Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space
I guess this is getting off into the weeds a bit, but is the quartz layer doped with cerium in the mass? Or is the cerium diffused into the surface by immersion in a molten cerium compound? --- Original Message --- On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 2:26 AM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > Robin, > > The whole deal is a set of tradeoffs that depends on the environment to be > encountered. At some altitudes, the Van Allen Belts have too much penetrating > radiation to allow solar cells to be used for long-term missions. > > Addition of coverslides makes the solarcell assembly vulnerable to solar > ultra-violet radiation. It is necessary to use high-purity fused silica for > the coverslides to prevent themselves from being damaged by the UV. But these > coverslides allow the UV to damage the adhesive that holds them to the solar > cells. Thus, it is necessary to put a UV filter on these coverslides. The UV > filters can be damaged by the trapped-proton environment if there is a > manufacturing error. Cerium-doped microsheet (CMS) is generally used for > coverslides because it does not transmit the UV that can damage the special > adhesives (flexible conformal coatings) that can function through the thermal > excursions experienced when the spacecraft enters and exits the Earth's > shadow. However, the CMS cutting out the damaging UV also lowers the starting > efficiency of the solar arrays that can derive energy from the UV. > > It is a tradeoff that must even recognize the possibility of solar flares > that, when extreme and aimed at the earth, can cause more damage (in days) > than all of the other sources of degradation over the rest of the mission. > The tradeoff is further complicated by the variety of cells and materials > (filters and coverslides) available. There is also the mission variables that > are sometimes of greatest concern. Sometimes it is more important to have max > power at the beginning of a mission; sometimes at the end. > > It was a portion of my job for nearly 30 years. > > Andrew > _ _ _ > On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 12:41 PM Robin > wrote > >> In reply to Andrew Meulenberg's message of Mon, 19 Dec 2022 00:25:20 -0600: >> Hi Andrew, >> >> I'm sure it does, however the high energy particles from other sources are >> also present, so it seems to be fairly >> effective against them too? Otherwise surely it would have been noticed that >> cells in space deteriorate rapidly? >> >>>Robin, >>> >>>This thickness of coverslide stops the low-energy trapped protons of the >>>Van Allen belts that would cut the cell efficiency by ~30% in not too many >>>months. >>> >>>Andrew >> [snip] >> Cloud storage:- >> >> Unsafe, Slow, Expensive >> >> ...pick any three.
Re: [Vo]:Current Findings on the Undeniable Alien Presence
Terry that was truly funny :-) I wonder why so many of them are now being seen/ reported. Is it because everyone now has access to both a camera and the internet? Maybe they are here to just watch- as we transition to ??? On the negative side, maybe they know that an upcoming sudden shift of the earth's magnetic field is going to cause several large land masses to shift, creating a giant Tsunami like the one that possibly occurred ~ 13,000 years ago, Maybe they are here as a rescue service? Or, are they just a bunch of tourists suddenly finding us more interesting? I hope they simultaneously nullify all our nuclear weapons. That, at least, is a positive thought. Merry Christmas Colin - Original Message - From: Terry Blanton Reply-To: To: Sent: 2022-12-19 7:48:56 AM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Current Findings on the Undeniable Alien Presence Or by AI that has decided to rid GAIA of this pest. On Mon, Dec 19, 2022, 1:24 AM Robin wrote: In reply to Terry Blanton's message of Sun, 18 Dec 2022 23:43:35 -0500: Hi, [snip] >Or self annihilation by nuclear war. If there is nuclear war it will be over Taiwan/Nth. Korea not Ukraine. Putin knows what nuclear radiation would do to his food. [snip] Cloud storage:- Unsafe, Slow, Expensive ...pick any three.
Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space
In reply to Andrew Meulenberg's message of Mon, 19 Dec 2022 20:26:52 -0600: Hi Andrew, Thanks for the info. It's nice to have comment from an "insider". :) >Robin, > >The whole deal is a set of tradeoffs that depends on the environment to be >encountered. At some altitudes, the Van Allen Belts have too much >penetrating radiation to allow solar cells to be used for long-term >missions. > >Addition of coverslides makes the solarcell assembly vulnerable to solar >ultra-violet radiation. It is necessary to use high-purity fused silica for >the coverslides to prevent themselves from being damaged by the UV. But >these coverslides allow the UV to damage the adhesive that holds them to >the solar cells. Thus, it is necessary to put a UV filter on these >coverslides. The UV filters can be damaged by the trapped-proton >environment if there is a manufacturing error. Cerium-doped microsheet >(CMS) is generally used for coverslides because it does not transmit the UV >that can damage the special adhesives (flexible conformal coatings) that >can function through the thermal excursions experienced when the spacecraft >enters and exits the Earth's shadow. However, the CMS cutting out the >damaging UV also lowers the starting efficiency of the solar arrays that >can derive energy from the UV. > >It is a tradeoff that must even recognize the possibility of solar flares >that, when extreme and aimed at the earth, can cause more damage (in days) >than all of the other sources of degradation over the rest of the mission. >The tradeoff is further complicated by the variety of cells and materials >(filters and coverslides) available. There is also the mission variables >that are sometimes of greatest concern. Sometimes it is more important to >have max power at the beginning of a mission; sometimes at the end. > >It was a portion of my job for nearly 30 years. > >Andrew [snip] Cloud storage:- Unsafe, Slow, Expensive ...pick any three.
Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space
Interesting... But I can't believe it took so long to get around to what should have been obvious. --- Original Message --- On Wednesday, December 21st, 2022 at 12:07 AM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > Things have gone beyond simple UV protection. At a quick glance, I found this > from 2014: > "Ion exchange doping of solar cell coverglass for sunlight down-shifting" > https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://www.academia.edu/download/39434467/Ion_exchange_doping_of_solar_cell_coverg20151026-13237-11ddof9.pdf=en=X=jkyiY7KwAY6yyATvqZyoBQ=AAGBfm2yTEGoICv5hlwEB0RulQA-SecuDg=scholarr > > On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 4:59 PM MSF wrote: > >> I was working with this method of surface treatment of glass more decades >> ago than I care to remember. You simply immerse ordinary glass into a bath >> of molten potassium nitrate and the sodium Ions at the surface are replaced >> with potassium ions, resulting in a highly impact resistant glass. These >> days it's called gorilla glass, but I was using this technique long before >> Corning. >> >> I see that cerium doped sheet is just glass, not fused silica. So it may be >> that no cerium ions could be implanted into pure silica by the molten salt >> technique. >> >> I recently discovered a method of depositing a layer of silica on any given >> surface using a ridiculously simple and inexpensive technique. This is >> something that should have been discovered 200 or so years ago, but wasn't. >> I've searched for months trying to find out if this was done before, but I >> find no reference to it. The silica layer deposited is only a few tens of >> microns thick, but the process can be repeated. Other compounds can be >> included; so far I've only tried copper. This is a solid transparent well >> adhered layer, not some powdered composite. I really don't know what to do >> with this, probably nothing. Thought you might be interested anyway. >> >> --- Original Message --- >> On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 10:00 PM, Andrew Meulenberg >> wrote: >> >>> Foster, >>> >>> You have raised an interesting possibility. I have been out of the loop for >>> 25 years, so my info may be dated. However, the cerium was included in the >>> melt, with the quantity a djusted for the optimum UV absorption for the >>> coverslide thickness. >>> >>> Use of a doped layer rather than the bulk could possibly provide some >>> improved optical matching in the "STACK". It would have to be tested for >>> stability during the thermal cycles. If the surface doping (by dipping or >>> by ion implantation) is a reliable process, this might be worth mentioning >>> it to the appropriate people (who I no longer know). >>> >>> Andrew >>> >>> -- Forwarded message - >>> >>> I guess this is getting off into the weeds a bit, but is the quartz layer >>> doped with cerium in the mass? Or is the cerium diffused into the surface >>> by immersion in a molten cerium compound? >>> >>> -- >>> On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 2:26 AM, Andrew Meulenberg >>> wrote: >>> >>
Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space
