I'm taking a 3 month mountain biking trip through British Columbia this summer. Most of the time will be spent camping at National/Provincial parks without access to electric. When I really break it down, the time between being plugged in will be long enough that I need to be electrically self-sufficient indefinitely. I have a 25ft travel trailer. My wife and I are what I consider electrically frugal. In general, we'll keep the Fridge going (on propane) 24h a day. We'll have 1-2 lights on for a couple hours per day on average. We'll run the water pump over the course of 1 hour per day doing dishes/flushing the toilet. Maybe once per day I'll fire up the hot water heater (propane) to get some hot water for dishes, or occasionally a navy shower. We'll charge an ipad/laptop/phone occasionally, but we can usually get around this and do it while we are driving, or with a battery pack I charge up when connected. Radio might be on occasionally or the fan if we need a little circulation of air. We won't don't use the TV/Furnace/AC under these conditions. I have a 1000W Honda generator if needed to run a couple hours per day if needed. I've been googling a lot, but to be quite honest, I find the information out there pretty open or wishy/washy, which is understandable considering power needs greatly vary. From what I've figured out, I should be designing my battery system to be in the 150-200 amp hr rage with panels in 150-200w. Does that seem reasonable for what I've described?

With the ever dropping price of solar panels I would go bigger, I have 4 100 watt panels feeding a pair of group 29 deep cycle batteries on my 28 ft motorhome thanks to the previous owner and in an ideal world I would like more. The problem is cloudy days, shaded solar panels and less than optimal sun angle.

Battery more in the 200-232 range more like. Solar iffy in many provincial park sites under trees so expect to use the gen. You'll need a charger/converter that can do 14.x volts for sure to recharge in the two hours, not be stuck at 13.8v Gen hours 9-11am and 6-8pm so you can't be away biking for any needed gen time. Suggest research and reserve camping sites that have sunlight so you can be away biking more (ask where on Canada/Alaska forum?)

The Honda may only power a 600 watt converter, if the battery bank is hungry. You may need to consider a battery charger depending on the OEM converter's size.I would double the numbers to around 300 amp-hours and 400 watts of solar.For my further thoughts on batteries and things solar surf here: https://freecampsites.net/adding-solar/CptSydor wrote: I have a 1000W Honda generator if needed to run a couple hours per day if needed. From what I've figured out, I should be designing my battery system to be in the 150-200 amp hr rage with panels in 150-200w. Does that seem reasonable for what I've described?

BFL13 wrote:Battery more in the 200-232 range more like. Solar iffy in many provincial park sites under trees so expect to use the gen. You'll need a charger/converter that can do 14.x volts for sure to recharge in the two hours, not be stuck at 13.8v Gen hours 9-11am and 6-8pm so you can't be away biking for any needed gen time. Suggest research and reserve camping sites that have sunlight so you can be away biking more (ask where on Canada/Alaska forum?) The BC park park site generally gives a description of the site, with pictures, so it should list them as shaded/partially or full sun. I'll have to take that into consideration.

PT, under trees where solar doesn't work, doubling the solar won't help. Doubling the gen would help as you say. OP can get a second 1000 and parallel them to run a bigger amp charger/converter. If his rig has a 55 amp converter that can do 14.x, that single 1000w gen won't run it.

Solar Requirements - Confirmation | Good Sam Community

Boon_Docker
Explorer III
Feb 23, 2017
westend wrote:
Boon Docker wrote:
westend wrote:
You want polycrystalline modules, not monocrystalline.

Curious, why would you recommend poly over mono?

- Mono is more efficient.
- Higher output per square foot.
- Longer useful life.

Polycrystalline has better production in low light conditions, something the OP may encounter in the arboreal forest.

I have read many different articles about poly vs mono and they all have different opinions on that subject. Hard to say who is right.
BFL13
Explorer II
Feb 23, 2017
Joel_T wrote:
BFL13 wrote:
"The power factor correction (PFC) circuit is designed to ...."

I wonder if that is an "extra" circuit that would account for the somewhat lower efficiency of the converter as mentioned earlier. (which is trivial compared with the big gain from PF correction)

Seems just one factor combining efficiency and the PF could simplify things. I mean why split up not handling what's coming in well with what's going out is less than what's coming in. Bottom line could be one line. Two in...one out...or whatever.

