[go: up one dir, main page]
More Web Proxy on the site http://driver.im/
Next Article in Journal
Biomechanics of Osseointegration of a Dental Implant in the Mandible Under Shock Wave Therapy: In Silico Study
Previous Article in Journal
High-Volume Phosphogypsum Cement Stabilized Road Base: Preparation Methods and Strength Formation Mechanism
Previous Article in Special Issue
High Spin Magnetic Moments in All-3d-Metallic Co-Based Full Heusler Compounds
You seem to have javascript disabled. Please note that many of the page functionalities won't work as expected without javascript enabled.
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Materials
Volume 17
Issue 24
10.3390/ma17246203
materials-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Numerical Investigation and Device Architecture Optimization of Sb2Se3 Thin-Film Solar Cells Using SCAPS-1D

by
Chung-Kuan Lai
and
Yi-Cheng Lin
*
Department of Mechatronics Engineering, National Changhua University of Education, Changhua 50007, Taiwan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Materials 2024, 17(24), 6203; https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17246203
Submission received: 26 November 2024 / Revised: 8 December 2024 / Accepted: 15 December 2024 / Published: 19 December 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Modeling and Characterization of Materials with Unique Magnetic, Electric and Mechanical Properties (Second Volume))
Browse Figures
Figure 1
<p>Schematic diagram of the proposed solar-cell structure: (<b>a</b>) p-n substrate configuration, (<b>b</b>) p-n superstrate configuration, (<b>c</b>) n-p-p<sup>+</sup> substrate configuration.</p> "> Figure 2
<p>Energy band diagrams of different device configurations: (<b>a</b>) substrate and (<b>b</b>) superstrate structures.</p> "> Figure 3
<p>Performance characteristics of different device configurations: (<b>a</b>) current–voltage curves and (<b>b</b>) external quantum efficiency spectra.</p> "> Figure 4
<p>Energy band diagrams of various HTL materials in the device structure.</p> "> Figure 5
<p>PCE comparison of different HTL materials.</p> "> Figure 6
<p>Relationship between Cu<sub>2</sub>O HTL thickness and device performance.</p> "> Figure 7
<p>Relationship between Cu<sub>2</sub>O HTL shallow acceptor density and device performance.</p> "> Figure 8
<p>Effect of shallow acceptor density on Sb<sub>2</sub>Se<sub>3</sub> solar-cell efficiency at different Cu<sub>2</sub>O HTL thicknesses.</p> "> Figure 9
<p>Numerical analysis of series and parallel resistance on device performance. (<b>a</b>) Open-circuit voltage (Voc) variation, (<b>b</b>) Short-circuit current density (Jsc) response, (<b>c</b>) Fill Factor (FF) dependence, and (<b>d</b>) Device efficiency changes with respect to series and parallel resistance.</p> ">
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Antimony selenide (Sb2Se3) shows promise for photovoltaics due to its favorable properties and low toxicity. However, current Sb2Se3 solar cells exhibit efficiencies significantly below their theoretical limits, primarily due to interface recombination and non-optimal device architectures. This study presents a comprehensive numerical investigation of Sb2Se3 thin-film solar cells using SCAPS-1D simulation software, focusing on device architecture optimization and interface engineering. We systematically analyzed device configurations (substrate and superstrate), hole-transport layer (HTL) materials (including NiOx, CZTS, Cu2O, CuO, CuI, CuSCN, CZ-TA, and Spiro-OMeTAD), layer thicknesses, carrier densities, and resistance effects. The substrate configuration with molybdenum back contact demonstrated superior performance compared with the superstrate design, primarily due to favorable energy band alignment at the Mo/Sb2Se3 interface. Among the investigated HTL materials, Cu2O exhibited optimal performance with minimal valence-band offset, achieving maximum efficiency at 0.06 μm thickness. Device optimization revealed critical parameters: series resistance should be minimized to 0–5 Ω-cm2 while maintaining shunt resistance above 2000 Ω-cm2. The optimized Mo/Cu2O(0.06 μm)/Sb2Se3/CdS/i-ZnO/ITO/Al structure achieved a remarkable power conversion efficiency (PCE) of 21.68%, representing a significant improvement from 14.23% in conventional cells without HTL. This study provides crucial insights for the practical development of high-efficiency Sb2Se3 solar cells, demonstrating the significant impact of device architecture optimization and interface engineering on overall performance.

