Users/Int1/Downloads/Schneider-Electric-Conext-XW-60hz-inverter-charger-datasheet_eng.pdf

The nominal input voltage is 25 volts for the small one, 50 volts for
the larger ones. Max input voltage is 32V, 64V respectively.

It's typically used with the solar charge controller that goes
between the inverter and the solar panels, so, let's look at that:

https://www.altestore.com/static/dat...ers/XW-SCC.pdf

Max DC solar panel input votage, operating: 140V
Max , open circuit 150V


Yet Diesel claims to have a residential system that's feeding
at least 600V into a solar system using at least the hybrid
inverter from that company. Go figure.

Nuff said, but if that's not enough, how about this:

http://www.dummies.com/home-garden/g...lar-equipment/

DC-to-AC Inverters for Your Solar Equipment - dummies

"In your solar power system, you need inverters to take the low-voltage, high-current signals from the PV panels and convert them into 120VAC or 240VAC, which is directly compatible with grid power. "





You obviously have no idea about what I wrote about. Yet, you
continue, and call me the troll? Laughable.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electrical_engineering

Cripes.. You could be almost anything, such a wide brush...

So, I will ask for my own clarification.. What do you specialize
in?

Don't wanna tell me? Are you still in college to become an electrical
engineer or something?

Still waiting for those examples of grid tied solar that powers
the house with the grid down and no batteries.

I already answered that for you. While it wasn't using batteries, it
was using something which emulated a small bank, as long as the PV
arrays were up and going.

There is no magic. You can't get more instantaneous power out of the
emulator than you can get out of the panels WITHOUT STORAGE of some kind.
Capacitors are a form of storage.

It would have to be one hell of a cap. And what's the point when storage
batteries are readily available?


The energy stored in a cap is
proportional
to the square of the voltage. You can store 400x the energy in a cap
at 1000V than you can at 48V. Problem is that high voltage capacitor
banks big enough to be useful are expensive...probably more expensive
than a 48V battery.
You could make an argument that a 1200V panel will put out 48V
at lower insolation than a 600V panel. But, at low currents available,
it won't do you much good. And component expenses for the higher voltage
and increased losses will probably exceed any gains.

I've had many discussions over the years with people who took a concept
they didn't fully understand, extrapolated it into a region where it
didn't apply and believed they'd invented something.
In every case, they hadn't invented a new branch of physics. They were
just plain wrong. They'd neglected something very important and
their system didn't do what they thought.


Under conditions of high insolation, you certainly can run your house
without a grid or storage, until the peak load exceeds the currently
available power. Then it's over in an instant. Let me rephrase...
The peaceful consumption of energy is over in an instant.
The thrashing of the voltage coming out of your 120VAC socket can
continue until the sun goes down or something catches fire.

Which it seems the eqpt manufacturers and installers understand, so
they don't offer solar house power systems that power the house without
batteries when the grid goes down.

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 2:35:54 PM UTC-4, mike wrote:

and, evidently, you
don't even understand what my modbox is doing, despite devices VERY
CLOSE TO IT already on the market, right now! Have you seen the
extremely small portable jump starter kits that will fit in your
glovebox? They typically run on a 5000MA lithium battery pack
producing less than 12volts usually, and, are somehow able (as if it
were magic) to provide 12volts DC at 400amps (or more) to jump start
your car. Obviously the battery pack they're using doesn't have
400AMPS on it to help you out, but, with some electronics in a very
small physical package, it's able to come up with it.

You're making a guess and extrapolating it and it still doesn't
make the argument.


First problem there is it doesn't take anywhere near 400A to
start a car. Typical car starter is ~1000 watts, so less
than 100A will do. These new jump starters, AFAIK, are relying
on lithium batteries, which pack a lot of power into a small
size. You only need to supply 1000W for a second to start a car
with no other issues. If a lithium battery pack can power a
handheld shop tool for it's job over a long period, what's so
special about providing 1000W for a second or two?



If your car is in good shape and the battery is good, it will
start in a second or two. If you left your lights on and ran the
battery down slightly, the jump starter can replenish the surface charge
in a few seconds to the point that much of the starting current is
will still coming from the car battery, not the jump starter.

If your battery is DEAD, you probably won't start most cars from
the handheld battery.

No, there aren't electronics that manufacture 400Amps out of thin air.

But that's irrelevant.
It's a battery; it's storage.
Your system doesn't use either.

+1

Looks like it doesn't use 600V either.





My modbox is very close to one of those in design principle, except
that it outputs 48volts DC (under load!) at 120+amps with variable
input power from approx 800 to 1200 volts, DC (with approx 3amps!) In
other words, it's emulating a small battery bank.

48V x 120A = 5760W out
1200V x 3A = 3600W in

+1 It doesn't add up. Funny coming from the guy who made the
alleged "mod box".

And something converting power from one source to another
is very different than a BATTERY. A battery stores power,
what's described above does not.



My math disagrees.
And when a cloud goes by, the system will crash as soon
as the output power required exceeds the input power available
from the panels because you have no storage.

+1



Your box adds cost, losses and does nothing to fix the
power problem.

+1

But a battery bank would. Why would some install company screw
around with a "mod box", instead of just using some batteries?
He did claim that he installed this working for a company for
a client, didn't he?

System reliability goes down as the voltages go up.
You are NOT emulating a battery bank because you have no storage.

Bingo.

You have a presumably regulated power supply at 48V output that still
has all the issues
that comes with unreliable solar.

+1

You have gained cost and complexity. You may have reduced wiring
losses, but that's a whole different argument that doesn't address
the unreliability of solar without storage.

There is no free lunch.

trader_4
Thu, 18
May 2017 15:09:31 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 6:29:08 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
mike news May 2017 04:10:42 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 5/17/2017 6:12 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Thanks very much for taking the time to put all this
information together, tomorrow morning when I have more
energy, I will scour all of it.
That wouldn't happen if you had battery backup!
Classic! ROTFL ;-)

Which is ironic on the face of it, as Trader initially said grid
tie can't run without the grid.

Now you're lying. YOU first gave us the specific example you were
talking about:

My apologies, I confused you for another poster:

MID:
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=149514290700

Does he know that most grid tie inverters will NOT function without
the grid.

What that means in practical terms, he cannot use the electricity
from solar during a power failure.

I think that is a travesty and the rules re inverter designs should
be changed.

