Cu2ZnSnS4 solar cells prepared with sulphurized dc-sputtered stacked metallic precursors

In the present work we report the details of the preparation and characterization results of Cu2ZnSnS4 (CZTS) based solar cells. The CZTS absorber was obtained by sulphurization of dc magnetron sputtered Zn/Sn/Cu precursor layers. The morphology, composition and structure of the absorber layer were studied by scanning electron microscopy, energy dispersive spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction and Raman scattering. The majority carrier type was identified via a hot point probe analysis. The hole density, space charge region width and band gap energy were estimated from the external quantum efficiency measurements. A MoS2 layer that formed during the sulphurization process was also identified and analyzed in this work. The solar cells had the following structure: soda lime glass/Mo/CZTS/CdS/i-ZnO/ZnO:Al/Al grid. The best solar cell showed an opencircuit voltage of 345 mV, a short-circuit current density of 4.42 mA/cm2, a fill factor of 44.29% and an efficiency of 0.68% under illumination in simulated standard test conditions: AM 1.5 and 100 mW/cm2.

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co-evaporated CuIn1-xGaxSe2using a one-stage process versus a three-stage process

Until this day, the most efficient Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin film solar cells have been prepared using a rather complex growth process often referred to as three-stage or multistage. This family of processes is mainly characterized by a first step deposited with only In, Ga and Se flux to form a first layer. Cu is added in a second step until the film becomes slightly Cu-rich, where-after the film is converted to its final Cu-poor composition by a third stage, again with no or very little addition of Cu. In this paper, a comparison between solar cells prepared with the three-stage process and a one-stage/in-line process with the same composition, thickness, and solar cell stack is made. The one-stage process is easier to be used in an industrial scale and do not have Cu-rich transitions. The samples were analyzed using glow discharge optical emission spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction, current–voltage-temperature, capacitance-voltage, external quantum efficiency, transmission/reflection, and photoluminescence. It was concluded that in spite of differences in the texturing, morphology and Ga gradient, the electrical performance of the two types of samples is quite similar as demonstrated by the similar J–V behavior, quantum spectral response, and the estimated recombination losses.