Hybrid Car – More Fun with Less Gas

How many panels ? ( to run 230 volt sprinkler pump 30 minutes a day?) - Page 34

register ::  Login Password  :: Lost Password?
Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on July 31, 2008, 7:05 pm
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:18:47 -0400, Ron Rosenfeld

In a catching-a-glimpse-at-a-wreck sort of way, it's fascinating to
watch George's progress in this thread. Hindered by little more than
extreme pigheadedness and an insistence that he already knows that
which he's attempting to comprehend, in mere weeks he's managed to
come within miles of learning things that mortals take hours or even
days to master. There can be no doubt that perhaps as soon as years
from now he will reach a level that most thought unattainable, and
that songs will be written about the feat. Not to diminish an existing
song, which proved remarkably <chuckle> prescient considering the
revelations in this thread... so far!

"I am the very model of a Solar Power Consultant.
  I've information secret, and I lead an ozzie cargo cult.
  I know the PV panel specs and quote their output powerful
  In amps and volts and watts but rarely energy watt-hourful
When I know more of power than a politician's concubine,
   When I know more of energy than people like old Nicky Pine,
   When I've a taste for laws like Ohm's and battery environments,
   You'll say a Solar Power Consultant has never made more sense...
 [chorus] "

 - Nick Pine, 2000,


Posted by Ron Rosenfeld on July 31, 2008, 7:15 pm
On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 12:05:05 -0700, wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net wrote:


You owe me a new keyboard!!


Posted by bealiba on July 31, 2008, 11:47 pm

Really. The idea behind Peukert's equation is that you first need to
establish the capacity of the battery at the 1 Amp rate.

Ah. And I say that you are lying about numbers. Taking both our claims
into account the solution seems to be to use an impartial SS to keep
things above board. Question is why does that suggestion have you back
peddling over the use of Peukerts.

So you say.

So you should welcome the chance to prove this statement using
impartial tools. But you are running away. Why

So you are saying that the Peukert SS is incorrect. Despite the fact
that your brother Tweedledum has stated that the exponent of 1.2 is
the "Generic".Do we sense friction between siblings.

Ah, Isn't Peukert's formula used to work out battery life for a given
Amp draw?

The Peukert's exponent come from your brother. The idea behind
Peukert's equation is that you first need to establish the capacity of
the battery at the 1 Amp rate.

Well, I guess that proves that Tweedledee is not prepared to work in
an impartial environment that is open to inspection.

The SS gives this

    Peukert Equation Calculator

    Peukert's Exponent    1.2             Peukert Capacity         693.1565433
    Batt Capacity    342
    At hour rating    10             Peukert        Total Amp
                                 corrected        Hours
              Time                   amps           Available
    Discharge Rate
    0.7                 1093.36        0.63        747.86
    6.8                68.99        10.05        471.87
    13.7               30.03        23.08        410.78
    20.5               18.46        37.55        378.79
    27.4               13.07        53.03        357.61
    34.2                10.00        69.32        342.00
    68.4                4.35        159.25        297.73
    102.6               2.68        259.05        274.54
    136.8               1.89        365.85        259.19
    171.0               1.45         478.18        247.87
    205.2              1.16        595.13        239.00
    239.4              0.97        716.06        231.74
    273.6              0.82        840.50        225.64
    307.8              0.72        968.10        220.38
    342.0              0.63        1098.58        215.79

    208              1.15        604.89        238.35

Note the 238 ah figure. This was questioned by Tweedledee. Based on
the exponent proposed by Tweedledum as the  "Generic"

The exponent as calculated from the peukert_2.xls is 1.3

Rating 1 (R1)    10         Hrs        Capacity (C1)    342         Ahrs

Rating 2 (R2)    120          Hrs        Capacity (C2)    620         Ahrs

Peukert's Exponent = n =                     1.314766878

And when used in   results in:

Peukert's Exponent    1.3             Peukert Capacity         986.8108999
Batt Capacity    342
At hour rating    10                Peukert        Total Amp
                                     corrected        Hours
                     Time                amps            Available
Discharge Rate
0.7                  1616.82        0.61        1105.90
6.8                 81.03                12.18        554.26
13.7                32.91               29.99        450.20
20.5                19.43               50.80        398.64
27.4                13.37               73.83        365.68
34.2                 10.00              98.68        342.00
68.4                 4.06               242.98        277.79
102.6                2.40              411.62        245.97
136.8                1.65              598.29        225.64
171.0                1.23               799.64        211.03
205.2               0.97              1013.52        199.79
239.4               0.80              1238.40        190.76
273.6               0.67              1473.16        183.27
307.8               0.57              1716.92        176.91
342.0               0.50              1968.95        171.41

208                0.96               1031.53        198.98

The chosen battery is still within the capacity to work. Tweedledee
will keep saying that the numbers are incorrect. This of course is a
lie. Read the pages about Peukert, play with the Spreadsheets and
learn to walk the walk yourself. Mind you in the normal course of
designing a home power system Peukert's law rarely plays a part as the
battery manufacturers have already done the calculation for their

Both Tweedledee and Tweedledum like to talk the talk. Neither can walk
the walk. But they sure do weasel well.

On offer is the chance to work with impartial tools. The problem with
the offer is that while Tweedledee and Tweedledum want to tell you
lies about the numbers, THE NUMBERS DO NOT LIE.

Offer still valid. (But will never be taken) Until then, Have fun.

Posted by wmbjkREMOVE on August 1, 2008, 12:57 am
 On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 16:47:48 -0700 (PDT), bealiba@gmail.com wrote:

<snipped the latest looney tunes blizzard of blunders from Oz>

Wrong. They can easily lie when intentionally manipulated by a nitwit.
You've proven it beyond a doubt more times than anyone can count. Why
you've persisted here with a position that your own mother probably
wouldn't support, is a mystery, and one of the most fascinating things
I've ever seen on Usenet.

George, think back to when you were perhaps 8 years old. Can you
remember the very first time somebody told you that letting your mouth
get ahead of your pea-brain will always make you your own worst enemy?
That was good advice. You should have listened then, and every time

Bwaahahaha. Sounds like somebody is running away again, but not before
dropping one last example of his expirt edator schizophrenic caps...
and only until he thinks up some new quackish incompetence to post!
Will he ever learn to stop destroying himself? Stay tuned for the next
exciting episode of the Ghinius Follies, which make 'Through the
Looking-Glass, and What Alice Found There' look like a documentary!


Posted by Ron Rosenfeld on August 1, 2008, 2:30 am
 On Thu, 31 Jul 2008 17:57:44 -0700, wmbjkREMOVE@citlink.net wrote:

It seems George also never heard the oft repeated advice, "It is better to
remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all

George has clearly removed all doubt.

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