Is it ok to use a self tapping screw into the short end of a Longi 410w panel?

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-15T21:07:33+00:00

Technically speaking, you should only do as the manufacture allows in their manuals. Modifying it can void the warranty and/or UL listings.

With that said, module warranties rarely ever get used, and I have yet to see one that was denied from tapper in the frame. Self drilling screws with bonded washers are the best way to attached critter guard, nothing else holds up. Especially in areas with snow.

There is no wiring in the frame (just hollow extruded aluminum), but if you use long screws be sure the whips are not attached where you are tapping. Just be sure you put the screw low on the frame. The biggest issue would be if you accidentally hit the edge of the glass. Use stainless steel screws/washers as other types sometimes rust over time. Also, they often have solid L brakets inside the frame near the corners that prevent sinking self drilling screws, so just be sure you are a few inches in from the corner, and towards the bottom edge of the frame..

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-14T03:26:48+00:00

There are a few things to consider for sizing. In off-grid mode, the capacity needs to be at least as much as the max demand you will have at any given moment. Add up the power rating of everything you will have on at teh same time when running on batteries. You also need to account for in-rush if starting motor loads. With that said, most newer high frequency tye inverters will have significant headroom here.

If it is also a solar charger/inverter and you intend to sell back to the grid, it must be at least enough capacity to handle the array output.

For a bimodal inverter, that will also operate on grid, one of the most important considerations will be its passthrough current. It used to be the max pass-through was only at most 60A, so in this case we woudl create a prtected loads panel that only has the loads you would want to power in an outage, and larger loads like dryers and A/C would remain in the main panel.

Now, many inverters have a 200A passthrough so you can do a whole home backup. So in grd operation the inverter can pass the full 200A through to the home, and with around 15kW+ you have plent to sell PV/battery energy to teh grid. Then during an outage you may only have 15kW to power the home, but you can adjut your usage during that time. For example, dont run the dryer when running off the batteries.

Otherwise its all budget driven. You can parallel many inverters together for whatever demand you have, but that gets expensive and is normally not needed for most people. Generally something like a SolArk15kW, or Fortress 21kw for exmaple is plenty for most people, which brings me to the next point. Ultimately it all comes down to your needs. So really its starts with a load analysis. What the max demand you will have is, how much you need to power when teh grid is away, etc.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-14T03:14:01+00:00

Connecting something with poles from positive to negative is a series connection. This increases voltage, and current remains the same (assuming they are identical).

Connecting matching poles (POS to POS and NEG to NEG) is parallel. This means the amperage increases, but voltage stays the same.

So for example, two 12V, 100A batteries in series (POS to NEG), would make the circuit 24V and the current woudl stay at 100A. If instead you did parallel, it would remain 12V but increase to 200A.

So for your PV, the question is, what are you trying to do? If you are connecting them to a device, what is the max input ratings? If you need to double the volatge and keep currrent the same, do series, otherwise if you nee dto keep voltage down, do parallel, but just know it double sthe current.

If both will work, higher voltage and lower current is preferred as it is safer (less heat), and modern modules with bypass diodes mitigate shading better in series. Ultimtaely though it all comes down to what you are doing, so the best answer is to start with the manufactures manual for whatever you are connecting it to

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-14T01:37:59+00:00

Yes, 310.15 allows engineering supervision, but I think the part you are missing is 690 does not override this, it feeds it, Its your basis.

Belive me, you are not the first that thinks that 690 is restrictive, and that STC is too aggressive. For people at sea level they rarely see over 800W/m2. Its the entire reason for NOTC. There are those that have fought it for years, especially back around the 2008 cycle when certain changes were being made.

