SunWiz

PO Box 263, Bangalow, NSW 2479

Craig Martin M: 0413 361 534
Planet Power @: warwick@sunwiz.com.au

6/1/10

Dear Craig,

Please find following advice relating to the minimum set back between two rows of solar panels in
order to ensure high levels of performance.

Introduction
When two or more rows of panels are set on raised frames, there arises the likelihood of the
foremost row of panels shading rear rows. Depending on the amount of shading, this can
significantly reduce output from the system as a whole, as entire strings of panels can drop out and
be bypassed. In worst case, this can stress system components and lead to early failure.

The amount and impact of shading significantly depends upon the row spacing, panel inclination,
roof pitch, and orientation and length of the rows. The impact of shading also depends on the array’s
string configuration.

Panels are most likely to shade the row behind when the sun is low in the sky, as occurs in late
afternoon and early morning, particularly in winter. At these times the suns intensity is not so great,
so loss of power due to shading at such times – a premise explored in this document. Consequently,
some shade may be considered acceptable.

An example is provided below in an illustration of a 1.5kW system with 2.34m set-back, as pictured
at 1030h on the midwinter solstice. Shading of the rear two rows would result in performance loss.

Independence, Expertise, Innovation

The picture below shows the times of the day and year that the same array is shaded, and the
consequential impact.

The graph below shows the impact of shading on a north-west facing system at 1530h on midwinter
solstice. Note on the rightmost diagram, which shows (in orange) impact of shade on the system
throughout the day, losses due to shading are disproportional to the amount of array that is shaded
(black).
Minimum Recommended Set Back
The minimum recommended set back between panels required to ensure low levels of shading is
presented below for two panel orientations (landscape with panel edge 0.8m and portrait panel
edge 1.6m), and three angles of panels. A spreadsheet is also attached that will assist in calculating
the minimum setback for any north-facing array. The set back is defined as the distance between
the front of two panels, not the gap between the rear of one panel and the front of the next.

Portrait Panel Orientation Landscape Panel Orientation

Panel Length (m) 1.6 1.6 1.6 0.8 0.8 0.8
Panel Inclination (deg) 10 20 30 10 20 30
Min Sun Angle (deg) 20 20 20 20 20 20
Min Set Back (m) 2.34 3.01 3.58 0.79 1.5 1.79
The above table shows that for near-zero shading, significant set-back is required between each row.

A simulation was performed of the performance of the first three arrays, each 10.9 kW in size with
two rows of Solon 170W panels configured as 8 strings and connected to a SMC10000 inverter. This
configuration understates the likely effect of shade as loss of one string is minor when compared to
the 8 strings available (in practice only 4-5 would be used), and only half of the array is ever shaded
because there are only two rows. The results are presented in the table below.

System 10° pitch 2.34 20° pitch 3.01 30° pitch 2.34
setback setback setback
Annual Performance 17142 kWh 17699 17780
(Mildura)
Losses due to shading 0.5% 0.9% 1.5%
Comparison to ideal 4.9% 1.9% 1.4%
This indicates that large gaps between rows of panels with higher inclination is more favourable than
smaller panel inclination with small gaps between rows.

Impact of Smaller Set Back

In the overall scheme of things, losses due to shading presented above are small. Consequently,
shading due to narrow gaps of 30° inclined panels may result in fewer losses than the lesser annual
radiation hitting 10° panels. This possibility is investigated in the following table, which shows the
impact of placing panels closer than the recommended levels.

10 kW System (2 rows) 30° pitch 30° pitch 30° pitch 30° pitch,
2.34 3.01 3.58 No Self
setback setback setback Shading
Annual Performance (Mildura) 17554 17747 17780 18030
(kWh/year)
Losses due to shading 2.7% 1.7% 1.5% 0%
The result of using less than minimum setback is quite small on a long multi-string array with 2 rows.
However, this is principally because multi-sting arrays are less susceptible to shade, and only half of
the rows are ever shaded. The table below looks at the other extreme, a small 1.5 kW single-string
array arranged in rows of 3 (9x170W Solon panels with a SB1700 inverter).

1.5 kW System (3 rows) 30° pitch 30° pitch 30° pitch

2.34 setback 3.01 setback 3.58 setback
Losses due to shading 6% 1.5% 1.1%
In conclusion, losses due to shading on smaller arrays become rapidly more significant for set-backs
of less than 3m (with 1.6m length panels inclined at 30°). Panel shading can have greater impact
than lower panel inclination, suggesting that on constrained roofs with small arrays, a smaller
inclination is preferable. However, for arrays that face 45° off true north, the impact of shading can
double unless the set back is increased significantly.

Panel Orientation: Landscape or Portrait?

The optimum configuration on a constrained roof depends upon the available roof area and its
length:width ratio. On a constrained north facing roof such as that on the left below, a solar array
may fit better with panels in landscape orientation, as a second row may be able to fit into the roof.
Conversely, on the roof pictured on the right, more panels may fit in if they are oriented in portrait
format. The optimal design may thus vary from roof to roof.

Also consider that an array with shade that covers only the bottom row of cells on panels in
landscape format generally will perform better than an array with shade on the bottom rows of cells
on panels in portrait format, due to the bypass diodes in each panel. For similarly reasons, strings
should preferably not span rows.

Ultimately, whilst orienting the panels in landscape format reduces the minimum set-back between
rows, more framing and end clamps are likely to be needed, raising system costs.
Summary
In summary,

• A minimum row-to-row distance (set back) of 3m is advised for standard 1.6m high panels
inclined at 30°, or 1.5m set back for panels of 0.8m height.
• Smaller set-backs are possible, but not preferable on arrays with less than 3 strings.
• On constrained roofs, smaller set-backs are preferred to lower inclinations, unless set-backs
of <2.3m are required.
• The cost increase in rows with panels in landscape-orientation is typically not justified unless
on a highly-constrained roof.
• Some roofs require specific design optimisation, particularly if constrained or not north-
facing.

Reports for the investigated systems are attached.

Kind regards,

Warwick Johnston
Manager
SunWiz