4.7 Article

Accounting for Fabrication Variability in Transparent Perovskite Solar Cells for Four-Terminal Tandem Applications

期刊

SOLAR RRL
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/solr.202300339

关键词

fabrication variability; opto-electronic-electric models; recombination; tandem; transparent perovskites

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study develops a comprehensive opto-electronic-electric model to predict the current-voltage characteristics of four-terminal (4T) tandem solar cells (TSCs) while accounting for variability in the optical and recombination parameters (ORPs) during fabrication. The model is calibrated and validated using 48 in-house fabricated transparent perovskite solar cells and a CIS bottom cell, capturing the variations in ORPs with perovskite layer thickness. The errors in models assuming constant ORPs are demonstrated, and methods to improve TSCs efficiency above 30% are discussed.
Opto-electronic models that seek to predict the performance of perovskite and tandem solar cells (PSCs/TSCs) often keep the optical and recombination parameters (ORPs) constant in subsequent studies. During fabrication of PSCs, however, these parameters can vary significantly. To account for the inherent fabrication variability, a comprehensive opto-electronic-electric model to predict the current-voltage characteristics of four-terminal (4T) TSCs is developed. This model is calibrated with forty-eight in-house fabricated transparent PSCs with perovskite layer thickness of 420, 550, and 700 nm and corresponding median efficiencies of 20.6%, 21.1%, and 21.0%, respectively; a CIS bottom cell with stand-alone efficiency of 17.5%; and combined 4T TSCs with a median efficiency of 29.0%. After fitting and validation, the functional forms of the ORPs are captured to estimate how they change with perovskite layer thickness. Finally, the errors with models assuming constant ORPs are demonstrated and how to improve the TSCs efficiency to more than 30% is discussed.

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