Cargando…

Role of Surface Coverage and Film Quality of the TiO(2) Electron Selective Layer for Optimal Hole-Blocking Properties

[Image: see text] Titanium dioxide (TiO(2)) is a commonly used electron selective layer in thin-film solar cells. The energy levels of TiO(2) align well with those of most light-absorbing materials and facilitate extracting electrons while blocking the extraction of holes. In a device, this separate...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Qudsia, Syeda, Dahlström, Staffan, Ahläng, Christian, Rosqvist, Emil, Nyman, Mathias, Peltonen, Jouko, Österbacka, Ronald, Smått, Jan-Henrik
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: American Chemical Society 2022
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9017100/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35449986
http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.1c06622
Descripción
Sumario:[Image: see text] Titanium dioxide (TiO(2)) is a commonly used electron selective layer in thin-film solar cells. The energy levels of TiO(2) align well with those of most light-absorbing materials and facilitate extracting electrons while blocking the extraction of holes. In a device, this separates charge carriers and reduces recombination. In this study, we have evaluated the hole-blocking behavior of TiO(2) compact layers using charge extraction by linearly increasing voltage in a metal–insulator–semiconductor structure (MIS-CELIV). This hole-blocking property was characterized as surface recombination velocity (S(R)) for holes at the interface between a semiconducting polymer and TiO(2) layer. TiO(2) layers of different thicknesses were prepared by sol–gel dip coating on two transparent conductive oxide substrates with different roughnesses. Surface coverage and film quality on both substrates were characterized using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy and atomic force microscopy, along with its conductive imaging mode. Thicker TiO(2) coatings provided better surface coverage, leading to reduced S(R), unless the layers were otherwise defective. We found S(R) to be a more sensitive indicator of the overall film quality, as varying S(R) values were still observed among the films that looked similar in their characteristics via other methods.