Page 62 of 68

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Sat Aug 19, 2017 3:22 am
by RegGuheert
Supersleeper wrote:Proud Leaf owner, and have been an Enphase customer now for about 5yr. I've got 24x M215 and so far they've been great in modest weather of California. Just looked at my specs today:
Thanks, Supersleeper, that's great to hear! Can you please share the link to the public webpage for your array so that I can add it to my MTBF calculation spreadsheet? You can find a link to my spreadsheet in the last line of my signature. Your inverters can help offset the M215 failures that Brian (Get OffYourGas) has been experiencing. Also, can you confirm that you have the original M215s that include a ground lug on the case?
Supersleeper wrote:Lifetime
41.6 MWh
287%
of estimated
The percent of estimated number seems a bit high. Typically, that number is on the order of 120% to 130%. I'm wondering if the specifications for your array (like azimuth and elivation angles) have been entered accurately.

After a bit over six years of production, our array will cross over 100 MWh in about two weeks. At the current size of our array, we should produce 100 MWh of electricity approximately every 5.5 years. Woohoo!

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 12:18 pm
by Supersleeper
RegGuheert wrote:Can you please share the link to the public webpage for your array so that I can add it to my MTBF calculation spreadsheet?


Not familiar with sharing, but I'll look to see what I can do.

RegGuheert wrote:Also, can you confirm that you have the original M215s that include a ground lug on the case?


Without going up, I'm 99% positive these do. I remember a very thick guage exposed ground wire hopping from inverter to inverter as well as a brand new ground stake planted into the side of the house.

RegGuheert wrote:The percent of estimated number seems a bit high. Typically, that number is on the order of 120% to 130%.


That's a good point. I haven't taken actual angles of the physical arrays. Maybe I should do that next time I clean them.

RegGuheert wrote:At the current size of our array, we should produce 100 MWh of electricity approximately every 5.5 years. Woohoo!


Holly smokes, you running 50+ panels??? I thought I had a lot with 24 as most in my hood only have like 10.

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Sun Aug 20, 2017 2:26 pm
by RegGuheert
Supersleeper wrote:Not familiar with sharing, but I'll look to see what I can do.
If you have access to Enlighten Manager, which you should since your array is "older", you can turn on sharing by clicking the tab with the picture of the gear to access the "Settings" page. Then scroll to the "Privacy Settings" section almost at the very bottom and under "Visitors" click the checkbox next to "Allow Visitors". Once you check that, you will find a line just below which reads:
Use this link to provide access to visitors: https://enlighten.enphaseenergy.com/pub ... /ZgcD12032
^^^
That's what it says on MY page. I will need the URL for your public site.

FWIW, I do NOT allow exact geolocation for my system.
Supersleeper wrote:Without going up, I'm 99% positive these do. I remember a very thick guage exposed ground wire hopping from inverter to inverter as well as a brand new ground stake planted into the side of the house.
Yep, that sounds the original type. The ground wire going from inverter to inverter is not used on later versions. Note that the the original M215s like the ones you have are currently showing the highest MTBF of all Enphase microinverter types at 415 years.
Supersleeper wrote:Holly smokes, you running 50+ panels??? I thought I had a lot with 24 as most in my hood only have like 10.
Yes, we now have 54 inverters and 66 PV modules. (12 of the inverters are driven by a pair of old 120Wp PV modules which I rewired to work with the Enphase microinverters.) It is colder here and the system is sized to provide all of our heat in wintertime via a heat pump. We are considering putting up a couple more modules since we started putting more miles on the LEAF recently.

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Wed Aug 23, 2017 7:10 am
by GetOffYourGas
My installer finally returned my working M215, and swapped out the failed M215. So one of my inverters technically has had about two weeks of offline storage. But according to Enphase, that same inverter is now back in service. I mention this because I wasn't sure if he still had it, or if I'd end up with a different one in that location.

So to recap, my original system was 16 panels / 16 M215s. I have had 4 fail, and now I have 12 M215s + 4 M215-IGs.

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Thu Aug 24, 2017 6:08 am
by RegGuheert
GetOffYourGas wrote:My installer finally returned my working M215, and swapped out the failed M215. So one of my inverters technically has had about two weeks of offline storage. But according to Enphase, that same inverter is now back in service. I mention this because I wasn't sure if he still had it, or if I'd end up with a different one in that location.

So to recap, my original system was 16 panels / 16 M215s. I have had 4 fail, and now I have 12 M215s + 4 M215-IGs.
Thanks for the update. I finally bit the bullet and broke out all of your replacements so that your M215s and M215IGs are tracked separately. Your system now occupies rows 134 through 142 in my spreadsheet. Please have a look and let me know if you spot any errors. If you want to provide the exact dates when your M215IGs were turned on, I can update those, but it is certainly not critical.

We now have just over 100 years on the M215IGs with a single failure (mine). In spite of Brian's failures, the M215s still show the highest MTBF of all the types we are tracking, but I expect the M250s to surpass them within the next six months or so since they have no known failures.

Anyone else want to provide an update on the systems you own or are tracking? QueenBee? drees? Tony?