Right now this behavior is REQUIRED by the rules to prevent the
possibility of backfeeding power to a dead power line.

At the time I wrote the post, I was not aware of any configuration
changes in the clients setup. IE: As far as I was aware, they did not
have a battery bank and were still using my modbox. My information
wasn't accurate. Simple as that.


--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

trader_4 news:1472ba22-56e1-49aa-ba7c-
Thu, 18 May 2017 14:41:11 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

It may have passed inspection

That it did.

if it's generating voltages above 600V.

Using both strings in a series wiring fashion, it can, yes.

What is the compelling reason to go above 600V anyway?

Already explained.


--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

mike news May 2017 18:09:54 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Dunno how the code is interpreted, but, if you have two 600V
panels connected in series inside your box, you have 1200V outside
your box and on the panels.

Nope, 1200 isn't flowing outside the unit. Circuitry inside the unit
prevents that. I'm not new at this, nor am I an idiot.

You can't get more instantaneous power out of the emulator than you
can get out of the panels WITHOUT STORAGE of some kind.

I don't disagree.

Capacitors are a form of storage.

Yes they are. I wasn't aware Capacitors was considered cheating? They
aren't batteries...

cap at 1000V than you can at 48V. Problem is that high voltage
capacitor banks big enough to be useful are expensive...probably
more expensive than a 48V battery.

Well, considering that the client didn't pay for the modbox, not a
single dime, they aren't out anything. And, I already covered this
possible issue with a reply to Trader sometime ago; when he/she asked
why the solar companies weren't doing this, already.

I've had many discussions over the years with people who took a
concept they didn't fully understand, extrapolated it into a
region where it didn't apply and believed they'd invented
something.

Interesting.

In every case, they hadn't invented a new branch of
physics. They were just plain wrong. They'd neglected something
very important and their system didn't do what they thought.

I didn't claim to have invented any new branch of physics.

Do you often make such assumptions?

Under conditions of high insolation, you certainly can run your
house without a grid or storage, until the peak load exceeds the
currently available power. Then it's over in an instant.

Unless the peak load of the house will most likely, never exceed the
systems capacity. You seem to be quick to forget, the appliances are
GAS, not electric. The 'load' for the house is essentially LED based
lighting and some home entertainment gear, oh, and a laptop and a few
tablets that for the most part, ONLY use the HOUSE to recharge.


Let me rephrase...

That's quite alright. You've made enough assumptions and rolled with
those assumptions.


You can't build a practical solar house that most people would
accept without the grid or local storage or some other energy
source, like diesel or natural gas or pumped water or...
Energy out of a system can never exceed the energy in.
Without storage, instantaneous power out can not exceed
power in. Solar is ill-suited to applications without storage
or replacement (the grid).

It's very interesting to me how we go from, it doesn't work if the
grid is down, to, you can't do it without such and such additional
conditions. Fact is, yourself nor Trader have one of these 'Solar'
houses or wired one, and you both seem to have a problem with the
idea in general.

I've read enough, thanks.

--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

mike news May 2017 18:34:23 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

You're making a guess and extrapolating it and it still doesn't
make the argument.

Nope. I'm going by first hand experience testing several of them on
the market. I don't work for any of those companies, either. Despite
occasionally getting free gear to test and report back on. While I'm
not paid in money, I do get to keep the gear, even if the report is a
terrible one.

If your car is in good shape and the battery is good, it will
start in a second or two. If you left your lights on and ran the
battery down slightly, the jump starter can replenish the surface
charge in a few seconds to the point that much of the starting
current is will still coming from the car battery, not the jump
starter.

Actually, you can disconnect your cars battery and run the jumper
cable clamps to your wires, directly. It will start your car if the
car can be started on the amps it can provide.

If your battery is DEAD, you probably won't start most cars from
the handheld battery.

See above. The reason it may not (I noticed you used the word
probably) if connected to a dead battery is because a dead battery is
like a black hole to incoming electricity. It's a heavy load while
dead/very low. Little electricity will be passed along so long as it
remains connected in those cases.

No, there aren't electronics that manufacture 400Amps out of thin
air.

I didn't say it did it out of thin air.

But that's irrelevant.
It's a battery; it's storage.
Your system doesn't use either.

Caps are storage (not for long term in this case), unless I was
taught incorrectly. And, It certainly does use some.

And when a cloud goes by, the system will crash as soon
as the output power required exceeds the input power available
from the panels because you have no storage.

Well, no, it won't. It possibly could have if left in it's original
configuration, but, as I wrote, a few days back now, he's on an
actual battery bank. The modbox is no longer wired into the system.

Your box adds cost, losses and does nothing to fix the
power problem.

My box is designed to keep the inverter going via PV array (if PV
array permits it) in the event of temporary grid failure. I didn't
say it would do anything more than that.

You are NOT emulating a battery bank because you have no
storage.

I have no longterm storage options in the modbox, correct. However,
as long as the PV array is up and going, It is as far as the inverter
is concerned, a small battery bank. If the grid temporarily goes
down, the inverter won't care, it can use the power provided by the
modbox to keep the client going. Which was the intention behind it.

You have gained cost and complexity. You may have reduced wiring
losses, but that's a whole different argument that doesn't address
the unreliability of solar without storage.

There is no free lunch.

Complexity, slightly, cost increase? No. The modbox cost me, but, not
the client. And, no there's no free lunch. Be it solar, wind,
nuclear, whatever you prefer. Nothings for free.


--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

On 5/18/2017 5:06 PM, Diesel wrote:
mike news May 2017 18:09:54 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Dunno how the code is interpreted, but, if you have two 600V
panels connected in series inside your box, you have 1200V outside
your box and on the panels.

Nope, 1200 isn't flowing outside the unit. Circuitry inside the unit
prevents that. I'm not new at this, nor am I an idiot.

It's not rocket science. Draw a schematic with two 600V battery symbols
representing the solar panels. Connect them in series inside your black
box. Inside the box, place an X on two points attached to the panels
that have 1200V between them.
Convince me that you can't find two points outside your black box
that have 1200V between them. It'll be two of the four wires attached
to the black box. If you can't they're not in series.


You can't get more instantaneous power out of the emulator than you
can get out of the panels WITHOUT STORAGE of some kind.

I don't disagree.

Capacitors are a form of storage.

