Cargando…
A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells
The pursuit of ever-higher solar cell efficiencies has focused heavily on multijunction technologies. In tandem cells, subcells are typically either contacted via two terminals (2T) or four terminals (4T). Simulations show that the less-common three-terminal (3T) design may be comparable to 4T tande...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Elsevier
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9450120/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36093056 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.104950 |
_version_ | 1784784455106297856 |
---|---|
author | VanSant, Kaitlyn T. Warren, Emily L. Geisz, John F. Klein, Talysa R. Johnston, Steve McMahon, William E. Schulte-Huxel, Henning Rienäcker, Michael Peibst, Robby Tamboli, Adele C. |
author_facet | VanSant, Kaitlyn T. Warren, Emily L. Geisz, John F. Klein, Talysa R. Johnston, Steve McMahon, William E. Schulte-Huxel, Henning Rienäcker, Michael Peibst, Robby Tamboli, Adele C. |
author_sort | VanSant, Kaitlyn T. |
collection | PubMed |
description | The pursuit of ever-higher solar cell efficiencies has focused heavily on multijunction technologies. In tandem cells, subcells are typically either contacted via two terminals (2T) or four terminals (4T). Simulations show that the less-common three-terminal (3T) design may be comparable to 4T tandem cells in its compatibility with a range of materials, operating conditions, and methods for subcell integration, yet the 3T design circumvents shading losses of the 4T intermediate conductive layers. This study analyzes the performance of two superstrate 3T III-V-on-Si (III-V//Si) tandem cells: One has slightly greater current contribution from the Si bottom cell (GaInP//Si) and the other has substantially greater current contribution from the GaAs top cell (GaAs//Si). Our results show that both tandem cells exhibit the same efficiency (21.3%), thereby demonstrating that the third terminal allows for flexibility in the selection of the top cell material, similar to the 4T design. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9450120 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | Elsevier |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-94501202022-09-08 A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells VanSant, Kaitlyn T. Warren, Emily L. Geisz, John F. Klein, Talysa R. Johnston, Steve McMahon, William E. Schulte-Huxel, Henning Rienäcker, Michael Peibst, Robby Tamboli, Adele C. iScience Article The pursuit of ever-higher solar cell efficiencies has focused heavily on multijunction technologies. In tandem cells, subcells are typically either contacted via two terminals (2T) or four terminals (4T). Simulations show that the less-common three-terminal (3T) design may be comparable to 4T tandem cells in its compatibility with a range of materials, operating conditions, and methods for subcell integration, yet the 3T design circumvents shading losses of the 4T intermediate conductive layers. This study analyzes the performance of two superstrate 3T III-V-on-Si (III-V//Si) tandem cells: One has slightly greater current contribution from the Si bottom cell (GaInP//Si) and the other has substantially greater current contribution from the GaAs top cell (GaAs//Si). Our results show that both tandem cells exhibit the same efficiency (21.3%), thereby demonstrating that the third terminal allows for flexibility in the selection of the top cell material, similar to the 4T design. Elsevier 2022-08-19 /pmc/articles/PMC9450120/ /pubmed/36093056 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.104950 Text en © 2022 The Author(s) https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). |
spellingShingle | Article VanSant, Kaitlyn T. Warren, Emily L. Geisz, John F. Klein, Talysa R. Johnston, Steve McMahon, William E. Schulte-Huxel, Henning Rienäcker, Michael Peibst, Robby Tamboli, Adele C. A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells |
title | A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells |
title_full | A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells |
title_fullStr | A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells |
title_full_unstemmed | A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells |
title_short | A performance comparison between GaInP-on-Si and GaAs-on-Si 3-terminal tandem solar cells |
title_sort | performance comparison between gainp-on-si and gaas-on-si 3-terminal tandem solar cells |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9450120/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36093056 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2022.104950 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT vansantkaitlynt aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT warrenemilyl aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT geiszjohnf aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT kleintalysar aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT johnstonsteve aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT mcmahonwilliame aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT schultehuxelhenning aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT rienackermichael aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT peibstrobby aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT tamboliadelec aperformancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT vansantkaitlynt performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT warrenemilyl performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT geiszjohnf performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT kleintalysar performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT johnstonsteve performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT mcmahonwilliame performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT schultehuxelhenning performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT rienackermichael performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT peibstrobby performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells AT tamboliadelec performancecomparisonbetweengainponsiandgaasonsi3terminaltandemsolarcells |