They should have no trouble holding up to big truck... They have been load tested for 230,000+ pounds.I wonder how they will hold up to big trucks.
SolarRoadways said:How much weight can these panels support? Semi-trucks get pretty heavy!
Originally, we were designing toward 80,000 pounds. That was supposed to be the maximum legal limit for a semi-truck. However, we live in logging country and a former logging truck driver informed us that they don't have scales in the woods and that he'd topped out at 124,000 pounds. So we decided that we should go for 150,000 pounds. We then learned that oil companies can get permission to move refinery equipment up to 230,000 pounds on frozen roads, so we decided to shoot for 250,000 pounds.
Both 3D Finite Element Method analysis and actual load testing at civil engineering labs showed that our Solar Road Panels can handle that and more.
Don't forget the roads and pretty much any other paved surface.I wondered how well they'd hold up to snow plow trucks with chains .....
I'd love to have those things on my driveway and sidewalks. Beats the heck out of traditional paver blocks.
Actually, the drawing shows panels lighting up the strip under them, not paint. Many of the items you noted were covered in the article and on the site. You may want to actually read the info instead of glancing at the pictures...The drawing shows panels with paint on them, that's NOT a good idea, because the paint blocks the light.
And, they've already responded....
Look I understand, they are telling people something they want to hear, but let me point out that the arguments against this happening are far stronger than the arguments for it happening. Consider their point, "False Claim: we can't afford to heat roads", while he quotes a number of issues, he does not address how this is even possible.And, they've already responded....
I love the non-factual facts, like "glass is a pretty soft material compared to asphalt". Doesn't exactly inspire you to believe most of the rest of the "debunking" facts used.
Again, not saying this is fool-proof, or even great for what they're touting it for. Personally, I see this happening more for personal drive ways, airport runways, and/or parking lots at apartment complexes or other parking complexes which are often empty during the day (movie theaters, for example).
No one is claiming these are ideal collectors. Non-motorized collectors in general are not ideal, but tons of homes have them installed and are getting great benefit from them. This is about using the *space* more efficiently, not about doing the most efficient thing.In an ideal solar system, the panel must be facing the sun, not flat on the ground.
Yes, if you calculate it based on what it takes to melt a block of ice, which is what most people are using for this argument. The problem is they're not talking about 3" of snow or ice. They're talking about keeping the surface just warm enough to prevent the snow from collecting in the first place. Those are different numbers. It takes significantly more energy to melt a large block of ice than it does if you break up that block into 20,000 small chunks.Take 175 watts for 1 hour / 1,550 square inches and you have 0.11 watts per square inch for 1 hour to melt snow. In simple terms, it's not going to happen.
Now cover that same panel with say 3" of snow and the power level will drop considerably.
yes and those darn horseless carriages made no sense either!If you want to believe it, that's your choice, but the engineering numbers to not make any sense. Either the people promoting this are not seeing the flaw OR they know and this is a great way to sucker people out of a lot of money.