Point defect segregation and its role in the detrimental nature of Frank partials in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mrow><mml:mi>Cu</mml:mi><mml:mo>(</mml:mo><mml:mi>In</mml:mi><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>Ga</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>)</mml:mo></mml:mrow><mml:msub><mml:mi>Se</mml:mi><mml:mn>2</mml:mn></mml:msub></mml:mrow></mml:math>thin-film absorbers

Sanli, Ekin Simsek; Barragan-Yani, Daniel; Ramasse, Quentin M.; Albe, Karsten; Mainz, Roland; Abou‐Ras, Daniel; Weber, Alfons; Kleebe, Hans‐Joachim; Aken, Peter A. van

doi:10.1103/physrevb.95.195209

Cited by 13 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In contrast, (partial) dislocations were shown to exhibit regions with changes in composition which extend over several nm . At these line defects, strain fields were found to induce substantial outdiffusion of Cu (Cu i defects), probably in order to relax the crystal lattice correspondingly, in addition to In Cu 2+ antisites present in areas under compressive strain . Therefore, in the case of (partial) dislocations, the change in composition results in an extended phase around the dislocation cores of several nm in diameter.…”

Section: Spatial Variations In Composition and Influences On Local Bamentioning

confidence: 96%

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se₂ Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin films have been reported to lead to band‐gap or electrostatic potential fluctuations, which may reduce the photovoltaic performance of the corresponding solar cells via enhanced recombination. The issue of where these inhomogeneities occur in the Cu(In,Ga)Se2 absorber has so far not been discussed in detail in literature. The present work gives an overview of spatial variations in composition, net doping, and lifetime on various scales, also with respect to their occurrences at interfaces and extended structural defects. Impacts of these spatial variations on the device performance of the corresponding solar cells are discussed. It can be shown that compositional inhomogeneities possibly affecting the device performance are only present at (partial) dislocations and at the Cu(In,Ga)Se2/buffer interface, and that inhomogeneous distributions of excess charges at line/planar defects as well as of net doping concentrations affect considerably the potential landscape within Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin films.

show abstract

Section: Spatial Variations In Composition and Influences On Local Bamentioning

confidence: 96%

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se₂ Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…No spectra could be recorded on unetched films and Cu-rich films after weak etching, due to the presence of the conductive Cu-Se phases at the surface. A recent DFT study by Simsek Sanli et al 54 on the effect of Cu In antisites and Cu interstitials in CIS reveals the appearance of states at 270 meV above the valence band maximum and 210 meV below the conduction band minimum, respectively. However, it is not obvious why the population of these two defects would increase upon KCN etching.…”

Section: Optoelectronics Of Cis Metastability Induced By Cyanidementioning

confidence: 99%

Chemical instability at chalcogenide surfaces impacts chalcopyrite devices well beyond the surface

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The electrical and optoelectronic properties of materials are determined by the chemical potentials of their constituents. The relative density of point defects is thus controlled, allowing to craft microstructure, trap densities and doping levels. Here, we show that the chemical potentials of chalcogenide materials near the edge of their existence region are not only determined during growth but also at room temperature by post-processing. In particular, we study the generation of anion vacancies, which are critical defects in chalcogenide semiconductors and topological insulators. The example of CuInSe 2 photovoltaic semiconductor reveals that single phase material crosses the phase boundary and forms surface secondary phases upon oxidation, thereby creating anion vacancies. The arising metastable point defect population explains a common root cause of performance losses. This study shows how selective defect annihilation is attained with tailored chemical treatments that mitigate anion vacancy formation and improve the performance of CuInSe 2 solar cells.

show abstract

“…However, Sanli et al found fluctuations in the Cu component in dislocation cores at the ends of the stacking faults. Decoration of these dislocation cores induced the formation of deep defect states . Relevant APT research showed the presence of Cu enrichment/depletion at stacking faults, but no cosegregation of Na, K, and O .…”

Section: Other Thin-film Solar Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Decoration of these dislocation cores induced the formation of deep defect states. 171 Relevant APT research showed the presence of Cu enrichment/ depletion at stacking faults, but no cosegregation of Na, K, and O. 169 Due to the multicomponent feature of CIGS, its compositional fluctuations require further investigation.…”

Section: ■ Other Thin-film Solar Cellsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Electron Microscopy to Explore Solar Cell Interfaces: Microstructures, Efficiency, and Stability

Wang,

Hou,

et al. 2024

ACS Energy Lett.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Solar cell interfaces, including grain boundaries, twin boundaries, stacking faults, and phase boundaries, are the main nonradiative recombination and degradation sites and affect the photoelectric conversion efficiency and stability of solar cells, making it necessary to understand their fine structures and properties. Electron microscopy has provided micrometer/nanometer/atomic-scale structural information for investigating the microstructure of materials to unravel the structure−performance relationships of solar cells. Electron microscopy and related techniques have recently been used to investigate solar cell interfaces, but there has been no systematic summary of this research. In recent years, advances in technologies such as electron microscopy imaging, electron spectroscopy, in situ electron microscopy, and detectors have greatly expanded researchers' understanding of the interface properties of solar cells. This Review covers the research on the interfaces in perovskite/silicon/CdTe and Cu(In,Ga)Se 2 (CIGS) solar cells using electron microscopy and provides prospects for further progress.

show abstract

Point defect segregation and its role in the detrimental nature of Frank partials inCu(In,Ga)Se2thin-film absorbers

Cited by 13 publications

References 31 publications

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se₂ Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se₂ Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations

Chemical instability at chalcogenide surfaces impacts chalcopyrite devices well beyond the surface

Using Electron Microscopy to Explore Solar Cell Interfaces: Microstructures, Efficiency, and Stability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Point defect segregation and its role in the detrimental nature of Frank partials inCu(In,Ga)Se2thin-film absorbers

Cited by 13 publications

References 31 publications

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations

Chemical instability at chalcogenide surfaces impacts chalcopyrite devices well beyond the surface

Using Electron Microscopy to Explore Solar Cell Interfaces: Microstructures, Efficiency, and Stability

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se₂ Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations

Inhomogeneities in Cu(In,Ga)Se₂ Thin Films for Solar Cells: Band‐Gap Versus Potential Fluctuations