News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products

Page 17 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

LightningZ71

Platinum Member
Mar 10, 2017
2,549
3,242
136
They mean cell design. Less expensive panels can completely fail or dramatically reduce output with fairly minor damage. The more exotic panels used in space based applications have a highly redundant cell layouts that can tolerate quite a lot of damage. They are, effectively grids of small panels, though the designs differ quite a bit from most terrestrial panels that prioritize cost over other factors.
 

Doug S

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2020
3,620
6,401
136
They mean cell design. Less expensive panels can completely fail or dramatically reduce output with fairly minor damage. The more exotic panels used in space based applications have a highly redundant cell layouts that can tolerate quite a lot of damage. They are, effectively grids of small panels, though the designs differ quite a bit from most terrestrial panels that prioritize cost over other factors.

Yes, plus if you're talking a square kilometer of solar as in this harebrained scheme if a micrometeorite punching through were to cause a massive 10 meter x 10 meter section to fail from that one tiny hole that's only 0.01% of its power production. It could tolerate 100 such impacts and still be at 99%. They wouldn't even need to design this as well as typical satellite solar arrays since the scale is so massive.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe NYC

LightningZ71

Platinum Member
Mar 10, 2017
2,549
3,242
136
The number of strikes per panel will increase as a square of the dimensions. Smaller arrays avoid some debris because those birds are often able to bump their orbit a bit to miss known objects and fields. A data center with multiple square kilometers of array won't be so nimble. Plus, there will always be spots with high criticality that will eventually get hit.

FOD is a real danger.
 
Last edited:

Doug S

Diamond Member
Feb 8, 2020
3,620
6,401
136
The number of strikes per panel will increase as a square of the dimensions. Smaller arrays avoid some debris because those birds are often able to bump their orbit a bit to miss known objects and fields. A data center with multiple square kilometers of array won't be so nimble. Plus, there will always be spots with high criticality that will eventually get hit.

FOD is a real danger.

Your problem isn't the array getting hit, it is an impact running in one side of the "datacenter" and out the other, disabling a few million dollars worth of GPUs on the way. That's what you'll steer to avoid problems with. You won't worry about the massive panels because they're so big they can take a lot of hits without any meaningful loss of production.

But yeah the mass of this monstrosity would be a real problem for getting out of the way of known hazards. You might need to have the datacenter be independently maneuverable and connected by long cables to the arrays - superconducting, no doubt! Man, this boondoggle just gets more and more expensive!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Joe NYC

LightningZ71

Platinum Member
Mar 10, 2017
2,549
3,242
136
It's be simpler to park the arrays in a higher, less densely populated orbit, then microwave beam the power to the data center that's parked in a lower orbit for easier servicing. Granted, I don't know anyone that wants a massive directed energy weapon flying around the planet.
 

jpiniero

Lifer
Oct 1, 2010
16,830
7,280
136
It's be simpler to park the arrays in a higher, less densely populated orbit, then microwave beam the power to the data center that's parked in a lower orbit for easier servicing. Granted, I don't know anyone that wants a massive directed energy weapon flying around the planet.

Project Goldeneye?
 

Thunder 57

Diamond Member
Aug 19, 2007
4,061
6,787
136
It's be simpler to park the arrays in a higher, less densely populated orbit, then microwave beam the power to the data center that's parked in a lower orbit for easier servicing. Granted, I don't know anyone that wants a massive directed energy weapon flying around the planet.

Because that worked out so well in, Sim City 2000 was it? It actually did, most of the time.
 

Hulk

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 1999
5,149
3,748
136
It's be simpler to park the arrays in a higher, less densely populated orbit, then microwave beam the power to the data center that's parked in a lower orbit for easier servicing. Granted, I don't know anyone that wants a massive directed energy weapon flying around the planet.
Doesn't take much more power/energy to get from a low orbit to a LA.