1. Introduction

Antimony selenide (Sb2Se3) represents a promising advancement in photovoltaic technology, characterized by its unique one-dimensional crystal structure and tunable direct bandgap (1.2–1.9 eV) [1]. This material system offers multiple advantages for solar-cell applications, including exceptional photoelectric properties, high absorption coefficient, minimal environmental impact, and cost-effectiveness due to earth-abundant constituents [2]. However, Sb2Se3 solar cells face significant performance limitations, primarily due to reduced open-circuit voltage resulting from carrier recombination at metal back contact interfaces and performance degradation caused by surface oxidation [3]. Various strategies have been implemented to enhance Sb2Se3 solar-cell performance, including doping mechanisms, defect engineering, and interface optimization [4,5]. Notable advances include tellurium doping for defect passivation and transition metal oxide implementation (NiOx, MoOx) for band alignment optimization. Recent developments, such as the solvent-assisted hydrothermal deposition (SHD) technique, have achieved efficiency improvements of up to 10.75% [6]. Nevertheless, these efficiencies remain significantly below the theoretical Shockley–Queisser (S-Q) limit and the performance of conventional thin-film photovoltaics.
The HTL plays a crucial role in thin-film solar cells by facilitating efficient hole transport while blocking electrons, thereby preventing charge recombination. Additionally, it optimizes energy-level alignment between the active layer and electrode while enhancing interface quality, ultimately improving PCE [7]. Contemporary research encompasses various HTL materials, including NiOx [8,9], CZTS [10,11], CuI [12], CuxO [13,14], CuSCN [15,16], CZ-TA [17,18], AgInTe2 [19], MoSe2 [20,21], and Spiro-OMeTAD [22,23,24]. While experimental studies dominate the field, comprehensive numerical investigations incorporating device structure optimization with HTL material selection remain limited. Among available solar-cell simulation tools, including AMPS1D and wxAMPS-1D [25,26,27], SCAPS-1D [12,17,19,28,29,30] has emerged as the preferred platform for Sb2Se3 solar-cell research. This study employed SCAPS-1D software (version 3.3.11) to conduct comprehensive numerical simulation and performance optimization of Sb2Se3 thin-film solar cells. The investigation encompassed device structures (substrate and superstrate configurations), HTL material optimization, thickness effects, shallow acceptor densities, and the impact of series and shunt resistance parameters. The aim of these simulations was to accelerate theoretical understanding and facilitate performance breakthroughs in Sb2Se3 solar-cell technology.

2. Device Structure and Simulation Parameters

2.1. Device Structure

Solar-cell device structures can be classified into two main categories: substrate and superstrate configurations. Figure 1a, with CdS positioned below the absorber layer, represents the substrate configuration [31], while Figure 1b, with CdS located above the absorber layer, illustrates the superstrate configuration. This investigation systematically examines three distinct device architectures: substrate and superstrate configurations without HTLs (Figure 1a and Figure 1b, respectively), followed by an advanced architecture incorporating an HTL (Figure 1c). In these solar-cell structures, molybdenum (Mo), fluorine-doped tin oxide (FTO), and aluminum (Al) serve as electron-collecting front contacts and hole-collecting back contacts. Antimony selenide (Sb2Se3) functions as the primary absorber layer, while cadmium sulfide (CdS) serves as the wide-bandgap window layer. Adjacent to the buffer layer, a highly resistive intrinsic zinc oxide (i-ZnO) layer is implemented, overlaid with tin-doped indium oxide (ITO) functioning as a transparent conductive oxide (TCO) to facilitate efficient charge collection and transport through the device. Additionally, i-ZnO acts as a buffer layer between CdS and ITO layers, while its undoped nature reduces interface recombination. It aids in band alignment for efficient charge transport and protects underlying layers during ITO deposition.

2.2. Numerical Method

The analysis of SCAPS-1D (version 3.3.11) is based upon Poisson’s equation, hole continuity, and electron continuity, as given below [29]:
∂ 2 φ ∂ x 2 + q ε p x − n x + N D − N A + ρ p − ρ n = 0
1 q d J p d x = G o p x − R ( x )
1 q d J n d x = − G o p x − R x
where ε is the dielectric constant; q is the electron charge; NA and ND are acceptor and donor type density, respectively; φ is the electrostatic potential; and p, n, ρp, ρn, Jp, and Jn are hole concentration, electron concentration, hole distribution, electron distribution, current densities of holes, and current densities of electrons, respectively. Gop is the optical generation rate, and R is the net recombination from direct and indirect recombination. All of these parameters are the function of the position coordinate x.
The numerical simulation implemented in SCAPS-1D software requires comprehensive material parameters for each layer of the device structure. All material properties and parameters utilized in this study are derived from established literature [8,10,32,33,34,35,36,37,38,39]. The simulation parameters are systematically organized in Table 1, Table 2, Table 3 and Table 4, encompassing fundamental material properties of the Sb2Se3 device, interface defect characteristics, HTL material specifications, and electrode parameters. Key simulation parameters include electron and hole capture cross-sections for both bulk and interface defects (10−15 cm2), radiative recombination coefficient (10−8 cm/s), and carrier thermal velocities (107 cm/s for both electrons and holes, as detailed in Table 3). All simulations were performed under standardized conditions of 300 K and AM 1.5 G illumination (100 mW/cm2), with initial analyses conducted without considering series and shunt resistance effects.

