That looks like a decent product! But I would have to ask whether there is a risk of an ice dam moving up the three inches to the point where the penetration occurs. The L-foot approach I used eliminates that possibility as long as the sealant holds. But I will grant that the effects of thermal cycling that they discuss might be real issues.QueenBee wrote:Sorry for not linking to it directly. I meant the simple model like this: http://www.quickmountpv.com/products/co ... html?cur=0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I have a hard time seeing the sealant fail in that amount of time given that it is completely protected from both sunlight and oxygen. But it does get fairly hot.QueenBee wrote:I imagine the sealants these days are a lot better than a few decades ago I'm sure so that's good but it'll be very interesting to see how it holds up over the decades.
Personally, I think a flashing under the L-feet that I used would make them MORE apt to leak.QueenBee wrote:The little custom L flashing that I've seen some people use when directly lagging the L foot seems to be a slight improvement as then there is also some physical barrier.
I have had real issues with this roof starting when we moved into this house. Those were largely resolved with the high-quality roof we installed just before the PV went up. But there does seem to be a problem in an area away from where the PV is located. It's something I need to look into pretty soon. So far the PV penetrations do not show any signs of trouble.QueenBee wrote:All I know is growing up in a house that seemed to have a never ending problem with roof leaks from skylights, flat torch down down, and low pitch roofs I've grow to really really hate the idea of having a roof leak
Yeah, if you look at most of the torque specifications related to PV I think most of the concern is overtightening. When I took the first phase off to replace the roof there were definitely cases where the volts that slide in the chancels on the rails had been over torqueed and started to press into the soft aluminum.RegGuheert wrote: Frankly, the biggest concern I had with the L-feet is the possibility of over-compressing the foot into the shingles. My little impact wrench could literally drive the foot directly through the asphalt shingle. If any of the shingles got torn by over-torquing, that could create a real problem. I don't think that happened, but it certainly could have.
QueenBee wrote:The little custom L flashing that I've seen some people use when directly lagging the L foot seems to be a slight improvement as then there is also some physical barrier.
I can't find a picture now but basically it's just a little piece of flashing in the shape of an L and the L foot and the flashing are back to to back so the water coming down the roof hits the flashing thus going around the L foot. It's just slipped up under the shingle up roof.RegGuheert wrote:Personally, I think a flashing under the L-feet that I used would make them MORE apt to leak.
Please join me in hoping this installation lasts for many decades!
Hi Reg,RegGuheert wrote:I told her we would do that, but that will be done as a separate step since I did not have a service panel on hand on Sunday when I was wiring the AC on the field array.
Correct. I should have said "load center" or "subpanel".wwhitney wrote:Nice system. Your use of the phrase "service panel" confuses me a little, as the panel at the service entrance typically has a combined neutral/ground bar bonded to the chasis. At all points after the service, such as a panel at your solar array, the grounds and neutrals need to be kept separate. Of course, you probably know that but I thought it was worth clarifying.
I also really like the design of that mount! But I paid someone to build it and install and wire the panels, so it wasn't cheap. I paid $4200 for all that 15 years ago (not including the PV!).QueenBee wrote:I like how simple (cost efficient AND adjustable!) your ground mount is.
Snow load is not an issue. That array goes to 60 degrees in wintertime and sheds snow very well. The real issue with that mount is WIND! That's why I paid so much to have it done. We have massive winds in the wintertime and with the array nearly vertical, the wind load is immense. Each of those pipes goes three feet into the ground and is set in concrete up to about 8 inches below the surface. And the builder added the guy system at the last minute.QueenBee wrote:How's your snow load? Around here generally the minimum design is for 25 psf on up if you are in a heavier snow area. This ends up meaning that ground mounts are very stout. Posts at the top and bottom with lots of cross members, etc. For example: http://green.binarypeople.net/solar-pha ... tallation/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;