Will an EMP burst kill solar panels?

[jeremy]

Why not keep the solar panel in a mesh based faraday cage on top of the main faraday cage? Sure there will be some loss depending on the mesh used, but it could theoretically still work.

 

[Enforcer831]

Not so sure what is funny or is there something I am missing.

 

[tacmedic]

It is my understanding that a faraday cage needs to allow any emp that occurs a path to ground. If your cage does not have an adequate grounding than it will be much less effective, if at all. I do not think that a faraday cage will be effective if it is made out of mesh type material as the current from the emp will pass through it and have a negative effect on what ever is inside the cage even if it is grounded well. Just my opinion though.

 

[jeremy]

Not so sure what is funny or is there something I am missing.

The first thing is did you bother reading a damn thing in the thread...

The second thing is the Mesh Faraday Cage idea...

 

[churchmouse]

Not so sure what is funny or is there something I am missing.

Welcome to ingo...the abuse is not that bad and you grow to need it after a while.....

Really, read the thread.

 

[Mosinguy]

If you're close enough to a nuclear blast to experience an EMP, honestly you've got other things to worry about.

 

[churchmouse]

If you're close enough to a nuclear blast to experience an EMP, honestly you've got other things to worry about.

Yup, if you can worry at all. EMP is sent down through the grid and will effect things that are attached to it.

 

[CarmelHP]

If you're close enough to a nuclear blast to experience an EMP, honestly you've got other things to worry about.

Not necessarily, an EMP effect can cause havoc even if you're far away from the blast, heat, and radiation effects. The biggest vulnerability is long collectors like power lines which can build big charges and destroy the power grid. I do consider shibumiseeker to be the "go to guy" in these discussions and endorse his response.

 

[Enforcer831]

Churchmouse, thanks for the warm welcome. For the record I did read the thread. I agree that you probably have bigger issues to worry about that an EMP. If I were worried about it, I would have a second set of everything protected somewhere.

I will have to apologize if my posts seem like the ranting’s of a crazed lunatic. I do have issues articulating my thoughts sometimes. (Head moves faster that my hands.) To explain my post, you have to realize I was approaching it as a pure engineering problem. I am an EE although no longer practicing. I switched to Embedded System design. I have talked with several of the EEs in the company I work for, (We design medical diagnostic equipment. EM inference/ static EMPs have to be handled properly or we could kill someone) and the confirm that the theory that I was basing my assumptions on were sound. My failure was at explaining myself to you all.

We all agree that a perfect Faraday cage is a completely enclosed metal structure with no holes punched into it for allowing wires out and is grounded, but that is not the only type of faraday cage. Mesh based cages do exist, but they have to be engineered properly for the task at hand. The first sentence of the Wikipedia entry for Faraday cages states this. There are also nice pictures ofthem as well. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage. The issue is they do not block all frequencies and have to be designed to handle what you are trying toblock. The spacing in the mesh is basedon the frequency or wavelength of the signal you are trying to block. If you know one you can get the other based on this equation, Frequency*Wavelenth = Speed of light. The spacing for the mesh will be a fraction of the Wavelength.

In order to protect something in a mesh we need to know 2 things: What are the frequencies we are trying to block, and what frequencies is the thing we trying to protect susceptible to. Figuring out the latter is easy with the right equipment. The first is a bit harder. So if the device I am protecting only reacts to frequencies lower than 2.4 gigahertz or wavelengths bigger than ~10 cm, then a mesh box with the same spacing as the mesh used on the window of a Microwave would block everything my device cared about. If you look at the Wikipedia entry for the EM spectrum you will see a chart listing out the Frequencies, Wavelengths and Energy in the signals. So in my sample case here, if we blocked out the frequencies lower that 2.4 gHz, light would still get through the mesh. Meaning if thehypothetical device was a Solar panel, it would still produce electric currents(albeit at a reduced rate) while being protected from frequencies lower than2.4 gHz. Obviously there is a bounding problem on how tight the mesh can be and have the panel still produce something useful.

Now back to the problem of the frequencies you are trying to block. I have no clue what I would need to block for a nuclear blast generated EMP. But I don’t care. I only have to protect my device from what it is susceptible to. I know someone is going to say, “But what about all the frequencies above visible light?” Remember, lower frequencies travel farther than high frequencies of equal strength. Meaning if there is anything of substantial power at a high frequency getting to where you are, you are probably boned anyway or will become the incredible hulk and things like a working light bulb won’t matter to you.

So that leaves one thing left in my original post to address, connecting the protected panels to the rest of the system. Remember in my post I said to put it on top of the cage holding the inverter and batteries. That would work if the hole into the other cage was contained inside the mesh cage, but now the main cage would be susceptible to the frequencies we are not blocking. The other solution is to shield the wires traveling from the panel cage to the main cage. The shielding must be attached to each of the cages, but you would still have the same problem of potentially opening up the system to the frequencies you were protecting.