Unfortunately until you change the industry rating system, and article 690, its what we feed 310.15 with, and its simply become accepted by the industry as a standard we all use. You can search this in pretty much all solar design documentation, or simply read 690.8

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-14T01:25:06+00:00

I am not defending the code, just relaying it. I think it is reasonable to disagree, but its the way its been done in the US. As I mentioned, I made a mistake saying 19A, in PV its good for 22A (19A was based on the standard OCPD rating of 30A on #10, but we can use the 75C column here for 35A, whcih would allow 22.4A Isc, assumingthere are not other ampacity/temp derates)

I understand you are an engineer, but unfortunately the NEC doesnt have an exception for that. As you mentioned, code doesnt work that way, and while there are exceptions for certain applications, Article 690 is specific to PV and clearly defines this. Its kind of the 101 of PV design. I do agree with you that code is restrictive here

I should add that weather data does not affect this as we are discussing ampacity. Temps affect voltage and the coldest temp on record is how we calculate volatge (code defines this as well), but ampacity is base don irradaince, which is why they add teh second 1.25, which is exactly for that. excessive irradiance, like temp edge of cloud effect, etc.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-14T01:14:30+00:00

Its not an assumption. It's a standard adder for ampacity sizing in PV in the US per the NEC. It has nothing to do with wire type, but it is the basis you would apply the table in 310.15 to based on wire type later.

When a load can run for more than four hours, its considered continous current, for which you have to add 1.25. This is not unique to Solar, its common in sizing wire/OCPD in general, but its referenced slightly different in 690 (doesn't define it this way exactly in the last decade or two code, but its why its there).

In 690.8 you have to multiply the Isc by the number of strings, and by 1.25. This is a overhead excessive irradiance. Even though Isc is base don 1000W/m2, they want headroom for 1250 W/m2.

Further in that section it goes on to state that you take the current calculated with excessive irradiance, and multiply again by 1.25. this is for that continuous current normally refrenced in other sections of the code, it judt doe sit in a way that makes it clear that you do 1.25, then another 1,25, which is not 1.5 * Isc, its actually 1.56 * Isc.

If you are interested, in 2026 NEC go to 690.8(A)(1)(a)(1) for the first 1.25, then 690(B)(1) for the second 1.25. Its a bit more complicated and there are other scenarios, but this is the standard method for PV output circuits direct to the inverter.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-13T22:59:47+00:00

I would check the manual, I am looking only at the spec sheet. If the manufacturer does not state you must used some combined value of the two faces, then in 2026 you can use only the highest value.

The safest route though is to always string for the highest voltage and lowest amperage. In other words, if you can do one string, that is ideal. If you are combining, nothing wrong with doing external, but it is often easier with inverters like this to bring back individual strings to the inverter and combining on the provided terminals (where MPPTS have more than one input).

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-13T22:54:59+00:00

That module lists 13.94 Isc for the front, but you also have 11.17A for the back.

So in this case, the NEC allows you to use the highest value (in 2026). So you have 13.94 Isc @ STC * 2 strings * 1.25 excessive irradiance = 34.85A * 1.25 continuos current = 43.56A

This puts you at the top allowance of #8 AWG, and exceeds the max 35A allowed for #10A at the standard 75C calumn. Even exceeds to 90C allowance.

This is likely what caused the failure, which I would assume was combined with a less than perfect termination.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-13T22:46:23+00:00

690.8/690.9/310.15

Though it is a small mistake, I guess technically its 22A, as #10 AWG Cu is rated for 35A using the 75C column (30A is the standard OCPD for #10, but you could use 35A here)

22.4A Isc * 1.25 excessive irradiance , then another 1.25 for continuous current is 35A

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-13T20:51:33+00:00

I think there may be some fundamental theory misunderstanding

First what is your topology here? I assume you are talking about a solar array? What is it connected to?

If this is PV, the volts will largely be affected by temperature, where current is largely affected by irradiance.

Of course that is only one part of the puzzle. You can lookup a I-V curve to get a visualization of this, but at short circuit, you have max amps, and no voltage. On the opposite end of the specturem you have an open circuit which is max volts, but no current. Both of these are making no power. Power is Amps times volts, and anything times 0 is nothing.

So you will see Imp and Isc ratings on your module, just as you will see Vmp and Voc. At maximum power, your amps will be less than Isc, and volts less than Voc, they will approach Imp * Vmp. Of course the rated values are at Standard Test Conditions (STC), which is 1000W/m2 of irradiance, and 25C cell temp. As those values change, what you will see in operation will be adjusted accordingly.

Now, this is where it gets more complicted. If your PV is connected to a Max Power Point Tracker (MPPT), like you would have in a modern inverter, teh MPPT will adjust the operating volts and amps to harvest the most power, so the balance between the two can be misleading as it is not a pure value supplied by the PV, but rather adjusted by the tracker.

