💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK
-
@NeverDie Wow, nice collection! How do you think, may it be reasonable to glue cut cells to a quartz or glass base? Would it compromise effectiveness?
IMHO the right way to cut them is either laser or high speed CNC. Also, CNC cut crystals may require extra polishing.
Just asked a couple of local vendors for a single cell, waiting for their reply. BTW those cells are usually of 18-19% energy efficiency, so the only way to beat Amorton or IXYS is to cover larger areas.
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
Also, CNC cut crystals may require extra polishing.
I think polishing would probably damage them. These cells are different than generic monocrystaline cells. Allegedly, at a microscopic level, they are built using tiny pyramids to increase their surface area. I can believe it, because when taken out of the package they look a bit like velvet. For that reason they apparently scratch extremely easily. The two that I received were in their raw form and totally unprotected, so I am right now in the middle of applying layers of an acrylic lacquer to them as a guard against scratching the active surfaces.
A water clear urethane coating might have been a better choice, as it's probably harder, but acrylic lacquer is all that I had on hand. I hope to handle differences in co-efficients of thermal expansion by coating both the front and the back equally. Otherwise, it will probably warp.
I soldered the dog-bones to them. I used rosin core solder, because that's all I have on hand, but next time I think I would use pure solder without the rosin, because I'm not sure whether the resin will interfere with a protective coating. I'll have a better idea about that when I finish coating this batch. Because of the cell's fragile nature and tendency toward scratching, I don't have the guts to clean off the resin with IPA without a protective layer in place. Perhaps I should, though, after the coating on the front finishes curing, and before coating the back of it.
-
@NeverDie Wow, nice collection! How do you think, may it be reasonable to glue cut cells to a quartz or glass base? Would it compromise effectiveness?
IMHO the right way to cut them is either laser or high speed CNC. Also, CNC cut crystals may require extra polishing.
Just asked a couple of local vendors for a single cell, waiting for their reply. BTW those cells are usually of 18-19% energy efficiency, so the only way to beat Amorton or IXYS is to cover larger areas.
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
BTW those cells are usually of 18-19% energy efficiency, so the only way to beat Amorton or IXYS is to cover larger areas.
The C-60, gen3 solar cells I received supposedly have a higher efficiency than that: https://us.sunpower.com/sites/default/files/media-library/spec-sheets/sp-sunpower-maxeon-solar-cells-gen3.pdf
That's the main reason why I ordered them.
-
@NeverDie Wow, nice collection! How do you think, may it be reasonable to glue cut cells to a quartz or glass base? Would it compromise effectiveness?
IMHO the right way to cut them is either laser or high speed CNC. Also, CNC cut crystals may require extra polishing.
Just asked a couple of local vendors for a single cell, waiting for their reply. BTW those cells are usually of 18-19% energy efficiency, so the only way to beat Amorton or IXYS is to cover larger areas.
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
How do you think, may it be reasonable to glue cut cells to a quartz or glass base?
Yes, totally reasonable. It would protect them from breaking.
-
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
Also, CNC cut crystals may require extra polishing.
I think polishing would probably damage them. These cells are different than generic monocrystaline cells. Allegedly, at a microscopic level, they are built using tiny pyramids to increase their surface area. I can believe it, because when taken out of the package they look a bit like velvet. For that reason they apparently scratch extremely easily. The two that I received were in their raw form and totally unprotected, so I am right now in the middle of applying layers of an acrylic lacquer to them as a guard against scratching the active surfaces.
A water clear urethane coating might have been a better choice, as it's probably harder, but acrylic lacquer is all that I had on hand. I hope to handle differences in co-efficients of thermal expansion by coating both the front and the back equally. Otherwise, it will probably warp.
I soldered the dog-bones to them. I used rosin core solder, because that's all I have on hand, but next time I think I would use pure solder without the rosin, because I'm not sure whether the resin will interfere with a protective coating. I'll have a better idea about that when I finish coating this batch. Because of the cell's fragile nature and tendency toward scratching, I don't have the guts to clean off the resin with IPA without a protective layer in place. Perhaps I should, though, after the coating on the front finishes curing, and before coating the back of it.