Yes they are. I wasn't aware Capacitors was considered cheating? They
aren't batteries...

cap at 1000V than you can at 48V. Problem is that high voltage
capacitor banks big enough to be useful are expensive...probably
more expensive than a 48V battery.

Well, considering that the client didn't pay for the modbox, not a
single dime, they aren't out anything. And, I already covered this
possible issue with a reply to Trader sometime ago; when he/she asked
why the solar companies weren't doing this, already.

I've had many discussions over the years with people who took a
concept they didn't fully understand, extrapolated it into a
region where it didn't apply and believed they'd invented
something.

Interesting.

In every case, they hadn't invented a new branch of
physics. They were just plain wrong. They'd neglected something
very important and their system didn't do what they thought.

I didn't claim to have invented any new branch of physics.

Do you often make such assumptions?

Yes, I do. If they can't explain the phenomenon using known laws
of physics, there has to be something new, previously unknown
going on.

Under conditions of high insolation, you certainly can run your
house without a grid or storage, until the peak load exceeds the
currently available power. Then it's over in an instant.

Unless the peak load of the house will most likely, never exceed the
systems capacity. You seem to be quick to forget, the appliances are
GAS, not electric. The 'load' for the house is essentially LED based
lighting and some home entertainment gear, oh, and a laptop and a few
tablets that for the most part, ONLY use the HOUSE to recharge.

Ok, so you've moved the battery to the device. That works. But it's
storage nonetheless. If you have adequate distributed storage in
devices to run
them without grid tie, you don't need grid tie and you're off the grid.
Good job.
Just don't try to tell me that it's a typical residential rooftop solar
system for the masses.


Let me rephrase...

That's quite alright. You've made enough assumptions and rolled with
those assumptions.


You can't build a practical solar house that most people would
accept without the grid or local storage or some other energy
source, like diesel or natural gas or pumped water or...
Energy out of a system can never exceed the energy in.
Without storage, instantaneous power out can not exceed
power in. Solar is ill-suited to applications without storage
or replacement (the grid).

It's very interesting to me how we go from, it doesn't work if the
grid is down, to, you can't do it without such and such additional
conditions. Fact is, yourself nor Trader have one of these 'Solar'
houses or wired one, and you both seem to have a problem with the
idea in general.

I've read enough, thanks.
You're welcome.

I've read enough, thanks.
You're welcome.


most of this discussion is irrelevant to the issue

Yes, of course it is POSSIBLE to make a PV system work without the grid.

The point is that most commercial grid tie PV systems that consumers actually buy will NOT work without the grid.

That's why I said this is a travesty,

Because it is technically possible to do but the regulatory constraints for the most part prevent it.

m

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:09:26 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4
Thu, 18
May 2017 15:09:31 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 6:29:08 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
mike news May 2017 04:10:42 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 5/17/2017 6:12 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Thanks very much for taking the time to put all this
information together, tomorrow morning when I have more
energy, I will scour all of it.
That wouldn't happen if you had battery backup!
Classic! ROTFL ;-)

Which is ironic on the face of it, as Trader initially said grid
tie can't run without the grid.

Now you're lying. YOU first gave us the specific example you were
talking about:

My apologies, I confused you for another poster:

MID:
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=149514290700

Does he know that most grid tie inverters will NOT function without
the grid.

What that means in practical terms, he cannot use the electricity
from solar during a power failure.

I think that is a travesty and the rules re inverter designs should
be changed.

IDK what "rules" you're referring to. As I and Mike have pointed out
over and over the fundamental problem with using solar to power a
house without the grid and without batteries is the SUN. What
happens to all the appliances, motors, etc when a cloud passes?
How many customers are willing to put up with brownouts or total
drop of power when clouds pass by, on a cloudy day, no power at
night when you typically need it the most, etc?




Right now this behavior is REQUIRED by the rules to prevent the
possibility of backfeeding power to a dead power line.


That issue is certainly the most common issues that solar companies
frequently cite when asked why it won't work without the grid.
But I've provided you cites that also include the insurmountable
problem outlined above. I suspect most solar companies go with
the disconnect story because it's simpler and doesn't make solar
look bad, but instead uses the safety issue. And you already said
that it could be disconnected via an interlock, just like we do
with generators. I agree with that, I don't see the isolation
thing being the big, insurmountable problem. It's the sun and
clouds, the inability to constantly keep up a given power level,
without a battery bank, as Mike and I have pointed out.

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:09:26 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4 news:1472ba22-56e1-49aa-ba7c-
Thu, 18 May 2017 14:41:11 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

It may have passed inspection

That it did.

if it's generating voltages above 600V.

Using both strings in a series wiring fashion, it can, yes.

Doh! A few posts ago, in series it was generating 1200V, now it
takes using both strings in series to get to 600V. Pretty soon
we'll be down to 120V.



What is the compelling reason to go above 600V anyway?

Already explained.


I guess I missed that and it's too much to say it here?
Reading what Mike was saying, I suspect the answer was that
the miracle mod box required it? That the same amount of power supplied
at the normal much lower voltage from the solar array just isn't good enough? Tell us why.




--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:09:29 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
mike news May 2017 18:09:54 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

Dunno how the code is interpreted, but, if you have two 600V
panels connected in series inside your box, you have 1200V outside
your box and on the panels.

Nope, 1200 isn't flowing outside the unit. Circuitry inside the unit
prevents that. I'm not new at this, nor am I an idiot.

You can't get more instantaneous power out of the emulator than you
can get out of the panels WITHOUT STORAGE of some kind.

I don't disagree.

Capacitors are a form of storage.

Yes they are. I wasn't aware Capacitors was considered cheating? They
aren't batteries...


They are also pretty much useless for storing energy to solve the passing
cloud problem too. It would take one hell of a cap to supply typical
power to a house for even a few seconds and why bother when
battery banks are available? Show us a solar install that relies on
caps for storage.



cap at 1000V than you can at 48V. Problem is that high voltage
capacitor banks big enough to be useful are expensive...probably
more expensive than a 48V battery.

Well, considering that the client didn't pay for the modbox, not a
single dime, they aren't out anything. And, I already covered this
possible issue with a reply to Trader sometime ago; when he/she asked
why the solar companies weren't doing this, already.

I've had many discussions over the years with people who took a
concept they didn't fully understand, extrapolated it into a
region where it didn't apply and believed they'd invented
something.