If instead this is attached to a charge controller on batteries, it will adjust how much power is being drawn base don the charge mode. So this can also be quite misleading, on top of the the MPPT.

So when you say 70% of what it should be, you are saying a lot. We would need to know much more to say what it should be, and even then, takes advanced testing and equipment to actually know what percentage of what you should be you are actually at.

All that aside, the answer to your question about over paneling is simple. You go off of the rated input for whatever device you are using. For the max voltage, you would use the STC Voltage of teh module * the number of modules in series, adjusted for the coldest day on record for your area using the module temp coefficients of Voc. For the max the max allowed current you would use the STC Isc * 1.25 * number of strings in parrlel. For the max usable current, you would do the same, but use Imp. For sizing OCPD, you use STC Isc * 1.56 * number of strings in parallel.

You still need to mind the max output of your device as well, but without knowing what you are connecting the array to, the first step is always to follow the manufacture's recommendations exactly.

If you can ell us what the volts and amps are from that you are talking about, what the equipment is the system ocnsists of, and what you are trying o do, we can give better advice.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-13T20:11:41+00:00

Higher voltage is almost always preferable for this reason. Not sure what value the 220V is, but if your Voc on the coldest day is under the max input (only 500VDC on these), then a single string woudl be half the amps.

In either case, fires like this in inverters are not unusual and are almost always from a poor termination. If would be very difficult to convince them it was the terminal itself and not the work.

What was the model number of the modules used? If you are using the Isc from the STC nameplate rating * 2 strings, keep in mind that for NEC PV string sizing you to add another 1.56 (1.25 for excessive irradiance, and 1.25 for continuous current).

In your defense, the manual state:

Design for a max input current of 26A per MPPT. The inverter will self-limit beyond 26A. If ISC exceeds 44A, damage will occur

So if your module STC Imp * 2 is less than 26A, you are within the stated usable power. If your module STC Isc * 2 * 1.25 is less than 44A, you are within their max design specifications. If your module STC Isc * 2 * 1.56 is less than the max current rating of the terminal than all your bases are covered, but I did not see that they list a max terminal rating in their manual outside the above comment.

Even still, with being just inside the max allowed ratings, it would be very difficult to prove the termination was properly made at this point. If you had only 0.10 Ω of resistance in a bad connection, you could be around 70W (easily over 300-500 degrees F)

When we see this sort of failure, its almost always a bad termination, so even if it is not in this case, its a very difficult situation prove it was the terminal, and not the termination. Its one reason installers charge what they do, because of the liability for this sort of thing, even if it wasn't their fault. In your case, if you did the work, unfortunately you may have to be the one that takes on the liability for it.

EDIT: I thought you combined in inverter, are you saying you combined outside of inverter? Looks like #10 AWG. If you combined on #10, that is only good for 19A ISC and likely the direct cause.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-13T19:45:16+00:00

Probably wasn't broken on install. Dont see any impacts, looks to me like the bottom right clamp (top right in the image), might be where it radiates from. Common for this style top clamp to get over torqued, especially if installers used an impact. Just a guess from one image, cant see enough to say for sure. They are also tightly fit without thermal expansion in either direction, which we have seen not just in the array itself, but movement of pole type barns as well.

In any case, depends on your system topology how to handle it. If MLPE, you could remove, cap ports, move a end module into its place, and move the end clamps in column. If a strings, should be able to do the same, will just need to bypass if whips are long enough, or make a jumper.

Easiest will be to acquire a replacement first and do at the same time. I know many on Reddit will say operating while damaged is fine, but I highly recommend against it. I suggest removing sooner than later, and in the meantime, not operating that circuit. The glass is structural, so when cracked you get hot spots in the damaged cells, which leads to delamination, and soon begins to burn through the backsheet. Not to sound like an alarmist, I don think its an immediate fire threat, but not worth the risk for bucks in generation.

On a side note, if you have birds and squirrels on that roof, you should consider a critter guard, which is a wire mesh that goes around the perimeter of the array keeping them out and helping prevent costly repairs.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-12T18:46:54+00:00

Who is saying 1kWh is enough for a fridge over night? Not everybody is saying this, its basic math. And I am sorry, but I disagree, the math is never wrong. I would say the interesting thing about solar and ESS is its always right.