3. Results and Discussion

3.1. Comparison of Substrate and Superstrate Configurations

This investigation presents a systematic comparison of substrate and superstrate architectures in Sb2Se3 solar cells. The substrate configuration implements a Mo/Sb2Se3/CdS/i-ZnO/ITO/Al structure (Figure 1a), whereas the superstrate variant employs a FTO/CdS/Sb2Se3/Al architecture (Figure 1b). Energy band alignments for both configurations are depicted in Figure 2. To ensure comparative validity, material layers and metal electrodes remained consistent, with contact parameters specified in Table 4. Utilizing parameters detailed in Table 1 and Table 2, we obtained current–voltage characteristics and external quantum efficiency (EQE) curves through numerical simulation (Figure 3), with performance metrics compiled in Table 5.
Energy band structure analysis (Figure 2) reveals that the primary differentiation between configurations manifests in the electrode/absorber interface characteristics. The substrate configuration exhibits favorable energetics, with minimal energy-level difference between the Mo electrode (work function 4.9 eV) and Sb2Se3 valence band (5.5 eV), enabling formation of a quasi-ohmic contact. This advantageous band alignment substantially reduces interfacial charge transfer resistance and minimizes non-radiative recombination at interface states. Conversely, the superstrate configuration’s Al electrode, characterized by a lower work function (4.28 eV), generates a significant Schottky barrier (approximately 1.22 eV), hindering efficient photogenerated hole collection. Substitution of Al with Au (work function 5.1 eV) as the back contact reduces barrier height to approximately 0.4 eV, substantially improving interfacial characteristics. This enhancement manifests in device parameters (Table 5), elevating both the fill factor (FF) and open-circuit voltage (Voc) through reduced interface recombination.
Current–voltage analysis (Figure 3a) demonstrates the substrate configuration’s superior performance, achieving higher open-circuit voltage (0.52 V) and short-circuit current density (38.42 mA/cm2) compared with the superstrate design (Voc = 0.38 V, Jsc = 35.34 mA/cm2). This performance enhancement primarily originates from the quasi-ohmic contact at the Mo/Sb2Se3 interface, where optimal band alignment minimizes carrier injection/extraction barriers and voltage losses. EQE measurements (Figure 3b) further validate this advantage, with the substrate configuration exhibiting enhanced photoresponse across 400–1000 nm, particularly maintaining high quantum efficiency in the long-wavelength region (>800 nm). These characteristics indicate superior minority carrier collection efficiency and reduced bulk recombination. Despite a slightly lower fill factor in the substrate configuration (71.88% vs. 74.62%), potential exists for enhancement through interface engineering.
Significantly, implementation of Au electrodes in the superstrate configuration elevates performance (PCE = 13.83%) near that of the substrate configuration (PCE = 14.23%), confirming the critical role of electrode/absorber interface band alignment. Based on comprehensive evaluation of performance metrics, process compatibility, and interface stability, we selected the substrate configuration for subsequent optimization studies. This architecture demonstrates both superior photovoltaic conversion efficiency potential and clear pathways for further performance enhancement in Sb2Se3 solar cells.

3.2. Comparison of Different HTL Materials

This investigation examines the performance characteristics of various HTL materials, with simulation parameters documented in Table 3. Figure 4 illustrates the energy band diagrams of different HTL materials within the complete device structure. Two critical band alignment requirements govern HTL material selection: First, the valence-band maximum (VBM) of the HTL must be positioned appropriately relative to both the back contact work function and the Sb2Se3 VBM to facilitate efficient hole transfer. As is evident from the band diagrams, the VBMs of NiOx, CuO, and CZTS lie slightly below that of the Sb2Se3 absorber layer, creating potential barriers that impede effective hole transport. Second, the conduction band minimum (CBM) of the HTL must exceed that of Sb2Se3 to prevent electron backflow. Although CuO and CZTS exhibit CBM levels marginally higher than the Sb2Se3 absorber layer, their relatively small energy offsets with the buffer layer results in inadequate electron blocking, failing to effectively prevent electron drift towards the back contact and increasing carrier recombination probability.
Table 6 presents the valence-band offset (VBO) values between each HTL and the Sb2Se3 absorber layer, calculated using the modified Equation (2). These VBO values significantly impact device performance: positive VBO values (such as Cu2O at 0.1 eV, CZ-TA at 0.17 eV, and Spiro at 0.36 eV) create appropriate energy barriers at the absorber/HTL interface, contributing to electron blocking functionality. Conversely, negative VBO values (such as NiOx at −0.13 eV and CuO at −0.11 eV) form energy wells at the interface, increasing carrier recombination probability. Simulation results, as shown in Figure 5, demonstrate that Cu2O achieves the highest PCE (21.1%) as an HTL material due to its moderate positive VBO (0.1 eV), which provides electron blocking capabilities without excessively hindering hole transport. This optimal performance is further enhanced by Cu2O’s superior carrier mobility characteristics.
Analysis reveals several key structure−property relationships. Materials with moderate positive VBO values (0.1–0.2 eV) exhibit superior performance by achieving an optimal balance between electron blocking and hole transport. Cu2O’s exceptional performance stems from its optimal band alignment and high carrier mobility (approximately 10−2 cm2/V·s), facilitating efficient hole extraction. In contrast, materials with larger positive VBO values, such as Spiro (0.36 eV), generate excessive barriers for hole transport despite effective electron blocking. The negative VBO values observed in NiOx and CuO not only fail to block electrons effectively but also create potential wells that trap holes, leading to increased interface recombination and reduced device efficiency.

