Spinning Solar Cell

Introductions, general chit chat and off-topic banter.
Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 03:06

Looks good. Hopefully it's claims can be replicated on a commercial scale

Article

Rgds,
Stiive

User avatar
Johny
Senior Member
Posts: 3729
Joined: Mon, 23 Jun 2008, 16:26
Real Name: John Wright
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Johny » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 14:32

"Additionally, V3Solar claims the strobe-light effect on the solar cells hyper-excites the electrons, creating more electricity in the process."

Uh-oh! Sounds good but a bit of hype creeping in there.

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 14:34

Johny wrote: "Additionally, V3Solar claims the strobe-light effect on the solar cells hyper-excites the electrons, creating more electricity in the process."

Uh-oh! Sounds good but a bit of hype creeping in there.
Yeh thats what i thought... sounds like a over unity sort of claim, but watch the video and it explains something about induced sunrise/sunset situations every spin cycle lol.
Rgds,
Stiive

User avatar
Adverse Effects
Senior Member
Posts: 1074
Joined: Sat, 01 Jan 2011, 03:30
Real Name: Adverse Effects
Location: Brisbane

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Adverse Effects » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 15:10

the cells output AC?

User avatar
Johny
Senior Member
Posts: 3729
Joined: Mon, 23 Jun 2008, 16:26
Real Name: John Wright
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Johny » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 15:15

Adverse Effects wrote: the cells output AC?
No I don't think they do but that's a thought. Place the cells in the correct configuration to generate a sine wave and rotate it in sync with the mains - no inverter required. We're bloody geniuses!

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 15:19

"The Sentinel system uses a quarter of the silicon when compared to a similar 1kW array of traditional flat solar panels and an external solar inverter isn't required as the system outputs AC power."

Yeh it does... Apparently...
Rgds,
Stiive

User avatar
Johny
Senior Member
Posts: 3729
Joined: Mon, 23 Jun 2008, 16:26
Real Name: John Wright
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Johny » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 15:21

Stiive wrote: "The Sentinel system uses a quarter of the silicon when compared to a similar 1kW array of traditional flat solar panels and an external solar inverter isn't required as the system outputs AC power."

Yeh it does... Apparently...
Well I'll be.... I wonder if it's an inbuilt inverter or they really do sync the spin rate.

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 15:24

excerpt from video (1min 24s)

"....Producing significantly more DC than flat static panels. This electricity is then conditioned by the power electronics and transferred to the electromagnets in the base ring. As these spin past the electromagnets in the stator ring, AC power is produced, like a standard generator"


Rgds,
Stiive

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2566
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by weber » Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 19:54

It's totally a scam.

If it had 20 times the output of standard flat panels, for the same area, or even if it had only 7 times, it would be more than 100% efficient. And if you don't know what's wrong with a claim like that, you probably shouldn't be on this forum.

See http://forums.whirlpool.net.au/archive/2000998

Also see some of the comments after the article here: http://www.gizmag.com/v3solar-spin-cell/24352/

Sure, cooling PVs is a good idea, if you can do it without using more energy (or money) than you gain. But even if you could get them all the way down to ambient you'd only gain 15%.

All the spinning does is bamboozle you for a while so it's hard to think about what's happening. It is in no sense tracking the sun so there's no possible gain from that.

And the "lenses". All they do is steal light from either side of the ones they are concentrating onto. "Dancing photons", "emptying buckets", complete nonsense.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

User avatar
coulomb
Site Admin
Posts: 3636
Joined: Thu, 22 Jan 2009, 20:32
Real Name: Mike Van Emmerik
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by coulomb » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 00:29

weber wrote: If it had 20 times the output of standard flat panels, for the same area, or even if it had only 7 times, it would be more than 100% efficient.

I got that right away, but assumed that the output increase was mostly due to concentration, and a little due to cooling.

But if they aren't tracking, then concentration is pointless.
Nissan Leaf 2012 with new battery May 2019.
5650 W solar, PIP-4048MS inverter, 16 kWh battery.
1.4 kW solar with 1.2 kW Latronics inverter and FIT.
160 W solar, 2.5 kWh 24 V battery for lights.
Patching PIP-4048/5048 inverter-chargers.

