| Literature DB >> 35515766 |
Fazal E Subhan1,2, Aimal Daud Khan3,4, Adnan Daud Khan1, Najeeb Ullah1, Muhammad Imran5, Muhammad Noman1.
Abstract
Tandem configuration-containing perovskite and silicon solar cells are promising candidates for realizing a high power conversion efficiency of 30% at reasonable costs. Silicon solar cells with planar front surfaces used in tandem devices cause high optical losses, which significantly affects their efficiency. Moreover, some studies have explored the fabrication of perovskites on textured silicon cells. However, due to improper texturing, light trapping is not ideal in these devices, which reduces the efficiency. In this work, we optimized the pyramid height of textured silicon cells and efficiently characterized them to achieve enhanced light trapping. Two different kinds of perovskites, namely, Cs0.17FA0.6Pb(Br0.17I0.7)3 and Cs0.25FA0.6Pb(Br0.20I0.7)3 with wide bandgaps were conformally deposited on textured silicon cells, and the performance of these flat and fully textured tandem devices was numerically analyzed. The thickness of each layer in the tandem cell was optimized in a way to ensure a perfect current match between the top perovskite and bottom silicon subcells. The results indicated that the textured tandem configuration enhances light absorption over a broad spectral range due to the optimized pyramid height compared to flat surfaces. Eventually, the photovoltaic parameters of the proposed tandem cell were compared with the already existing structures, and our design supports large values of open circuit voltage (V oc) = 1.78 V, short circuit current density (J sc) = 20.09 mA cm-2, fill factor (FF) = 79.01%, and efficiency (η) = 28.20% compared to other kinds of tandem solar cells. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35515766 PMCID: PMC9055390 DOI: 10.1039/d0ra04634e
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 3.361
Fig. 1(a–f) SEM images of the textured silicon sample to analyze the surface topography of different pyramid heights under 5000 resolution, and (g) AFM image of textured silicon.
Fig. 2(a) Angular resolved reflectance of textured c-Si with different pyramid heights, and (b) reflectance of textured c-Si with different pyramid heights (extracted from AFM).
Fig. 3Perovskite/silicon tandem solar cells with (a) front side polished and (b) double sides textured.
Thicknesses of the functional layers of perovskite solar cells
| Layer | Perovskite Cs17/Br17 thickness (nm) | Perovskite Cs25/Br20 thickness (nm) |
|---|---|---|
| Front ITO | 120 | 120 |
| SnO2 | 15 | 15 |
| C60 | 15 | 15 |
| Perovskite | 500 | 650 |
| NiO | 20 | 20 |
| Rear ITO | 20 | 20 |
| Glass | 1000 | 1000 |
| Ag | 300 | 300 |
Thicknesses and current density values for the perovskite/silicon tandem solar cell
| Layer | Perovskite/silicon tandem layer thickness (nm) |
|
|---|---|---|
| MgF2 | 100 | 0.065 |
| ITO front | 120 | 1.653 |
| SnO2 | 15 | 0.256 |
| C60 | 15 | 1.214 |
| Perovskite (Cs17/Br17/Cs25/Br20) | 500/650 | 20.34 |
| NiO | 20 | 0.325 |
| Intermediate ITO | 20 | 0.418 |
| a-Si:H(n) | 8 | 0.005 |
| a-Si:H(i) | 8 | 0.002 |
| c-Si | 250 000 | 20.09 |
| a-Si:H(i) | 8 | 0.000 |
| a-Si:H(p) | 11 | 0.000 |
| Rear ITO | 180 | 0.431 |
| Ag | 300 | 0.225 |
Fig. 4Absorption and reflectance spectra of perovskite/Si tandem solar cells with (a) front-side-polished Cs17/Br17–Si, (b) double-side-textured Cs17/Br17–Si, (c) front-side-polished Cs25/Br20–Si, and (d) double-side-textured Cs25/Br20–Si, respectively.
Photovoltaic parameters of Cs17/Br17–Si and Cs25/Br20–Si tandem solar cells
| Perovskite–silicon tandem cell |
|
| FF (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cs17/Br17–Si | 1.72 | 20.09 | 77.43 | 26.75 |
| Cs25/Br20–Si | 1.78 | 20.09 | 79.01 | 28.20 |
Comparison with various types of tandem solar cell structures
| Reference | Structure |
|
| FF (%) |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Monolithic single side textured perovskite–c-Si HJ | 1.75 | 16.89 | 74.30 | 21.93 |
|
| Monolithic planar perovskite–c-Si HJ | 1.69 | 18.04 | 75.43 | 23.08 |
|
| Monolithic fully textured perovskite–c-Si HJ | 1.78 | 19.5 | 73.10 | 25.20 |
|
| Monolithic planar perovskite–c-Si HJ | 1.76 | 19.2 | 76.50 | 26.00 |
|
| 4-Terminal planar perovskite–c-Si HJ | — | — | — | 27.0 |
|
| Monolithic fully textured perovskite–c-Si HJ | 1.82 | 19.3 | 74.4 | 26.0 |
| Current study | Proposed monolithic perovskite–c-Si HJ | 1.78 | 20.09 | 79.01 | 28.20 |