Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

How many panels ? ( to run 230 volt sprinkler pump 30 minutes a day?) - Page 31

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on July 28, 2008, 2:54 pm
 
On Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:54:35 -0700 (PDT), bealiba@gmail.com wrote:



You say there's "no point", yet here you are *again*! Why have you
written several posts (without any plans to stop apparently) since
proclaiming that there's "no point" in carrying on? Why do you write
things which obviously contradict your actions? Have you considered
getting a struckteral edatir to check your posts for logic?


Not a "single calculation", eh, nitwit? How stupid is it to write
things that are easily disproved in seconds? For example: "In other
words, a battery that actually MEETS *George's* minimun requirements
will run the pump for 30/245*60 =  7 minutes at the very most."
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/b6a4a9a590e18408
Now, would you like to withdraw your assertion as any normal person
would do, or will you go on repeating it, exaggerating it, and double
talking around it as usual? As if we don't know the answer.


*Your* useless spreadsheet uses the daily load to spec the battery
capacity. Adjust the number at that point or in the following battery
section, however you like. But if you were to use the basic method of
calculation, which is the *most* anyone could ever expect from you,
then the result will be the same. Or is it your position now that if
the calculation isn't made the way you wish you'd done it, then it's
better to just ignore the effect entirely as you and your "spreadsheet
of the formula" have been doing for your entire "career"?


"One" being George the ghinius deeziner, who claims to be "good" at
his phony job, while getting his butt kicked in public over and over
again rather than learning what he doesn't know about the basics of
system design.

Wayne



Posted by bealiba on July 28, 2008, 11:00 pm
 
On Jul 29, 12:54 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:

most."http://groups.google.com/group/alt.solar.photovoltaic/msg/b6a4a9a590e ...

15 and counting

Posted by bealiba on July 30, 2008, 12:44 am
 On Jul 29, 12:54 am, wmbjkREM...@citlink.net wrote:

Because you have proposed a calculation.

This is an interesting bit of math. Simply, the calculation is
correct. The problem is that it is based on a lie.

Here is the lie. Tweedledum requires that the formula be seen to be
useless. So he proposes that the information of the daily load be
changed with Peukert's equation for battery capacity. The thing is
that the daily load is a "calculated input". This being the case it
should not be changed. Changing it would be the same as saying that -
1+1=3 - just because "2" isn't the answer you want. The place to put
battery specs is at B7, B8, B9, B12

Tweedledum wants the daily load changed so the result hides the 180Ah
minimum battery capacity. The 180Ah is correct for the C0.5 rate.

Now the truth is that I have never specified a battery for this
system. Therefore, any claims by Tweedledee or Tweedledum about
battery specs are lies. You see, you have to take into account their
education. They have both had a broad education. Theyve been to the
School of  "My Dad Always Said", the College of "It Stands to Reason"
and are now postgraduate students at the University of "What Some
Bloke In The Pub Told Me".*

Neither of them designed their systems.


If I was to add battery and panel specifications the formula would
look something like this;

A2      Daily load = 1250Wh
A4      Inverter Efficiency = 85%
A5      Account for inverter inefficiency - Load (A2/A4) = 1470.5
A7      System Voltage = 12
A8      Total A-hr demand per day (A5 / A7) = 122.55

B1      Number of days of autonomy = 1
B2      Maximum allowable depth of discharge = 70%
B3      Battery capacity (A8 x B1 / B2) = 175Ah
B4      Lowest 24 hour average temperature =15c
B5      Temperature correction factor =.97
B6      Adjusted battery capacity (B3 / B5) = 180
B7      Selected Battery 2AS620
B8      Selected battery discharge rate 1
B9      A-hr capacity of selected battery = 238Ah
B10     Number of batteries in parallel (B6 / B9, rounded off) = 4
B11     Number of batteries in series (A7 / battery voltage) =1
B12     Check Capacity of selected battery at 1 Hr rate = 238
B13     Capacity of battery bank at 1 hr rate (B12 x B10) = 238
B14     Daily depth of discharge (100 x A8 / B13) = 51.49%

C1      Design tilt
C2      Design month
C3      Total energy demand per day (A8) =122.55Ah
C4      Battery efficiency = 90%
C5      Array output required per day (C3 / C4) = 136.2
C6      Peak sun hours at design tilt for design month = 5
C7      Selected module BP350
C8      Selected module I at 17 volts at NOCT 2.9A
C9      Selected module nominal operating voltage. = 12V
C10     Guaranteed current (C8 x 0.9) = 2.61A
C11     Number of modules in series (A7 / C9) = 1
C12     Output per module (C10 x C6) = 13.2Ah
C13     Number of parallel strings of modules (C5 / C12) = 10.43

This formula will correctly size a stand alone PV system given the
user input is correct. You can see every calculation. No great
secrets. No mysteries.

You do however have to provide correct data at several points.  If
you, like Tweedledee and Tweedledum, are unable to do so then you
would be better off to hire someone to do it for you as Tweedledee
did, or, you can follow Tweedledum's solution and copy someone else's
system design and throw money at it until it works, at least during
daylight hours..

* Thank you Terry Pratchette

Posted by Ron Rosenfeld on July 30, 2008, 3:06 am
 On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:44:28 -0700 (PDT), bealiba@gmail.com wrote:


If by C0.5 you mean the 30 minute rate, that would be a lot closer to a
workable system.