Interesting.

In every case, they hadn't invented a new branch of
physics. They were just plain wrong. They'd neglected something
very important and their system didn't do what they thought.

I didn't claim to have invented any new branch of physics.

Do you often make such assumptions?

Under conditions of high insolation, you certainly can run your
house without a grid or storage, until the peak load exceeds the
currently available power. Then it's over in an instant.

Unless the peak load of the house will most likely, never exceed the
systems capacity. You seem to be quick to forget, the appliances are
GAS, not electric. The 'load' for the house is essentially LED based
lighting and some home entertainment gear, oh, and a laptop and a few
tablets that for the most part, ONLY use the HOUSE to recharge.


The problem here is that the system we're discussing keeps morphing.
We were talking about solar, it's viability for the country. When
you started on this case study, there was no mention of it having
unusual gear, eg propane powered AC, very limited loads. Funny how
the details keep getting added.





Let me rephrase...

That's quite alright. You've made enough assumptions and rolled with
those assumptions.


You can't build a practical solar house that most people would
accept without the grid or local storage or some other energy
source, like diesel or natural gas or pumped water or...
Energy out of a system can never exceed the energy in.
Without storage, instantaneous power out can not exceed
power in. Solar is ill-suited to applications without storage
or replacement (the grid).

It's very interesting to me how we go from, it doesn't work if the
grid is down,

You said he had a grid tied solar with no battery bank. And so
far, you say it works by virtue of this miracle "mod box" that
emulates a battery. Why would anyone want to or need to emulate
a battery when batteries are readily available? What is the source
and specs for the storage in this "mod box"? Those are really simple questions.

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:09:30 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
mike news May 2017 18:34:23 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

You're making a guess and extrapolating it and it still doesn't
make the argument.

Nope. I'm going by first hand experience testing several of them on
the market. I don't work for any of those companies, either. Despite
occasionally getting free gear to test and report back on. While I'm
not paid in money, I do get to keep the gear, even if the report is a
terrible one.

If your car is in good shape and the battery is good, it will
start in a second or two. If you left your lights on and ran the
battery down slightly, the jump starter can replenish the surface
charge in a few seconds to the point that much of the starting
current is will still coming from the car battery, not the jump
starter.

Actually, you can disconnect your cars battery and run the jumper
cable clamps to your wires, directly. It will start your car if the
car can be started on the amps it can provide.

It will probably start the car, but I sure wouldn't do it on a
modern car with all the electronic gear in it.



If your battery is DEAD, you probably won't start most cars from
the handheld battery.

See above. The reason it may not (I noticed you used the word
probably) if connected to a dead battery is because a dead battery is
like a black hole to incoming electricity. It's a heavy load while
dead/very low. Little electricity will be passed along so long as it
remains connected in those cases.

Bingo. And I'd like to see an instruction sheet from one of those
car starting battery packs that tell you it's OK, a good idea, to
disconnect the car battery and just use it



No, there aren't electronics that manufacture 400Amps out of thin
air.

I didn't say it did it out of thin air.

But that's irrelevant.
It's a battery; it's storage.
Your system doesn't use either.

Caps are storage (not for long term in this case), unless I was
taught incorrectly. And, It certainly does use some.

ROFL. Uses "some"? Just tell us the size of those caps,
that's an easy question.





And when a cloud goes by, the system will crash as soon
as the output power required exceeds the input power available
from the panels because you have no storage.

Well, no, it won't. It possibly could have if left in it's original
configuration, but, as I wrote, a few days back now, he's on an
actual battery bank. The modbox is no longer wired into the system.

Good grief. Now we've morphed to that it will have the problems
from passing clouds that Mike and I said from the beginning,
except that now it has a battery bank? That's exactly what I
said in my first reply, to make this work, you need a battery bank.




Your box adds cost, losses and does nothing to fix the
power problem.

My box is designed to keep the inverter going via PV array (if PV
array permits it) in the event of temporary grid failure. I didn't
say it would do anything more than that.


Now, you said or implied that he had the house powered with solar
without the grid and without a battery bank. Since then, you've
finally told us that the "house" has propane AC, no loads except
some LED lighting, some limited entertainment gear (probably a
radio), and some tablets that typically aren't charging. Again,
context is everything. We were talking about the viability of
solar for the country, for people tied to the grid, ie the typical
scenario. If you redefine a house to be something that can run
off of just 200 watts, well it sure makes powering it with an
array of panels but little sun possible. Possible, but not
viable for a solution for the country. And again, who would
screw around with a "mod box", developing one, building it,
(BTW, is it UL listed?), instead of just
following the install instructions that say the hybrid inverter
needs a BATTERY BANK? Don't they have storage batteries in TN?



You are NOT emulating a battery bank because you have no
storage.

I have no longterm storage options in the modbox, correct. However,
as long as the PV array is up and going, It is as far as the inverter
is concerned, a small battery bank. If the grid temporarily goes
down, the inverter won't care, it can use the power provided by the
modbox to keep the client going. Which was the intention behind it.

You have gained cost and complexity. You may have reduced wiring
losses, but that's a whole different argument that doesn't address
the unreliability of solar without storage.

There is no free lunch.

Complexity, slightly, cost increase? No. The modbox cost me, but, not
the client. And, no there's no free lunch. Be it solar, wind,
nuclear, whatever you prefer. Nothings for free.


Why did this "mod box" cost you, but not the client? What solar install
company puts in gear that one of it's employees hacks together for free,
that emulates a battery, instead of just using a battery? No batteries in TN? What did the electrical inspector say when he saw your "mod box"?

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 2:37:05 AM UTC-4, mike wrote:


Ok, so you've moved the battery to the device. That works. But it's
storage nonetheless. If you have adequate distributed storage in
devices to run
them without grid tie, you don't need grid tie and you're off the grid.
Good job.
Just don't try to tell me that it's a typical residential rooftop solar
system for the masses.

Interesting isn't it how the story morphs. In the beginning there
was no mention the the house had propane powered AC, (and I think
some other propane powered non-traditional stuff too), now the house
has almost no loads other than LED lighting, some entertainment gear
(radio?), and tablets, PCs etc that run off charged batteries.
Diesel's problems in other threads is that he either can't grasp
context or he deliberately distorts it. We were talking about solar
viability across the country, not one peculiar, extreme case.

