Single-row trackers remain the dominant global format, mainly due to greater flexibility, row-level control, and O&M advantages
Dual-row designs continue to find use on irregular or constrained sites, where shorter structures can improve layout flexibility
Suppliers take different approaches, with some favoring independent-row optimization and others highlighting lower motor and controller counts in linked-row systems
Beyond structural configurations such as 1P and 2P, tracker design also varies in how module rows are organized and controlled. This distinction influences system layout, control strategy, and overall project optimization. In a single-row configuration, each row operates independently, while in the dual-row configuration, 2 adjacent module rows are mechanically linked and supported by a shared drive system. The Twin model from Axial represents one such dual-row configuration. Driven by 1 motor, the 2 rows are connected through a magnetic joint that tolerates up to 30° of elevation deviation between them, enabling synchronized operation even on irregular terrain. This mechanical-linking approach reduces controller count while maintaining stable motion across long spans or uneven land parcels (see No One-Size-Fits-All: Tracker Design Depends On Site Conditions).
Dual-row trackers were widely used until a couple of years ago. However, according to Nextpower’s Anvitha Ravi, Senior Manager at the Global Market Intelligence Division, single-row trackers-especially independent-row designs-remain the dominant architecture globally due to their flexibility, energy optimization, and O&M advantages. While dual-row and some multi-row designs still exist in niche applications, most developers prioritize row-level control and layout adaptability, she adds.
YunHua (Kevin) Shu, Deputy Director of Product Management at TrinaTracker, emphasizes that the choice is determined by site characteristics rather than technical superiority. Dual-row trackers are shorter and offer greater layout flexibility on hilly or irregular terrain, especially near boundaries such as lakes and mountains. Single-row systems suit large, flat utility-scale sites in markets such as the Middle East, the US, China, and Australia. “Here, longer strings reduce cost per MW and streamline installation,” says Shu. Soltec’s
Iván Soto San Andrés, Corporate Market Intelligence Coordinator at Soltec, also shares Shu’s view that the choice between single-and dual-row is rather site-specific, and attributes similar application scenarios to each variant (see Solar Tracker Designs Shift Toward Simpler Configurations).
PVH supports both independent-row and linked-row designs. Its configurable architecture allows selective linking within the same project, giving developers flexibility to balance cost, O&M access, and layout constraints. Solar Steel, on the other hand, now promotes a dual-row 1P tracker as its main product. The system uses a cardan mechanism to move the second row, reducing the number of motors and controllers by nearly 50%, according to the company. Zimmermann clearly favors single-row configurations, citing the ability to optimize tracking angles at the individual row level as a key advantage, particularly on undulating terrain. The operational inconvenience caused by linked rows is cited as the key constraint associated with dual-row trackers.
The text is an edited excerpt from TaiyangNews’ Market Survey on Solar Trackers 2026, which can be downloaded for free here.