A 2-kW CONCENTRATING PV ARRAY USING TRIPLE JUNCTION CELLS

Raed Sherif. Anastacio Paredes, Hector Cotal. and Herb Hayden 1. Spectrolab, Inc., 12500 Gladstone Avenue, Sylmar, CA 91342 2. Arizona Public Service, 400 N. Sh Street (MS-8255). Phoenix, AZ 85004 Phone (818) 8387479 Far (818) 838-7474 Email rsherif@soectmlab.com ABSTRACT This paper discusses a dense array receiver design that utilizes Spectrolabs high efficiency triple junction cells. The system involves the use of a reflective dish optics and dual tracking system. and at 300-sun concentration, the peak power is projected to exceed 2 kW. The details of the cell and module design are discussed in this paper. INTRODUCTION The use of multijunction. high efficiency solar cells for terrestrial power generation requires the use of high concentration to offset their cost and enable a competitive $Nan. Spectrolab has recently leveraged its multijunction PV technology, used in Electrical challenges associated with high concentration PV receivers include designing the cells and interconnects to handle high current. For MJ cells, this is complicated further by having to protect individual cells from reverse bias conditions. Dense array designs, which must have a good packing factor for them to be economically feasible, cannot afford to have bypass diodes occupying areas that could otherwise generate electricity. THE 2 kW DENSE ARRAY RECEIVER

In order to address all the thermal, mechanical, and electrical issues, we considered the use of an intermediate substrate. Three solar cells and one bypass diode are soldered to a kovar strip, as show in Fiq. (1).

DENSE PV ARRAY CHALLENGES The challenges that face the design engineer in designing a dense array PV receiver encompass a variety of thermal, mechanical, and electrical issues. T h s e issues can depend on each other, and hence they cannot be addressed separately. At high levels of concentration, thermal management of the dense array is of paramount importance. Active cooling is typically required for a dense array receiver, while passive cooling may be just enough when the solar cells are spaced far apali from each other. For an efficient thermal path between the solar cells and the cooling fluid, e.g., air or water, it is required to have materials with high thermal condUCtNity that are attached to each other via a good thermal conductor, e.g., solder or epoxy. In this sense, solar cells would ideally be soldered or epoxied to a copper or aluminum heat sink or cooling plate. However, the use of solder or epoxy requires materials to have closely matched coefficient o thermal expansion (CTE); otherwise, f repeated temperature cycling would break the solder or eooxv ioint. leadina to loss of thermal oath. The MJ &ll hice a.CTE 56 ppdC. whiie Cu and Al have CTEs of 17 and 22 ppm/C, respectively. The arrangement of direct bonding of cells to Cu or AI would simply fail reliabilitytests.

Fig. (1)- A subassembly involves 3 cells in parallel and one bypass diode that protects them from reverse bias conditions. The kovar has a closely matched CTE to that of the MJ cell. The above subassembly presents the basic building block of the dense PV array. Such assemblies can be put together on a cooling plate using silicone thermal adhesive to form an array, as shown in Fia. (2).

OF-

Fig. (2)- A dense PV array using subassemblies as building blocks The use of silicone thermal adhesive ensures that it can absorb the expansion mismatch between the

0-7803-7471-1/02/%17.00 02002 IEEE

1380

koavr and the cooling plate. The presence of the bypass diodes on the sides can be accommodated without interfering with the illuminated area.

The breakdown of the temperature drop across the different layers is shown in Fig. (5) for one concentration level.

In order to make the electrical connection between the individual subassemblies. we considered wire bonding, which is typically used for microelectronics applications. In order to do so, the ohmic bars of the cells on one subassembly are connected to the kovar strip of the next subassembly, as shown in Fig. (3).

14

12
10

0 8 % 6
4

2 0

Fig. (5)- Thermal budget of the PV array at ZOO-sun concentration From this figure, it is clear that the thermal adhesive represents the major barrier to the heat conduction path from the solar cell to the cooling fluid. it is obtained for a 4-mil thick thermal adhesive that has thermal conductivity of 2 Wlm-C. The dependence of the cell temperature on the adhesive thermal conductance (measured by the thermal conductivity divided by the thickness) is shown in Fig. (E).

Fig. (3)-Interconnection between 2 subassemblies is made by wire bonding the ohmic bar of one cell to the kovar strip of the next subassmeby The above design, as expressed in Figs. (1)-(3), was validated by a combination of analyses and high concentration tests. This is summarized below.

THERMAL 8 ELECTRICAL ANALYSIS

We used finite element modeling (FEM) to validate the thermal management of the PV array. 'A 3-D FEM model was Cmstructed for one subassembly mounted on aluminum cooling piate via thermal adhesive. Worst thermal conditions happen when the PV array is not generating electricity, e.g., under V conditions. We assume the average cooling , water to be at 45 C. Figure (4) shows the projected cell temperature under different concentration ievels.

Fig. (6)- Dependence of the cell temperature on the adhesive thermal conductance It is important to keep in mind that the above thermal analysis represents the ideal situation when there are no voids in the solder. In practical situations, there will be some levels of voids in the solder. Hence it must be determined what level of voids is acceptable. Figure (7) shows a temperature projection when there is a big void that occupies about 35% of the area under 300-sun concentration. Under this condition. the maximum local cell temperature is 155 C, and the thermal gradient across the cell is close to EO C. This would clearly lead to catastrophic cell failure.