3.3. Effects of Cu2O Thickness and Shallow Acceptor Density on Device Performance

The influence of Cu2O thickness on device performance is characterized in Figure 6, with thickness variations examined from 0.01 μm to 0.1 μm. Throughout this range, the open-circuit voltage (Voc) maintains relative stability at approximately 0.68 V, attributable to ideal solar cell behavior where light penetration and minority carrier collection remain optimal. Increasing Cu2O thickness extends the optical path length through the HTL, enhancing photon absorption and carrier generation, consequently improving short-circuit current density (Jsc). An optimized HTL thickness facilitates balanced electron and hole transport rates, minimizing interface charge accumulation and enhancing the fill factor. However, excessive Cu2O layer thickness leads to carrier recombination before electrode collection, reducing carrier collection efficiency, conductivity, Jsc, fill factor, and overall performance. Simulation results establish optimal photoelectric conversion efficiency of 21.43% at 0.06 μm thickness. Shallow acceptor density characterizes the concentration of hole acceptors proximate to the conduction band edge in semiconductors. These acceptors, introduced through impurity atoms or intrinsic defects, exhibit energy levels within 0.1 eV of the conduction band edge, effectively capturing photo-excited holes and reducing recombination losses, thereby enhancing photoelectric conversion efficiency.
Figure 7 illustrates the correlation between Cu2O HTL shallow acceptor density and device performance. Performance enhancement becomes significant above 1016 cm−3, corresponding to the absorption layer’s shallow acceptor density. Exceeding this threshold creates an effective back potential barrier, with increased shallow acceptor density improving conductivity, Jsc, fill factor, and overall efficiency while reducing series resistance. However, continued density increases shift the Fermi level toward the valence band. At excessive densities, the Fermi level enters the valence band, creating high hole concentrations and transforming the semiconductor into a strong p-type conductor, potentially causing simulation convergence failures.
Figure 8 presents a comprehensive visualization of device efficiency as a function of both Cu2O HTL thickness and shallow acceptor density, displayed through a color-mapped surface plot. In the low acceptor density region (1012–1015 cm−3), device efficiency remains relatively low, particularly when combined with HTL thicknesses below 0.04 μm. The plot reveals a critical transition around 1016 cm−3 acceptor density, above which device performance significantly improves. Notably, devices with HTL thickness near 0.06 μm demonstrate optimal performance and exhibit greater stability across acceptor density variations, suggesting a favorable processing window for device fabrication. The highest efficiency region, indicated by the red area in the plot, occurs at the combination of 0.06 μm HTL thickness and acceptor densities above 1018 cm−3. Under these optimal conditions (0.06 μm thickness, 1019 cm−3 acceptor density), the device achieves peak performance parameters: Voc = 0.69 V, Jsc = 39.11 mA/cm2, FF = 80.88%, and overall efficiency of 21.68%. This efficiency enhancement can be attributed to improved carrier transport and reduced interface recombination at higher acceptor densities, while the optimal thickness ensures effective light absorption without excessive carrier transport losses.

3.4. Effects of Series and Shunt Resistance on Device Performance

To investigate the influence of series resistance (Rs) and shunt resistance (Rsh), we maintained all other parameters at their optimized values. The impact of these resistances on solar-cell performance is illustrated in Figure 9, with Rs varying from 1–30 Ω-cm2 and Rsh from 100–2100 Ω-cm2. Both parameters demonstrate significant influence on overall device efficiency. Figure 9a,b reveal distinct relationships between resistance parameters and device characteristics: the open-circuit voltage (Voc) exhibits slight enhancement with increasing Rsh while remaining independent of Rs variations. Conversely, short-circuit current density (Jsc) shows strong Rs dependence while maintaining relative stability with Rsh variations. This behavior aligns with Ohm’s law (V = IR): during open-circuit conditions, current absence through Rs results in zero voltage drop, rendering Voc independent of Rs magnitude. Under short-circuit conditions, the external circuit resistance becomes negligible compared to Rsh, directing photogenerated current predominantly through the external circuit. Analysis of Figure 9c,d reveals substantial performance dependencies: increasing Rs severely degrades the fill factor (FF) from 76.05% to 27.55%, with corresponding efficiency reduction from 20.38% to 4.18%. In contrast, enhanced Rsh improves device performance, elevating FF from 68.18% to 80.27% and efficiency from 18.14% to 21.51%. These findings establish optimal performance parameters for Sb2Se3 solar cells: Rs should be minimized to 0–5 Ω-cm2, while Rsh should exceed 2000 Ω-cm2.

