Are Photovoltaic Cells Considered Ohmic Devices?

  • Thread starter Thread starter sj21
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cells
AI Thread Summary
Photovoltaic cells are not considered ohmic devices due to their behavior under varying light conditions and saturation currents. The equation P = I²*R = V*I is not applicable for PV cells, but Pout = V*I can be used for DC circuits. The discussion also explores the relationship between heat generation in PV cells and incident solar radiation, suggesting that drawing power may help dissipate heat. A proposed method to analyze this involves plotting Vload versus Iload to find peak power output and internal dissipation. The conversation emphasizes the need for a thermal model to understand the heat generated in relation to electrical output.
sj21
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hey,

I needed a clarification regarding this.
Are photovoltaic cells ohmic devices? Or if I consider an entire PV Module, will that be an ohmic device or not?

I basically need to know whether I can utilize the equation P = I2*R = V*I for a cell or not.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No, they are not. There is a saturation current that depends on amount of light the cell receives, and the voltage across the cell is a constant step that depends on semiconductor used. As you are nearing the saturation, of course, the apparent voltage will drop, which will have properties similar to internal resistance of the battery, but you are still not looking at anything remotely ohmic.
 
sj21 said:
I basically need to know whether I can utilize the equation P = I2*R = V*I for a cell or not.
You can use Pout = V*I
this always works for DC
 
Ohk. Thanks a lot.

I was basically trying to obtain how much heat is generated in the PV Cell because of current/voltage being generated? And how it (the heat generated) is related to the incident solar radiation on the cell. Can you help me with that if you have any idea?
 
sj21 said:
I was basically trying to obtain how much heat is generated in the PV Cell because of current/voltage being generated? And how it (the heat generated) is related to the incident solar radiation on the cell.
That is an interesting question. I'm sure textbooks on PV cells would deal with it. Not having studied PV cells, I'm wondering whether it would be naive of me to ask would a cell be cooler when you are drawing electrical power from it because that represents some of the incident radiation being dissipated outside the cell.

Anyway, one thought I have is could you plot Vload vs. Iload for your array, and then convert this to a power graph, Pload vs. Iload? If so, then it should show a peak, and knowing the maximum power transfer theorem, you can say where the power output peaks, an equal power is being dissipated internally.

That might be a start. :smile:
 
I am trying to prepare a thermal model. Using Maximum Power Point methods makes it more of an electrical model. I am trying to consider electric current generation by limiting it to the amount of heat generated because of that and loss in incident solar radiation transmitted through the PV Module.
Still, thanks for your suggestion! :)
 
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
It may be shown from the equations of electromagnetism, by James Clerk Maxwell in the 1860’s, that the speed of light in the vacuum of free space is related to electric permittivity (ϵ) and magnetic permeability (μ) by the equation: c=1/√( μ ϵ ) . This value is a constant for the vacuum of free space and is independent of the motion of the observer. It was this fact, in part, that led Albert Einstein to Special Relativity.
Back
Top