Performance analysis of an efficient and stable perovskite solar cell and a comparative study of incorporating metal oxide transport layers

Arnob Ghosh; Arnob Ghosh; Shahriyar Safat Dipta; Shahriyar Safat Dipta; Sk Shafaat Saud Nikor; Nazmus Saqib; Arnob Saha; Arnob Saha

doi:10.1364/JOSAB.391817

Journal of the Optical Society of America B
Vol. 37,
Issue 7,
pp. 1966-1973
(2020)
•https://doi.org/10.1364/JOSAB.391817

Performance analysis of an efficient and stable perovskite solar cell and a comparative study of incorporating metal oxide transport layers

Arnob Ghosh, Shahriyar Safat Dipta, Sk Shafaat Saud Nikor, Nazmus Saqib, and Arnob Saha

Not Accessible

Your library or personal account may give you access

Get PDF
Email
Share
Get Citation
Copy Citation Text
Arnob Ghosh, Shahriyar Safat Dipta, Sk Shafaat Saud Nikor, Nazmus Saqib, and Arnob Saha, "Performance analysis of an efficient and stable perovskite solar cell and a comparative study of incorporating metal oxide transport layers," J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 37, 1966-1973 (2020)

Export Citation
- BibTex
- Endnote (RIS)
- HTML
- Plain Text
Citation alert
Save article

Check for updates

Abstract

As poor stability is the primary constraint for the commercialization of perovskite solar cells, improving stability has been the primary focus of recent research works regarding solar cells that make use of perovskite materials. Different metal oxide transport layers are being used with the aim of fabricating stable perovskite solar cells. A stable and efficient solar cell with both metal oxide transport layers (ZnO and ${{\rm NiO}_{\rm X}}$) and a perovskite (methyl ammonium lead iodide) absorber layer is simulated in this work, and a comparison of performance parameters is made with other transport layers from the literature. The issue of optimization regarding the thickness of the absorber layer and the doping concentration in the absorber and transport layers has been addressed, and the effect of defect concentration at the interface has been investigated. Optimum performance is achieved with an absorber layer of thickness 800 nm. Linear grading is also introduced in the absorber layer by varying the concentration of different halides, which increases the efficiency by approximately 8% owing to the increase in the short circuit current density.

Full Article | PDF Article

More Like This

Performance evaluation and comparative analysis of a highly efficient FAPbI₃-based perovskite solar cell

Kazi Barria Nine, Md. Nahid Haque Shazon, and Shaikh Asif Mahmood
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 37(10) 2996-3004 (2020)

Compatibility of Al-doped ZnO electron transport layer with various HTLs and absorbers in perovskite solar cells

N. S. N. M. Alias, F. Arith, A. N. M. Mustafa, M. M. Ismail, S. A. M. Chachuli, and A. S. M. Shah
Appl. Opt. 61(15) 4535-4542 (2022)

Numerical simulation design of all-inorganic hole-transport-layer-free CsSnI₃ (Sn-rich)/CsSnI₃ perovskite efficient solar cells

Mengying Jiang and Jiyu Tang
J. Opt. Soc. Am. B 38(12) 3754-3764 (2021)

Previous Article Next Article

Cited By

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Cited by links are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Figures (11)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Figure files are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Tables (2)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Article tables are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Equations (10)

You do not have subscription access to this journal. Equations are available to subscribers only. You may subscribe either as an Optica member, or as an authorized user of your institution.