@NeverDie No no, by polishing I mean only the edge after cutting. I'd prefer to have it nice and clean just to avoid possible impact of cell layers which might cause shortenings. It's also very interesting to know that the cell has 3D surface - cool.
How easy it was to solder anything to the cell? Have you tried to solder anything to crystal raw surface? My concerns is that after the cell will be cut it will lose interconnection of conductors so it would be nice to restore the metallization layer.
-
@NeverDie No no, by polishing I mean only the edge after cutting. I'd prefer to have it nice and clean just to avoid possible impact of cell layers which might cause shortenings. It's also very interesting to know that the cell has 3D surface - cool.
How easy it was to solder anything to the cell? Have you tried to solder anything to crystal raw surface? My concerns is that after the cell will be cut it will lose interconnection of conductors so it would be nice to restore the metallization layer.
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
How easy it was to solder anything to the cell? Have you tried to solder anything to crystal raw surface?
I soldered on the dog bones (a kind of bus connector) to the edges and gave each cell a brief test before applying a protective coating. They each work. That's about all I know. What's a bit confusing is that the solder pads look as if they they are made out of solder mask, but clearly they must be some kind of white conductive material that doesn't look like metal. I'm not exactly sure what's going on with that. I haven't yet found a "how-to" guide for this type of cell that explains anything in any detail. Its construction is completely different from any other kind of solar cell I've tried.
I don't know what country you're in, but in the US the ebay sellers fullbattery and theHeartOfTheSun sell them at reasonable prices. Do an ebay search for C60.
-
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
How easy it was to solder anything to the cell? Have you tried to solder anything to crystal raw surface?
I soldered on the dog bones (a kind of bus connector) to the edges and gave each cell a brief test before applying a protective coating. They each work. That's about all I know. What's a bit confusing is that the solder pads look as if they they are made out of solder mask, but clearly they must be some kind of white conductive material that doesn't look like metal. I'm not exactly sure what's going on with that. I haven't yet found a "how-to" guide for this type of cell that explains anything in any detail. Its construction is completely different from any other kind of solar cell I've tried.
I don't know what country you're in, but in the US the ebay sellers fullbattery and theHeartOfTheSun sell them at reasonable prices. Do an ebay search for C60.
-
Not really surprising: they do much better with sunlight than with LED or fluorescent light.
-
At 28lux of really lousy LED lighting, a C60 cell produces 0.66ma short circuit current and 96mv open circuit voltage. So, maybe not so terrible after all.
-
Not really surprising: they do much better with sunlight than with LED or fluorescent light.
@NeverDie My thought was that amorphous silicon (a-Si) cells have better spectral response to artificial light than crystalline cells (c-Si). However, after investigating this a little bit I've found that this doesn't seem to be true. Instead, it's shown everywhere that c-Si cells have better response to every wavelength:
Moreover, when the light source has wide spectrum (like the sun or an incandescent bulb), c-Si panels take the advantage and produce significantly more energy from the same source, and this all explains why a-Si cells are almost two times less effective than c-Si (roughly 8% vs 20%). Please note, because of narrow spectrum a LED lamp will be obviously inefficient for a PV panel.
But at the same time, there are reports of a-Si cells being 4x more effective in low light than crystalline. Indeed, both crystalline and poly-crystalline cells may degrade a lot:
The seem happens due to low parallel resistance of c-Si type cells. Shunt resistance of amorphous cells is naturally higher which results to less degradation of Vmpp and hence higher efficiency in low light conditions. Some paper show the shunt resistance rather low, when other mentions it relatively high, but at extremely low power conditions even 20 kOhm may be too much.
In short, a-Si cells are tend to produce fairly better results in very low light environments. But they can't leverage from wide spectrum sources, yet are subject to the Staebler-Wronski effect when exposed to direct sun (which can be reversed to some extent by heating the panel). In case if the light source is bright enough (around 1000 lx and above) a c-Si pannel should be preferred.
Finally, there are some other kind of solar cells, in particular those made from III-V semiconductors compound and promising even better low light performance.
