I see there is some space left on the tail of the car where it appears there would be plenty of room where more solar cells could be applied. It looks like double the amount of cells could fit, if the cells were arranged side by side, parallel to the rear of the car. that would add another 30w or so depending on cells used, and maybe get the vehicle over the 700w mark. is this feasible? if not, what is the limitation?
Thank you!
Good question and I don’t have an answer... personal thoughts....
I guess if you are in a lower solar zone area this might be useful to get as much as you can!
There is already 3 cu meters/ 180 (?) solar cells on this model configuration, where this 700W provides a max of 44 miles of range. (Selfish Solar Zone 8 speaking) And that covers the entire hood, dash and the hatch.I kind of like a nice margin of the colored vinyl wrap on the edge I believe that is how they are building one of the Development vehicles
But I read the cells are replaceable and the efficiency is always improving on PV cells.
As the owner of an hatchback I see this more as a loading/unloading zone. As such I usually place a piece of protective rubber cover this because it is easily nicked and scratched whenever I drag things in and out of the vehicle. See the picture for an example. This is why IMHO this may not be the most judicious spot to choose for solar panels:
Kind regards.
I would really prefer that they fill in that empty space between the two Chevrons with more solar panels. I would think they could get 14 in there if they did two rows across. Perhaps they don't want to do it for styling reasons, but I would like to see it at least offered as an option.
https://www.aptera.us/forum/main/comment/60560dfda13f1600e9958fd2 park so solar is facing south, as a general rule if u cant tell how the sunlights going to be. this recommendation as reminder would be nice, using google maps for compass can help direct where is south for those who dont know: https://www.aptera.us/forum/main/comment/6057e87d32cbe40089cf9b1a
That's what I was thinking, trunks get damaged all the time.
Though they may not use a controller between the battery and the panels, if so then the MAXIMUM power that the cells put out on the sunniest of days has to be the max battery level and no higher, otherwise the batteries could overcharge if the car sits in the sun for weeks on end. I count 182 cells on the car (well there are 3 weird colored ones that may not be cells). If each cell is 2 volts max that's 360+ volts. Not that I know what cells generate at max power, but it's a theory unless someone knows more numbers that would kill it...
It could be as simple as not wanting cells to be damaged while loading luggage.
It's possible that the "tail" is as thin as it can be, given the internal structure. If so, adding solar panels there will make the tail thicker, which may increase air resistance. Just a thought.
My guesses are:
Aptera will take the present design/technology,as we read and see it, and have them incorporated in Development vehicles. And that reality will be revealed in the coming weeks in their Development vehicles.
Then take those vehicles on the roads of the US first, but in different states and variety of terrain, elevations and weather conditions to assess and test. Any corrections , updates along with great customer feedback from these forums, social media etc.... can then be incorporate and reassessed to get into the production vehicles, but on their published timeline. Surely future year models could come back to ideas that were placed in “the parking lot of ideas”...IMHO
A little selfish here in sunny Colorado...but generally if one wishes to market a product, compromises have to be made between squeezing out the highest possible efficiency and what will sell. I tend to prefer form to follow function, but in this case I feel that the Aptera design people have done an exceptional job addressing both and have produced a beautiful vehicle that people can still make changes to.
You reach a point with the solar charge controllers where shaded cells reduce the peek voltage you can generate. There are ways around it, but they involve lowering your max voltage, so keeping the majority of the cells on the same plane is a good thing. I imagine the areas not covered are actually more sloped than you can tell in the picture, and therefor not good return on investment for the cells. There is an RV in design stages that has solar cells all the way down the sides. When asked for some details, it was discovered that even in no shade, the cells down the side if removed would allow the cells on top to produce more power. So they are just for looks if they don't fall into the same plane as the rest of the panels. Hope this helps?
I am in michigan, zone 4. great to hear the panels will be replaceable, and upgradable. I'm always trying to maximize efficiency, and in this case, the higher the milage number per day, the better, especially when it comes to marketing.