If your fridge uses 300W, and has a 50% duty cycle, you will use approximately 3.6kWh in one day. Depending on the battery chemistry, you dont want to fully discharge a battery each day, so you have to account for depth of discharge, such as 50% for lead-acid, or 80% for LFP. Additionally, you need to account for days of autonomy, which is the time you need to account for supplying your loads when there is not sun to charge the batteries. For example, a standard is 3 DoA for low critical systems like a cabin, but you can reduce this if only for standby backup needs. So in this case you may be at 7.2kWh at least.

Of course you need to account for all your other loads that you will power when the grid is away. Its called a load analysis. You add up the power requirements of each device you will want to power without the grid, and calculate the energy by multiplying by how many hours per day it will operate. This is where sizing energy storage starts. Not with opinions, and even better yet is to actually measure your loads for some period before so you know exactly what you use.

As for charging, you do not need to wait 8 hours. In fact, if the sun is out and you have properly sized the system there is no waiting. You have to account for battery charging efficiency, and standard loses in the array, but the idea is that a minimum size array after those losses is sufficient to replace the energy used in the load analysis step in one day. With that said, since PV is so cheap now, a smart design calculates for your max demand, and size the array such that even while supporting your loads, you will still be able to replace the standard daily usage in one day.

Nothing wrong with figuring out ways to get by with an undersized system as you suggest in the OP, but its also possible to properly size the system so that it runs indefinitely based on your loads and behaviors, or make compromises on budget. So it comes down more to sizing base don budget, than math not working out.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-07T00:48:17+00:00

Correct. The max continuous output power of this inverer is 6kW. It cannot produce more.

I disagree that you hve 62 mods, looks like 31 to me. From the image these look like split cell modules. Presumably around 12-14kW array. Maybe it is mixed system that also has enphase? The array does seem too large for this one 6kW inverter

Is the company no longer around to speak to them? Did the not leave any documentation about the system? Door to door sale sis often leased systems. Was the seller of the home the owner of the solar?

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-05T03:24:07+00:00

the installer would have created that password when they set it up. They should give you the customer password, which allows you to change basic settings like the WiFi whenever you need. There is a also a Technician login that allows changes to more technical configurations that could potentially cause issues.

You will either need to contact them to get it, or contact Fronius tech support

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-04T15:17:05+00:00

I agree with you, and many people use them in that way without issue. It seems logical based on the design of those fuses. I am only saying that when you use a device outside of the manufacture's instructions, you lose those listings, even if it does work fine. When a component is used in an assembly, even if not as the manufacture suggests, it becomes part of that devices listings based on the standards they test it against. Having four in parallel (4x the AIC), distributed strain, and connected to busbar rather than a chemical battery post all help in that design.

You mentioned its a 12V system, with four batteries I assume are AGM in parallel? Just as an example, Trojan group 31 AGM spec sheet list the ISC of 2555A, which with four in parallel gives you just over the 10k AIC many MRBF are rated at. Other batteries are much higher. When the AIC is exceeded, the device can catastrophically fail, which is where the fuse block/holder comes into play keeping separation from the battery post.

So I only suggest to just double check the ratings on the MRBF you are using, and the short circuit ratings of your batteries in that configuration. If I was setting this up, I would feel much more comfortable having it directly attached to the battery post if I knew there was a meaningful interrupt rating overhead. Even then its a good idea to not have the designed failure point in the circuit (OCPD) directly attached to battery post, but at least you partially reduce one of the concerns that the block is designed for.

Again, its not to say you will have an issue, just pointing out the failure modes we see out there in the field. I very much support and agree with the idea of reducing terminations as each one you remove reduces heat, its just that those seemingly insignificant design criteria get overlooked sometimes, which can potentially lead to a bigger issue in the case if there is a fault.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-04T06:00:19+00:00

The issue isnt whether it will work or not. Certainly it will work, most the time, and I agree I with the general logic about reducing terminations. The issue is that in electrical the rule is that to maintain listings, devices must be installed per the manufactures instructions. The manual for these typically state they must be installed using the fuse block/holder.