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 9:21:04 AM UTC-4, wrote:

I've read enough, thanks.
You're welcome.


most of this discussion is irrelevant to the issue

Yes, of course it is POSSIBLE to make a PV system work without the grid.

The point is that most commercial grid tie PV systems that consumers actually buy will NOT work without the grid.

That's why I said this is a travesty,

Because it is technically possible to do but the regulatory constraints for the most part prevent it.

m

I'd like to see the regulatory constraints that prevent it. If you
have links to actual regs, please provide them. I agree that is what
most solar companies say, that it's a safety issue, but I don't see
why. For example, we have backup generators that a simple transfer switch
isolates. Some solar companies also cite what Mike and I have been
saying, that solar without the grid won't work because the sun doesn't
shine consistently. A passing cloud, you'd have a brownout or total
drop. How many customers would put up with that? And also I don't
see how it's a safety reg issue when hybrid systems that include a
battery bank work with the grid.

trader_4
Thu, 18
May 2017 22:50:45 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

It's typically used with the solar charge controller that goes
between the inverter and the solar panels, so, let's look at that:
https://www.altestore.com/static/dat...ers/XW-SCC.pdf

Wrong one, genius.

http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...rol-panel-scp/

or this one:

http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...conext-combox/

Yet Diesel claims to have a residential system that's feeding
at least 600V into a solar system using at least the hybrid
inverter from that company. Go figure.

That I did, and, I do. The controllers above are rated for that purpose.

Nuff said, but if that's not enough, how about this:

You're right, I've wasted more than enough time on this subject with you.



--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

mike news May 2017 06:35:33 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

It's not rocket science. Draw a schematic with two 600V battery
symbols representing the solar panels. Connect them in series
inside your black box. Inside the box, place an X on two points
attached to the panels that have 1200V between them.
Convince me that you can't find two points outside your black box
that have 1200V between them. It'll be two of the four wires
attached to the black box. If you can't they're not in series.

No, it's not rocket science...
http://www.talkingelectronics.com/pr...e%20Works.html

While I won't get into my specific circuit designs, suffice to say,
you won't see 1200volts on the input terminals unless you take a
reading outside the box, and, not internally. As internally, as I
already told you, it has circuitry to prevent that issue.

The diode reference above is one of the important components to that
'safety' circuit, and I offered the link because you don't seem to
understand what a diode can be used for. Well, now you you do.

Ok, so you've moved the battery to the device. That works. But
it's storage nonetheless. If you have adequate distributed
storage in devices to run
them without grid tie, you don't need grid tie and you're off the
grid. Good job.
Just don't try to tell me that it's a typical residential rooftop
solar system for the masses.

I'm not sure what you mean by traditional, but, it is a viable solar
option, if you can afford the costs and don't expect to recoup the
losts by selling it to your power company. His goal wasn't to be off
the grid, but, he could be if he so desired.




--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

trader_4
Fri, 19
May 2017 19:31:40 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

It will probably start the car, but I sure wouldn't do it on a
modern car with all the electronic gear in it.

Ok.


Well, no, it won't. It possibly could have if left in it's
original configuration, but, as I wrote, a few days back now,
he's on an actual battery bank. The modbox is no longer wired
into the system.

Good grief. Now we've morphed to that it will have the problems
from passing clouds that Mike and I said from the beginning,
except that now it has a battery bank? That's exactly what I
said in my first reply, to make this work, you need a battery
bank.

we haven't morphed into anything...

My box is designed to keep the inverter going via PV array (if PV
array permits it) in the event of temporary grid failure. I
didn't say it would do anything more than that.


Now, you said or implied that he had the house powered with solar
without the grid and without a battery bank.

Yep. His household appliances are gas, not electric. The house itself
requires little power by comparison to a house that has electric
appliances. So, with the modbox OR a real battery bank, he can run
without the grid.

finally told us that the "house" has propane AC, no loads except
some LED lighting, some limited entertainment gear (probably a
radio), and some tablets that typically aren't charging. Again,
context is everything.

Yep. You and mike made assumptions that weren't correct. You both
assumed everyone has the same setup as yourself or someone else you
know, and, you both rolled with it.

Neither of you have actually installed the hardware to one of these,
or, wired them for that matter. You both just assume you know more
than you actually do on the subject and the conditions with which
this setup is running.

Why did this "mod box" cost you, but not the client?

Because I didn't sell it to them?!? It's mine. It was on loan to
them.

What solar install company

More assumptions on your part. I don't work for a 'solar install
company' - We do a hell of a lot more than solar installs, thanks.
Residential/commercial and industrial wiring is our thing, primarily.
As I told you, before, we were asked by a contractor to setup and
install the solar equipment on a new house that was just built. So,
the company said yes and some of us were assigned to do it. And, we
did. Passed inspection, it's all good.

No batteries in TN? What did the electrical inspector
say when he saw your "mod box"?

paraphrasing "Oh cool a regulated power supply. Neat" What else would
he have said? I'm surprised it's taken all this time and you still
didn't know what the modbox was. So, what aspect of electrical
engineering do you specialize in?





--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

trader_4
Fri, 19
May 2017 19:02:35 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:09:26 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4
Thu,
18 May 2017 15:09:31 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 6:29:08 AM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
mike news 18 May 2017 04:10:42 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 5/17/2017 6:12 PM, Stormin' Norman wrote:
Thanks very much for taking the time to put all this
information together, tomorrow morning when I have more
energy, I will scour all of it.
That wouldn't happen if you had battery backup! Classic!
ROTFL ;-)

Which is ironic on the face of it, as Trader initially said
grid tie can't run without the grid.

Now you're lying. YOU first gave us the specific example you
were talking about:

My apologies, I confused you for another poster:

MID:
http://al.howardknight.net/msgid.cgi?ID=149514290700

Does he know that most grid tie inverters will NOT function
without the grid.

What that means in practical terms, he cannot use the
electricity from solar during a power failure.

I think that is a travesty and the rules re inverter designs
should be changed.

IDK what "rules" you're referring to. As I and Mike have pointed
out over and over the fundamental problem with using solar to
power a house without the grid and without batteries is the SUN.
What happens to all the appliances, motors, etc when a cloud
passes? How many customers are willing to put up with brownouts or
total drop of power when clouds pass by, on a cloudy day, no power
at night when you typically need it the most, etc?

You're responding to the wrong individual. I quoted the individuals
post, and included MID for you with the apology for having accused
you of writing the nonsense.




-- I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet. Please
be patient. I will get to you shortly.

trader_4
Fri, 19
May 2017 19:07:05 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:09:26 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4 news:1472ba22-56e1-49aa-ba7c-
Thu, 18 May 2017 14:41:11 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

It may have passed inspection

That it did.

if it's generating voltages above 600V.

Using both strings in a series wiring fashion, it can, yes.

Doh! A few posts ago, in series it was generating 1200V, now it
takes using both strings in series to get to 600V. Pretty soon
we'll be down to 120V.

Hmm. You might wanna take a refresher course in english comprehension.
Using both strings, it can easily exceed 600volts. Close to 1200,
actually. Each string is capable of generating nearly 600 volts on it's
own, and, I've never claimed differently.

I guess I missed that

I guess you should consider accessing usenet via a real client.



--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

trader_4
Thu, 18
May 2017 22:50:45 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:


It's typically used with the solar charge controller that goes
between the inverter and the solar panels, so, let's look at that:

https://www.altestore.com/static/dat...ers/XW-SCC.pdf

I see you intentionally picked the wrong controller.

http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...t-mppt-80-600/

I covered that on Wednesday:

Message-ID: if158Y09M3f43yNnS8u4

-----------------------------------------------------------------
http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...t-mppt-80-600/

You have your choice of the control panel...

http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...rol-panel-scp/

Or this version of the control panel that requires either a laptop
or Android device.

http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...conext-combox/

They're sold seperately.

--------------------------------------------


Yet Diesel claims to have a residential system that's feeding
at least 600V into a solar system using at least the hybrid
inverter from that company. Go figure.

Yep...

http://cdn.solar.schneider-electric....t-20161207.pdf
http://cdn.solar.schneider-electric...._Rev-F_ENG.pdf


Nuff said

Indeed.

I find your intentional dishonesty rude, to say the least. And, I've
tolerated it for as long as I'm going to.

I see now why so many people think you're a troll. Don't concern
yourself with responding, You'd be wasting your time as I wouldn't
see it. Having the benefit of a real usenet client does have it's
perks. One of which is filtering. Both internally to the client as
well as externally.

In other words, future posts from you will be dropped when my client
goes to query the server for new posts. I don't even have to bother
adding you to the filters on the client. Damn google groupie; I
should have known better than to attempt interaction with you in the
first place, when you initially claimed I was attacking you without
justification for the claim.


--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 6:04:11 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4
Thu, 18
May 2017 22:50:45 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

It's typically used with the solar charge controller that goes
between the inverter and the solar panels, so, let's look at that:
https://www.altestore.com/static/dat...ers/XW-SCC.pdf

Wrong one, genius.

http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...rol-panel-scp/

or this one:

http://solar.schneider-electric.com/...conext-combox/

Doesn't matter, it just reinforces what I said. Both those devices
only accept inputs of 15V to 24V DC. Show us the eqpt that needs
or accepts 600V from the solar panels.




Yet Diesel claims to have a residential system that's feeding
at least 600V into a solar system using at least the hybrid
inverter from that company. Go figure.

That I did, and, I do. The controllers above are rated for that purpose.

Now they are not. Not a single Conext data sheet or install guide
shows any of their eqpt being used with 600V. The max operating
voltage is 150V.


Still waiting for some simple answers that the designer of a "mod box"
should have been able to answer instantly.

1 - Give us the specs for the caps that you say are used as part of a
design to "emulate" a battery bank. How large are they?

2 - Why would anyone design a "mod box" using caps instead of just
using a battery bank? No batteries in TN? And why would any real,
reputable solar company have one of it's employees hacking around,
building special gear to install at a customer site instead of just
using a very simple battery bank, which the Conext install manual
clearly says must be used? And note that the battery bank could
also provide power when there is no sun too.

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 6:04:12 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:


Good grief. Now we've morphed to that it will have the problems
from passing clouds that Mike and I said from the beginning,
except that now it has a battery bank? That's exactly what I
said in my first reply, to make this work, you need a battery
bank.

we haven't morphed into anything...

Yes, we did and you did the morphing. The CONTEXT was the viability
of solar, for the country, the economics of it. You brought up a
case you say you were involved with, but didn't tell us at the outset
that, if true, it's a pathological case. It takes days for it to morph
into that the house allegedly now has propane running the AC, propane
running the refrigerator, very limited loads, eg just LED lighting,
tablets that are typically charged and running off batteries, etc.
Clearly that isn't the homes that 99% of the US is living in. It
sounds more like an RV. And to not disclose that at the outset
when making your case is just fraudulent and dishonest.




My box is designed to keep the inverter going via PV array (if PV
array permits it) in the event of temporary grid failure. I
didn't say it would do anything more than that.


Now, you said or implied that he had the house powered with solar
without the grid and without a battery bank.

Yep. His household appliances are gas, not electric. The house itself
requires little power by comparison to a house that has electric
appliances. So, with the modbox OR a real battery bank, he can run
without the grid.

finally told us that the "house" has propane AC, no loads except
some LED lighting, some limited entertainment gear (probably a
radio), and some tablets that typically aren't charging. Again,
context is everything.

Yep. You and mike made assumptions that weren't correct. You both
assumed everyone has the same setup as yourself or someone else you
know, and, you both rolled with it.

No, our only mistake was giving you credit for being honest.



Neither of you have actually installed the hardware to one of these,
or, wired them for that matter. You both just assume you know more
than you actually do on the subject and the conditions with which
this setup is running.

Which is why I asked you some simple questions, that so far you
refuse to answer:

1 - Give us the specs for the caps that you say are used as part of your
design to "emulate" a battery bank. How large are they?

2 - Why would anyone design a "mod box" using caps instead of just
using a battery bank? No batteries in TN? And why would any real,
reputable solar company have one of it's employees hacking around,
building special gear to install at a customer site instead of just
using a very simple battery bank, which the Conext install manual
clearly says must be used? And note that the battery bank could
also provide power when there is no sun too.






Why did this "mod box" cost you, but not the client?

Because I didn't sell it to them?!? It's mine. It was on loan to
them.

