solar panel

Derek, can you tell me please why a bifold panel would give more power than a fixed pane? 2x50w in a bifold would give the same power as a 100w wouldn't they?

I think what derek is suggesting is that the bi-fold or for that matter a single fixed can be moved around to get the full potential from the sun and therefore more power over the course of a day

Thanks David. Been looking at panels and wondering at the statement. I hadn't read it that way

carry bag it suppose to be. (carry)

Jim,
you say-> "They are an amorphous panel and are more efficient than the conventional "poly crystalline" panels, however are a bit DEARER and BIGGER for a given output"

That's because they are actually NOT as efficient, if they were as efficient they would be smaller or a higher rating . . :-))

I think you may have meant "Multy"-crystalline or even "Mono"-crystalline panels, but even they are smaller in size than the equivelent capacity Unisolar panel, again because they are more efficient also.


Shane, to buy a solar panel you first need to know how much "power" you have to replace from the battery !!

When you work it out just buy a panel that will give you that "power" as an average of it's output.

Any 80 Watt panel puts out ONLY 80 Watts MAXIMUM (~5 Amps) when used under 'ideal' conditions, you have to be realistic and allow for ALL conditions, that's where a "poly-crystalline" panel will produce more power over a given number of days than Unisolar panel, Mono or Multy-crystalline because they work in very low light from earlier in the morning till later in the day and cloudy conditions too.

SHARP Poly-Crystalline Solar panel technology

They even look similar at the surface as Unisolar panels, but much smaller size with larger power out-put, and only because they are MORE EFFICIENT :-))

Sorry to jump in on your thread Shane,

Mainey i have a been looking at my power requirements for a while know and I'm interested in this 123w sharp panel that you provided a link for I'm trying to weigh up the 80w sharp the 123w sharp panel, or a shell 85w panel

As every one states calculate your power requirements that's hard i realy don't know, these batteries will be my only source of power for at lest 1 year and i can see a lot of day to day variables.

Now regulators i can see that the ducks guts is a plasmatronics but what's your view on morningstar? I have also read that its better to keep your regulator close to the battery is this true?

Finally price i can get a 123w for $950, 80w for $660 of the shell 85w for $749 the 10 A morning star regulator for $89

Regards

Stephen

Amorhous panels are more efficient because they don't lose power output above 25 C as the others do.

They also produce power when partially shaded whereas the others stop working altogether.

Anyway, I don't profess to be an expert, I just take advice from Collyn Rivers. Do a Google search of Collyn Rivers. He has probably forgotten more than any of us are ever likely to know.

Stephen,
Yes, Plasmatronics may be the "ducks guts" however I would recommend you also look closely at a PR series Steca.
Steca are made in Germany, when you compare the differences and what programs you need in a Solar regulator I believe you also would be more than happy with the Steca PR series, as it will tell you at a glance what the Solar/battery system is doing at any given time on an easy to read LCD screen, they have a 'history' memory and "State of Charge" % is inbuilt, they are also a tad less expencive.

Morningstar is a Brand name, what "model" 10A reg with-in the Morningstar range would you compare to a Plasmatronics, after all why would you want to use a solar regulator that did not *perform* as well as the best Regulators available?
A decent solar regulator must also act in exactly the same way as the best 240v battery chargers.
Example; 3 x stage battery charging and with PWM to eliminate battery sulphation as is available in quality 240v battery chargers.
The only difference is the power is now coming from a Solar panel and not from a 240v grid power connection.

If you can get the sharp "ND"-L3EJEA 123 Watt panel for only $950 there is no choice, it retails @ ~$1,200+
The Sharp Multy-crystalline "NE" series 123 Watt panels are less expensive, but are also less technically advanced too.



Jim,
Just for some clarification
Both panels mentioned are very similar physical size, the Sharp panel is only just slightly smaller.

