4.7 Article

The structural and material properties of CuInSe2 and Cu(In,Ga)Se-2 prepared by selenization of stacks of metal and compound precursors by Se vapor for solar cell applications

期刊

SOLAR ENERGY MATERIALS AND SOLAR CELLS
卷 93, 期 5, 页码 577-582

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.solmat.2008.12.002

关键词

Two stage; Phases; Band gap; Selenization; Single phase; Efficiency

资金

  1. National Research Foundation of South Africa

向作者/读者索取更多资源

CuInSe2 films and related alloys were prepared by thermal evaporation Of Cu, InSe and GaSe compounds instead of elemental sources. Band-gap tailoring in Cu(In,Ga)Se-2-based solar cells is an interesting path to improve their performance. In order to get comparable results, solar cells with Gal(In+Ga) ratios x = 0 and 0.3 were prepared, all with a simple two-step sequential evaporation process. The morphology of the. resulting films grown at 550 degrees C was characterized by the presence of large facetted chalcopyrite grains, which are typical for device quality material. It is important to note that absorber films with elemental gallium resulted in a significant decrease in the average grain size of the film. The X-ray diffraction (XRD) diffraction pattern of single-phase Cu(In,Ga)Se-2 films depicts diffraction peaks shifting to higher 2 theta values compared to that of pure CuInSe2. The photoluminiscence (PL) spectrum of Cu(In,Ga)Se-2 thin films also depicts the presence of the peak at higher energy that is attributed to the incorporation of gallium into the chalcopyrite lattice. As the band gap of CIGS increases with gallium content, desirable effects of producing higher open-circuit voltage and low current density devices were achieved. A corresponding increase in device efficiency with gallium content caused by a higher fill factor was observed. The best results show passive area efficiencies of up to 10.2% and open-circuit voltage (V-oc) up to 519 mV at a minimum band gap of 1.18 eV. (C) 2008 Published by Elsevier B.V.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据