1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
f
Towards an optimized all lattice-matched InAlAs/InGaAsP/InGaAs multijunction solar cell with efficiency >50%
Rent:
Rent this article for
Access full text Article
/content/aip/journal/apl/102/3/10.1063/1.4758300
1.
1. S. Kurtz and J. Geisz, Opt. Express 18, A73 (2010).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1364/OE.18.000A73
2.
2. J. Olson, T. Gessert, and M. Al-Jassim, in Proceedings of the 18th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, New York, 1985), p. 552.
3.
3. H. Cotal, C. Fetzer, J. Boisvert, G. Kinsey, R. King, P. Hebert, H. Yoon, and N. Karam, Energy Environ. Sci. 2, 174 (2009).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1039/b809257e
4.
4. A. Luque and S. Hegedus, Handbook of Photovoltaic Science and Engineering (Wiley, 2011).
5.
5. A.G. Imenes and D. R. Mills, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 84, 19 (2004).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2004.01.038
6.
6. R. R. King, Nat. Photonics 2, 284 (2008).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nphoton.2008.68
7.
7. A. Luque, J. Appl. Phys. 110, 031301 (2011).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3600702
8.
8. J. M. Olson, S. R. Kurtz, A. E. Kibbler, and P. Faine, Appl. Phys. Lett. 56, 623 (1990).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.102717
9.
9. K. A. Bertness, S. R. Kurtz, D. J. Friedman, A. E. Kibbler, C. Kramer, J. M. Olson, Appl. Phys. Lett. 65, 989 (1994).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.112171
10.
10. R. R. King, D. C. Law, K. M. Edmondson, C. M. Fetzer, G. S. Kinsey, H. Yoon, R. A. Sherif, and N. H. Karam, Appl. Phys. Lett. 90, 183516 (2007).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2734507
11.
11. J. F. Geisz, S. Kurtz, M. W. Wanlass, J. S. Ward, A. Duda, D. J. Friedman, J. M. Olson, W. E. McMahon, T. E. Moriarty, and J. T. Kiehl, Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 023502 (2007).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2753729
12.
12. R. R. King, A. B. , W. Hong, X.-Q. Liu, D. Bhusari, D. Larrabee, K. M. Edmondson, D. C. Law, C. M. Fetzer, S. Mesropian, and N. H. Karam, in Proceedings of the 24th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference (Hamburg, 2009), p. 55.
13.
13. R. R. King, D. Bushari, D. Larrabee, X.-Q. Liu, E. Rehder, K. Edmondson, H. Cotal, R. K. Jones, J. H. Ermer, C. M. Fetzer, D. C. Law, and N. H. Karam, Prog. Photovoltaics 20, 801 (2012).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pip.1255
14.
14. M. Wiemer, V. Sabnis, and H. Yuen, Proceedings of the SPIE Optics + Photonics − Solar Energy + Technology (San Diego, 2011).
15.
15. J. M. Zahler, K. Tanabe, C. Ladous, T. Pinnington, F. D. Newman, and H. A. Atwater, Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 012108 (2007).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.2753751
16.
16. N. Szabo, B. E. Sagol, U. Seidel, K. Schwarzburg, and T. Hannappel, Phys. Status Solidi (RRL) 2, 254 (2008).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pssr.200802141
17.
17. M. W. Wanlass, T. I. Coutts, J. S. Ward, K. A. Emery, T. A. Gessert, and C. R. Osterwald, in Proceedings of the 22nd IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, 1991), p. 38.
18.
18.Here, the optimization refers to the best band gap combination corresponding to semiconductor compounds with lattice spacing between GaAs and InP, therefore the design is termed “optimized.”
19.
19. R. Stangl, M. Kriegel, and M. Schmidt, in Proceedings of the 4th World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (IEEE, New York, 2006), p. 1350.
20.
20. M. S. Leite, R. L. Woo, W. D. Hong, D. C. Law, and H. A. Atwater, Appl. Phys. Lett. 98, 093502 (2011).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3531756
21.
21. M. S. Leite, E. C. Warmann, G. M. Kimball, S. P. Burgos, D. M. Callahan, and H. A. Atwater, Adv. Mater. 23, 3801 (2011).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/adma.201101309
22.
22.The crystal quality of the subcells was analyzed by high resolution x-ray diffraction measurements using a conventional Cu-K x-ray source. The x-ray beam size was 4 × 25 mm2, giving an accurate and representative estimative of the crystal diffraction condition, and therefore its lattice constant. (004) symmetric ω-2θ scans were performed to confirm that the material grown was lattice-matched to the InP substrate.
23.
23. R. L. Woo, W. D. Hong, S. Mesropian, M. S. Leite, H. A. Atwater, and D. C. Law, in 37th Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, Seattle, 2011).
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/apl/102/3/10.1063/1.4758300
Loading

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.

Click to view

FIG. 1.

