Page 1 of 1
[0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Tue May 02, 2017 6:11 pm
by Ubertwink
Advantages:
- Extra accumulators for power surges like laser turrets
- Perfect symmetry
- Copper wires look fancy and never mess up because of a different substation build order
- Supports both 1-tile and 2-tile passages between arrays
Add concrete if necessary.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Thu May 04, 2017 1:53 pm
by mNote
Thank you! I was waiting for someone to make an OCD-dependent/tileable setup!
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Thu May 04, 2017 10:21 pm
by Nexarius
nice
I've made something similar.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Mon May 08, 2017 12:12 am
by Ubertwink
Nexarius wrote:I've made something similar.
Can you walk between these arrays? Or are they meant to be shift-placed?
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Mon May 08, 2017 4:51 am
by Nexarius
Ubertwink wrote:Nexarius wrote:I've made something similar.
Can you walk between these arrays? Or are they meant to be shift-placed?
You cannot walk between it.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Tue May 09, 2017 12:44 pm
by Distelzombie
Ubertwink wrote:Advantages:
- Extra accumulators for power surges like laser turrets
- Perfect symmetry
- Copper wires look fancy and never mess up because of a different substation build order
- Supports both 1-tile and 2-tile passages between arrays
Add concrete if necessary.
It looks GREAT!! THank you!
But, has the ratio changed in 0.15 or why are you clarifying that in the title?
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Tue May 09, 2017 4:52 pm
by Ubertwink
The "perfect" ratio is still 0.84, but I think that having an overhead in accumulators is good, if not necessary.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Wed May 10, 2017 1:17 am
by iceman_1212
These roboport centric arrays can be tesselated to construct an even larger blueprint - one that has radar on the edges so it's easy to use the new map-view feature to place new solar.
To make things even easier, I have a rail track running down the middle along with a separate blueprint for a drop-off station so that my construction bots don't end up having to fly too far.
If playing without biters, which I know a lot of people are doing these days, it becomes a very automated system of power expansion.
Here is my the current map view of my 0.15 marathon run (no mods) at full zoom. I changed designs halfway through which is why the left and right sides don't match. Once a new leg is started, I never need to visit the solar site in person.
P.S. My intention was to use nuclear on this map but I didn't realize just how rare uranium ore is if the frequency setting is set to low. Aside from my starting patch, which only yielded ~15 or so U-235, I've found only one other uranium patch so far, that too, at around ~75 hours in, at which point I'd already started automating my solar.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Fri May 12, 2017 7:23 am
by apriori
Ubertwink wrote:The "perfect" ratio is still 0.84, but I think that having an overhead in accumulators is good, if not necessary.
Why is ratio 0.84? According to my (maybe incorrect) math it's 0.95... Calculation is attached. You can input your factory consumption in the first row to recalc.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Fri May 12, 2017 10:36 am
by DaveMcW
apriori wrote:Why is ratio 0.84?
Accumlators are not needed for the first 50 seconds of twilight, they are only needed for the last 116.67 seconds.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Fri May 12, 2017 1:27 pm
by MicFac
Looks good! awesome idea with the extra accumulators
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Fri May 12, 2017 2:27 pm
by apriori
DaveMcW wrote:apriori wrote:Why is ratio 0.84?
Accumlators are not needed for the first 50 seconds of twilight, they are only needed for the last 116.67 seconds.
Well, then I've got extra accus in my setups))) Thanks.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Tue May 16, 2017 5:06 pm
by Ubertwink
apriori wrote:Ubertwink wrote:The "perfect" ratio is still 0.84, but I think that having an overhead in accumulators is good, if not necessary.
Why is ratio 0.84? According to my (maybe incorrect) math it's 0.95...
Here is a sketch of the problem:
P1 is the power consumption of our factory.
P2 is the maximum output of solar panels.
Area of Trapeziod 1 is total amount of energy drained from accumulators.
Area of Trapezoid 2 (which is split in to 2 parts on this sketch) is total amount of energy injected into the accumulators by excess power from solar panels.
t is night duration,
2t is dusk/dawn duration and
5t is day duration (split in to 2 parts on this sketch).
We know that t=41.(6).
In order for the system to be perfectly balanced, areas of two trapezoids must be equal:
P1*(t+x)=(P2-P1)*(5t+(2t-x));
P1*(t+x)=(P2-P1)*(7t-x);
P1*t+P1*x=7*P2*t-P2*x-7*P1*t+P1*x;
P1*x+P2*x-P1*x=7*P2*t-7*P1*t-P1*t;
P2*x=7*P2*t-8*P1*t;
x=7*t-8*t*P1/P2.
We don't know
x yet. But we can take a look at two triangles with green hypotenuse: one with legs
2t and
P2, and one with legs
x and
P1. They are similar and their angles are equal, which means they have the same tangent values, which leads us to the next equation:
P2/2t=P1/x;
x=2*t*P1/P2.
Now we can make a substitution in the first equation:
2*t*P1/P2=7*t-8*t*P1/P2;
10*t*P1/P2=7t;
P1/P2=0.7.
We discovered that our factory power consumption should be at 70% of the maximum solar output. This knowledge helps us identifying
x:
x=2*t*0.7=1.4*t.
Now we know everything to find out the ratio of accumulators to solar panels. Finding the amount of solar panels is as easy as dividing
P2 by the production of a single panel. To calculate the amount of accumulators we need to divide their total capacity (area of any of the trapezoids) by single accumulator capacity.
Accumulators/Panels=(P1*(t+x)/5000000)/(P2/60000)=(P1*2.4*t/5000000)/(P2/60000)=(P1*100/5000000)/(P2/60000)=(P1/50000)/(P2/60000)=(P1/P2)*(60000/50000)=0.7*(60000/50000)=42000/50000=0.84.
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Sat Jun 03, 2017 7:23 am
by klauskaan
I'm using this. Thanks for making it
Re: [0.15] OCD-friendly solar array, 0.932 ratio
Posted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 9:11 am
by Bauer
Thanks. As far as I can see, this calculation makes perfectly sense. Let me add two ideas to this thread:
1. The exact ratio is only important if you energy consumption is very constant and very closely matched to your energy production. If your consumption fluctuates much (thanks to laser activities or because you take un-active parts with many beacon off the grid temporarily) you will need many more accumulators as buffers. If your power production exceeds your consumption (because you are constantly extending you factory and better have some head room in power production) you need (rather) fewer accumulators. After experimenting with this for a little while, I decided for my base (before going nuclear) that more accumulators (about 1:1 ratio) is the better choice. If they do not fully recharge during a day cycle, I receive an alarm. After having the freedom of choosing the ratio more freely, you will see that you can meet other demands more easily (logistic range, aesthetics, ...)
2. In 0.15 times, solar is merely contributing to the base load of the power consumption. My base has a 800 MW solar farm and an average of about 3 TW consumption. I burn waste (wood, old electrc pole, ...) and coal I accidentially collect in a small steam-engine plant. But the main power production is nuclear. Since solar is given priority over everything else, the nuclear plant needs to be controlled to cover up for fluctuations. As a result, my accumulators are always charged and never used. If their power is used, it's the sign to scale up the nuclear power plant. So after going solar, I decided to build solar farms without any further accumulators that only help with the base load of the base. (I wouldn't need solar at all, but I'm german and need to be prepared to exit nuclear in 2022.
)
HF,
Bauer