4. Conclusions

This study utilized SCAPS-1D software to conduct numerical simulation and performance optimization of Sb2Se3 thin-film solar cells. The investigation focused on key parameters including solar-cell device structures (substrate and superstrate configurations), various hole-transport layer (HTL) materials (NiOx, CZTS, Cu2O, CuO, CuI, CuSCN, CZ-TA, and Spiro-OMeTAD), their thicknesses, shallow acceptor densities, and the effects of series and shunt resistances. Through systematic analysis, the substrate configuration with Mo back contact demonstrated superior performance compared to the superstrate configuration. Among the various HTL materials investigated, Cu2O exhibited the highest photoelectric efficiency due to its smallest VBO value. The study revealed that HTL thickness control is more critical than carrier concentration control, with Cu2O HTL achieving optimal photoelectric conversion efficiency at 0.06 μm thickness. This configuration provided a wide process window, as the efficiency showed relatively low sensitivity to changes in shallow acceptor density. For achieving high-efficiency Sb2Se3 solar cells, the research established that series resistance should be reduced (to 0–5 Ω-cm2) and shunt resistance increased (to above 2000 Ω-cm2), which significantly improved both the fill factor and photoelectric conversion efficiency. Under optimized conditions utilizing the Mo/Cu2O(0.06 μm)/Sb2Se3/CdS/i-ZnO/ITO/Al structure, the device showed significantly improved photoelectric conversion efficiency from 14.23% (conventional cells without HTL) to a maximum of 21.68% with the optimized Cu2O HTL.
Looking forward, several promising research directions emerge from this work. Further interface engineering studies could focus on novel buffer layer materials and surface passivation techniques to minimize recombination losses. Material development efforts should explore new HTL alternatives with enhanced band alignment and carrier transport properties, while also considering stability and cost-effectiveness. Device architecture optimization could investigate tandem configurations and alternative contact materials. Additionally, practical implementation aspects such as scalable fabrication processes, long-term stability, and cost–benefit analyses of different materials and structures warrant investigation. These future directions are aimed at bridging the gap between simulated theoretical performance and practical device implementation, ultimately advancing the development of high-efficiency Sb2Se3 solar cells for real-world applications.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, Y.-C.L.; Data curation, C.-K.L.; Writing—original draft, C.-K.L.; Writing—review & editing, Y.-C.L.; Supervision, Y.-C.L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by National Science and Technology Council under grant number 113-2221-E-018-001.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in this study are included in the article. Further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Acknowledgments

