4.7 Article

Improvement in Efficiency and Reproducibility for FAPbI3 Solar Cells with Rapid Crystallization

期刊

ENERGY & FUELS
卷 37, 期 1, 页码 791-797

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.2c04035

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Studying the crystallization process of FAPbI3 film is crucial for improving the performance of perovskite solar cells, and the annealing time plays a key role in controlling the nucleation and crystal growth. In this study, a pure alpha-FAPbI3 perovskite film was successfully grown through precise manipulation of the annealing time in the electrodeposition-assisted method. The resulting perovskite film exhibited high solar light absorption capacity and large grains, leading to the best power conversion efficiency (PCE) of 13.33% for the corresponding alpha-FAPbI3 solar cells.
Clarifying the crystallization process of the perov-skite FAPbI3 film is quite an important pathway for improving the performance of perovskite solar cells, and the annealing time is a key factor to control the nucleation and crystal growth. However, the existing electrodeposition method lacks systematic studies on the growth of the perovskite FAPbI3 film. Herein, we manipulate the annealing time precisely for growing a pure alpha-FAPbI3 perovskite film in the electrodeposition-assisted method. The perovskite pure alpha-FAPbI3 film can be synthesized by fast annealing in only 1 min, and the as-prepared perovskite film shows high solar light absorption capacity and large grains. Thus, the corresponding solar cells based on alpha-FAPbI3 show the best power conversion efficiency (PCE) of 13.33%, which is 32% higher than that of FAPbI3 solar cells annealed for a long time (20 min). More importantly, all of these PCE variances do not exceed 1% under different annealing times, indicating the high reproducibility of the perovskite solar cells based on this rapid crystallization method. With a phenethylammonium iodide passivation layer, the PCE can even be improved to 14.02%.

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