Author Topic: Solar Cell Power Doubler ???  (Read 1643 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

amiklic1

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 177
Solar Cell Power Doubler ???
« on: September 13, 2005, 03:51:17 PM »
Below is a text from another web page with extremely interesting topic.

From the picture in that article, I can see that building such a device ( swystem) is very easy. Did anyone have seen this before? Oppinions??


Solar Cell Power Doubler - KeelyNet 12/22/01:


"...During the test, the conventional (solar cell array) produced 83.48 watt-hours of energy while the SYLCELL produced 159.20 watt-hours. The SYLCELL battery cells lost 25.88 watt-hours during the dark period from discharge through the solar cells (A reverse current blocking device was not used during this test.)


The SYLCELL configuration produced 50.09 watt-hours more than the conventional configuration for this test case, or stated another way, the SYLCELL configuration produced 60 percent more energy for the same solar radiation."


Although the report confirms a 60 percent increase in power transfer, in actual use actual power transfer efficiencies have been improved over 100 percent.


Advantages


Does not use trackers, filters or optical concentrators.


Over 100 percent increase in energy transfer efficiency when compared to conventional methods.


Uses off-the-shelf photo-voltaic cells. Matching of cells is NOT required. (In fact...greater efficiency is realized with unmatched cells.)


No special tooling required. Array assembly cost increase 5 percent on an average.


Nothing extra to buy. No 'black-box' technology involved. SYLCELL is a method, not a piece of hardware.


Works on small or large systems alike.


Less array required (smaller footprint) for the same amount of power.


Lowers system cost by lowering the amount of cells for any given amount energy required.



Editors Note:


I guess I have to ask:"wheres the weenie?" No link no schematic so kind of lacking any real content to discuss.



« Last Edit: September 13, 2005, 03:51:17 PM by (unknown) »