Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2024 Jan 17;11(1):231202.
doi: 10.1098/rsos.231202. eCollection 2024 Jan.

Evaluating the influence of novel charge transport materials on the photovoltaic properties of MASnI3 solar cells through SCAPS-1D modelling

Khalid Afridi  1 , Muhammad Noman  1 , Shayan Tariq Jan  1   2
Affiliations

Evaluating the influence of novel charge transport materials on the photovoltaic properties of MASnI3 solar cells through SCAPS-1D modelling

Khalid Afridi et al. R Soc Open Sci. .

Abstract

In recent decades, substantial advancements have been made in photovoltaic technologies, leading to impressive power conversion efficiencies (PCE) exceeding 25% in perovskite solar cells (PSCs). Tin-based perovskite materials, characterized by their low band gap (1.3 eV), exceptional optical absorption and high carrier mobility, have emerged as promising absorber layers in PSCs. Achieving high performance and stability in PSCs critically depends on the careful selection of suitable charge transport layers (CTLs). This research investigates the effects of five copper-based hole transport materials and two carbon-based electron transport materials in combination with methyl ammonium tin iodide (MASnI3) through numerical modelling in SCAPS-1D. The carbon-based CTLs exhibit excellent thermal conductivity and mechanical strength, while the copper-based CTLs demonstrate high electrical conductivity. The study comprehensively analyses the influence of these CTLs on PSC performance, including band alignment, quantum efficiency, thickness, doping concentration, defects and thermal stability. Furthermore, a comparative analysis is conducted on PSC structures employing both p-i-n and n-i-p configurations. The highest-performing PSCs are observed in the inverted structures of CuSCN/MASnI3/C60 and CuAlO2/MASnI3/C60, achieving PCE of 23.48% and 25.18%, respectively. Notably, the planar structures of Cu2O/MASnI3/C60 and CuSbS2/MASnI3/C60 also exhibit substantial PCE, reaching 20.67% and 20.70%, respectively.

Keywords: MASnI3; SCAPS-1D; carbon ETL; copper HTL; perovskite solar cell.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

We declare we have no competing interests.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.
Optical absorption of HTL.
Figure 2.
Figure 2.
Optical absorption of ETL.
Figure 3.
Figure 3.
The energy band diagram of the perovskite/HTL system.
Figure 4.
Figure 4.
The energy band diagram of the ETL/perovskite system.
Figure 5.
Figure 5.
Electric potential of different hole transport materials with perovskite.
Figure 6.
Figure 6.
Electric potential of different electron transport materials with perovskite.
Figure 7.
Figure 7.
Recombination at perovskite HTL heterojunctions.
Figure 8.
Figure 8.
The electric potential at ETL perovskite heterojunction.
Figure 9.
Figure 9.
Effect of HTL on QE.
Figure 10.
Figure 10.
Effect of ETL on QE.
Figure 11.
Figure 11.
(a) J-V curve with PCBM as ETL and (b) J-V curve with C60 as ETL.
Figure 12.
Figure 12.
Power conversion efficiency (PCE) versus absorber thickness.
Figure 13.
Figure 13.
Open circuit voltage (VOC) versus absorber thicknesses.
Figure 14.
Figure 14.
Short circuit current (JSC) versus active layer thickness.
Figure 15.
Figure 15.
HTL thickness versus PCE.
Figure 16.
Figure 16.
JSC versus HTL thickness.
Figure 17.
Figure 17.
VOC versus HTL thickness.
Figure 18.
Figure 18.
ETL thickness versus PCE.
Figure 19.
Figure 19.
VOC versus ETL thickness.
Figure 20.
Figure 20.
ETL thicknesses versus JSC.
Figure 21.
Figure 21.
Absorber doping density NA versus PCE.
Figure 22.
Figure 22.
Absorber doping density NA versus VOC and JSC.
Figure 23.
Figure 23.
Doping concentration of HTL versus PCE.
Figure 24.
Figure 24.
Doping concentration of HTL versus JSC and VOC.
Figure 25.
Figure 25.
ETL doping density ND versus PCE.
Figure 26.
Figure 26.
ETL doping density ND versus JSC.
Figure 27.
Figure 27.
ETL doping density ND versus VOC.
Figure 28.
Figure 28.
Defect density Nt versus PCE.
Figure 29.
Figure 29.
Effect of defect density Nt versus JSC and VOC.
Figure 30.
Figure 30.
Interface defect effect at ETL/perovskite.
Figure 31.
Figure 31.
Interface defect effect at perovskite/HTL.
Figure 32.
Figure 32.
Thermal stability of various hole transport materials with increasing temperature.
Figure 33.
Figure 33.
Effect of temperature on JSC and VOC.
Figure 34.
Figure 34.
Different metalwork functions affect PCE.
Figure 35.
Figure 35.
Different work function effects on JSC and VOC.
Figure 36.
Figure 36.
Optimized J-V curve of p-i-n structures.
Figure 37.
Figure 37.
Optimized J-V curve of n-i-p structures.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Lakhdar N, Hima A. 2020. Electron transport material effect on performance of perovskite solar cells based on CH3NH3GeI3. Opt. Mater. 99, 109517. (10.1016/j.optmat.2019.109517) - DOI
    1. Jayan KD, Sebastian V. 2021. Comparative study on the performance of different lead-based and lead-free perovskite solar cells. Adv. Theory Simul. 4, 1-11. (10.1002/adts.202100027) - DOI
    1. Kojima A, Teshima K, Shirai Y, Miyasaka T. 2009. Organometal halide perovskites as visible-light sensitizers for photovoltaic cells. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 131, 6050-6051. (10.1021/ja809598r) - DOI - PubMed
    1. Luo S, Daoud WA. 2015. Recent progress in organic-inorganic halide perovskite solar cells: mechanisms and material design. J. Mater. Chem. A 3, 8992-9010. (10.1039/c4ta04953e) - DOI
    1. Zhang F, Yang X, Wang H, Cheng M, Zhao J, Sun L. 2014. Structure engineering of hole−conductor free perovskite-based solar cells with low-temperature-processed commercial carbon paste as cathode. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 6, 16 140–16 146. (10.1021/am504175x) - DOI

LinkOut - more resources