Richo
Senior Member
Posts: 3597
Joined: Mon, 16 Jun 2008, 00:19
Real Name: Richard
Location: Perth, WA

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Richo » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 00:51

Some noob wrote: Used with a proprietary "Power Pole" mounting system, 10KW can be deployed in a 10 square meter space.


Given we get 1.4kW/m2 of sunlight on our planet they are running a total conversion efficiency of 71% - or they are from another planet...

Given the theoretical efficiency limit of a panel is 33% no amount of spinning, lenses or heatsinking can improve this 33%.

I wonder how they came up with the idea of putting cones and spinning together Image
Help prevent road rage - get outta my way! Blasphemy is a swear word. Magnetic North is a south Pole.

Canberra32
Groupie
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed, 13 Jun 2012, 04:25
Real Name: Damian butcher
Location: Canberra

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Canberra32 » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 02:32

I may just be a fabrication wiz and don't understand them fancy terms but...
How dose an equivalent built pyramid of panels pointed at the sun instead of a flat panel stack up in numbers?
Because there seems to be a whole lot of complication going on I'm not getting

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2566
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by weber » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 03:06

BTW, the 33.7% limit is only for single-junction cells. The limit for all types is 86%. The most efficient yet made is 44% (a triple junction that requires concentration) and that's in a lab, not commercial.

The 1.4 kW/m^2 figure is at the top of the atmosphere. At ground level it's only 1.0 kW/m^2.

So 10 kW in 10 m^2 would be 100% efficient. And none of this alters the fact that whoever is trying to extract money from people for this thing's "development" is an evil lying bastard.

[Edit: Changed "But still" to "So"]
Last edited by weber on Wed, 27 Feb 2013, 17:11, edited 1 time in total.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

Canberra32
Groupie
Posts: 238
Joined: Wed, 13 Jun 2012, 04:25
Real Name: Damian butcher
Location: Canberra

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Canberra32 » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 04:00

Ahh weber is right!!
That means he aliens that built the pyramids but couldn't afford to have their contractors put the panels up coz they lost the government incentives were on to something ;)

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 15:16

weber wrote: If it had 20 times the output of standard flat panels, for the same area, or even if it had only 7 times, it would be more than 100% efficient.


I missed (and still missing) the part where it claimed to be 20x better. But I haven't read the article in detail

From a skim, it does say they use 1/4 of the silicon - and from the m^2 output it seems 6.667x more output.

But then, that's probably earth surface area. So considering base of the conical shape is 10m^2, the radius would be 1.784m. Assuming the cone is as high as it is wide, the hypotenuse would be 2.523m, giving the conical surface an area of 14.15m^2. (Obviously this area isn't orthogonal to the sun though)

Therefore this system gets 10kW for 14.15m^2. So really its only 4.7x better than the other PV cited.
Still that's bordering too close to (if not above) 100% efficiency already.

But hey, even if it only produces half its claim - you cant write it off. Maybe it is more efficient per m^2 and we will all have spinning pyramids on our roof in the future Image
But one does wonder about the type of people who make such claims which are obviously exaggerated - but perhaps there's some clause information we don't know about.

Anyway, food for thought, and a reminder to think outside the box.

Rgds,
Stiive

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 15:25

Stiive wrote:perhaps there's some clause information we don't know about.


Just read they say there is a 30x concentration! Perhaps they have some mirrors set up to reflect more than 30*10m^2 worth of sunlight onto the thing (or in a lab shining a 30x concentrated beam)... Then it wouldn't be 100% efficient... infact it would be far less efficient than the other system - but the cost of PV per kw would be reduced and be replaced with the cost of the mirror array.

Then its a sort of marketing gimmick to give the output in terms of the space required only for the actual PV.

I'd say itd be spinning much faster than 60hz to keep cool!!! 1Mhz? haha. The faster they spin too, the more resistance and even lower efficiency - but hey, its all about the economics.