Things have gone beyond simple UV protection. At a quick glance, I found this from 2014: "Ion exchange doping of solar cell coverglass for sunlight down-shifting" https://scholar.google.com/scholar_url?url=https://www.academia.edu/download/39434467/Ion_exchange_doping_of_solar_cell_coverg20151026-13237-11ddof9.pdf=en=X=jkyiY7KwAY6yyATvqZyoBQ=AAGBfm2yTEGoICv5hlwEB0RulQA-SecuDg=scholarr On Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 4:59 PM MSF wrote: > > I was working with this method of surface treatment of glass more decades > ago than I care to remember. You simply immerse ordinary glass into a bath > of molten potassium nitrate and the sodium Ions at the surface are replaced > with potassium ions, resulting in a highly impact resistant glass. These > days it's called gorilla glass, but I was using this technique long before > Corning. > > I see that cerium doped sheet is just glass, not fused silica. So it may > be that no cerium ions could be implanted into pure silica by the molten > salt technique. > > I recently discovered a method of depositing a layer of silica on any > given surface using a ridiculously simple and inexpensive technique. This > is something that should have been discovered 200 or so years ago, but > wasn't. I've searched for months trying to find out if this was done > before, but I find no reference to it. The silica layer deposited is only a > few tens of microns thick, but the process can be repeated. Other compounds > can be included; so far I've only tried copper. This is a solid transparent > well adhered layer, not some powdered composite. I really don't know what > to do with this, probably nothing. Thought you might be interested anyway. > > --- Original Message --- > On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 10:00 PM, Andrew Meulenberg < > mules...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Foster, > You have raised an interesting possibility. I have been out of the loop > for 25 years, so my info may be dated. However, the cerium was included in > the melt, with the quantity a djusted for the optimum UV absorption for the > coverslide thickness. > > Use of a doped layer rather than the bulk could possibly provide some > improved optical matching in the "STACK". It would have to be tested for > stability during the thermal cycles. If the surface doping (by dipping or > by ion implantation) is a reliable process, this might be worth mentioning > it to the appropriate people (who I no longer know). > > Andrew > > -- Forwarded message - > > > I guess this is getting off into the weeds a bit, but is the quartz layer > doped with cerium in the mass? Or is the cerium diffused into the surface > by immersion in a molten cerium compound? > > -- > On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 2:26 AM, Andrew Meulenberg < > mules...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >> > >> >> > >
Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space
I was working with this method of surface treatment of glass more decades ago than I care to remember. You simply immerse ordinary glass into a bath of molten potassium nitrate and the sodium Ions at the surface are replaced with potassium ions, resulting in a highly impact resistant glass. These days it's called gorilla glass, but I was using this technique long before Corning. I see that cerium doped sheet is just glass, not fused silica. So it may be that no cerium ions could be implanted into pure silica by the molten salt technique. I recently discovered a method of depositing a layer of silica on any given surface using a ridiculously simple and inexpensive technique. This is something that should have been discovered 200 or so years ago, but wasn't. I've searched for months trying to find out if this was done before, but I find no reference to it. The silica layer deposited is only a few tens of microns thick, but the process can be repeated. Other compounds can be included; so far I've only tried copper. This is a solid transparent well adhered layer, not some powdered composite. I really don't know what to do with this, probably nothing. Thought you might be interested anyway. --- Original Message --- On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 10:00 PM, Andrew Meulenberg wrote: > Foster, > > You have raised an interesting possibility. I have been out of the loop for > 25 years, so my info may be dated. However, the cerium was included in the > melt, with the quantity a djusted for the optimum UV absorption for the > coverslide thickness. > > Use of a doped layer rather than the bulk could possibly provide some > improved optical matching in the "STACK". It would have to be tested for > stability during the thermal cycles. If the surface doping (by dipping or by > ion implantation) is a reliable process, this might be worth mentioning it to > the appropriate people (who I no longer know). > > Andrew > > -- Forwarded message - > > I guess this is getting off into the weeds a bit, but is the quartz layer > doped with cerium in the mass? Or is the cerium diffused into the surface by > immersion in a molten cerium compound? > > -- > On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 2:26 AM, Andrew Meulenberg > wrote: >
Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space
In reply to MSF's message of Tue, 20 Dec 2022 22:59:35 +: Hi Michael, >I recently discovered a method of depositing a layer of silica on any given >surface using a ridiculously simple and inexpensive technique. This is >something that should have been discovered 200 or so years ago, but wasn't. >I've searched for months trying to find out if this was done before, but I >find no reference to it. The silica layer deposited is only a few tens of >microns thick, but the process can be repeated. Other compounds can be >included; so far I've only tried copper. This is a solid transparent well >adhered layer, not some powdered composite. I really don't know what to do >with this, probably nothing. Thought you might be interested anyway. ...take out a patent? Then any one interested will let you know in short order. :) Cloud storage:- Unsafe, Slow, Expensive ...pick any three.
Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space
Foster, You have raised an interesting possibility. I have been out of the loop for 25 years, so my info may be dated. However, the cerium was included in the melt, with the quantity a djusted for the optimum UV absorption for the coverslide thickness. Use of a doped layer rather than the bulk could possibly provide some improved optical matching in the "STACK". It would have to be tested for stability during the thermal cycles. If the surface doping (by dipping or by ion implantation) is a reliable process, this might be worth mentioning it to the appropriate people (who I no longer know). Andrew -- Forwarded message - From: MSF Date: Tue, Dec 20, 2022 at 1:23 PM Subject: Re: [Vo]:Solar cell lifetime in space To: I guess this is getting off into the weeds a bit, but is the quartz layer doped with cerium in the mass? Or is the cerium diffused into the surface by immersion in a molten cerium compound? --- Original Message --- On Tuesday, December 20th, 2022 at 2:26 AM, Andrew Meulenberg < mules...@gmail.com> wrote: Robin, The whole deal is a set of tradeoffs that depends on the environment to be encountered. At some altitudes, the Van Allen Belts have too much penetrating radiation to allow solar cells to be used for long-term missions. Addition of coverslides makes the solarcell assembly vulnerable to solar ultra-violet radiation. It is necessary to use high-purity fused silica for the coverslides to prevent themselves from being damaged by the UV. But these coverslides allow the UV to damage the adhesive that holds them to the solar cells. Thus, it is necessary to put a UV filter on these coverslides. The UV filters can be damaged by the trapped-proton environment if there is a manufacturing error. Cerium-doped microsheet (CMS) is generally used for coverslides because it does not transmit the UV that can damage the special adhesives (flexible conformal coatings) that can function through the thermal excursions experienced when the spacecraft enters and exits the Earth's shadow. However, the CMS cutting out the damaging UV also lowers the starting efficiency of the solar arrays that can derive energy from the UV. It is a tradeoff that must even recognize the possibility of solar flares that, when extreme and aimed at the earth, can cause more damage (in days) than all of the other sources of degradation over the rest of the mission. The tradeoff is further complicated by the variety of cells and materials (filters and coverslides) available. There is also the mission variables that are sometimes of greatest concern. Sometimes it is more important to have max power at the beginning of a mission; sometimes at the end. It was a portion of my job for nearly 30 years. Andrew _ _ _ On Mon, Dec 19, 2022 at 12:41 PM Robin wrote > In reply to Andrew Meulenberg's message of Mon, 19 Dec 2022 00:25:20 -0600: > Hi Andrew, > > I'm sure it does, however the high energy particles from other sources are > also present, so it seems to be fairly > effective against them too? Otherwise surely it would have been noticed > that cells in space deteriorate rapidly? > > > >Robin, > > > >This thickness of coverslide stops the low-energy trapped protons of the > >Van Allen belts that would cut the cell efficiency by ~30% in not too many > >months. > > > >Andrew > [snip] > Cloud storage:- > > Unsafe, Slow, Expensive > > ...pick any three. > >
