Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cells

Since solar energy conversion by photovoltaics is most efficient for photon energies at the bandgap of the absorbing material the idea of combining absorber layers with different bandgaps in a multijunction cell has become popular. In silicon thin-film photovoltaics a multijunction stack with more t...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Walder Cordula, Kellermann Martin, Wendler Elke, Rensberg Jura, von Maydell Karsten, Agert Carsten
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: EDP Sciences 2015-01-01
Series:EPJ Photovoltaics
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjpv/2015003
_version_ 1818866141430284288
author Walder Cordula
Kellermann Martin
Wendler Elke
Rensberg Jura
von Maydell Karsten
Agert Carsten
author_facet Walder Cordula
Kellermann Martin
Wendler Elke
Rensberg Jura
von Maydell Karsten
Agert Carsten
author_sort Walder Cordula
collection DOAJ
description Since solar energy conversion by photovoltaics is most efficient for photon energies at the bandgap of the absorbing material the idea of combining absorber layers with different bandgaps in a multijunction cell has become popular. In silicon thin-film photovoltaics a multijunction stack with more than two subcells requires a high bandgap amorphous silicon alloy top cell absorber to achieve an optimal bandgap combination. We address the question whether amorphous silicon carbide (a-SiC:H) or amorphous silicon oxide (a-SiO:H) is more suited for this type of top cell absorber. Our single cell results show a better performance of amorphous silicon carbide with respect to fill factor and especially open circuit voltage at equivalent Tauc bandgaps. The microstructure factor of single layers indicates less void structure in amorphous silicon carbide than in amorphous silicon oxide. Yet photoconductivity of silicon oxide films seems to be higher which could be explained by the material being not truly intrinsic. On the other hand better cell performance of amorphous silicon carbide absorber layers might be connected to better hole transport in the cell.
first_indexed 2024-12-19T10:58:44Z
format Article
id doaj.art-66250545b4f34f4d9fa30d55831ccbda
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2105-0716
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-19T10:58:44Z
publishDate 2015-01-01
publisher EDP Sciences
record_format Article
series EPJ Photovoltaics
spelling doaj.art-66250545b4f34f4d9fa30d55831ccbda2022-12-21T20:24:43ZengEDP SciencesEPJ Photovoltaics2105-07162015-01-0166530210.1051/epjpv/2015003pv140017Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cellsWalder Cordula0Kellermann Martin1Wendler Elke2Rensberg Jura3von Maydell Karsten4Agert Carsten5NEXT ENERGY · EWE Research Centre for Energy Technology at the University of OldenburgNEXT ENERGY · EWE Research Centre for Energy Technology at the University of OldenburgInstitut für Festkörperphysik, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität JenaInstitut für Festkörperphysik, Friedrich-Schiller-Universität JenaNEXT ENERGY · EWE Research Centre for Energy Technology at the University of OldenburgNEXT ENERGY · EWE Research Centre for Energy Technology at the University of OldenburgSince solar energy conversion by photovoltaics is most efficient for photon energies at the bandgap of the absorbing material the idea of combining absorber layers with different bandgaps in a multijunction cell has become popular. In silicon thin-film photovoltaics a multijunction stack with more than two subcells requires a high bandgap amorphous silicon alloy top cell absorber to achieve an optimal bandgap combination. We address the question whether amorphous silicon carbide (a-SiC:H) or amorphous silicon oxide (a-SiO:H) is more suited for this type of top cell absorber. Our single cell results show a better performance of amorphous silicon carbide with respect to fill factor and especially open circuit voltage at equivalent Tauc bandgaps. The microstructure factor of single layers indicates less void structure in amorphous silicon carbide than in amorphous silicon oxide. Yet photoconductivity of silicon oxide films seems to be higher which could be explained by the material being not truly intrinsic. On the other hand better cell performance of amorphous silicon carbide absorber layers might be connected to better hole transport in the cell.http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjpv/2015003
spellingShingle Walder Cordula
Kellermann Martin
Wendler Elke
Rensberg Jura
von Maydell Karsten
Agert Carsten
Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cells
EPJ Photovoltaics
title Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cells
title_full Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cells
title_fullStr Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cells
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cells
title_short Comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin-film solar cells
title_sort comparison of silicon oxide and silicon carbide absorber materials in silicon thin film solar cells
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1051/epjpv/2015003
work_keys_str_mv AT waldercordula comparisonofsiliconoxideandsiliconcarbideabsorbermaterialsinsiliconthinfilmsolarcells
AT kellermannmartin comparisonofsiliconoxideandsiliconcarbideabsorbermaterialsinsiliconthinfilmsolarcells
AT wendlerelke comparisonofsiliconoxideandsiliconcarbideabsorbermaterialsinsiliconthinfilmsolarcells
AT rensbergjura comparisonofsiliconoxideandsiliconcarbideabsorbermaterialsinsiliconthinfilmsolarcells
AT vonmaydellkarsten comparisonofsiliconoxideandsiliconcarbideabsorbermaterialsinsiliconthinfilmsolarcells
AT agertcarsten comparisonofsiliconoxideandsiliconcarbideabsorbermaterialsinsiliconthinfilmsolarcells