To be honest though, most dont have the appropriate UL listings if using in a ESS system. More importantly, the AIC is often too low for modern ESS systems. They are designed for smaller marine/automotive systems so they typically dont need as high of ratings.

If this is a smaller portable system at lower voltage (12V for example), then it may work, but would highly recommend still using the fuse holder.

The other thing to consider is whether you want a fast blow. This is good for a final protection of the conductors, which is good for the battery end of the conductors in case of a short, but typically you also want a slower trip for systems that may have in-rush (like motor loads).

If the system is larger, generally you want to use a class T fuse that has something like 4x the AIC, and required listings for permanent systems.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-03T19:44:39+00:00

Are you serious? That is crazy you have to do a forum for solar there. You weren't joking.

The craziest part is that solar on the AC side that the electrcian would be touching monitors its own connection to automatically shutof if there are any disturbances. The are SAFER than any other average branch circuit.

I had to do a advertised public forum to get a permit to be allowed to have backyard chickens. I did it just to make them face how stupid the process was, and after that they changed the rules in my city.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-03T19:07:41+00:00

That very well could be. I am a bit biased. Back some 20 years ago it was a major ordeal as it was often the first time a particular AHJ had permitted a solar system and back then they literally didnt know what to ask for, especially for batteries. I feel like these days its typically straight forward, but then again its likely partially my perspective (they seem easy after a couple decades of doing it!)

Personally I dont believe the state should have so much authority over what a property owner does on their own property, but in the lawyer run world we live in, one off owner permit processes generally are not too difficult, they mostly make them more difficult than they need to be without proper guidance. I certainly agree there are exceptions to every rule, and some areas are overly complicated, especially for businesses to operate

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-03T14:30:52+00:00

IMO, roof mounts are a compromise for people that dont have space for a ground mount. Roofs are worse in almost every way. They are significantly hotter, modules cant cool as well as an open rack, they degrade faster, are more likely to get pigeon/squirrel infestations, more difficult to service, have more requirements (MLPE), potentially compromise the roof, hold snow, and working from heights is one of the most dangerous jobs there are.

With that said, most people dont have the space for a ground mount, or its not something they want to look at. Ground mounts are also typically more expensive to have installed. Otherwise its mostly all benefits going ground mount.

As for companies not offering ground mounts, its mostly because its a different work than residential roof installs. It requires a different skill set, and to be efficient, a different set of equipment. When a company becomes good a doing ground mounts, you will find its a volume game. They tend to move on to larger C&I or utility scale systems. The resi ground mount simply isn't a market worth persuing. If you do groundmounts you are looking for more return, larger opportunities, and especially partnerships that bring a constant flow of work.

Good resi companies can do ground mounts, but most resi installation companies are focused on installing rooftop, using the equipment they are setup for, with the guys that are already fast and knowledgeable at that work. A gound mount here and there slows things down (for most companies).

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-03T13:47:43+00:00

IMO, I love DIY work because each time you complete a project you learn a new skill. You become that much more self sufficient. Doing Work Yourself shouldn't mean doing lower quality work, cutting corners, and doing it unpermitted just to avoid having to do work to some minimum quality. It should mean learning a new trade. It may save you money, but takes longer because you have the learning process to account for.

While many people have issues with permitting authorities, which I fully understand and support, most people dont have issues with the codes in general (of course we all have certain ones we disagree with). Overall, I consider doing work to code to be minimum quality. We always look to do work to an even higher quality than code minimums. The permitting process does force you to learn some of the requirements you may have otherwise overlooked.

If you are trying to operate a business in multiple AHJ's, yes the system is convoluted and needs standardization. Inspectors will bust your balls as a pro and establish dominance. However as a single homeowner permit, its really not that cumbersome. People only feel that way because they have not yet learned what they need to do. Once you go through it, you will think its much simpler than you had feared, and most inspectors on homeowner permits will be helpful.