Unfortunately for your credibility, what you posted and claimed as a
minimum requirement was:


The 100 hr rate is NOT the same as the 30 minute rate.  But now that you've
finally changed that, I see in your latest posting you've now come up with
new battery specifications, and also panels that clearly exceed your
original.  Let's see if you finally got it right, and let's look at some of
these formulas, because, at first glance, I think you still need to make
some changes:


What George wrote about panels for the OP's system with his third try:

Let's look closely at what you've posted now:

George's 4th system:

Panels:        11  50 watt  BP350
Batteries:     4  2AS620   Battery Energy


================================================

======================================================
Selected lines from above:

A7      System Voltage = 12
B6      Adjusted battery capacity (B3 / B5) = 180
B7      Selected Battery 2AS620
B8      Selected battery discharge rate 1
B9      A-hr capacity of selected battery = 238Ah
B10     Number of batteries in parallel (B6 / B9, rounded off) = 4
B11     Number of batteries in series (A7 / battery voltage) =1

What's wrong here, George?

You are recommending a system which has a total of four (4) 2AS620
batteries wired in parallel.  That doesn't even pass a common sense test,
but lets look at the math:

How do you arrive at 4  2AS620's?

Well, according to your posting, B10 (number of batteries in PARALLEL) =
B6/B9, rounded off = 4

But:

B6 = 180
B9 = 238

B6/B9 = 180/238 = 0.756303

How does your useless spreadsheet come up with a value of 4?  And why?

Now look at B11 (batteries in series):  A7 / battery voltage = 1

A7 = 12
Battery Voltage, according to the manufacturer, = 2 Volts.

12/2 = 6

How does your useless spreadsheet come up with a value of 1, and why?

How long have you been using this spreadsheet and attesting to its
accuracy, and challenging others to find errors?

So far as your inputs, according to the Battery Energy company's Discharge
table, published on their web site, the 2AS620 has a 1 hr capacity of 161
Ah to 1.8 vpc.  

http://www.batteryenergy.com.au/02_suncycle_discharge.htm

Where did the 238Ah you have in B9 come from?

-----------------------------

If the mfg specifications are to be believed, 4 2AS620 batteries in
parallel, and 1 in series, for a total number of batteries = 4 would have a
1 hr capacity of 161*4 = 644Ah @ 2 volts.  This will not work in a 12 volt
system.

Care to try again, George?
--ron

Posted by bealiba on July 30, 2008, 8:08 am
 
Well, duh.

Still pandering the same lie. No battery was specified so no specs
were supplied.

Having read the rest of your drivel I will ask now, Show the maths
that prove your claims.

Typos. I have been through your lies, misinformation and am just plain
worn out trying tokeep up with your nonsense. So why don't you stand
up and put forward your best effort at system sizing.  Then we can
have a real good laugh. But then you can't can you.

This is the calculation I used. Sorry for the typos. Live with it.

SYSTEM SIZING    SYSTEM V    BATTERY V
PHOTOVOLTAIC     12.00                    2.00
240 VOLT WATT HOURS    1250.00    W HOURS
INVERTER EFFICIENCY    85.00    %
ACCOUNT FOR INVERTER INEFFICIENCY    1470.59    W HOURS
INVERTER SIZE    882.35    WATTS
12/24/48 VOLT WATT HOURS PER DAY    0.00    W HOURS
SYSTEM VOLTAGE    12.00    VOLTS
TOTAL AMP HOUR DEMAND PER DAY    122.55    A HOURS
BATTERY SIZING
NUMBER OF DAYS AUTONOMY    1.00    DAYS
MAX. ALLOWABLE DEPTH OF DISCHARGE    70.00    %
BATTERY CAPACITY    175.07    A HOURS
LOWEST 24 HOUR AVERAGE TEMPERATURE    15.00    DEGREES C.
TEMPERATURE CORRECTION FACTOR    0.97
ADJUSTED BATTERY CAPACITY    180.48    A HOURS
SELECTED BATTERY    2AS620
SELECTED BATTERY DISCHARGE RATE    1.00    HOURS
Ah CAPACITY OF SELECTED BATTERY    238.00    A HOURS
NUMBER OF BATTERIES IN PARALLEL    1.00
NUMBER OF BATTERIES IN SERIES    6.00
CAPACITY OF BATT. BANK @ 1 HR RATE    238.00    A HOURS
DAILY DEPTH OF DISCHARGE    51.49    %
PHOTOVOLTAIC ARRAY SIZING
DESIGN TILT    60.00    DEGREES
DESIGN MONTH    JUNE
TOTAL ENERGY DEMAND PER DAY    122.55    A HOURS
BATTERY EFFICIENCY    90.00    %
ARRAY OUTPUT REQUIRED PER DAY    136.17    A HOURS
PEAK SUN HOURS FOR TILT/MONTH    5.00    HOURS
SELECTED MODULE          BP350
SELECTED MODULE I AT 14 VOLTS NOCT    2.90    AMPS
SELECTED MODULE NOMINAL VOLTAGE    12.00    VOLTS
GARANTEED CURRENT    2.61    AMPS
NUMBER OF MODULES IN SERIES    1.00    MODULES
OUTPUT PER MODULE    13.05    A HOURS
NUMBER OF PARALLEL STRINGS    10.43    STRINGS

Care to prove it wrong. It is correct. Mind you I would never build
this system. It is a dead end.

The formula is there. Care to try just once. You have totally failed
in all your posts to even come close to a solution.

This Thread
Bookmark this thread:
 
 
 
 
 
 
  •  
  • Subject
  • Author
  • Date
please rate this thread