What Type of Solar Panel?

[eastridges]

Hi all,

I am planning on installing a solar system on my 3605rl. I am wondering what type of panel performs the best for the RV lifestyle, amorphous, Polycrystalline or Monocrystalline? Any input is appreciated.

Bill

[Jolu]

Bill, I use four of these and they are performing very well. I have no complaints about them.
Panels
AZ Wind and Sun

[7.3Ford]

Bill,

I went with 408 Watts of Uni-Solar Laminate Panels. The stick right on the roof, and you can walk on them if you need to. I put them down so I could step over them to get to slides.





It is really nice having Monty over at storage, and know the batteries are always charged.

[simonsrf]

Try this site for purchase and education.

These guys did ours, been working perfectly for almost 5 years.

amsolar.com

[The Oldguard]

quote:Originally posted by simonsrf

Try this site for purchase and education.

These guys did ours, been working perfectly for almost 5 years.

amsolar.com

Three years for us

[VaughnMB]

Hi Bill,

I have a 2010 3150RL and I have two standard solar panels that total 200 watts. I can run whatever lights I want to at night and the furnace. After 3-4 hours of sunlight my two 6 volt batteries are fully charged again and ready for the next night.

Mitch

[eastridges]

Thanks for all the replies, everyone. I hear amorphous panels will produce in partially shaded areas and overcast conditions. What about polycrystiline or monocrystiline? I believe most people have polycrystiline or monocrystiline as these collect more watts with the same size panel as the amorphous. I camp in wooded ares and want to be able to charge in these areas and overcast conditions.

[7.3Ford]

Bill,

The Uni-Solar Laminate Panels are suppose to be shadow tolerant, but I found performance drops a lot under trees and overcast days.

[Leftie Canuk]

Hi, Wow - as a retired IT guy, I am humbled by the amount of knowledge you have applied to your energy management system on your Monty. I have read some of your blog and came across what I believe are two distinctly different types of solar panels on the roof of your coach - flexible ones that seem to be applied directly to the coach roof with some sort of adhesive, and a frame-based panel mounted via a few penetrating attachment points. Am I seeing things correctly ? I would be interested in your thoughts (pro-con) on the two types of solar panels, from a practical installation aspect, as well as the efficiency and efficacy of the two types. If there are blogs that I should visit to get the answers, please feel free to just send the links.
Again, wow ! You are an inspiration to this neophyte DIYer on solar.

[PNW Fireguy]

Originally Posted by eastridges

Thanks for all the replies, everyone. I hear amorphous panels will produce in partially shaded areas and overcast conditions. What about polycrystiline or monocrystiline? I believe most people have polycrystiline or monocrystiline as these collect more watts with the same size panel as the amorphous. I camp in wooded ares and want to be able to charge in these areas and overcast conditions.

If your concern is shading then I would recommend mono panels and connect them in parallel vs series. Make an appropriate selection of a suitable solar charger. Again based upon your stated concerns I would go MPPT vs PWM.

[JamesD]

I 2nd the MPPT controller recommendation. You'll want that to get the most out of your panels. I'd only go with PWM if you want lowest price and just want to extend the amount of time between running your generator.

You can mix parallel and series for your solar panels. For example two sets of panels in parallel with each set connected in series. This is the setup that lets me max out my charge controller when hooked up to a 12v battery setup. If you use series, be sure your panels have bypass diodes so that if a panel is shaded, it doesn't impact the rest of the string in that series group.

Consider changing to 24 or 48 volts with a stepdown transformer to feed the normal 12v stuff. It will let you use smaller wire with less loss. Just remember you will want an inverter and charge controller matching your chosen voltage. I made the mistake of going with 12v because my RV had room for 3 batteries. Now I'd go with 24v, 4 LiFePO4 batteries, and a larger charge controller.

I love the flexible solar panels that stick down you your roof. They can't be seen from the ground, they are easier to install, they don't create additional drag, they are lighter, etc... However, I have seen some videos where some flexible panels failed and the panels became brittle over time, which probably means you shouldn't walk on them. This is probably brand specific, so look for long term reviews. I have conventional polychristaline panels.

When it comes to mono vs polychrystalin vs thin film... price and efficiency are the main differences.
Monocrystalline is most efficient, but most expensive.
Polycrystalline isn't quite as efficient, but they are cheaper.
Thin film, like the stick on panels, have the lowest efficiency, but also the lowest price.
The less efficient the panels, the larger the roof space you need for the same wattage.
The price difference is enough between each step, that you can make up for the difference in efficiency and still be cheaper than the next more efficient/expensive technology.

[JamesD]

A few videos on the topic.
Charge controllers
https://youtu.be/3bQ7kQLq1Mc
Batteries
https://youtu.be/GMns62-ZVDc
Panels
https://youtu.be/kHSL_6sG5ZE

According to that last video, flexible panels are more expensive. So... my bad.

[JamesD]

Something else you will want to know

Bypass and blocking diodes
https://youtu.be/5rYy0gHZepI

[BiggarView]

I've read that the stick-on or flexible panels have a much shorter lifespan than the frame mounted ones. I've also read that the solar panels create a lot of heat and therefore having air space under them helps improve lifespan of the panels.

[JamesD]

Originally Posted by BiggarView

I've read that the stick-on or flexible panels have a much shorter lifespan than the frame mounted ones. I've also read that the solar panels create a lot of heat and therefore having air space under them helps improve lifespan of the panels.

They do have a shorter life, and the heat is very important. As panels heat up, they loose efficiency. So how was the efficiency of those panels calculated? Were they mounted where air could flow under them, or were they mounted to a surface where there was no air flow underneath?