Talk:Sun-tracking: Difference between revisions
m (moved Talk:Tracking to Talk:Sun-tracking) |
(→Combo Tracker?: new section) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
However, since they have very few moving parts, and rely on gravity + evaporation to track the sun, they require almost no upkeep. Compared to electronic/motorized trackers, these guys are the epitome of lifetime engineering. | However, since they have very few moving parts, and rely on gravity + evaporation to track the sun, they require almost no upkeep. Compared to electronic/motorized trackers, these guys are the epitome of lifetime engineering. | ||
== Combo Tracker? == | |||
Could you do both, calculate where the sun should approximately be and then use feedback to accurately place it? [[User:Catprog|Catprog]] 15:16, 28 July 2011 (CEST) | |||
Revision as of 13:16, 28 July 2011
I would also recommend including content about passive solar tracking, as this eliminates both electronics and motors from the equation, and makes solar tracking possible with relatively basic materials. See the zomeworks tracker for details on this method: http://zomeworks.com/products/pv-trackers. Electronic solar trackers can often provide a 100% increase in photovoltaic efficiency, and passive trackers provide between 45% and 85%, depending on a number of environmental factors, foremost being wind.
However, since they have very few moving parts, and rely on gravity + evaporation to track the sun, they require almost no upkeep. Compared to electronic/motorized trackers, these guys are the epitome of lifetime engineering.
Combo Tracker?
Could you do both, calculate where the sun should approximately be and then use feedback to accurately place it? Catprog 15:16, 28 July 2011 (CEST)