Unisolar panel is only 64 Watts or 3.9 Amps
136cm long x 74cm wide
= 1.01 Sq mtr
(Sq mtr) = 3.86 Amps

Sharp "ND" panel is 123 Watts or 7.16 Amps
149cm long x 66cm wide
= O.99 Sq Mtr
(Sq mtr) = 7.23 Amps


It can plainly be seen the Sharp "ND" series panel technology gives almost DOUBLE the Amps per Square Metre than the Unisolar panel, mathematics absolutely prove that beyond any doubt.

As to working in temps above 25 degrees, if you lost a realistic 7% as quoted by 'experts' you would still be so far ahead it would still be no contest.

The major benefit of the "ND" series Sharp panel over 'conventional' solar panels is they also works in partial shade, as it's similar to the Unisolar panel in this way, but still gives almost double the total amps in full sun per sq mtr of panel surface.

I have never professed to being an "expert" either, however...?
I use em, I cel em, I fit em & I forget stuff too :-))

A quick question:
why do they NOT use Unisolar panels on all the various outback power grids all over Australia ??

When you compare the price of Solar panels you should ascertain the $$ price per Amp available, both Unisolar and Sharp are ~$170

Mainey...

Mainey,

All I know about amorphous panels in that Collyn recommends them for travel/camping purposes and uses the others on the roof of his home as he says that they are more practical, more space efficient for that purpose. Hence, I agree with your statement about power grids, based on the expertise of Collyn.

Anyway, all I know is my 64 watt Unisolar will keep up with my 80 L Waeco in ideal conditions and gets by with a little help from the gennie or the car at other times.

ATB,

Jim.

Jim,
you say-> "All I know about amorphous panels in that Collyn recommends them for travel/camping purposes and uses the *OTHERS* on the roof of his home as he says that they are more practical, more space efficient for that purpose"


Jim, now I'm totally confused - what 'panel' is it you refer to as "others" ???

As it's been clearly shown Unisolar are definately not "more space efficient" I can only make the (incorrect) assumption that he does not "use Unisolar panels on the roof of his home" !!

Shane, what is the contraption on the front of your vehicle? Does it enable you to winch backwards? Scott

I'm tipping it's a boat loader.

your right, i have a winch on the front with a wireless remote. i use that bar with a wheel on top to pull the boat up on the rack. works great and i can stay with the boat while its being pulled up.

I see. Not being a fisherman I went in the wrong direction. But I have always harboured an idea of designing a contraption to enable you to winch backwards from a front mounted winch. Something like an A frame pointing forward and down off the front with a pulley at the apex so you could run your cable through it and under the car. Of course the problem being the car will most likely be sitting on it's belly. But when I saw your car I thought it might be the same idea but going over the roof. Cheers Scott.

Shane,
The 'best' or most efficient way to use a Solar panel is very different to the way most use a 'generator' or motorised battery charger, etc... etc..... as they are used to charge a battery, generally at night and only when the battery is getting a low charge reading because it's been running the various accessories ALL day, with-out being recharged till it gets low.

With Solar the *best* method is to get a panel that will replace ALL the power used - as it's being used - and to ALSO trickle-charge the (fully charged) battery at the same time.

After all if your going to the trouble of putting a solar panel out to recharge your battery it may as well do the job fully and totally, to use a lesser capacity panel means you loose the benefits available to fully charge the battery.

When this is achieved, the battery remains fully charged ALL day and is only loosing it's power at night, it is however fully re-charged again before lunch next day. This method will also avoid sulphation and early battery failure, because the battery is NOT supplying the power to the load (fridge - lights etc..) during the day, as the power is actually coming DIRECT from the solar system - this is assuming the solar regulator is capable of working in conjunction with the solar system and the load (fridge - lights etc..) to deliver the required power DIRECT to the load, and the ballance of the power supplied by the solar panel goes to trickle charge the (fully charged) battery - unfortunately many low cost regs DON'T have this capability.

Mainey...

i dont need to run a fridge off the battery.