Welcome to Keen Software House Forums! Log in or Sign up to interact with the KSH community.
  1. You are currently browsing our forum as a guest. Create your own forum account to access all forum functionality.

[Solar panel usefull or just pretty?]

Discussion in 'Survival' started by Zandraak, Mar 21, 2014.

Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.
  1. radam Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,207
    Now solars work at full even if reactor is on yay
     
  2. BlankWarningsign Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    278
    One use for Solar Panels that I enjoy is with Rally Points.

    Build a Station, this station has One Block of light armor, a Beacon, and two Solar Panels sticking out like wings.

    "PARTY OVA HEEEERE!!!" will now echo across the sector =^_^=
     
  3. jtank4 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    71
    Sorry to say, but you're very incorrect. Allow me to enlighten you.
     
  4. Teravisor Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    398
    Devs mentioned solar storms in far future that'll damage solar panels.
    But that'll make them useless on beacons, and hard-to-maintain on large ships...
    Even though they don't give much energy...
     
  5. redneckpirate Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    225
    Make way for the FARRADAY CAGE
     
  6. ADM-Ntek Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    87
    solar storm not lightnig storm.
     
  7. Ranakastrasz Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    54
    What is really needed is for solar panels to be able to power a refinery (and anything else) at low level, such that everything will function, but slowly/poorly.

    That way, you can have a solar panel hooked up to a refinery, which will, over like a minute, refine a tiny amount of uranium so you can power your reactor.
     
  8. Teravisor Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    398
    For that you need batteries, and they might be coming later.

    You can't heat a furnance with power when heat dissipates faster than you heat it...
     
  9. Ranakastrasz Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    54
    True enough.

    Minecraft's Industrialcraft mod let this happen, but that was again by having storage in all power using devices. They would either stutter/run slowly, or else wait for a full charge to run, but it made solar panels useful in small numbers as well as massive numbers.
     
  10. ProfessorFalken Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    290
    Nice math. I agree completely. I have been working in the solar industry for several years now, and the output on panels have increased their wattage by almost 50% during the lase 3 years. I would assume that by 2077 the panels would be mush stronger than this.
     
  11. Jikanta Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    418
    Almost 50% increase sounds great. What is their current wattage anyway?
     
  12. McHendrik Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    152
    Nice post.

    The size of the sun and the rest of the environment are definitely out of whack. I have felt that way about the sun repeatedly. The sun is way too big for our asteroid belt. The apparently size is obviously correct only for much closer-in. But then everything ELSE doesn't make sense.

    Anything at the orbit of Mercury would be seriously fried. That is the one big drawback to your math. You assume a high efficiency but don't explain how a flat panel facing the sun at the orbit of Mercury dissipates the kind of heat involved. Every watt below 100% would cook that panel to extreme temperatures, and I don't see radiative heat sinks on the back. Not to mention the amount of power that would be required to cool everything else in our base, even the armour. I'd bet most metals would be pretty soft and polymers would be liquid. Magnesium wouldn't be ore in the asteroids, it would be rivers, since it melts at 650C.

    Of course, maybe that's why our suit's batteries only last a few minutes. That's some pretty powerful air conditioning!

    Solar panels at efficiencies at 100% would not get hot, obviously, because the energy reaching them is converted to entirely to electricity and not heat, but now we're really getting into the realm of fiction (or fantasy). Light is low-entropy coherent energy and it's conceivable that efficiencies could be much higher than the Carnot limit, but 80%+ seems to me to be way too high.

    I have my own research to do, but take your remaining 18% in watts, and identify the best possible thermal emitter for the back side of that panel that you can find. You already know the area, so you know at that point the wattage that can be radiated away. At the orbit of Mercury that panel would turn into a puff of gas fairly quickly, I bet. I bet the efficiency that would be required to avoid a complete meltdown would be much closer to 100%, and that is definitely a fantasy.

    So the whole situation is unrealistic, and personally I think the sun should be much smaller (since it's much farther away than it is at Mars). An orbit that far our with a much smaller sun makes the current solar panel power output much more realistic.

    Don't even get me started about Uranium.
     
  13. McHendrik Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    152
    Sigh... of course I had to go do it now that I was curious about it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stefan%E2%80%93Boltzmann_law

    Given your power/m2 hitting the panel at 1/5th the orbit of Mercury and 82% efficiency the temperature of the panel has to be 933K or around 600C to be in thermal equilibrium. (Solve for T given j* = 0.18 * 2.4e5 W/m2.)

    Those panels... they look to you like they're 600C? Every point below 82% efficiency is hotter.

    I don't think the devs are going to up the wattage. I think instead that the sun is too big for the actual orbit we play at.
     
  14. jtank4 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    71
    I've already replied to you on my thread, as you copied your post there, but I'll respond here for the record: I definitely did not intend to say that I thought the developers should buff the panels to that amount, but rather, as stated at the bottom of my post, that they should do both and make the sun appear further away (maybe to around Mars's orbit, as of now the panels output as if we were around Jupiter) and buff the panels to according levels.
     
  15. SaturaxCZ Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,718
    Hmm... Ok i didnt take in to consideration size of sun and real in game distance from it. But like some one say over heating will be problem, becose when you get biger heat you get biger ( resistance? ( im not sure if resistance is corect word in English so i will us clasic R )) with biger R on conductor there will biger energy loss when 100-150°C creat over 80-99% energy loss on conductors.

    Soo... until some one find answer on:
    How much solar panels start over heat ?
    How fast will heat sink ?

    You can not tell how effective will they be in real conditions, or if you will need more minerals creat some coolers for them, change angle, atc...
     
  16. titi Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    33
    i hope in the futur that we can make batteries to store the solar energy, "solar panels needs batteries to store the energy"

    But the problem is that solar panels are quite useless for station. Because you cannot orientate them.
    It will be very good that we can orientate them to the direction of the solar source
     
  17. Meri Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    34
    The only downside of the solar panels I found so far is a huge amount of time required to build them @ survival. It's so damn boring to sit there for those few long minutes, waiting for it to get built while the wielder flash rapes your eyes out...
     
  18. Maul555 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    239
    Yuuuuup... This that and this... And I think I am going to steal the phrase "welder flash eye rape" from you..
     
  19. extraammo Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,015
    Why is everyone assuming that this close star is our sun?
     
  20. Teravisor Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    398
    You can actually judge what star it is by color. Noone here did it yet though.
     
  21. SaturaxCZ Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,718
    You can not trust colors when you see gray space :nono: meybe its Sun, meybe not, but only way is check star map :rof: and not that shyning ball.
     
  22. jtank4 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    71
    It's almost official that it is our star. This game is supposed to take place in the same universe as Miner Wars, which takes place in our solar system, around the same time as this game. Also, to get to Proxima Centauri (the closest star to the sun, to get to it in 60 years), only 4.2 lightyears away, we'd need to launch a space craft today able to get up to 212,000,000m/s almost immediately then slow down at the end of its trip to orbital speed (obviously there are other ways, like accelerating slower but to a higher speed, but the point is just to show how astronomically far off we are from being able to do this). Hint: we can't do that. So, a. we are in our system, or b. we should have warp drives in game. Either way I'm happy.
     
  23. Maul555 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    239
    I think I read somewhere that the devs are purposefully trying to make this game as generic as possible so they dont get backed into a corner with the existing miner wars universe. Yes, it is a spawn of miner wars, but they are not developing it as such... But the year that has been set alone would prove that it's our star...
     
  24. Teravisor Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    398
    And I'd say it's some random white dwarf... Who cares? We need more solar power, why do we need arguments? At least we need a way to mod solar panel output.
     
  25. pipakin Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    182
    Adjust the value in CubeBlocks.sbc. I believe it's MaxPowerOutput.
     
  26. Teravisor Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    398
    Yeah, you're right, I didn't look there.
    Then what is this argument about?:confused:
     
  27. jtank4 Trainee Engineer

    Messages:
    71
    Which argument specifically? The whole thread? Or just recent developments? The thread was posted because the OP is of the opinion that by default solar panels should output more, not just because he was to lazy to change that value, but I would imagine because servers would still have the lower value regardless of his modding. The recent argument was about whether we were in our solar system as I did math to determine how far we were from the sun and by extension how much power solar panels should output, but that's only valid if we're in our solar system. Also I don't think we should stay at the distance we are at, we're way to close to the sun.
     
  28. Gwindalmir Senior Engineer

    Messages:
    1,006
    I think solar panels are fine.

    One solar panel can run (at least):
    1 gravity generator
    Inertial dampers (to maintain attitude, not translation), I can even rotate a ship with just one solar panel.
    1 Medical room
    Several lights
    Assembler (on idle)
    Refinery (on idle)

    All that combined is only about 50% of that solar panel usage.

    Solar panels are perfect for preventing waste of uranium when idle. Which, IMO is their purpose. Also for emergency situations, so you always have an active med bay.

    What would really be nice is if the refinery, and/or assembler would operate at a lower speed/efficiency if there's not enough power, as opposed to just not working at all.
     
  29. Teravisor Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    398
    They just became neither pretty nor useful because of meteors...
     
  30. Maul555 Apprentice Engineer

    Messages:
    239
    gonna go experiment with gravity shields.... its ugly but it if it works it works...
     
Thread Status:
This last post in this thread was made more than 31 days old.