| Literature DB >> 36134254 |
Chandra Kamal Borah1, Pawan K Tyagi2,3, Sanjeev Kumar1.
Abstract
The efficiency of a Si-HIT (heterojunction with intrinsic thin layer) solar cell based on a graphene/MoS2 heterostructure has been optimized by varying the various parameters of graphene (Gr) as a transparent conducting electrode (TCE) and n-type molybdenum disulfide (n-MoS2) as an emitter layer. The photovoltaic performance of a graphene/n-MoS2/a-Si:H/p-cSi/Au single facial HIT solar cell has been studied using AFORS-HET v2.5 simulation software. A maximum output efficiency of 25.61% has been achieved. The obtained results were compared with the results from a commercially available a-Si:H layer and p-cSi wafer after simulation. Moreover, the dependence of the cell performance on changes in the TCE and the back contact materials has also been studied. Finally, it has been demonstrated that the graphene layer and n-MoS2 layer could act as a TCE and an efficient emitter layer, respectively, in a n-MoS2/p-cSi based HIT solar cell. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 36134254 PMCID: PMC9418949 DOI: 10.1039/d0na00309c
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Adv ISSN: 2516-0230
Fig. 1(a) The proposed HIT solar cell structure, and (b) band diagram as generated using AFORS-HET software for the proposed structure.
Front and back contact parameters
| Parameter | Front contact | Back contact | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Initially | After optimization | Initially | After optimization | ||
| Material | Graphene | ITO | Al | Au | Ag |
| Thickness | 1L–5L (1L = 0.334 nm) | 80 nm | 80 nm | 10 μm | 10 μm |
| Optical properties |
| ITO |
| Au | Ag |
|
|
| ||||
| Work function (eV) | 4.31 | 4.4 | 4.06 | 5.4 | 4.64 |
| 4.50 | 4.45 | 4.20 | 4.74 | ||
| 4.54 | 4.5 | 4.26 | |||
| 4.77 | |||||
| 4.90 | |||||
| Absorption loss | 0.023 (constant) | ITO abs (default) | 0.056 | 0 | 0 |
| External reflection | 1L = 0 | ITO Ref (default) | 0.868 | 0 | 0 |
| 2L = 0.023 | |||||
| 3L = 0.046 | |||||
| 4L = 0.070 | |||||
| 5L = 0.092 | |||||
| Surface condition | Plane | Plane | Plane | Plane | Plane |
| Internal reflection | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Parameters of the layers
| Parameter | n-MoS2 | a-Si:H(i) | p-cSi |
|---|---|---|---|
| Thickness | 3L–6L (1L = 0.65 nm) | 3–10 nm | 50–500 μm |
| Dielectric constant ( | 4–14 | 11.9 | 11.9 |
| Electron affinity | 3.74–4.45 | 3.9 | 4.05 |
| Band gap, | 1.41–1.48 | 1.6–2.0 | 1.12 |
| Effective conduction band density, | 3 × 1018 to 9 × 1020 | 2.5 × 1020 | 3 × 1019 to 1 × 1021 |
| Effective valence band density, | 3 × 1018 to 9 × 1020 | 2.5 × 1020 | 3 × 1019 to 1 × 1021 |
| Effective electron mobility, | 517 | 20 | 1104 |
| Effective hole mobility, | 8.5 | 5 | 420 |
| Acceptor concentration | 0 | 0 | 1015 to 1017 |
| Donor concentration | 1012 to 1018 | 0 | 0 |
| Electron thermal velocity, | 107 | 107 | 107 |
| Hole thermal velocity, | 107 | 107 | 107 |
| Layer density, (g cm−1) | 5.06 | 2.328 | 2.328 |
| Auger electron recombination coefficient, (cm6 s−1) | ∼10−24 | 0 | 2.2 × 10−31 |
| Auger hole recombination coefficient, (cm6 s−1) | ∼10−24 | 0 | 9.9 × 10−32 |
| Band-to-band recombination coefficient, (cm3 s−1) | ∼10−7 | 0 | 9.5 × 10−15 |
| Defect type | Single | Conduction tail | Single |
| Defect charge | Acceptor | Acceptor | Acceptor |
| Total defect density (cm−3) | 1018 | 6.4 × 1019 | 1010 |
| Specific defect density (cm−3 eV−1) | 1018 | 1.83 × 1021 | 1010 |
| Defect level energy (eV) | 0.6 | 0.035 (Urbach) | 0.56 |
| Electron and hole capture cross section (cm−2) | 10−14 (default) | 7 × 10−16 | 10−14 |
| Optical properties |
| a-Si | c-Si |
Interfacial Parameters
| Interface | Numerical model | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Graphene/n-MoS2 | MS-Schottky contact | Surface recombination velocity for electrons and holes = 107 cm s−1 (default) |
| p-cSi/Au | ||
| n-MoS2/a-Si:H | Drift diffusion model | Interface charge = 1011 cm−2 |
| a-Si:H/p-cSi |
Fig. 2Optimization of the n-MoS2 layer: (a) and (b) donor concentration ND (cm−3), (c) and (d) effective conduction band and valance band density NC/NV (cm−3), (e) and (f) the bandgap energy Eg (eV), (g) and (h) the number of layers of MoS2, (i) and (j) the electron affinity χ (eV), and (k) and (l) the dielectric constant εr. The p-cSi parameters were maintained as: thickness = 100 μm, NA = 1 × 1016 cm−3, NC/NV = 3 × 1019 cm−3 and χ = 4.05 eV, and the graphene parameters were maintained as: number of layers = 5, reflectance = 0.092 and work function = 4.31 eV. The other parameters are given in Tables 1 and 2.