-
@NeverDie My thought was that amorphous silicon (a-Si) cells have better spectral response to artificial light than crystalline cells (c-Si). However, after investigating this a little bit I've found that this doesn't seem to be true. Instead, it's shown everywhere that c-Si cells have better response to every wavelength:
Moreover, when the light source has wide spectrum (like the sun or an incandescent bulb), c-Si panels take the advantage and produce significantly more energy from the same source, and this all explains why a-Si cells are almost two times less effective than c-Si (roughly 8% vs 20%). Please note, because of narrow spectrum a LED lamp will be obviously inefficient for a PV panel.
But at the same time, there are reports of a-Si cells being 4x more effective in low light than crystalline. Indeed, both crystalline and poly-crystalline cells may degrade a lot:
The seem happens due to low parallel resistance of c-Si type cells. Shunt resistance of amorphous cells is naturally higher which results to less degradation of Vmpp and hence higher efficiency in low light conditions. Some paper show the shunt resistance rather low, when other mentions it relatively high, but at extremely low power conditions even 20 kOhm may be too much.
In short, a-Si cells are tend to produce fairly better results in very low light environments. But they can't leverage from wide spectrum sources, yet are subject to the Staebler-Wronski effect when exposed to direct sun (which can be reversed to some extent by heating the panel). In case if the light source is bright enough (around 1000 lx and above) a c-Si pannel should be preferred.
Finally, there are some other kind of solar cells, in particular those made from III-V semiconductors compound and promising even better low light performance.
@Mishka Have you found a good candidate for an amorphous cell to try? I see a lot of cells/panels advertised as amorphous, but without a datasheet showing performance under low light conditions, selecting one seems a bit like throwing darts at a map.
I've seen some flexible amorphous panels that claim to stack materials with different light sensitivities to get a better spectral response:
But are they any good, or is it just puffery?I've seen articles claiming that CIGS have efficiencies of 20% to other articles saying that CIGS are barely better than amorphous. Some also make claims that CIGS perform well under "low light," but without the detailed datasheet, there's just not much to hang one's hat on when it comes to selecting one to try....
And then there's powerfilm, which I had linked to earlier above, which claims to be optimized for 200 lux and below. At least they were selected by TI for TI's BLE demo kit, so presumably they were a good choice, at least at the time the choice was made....
Is amorphous better than these other choices at low light, and if so, which amorphous solution has the best efficiency under low light?
NREL seems to be an objective independent source for testing, but for high brightness conditions (according to wikipedia, the standard test conditions for solar cells are "the AM1.5 spectrum as the reference. This air mass (AM) corresponds to a fixed position of the sun in the sky of 48° and a fixed power of 833 W/m2. "):
https://www.nrel.gov/pv/assets/pdfs/best-research-cell-efficiencies.20200218.pdf
https://www.nrel.gov/pv/cell-efficiency.html
At least on paper, the multi-junction cell efficiency looks really quite amazing. There are some for sale on ebay in the $20-$35 dollar range, depending on quantity. So, if you absolutely had to have one to meet your size requirements, there they are. No datasheets though, so again, just a cat in a bag. One claims 35% efficiency. No indication at all as to low light efficiency. -
@NeverDie Right, the good thing about thin-film solar cells that they can be relatively easily stacked up to gain better efficiency. Don't know about CIGS, but some III-V compounds like GaAs are known to be very effective in low light environment (please see the last paper in my previous post). Such, some manufacturers are making tripple-junction GaAs cells with power effectiveness up to 15 μW/cm² at 200 lx - just compare it to Amorton which have it at about 6 to 8 μW/cm² under the same conditions. Sounds like a huge difference, especially taking in account the Panasonic offers rather high quality cells. Unfortunately, the cost is as high as the satellites carrying these cells.
-
Last night I hooked up the keychain solar cell to my simple solar circuit, and at 5 lux it could still charge a 100uF capacitor to 2.7v and blink a red led without any boosting. It looks like it's probably amorphous. So, pretty good performance considering its low cost, but perhaps not as small as what you're looking for.
-
Last night I hooked up the keychain solar cell to my simple solar circuit, and at 5 lux it could still charge a 100uF capacitor to 2.7v and blink a red led without any boosting. It looks like it's probably amorphous. So, pretty good performance considering its low cost, but perhaps not as small as what you're looking for.
-
@NeverDie Well, 5 lux is ridiculously low. It's about the same illuminance you may have at 45 cm from a candle. Are you sure your lux meter is working? :-)
Interesting to measure Voc and Isc at that light. What's dimension of the cell?