Contact your librarian or system administrator
or
Login to access Optica Member Subscription

Parameter	ITO	${N i O}_{X}$	Perovskite (Absorber)	${Z n O}_{2}$	CuSCN	${C u}_{2} O$
Bandgap (eV)	3.5	3.5	1.55	3.2	3.9	2.17
Electron affinity (eV)	2.3	2.2	3.9	4.0	1.7	3.0
Dielectric permittivity	9.0	9.0	6.5	8.5	10	7.11
Density of states $N_{c}$ ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 19$	$2.0 E + 17$
Density of states $N_{v}$ ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 18$	$1.1 E + 19$
Electron thermal velocity (cm/sec)	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$
Hole thermal velocity (cm/sec)	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$
Electron mobility ( ${c m}^{2} / V$ -sec)	$3 E + 1$	$4.7 E + 0$	$2 E + 0$	$1 E + 2$	$1.0 E + 2$	$2.0 E + 2$
Hole mobility ( ${c m}^{2} / V$ -sec)	$5 E + 0$	$4.7 E + 0$	$2 E + 0$	$3 E + 1$	$2.5 E + 1$	$8.0 E + 1$
Donor doping density ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	0	0	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 16$	0	0
Acceptor doping density ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$2.0 E + 16$	$5.6 E + 16$	0	0	$5.6 E + 16$	$5.6 E + 16$
Thickness (nm)	55	80	320	70	80	80
Defect density $N_{t}$ ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$	$2.15 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$

HTL of PSC	Grading	$V_{O C}$ (V)	$J_{S C}$ ( $m A / {c m}^{2}$ )	FF (%)	PCE (%)
${N i O}_{2}$	Non-graded	1.01	20.96	75.95	16.12
${N i O}_{2}$	Graded	1.06	21.57	76.61	17.57
${C u}_{2} O$	Non-graded	1.02	27.02	75.36	20.86
${C u}_{2} O$	Graded	1.07	27.59	75.94	22.53
CuSCN	Non-graded	1.01	22.82	75.85	17.59
CuSCN	Graded	1.06	23.22	76.41	18.92

Parameter	ITO	${N i O}_{X}$	Perovskite (Absorber)	${Z n O}_{2}$	CuSCN	${C u}_{2} O$
Bandgap (eV)	3.5	3.5	1.55	3.2	3.9	2.17
Electron affinity (eV)	2.3	2.2	3.9	4.0	1.7	3.0
Dielectric permittivity	9.0	9.0	6.5	8.5	10	7.11
Density of states $N_{c}$ ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 18$	$2.2 E + 19$	$2.0 E + 17$
Density of states $N_{v}$ ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 19$	$1.8 E + 18$	$1.1 E + 19$
Electron thermal velocity (cm/sec)	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$
Hole thermal velocity (cm/sec)	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$	$1 E + 7$
Electron mobility ( ${c m}^{2} / V$ -sec)	$3 E + 1$	$4.7 E + 0$	$2 E + 0$	$1 E + 2$	$1.0 E + 2$	$2.0 E + 2$
Hole mobility ( ${c m}^{2} / V$ -sec)	$5 E + 0$	$4.7 E + 0$	$2 E + 0$	$3 E + 1$	$2.5 E + 1$	$8.0 E + 1$
Donor doping density ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	0	0	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 16$	0	0
Acceptor doping density ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$2.0 E + 16$	$5.6 E + 16$	0	0	$5.6 E + 16$	$5.6 E + 16$
Thickness (nm)	55	80	320	70	80	80
Defect density $N_{t}$ ( ${c m}^{- 3}$ )	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$	$2.15 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$	$1 E + 15$

HTL of PSC	Grading	$V_{O C}$ (V)	$J_{S C}$ ( $m A / {c m}^{2}$ )	FF (%)	PCE (%)
${N i O}_{2}$	Non-graded	1.01	20.96	75.95	16.12
${N i O}_{2}$	Graded	1.06	21.57	76.61	17.57
${C u}_{2} O$	Non-graded	1.02	27.02	75.36	20.86
${C u}_{2} O$	Graded	1.07	27.59	75.94	22.53
CuSCN	Non-graded	1.01	22.82	75.85	17.59
CuSCN	Graded	1.06	23.22	76.41	18.92

Abstract

Cited By

Figures (11)

Tables (2)

Equations (10)

Journal of the Optical Society of America B