Energy gap calculation for semi-conductors.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the energy gap required for solar cell materials to effectively absorb solar radiation, particularly wavelengths of 1 µm or less. It is calculated that the energy gap should be approximately 1.24 eV to absorb this radiation, and silicon, with an energy gap of about 1.14 - 1.17 eV, is deemed suitable for solar cells. Concerns are raised about silicon's ability to absorb shorter wavelengths, as energy gaps increase with decreasing wavelength. However, it is noted that modern solar cells often incorporate multiple layers of materials to enhance absorption across a broader spectrum. This layered approach allows silicon to remain a viable option despite its limitations with certain wavelengths.
NewtonianAlch
Messages
453
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Most solar radiation has a wavelength of 1 µm or less.

(a) What energy gap should the material in a solar cell have if it is to absorb this radiation?
(b) Is silicon an appropriate solar cell material?

Explain your answer.

Homework Equations



f = c/lambda
E = hf

The Attempt at a Solution



a) f = 3E8/1000E-9 = 3E14 Hz

E = hf

So E ≤ 1.24eV

b) Yes, because silicon has an energy-gap of roughly 1.14 - 1.17eV so 1.24eV is enough to excite the electrons into the conduction band.


----

What I don't fully understand is if the wavelength is below this 1000nm mark, the associated energy gap is going to increase, very quickly certain wavelengths aren't going to be absorbed by silicon for it to act as a semi-conductor. So I'm thinking my answer is wrong?

For e.g. if the wavelength was 700nm, then E = 1.77eV, and silicon and a lot of other semi-conductors wouldn't be able to utilize these kinds of wavelengths.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Nvm, I found out that most solar cells have layers of other material to absorb different wavelengths to be more efficient, so it was correct.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top