What solar install company

More assumptions on your part. I don't work for a 'solar install
company' - We do a hell of a lot more than solar installs, thanks.
Residential/commercial and industrial wiring is our thing, primarily.
As I told you, before, we were asked by a contractor to setup and
install the solar equipment on a new house that was just built. So,
the company said yes and some of us were assigned to do it. And, we
did. Passed inspection, it's all good.

No batteries in TN? What did the electrical inspector
say when he saw your "mod box"?

paraphrasing "Oh cool a regulated power supply. Neat" What else would
he have said? I'm surprised it's taken all this time and you still
didn't know what the modbox was. So, what aspect of electrical
engineering do you specialize in?


BS detection.

On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 6:08:59 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4
Fri, 19
May 2017 19:07:05 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On Thursday, May 18, 2017 at 8:09:26 PM UTC-4, Diesel wrote:
trader_4 news:1472ba22-56e1-49aa-ba7c-
Thu, 18 May 2017 14:41:11 GMT in
alt.home.repair, wrote:

It may have passed inspection

That it did.

if it's generating voltages above 600V.

Using both strings in a series wiring fashion, it can, yes.

Doh! A few posts ago, in series it was generating 1200V, now it
takes using both strings in series to get to 600V. Pretty soon
we'll be down to 120V.

Hmm. You might wanna take a refresher course in english comprehension.
Using both strings, it can easily exceed 600volts. Close to 1200,
actually. Each string is capable of generating nearly 600 volts on it's
own, and, I've never claimed differently.

You might want to take a refresher course in keeping your story straight.
You just confirmed again exactly what I posted above.



I guess I missed that

I guess you should consider accessing usenet via a real client.


Typical, now trying to start a diversion into what is totally
irrelevant.



Still waiting for some simple answers that the designer of a "mod box"
should have been able to answer instantly.

1 - Give us the specs for the caps that you say are used as part of a
design to "emulate" a battery bank. How large are they?

2 - Why would anyone design a "mod box" using caps instead of just
using a battery bank? No batteries in TN? And why would any real,
reputable solar company have one of it's employees hacking around,
building special gear to install at a customer site instead of just
using a very simple battery bank, which the Conext install manual
clearly says must be used? And note that the battery bank could
also provide power when there is no sun too.

I'm loosing faith in Usenet.

This is one of the few threads in AHR that is on topic.

AHR is being attacked by spam.

You both are knowledgeable guys so lets end the ****ing context and
try to help some newbies.

Else this newsgroup is going to die.

m

On Sat, 20 May 2017 09:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
trader_4 wrote:

From: trader_4
Subject: Solar Roof Read reply Solar is joke
Date: Sat, 20 May 2017 09:55:14 -0700 (PDT)
User-Agent: G2/1.0
Newsgroups: alt.home.repair


LOL you and dustin make a fine pair...both winning friends where
ever you go.
You two should holiday together.

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I'm loosing faith in Usenet.

This is one of the few threads in AHR that is on topic.

AHR is being attacked by spam.

You both are knowledgeable guys so lets end the ****ing context and
try to help some newbies.

Else this newsgroup is going to die.

m

I don't see the relevance to your comment. What is or isn't going on
in this on-topic thread has nothing to do with the new spam and I have
been responding to other legitimate posts. Actually, if you're paying
attention, the sudden increase started with the arrival of certain posters,
who brought some "friends" with them. I agree that it's under attack,
that it's probably finished, but IDK how to solve it. Someone suggested
creating a moderated group.

On 5/22/2017 12:15 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I'm loosing faith in Usenet.

This is one of the few threads in AHR that is on topic.

AHR is being attacked by spam.

You both are knowledgeable guys so lets end the ****ing context and
try to help some newbies.

Else this newsgroup is going to die.

m

I don't see the relevance to your comment. What is or isn't going on
in this on-topic thread has nothing to do with the new spam and I have
been responding to other legitimate posts. Actually, if you're paying
attention, the sudden increase started with the arrival of certain posters,
who brought some "friends" with them. I agree that it's under attack,
that it's probably finished, but IDK how to solve it. Someone suggested
creating a moderated group.


I don't like the idea of moderation. Sadly, this group has a lot of
crap now. I do find that putting a half dozen posters in the bozo bin
gets rid of a lot of the nonsense. Just added another this morning.
Ignoring them may help.

I don't see the relevance to your comment. What is or isn't going on
in this on-topic thread has nothing to do with the new spam ...



right, I'm saying this thread is NOT spam, and is on topic...

So lets keep it civil even if we have disagreements.

My point being, if we can't keep the on topic threads between knowledgeable folks civil, we have no chance against the spam.

m

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:06:06 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 5/22/2017 12:15 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I'm loosing faith in Usenet.

This is one of the few threads in AHR that is on topic.

AHR is being attacked by spam.

You both are knowledgeable guys so lets end the ****ing context and
try to help some newbies.

Else this newsgroup is going to die.

m

I don't see the relevance to your comment. What is or isn't going on
in this on-topic thread has nothing to do with the new spam and I have
been responding to other legitimate posts. Actually, if you're paying
attention, the sudden increase started with the arrival of certain posters,
who brought some "friends" with them. I agree that it's under attack,
that it's probably finished, but IDK how to solve it. Someone suggested
creating a moderated group.

I don't like the idea of moderation. Sadly, this group has a lot of
crap now. I do find that putting a half dozen posters in the bozo bin
gets rid of a lot of the nonsense. Just added another this morning.
Ignoring them may help.


I rarely killfiled anyone when I was using a "Real" newsreader but there is no killfile with Google Groups. I may be forced to load a newsreader on this little stick computer because of the malicious flood of crap that's hit the newsgroup for some reason. It seems to follow certain individuals around Usenet trying to destroy any group they post in. ”Œ( à²*_à²*)”˜

[8~{} Uncle Cross Monster

On 5/22/2017 6:09 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:06:06 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 5/22/2017 12:15 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I'm loosing faith in Usenet.

This is one of the few threads in AHR that is on topic.

AHR is being attacked by spam.

You both are knowledgeable guys so lets end the ****ing context and
try to help some newbies.

Else this newsgroup is going to die.

m

I don't see the relevance to your comment. What is or isn't going on
in this on-topic thread has nothing to do with the new spam and I have
been responding to other legitimate posts. Actually, if you're paying
attention, the sudden increase started with the arrival of certain posters,
who brought some "friends" with them. I agree that it's under attack,
that it's probably finished, but IDK how to solve it. Someone suggested
creating a moderated group.