Just a thought.
Rgds,
Stiive

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2566
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by weber » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 16:12

Stiive wrote:Anyway, food for thought, and a reminder to think outside the box.

Hi Stiive. If I had a dollar for every time I was reminded to "think outside the box" ....

If I listed some of the things I have designed and built in my life, you'd see that I am very good at "thinking outside the box". But really:

Anyone can think outside the box. The real trick is not to think so far outside the box that you're thinking outside reality.

And that requires in-depth knowledge of the area concerned. Photovoltaics is one such area for me.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

User avatar
Johny
Senior Member
Posts: 3729
Joined: Mon, 23 Jun 2008, 16:26
Real Name: John Wright
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Johny » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 16:21

weber wrote:Anyone can think outside the box. The real trick is not to think so far outside the box that you're thinking outside reality.
Keep in mind Stiive that we have been reminded to think outside the box by so many over unity and such di&@%^ds over the past few years that it's wearing a bit thin.
Last edited by Johny on Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 05:21, edited 1 time in total.

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 16:47

Image
Last edited by Stiive on Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 10:54, edited 1 time in total.
Rgds,
Stiive

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 16:53

Stiive wrote: Just like Aristotle had an in-depth knowledge of physics, which largely was accepted until Galileo 1,800 years later.
Weberian physics?


PS, not having a go at ya mate. Just a bit of fun Image
Rgds,
Stiive

User avatar
Jeff Owen
Groupie
Posts: 155
Joined: Thu, 13 Nov 2008, 15:53
Real Name: Jeff Owen
Location: Brisbane

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Jeff Owen » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 17:12

Stiive wrote:Anyway, food for thought, and a reminder to think outside the box.
Weber's "box" is actually a dodecahedron. I have seen it on his back verandah directly above the MX5.

User avatar
weber
Site Admin
Posts: 2566
Joined: Fri, 23 Jan 2009, 17:27
Real Name: Dave Keenan
Location: Brisbane
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by weber » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 18:57

Stiive wrote: Just like Aristotle had an in-depth knowledge of physics, which largely was accepted until Galileo 1,800 years later.
Weberian physics?

PS, not having a go at ya mate. Just a bit of fun Image
That's fine Stiive. But I would like to note that prior to Galileo the scientific method hadn't been invented (at least not in the western world), or to put it another way, there was no requirement that the pronouncements of Aristotle should be tested against reality, or questioned in any way. In fact you could be burned at the stake for doing so (eg Giordano Bruno). As it was, Galileo was "shown the instruments of torture" and kept under house arrest. Thankfully, nowadays you get rewarded, eg Nobel prize, for proving the previous guy was wrong.

Since you still think the "spin cell" is in with a chance, I suggest you buy one and bring it over to my place Image so I can measure its output. And if it's anything like they claim, then I'll take it apart to look for hidden power sources or energy storage. And if I don't find any, I'll happily announce this to the world. So you see, I'm open minded, just not so open minded that my brains have fallen out. Image

[Edit: Added "Thankfully"]
Last edited by weber on Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 11:28, edited 1 time in total.
One of the fathers of MeXy the electric MX-5, along with Coulomb and Newton (Jeff Owen).

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 20:42

Image
Last edited by Stiive on Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 10:54, edited 1 time in total.
Rgds,
Stiive

Stiive
Groupie
Posts: 295
Joined: Wed, 31 Dec 2008, 08:26
Location: Melbourne

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Stiive » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 20:49

Image
Last edited by Stiive on Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 10:53, edited 1 time in total.
Rgds,
Stiive

User avatar
Johny
Senior Member
Posts: 3729
Joined: Mon, 23 Jun 2008, 16:26
Real Name: John Wright
Location: Melbourne
Contact:

Spinning Solar Cell

Post by Johny » Thu, 28 Feb 2013, 21:38

I think you really ought to stop now Stiive. I'm quite sure that you would be surprised at the engineering prowess (and qualifications) of some of the folk that you are offending - just stop, OK?

Post Reply