Their entire value proposition stands on this radical idea of "dynamic spin". Apparently, these two words must always be together, lest someone confuse their technology with "static spin" or "dynamic stillness". Also, they can always admonish detractors to "discard static thinking and embrace dynamic thinking" to make them seem like curmudgeons. They have this idea that you can spin the cell in and out of light and pay no penalty ("This happens because the excitation rate of PV is the speed of light, and the decay rate is slower. The PV flashes out of the light so quickly that it never has time to decay."[1]). Or 35% penalty ("The key to our increased production is that even though half of the facets are "out of the light' at any time, they remain at a minimum of 65% excitation."[1]). It all depends on the latest press release strategy (though curiously those two quotes are in the same one).
Of course, you can't expect Robert Skyler to get the technical details just right, no matter how much technicalese he throws around, because he's not the engineer. That's what he invariably falls back on when someone points out the deficiencies in their science ... after about 5 rounds of sparring.[2] So just as with the spinning dome thing where they couldn't decide if they meant "power" or "efficiency" or "energy"[3] -- hey, what's the difference, really? they're all just different terms for electricity, right? -- now they seem to be throwing around "excitation" when they apparently mean "voltage" and are trying to imply "power". Because all they're really doing is turning parasitic capacitance from a bug into a feature.
When you light up the cell, you get a voltage and some current. It takes a finite amount of time ("speed of light'? yes, but in a much slower medium than vacuum) to charge the capacitor. When you abruptly take the light away, the voltage collapses somewhat slower because of the series resistance between the capacitor and the load (also at the speed of light, by the way). But the capacitor is small and the power delivered during this period is correspondingly small. So these guys are showing an idealized form of the voltage, calling it "excitation", and implying that this is "output power". Truthy enough for a press release, I guess.
There's another problem with their modeling demo: they are showing the vol, er, I mean "pow", um, "excitation" as if it was maximum and flat while the facet was in the light, and then it decays while out of the light, and then goes back up to maximum in the light.[2] Well, only if they were constantly illuminating it and chopping the light. In reality, the facet gradually enters the light and then gradually leaves it. During that time, the projected area of the facet is reduced, so you're really only getting cos(60/2) or about 86% of the incoming light hitting the cell. Plus, assuming their concentrator is any good and is focusing on the full area of the facet when it is normal (i.e. the Strehl ratio is high), the fall-off around the edges will be severe, so only a small portion of the cell will be receiving that 86%. Therefore, it will be receiving much less than 86% of full sunlight as it starts to rotate into the illuminated zone, increase up to 100%, and then fall off again. A more realistic model then would show a sinusoidal output that fell off a heck of a lot more than 35%. I will gladly concede that the concentrator design is not very good and that much of the light is spilling over onto the adjacent facet, but that's not going to help much.
So, no, I don't believe that they are getting 100% out of the cells in the light and 65% out of the other cells. At best, they get 100% from the illuminated cell at the one instant in time when it is normal to the light, and the rest of the time they get less than that - perhaps much less. And therefore, no, I don't believe their cost/benefit calculations. And they have not once responded to my observation that they will need specialized power management systems to interface to the load or grid and cannot take advantage of returns to scale there, since every other solar system is delivering a dc output while this will be delivering a very unique 2-phase, 15 Hz power scheme.
[1]
http://us6.campaign-archive1.com/?u=80fb864fefa4b4efe048fbd7f&id=65fa0feeca&e
[2]
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/07/07/v3solar-video-dynamic-spin-technology/
[3]
http://cleantechnica.com/2013/01/24/v3solar-spin-cell-cones-cheap-solar/