(a) Energy band gap diagram as a function of lattice spacing for selected III-V compound semiconductor materials. The substrates' lattice spacings are represented by open circles. The alloys of the 3-junction lattice-matched existing Ge and GaAs-based designs are indicated by blue squares, and the IMM 1.8 eV InGaP/1.4 eV GaAs/1.0 eV InGaAs approach by bluecircles. The proposed lattice-matched design, formed by (1.93 eV) In0.37Al0.63As/(1.39 eV) In0.38Ga0.62As0.57P0.43/(0.94 eV) In0.38Ga0.62As, with optimized band gaps and lattice spacing = 5.807 Å, is displayed as red triangles. The green diamonds correspond to an InP-based approach, which involves thesame alloyed semiconductors as the optimized 3-junction: (1.47 eV) In0.52Al0.48As/(1.06 eV) In0.53Ga0.47As0.42P0.58/(0.74 eV) In0.53Ga0.47As. (b) Efficiency as a function of number of suns (light intensity) obtained by detailed balance calculation for the four different triple-junction designs shown in (a), in a two-terminal series-connection configuration. All calculations were performed assuming constant temperature (300 K). Note that the optimized 3-junction design (red triangles) can ideally achieve more than 50% in efficiency under merely 30-suns illumination.

Image of FIG. 2.

Click to view

FIG. 2.

(a) Schematic of a monolithic two-terminal series-connected (1.93 eV) In0.37Al0.63As/(1.39 eV) In0.38Ga0.62As0.57P0.43/(0.94 eV) In0.38Ga0.62As 3-junction solar cell with an optimized band gap energies combination, and lattice constant equal to 5.807 Å, as represented by red triangles in Figure 1(a) . P- and n-type layers are base and emitter, respectively. The layers are out of scale to better represent the different alloys involved in the design, and the window layers are omitted here for simplicity. (b) Light J-V curve obtained from 1-dimensional full device modeling for the 3-junction solar cell shown in (a). Note that >51% in efficiency is achieved for concentration illumination. The simulation was performed using AM 1.5 direct 100-suns illumination, assuming zero-resistance tunnel junctions.

Image of FIG. 3.

Click to view

FIG. 3.

(a) Light J-V curve under 1-sun AM1.5 global illumination for the InAlAs, InGaAsP and InGaAs subcells lattice-matched to InP externally connected in series, in a six terminal configuration. 850 and 1200 nm long pass filters were used on top of the InGaAsP middle and InGaAs bottom subcells, respectively, in order to mimic the behavior of the 3-junction device. (b) External quantum efficiency measurements for each independent subcell.

Image of FIG. 4.

Click to view

FIG. 4.

(a) Light J-V curve measured under 1-sun AM1.5 direct illumination for the InP-based 1.47 eV InAlAs/1.06 eV InGaAsP/0.74 eV InGaAs 3-junction device (red triangles), and obtained from 1-dimensional device modeling (grey solid line). (b) External quantum efficiency for the InP-based 3J solar cell.

Tables

Generic image for table

Click to view

Table I.

Materials, band gaps and thicknesses of each subcell forming the (1.93 eV) InAlAs/(1.39 eV) InGaAsP/(0.94 eV) InGaAs monolithic lattice-matched 3-junction suggested device with optimized band gap combination. The tunnel junctions are omitted since the simulations assumed zero-loss resistance junctions.

Generic image for table

Click to view

Table II.

Figures of merit for all individual subcells in a tandem configuration and for the optimized (1.93 eV) In0.37Al0.63As/(1.39 eV) In0.38Ga0.62As0.57P0.43/(0.94 eV) In0.38Ga0.62As 3-junction device obtained from 1-dimensional device modeling, assuming Lambert-Beer absorption, normal incidence of light, constant temperature (300 K), and AM 1.5 direct 1-sun illumination.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/aip/journal/apl/102/3/10.1063/1.4758300
2013-01-22
2014-04-16

Abstract

An approach for an all lattice-matched multijunction solar cell optimized design is presented with 5.807 Å lattice constant, together with a detailed analysis of its performance by means of full device modeling. The simulations show that a (1.93 eV)In0.37 Al 0.63As/(1.39 eV)In0.38Ga0.62As0.57P0.43/(0.94 eV)In0.38Ga0.62As 3-junction solar cell can achieve efficiencies >51% under 100-suns illumination (with Voc = 3.34 V). As a key proof of concept, an equivalent 3-junction solar cell lattice-matched to InP was fabricated and tested. The independently connected single junction solar cells were also tested in a spectrum splitting configuration, showing similar performance to a monolithic tandem device, with Voc = 1.8 V.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/aip/journal/apl/102/3/1.4758300.html;jsessionid=294qholp0ar7a.x-aip-live-01?itemId=/content/aip/journal/apl/102/3/10.1063/1.4758300&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah&containerItemId=content/aip/journal/apl
true
true
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Towards an optimized all lattice-matched InAlAs/InGaAsP/InGaAs multijunction solar cell with efficiency >50%
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/aip/journal/apl/102/3/10.1063/1.4758300
10.1063/1.4758300
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM