is the market flooded with fake dangerous solar cable?


ALL NEW - Battery Finder Search for 12/24/36/48v or by capacity www.batteryfinder.net

Boron

Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2023
Messages
140
I have taken delivery of samples of TUV solar cables 6mm2 from EB. I was curious to know if these conformed to the specs. Correct me if I am wrong but we should have tinned Cu wire 0.3mm dia x 84 strands annealed. This gives 5.94mm2 thats ok for 70A. The samples I got
a) looked genuine printed on the outside "6 sqmm DUCAB C BICC PV cable 1.5kV" but it had 84 x 0.25 dia core = 4.124mm2
b) unmarked plain black pvc with inner white sheath 83 x 0.22mm dia core = 3.193mm2

Grossly under rated 40-50% - fire risk, insurance issue? the strands seemed springy - not annealed - fragile at crimp joints if flapping around in the wind. Is it proper UV resistant sheath or will it crack up in the direct sun (like cheap domestic cable does)

Clearly some very important discrepancies - fertile ground for the Cheap Charlie to profit?

Before I go Nuclear with the suppliers, has anyone else noticed this issue as I took one look at the cable construction and immediately thought that its an obvious area for cheating.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That's definitely a serious issue. If they are that underrated they a for sure a fire risk. And for insurance purposes, if they found out that that kind of wire was used, they'd most likely toss out the whole case and jack your rates up thru the roof. Or go ahead and pay and jack rates thru the roof.

I've actually wondered about this myself. I never got any of the cables because I don't have any panels atm.

I would definitely complain to the seller about the issue. Record a video of the process showing their branding on the cable and clearly showing the testing process to show it's out of spec. You could also do the flame test. Tinned Copper wires won't melt easily under a lighter flame, but aluminum will.

Not sure how you'd do the UV testing, though. Perhaps there's a quick way to do a test with a UV A/B lamp in an enclosure to give concentrated amounts in a short period of time.
 
Thanx K, Im glad someone sees the importance of this issue. There have been several reports of roof fires caused by solar panels (mc4/anderson connectors, loose joints, falling object impact on panels etc). Once panels are on your roof it may not be a simple (or safe) means of access for maintenance/faults etc. AFAIK panels are not a "fit and forget" item but such installations are hyped by corps knowing they will eventually be called in for $$$$ assistance. If I had the space I would always go for a ground bank (assuming we dont flood given our weather).

I see that in some states, property insurers are questioning owners whether they have solar panels or powerwalls and jacking rates to match. Would a DIY roof panel system be accepted for insurance? I believe that a registered NEC inspection is needed and if you are not to code!!!!!

Solar energy harvesting should be such a noble "green" thing to do but it seems overshadowed by massive hype and fraudulent sellers/suppliers. The DIY amateur needs to do a lot of homework (and listen to gurus on here). Reminds me of all the massive hype over Wind Turbines twenty years ago.
 
panels are not a "fit and forget" item but such installations are hyped by corps knowing they will eventually be called in for $$$$ assistance. If I had the space I would always go for a ground bank (assuming we dont flood given our weather).
Same, I don't like the idea of putting panels on my roof. For one main reason, beyond the aforementioned, is that the panels add a lot of extra weight to the roof, which it was not initially designed to hold up. And then with the added wind down force and turbulence, I feel that it could cause problems later on.
Obviously with new construction builds, this is probably already taken into consideration and added supports are installed. But with existing homes >10yrs old probably not so much.

Would a DIY roof panel system be accepted for insurance? I believe that a registered NEC inspection is needed and if you are not to code!!!!!
Yes, the local EE needs to inspect the installation to sign off on it as being valid. This is true for many different countries. EE's can also put the stamp of UL on some devices as well, even if they weren't initially stamped by the manufacturer.

Solar energy harvesting should be such a noble "green" thing to do but it seems overshadowed by massive hype and fraudulent sellers/suppliers
Yeah, this is the part that really stinks about Solar installations. It's these fraudsters that have actually helped to contribute to the increase in prices for insurance, too.
This is starting to change, tho. More regulations are coming into play at the gov't level for companies to be able to be allowed to install panels. So this should help decrease insurance and installation costs. We'll see over time what happens.
 
Hallelujah, someone singing on the same page. Dont ask about UK - Im too embarrassed about our total school playground ripe with piracy. The Aussies seem to have a firm hand on their regs and are a subset of our own IET regs. Its all a bit of a dog's breakfast. Our Gov some 10 years back did have a populist agenda offering some grants to have panels fitted to our roofs. It was quickly shown up as a ruthless scam, feeding surplus to the grid yadayada. It took 20 years to repay the capital investment. We got the same crap about installing heat pumps (above ground to air exchangers btw) - another huge populist scam. You need a buried exchanger (deep pit excavation) or running water stream and live up north to make it worthwhile.
 
On ebay, ali & Co. you see a lot of cables claimed as copper/copper alloy or alike which is all pure cca garbage! If you buy cheap from untrustworthy sellers you get ripped off here! Double check when you recieve items before installing them on the roof! Same for MC4 connectors and panels as well!
 
Last edited:
has anyone else noticed this issue as I took one look at the cable construction and immediately thought that its an obvious area for cheating
I also agree (a bit late!) with what you're saying, it's a problem that needs looking into, I never did really. The online vendors in Italy, and the local stores, are usually very strict on this.
I don't have a micrometer to measure the strands in the wiring I have. But I surely do check all the writings on the cables before adding them to the cart (I check the product's photos, if there's no writing or no photos = no buying).

An underrated or low quality cable could be a big hazard. So that's one of the products you can't save on.

This gives 5.94mm2 thats ok for 70A
a 6mm2 (CSA, Cross Section Area) wire is a 9AWG, rating should be around 35A @60°C (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_wire_gauge)
[ To be on the safe side my rule-of-thumb is 4A per each square mm, sono I'd use a 6mm2 wire for max 24A ]
 
Here's a good article on OFC (Oxygen Free Copper, or Pure Copper) vs CCA (Copper Clad Aluminum/Aliminium). Basically CCA will have a much higher resistance value than OFC, so testing your wires should be fairly easy to do with a stand DMM. If you know what the resistance is supposed to be for a given gauge of OFC, and the cable in question has a much higher value than expected, you know it's CCA, not OFC.


Resistance is pretty easy to figure out, too, considering the length of the cable is part of the calculation. Just take a look at the chart here:

Here's a comparison of Copper vs Aluminum: https://www.engineeringtoolbox.com/copper-aluminum-conductor-resistance-d_1877.html
 
Many are missing the point here, Solar cables are designed to run at much higher temps than PVC cable 90C vs 60C, cos I guess they are out in the open and generally not accessible to human touch (especially kids). They have silicon sheaths
 
Back
Top