4.7 Article

Light trapping in solar cells: simple design rules to maximize absorption

期刊

OPTICA
卷 7, 期 10, 页码 1377-1384

出版社

OPTICAL SOC AMER
DOI: 10.1364/OPTICA.394885

关键词

-

类别

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia [PD/BD/143031/2018, PTDC/EAM-PEC/29905/2017, PTDC/NAN-OPT/28430/2017, PTDC/NAN-OPT/28837/2017, UID/CTM/50025/2019]
  2. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo [2015/21455-1]
  3. Engineering and Physical SciencesResearch Council [EP/P02324X/1]
  4. EPSRC [EP/P02324X/1] Funding Source: UKRI
  5. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [PTDC/NAN-OPT/28430/2017, PD/BD/143031/2018, PTDC/EAM-PEC/29905/2017, PTDC/NAN-OPT/28837/2017] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Solar cells can strongly benefit from optical strategies capable of providing the desired broadband absorption of sunlight and consequent high conversion efficiency. While many diffractive light-trapping structures prove high absorption enhancements, their industrial application rather depends on simplicity concerning the integration to the solar cell concept and the process technology. Here, we show how simple grating lines can perform as well as advanced light-trapping designs. We use a shallow and periodic grating as the basic element of a quasi-random structure, which is highly suitable for industrial mass production. Its checkerboard arrangement breaks the mirror symmetry and is shown, for instance, to enhance the bulk current of a 1 mu m slab of crystalline silicon by 125%. We explain its excellent performance by drawing a direct link between a structure's Fourier series and the implied photocurrent, derived from a large and diverse set of structures. Our design rule thus meets all relevant aspects of light-trapping for solar cells, clearing the way for simple, practical, and yet outstanding diffractive structures, with a potential impact beyond photonic applications. Published by The Optical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

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