Adheshe thermal condvtklly

IWI~ZI

Fig. (4)- Projected cell temperature at different concentration levels

0-7803-7471-1/02/$17.00 02002 IEEE

1381

bonds, the current-at-failure was recorded. The test was repeated at 100 C and 150 C. This test showed that the room temperature current-at-failure, which started at 1.8 A, dropped by 0.12 A for every 50 C. We constructed a 3-D finite element model for onehalf wire bond (because of symmetry). The wire bond is attached to the solar cell or the kovar strip on one end, and the other end is assumed adiabatic because of symmetry. Heating of he wire bond is caused by a combination of the current that is flowing through it, as well as by direct solar absorption. Figure (9) shows the maximum wire bond temperature under 300-sun concentration to be only 15 C hotter than the cell itself. This result underscores the importance of heat conduction in the wire itself, for if this was to be neglected, the wire temperature will be at least one order of magnitude above that value.

rr

U_

.N. 1Y

so1e.L.

E -..

% .

U c

Fig. (7)- Cell temperature projectionunder 35% solder void condition

As for the electrical design, we must assess both the cell- and interconnects current carrying capability. Under high concentration, it is desired to have the grid lines of the cells close to each other to be able to carry the high current yet spaced far enough to minimize the obscuration losses. Hence, an optimization process is needed to identify the right grid line spacing under the required level of concentration, as shown in Fig. (8).

100
I I ~..PI.L~YI..UC.I.l~.I~.-,.~~-~

g
Y

80

BO

Fig. (9)- Finite element modeling of the wire bond temperature The maximum current that each wire bond can carry is determined by the intersection of two curves, as shown in Fig. (10). One curve is monotonically decreasing with temperature, which represents the drop in the wire bond currentcarrying capacity with temperature. The second curve represents the fact that as more current flows in the wire bond, its temperature will go up due to 12R heating effect.
18

I8

Io
20

0 0
100
Gridlho SI)aobg

200

300

bnl

Fig. (8)- Grid line spacing optimization for a concentrator cell The wire bonds current-canying capacity depends on their diameter and on their temperature. On the one hand, it is important to consider using large diameter wires to reduce the series losses as the current flows through them. Yet the amount of force that the cell is subjected to during the bonding process must also be considered. Using 1.3 mil diameter gold wires, each wire bond can carry up to 1.8 A at room temperature. As the temperature increases, the current-carrying capacity of the wire bonds drops. Some test coupons were assembled with kovar strips adhesive bonded to aluminum plate and wire bonded to each other. As electrical current flowed from one strip to the next via the wire
E 2 t
5

2 15
12

Z 06

t
E

09

? 3 i 0
0

75 1 125 150 175 2W 225 W

w e tYm

[dog. C l

Fig. (10)- The maximum currentcarrying capacity of the wire bond is determined by the intersection of two curves

0-7803-7471-1/02/$17.00 02002 IEEE

1382

From Fig. (10). we conclude that each wire bond should be able to handle up to 1.4 A at temperature. For the 3-cell in parallel configuration at 300-sun concentration, the total current is 45. Hence, if we use 60 wire bonds per cell, each wire bond will only need to carry a maximum current of 0.25 A.

From the above analysis, we conclude that the PV array design will be able to handle 300-sun concentration. The projected module output at 300sun concentration is shown in Fig. (11) for an i average day in Phoenix, A! at two different temperatures: 25 C and 65 C.

arrangement has led to the loss of one-third of the module output. This is a consequence of the fact that one bypass diode is providing protection to 3cells in parallel. If one cell is lost, the other two cells on the same subassembly continue to produce power; hence, they limit the current output of the whole array. The arrangement of 3-celis in parallel is also not desirable because it triples the current produced by the array and hence it increases the chances of one or more cells getting shunted.

410OA"

e "

Il:OOPY nm. Ihr,

6IOPY

42:POI

Fig. (13)- A partially-populated test array that was tested at Huntsville, AL under 230-sun concentration CONCLUSIONS The use of multijunction cells under high concentration has been demonstrated. Initial field testing demonstrates the design to be viable; yet some improvements are needed to increase the design robustness. ACKNOWLEDGMENT This work was funded by Spectrolab IR&D, Arizona Public Service, and the DOE Concentrating Solar Power program under NREL subcontract # RDC-O30443. REFERENCES [ l ] R. R. King, C. M. Fetzer, P. C. Colter, K. M. Edmondson, J. H. Ener, H. L. Cotal, H. Yoon. A. P. Stavrides, G. Kinsey, D. D. Krut, N. H. Karam. "High-Efficiency Space and Terrestrial Multijunction Solar Cells Through Bandgap Control in Cell Structures," to appear in the 29th /E Photovoltaic Specialists Conf., May 19-24, 2002.

Fig. (11)- Projected array output at 300-sun concentration at two different temperatures
HIGH CONCENTRATION TESTS

Several test coupons were assembled in order to validate the PV array design. Figure (12) shows one coupon that was used at Spectroiab to obtain outdoor test data at different levels of concentration.

Fig. (12)- Test coupon that was tested at Spectrolab outdoor station at different concentration levels In addition to the tests that were done at Spectrolab, a partially populated test coupon, shown in Fig. (13), was also tested at Huntsville, AL. Results of the tests confirmed that the receiver design was viable. The tests, however, showed that the arrangement of 3 cells in parallel is not particularly desirable. In the case of this partially populated module, the ioss of one cell in the 3-cell

[Z] H. L. Cotal, R. A. Sherif, G. S. Glenn, A. Paredes, T. Meza, and H. Hayden, 'High Concentration Testing and Performance of Multijunction Solar Cells." To appear in the 2$fh /E Photovoltaic Specialists Conf., May 19-24,

2002.

0-7803-7471-1102/$17.00 02002 IEEE

1383