So is my proposed solution perfect, nope. Would it work in the hypothetical situation I described, yep. Another way to think about it is this. Think of the mesh as a grid of perfect squares with sides the size of X. The smaller X gets the higher the frequencies you block. Once X gets to 0, you block all of them, and you also have a solid sheet.

Sorry that took so long. Hopefully someone out there will get something from it.

 

[churchmouse]

Wow, I am humbled...completely. We tend to harass the new guys a bit but no harm is really intended. Sometimes the questions are a bit left field.
Stick around, we could use some good engineering input.

 

[jeremy]

Churchmouse, thanks for the warm welcome. For the record I did read the thread.

What I'm chopped ****ing liver her?!

Sorry that took so long. Hopefully someone out there will get something from it.

See that is a much better post, it makes it sound like you know what you are talking, and not a fly by night hack...

 

[Enforcer831]

What I'm chopped ****ing liver her?!

See that is a much better post, it makes it sound like you know what you are talking, and not a fly by night hack...

I didn't mean any disrespect. Hi nice to meet you.

 

[jeremy]

I didn't mean any disrespect. Hi nice to meet you.

No disrespect was felt. Humor and Sarcasm are hard to notice sometimes around here...

 

[shibumiseeker]

Obviously there is a bounding problem on how tight the mesh can be and have the panel still produce something useful.

But it's a solution in search of a problem. Any EMP strong enough to damage a solar panel will also distort sheet metal from induced current creating and induced magnetic pulse in the metal and the current rise time and total impulse is fast enough that the mass of the cells and interconnections that heating failure is not an issue. The EMP test facilities which mimic high altitude EMP (HAEMP) blasts in the 10-20 megaton don't induce that kind of damage. A localized EMP caused by a nuclear blast near ground level will also destroy significant property and cause numerous casualties, and while the EMP may be many orders of magnitude stronger locally, it won't be far reaching like a HAEMP, hence my statement i the earlier part of this thread that any blast that harms your panels will leave you not worrying about them. Reference also my comment about panels taking direct lightning strikes and surviving.

 

[handgun]

Wow.umm.
1. Semi - Strange concern
2. Electro Magnetic Pulses can be generated with out the detonation of a NUKE.
While, the thoughts have ran through my head on occasion, If this is truly your concern about your solar panels you are in much more of a need to be worried about something bigger. Your transportation. Most modern cars will not run with out their computer. Thus, making it a 1-2 ton pile of heap sitting on your property. I would be more concerned about transportation than your solar panels(personally) Unless you have say the land and some sort of elaborate military grade bunker that could support a few families, filtered air, water, sewage,etc.. or conduct extensive laboratory tests, etc.. Would you know a nuke is inbound? would you even have time to get to that shelter? While I very much respect the other members comments that have chimed in as far as EMP goes and Nukes go.. if the damage is due to a nuke, you have a lot bigger problems than no electricity.
I hope you are not going in other directions than a NUKE. I will refrain from a short list of more likely reasons you would encounter a EMP or multiple EMPs. The world has enough to worry about.. I don't want to add a few more fears to your fears.. Your solar panels Should be fine.. but on the safe side.. you could build a lead box, and tuck a spare converter box in there..

 

[churchmouse]

Wow.umm.
1. Semi - Strange concern
2. Electro Magnetic Pulses can be generated with out the detonation of a NUKE.
While, the thoughts have ran through my head on occasion, If this is truly your concern about your solar panels you are in much more of a need to be worried about something bigger. Your transportation. Most modern cars will not run with out their computer. Thus, making it a 1-2 ton pile of heap sitting on your property. I would be more concerned about transportation than your solar panels(personally) Unless you have say the land and some sort of elaborate military grade bunker that could support a few families, filtered air, water, sewage,etc.. or conduct extensive laboratory tests, etc.. Would you know a nuke is inbound? would you even have time to get to that shelter? While I very much respect the other members comments that have chimed in as far as EMP goes and Nukes go.. if the damage is due to a nuke, you have a lot bigger problems than no electricity.
I hope you are not going in other directions than a NUKE. I will refrain from a short list of more likely reasons you would encounter a EMP or multiple EMPs. The world has enough to worry about.. I don't want to add a few more fears to your fears.. Your solar panels Should be fine.. but on the safe side.. you could build a lead box, and tuck a spare converter box in there..

Go to the sticky on EMP. I think you will find a post on the subject of car computers. They are tougher than you think. I had this fear but no longer. It is worth the read.

 

[shibumiseeker]

Wow.umm.
1. Semi - Strange concern
2. Electro Magnetic Pulses can be generated with out the detonation of a NUKE.

Yes they can, numerous ways in fact. But on a scale that affects more than just very localized equipment (a few hundred feet) they either require huge power supplies and very bulky equipment that doesn't lend itself to portability, conventional explosives, or acts of nature, and the first one isn't much of a worry to the average civilian, the second one also tends to be rather localized and when done on scales that affect a few city blocks will also cause secondary damage.

As far as the rest of your post goes, I was having difficulty making much sense of it, it seemed to ramble a fair amount.