Fig. 3Optimization of the a-Si:H(i) layer: (a) and (b) thickness (nm) in which Eg was maintained at 1.6 eV.
Fig. 4Optimization of the p-cSi layer: (a) and (b) acceptor concentration NA (cm−3), (c) and (d) effective conduction band and valance band density NC/NV (cm−3), (e) and (f) thickness (μm), (g) and (h) number of layers of MoS2 and (i) and (j) layer thickness of a-Si:H(i). The optimized parameters of a-Si:H(i) were maintained as: thickness = 3 nm, Eg = 1.6 eV, and the parameters for n-MoS2 were maintained as: ND = 1018 cm−3, NC/NV = 3 × 1020 cm−3, number of layers = 3, Eg = 1.47 eV, χ = 4.1 eV and εr = 6.
Fig. 5Optimization of the graphene (front contact) layer: (a) and (b) optimization of the graphene layer number, (c) and (d) optimization of the Φ (eV) of the graphene layer in which the parameters of n-MoS2 and p-cSi are maintained at their best-optimized values, (e) and (f) optimization of the Φ (eV) of the graphene layer and (g) and (h) optimization of the thickness of a commercially available silicon wafer with practically available p-cSi parameters.
Summary of the most optimized cell
| Cell parameter | Most optimized cell (before optimization of the parameters of the graphene layers) | Graphene layer number optimized cell (after optimization of n-MoS2 and p-cSi) | n-cSi wafer optimized cell for practically available silicon parameters |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| 696.1 | 697.7 | 697.7 |
|
| 40.09 | 44.25 | 43.27 |
| FF (%) | 82.96 | 82.95 | 82.82 |
|
| 23.15 [@ 3L n-MoS2 at | 25.16 [@ 3L n-MoS2 at | 25 [@ 3L n-MoS2 at |
Fig. 6Changing the front and back contact: (a) and (b) variation in the Φ (eV) of ITO, (c) and (d) variation in the Φ (eV) of Al, and (e) and (f) variation in the Φ (eV) of Ag.
Fig. 7IV characteristics of the most optimized cell.
Graphene and MoS2 silicon-based solar cells
| Type of study | Solar cell structure |
|
| FF (%) |
| Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Experimental | ITO/graphene/MoS2/n-cSi/(Ti/Ag) | 0.59 | 36.8 | 73 | 15.8 | 66 |
| Experimental | Au/graphene/MoS2/n-Si/In | 0.56 | 33.4 | 60 | 11.1 | 67 |
| Experimental | Au/graphene/MoS2/n-Si/Au | 0.50 | 28.1 | 47 | 6.56 | 68 |
| Experimental | Pd/n-MoS2/i-SiO2/p-Si/In | 0.30 | 5.5 | 42 | 4.5 | 69 |
| Experimental | Ni/graphene/MoS2/p-csi/Al | 0.51 | — | — | 2.58 | 70 |
| Theoretical | TCO/MoS2/SiGe:H/p-Si/Al | 0.652 | 40.01 | 83.7 | 21.85 |
|
| Theoretical | Graphene/n-MoS2/a-Si:H/p-cSi/Au | 0.697 | 44.25 | 82.95 | 25.61 | This work |