Cargando…

A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET

Despite the increasing trend of n-type silicon wafer utilization in the manufacturing of high-efficiency heterojunction solar cells due to the superior advantages over p-type counterparts, its high manufacturing cost remains to be one of the most crucial factors, which impedes its market share growt...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Alkharasani, Wabel Mohammed, Amin, Nowshad, Shahahmadi, Seyed Ahmad, Alkahtani, Ammar Ahmed, Mohamad, Ili Salwani Binti, Chelvanathan, Puvaneswaran, Sieh Kiong, Tiong
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9142932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35629537
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15103508
_version_ 1784715681222098944
author Alkharasani, Wabel Mohammed
Amin, Nowshad
Shahahmadi, Seyed Ahmad
Alkahtani, Ammar Ahmed
Mohamad, Ili Salwani Binti
Chelvanathan, Puvaneswaran
Sieh Kiong, Tiong
author_facet Alkharasani, Wabel Mohammed
Amin, Nowshad
Shahahmadi, Seyed Ahmad
Alkahtani, Ammar Ahmed
Mohamad, Ili Salwani Binti
Chelvanathan, Puvaneswaran
Sieh Kiong, Tiong
author_sort Alkharasani, Wabel Mohammed
collection PubMed
description Despite the increasing trend of n-type silicon wafer utilization in the manufacturing of high-efficiency heterojunction solar cells due to the superior advantages over p-type counterparts, its high manufacturing cost remains to be one of the most crucial factors, which impedes its market share growth with state-of-the-art silicon heterojunction (SHJ) solar cells demonstrating high conversion efficiencies from various configurations, the prospect of using an n-type wafer is debatable from a cost-efficiency point of view. Hence, a systematic comparison between p- and n-type SHJ solar cells was executed in this work using AFORS-HET numerical software. Front and rear-emitter architectures were selected for each type of wafer with ideal (without defects) and non-ideal (with defects) conditions. For ideal conditions, solar cells with p-type wafers and a front-emitter structure resulted in a maximum conversion efficiency of 28%, while n-type wafers demonstrated a maximum efficiency of 26% from the rear-emitter structure. These high-performance devices were possible due to the optimization of the bandgap and electron-affinity for all passivating and doping layers with values ranging from 1.3 to 1.7 eV and 3.9 to 4 eV, respectively. The correlation between the device structure and the type of wafers as demonstrated here will be helpful for the development of both types of solar cells with comparable performance.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9142932
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher MDPI
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-91429322022-05-29 A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET Alkharasani, Wabel Mohammed Amin, Nowshad Shahahmadi, Seyed Ahmad Alkahtani, Ammar Ahmed Mohamad, Ili Salwani Binti Chelvanathan, Puvaneswaran Sieh Kiong, Tiong Materials (Basel) Article Despite the increasing trend of n-type silicon wafer utilization in the manufacturing of high-efficiency heterojunction solar cells due to the superior advantages over p-type counterparts, its high manufacturing cost remains to be one of the most crucial factors, which impedes its market share growth with state-of-the-art silicon heterojunction (SHJ) solar cells demonstrating high conversion efficiencies from various configurations, the prospect of using an n-type wafer is debatable from a cost-efficiency point of view. Hence, a systematic comparison between p- and n-type SHJ solar cells was executed in this work using AFORS-HET numerical software. Front and rear-emitter architectures were selected for each type of wafer with ideal (without defects) and non-ideal (with defects) conditions. For ideal conditions, solar cells with p-type wafers and a front-emitter structure resulted in a maximum conversion efficiency of 28%, while n-type wafers demonstrated a maximum efficiency of 26% from the rear-emitter structure. These high-performance devices were possible due to the optimization of the bandgap and electron-affinity for all passivating and doping layers with values ranging from 1.3 to 1.7 eV and 3.9 to 4 eV, respectively. The correlation between the device structure and the type of wafers as demonstrated here will be helpful for the development of both types of solar cells with comparable performance. MDPI 2022-05-13 /pmc/articles/PMC9142932/ /pubmed/35629537 http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15103508 Text en © 2022 by the authors. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
spellingShingle Article
Alkharasani, Wabel Mohammed
Amin, Nowshad
Shahahmadi, Seyed Ahmad
Alkahtani, Ammar Ahmed
Mohamad, Ili Salwani Binti
Chelvanathan, Puvaneswaran
Sieh Kiong, Tiong
A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET
title A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET
title_full A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET
title_fullStr A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET
title_full_unstemmed A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET
title_short A Comparative Study on p- and n-Type Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cells by AFORS-HET
title_sort comparative study on p- and n-type silicon heterojunction solar cells by afors-het
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9142932/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35629537
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ma15103508
work_keys_str_mv AT alkharasaniwabelmohammed acomparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT aminnowshad acomparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT shahahmadiseyedahmad acomparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT alkahtaniammarahmed acomparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT mohamadilisalwanibinti acomparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT chelvanathanpuvaneswaran acomparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT siehkiongtiong acomparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT alkharasaniwabelmohammed comparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT aminnowshad comparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT shahahmadiseyedahmad comparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT alkahtaniammarahmed comparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT mohamadilisalwanibinti comparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT chelvanathanpuvaneswaran comparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet
AT siehkiongtiong comparativestudyonpandntypesiliconheterojunctionsolarcellsbyaforshet