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 8:07 am
by RegGuheert
In spite of the fact that I have experienced one failure of a fourth-generation inverter in the past year and zero failures of the third-generation M190s, I decided to fully divest myself of M190s. I just purchased 12 new 72-cell M250s on eBay for $90 each shipped. This is the cheapest price I have ever paid for ANY Enphase inverters, new or used. These new inverters will replace the 12 M190s that are each connected to pairs of 72-cell, 120W PV modules in the field.

With this change, I expect to see a marginal increase in production in the wintertime since the old inverters spent much of their time saturated at 199W during the cold weather. The bigger benefit of this upgrade is the extension of the warranty period from ending at the close of 2025 to ending in 2042. The field array currently produces about $400-worth of electricity each year. I expect that in 2026, that amount of electricity will be worth about $600, if not more. In 2042, I expect that amount of electricity will be worth at least $800. As such, I expect today's $1080 investment to return about $12,000 between the years 2026 and 2042. If they last longer than that or if electricity gets more expensive than that, it will just be more gravy.

Given Enphase' current focus on the S280s and IQ-series inverters, I also wonder how much longer these 72-cell M250s will be available on eBay in new condition.

Hopefully I can sell the M190s for something.

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 6:30 pm
by ltbighorn
Interesting, you're tempting me to pickup a couple M250s as spares just in case the worst happens to Enphase, but I'll probably hold off for now. I think if worst came to worst, I could also use the S280s using the same cabling and Envoy-S, or am I misremembering?

Line 207 - all of my 12 M250s are still in good shape. Have now reached 6.3 MWh total production.

I've seen the brief return of the inconsistent consumption metering, but it's become a very rare occurrence. I do think it's some combination of highly volatile solar production (peek-a-boo sun) + the Envoy-S sometimes bogging and not comparing production meter vs consumption meters simultaneously.

The issue is never detectable on a steady sun day, but doesn't always happen on a peek-a-boo sun day either. I'm guessing the Envoy-S bogs sometimes on steady sun days, but since the output is steady, the non-simultaneous readings don't produce a noticeable enough misreading to be casually detectable. (Unlike on peek-a-boo days, where a split-second offset can result in reported very low or negative consumption levels.)

As an side, it seems Enphase has started making Envoys only report 15-minute intervals, down from 5-minute intervals, as a cost saving measure. This results in stair-stepping on the Enphase graphs (and anything that pulls from their API). Very annoying. In order to get 5-minute data back I've had to switch pvoutput from API polling to pushes from my local server polling the Envoy-S. Seems silly. If they want to cost save, they should just reduce the >30 day 5-minute interval data down to 15-minutes. Tiny savings either way, but the storage cost of the long-term data is going to way outsize the last couple weeks of data.

edit: typos

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 11:19 pm
by drees
ltbighorn wrote:As an side, it seems Enphase has started making Envoys only report 15-minute interval failures, down from 5-minute, as a cost saving measure. This results in stair-stepping on the Enphase graphs (and anything that pulls from their API). Very annoying. In order to get 5-minute data back I've had to switch pvoutput from API polling to pushes from my local server polling the Envoy-S. Seems silly. If they want to cost save, they should just reduce the >30 day 5-minute interval data down to 15-minutes. Tiny savings either way, but the storage cost of the long-term data is going to way outsize the last couple weeks of data.

Yes, that was my exact thoughts as well, and frankly, I'm pissed that they didn't properly notify customers when taking away the feature, especially when they don't provide a good way to get the data directly off the envoy.

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Mon Aug 28, 2017 11:27 pm
by ltbighorn
drees wrote:Yes, that was my exact thoughts as well, and frankly, I'm pissed that they didn't properly notify customers when taking away the feature, especially when they don't provide a good way to get the data directly off the envoy.


Especially given I paid extra cash up front for the installer view, which they've now reduced the value/utility of.

Re: Enphase field MTBF: M190: ~38 Years M215: ~460 Years M250: >300 Years

Posted: Tue Aug 29, 2017 2:54 am
by RegGuheert
ltbighorn wrote:Interesting, you're tempting me to pickup a couple M250s as spares just in case the worst happens to Enphase, but I'll probably hold off for now. I think if worst came to worst, I could also use the S280s using the same cabling and Envoy-S, or am I misremembering?
Yes, even though Enphase claimed the S280s required the new Envoy, philip reported that they DO report properly with the old Envoys.

But I'm starting to wonder if Enphase still manufactures the S-Series inverters. When I look at what the large solar houses sell, I see the IQ+ and the M250-72 and C250.
ltbighorn wrote:Line 207 - all of my 12 M250s are still in good shape. Have now reached 6.3 MWh total production.
Thanks! Updated.
ltbighorn wrote:As an side, it seems Enphase has started making Envoys only report 15-minute interval failures, down from 5-minute, as a cost saving measure. This results in stair-stepping on the Enphase graphs (and anything that pulls from their API). Very annoying. In order to get 5-minute data back I've had to switch pvoutput from API polling to pushes from my local server polling the Envoy-S. Seems silly. If they want to cost save, they should just reduce the >30 day 5-minute interval data down to 15-minutes. Tiny savings either way, but the storage cost of the long-term data is going to way outsize the last couple weeks of data.
Perhaps I am not understanding what you are saying by "only report 15-minute interval failures, down from 5-minute" as all my data is still available in 5-minute intervals.