the solution
Photovoltaic, pv, cells require the correct frequency of photons to produce amperage. Amperage is required to make voltage from the inherent resistance of a pv cell. More amperage is required to pass wattage to the next cell or group of cells. The greater the number of cells in a group the smaller number of correct photons are required for the passing of wattage.
The rotation of cells by themselves reduces their output. A reflective surface forces the unused photons to re-impact the conversion molecules of the pv cell cathode surface. The process of grouping, reflection and rotation greatly increases the density of conversion molecules present in the pv panel. Efficiency begins to exceed 100% so a new definition is required. I haven’t found a source to state photon density per volume on the earth’s surface, but time is a factor considering the amount of reflection of photons in the panel volume.
Some commercial panels have reflective characteristics since single impact is a waste of light and area. Even with the use of reflective characteristics current panels suffer from shading which means no wattage output in low light environments, weather. trees, birds or that which causes shading. The solution panel just puts out less wattage until the obstruction is cleared, remember efficiency in excess of 100%.
The current panel has a measured wattage in excess of 100 watts, by definition that’s at least 100% efficient. Current panels rely upon pv cell efficiency and reflective characteristics. What is a current panel’s efficiency? They usually speak wattage not efficiency. The panel under discussion was built with polycrystalline cells, they are about fifteen percent efficient. So how does it produce over 100% efficiency, cell rotation, grouping, spacing, and alignment to source.
Photon density is an interesting item. I know a group of polycrystalline cells produces four amps at half a volt but a monocrystalline group of the same size produces five amps at 0.65 volts. If the panel were built with better cells and if photon density supports the operation then such a panel would produce over 100 watts more often.
These panels shouldn’t be fixed to a roof, panel alignment has to be maintained for best output and operation. The panels would be sold in arrays of nine, sixteen and twenty-five, going larger means dealing with a substantial sail and I live in an area known for tornados and high winds which speaks to mechanics of the design. Nine panels built to specifications with good cells and assuming photon density is good then it should produce over a kilowatt with some regularity.
The panels alignment with its source is critical. The array needs to be attached to a dual axis tracker with alignment to geodetic alignment. Rotating the panel ten degrees has a critical effect on wattage. When the panel is correctly aligned, the best power output is achieved. The position setting cannot be attained through solar sensors, GPS tracking, or other common tracking systems. I am developing a better system. On a very cloudy day the best position could be straight up at 3PM, diffusion through the clouds. Additionally perpendicular does not always work, in twenty years the cells will change, deteriorate, so a different angle will be better for power. That is a change in expectations.
The design concepts could be used in space. The benefit would to be change the inertial moment of panels. The concept of the panel functions based upon photon density, If panels on the surface of the earth are over 100% efficient then in orbit the comparative efficiency would be in excess of 200% and would be similar on the moon. Mars has about 60% of the light compared to earth so the concept would be over 60% efficient. Notice the use of concept, the panels and tracker designs would be different for these environment but it would be worthwhile to pursue.
You can view collected data by month here:
CONCLUSION
Commercial solar panels usually require a roof with its peak running in a certain direction or if they affixed to a flat surface then angle is not a consideration. Some houses can have roof mount and some cannot. The different panels addressed in this paper operate from a dual axis tracker, got a yard, and are more broadly applicable. Additionally these panels develop more power in various lighting conditions especially if different cells are used. I do not believe solar density will be a show stopper, I think there is a lot of light from the sun available for conversion to electricity. There will be more to come and as I like to say things only get better.
the solution
Photovoltaic, pv, cells require the correct frequency of photons to produce amperage. Amperage is required to make voltage from the inherent resistance of a pv cell. More amperage is required to pass wattage to the next cell or group of cells. The greater the number of cells in a group the smaller number of correct photons are required for the passing of wattage.
The rotation of cells by themselves reduces their output. A reflective surface forces the unused photons to re-impact the conversion molecules of the pv cell cathode surface. The process of grouping, reflection and rotation greatly increases the density of conversion molecules present in the pv panel. Efficiency begins to exceed 100% so a new definition is required. I haven’t found a source to state photon density per volume on the earth’s surface, but time is a factor considering the amount of reflection of photons in the panel volume.
Some commercial panels have reflective characteristics since single impact is a waste of light and area. Even with the use of reflective characteristics current panels suffer from shading which means no wattage output in low light environments, weather. trees, birds or that which causes shading. The solution panel just puts out less wattage until the obstruction is cleared, remember efficiency in excess of 100%.
The current panel has a measured wattage in excess of 100 watts, by definition that’s at least 100% efficient. Current panels rely upon pv cell efficiency and reflective characteristics. What is a current panel’s efficiency? They usually speak wattage not efficiency. The panel under discussion was built with polycrystalline cells, they are about fifteen percent efficient. So how does it produce over 100% efficiency, cell rotation, grouping, spacing, and alignment to source.
Photon density is an interesting item. I know a group of polycrystalline cells produces four amps at half a volt but a monocrystalline group of the same size produces five amps at 0.65 volts. If the panel were built with better cells and if photon density supports the operation then such a panel would produce over 100 watts more often.
These panels shouldn’t be fixed to a roof, panel alignment has to be maintained for best output and operation. The panels would be sold in arrays of nine, sixteen and twenty-five, going larger means dealing with a substantial sail and I live in an area known for tornados and high winds which speaks to mechanics of the design. Nine panels built to specifications with good cells and assuming photon density is good then it should produce over a kilowatt with some regularity.
The panels alignment with its source is critical. The array needs to be attached to a dual axis tracker with alignment to geodetic alignment. Rotating the panel ten degrees has a critical effect on wattage. When the panel is correctly aligned, the best power output is achieved. The position setting cannot be attained through solar sensors, GPS tracking, or other common tracking systems. I am developing a better system. On a very cloudy day the best position could be straight up at 3PM, diffusion through the clouds. Additionally perpendicular does not always work, in twenty years the cells will change, deteriorate, so a different angle will be better for power. That is a change in expectations.
The design concepts could be used in space. The benefit would to be change the inertial moment of panels. The concept of the panel functions based upon photon density, If panels on the surface of the earth are over 100% efficient then in orbit the comparative efficiency would be in excess of 200% and would be similar on the moon. Mars has about 60% of the light compared to earth so the concept would be over 60% efficient. Notice the use of concept, the panels and tracker designs would be different for these environment but it would be worthwhile to pursue.
You can view collected data by month here: