best low light performance
Hi, Amorphous panels are clearly the best for low light performance--but are relatively speaking huge. Does any one know if Poly or Mono are better in low light?
Forum Discussion
Given the space restrictions we have on RV's, if you're looking for low light performance then amorphous is not a good choice.
Power output at 200W/m^2
Unisolar: P = 200W * 8% = 16W
Siemens: P = 200W * 12% = 24W
Kyrocera: P = 200W * 11.2% = 22.4W
If you're looking to maximize solar power, then amorphous is not a good choice.
Power output at 1000W/m^2
Unisolar: P = 1000W * 6% = 60W
Siemens: P = 1000W * 13.2% = 132W
Kyrocera: P = 1000W * 12% = 120W
For a one square meter area, poly produces about 8 W more power at low light levels, and more than 60W at high irradiance.
BTW, Kyrocera advertises efficiency better than 16%. The Unisolar chart listed it at 12%. That means for a 1 m^2 panel, the Kyrocera will output 160W while the Unisolar outputs 60W.
Sal
Power output at 200W/m^2
Unisolar: P = 200W * 8% = 16W
Siemens: P = 200W * 12% = 24W
Kyrocera: P = 200W * 11.2% = 22.4W
If you're looking to maximize solar power, then amorphous is not a good choice.
Power output at 1000W/m^2
Unisolar: P = 1000W * 6% = 60W
Siemens: P = 1000W * 13.2% = 132W
Kyrocera: P = 1000W * 12% = 120W
For a one square meter area, poly produces about 8 W more power at low light levels, and more than 60W at high irradiance.
BTW, Kyrocera advertises efficiency better than 16%. The Unisolar chart listed it at 12%. That means for a 1 m^2 panel, the Kyrocera will output 160W while the Unisolar outputs 60W.
Sal
full_mosey wrote:pianotuna wrote:
Hi,
Amorphous panels are clearly the best for low light performance--but are relatively speaking huge.
Does any one know if Poly or Mono are better in low light?
The answer is NO, neither Poly or Mono are better than Amorphous.
The real question is "How many sq meters will be needed to beat Amorphous and be less huge?".
HTH;
John