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
Are you sure your lux meter is working?
I'm not at all sure that it's accurate, but that's what the lux meter said. It's one of these: https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Meter-LX1330B-Digital-Illuminance-Light/dp/B005A0ETXY/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=lux+meter&qid=1582903100&sr=8-3
I've misplaced the manual, but someone posted this on amazon as to its specs:
The specifications in the instruction manual reflect the following:
Light-measuring level from .1Lux to 200,000Lux
Accuracy +- (3%rdg+10dgt) <=20,000Lux/2,000FC
+- (5%rdg+10dgt) >= 20,000Lux/2,000FC
Repeatability +-2%
Photo detector lead length ~150cm
Spectral Sensitivity- curve shows mostly betweeen 500nm and 650nmPerhaps I should get something better, or else maybe find some way to calibrate it. What is it that you're using?
I assume that for "Accuracy +- (3%rdg+10dgt)" it means plus or minus 3% of the reading, which is fine. Not sure what the 10dgt means though. If that means it could be plus or minus 10 lux, then I guess it's useless for measuring 5 lux.
-
@NeverDie Well, 5 lux is ridiculously low. It's about the same illuminance you may have at 45 cm from a candle. Are you sure your lux meter is working? :-)
Interesting to measure Voc and Isc at that light. What's dimension of the cell?
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
What's dimension of the cell?
37mm x 22mm
-
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
Are you sure your lux meter is working?
I'm not at all sure that it's accurate, but that's what the lux meter said. It's one of these: https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Meter-LX1330B-Digital-Illuminance-Light/dp/B005A0ETXY/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=lux+meter&qid=1582903100&sr=8-3
I've misplaced the manual, but someone posted this on amazon as to its specs:
The specifications in the instruction manual reflect the following:
Light-measuring level from .1Lux to 200,000Lux
Accuracy +- (3%rdg+10dgt) <=20,000Lux/2,000FC
+- (5%rdg+10dgt) >= 20,000Lux/2,000FC
Repeatability +-2%
Photo detector lead length ~150cm
Spectral Sensitivity- curve shows mostly betweeen 500nm and 650nmPerhaps I should get something better, or else maybe find some way to calibrate it. What is it that you're using?
I assume that for "Accuracy +- (3%rdg+10dgt)" it means plus or minus 3% of the reading, which is fine. Not sure what the 10dgt means though. If that means it could be plus or minus 10 lux, then I guess it's useless for measuring 5 lux.
@NeverDie said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
I'm not at all sure that it's accurate, but that's what the lux meter said.
Wow, relatively to my built into the smartphone Sensortek STK3x1x ambient light sensor this one looks very serious.
The cell has surprisingly high voltage (2.7V) at so low light. My amorphous cell has Voc = 1.8V at 50 lux (2 m from a fluorescent lamp). Maybe yours has many more cells in series. I'm going to order some Amorton panels of suitable size (less than 25x25), it will be interesting to compare them with my other amorphous cell.
I'm also wondering would it be good o bad to connect two cells of different types - one amorphous and one crystalline.
-
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
Are you sure your lux meter is working?
I'm not at all sure that it's accurate, but that's what the lux meter said. It's one of these: https://www.amazon.com/Dr-Meter-LX1330B-Digital-Illuminance-Light/dp/B005A0ETXY/ref=sr_1_3?keywords=lux+meter&qid=1582903100&sr=8-3
I've misplaced the manual, but someone posted this on amazon as to its specs:
The specifications in the instruction manual reflect the following:
Light-measuring level from .1Lux to 200,000Lux
Accuracy +- (3%rdg+10dgt) <=20,000Lux/2,000FC
+- (5%rdg+10dgt) >= 20,000Lux/2,000FC
Repeatability +-2%
Photo detector lead length ~150cm
Spectral Sensitivity- curve shows mostly betweeen 500nm and 650nmPerhaps I should get something better, or else maybe find some way to calibrate it. What is it that you're using?
I assume that for "Accuracy +- (3%rdg+10dgt)" it means plus or minus 3% of the reading, which is fine. Not sure what the 10dgt means though. If that means it could be plus or minus 10 lux, then I guess it's useless for measuring 5 lux.
