Skip to content
SolarLab

Battery24%

Measured

Panel by panel

Twelve of the 24 panels have their own optimiser, so each one is measured on its own. Here they are on a photo of the frame, right now or over any period you choose.

Week 38, 2026

Right nowor a period:
Panel 1, monocrystalline. 466 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.66 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.4 hours.M1466 WhPanel 2, monocrystalline. 485 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.73 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.6 hours.M2485 WhPanel 3, monocrystalline. 475 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.70 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.4 hours.M3475 WhPanel 4, monocrystalline. 466 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.66 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.4 hours.M4466 WhPanel 5, monocrystalline. 466 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.67 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.3 hours.M5466 WhPanel 6, monocrystalline. 460 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.64 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.3 hours.M6460 WhPanel 1, polycrystalline. 475 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.73 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.5 hours.P1475 WhPanel 2, polycrystalline. 489 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.78 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.5 hours.P2489 WhPanel 3, polycrystalline. 483 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.76 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.5 hours.P3483 WhPanel 4, polycrystalline. 462 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.68 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.6 hours.P4462 WhPanel 5, polycrystalline. 465 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.69 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.7 hours.P5465 WhPanel 6, polycrystalline. 481 Wh over Week 38, 2026, 1.75 kWh per kWp, measured for 28.4 hours.P6481 Wh
The tilted frame seen from the lawn, photographed on 17 September 2026. Each panel carries what it produced over Week 38, 2026.
Tint: energy per kilowatt peak, compared with the best of the twelve over this period.under 80 %80 to 90 %90 to 95 %95 to 99 %99 % and over

How even is each row

How much less the weakest panel of a row produces than the strongest, in percent of the strongest. This is a calculation made from the twelve measurements above, not a measurement of its own.

The six panels of a row see the same sky, so they should produce about the same share of their peak power. One that falls behind points to shade, dirt, snow or a fault. Over a period, a passing cloud no longer matters.

Upper row, monocrystalline

Strongest
M2, 1 734 Wh/kWp
Weakest
M6, 1 643 Wh/kWp
Difference (calculated)
5 % less

6 of the 6 panels of this row answered. The weakest, M6, produces 5 percent less than the strongest, M2 (1 643 Wh/kWp against 1 734 Wh/kWp). Over a period, a difference above about 5 percent deserves a look at that panel.

Lower row, polycrystalline

Strongest
P2, 1 778 Wh/kWp
Weakest
P4, 1 678 Wh/kWp
Difference (calculated)
6 % less

6 of the 6 panels of this row answered. The weakest, P4, produces 6 percent less than the strongest, P2 (1 678 Wh/kWp against 1 778 Wh/kWp). Over a period, a difference above about 5 percent deserves a look at that panel.

How to read these numbers

  • Direct current, before the inverter. The inverter loses a few percent, so the sum of these panels is more than the lab delivers. The real production is on the live page.
  • The vertical array is not shown. Its twelve modules have no optimiser, so they are only measured together, as array 3.
  • Read through Tigo. The optimisers report to the Tigo cloud and this site reads the values from there.

Each panel's history can be charted and downloaded on the data page. The three arrays are compared on key figures and records.