4.7 Article

Boosting Efficiency and Stability of Planar Inverted (FAPbI3)x(MAPbBr3)1-x Solar Cells via FAPbI3 and MAPbBr3 Crystal Powders

期刊

SOLAR RRL
卷 4, 期 5, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/solr.202000091

关键词

boosting performance; crystal powders; perovskite solar cells; planar inverted; stability

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2018YFB0704100]
  2. Leading talents of Guangdong province program [2016LJ06N507]
  3. Research and Development Program of Guangdong province for Key Areas [2019B010941001]
  4. Shenzhen Basic Research Fund [CYJ20170817110652558]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Solution-processed perovskite precursors, especially for MAPbBr(3)-assisted FAPbI(3) crystallization, has been noted to achieve high power conversion efficiency (PCE) for perovskite solar cells (PSCs). However, this low-temperature processed (FAPbI(3))(x)(MAPbBr(3))(1-x) typical precursor derived from commercial products (FAI, PbI2, MABr, and PbBr2) suffers from environmental sensitivity, poor film crystallinity and less than ideal device reproducibility. Herein, (FAPbI(3))(x)(MAPbBr(3))(1-x) (0.80 <= x <= 0.90)-based planar inverted PSCs are fabricated, employing grinded monocrystalline MAPbBr(3) and powdered polycrystalline FAPbI(3) as precursors. The champion device with optimal molar ratio x = 0.85 comprising highly crystalline larger-grained perovskite film with enhanced carrier transport kinetics and reduced trap-state density exhibits boosted efficiency reaching 20.50%, which shows a 22.90% improvement over typical precursors with a PCE of 16.68%. In addition, the crystal powder precursor yields obvious film stability under ambient conditions (23 degrees C, 65-85% humidity) for 150 days and improved device storage stability in the glove box within two months. This protocol using stock crystal powders for perovskite precursor formulation provides a relatively facile and reproducible device fabrication route for the commercialization of PSCs.

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