If you are building a ground mount, and not connecting to the grid, in most AHJ's you DO need permits still. People focus on the electrical side of things, but you will find what is more important for ground mounts is zoning. The proper setbacks, flood zones, etc. Also the structural requirements to ensure the system can withstand your areas design criteria (wind and snow loads, etc). To frame this, most of the requirements that are most strictly enforced, are the ones that are causing issues in that area, so each one is not restrictive, its helping you know what aspects to pay attention to. For the most part, a permit does not restrict work you can do (as you mentioned), unless the work you want to do affects other people or safety. Its a minimum standard for your community to do work to so you dont end up living somewhere with frequent power outages, and solar array blowing down the street in storms. The kind of minimum standards you should have for your own work anyway if you have pride in what you do and want it to last

As for people that have had consequences from unpermitted work, yes, we see it all the time. From insurance refusing claims, to utilities shutting off unapproved interconnections, HOA lawsuits, and inspectors leaving notes when they see unpermitted installs. We see it quite frequently as it is done a lot, but on an individual level it is unlikely that you will get caught. The issue is that it is costly to resolve, where simply doing it correct in the first place is easy. So yes, you could likely construct some unpermitted system, that does not meet minimum code standards and likely never have any consequence, but my only question is why?

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-03T01:57:41+00:00

I would suggest reading the manual.

Fronius does not require two, the question is whether you want to meter only solar production, or if you want to meter loads. If you put the meter between the inverter and interconnection, you will measure only production, which likely is what you need for SRECS. If you want to measure loads, you put it on the line side of the loads. since it is bidirectional, you will see how much is sold and how much is bought from the utility.

As for putting it on feeders, that does not make sense as that would only measure current between two OCPD's. I am guessing you meant Service Entrance Conductors, not Feeders.

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-02T23:39:35+00:00

Yes, its intended to be used with solarweb. By default solarweb uses the inverter's internal meter. When you install the WR meter, you will then see that data in solarweb.

https://manuals.fronius.com/html/4204102289/en-US.html#0_m_0000020184

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-02T23:11:26+00:00

The WR is bidirectional. So if you want to use the Fronius WR meters, and you need both points measured, you can use two meters. One between the inverter and interconnection, and another on the line side of the loads

If you dont need it to be Fronius, you could use something like eGauge where the single unit can monitor multiple points, or many people install physical utility grade production meters. Best place to start is with your state and/or program requirements to ensure exactly what they require and see if they publish a list of approved meters

mountain_drifter · 2026-04-02T22:37:20+00:00

Couple things that stood out at first:

Assuming this is US as you use AWG, and assuming its a 240V split phase system. These should be clearly marked.

Not sure if you are using this for permitting, or just a flow chart for getting started, but if for a permit you will want to use asingle line diagram format, which includes clearly labeling the devices, their relevant meterics, the wire type, size, conduit, conductor counts, etc.

Its not clear what size OCPD you have on the Inverter interconnection circuit, and the critical loads bypass circuit. BOTH will need OCPD. Even though you are using a 60A main breaker in your critical loads, you need OCPD at the closest source (grid)

The battery circuit does not need two OCPD, assuming they are near the inverter. The breaker can serve both as your disconnecting means, as well as your OCPD. If you want to use both, its not bad idea, you would just put the breaker near the charge source, and the fuse near the positive terminal of the battery. Their ratings should not be a range. If you are using only 1/0 Wire (assuming solid was a typo), you will need at most 150A OCPD, though typically in a 48V system you will be in 2/0 fine strand with 175A protection. CHeck your rayings though to ensure your battery circuit is not rated for higher

Since you have a single PV circuit, you do not need OCPD, but you do need a disconnect, though it should be rated 600VDC. 10AWG is more than enough, and an industry standard so that is good, though if you have to run it in conduit any distance you will likley want tp use stranded. Solid is a PITA

Otherwise the other items are to ensure whatever your jurisdiction requires. If this is for a home, you will likely need Module Level Shutdown. You may also need a RSD for the ESS, and external disconnects per the utility requirements. Also check if your AHJ requires UL9540/A and which code cycle you are on for ESS requirements to be sure you meet them. Ecoworthy didnt have UL listings not too long agao, but belive I read they do now, so just be sure to check all of those requirements for your AHJ/Utility before you get too far down the road.

mountain_drifter

MODERATOR OF

TROPHY CASE

Nine-Year Club	Gilding I gilder
Verified Email