The document summarizes a student project to study a photovoltaic solar panel. The project was completed on time and on budget. Students designed and built a testing frame, then collected data on the panel's performance across varying light intensities. Testing showed the panel did not deliver its stated power output. Lessons included allowing more time for unexpected delays and fabrication issues, and triple checking budgets.

2. PROJECT HELIOS:
A PHOTOVOLTAIC SOLAR PANEL STUDY
For
ELEC5036 and COMM3057
Professor Volkening and Professor Buckle
Fanshawe College

3. Project Helios Group Presentation
Agenda
• Introduction
• Project Status
• Scope and deliverables
• Technical Problem and Solution
• Project Scheduling
• Project Budget
• Conclusion

4. Project Status
• Project Completed
• Report Submitted
• Completed on time
• Completed on budget
• More later…

5. Technical Problem and Solution
Problem Scope
• To study how a PV panel responds to sunshine by developing
a test platform and a testing procedure to collect data.
• To analyze and prepared in a report presenting the results of
testing. Specifically, the V-I vs. light intensity characteristics.
Requirements
 A frame to hold the PV Panel.
 Hold panel securely at any angle.
 Mount meters for ease of use.
 Hold light meter inline with PV Panel.
 Procedure to safely test the panel and
acquire data.

6. Design and Building a Prototype
• Heavy enough hold testing
stand stable.
• High enough for ease of use
• Needs to swivel to face the sun
• Fabricated from steel for strength
• Sized to hold panel , all meters
and rheostat.

7. Design and Building a Prototype
• Safely test the Open Circuit
voltage
• Safely test the Short Circuit
current
• Test voltage and current across
a variable resistive load

8. Preparation For Testing
Testing Procedure
1. Panel will be covered with a piece of cardboard prior to any
disconnect or reconnection of wires and or meters.
2. Panel will be oriented for maximum power and solar output
reading will be taken.
3. Panel will be uncovered, and voltage and current
measurements will be taken.
4. Variable resistor will be adjusted 10 times to yield ten
values.
5. Panel will be recovered with the cardboard until the next
testing round.
6. Panel will be moved to alter the solar output value lower
and step 3 and 4 will be repeated.
7. Testing is complete after 10 levels
of solar output are achieved.

9. Preparation For Testing
•Testing dates: Oct 29th & Nov 1st
• Two person operation:
1 - monitor/adjust for intensity
1 - take voltage/current readings
• Measurement of 12 intensities
with at least 10 readings per
intensity.

10. Data and Analysis
•Testing PV Panel in twelve Light
Intensities
•Find open circuit voltage and short
circuit current.
•Examine PV Panel performance
under resistive load.
Testing Highlights:
Maximum intensity : 1kW/m2
Max. Short Circuit current: 560 mA
Max. Open voltage 24.7 Volts
Optimum Output range: 15-18 V
Max. Current @12 V: 400 mA

11. Data and Analysis
• Output power is calculated
as Current x Voltage
• Output at 1kW/m2: 5.86 W
• Input at 1kW/m2 on 0.19 m2
panel: 186.05 W
•Efficiency= 3.2%

12. Technical Conclusion
• Testing demonstrated that the panel did not deliver stated power output .
(15 Watt PV panel output only 5.86 Watts)
• Product reviews on the Canadian Tire website indicate others have had
problems getting stated power output, symptoms being low output current.
• Manufacturer states that any panel generating over 24 volts open circuit
voltage is operating properly, regardless of current output.
• Panel response to varying light intensities was good, response was linear up
to 18 volts. Maximum output power was between 15-18 volts all ranges.
• This panel is not recommended for powering a direct load, and may be
suitable for 12 volt battery trickle charging.

13. Risk Management
• Risks primarily addressed by adding extra time in scheduling

14. Project Timeline
• 13 week project
• Duties split 50/50
• Planning, Execution
and Termination Phases
• 4 status reports

15. Project Timeline
Project Helios CPI/SPI
5.00
4.00 CPI
SPI/CPI Index
3.00 SPI
2.00
1.00
0.00
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26
Tasks
• Specific tasks completed early / under budget. (Task 6)
• Task 15 (Fabrication) took extra time to complete.
• Task 17 (Testing) was delayed one day, but completed in less time.
• Task 26 (Status Reports) Memo report required extra time to
complete.

16. Project Budget
• Original estimate was incorrect
due to spreadsheet calculation
issues.
• Savings from tasks completed
early funded any tasks that
required extra time.
• Enough savings across the project
allowed original estimate to stand.
• Project over budget by 10 cents.
• Reserve funds used to
complete status report.

17. Lessons Learned
• Risk Management: give tasks extra time for unexpected
issues/delays.
• Fabrication: Keep proper inventory list, allow for greater tilt
adjustments in future.
• Budget: Triple check calculations, and calculate a little extra in
case of overruns.
• Testing: Don’t always believe what the packaging states.
• Computer skills: more experience with PM tools

18. In Conclusion
• Kept budget, met the targets.
• Kept schedule, with only one delay.
• Designed and built a rugged prototype.
• Completed testing and data analysis.
• Recommendations for panel tested
• Questions?

19. Thank you for your participation!
Dave Mason and Todd Jenney wish to thank:
Professor Ke Liu, Technical Advisor
Professor Martin Volkening, PM Advisor
Professor Dianna Buckle, Comm Advisor
Fanshawe College