@NeverDie said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
If that means it could be plus or minus 10 lux, then I guess it's useless for measuring 5 lux.
Well, maybe not completely useless. If the specs are valid, then it's surely less than 20 lux, assuming I'm giving the right interpretation to "10dgts".
-
@NeverDie said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
I'm not at all sure that it's accurate, but that's what the lux meter said.
Wow, relatively to my built into the smartphone Sensortek STK3x1x ambient light sensor this one looks very serious.
The cell has surprisingly high voltage (2.7V) at so low light. My amorphous cell has Voc = 1.8V at 50 lux (2 m from a fluorescent lamp). Maybe yours has many more cells in series. I'm going to order some Amorton panels of suitable size (less than 25x25), it will be interesting to compare them with my other amorphous cell.
I'm also wondering would it be good o bad to connect two cells of different types - one amorphous and one crystalline.
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
I'm going to order some Amorton panels of suitable size (less than 25x25), it will be interesting to compare them with my other amorphous cell.
I'm thinking of ordering the AM-1816CA, which AFAIK is the largest one rated for indoor and low lux. https://www.mouser.com/datasheet/2/315/panasonic_AM-1816CA-1196985.pdf
My only reason for ordering the largest would be to see what the limit is on how dim things can get in that series and still have something that can function. Maybe ordering smaller panels would make more sense, though, as they could always be added together in parallel or series. Yeah, that would make more sense I think.In addition, if you let me know what models you order, I may order one of the same too just so we can have something in common to compare results.
At very dim levels I notice that my Fluke 87v multimeter actually draws too much current off the solar cell to get an accurate open circuit voltage measurement. So, I'll have to rig up some kind of voltage following op amp buffer as an aid to doing these measurements.
-
@NeverDie said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
I'm not at all sure that it's accurate, but that's what the lux meter said.
Wow, relatively to my built into the smartphone Sensortek STK3x1x ambient light sensor this one looks very serious.
The cell has surprisingly high voltage (2.7V) at so low light. My amorphous cell has Voc = 1.8V at 50 lux (2 m from a fluorescent lamp). Maybe yours has many more cells in series. I'm going to order some Amorton panels of suitable size (less than 25x25), it will be interesting to compare them with my other amorphous cell.
I'm also wondering would it be good o bad to connect two cells of different types - one amorphous and one crystalline.
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
I'm also wondering would it be good o bad to connect two cells of different types - one amorphous and one crystalline.
Only one way to know for sure, but I would guess that the crystalline one would drain off the current produced by the amorphous one (based partly on your theory as to why amorphous is better in low light). Worth a shot though: maybe as a compromise solution you can have the best of both worlds.
Thinking out loud here, I have read about some research solar harvesters where they use a separate "pilot" solar cell to power the control electronics past the cold boot threshold. These days, with nanoamp current drains from control components, it would mostly need to produce adequate voltage and not much current, so a simple approach would be optimize the pilot configuration for exactly that--perhaps putting a few tiny cells in series. Perhaps any extra current could then spill over into the main accumulating capacitor. That would be yet another way to use more than one type of panel.
The ideal solution would be if there were some way to re-configure multiple cells in series or parallel depending on the lighting conditions. It could default to series to push past the cold start and then switch to parallel (or some appropriate combination of series and parallel) for the energy harvesting. I haven't seen much on that topic, but I'd be keen to know if there are ways to do reconfiguring that consume very little power in overhead.
-
@NeverDie said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
I'm not at all sure that it's accurate, but that's what the lux meter said.
Wow, relatively to my built into the smartphone Sensortek STK3x1x ambient light sensor this one looks very serious.
The cell has surprisingly high voltage (2.7V) at so low light. My amorphous cell has Voc = 1.8V at 50 lux (2 m from a fluorescent lamp). Maybe yours has many more cells in series. I'm going to order some Amorton panels of suitable size (less than 25x25), it will be interesting to compare them with my other amorphous cell.
I'm also wondering would it be good o bad to connect two cells of different types - one amorphous and one crystalline.
@Mishka said in 💬 The Harvester: ultimate power supply for the Raybeacon DK:
less than 25x25
That probably limits you to a couple of AM-1456 (25mm x 10mm) or a single AM-1606 (15mm x 15mm) as your only choices.