The authors wish to thank the developers of SCAPS at the University of Gent for making their software package publicly available free of charge. The authors also like to acknowledge the financial support of the National Science and Technology Council under grant number 113-2221-E-018-001.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Duan, M.; Zhang, X.; Chen, Y.; Wang, L.; Yang, J.; Liu, F.; Yang, P.; Tang, Z.; Zhou, W.; Chen, S. Sb2Se3 Thin-film solar cells exceeding 10% power conversion efficiency enabled by injection vapor deposition technology. Adv. Mater. 2022, 34, 2202969. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Zhou, Y.C.; Wang, L.; Chen, S.; Mahadik, S.K.; Liu, A.; Zhu, C.; Zhang, W.; Yang, H.; Gao, M.; Chen, S. High-efficiency flexible Sb2Se3 solar cells by back interface and absorber bulk deep-level trap engineering. ACS Energy Lett. 2022, 7, 2095–2102. [Google Scholar]
  3. Zeng, Y.; Xie, S.Y.; Chen, C.H.; Fan, J.D.; Yang, R.X. A review of Sb2Se3 photovoltaic absorber materials and thin-film solar cells. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2016, 151, 57–70. [Google Scholar]
  4. Liu, X.; Chen, J.; Yang, M.; Zhou, Y.; Chen, S.; Liu, Z.; Tang, J. Efficient Sb2Se3 solar cells with Sb and Ge co-doping. J. Mater. Chem. A 2022, 10, 10060–10068. [Google Scholar]
  5. Zhang, X.; Li, Y.; Sun, J.; Liu, H.; Liu, X.; Zhou, Y. Efficient Sb2Se3 solar cells with defect engineering and surface passivation. ACS Energy Lett. 2023, 8, 47–55. [Google Scholar]
  6. Chen, X.; Sun, L.; Li, Y.; Zhang, H.; Wang, X.; Tang, J. Solvent-assisted hydrothermal deposition approach for highly-efficient Sb2(S,Se)3 thin-film solar cells. Adv. Energy Mater. 2023, 23, 2300391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Wang, X.; Li, Y.; Liu, Z.; Yang, W.; Chen, S. Efficient Sb2Se3 solar cells with a new hole transport layer. Nano Energy 2022, 87, 105803. [Google Scholar]
  8. Guo, L.; Vijayaraghavan, S.N.; Duan, X.; Menon, H.G.; Wall, J.; Kong, L.; Yan, F. Stable and efficient Sb2Se3 solar cells with solution-processed NiO_x hole-transport layer. Sol. Energy 2021, 218, 525–531. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Li, P.; Yuan, X.; Feng, M.; Ran, F.; Zhang, D.; Chen, S. Fabrication of TiO_x/Sb2Se3/p-NiO_x photocathode for efficient photoelectrochemical water reduction. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2021, 119, 100445. [Google Scholar]
  10. Mu, F.; Liu, Z.; Zi, W.; Cao, Y.; Lu, X.; Li, Y.; Cheng, N. CZTS nanoparticles as an effective hole-transport layer for Sb2Se3 thin-film solar cells. Sol. Energy 2021, 226, 154–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Maurya, K.K.; Singh, V.N. Sb2Se3/CZTS dual absorber layer based solar cell with 36.32% efficiency: A numerical simulation. J. Sci. Adv. Mater. Dev. 2022, 7, 100445. [Google Scholar]
  12. Li, Z.Q.; Ni, M.; Feng, X.D. Simulation of the Sb2Se3 solar cell with a hole transport layer. Mater. Res. Express 2020, 7, 016416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Sultana, B.; Islam, A.S.; Haque, M.D.; Kuddus, A. Cu2O-Enhanced Back Surface Field Empowers Selenium-Based TiO2/Sb2Se3 Thin Film Solar Cells to Achieve Efficiency over 32%. Appl. Sol. Energy 2023, 59, 836–850. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Lee, S.; McInerney, M.F. Optimization of bifacial Ge-incorporated Sb2Se3 thin-film solar cells by modeling Cu2O back buffer layer. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2023, 257, 112399. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Christians, J.A.; Kamat, P.V. Trap and transfer. Two-step hole injection across the Sb2S3/CuSCN interface in solid-state solar cells. ACS Nano 2013, 7, 7967–7974. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Li, K.; Wang, S.; Chen, C.; Kondrotas, R.; Hu, M.; Lu, S.; Tang, J. 7.5% n-i-p Sb2Se3 solar cells with CuSCN as a hole-transport layer. J. Mater. Chem. A 2019, 7, 9665–9672. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Ngoupo, A.T.; Ouédraogo, S.; Zougmoré, F.; Ndjaka, J.M.B. Numerical analysis of ultrathin Sb2Se3-based solar cells by SCAPS-1D numerical simulator device. Chin. J. Phys. 2021, 70, 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Li, D.B.; Yin, X.; Grice, C.R.; Guan, L.; Song, Z.; Wang, C.; Tang, J. Stable and efficient CdS/Sb2Se3 solar cells prepared by scalable close space sublimation. Nano Energy 2018, 49, 346–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Joy, A.; Abir, A.T.; Mondal, B.K.; Hossain, J. Numerical studies on a ternary AgInTe2 chalcopyrite thin film solar cell. Heliyon 2023, 9, e15876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Liu, L.; Zhang, S.L.; Wu, J.Y.; Wang, W.H.; Liu, W.; Wu, L.; Zhang, Y. Current improvement in substrate structured Sb2S3 solar cells with MoSe2 interlayer. Chin. Phys. B 2020, 29, 058801. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Ngoupo, A.T.; Ndjaka, J.M.B. Performance enhancement of Sb2Se3-based solar cell with hybrid buffer layer and MoSe2 as a hole transport material using simulator device. Discov. Mech. Eng. 2022, 1, 5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Guijarro, N.; Lutz, T.; Lana-Villarreal, T.; O’Mahony, F.; Gómez, R.; Haque, S.A. Toward antimony selenide sensitized solar cells: Efficient charge photogeneration at spiro-OMeTAD/Sb2Se3/metal oxide heterojunctions. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2012, 3, 1351–1356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Du, Q.; Shen, Z.; Chen, C.; Li, F.; Jin, M.; Li, H.; Wang, M. Spiro-OMeTAD: Sb2S3 Hole Transport Layer with Triple Functions of Overcoming Lithium Salt Aggregation, Long-Term High Conductivity, and Defect Passivation for Perovskite Solar Cells. Sol. RRL 2021, 5, 2100622. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Bera, A.; Mahapatra, A.D.; Mondal, S.; Basak, D. Sb2S3/Spiro-OMeTAD inorganic-organic hybrid p-n junction diode for high performance self-powered photodetector. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 34506–34512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Hernandez-Como, N.; Morales-Acevedo, A. Simulation of hetero-junction silicon solar cells with AMPS-1D. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2010, 94, 62–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Hadjab, M.; Wagner, J.M.; Bouzid, F.; Boudour, S.; Larbi, A.H.; Bennacer, H.; Berrah, S. A numerical optimization study of CdS and Mg0.125Zn0.875O buffer layers in CIGS-based solar cells using wxAMPS-1D package. Int. J. Model. Simul. 2022, 42, 179–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Smucker, J.; Gong, J. A comparative study on the band diagrams and efficiencies of silicon and perovskite solar cells using wxAMPS and AMPS-1D. Sol. Energy 2021, 228, 187–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Al-Hattab, M.; Khenfouch, M.; Bajjou, O.; Chrafih, Y.; Rahmani, K. Numerical simulation of a new heterostructure CIGS/GaSe solar cell system using SCAPS-1D software. Sol. Energy 2021, 227, 13–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Basak, A.; Singh, U.P. Numerical modelling and analysis of earth abundant Sb2S3 and Sb2Se3 based solar cells using SCAPS-1D. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2021, 230, 111184. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Islam, M.S.; Sobayel, K.; Al-Kahtani, A.; Islam, M.A.; Muhammad, G.; Amin, N.; Akhtaruzzaman, M. Defect study and modelling of SnX3-based perovskite solar cells with SCAPS-1D. Nanomaterials 2021, 11, 1218. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Lovergine, N.; Cingolani, R.; Mancini, A.M.; Ferrara, M. Photoluminescence of CVD grown CdS epilayers on CdTe substrates. J. Cryst. Growth 1992, 118, 304–308. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Srinivas, B.; Babujani, S.; Chandra, G.H.; Subbaiah, Y.P.V.; Gupta, M. Synthesis and characterization of Cu-sandwiched Sb2Se3 thin films and numerical simulation of p-Sb2Se3/n-ZnSe heterojunction solar cell. Opt. Mater. 2023, 135, 113289. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Moujoud, S.; Hartiti, B.; Touhtouh, S.; Belhora, F.; Hajjaji, A. Optimizing Sb2Se3 thin-film solar cells: A comprehensive simulation study of multiple influential factors. Optik 2024, 303, 171723. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Cao, Y.; Zhu, X.; Chen, H.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, J.; Hu, Z.; Pang, J. Towards high efficiency inverted Sb2Se3 thin film solar cells. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2019, 200, 109945. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Ranjan, R.; Anand, N.; Tripathi, M.N.; Srivastava, N.; Sharma, A.K.; Yoshimura, M.; Chang, L.; Tiwari, R.N. SCAPS study on the effect of various hole transport layer on highly efficient 31.86% eco-friendly CZTS based solar cell. Sci. Rep. 2023, 13, 18411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Abdur, R.; Choudhury, S.; Bashar, M.S.; Mossain, M.R.; Quddus, M.S.; Akhtar, U.S.; Shaikh, M.A.A.; Hossain, M.; Jamal, M.S. Enhancing perovskite solar cell performance: Investigating the impact of post-annealing on the optoelectrical and structural properties of RF-sputtered NiO films via SCAPS-1D device modeling. Sol. Energy 2024, 271, 112443. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Karade, V.C.; Jang, J.S.; Kumbhar, D.; Rao, M.; Pawar, P.S.; Kim, S.; Gour, K.S.; Park, J.; Heo, J.; Dongale, T.D.; et al. Combating open circuit voltage loss in Sb2Se3 solar cell with an application of SnS as a back surface field layer. Sol. Energy 2022, 233, 435–445. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Mamta Maurya, K.K.; Singh, V.N. Sb2Se3 as an HTL for Mo/Sb2Se3/Cs2TiF6/TiO2 solar structure: Performance evaluation with SCAPS-1D. Heliyon 2022, 8, e10925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Azhakanantham, D.; Selvamani, M.; Kim, T.G.; Contreras, D.; Kesavan, A.V. Exploring novel HTL suitable for Eco-friendly and high performance FASnI3 photovoltaics. Mater. Sci. Eng. B 2022, 284, 115789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Materials 17 06203 g001
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the proposed solar-cell structure: (a) p-n substrate configuration, (b) p-n superstrate configuration, (c) n-p-p+ substrate configuration.
Figure 1. Schematic diagram of the proposed solar-cell structure: (a) p-n substrate configuration, (b) p-n superstrate configuration, (c) n-p-p+ substrate configuration.
Materials 17 06203 g001
Materials 17 06203 g002
Figure 2. Energy band diagrams of different device configurations: (a) substrate and (b) superstrate structures.
Figure 2. Energy band diagrams of different device configurations: (a) substrate and (b) superstrate structures.
Materials 17 06203 g002
Materials 17 06203 g003
Figure 3. Performance characteristics of different device configurations: (a) current–voltage curves and (b) external quantum efficiency spectra.
Figure 3. Performance characteristics of different device configurations: (a) current–voltage curves and (b) external quantum efficiency spectra.
