Aluminum profiles are widely used in PV (photovoltaic) brackets, thanks to their lightweight, corrosion resistance, and easy bending. PV brackets need precise angle control to fit different installation scenarios—roof-mounted, ground-mounted, or tracking systems. The angle of the bracket directly affects the PV panel’s sunlight absorption efficiency and overall system stability. Poor angle accuracy from bending can lead to panel misalignment, reduced power generation, and even bracket structural failure over time. This article focuses on angle accuracy control in the aluminum profile bending process for PV brackets, breaking down key points into simple, easy-to-follow sections with real on-site data and cases.
Common Bending Methods for PV Bracket Aluminum Profiles
PV bracket aluminum profiles (usually 6061-T6 or 6063-T5) are bent using three main methods, each with different angle accuracy performance:
Roll bending: Most widely used for long PV bracket rails (3-6m). It’s continuous, efficient, and ideal for gentle arcs (angle range: 5-30°). Angle accuracy can reach ±0.5° with proper adjustment.
Press bending: Suitable for small PV bracket components (e.g., support arms). It’s simple and low-cost but less accurate (±1°) for large angles, making it better for non-critical parts.
CNC bending: Used for high-precision PV tracking brackets. It’s computer-controlled, with angle accuracy up to ±0.2°, but more expensive—only needed for projects with strict angle requirements.
Key Factors Affecting Bending Angle Accuracy
Several on-site factors can throw off angle accuracy—small mistakes here lead to big issues later:
Profile material and thickness: Thicker profiles (≥3mm) need more bending force; uneven material hardness causes inconsistent bending angles. 6061-T6 profiles are harder, so they require slower bending speed than 6063-T5.
Bending speed: Too fast (＞5mm/s) causes material deformation unevenly; too slow (＜2mm/s) wastes time. 3-4mm/s is optimal for most PV bracket profiles (2-4mm thickness).
Springback effect: Aluminum profiles bounce back 1-3° after bending—this is unavoidable. You need to pre-calculate springback and adjust the bending angle accordingly (e.g., bend 2° more for a 30° target angle).
Tooling alignment: Bending dies and rollers must be aligned perfectly. Misaligned tooling causes one side of the profile to bend more, leading to angle deviation (often ≥1°).
Practical Angle Accuracy Control Tips
These tips are easy to implement on the production line, no fancy equipment needed:
Pre-bending test: Before mass production, bend 2-3 sample profiles. Measure their angles with a digital protractor (accuracy ±0.1°) and adjust springback compensation until the angle is correct.
Real-time monitoring: Assign a worker to check every 10-15 profiles during bending. Use a digital protractor to spot deviations early—fixing small issues (±0.3°) is easier than reworking hundreds of profiles.
Tooling maintenance: Clean bending dies/rollers daily to remove aluminum shavings. Check alignment weekly—misalignment is a top cause of angle errors in mass production.
Temperature control: Bending in extreme temperatures (＜10℃ or ＞35℃) affects material flexibility. Keep the workshop at 15-25℃ to maintain consistent bending performance.
On-Site Application Cases
Case 1: Ground-mounted PV project (10MW). A Chinese PV component maker used roll bending for 6063-T5 profiles (3mm thickness) to make 15° brackets. Initial angle deviation was ±1.2°, causing panel misalignment. After adjusting springback compensation (pre-bend 17°) and slowing speed to 3mm/s, deviation dropped to ±0.4°—power generation improved by 5%.
Case 2: Roof-mounted PV project (2MW). Press bending was used for small support arms (target angle 20°). Misaligned tooling caused ±0.8° deviation. Realigning the dies and adding real-time checks reduced deviation to ±0.3°, avoiding rework of 200+ brackets.
Case 3: Tracking PV project (5MW). CNC bending was used for high-precision rails (target angle 0-45° adjustable). By calibrating the machine weekly and pre-testing samples, angle accuracy stayed at ±0.2°, meeting the tracking system’s strict requirements.
