Over the past few years, the application of the physical principle, i.e., “luminescence extraction,” has produced record voltages and efficiencies in photovoltaic cells. Luminescence extraction is the use of optical design, such as a back mirror or textured surfaces, to help internal photons escape out of the front surface of a solar cell. The principle of luminescence extraction is exemplified by the mantra “a good solar cell should also be a good LED.” Basic thermodynamics says that the voltage boost should be related to concentration ratioCof a resource by ΔV= (kT/q) ln{C}. In light trapping (i.e., when the solar cell is textured and has a perfect back mirror), the concentration ratio of photonsC= {4n2}; therefore, one would expect a voltage boost of ΔV= (kT/q) ln{4n2} over a solar cell with no texture and zero back reflectivity, wherenis the refractive index. Nevertheless, there has been ambiguity over the voltage benefit to be expected from perfect luminescence extraction. Do we gain an open-circuit voltage boost of ΔV= (kT/q) ln{n2}, ΔV= (kT/q) ln{2n2}, or ΔV= (kT/q) ln{4n2}? What is responsible for this voltage ambiguity ΔV= (kT/q) ln{4}≍36 mV? We show that different results come about, depending on whether the photovoltaic cell is optically thin or thick to its internal luminescence. In realistic intermediate cases of optical thickness, the voltage boost falls in between: ln{n2}qΔV/kT)n2}.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ganapati et al. (2016) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: