4 ms·
Would it not be sufficient to angle the panels to 90 degrees so that they're sitting vertical instead of angled to the sun. That would at least minimize the sur
by another2another 3y ago
Would it not be sufficient to angle the panels to 90 degrees so that they're sitting vertical instead of angled
to the sun. That would at least minimize the surface are exposed to the falling hail (unless it's really falling at an angle).
I'm guessing the top edges of the panels are (or could be made) strong enough to handle a direct hit.
* * * * *
| | | | | \ \ \ \
---------- instead of. -----------
- peteradio 3y agoThat would exactly negate the efficiency of the panel. You want the normal of the panel to be pointing at the sun which is generally towards the clouds emitting hail. Or are you suggesting an automated panel movement when hail is approaching?
- another2another 3y ago>Or are you suggesting an automated panel movement when hail is approaching? Yes, big Red Button to re-orient all panels when hail is approaching. Some of these farms are massive so I think it would save enough of them to make it a cost-effective feature. Not sure how much human monitoring goes on though, or if an automated system would be better in case it happens e.g. late at night. (sorry about the formatting +embarrassed smiley+ )
- mbreese 3y agoI think the question is all about cost. How much would it cost to add such a system? And how much is hail damage insurance on those panels? How much does your insurance decrease if you had such a system? So long as the system costs more than the insurance savings, it won't be common. However, if your insurer starts demanding it, then it will be installed everywhere quickly.
- aidenn0 3y agoThat would mean mounting the panels a lot higher, and not all panels are mounted on motors due to cost already. The real question is how many panels will be damaged by hail in a 10 year period and back-calculate what it's worth to protect them.