I don't like the idea of moderation. Sadly, this group has a lot of
crap now. I do find that putting a half dozen posters in the bozo bin
gets rid of a lot of the nonsense. Just added another this morning.
Ignoring them may help.


I rarely killfiled anyone when I was using a "Real" newsreader but there is no killfile with Google Groups. I may be forced to load a newsreader on this little stick computer because of the malicious flood of crap that's hit the newsgroup for some reason. It seems to follow certain individuals around Usenet trying to destroy any group they post in. ”Œ( à²*_à²*)”˜

[8~{} Uncle Cross Monster


I was gone all day, and when I loaded this group this evening it wanted
to d/l 300 posts. After my filters deleted all the junk, cross posts,
and trolls I only had 66 our of the 300 posts that were left to read.

--
Maggie

On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 8:18:41 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 5/22/2017 6:09 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:06:06 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 5/22/2017 12:15 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I'm loosing faith in Usenet.

This is one of the few threads in AHR that is on topic.

AHR is being attacked by spam.

You both are knowledgeable guys so lets end the ****ing context and
try to help some newbies.

Else this newsgroup is going to die.

m

I don't see the relevance to your comment. What is or isn't going on
in this on-topic thread has nothing to do with the new spam and I have
been responding to other legitimate posts. Actually, if you're paying
attention, the sudden increase started with the arrival of certain posters,
who brought some "friends" with them. I agree that it's under attack,
that it's probably finished, but IDK how to solve it. Someone suggested
creating a moderated group.

I don't like the idea of moderation. Sadly, this group has a lot of
crap now. I do find that putting a half dozen posters in the bozo bin
gets rid of a lot of the nonsense. Just added another this morning.
Ignoring them may help.

I rarely killfiled anyone when I was using a "Real" newsreader but there is no killfile with Google Groups. I may be forced to load a newsreader on this little stick computer because of the malicious flood of crap that's hit the newsgroup for some reason. It seems to follow certain individuals around Usenet trying to destroy any group they post in. ”Œ( à²*_à²*)”˜

[8~{} Uncle Cross Monster

I was gone all day, and when I loaded this group this evening it wanted
to d/l 300 posts. After my filters deleted all the junk, cross posts,
and trolls I only had 66 our of the 300 posts that were left to read.
--
Maggie


I wonder who the new batch of creeps is following? ”Œ( à²*_à²*)”˜

[8~{} Uncle Curious Monster

On 05/22/2017 08:18 PM, Muggles wrote:

[snip]

I was gone all day, and when I loaded this group this evening it wanted
to d/l 300 posts. After my filters deleted all the junk, cross posts,
and trolls I only had 66 our of the 300 posts that were left to read.


I didn't notice the numbers, but I did see similar this morning, after
filtering out some obvious junk posters.

BTW, I'm using Thunderbird and wish there was a way to make a filter
affect multiple groups.

--
Mark Lloyd
http://notstupid.us/

"It is scandalous that any modern, intelligent, well- educated person
should believe in Christianity." [Delos B. McKown, Ph.D., U.S.
professor, philosopher, author, Former clergyman]

On 5/22/2017 11:42 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 8:18:41 PM UTC-5, Muggles wrote:
On 5/22/2017 6:09 PM, Uncle Monster wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 12:06:06 PM UTC-5, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
On 5/22/2017 12:15 PM, trader_4 wrote:
On Monday, May 22, 2017 at 9:16:59 AM UTC-4, wrote:
I'm loosing faith in Usenet.

This is one of the few threads in AHR that is on topic.

AHR is being attacked by spam.

You both are knowledgeable guys so lets end the ****ing context and
try to help some newbies.

Else this newsgroup is going to die.

m

I don't see the relevance to your comment. What is or isn't going on
in this on-topic thread has nothing to do with the new spam and I have
been responding to other legitimate posts. Actually, if you're paying
attention, the sudden increase started with the arrival of certain posters,
who brought some "friends" with them. I agree that it's under attack,
that it's probably finished, but IDK how to solve it. Someone suggested
creating a moderated group.

I don't like the idea of moderation. Sadly, this group has a lot of
crap now. I do find that putting a half dozen posters in the bozo bin
gets rid of a lot of the nonsense. Just added another this morning.
Ignoring them may help.

I rarely killfiled anyone when I was using a "Real" newsreader but there is no killfile with Google Groups. I may be forced to load a newsreader on this little stick computer because of the malicious flood of crap that's hit the newsgroup for some reason. It seems to follow certain individuals around Usenet trying to destroy any group they post in. ”Œ( à²*_à²*)”˜

[8~{} Uncle Cross Monster

I was gone all day, and when I loaded this group this evening it wanted
to d/l 300 posts. After my filters deleted all the junk, cross posts,
and trolls I only had 66 our of the 300 posts that were left to read.
--
Maggie


I wonder who the new batch of creeps is following? ”Œ( à²*_à²*)”˜

[8~{} Uncle Curious Monster


Beats me! I got rid of hundreds of posts by adding 2 new filters!

--
Maggie

On 5/23/2017 11:02 AM, Mark Lloyd wrote:
On 05/22/2017 08:18 PM, Muggles wrote:

[snip]

I was gone all day, and when I loaded this group this evening it wanted
to d/l 300 posts. After my filters deleted all the junk, cross posts,
and trolls I only had 66 our of the 300 posts that were left to read.


I didn't notice the numbers, but I did see similar this morning, after
filtering out some obvious junk posters.

BTW, I'm using Thunderbird and wish there was a way to make a filter
affect multiple groups.


yeah, me too.

--
Maggie

Mark Lloyd
Tue, 23 May 2017 16:02:18 GMT in alt.home.repair, wrote:

On 05/22/2017 08:18 PM, Muggles wrote:

[snip]

I was gone all day, and when I loaded this group this evening it
wanted to d/l 300 posts. After my filters deleted all the junk,
cross posts, and trolls I only had 66 our of the 300 posts that
were left to read.


I didn't notice the numbers, but I did see similar this morning,
after filtering out some obvious junk posters.

BTW, I'm using Thunderbird and wish there was a way to make a
filter affect multiple groups.


NewsProxy. G


--
I would like to apologize for not having offended you yet.
Please be patient. I will get to you shortly.