MIT Making Super Efficient Origami Solar Panels 140
ByronScott writes "Could the next solar panels be in the shapes of origami cranes? They could be if MIT power engineering professor Jeffrey Grossman has his say. Standard flat solar panels are only optimized to capture sunlight at one point of the sun's trajectory — otherwise they need automated tracking systems to follow the sun. But Grossman found that folded solar cell systems could produce constant power throughout the day sans tracking and his new designs are up to two and a half times more efficient per comparative length and width than traditional flat arrays."
Re:RE : MIT Making Super Efficient Origami Solar P (Score:3, Informative)
The linked page actually mentions that the guy who came up with these was inspired by the way trees grow.
Re:Interesting but expensive (Score:4, Informative)
It's an interesting, nerdy endeavor, but less practical than automated tracking systems; the expensive part of solar is the panels themselves. From TFA: His new designs are up to two and a half times more efficient per comparative length and width than traditional flat arrays.
If solar cells were free, than this would indeed be more efficient, and if there's limited space thay MAY be more practical.
Exactly!
consider the simplified case of sun's arc not moving with the seasons. then you could put down the panels in a 90 degree zig-zag. this way all light that is reflected is assured to strike a second panel. this would dramatically increase the efficiency and reduce the variation throughout the day. but it would take 1.4 times as much panels to cover the same area as a flat panel. if you go for the 3D full corner cube then it's 1.7 times as much.
If you were to spread this out you would have 40% more area. this would mean that at peak power you'd get 1.4 times as much, but at obtuse incidence angles were the reflection is high you'd take a loss. the trade off point is when the reflective loss is greater than 40% I think.
another problem with a highly faceted desing is going to be in making the nominally circular cells conform to odd shaped facets, and for mass producing these. If you look at conventional panels you see they cut they often circular cells into half-circles then put these down in a row laternating the directions. this allows them to make mass producable long sections that dont have as much dead space when the components are placed side by side. If you have facets of differenting shapes you have to make eachone differently and the chips may have to be cut differently.
The best part of this idea is the continuous power level however.
Re:RE : MIT Making Super Efficient Origami Solar P (Score:0, Informative)
How does someone get +5 insightful calling plants "efficient"?
I thought knowledgeable people read this.
Re:Interesting but expensive (Score:2, Informative)
another problem with a highly faceted desing is going to be in making the nominally circular cells conform to odd shaped facets, and for mass producing these.
That's because nobody has thought to slice the silicon ingots _lengthwise_ which would yield long (although varying width) rectangular strips, which could be cut into square or rectangular shapes which would fit more densely into square panels.
Already been done: see www.sliver.com.au.
Re:Interesting but expensive (Score:3, Informative)
It took me a long time to find the real article [aip.org]. I think this paragraph addresses your concerns.
Of course, is is pretty darn funny. Turns out after all this genetic algorithm stuff. A very simple structure is close enough to optimal to make other more complex structures pointless.
Re:Interesting but expensive (Score:3, Informative)
hopefully that is in jest.
In case it wasn't:
the fabrication technology required balanced wafers for chemical deposition (spin deposition).
If you had odd shaped wafers you would have to come up with an amazing new process. Also, your machines are big enough already, I don't think they want to make bigger machines. Finally, 300mm wafers look to be the largest doable with Si, else they start to break under their own weight. Same reason GaAs tech hasn't gone to 200mm (not sure if it even is at 100mm honestly).
-nB
Re:Tired of hearing about super efficient.. (Score:4, Informative)
"Sure, real soon now. And yet, every time I try and get a quote on mounting a few panels on my roof, the cost is $25,000 and it will take me 30 years to break-even on the electricty."
Out of curiosity, where are you located? We did an install last year, and our payback time at the current electric rates is about seven years. If you assume the rates rise at the average 8% per year that they've been doing, it's even quicker. But we're in Arizona, where solar is a no-brainer. The panels have a 25-year *warranty* and a 40-year life is not unreasonable. The inverter will need replacing about once every 12 years, but that's a trivial cost compared to the savings. Even if we're only in the house for another ten years, we'll likely double our investment, before the resale value of the system when we sell the house is even taken into account.
Re:Tired of hearing about super efficient.. (Score:5, Informative)
He has a point. As soon as solar panels are cheap enough, everyone will be doing them, no legislation needed. And by now they should be, based on the stories we've read.