You are allowed to think of it any way you like! :)

That Xantrex white paper also uses "efficiency" for how much of the supplied power gets used, so a higher PF means it is more "efficient" that way. Converter efficiency is after that-- watts out/watts in.

Solar controller efficiency is the same thing when you do the buck converter 12-12 vs 24-12 etc., where 12-12 is more efficient. Watts out/watts in.

With solar controllers instead of PF happening before the watts in part, you have how much of the panel's rated power arrives at the controller. There is power loss due to heat, and line loss from panel to controller. Even before that there is "panel efficiency" for its output vs area.
brulaz
Explorer
Feb 23, 2017
westend wrote:
Boon Docker wrote:
westend wrote:
You want polycrystalline modules, not monocrystalline.

Curious, why would you recommend poly over mono?

- Mono is more efficient.
- Higher output per square foot.
- Longer useful life.

Polycrystalline has better production in low light conditions, something the OP may encounter in the arboreal forest.

Think that's based on JimInDenver's results? Haven't seen anything else, so I'm not sure that's the case under all low light conditions, diffuse vs low light, cloud cover vs leaf cover, panel orientation.

We camp in low light and I've got fixed mono panels but primarily because they were the only 24V ones that would fit (72 cells but only 32" wide), were a good price and available locally.

Price, quality, size and local availability strike me as being most important when selecting panels.

And if in low light a lot, you'll definitely want more, no matter what they are made of!

Another issue when low light camping (without a generator) is that your batteries can go long periods without being fully charged. From what I've read here, that can be harder on an AGM battery than on a Flooded Lead Acid. At least with FLA you can later equalize them with high voltage to de-sulphate. Anyway, we've avoided AGM for this reason (as well as costs and weight). But if you use a generator to top regularly, this shouldn't be an issue.
Joel_T
Explorer
Feb 23, 2017
BFL13 wrote:
"The power factor correction (PFC) circuit is designed to ...."

I wonder if that is an "extra" circuit that would account for the somewhat lower efficiency of the converter as mentioned earlier. (which is trivial compared with the big gain from PF correction)

Seems just one factor combining efficiency and the PF could simplify things. I mean why split up not handling what's coming in well with what's going out is less than what's coming in. Bottom line could be one line. Two in...one out...or whatever.
westend
Explorer
Feb 23, 2017
Boon Docker wrote:
westend wrote:
You want polycrystalline modules, not monocrystalline.

Curious, why would you recommend poly over mono?

- Mono is more efficient.
- Higher output per square foot.
- Longer useful life.

Polycrystalline has better production in low light conditions, something the OP may encounter in the arboreal forest.
Boon_Docker
Explorer III
Feb 23, 2017
westend wrote:
You want polycrystalline modules, not monocrystalline.

Curious, why would you recommend poly over mono?

- Mono is more efficient.
- Higher output per square foot.
- Longer useful life.
SoundGuy
Explorer
Feb 22, 2017
Well since BFL took me to task over my statement that my Kill-a-Watt was reading a PF that varied slightly by 0.01, which is entirely normal for any consumer level digital display, here's something else for him to chew on .... :W

Yesterday I plugged my CTEK charger into the Kill-a-Watt to check the CTEK's PF and it showed 0.59. It's been on for about 20 hours, the charger output voltage is now at float ... and the PF reads just 0.40.

You tell me. :h
BFL13
Explorer II
Feb 22, 2017
"The power factor correction (PFC) circuit is designed to ...."

I wonder if that is an "extra" circuit that would account for the somewhat lower efficiency of the converter as mentioned earlier. (which is trivial compared with the big gain from PF correction)
time2roll
Nomad
Feb 22, 2017
I believe the LED issue is the controller or "ballast" to convert the power to a controlled usable form.
Joel_T
Explorer
Feb 22, 2017
time2roll wrote:
Can we now move on to 3-Phase power? ;)

:) Nah...I was just hoping to keep it simple and ask how an LED could possibly have a worse PF than most chargers.

Do have to say thanks to several here who've helped me get a waaay better grasp on efficiency, PF and VA.