Evolith
2021-10-27 09:13:53
- #1
exactly,
I get a different result:
Premises:
Roof pitch RP 35°, panels mounted flat. (Ecliptic 23°)
then, for example, at FFM (BG approx. 50°N) the south panels would see a max 52° angle of incidence in winter (at noon):
(90° - BG) + RP - Ecliptic.
For the north panels it would be
(90° - BG) - RP - Ecliptic = -18° max angle of incidence
meaning the north panels don’t see the sun at all from about Nov to Feb (when most electricity is needed).
They only get some diffuse radiation, typically < 5% nominal power.
That’s why north panels at 35° RP don’t make sense in Germany.
Or with a mounting frame?
ps.: Nominal power is defined at 90° angle of incidence,
at approx. 70° solar elevation and
1 kW radiation power/m²
(IIRC)
This cannot be calculated generally like that. It depends on which panels you want to use. If I am to believe the solar installers (and we have already talked to several), then the modern panels of the last 2-4 years have taken a huge step forward. You no longer need direct sunlight to generate an acceptable power output. Of course, you generate more with south/west orientation. But if you have the space and no shading, it also works easily on the north side. (we have a very large roof, so the north side gets enough light at 35°) With northeast orientation you naturally have to make more compromises.
For example, with our system it is not about always getting the maximum possible yield, but about covering our demand over the day for as long as possible.
In our case this means a battery for the heat pump and accordingly large system so that the adequately sized battery can also tend towards full capacity in winter.
To give you an idea, I have attached our house (this is from last May, according to the sun position it must have been around 10 am). The shadow of the trees in the west will be interesting in winter. But they will already calculate that accordingly.