A question about solar panel output.

[Solar71]

Hey guys.

Ok so here is my question.

When I look at the little basic (non-tracking) solar panel. It looks to me, to be roughly 1m x 1m square.

When I looked online about solar panel power production, I saw 150w-200w per square meter in vacuum.

Also about 100w-150w at sea level. Both of these are at 100% optimal conditions.

So when I look at the solar panel in KSP it says 0.35 per second of power generation.

But what is that? 0.35 watts? 0.35 kilowatts? Megawatts, Gigawatts?

I'm trying to understand how much power they make so I can adjust them to more realistic values.

Thanks in advance

[MaverickSawyer]

First, your online data is for Earth, correct? Well, this is Kerbal, so it's not entirely the same. Same laws of physics, but different values for the variables.

As for the power generation, my understanding is that it's not a particular measure of power. It's just electric charge.

[Xannari Ferrows]

EDIT: Go to page 2.

Edited June 19, 2015 by Xannari Ferrows

[Solar71]

.35 ECs per second. ECs have no real defined value, but you can figure that an EC = [about] 5.45 • 10^-17 Joules. 1 solar cell outputs .5 electronvolts of power, therefore with 238 of them, a simple electronvolt to Joule conversion, and you're all set.

EDIT: That's 9.083 • 10^-19 Watts

Thank you!!!

I didn't realize an EC had no real world equivalent.

[Solar71]

.35 ECs per second. ECs have no real defined value, but you can figure that an EC = [about] 5.45 • 10^-17 Joules. 1 solar cell outputs .5 electronvolts of power, therefore with 238 of them, a simple electronvolt to Joule conversion, and you're all set.

EDIT: That's 9.083 • 10^-19 Watts

Sorry to bother you again, but im not sure I got your answer correctly...

Is 5.6901 Watts the correct calculation to your equation?

Im not familiar with the ^ symbol.

But I read that it means "and" in mathematics.

So is it the Equivalent to 9.083 e -19 ?

Thanks. sorry for bothering you.

[Xannari Ferrows]

EDIT: Nothing to see here.

Edited June 19, 2015 by Xannari Ferrows

[Snark]

There's really no conversion at all-- it's a fantasy solar system, we have no real-world numbers for anything that would indicate an actual conversion to "real world" values. It's not like masses, and radii, and speeds, and so forth where there are real units attached to anything.

I assume that Xannari is using "^" to mean "to the power of", but, A) I have no idea where he's getting those numbers, or why pick numbers that are so tiny.

The numbers he's giving (in the ten-to-the-minus-19th-power watts) means that you'd need a mass of solar cells the size of a small planet in order to power a single light bulb. There's simply no comparison.

The real answer is that there's simply no way to calculate what a KSP "EC" is in terms of real-world energy units, since there are no points of reference. You can make some guesses if you like, for example, "measure the size of a solar panel and assume 150 watts per square meter in vacuum at Kerbin", which would let you calculate a number. But that's still going to be a completely made-up number.

- - - Updated - - -

I was too lazy to look for an upscript text, to I just used ^ to signify exponentiation.

9.083E-19 is the wattage of a single solar panel.

Where are you getting that number? That would mean you'd need over 10 quintillion solar panels to power a single small energy-efficient light bulb, which seems a bit... ah... extreme.

[Solar71]

There's really no conversion at all-- it's a fantasy solar system, we have no real-world numbers for anything that would indicate an actual conversion to "real world" values. It's not like masses, and radii, and speeds, and so forth where there are real units attached to anything.

I assume that Xannari is using "^" to mean "to the power of", but, A) I have no idea where he's getting those numbers, or why pick numbers that are so tiny.

The numbers he's giving (in the ten-to-the-minus-19th-power watts) means that you'd need a mass of solar cells the size of a small planet in order to power a single light bulb. There's simply no comparison.

The real answer is that there's simply no way to calculate what a KSP "EC" is in terms of real-world energy units, since there are no points of reference. You can make some guesses if you like, for example, "measure the size of a solar panel and assume 150 watts per square meter in vacuum at Kerbin", which would let you calculate a number. But that's still going to be a completely made-up number.

- - - Updated - - -

Where are you getting that number? That would mean you'd need over 10 quintillion solar panels to power a single small energy-efficient light bulb, which seems a bit... ah... extreme.

5.6901 watts is what I get when I type 9.083 e -19

not sure if that is correct or not.

[MaverickSawyer]

5.6901 watts is what I get when I type 9.083 e -19

not sure if that is correct or not.

No, the e your inputting there is something else. This equation is 9.083x10^-19 (9.083 times ten to the minus nineteenth power)

[NathanKell]

Interestingly, if you take EC as kilojoules (and thus EC/sec as kW) then the _mass_ of solar panels is just about right for what they're generating. Only the visual model is too small.

[FancyMouse]

But then mining is like breaking the conservation of energy completely

Well, the fact ore can be either converted to LF or O is itself magic, so I won't be picky about that. Just saying.

[Xannari Ferrows]

EDIT: Wow, I [Removed] everything up. Okay, according to yet another remodulation of the calculator, I'm getting 1 panel outputs 41.65 watts, and 1 EC = 119 Joules. In other words, about as much power as Grant's hand-crank charger.

Edited June 18, 2015 by Xannari Ferrows

[Snark]

How much time are you giving the panels to generate power? According to the conversion method I'm using, your panels can generate 9.083 Joules in 3.59e-18 seconds.

Which would give your panel a power of around 2.5e18 watts, i.e. able to generate enough electricity in 1 second to power an entire planetary civilization for a year. Which also doesn't make a lot of sense.

Where are you getting your numbers from?

[tutike2000]

But then mining is like breaking the conservation of energy completely

Depends on what you're 'mining'. Otherwise the entire petroleum industry also breaks conservation of energy

[FancyMouse]

Depends on what you're 'mining'. Otherwise the entire petroleum industry also breaks conservation of energy

I mean the Ore+Ec->LF+O equation. Should've said ISRU instead of mining.