Hi,
A very thought-provoking project on which a (large) book could be written, to cover all the technical aspects alone. So I'll start with just a few "bullet points" (or Chapter headings) and you can ask for further details on any particular features of interest.
No, an operational lifetime of 100 years cannot be "expected", but there is plenty that can (and needs) to be done to give a reasonably extended lifetime. Many electronics components have a typical functional lifetime of perhaps 20 years, with batteries in particular, generally less than that. Even the "Data Retention Time" of the Program Memory in a PIC(axe) chip is specified as "typically 40 years" (TRETD in the
Data Sheet) with no Max or Min limits quoted.
Perhaps you should be looking at (some of) the methods used in the design of space satellites, for example the duplication of ALL* hardware modules, each cross-linked with the (automatic) ability to detect and isolate faulty units. Strictly, sensors (excluding cameras) should be
triplicated so that a "majority decision" can be made if two sensors disagree. But, as said above, a LDR is not needed because the output from the Solar Panel(s) can indicate the ambient light level directly**. Even satellite lifetimes are normally quoted in years rather than tens of years, noting that the "deep space probes" that have run for around 50 years don't use solar panels nor storage batteries, but nuclear reactors! However, a look through the "
Picaxe in Space" ($50 Sat) thread on this forum (which ended
here) might be rewarding. See also
This Thread which ran a PICaxe and flashed a LED on 3 AA Alkaline cells for 11 years!
** PV panels basically have a "Constant Voltage" output (except in darkness or when overloaded, of course), around 500 mV for each "pane" (silicon diode) connected in series, where the maximum available output current increases proportionally with the light level. Typical Efficiency is up to 20% (nearer 10% for Amorphous Silicon types) from a maximum summer solar illumination of 1000 Watts/square meter at right angles to the panel surface, or around 400 W/m2 for direct sunlight in winter (due to a longer path though the atmosphere). A good quality "roof" panel could last for about 25 years (to around a 25% reduction of output) but it might be difficult to find small, high quality panels. The low-cost "resin" encapsulated panels have been reported to go "cloudy" (or milky) within just a few years, so this material might be best avoided.
It may depend if you have any control over the orientation of the headstone, but I suggest
vertically mounted PV panel(s) facing North. The reason is that maximising the Winter power output is far more important than achieving a high average annual value. In Winter, the sun's maximum elevation (at Latitude 40) is about 27 degreees above the horizon (i.e. 90 - 40 - 23 degrees Earth tilt), and lower when away from noon or from north. Thus the optimum slope is about 20 degrees from vertical, but the Cosine of 20 degrees is 0.94 and the Sine 0.34, so a Vertical panel will "lose" only about 6% of the available light energy compared with a Horizontal panel's 66% (or worse, taking into account reflection off the acute-angled glass surface(s) ). And perhaps as important is that a Vertical panel will restrict the high Summer energy where the problem could be over-heating, or over-charging the battery. Note that disconnecting (or short-circuiting) a PV panel can't change the amount of energy
entering the panel, so if the avaiable electricity is not "used" it just adds to heat build-up in the panel/electronics.
As said above, the Lithium Iron Phosphate (LiFePO4) cell technology is currently, probably the most appropriate for long life. It's nominal voltage of 3.2 volts is more than enough for a PICaxe, which can also easily measure its own internal supply voltage (using the CALIBADC10 command) and can control the (overall average) power drain to keep the battery voltage within (my recommendation of) a range of 3.0 to 3.5 volts, without any other hardware. Again, the battery capacity should be at least a week, to accommodate winter light levels and the number of cycles over a period of tens of years. It may even be appropriate to include a yearly cycle component, perhaps with a secondary battery optimised for a smaller number of deep cycles.
Personally, I would consider a few modifications to the concept. Firstly could the "tears" actually "fall" downwards ? Cycling the LEDs (i.e. switching on one or two at a time) will reduce the power drain considerably and "flashing" a LED is much more visible than a steady dim light. Also, and in view of your comment in #8, might there be a "daytime" mode? Of course the power consumption will be much higher, but no battery is required to store the energy and there is a good correlation between the amount of power supplied by the PV panels and the electricity needed to make the LEDs visible at the corresponding ambient light level. One of the tricks to obtain good visibility in daylight is to ensure that the background (i.e. LED Off state) is as "black" as possible by reducing (or at least diffusing) all reflected light. This can include adding a dark cover filter, because reflected light undergoes two attenuating passes through the filter, whilst the LED output only one.
* Implementing the duplication of PV panels is quite easy because each can be connected via a forward diode (which may be already present within the panel) to prevent a fault loading the other PV(s). Duplicated LED(s) (with their own drivers) don't even need to be electrically connected; they can be simply located close to each other. Ideally, duplicated PICaxes should run separately-developed software, since "bugs" can be the greatest cause of a system failure. But the greatest problem is the batteries which probably have the lowest reliability and often fail to a short-circuit (or high leakage). Thus they must be capable of being (automatically) switched away from both the charging source and the load, to allow these to continue with any duplicated unit(s).
Particularly if you don't want the complication of a fully duplicated topology, you might construct two totally independent "day" and "night" systems, sharing only the PV panel(s) and removing the potential unreliability of a battery from the daylight system. Of course the software versions would be totally different, with the daylight system re-starting every morning, avoiding any risk from a memory leak or the need for additional "watchdog" monitoring. A truly "belt and braces" approach !
Cheers, Alan.