Materials 17 06203 g003
Materials 17 06203 g004
Figure 4. Energy band diagrams of various HTL materials in the device structure.
Figure 4. Energy band diagrams of various HTL materials in the device structure.
Materials 17 06203 g004
Materials 17 06203 g005
Figure 5. PCE comparison of different HTL materials.
Figure 5. PCE comparison of different HTL materials.
Materials 17 06203 g005
Materials 17 06203 g006
Figure 6. Relationship between Cu2O HTL thickness and device performance.
Figure 6. Relationship between Cu2O HTL thickness and device performance.
Materials 17 06203 g006
Materials 17 06203 g007
Figure 7. Relationship between Cu2O HTL shallow acceptor density and device performance.
Figure 7. Relationship between Cu2O HTL shallow acceptor density and device performance.
Materials 17 06203 g007
Materials 17 06203 g008
Figure 8. Effect of shallow acceptor density on Sb2Se3 solar-cell efficiency at different Cu2O HTL thicknesses.
Figure 8. Effect of shallow acceptor density on Sb2Se3 solar-cell efficiency at different Cu2O HTL thicknesses.
Materials 17 06203 g008
Materials 17 06203 g009
Figure 9. Numerical analysis of series and parallel resistance on device performance. (a) Open-circuit voltage (Voc) variation, (b) Short-circuit current density (Jsc) response, (c) Fill Factor (FF) dependence, and (d) Device efficiency changes with respect to series and parallel resistance.
Figure 9. Numerical analysis of series and parallel resistance on device performance. (a) Open-circuit voltage (Voc) variation, (b) Short-circuit current density (Jsc) response, (c) Fill Factor (FF) dependence, and (d) Device efficiency changes with respect to series and parallel resistance.
Materials 17 06203 g009
Table 1. Materials parameters used in the simulation.
Table 1. Materials parameters used in the simulation.
ParameterITO [32]i-ZnO [33]CdS [33]Sb2Se3 [33]
Thickness (µm)0.30.050.071.5
Eg (eV)3.63.32.41.17
χ (eV)4.14.454.24.3
εr1091019
NC (1 cm−3)2.2 × 10182.2 × 10182.2 × 10182.2 × 1018
NV (1 cm−3)1.8 × 10191.8 × 10191.8 × 10191.8 × 1019
υth,e (cm/s)107107107107
υth,h (cm/s)107107107107
μe (cm2 (V S)−1)7510010015
μh (cm2 (V S)−1)50252542
Donor density, ND (1/cm3)1019101810170
Acceptor density, NA (1 cm−3)010181021016
Defect type AcceptorDonorNeutral
Reference Above EVAbove EVAbove EV
Et (eV) 0.60.60.6
Nt (1 cm−3) 101010151012
χ: electron affinity, εr: dielectric permittivity (relative), N: effective density of states, C: conduction band, V: valence band, υth: thermal velocity, μ: mobility, NA: shallow acceptor density, ND: shallow donor density, Et: trap position, Nt: trap density.
Table 2. Interface defect simulation parameters used in the simulation.
Table 2. Interface defect simulation parameters used in the simulation.
Interfacei-ZnO/CdS [33]CdS/Sb2Se3 [33]Sb2Se3/HTL [34]
Defect typeNeutralNeutralNeutral
σe (cm2)4 × 10−181 × 10−191 × 10−19
σh (cm2)4 × 10−181 × 10−191 × 10−19
Nt (1 cm−2)10102.8 × 10101012
σ: capture cross-section, Nt: trap density.
Table 3. Simulation parameters of HTL materials used in the simulation.
Table 3. Simulation parameters of HTL materials used in the simulation.
ParameterCZ-TA [17]Spiro [17]CZTS [11]Cu2O [35]CuO [35]CuI [35]CuSCN [36]NiOx [36]
Thickness (µm)0.050.050.050.050.050.050.050.05
Eg (eV)3.102.911.42.171.513.13.43.8
χ (eV)2.22.24.13.24.072.11.91.8
εr3397.1118.16.510.011.75
NC (cm−3)8 × 10178 × 10172.2 ×10182.02 × 10172.2 × 10192.8 × 10192.2 × 10182 × 1018
NV (cm−3)1.8 × 10191.8 × 10191.8 × 10181.1 × 10195.5 × 10201.0 × 10191.8 × 10182 × 1018
μe (cm2 (VS)−1)1.65 × 10−46.17 × 10−5100200101001008
μh (cm2 (VS) −1)1.65 × 10−46.17 × 10−512.5800.143.92581.10
ND (1 cm−3)00000000
NA (1 cm−3)10191019101910191019101910191019
Table 4. Simulation parameters of contact materials used in the simulation.
Table 4. Simulation parameters of contact materials used in the simulation.
ContactsAl [37]Mo [38]FTO [39]
Wf4.285.04.4
Se107105107
Sh105107105
ReflectionNoNoNo
Wf: work function, S: surface recombination velocity.
Table 5. Device performance parameters for different configuration structures.
Table 5. Device performance parameters for different configuration structures.
VOC (V) J SC   ( m A / c m 2 ) FF (%)PCE (%)
Substrate0.5238.4271.8814.23
Superstrate0.3835.3474.6210.09
Superstrate with Au (Wf = 5.1)0.5235.6675.2113.83
Table 6. Calculated VBO values for different HTL materials.
Table 6. Calculated VBO values for different HTL materials.
HTLNiOXCZ-TASpiroCZTSCu2OCuOCuICuSCN
VBO−0.130.170.36−0.030.1−0.110.270.17
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Lai, C.-K.; Lin, Y.-C. Numerical Investigation and Device Architecture Optimization of Sb2Se3 Thin-Film Solar Cells Using SCAPS-1D. Materials 2024, 17, 6203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17246203

AMA Style

Lai C-K, Lin Y-C. Numerical Investigation and Device Architecture Optimization of Sb2Se3 Thin-Film Solar Cells Using SCAPS-1D. Materials. 2024; 17(24):6203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17246203

Chicago/Turabian Style

Lai, Chung-Kuan, and Yi-Cheng Lin. 2024. "Numerical Investigation and Device Architecture Optimization of Sb2Se3 Thin-Film Solar Cells Using SCAPS-1D" Materials 17, no. 24: 6203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17246203

APA Style

Lai, C. -K., & Lin, Y. -C. (2024). Numerical Investigation and Device Architecture Optimization of Sb2Se3 Thin-Film Solar Cells Using SCAPS-1D. Materials, 17(24), 6203. https://doi.org/10.3390/ma17246203

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop