Analyzing ecofriendly perovskite solar cells

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

Analyzing ecofriendly perovskite solar cells 1Mohit Dhanik 1

UG Student of Department of Physics, Graphic Era Hill University, Dehradun 248002,Uttarakhand ,India ---------------------------------------------------------------------***---------------------------------------------------------------------

Abstract - This research paper presents an analysis of

also shown the influence of absorber and ETL thickness , working temperature, and current-voltage density (J-V) characteristics. We also demonstrated the effect of the layer thickness on PCE and J-Vand I-V characteristics of CH3NH3SnI3.

highly efficient eco-friendly perovskite solar cells using the SCAPS 1D simulator. Perovskite solar cells(PSCs) have gained a lot of attention as an alternative to conventional silicon – based solar cells due to their high power conversion efficiency (PCE) and low cost fabrication.The study investigates the impact of different –different hole transport layers(HTL) and electron transport layers(ETL) on the performance of the perovskite solar cell.And finding which(HTL/CH3NH3SnI3/ETL) combination would be best.The graphs for capacitancevoltage, current density voltage, fill factor and quantum efficiencies are also evaluated. Furthermore,we have used Cu2O,Spiro-MeOTAD and CuO as our best HTL and ZnO , TiO 2 and WS2 as our best ETL.The simulation results show that optimizing these parameters can significantly enhance the device efficiency .The study also highlights the potential of perovskite solar cells to be an efficient and cost –effective solution for renewable energy generation.

2. Device structure and simulation SCAPS 1D software[5] [6][7][8]solves the poisson equation(a) ,continuity equation of electron(b) and holes(c).

[9]

Key Words: Solar cells - electron transport layer – hole transport layer-SCAPS 1D-PCE

where, G, τn, τp, D, q, Ψ, μn, μp, n (x), p (x), nt (x), pt (x), N−A (x) , N+D (x) and ξ denote the generation rate, electron lifespan, diffusion coefficient, electron charge, electrostatic potential, electron mobility, hole mobility, free electrons concentration, free holes concentration, trapped electrons concentration, trapped holes concentration, ionized acceptor concentrations, ionized donor concentrations and electric field.[9]

1.INTRODUCTION The world's energy needs have been increasing day by day.

The depletion of energy sources and fossil fuels, natural gas, coal, etc. have a negative impact on our societies and the environment [1]. Therefore, the development of alternative energy resources and sustainable energy sources considering economic and environmental aspects is the focus of research worldwide [1]. Perovskite materials are widely used in photovoltaic devices such as solar cells and light-emitting diodes (LEDs) [2]. The energy conversion efficiency of PSCs has improved rapidly in recent years.

Lead-based metal halide perovskites have revolutionized photovoltaics in recent years, dramatically increasing the efficiency from 3.8% in 2009 to 25.7% in 2022 [3].But those perovskite are mostly lead based and the use of toxic materials and organic cations in PSCs presents challenges for commercial applications.

Table 1 :Input parameters of the ITOs, ETLs and absorber layer Parameters Thickness(nm) Band gap,Eg(eV) Electron affinity,(eV) Dielectric permittivity(relative), CB effective density of states,Nc(1/cm3) VB effective density of states,Nv(1/cm3) Electron mobility,(cm2/Vs) Hole mobility,(cm2/Vs) Shallow uniform acceptor density,NA(1/cm3) Defects density,Nt(1/cm3) References

In this work, we analyze the solar cells with the help of SCAPS software. There are five layers consisting of ITO/ETL/ CH3NH3SnI3 /HTL/Au. ZnO, TiO2 and WS2 was used as electron transporting layer (ETL) and Cu2O, Spiro-MeOTAD and CuO was used as hole transport layer (HTL).ITO and Au are used as they are best suitable[4]. These layers have the advantages of being eco friendly and highly efficient. We analysed the performance of the ETL and HTL layer. We have

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

|

ITO 500 3.5 4

TiO2 30 3.2 4

ZnO 50 3.3 4

WS2 100 1.8 3.95

CH3NH3SnI3 500 1.3 4.170

9

9

9

13.6

6.5

2.20E+18

2.0E+18

3.7E+18

1.0E+18

2.2E+19

1.8E+19

1.8E+19

1.8E+19

2.4E+19

2.2E+19

20

20

100

100

1.6

10

10

25

100

1.6

--------

---------

----------

----------

3.2E+15

1.0E+15

1.0E+15

1.0E+15

1.0E+15

1.0E+13

[4][10][11][12]

[13][10][4]

[8][14][4]

[10][15][4]

[16]

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 489

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

3.1 Discussions

Table 2: Input parameters of the HTLs Cu2O 50 2.2 3.4 7.5 2.0E+19 1.0E+19 200 8600 1.0E+18

Spiro-MeOTAD 200 3 2.2 3 2.2E+18 1.8E+19 2.1E-3 2.16E-3 1.0E+18

------1.0E+15 [13][4] Energetic Distribution

-----------------1.0E+15 1.0E+15 [4][8] [4] Reference for Total density (cm-2) defect energy level Above the EV 1.000E+15[17] maximum

3.1.1. Effect of thickness –

CuO 50 1.51 4.07 18.1 2.2E+19 5.5E+20 100 0.1 1.0E+18

FOR HTL:

26.7

(a)

26.6 26.5

Single Single

Above the EV maximum

eta(%)

Parameters Thickness(nm) Band gap,Eg(eV) Electron affinity,(eV) Dielectric permittivity(relative), CB effective density of states,Nc(1/cm3) VB effective density of states,Nv(1/cm3) Electron mobility,(cm2/Vs) Hole mobility,(cm2/Vs) Shallow uniform acceptor density,NA(1/cm3) Shallow uniform donor density,ND(1/cm3) Defects density,Nt(1/cm3) References Interface Defect type Capture crosssection:electrons /holes(cm3) ETL/ Neutral 1.000E-15[17] CH3NH3S 1.000E-15 nI3 CH3NH3S Neutral 1.000E-15[12] nI3/HTL 1.000E-15

26.4 26.3 26.2 26.1 26.0 25.9 0

2

4

6

8

10

TiO2 thickness(um)

1.000E+15[12] 1.0108

(b)

1.0106 1.0104

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS Voc(V)

1.0102

Table 3: Results of solar cells with different –different HTL layers

1.0100 1.0098 1.0096 1.0094 1.0092

Optimized device TiO2/ CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O

Voc(V) 1.0091

Jsc(mA/cm2) 31.642

FF(%) 81.20

PCE(%) 25.93

ZnO / CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O WS2/ CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O

1.0098 0.98

31.881 19.13

81.23 81.23

26.15 15.30

1.0090 0

32.6

Jsc(mA/cm2) 32.53

FF(%) 81.22

PCE(%) 26.70

ZnO/ CH3NH3SnI3/ SpiroMeOTAD ZnO/ CH3NH3SnI3/ CuO

0.88

32.45

71.98

20.68

0.98

33.41

83.13

27.28

6

8

10

(c)

32.4

Jsc(mA/cm2)

Voc(V) 1.01

4

TiO2 thickness(um)

Table 4: Results of solar cells with different-different ETL layers Optimized device ZnO/ CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O

2

32.2

32.0

31.8

31.6 0

2

4

6

8

10

8

10

TiO2 thickness(um)

81.230

(d)

FF(%)

81.225

81.220

81.215

81.210

81.205

81.200 0

2

4

6

TiO2 thickness(um)

Fig.1 Dependence of layer thickness of TiO2 on PCE (%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF (%)

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 490

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

26.7

28

(a)

26

26.6

24

26.5

eta(%)

eta(%)

(a)

22

26.4

20

26.3

18

26.2

16

26.1 0

0

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

10

8

10

ZnO thickness(um)

10

WS2 thickness(um)

(b)

1.0108

1.015

1.0106

1.005

1.0104

VOC(V)

VOC(V)

(b) 1.010

1.000

1.0102

0.995

1.0100

0.990

1.0098 0

0.985 0

2

4

6

8

2

10

4

6

ZnO thickness(um)

WS2 thickness(um)

34

(c)

32.5

(c) 32

32.4

JSC(mA/cm2)

Jsc(mA/cm2)

30 28 26

32.3 32.2 32.1

24

32.0 22

31.9 20 0

2

4

6

8

31.8

10

0

2

WS2 thickness(um)

81.240

6

8

10

8

10

81.2305

(d) 81.235

81.2300

81.230

81.2295

81.225

81.2290 FF(%)

FF(%)

4

ZnO thickness(um)

81.220 81.215

(d)

81.2285 81.2280

81.210

81.2275

81.205

81.2270 81.2265

81.200 0

2

4

6

8

10

81.2260

WS2 thickness(um)

0

2

4

6

ZnO thickness(um)

Fig.2 Dependence of layer thickness of WS2 on PCE (%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF (%)

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

Fig.3 Dependence of layer thickness of ZnO on PCE (%), Voc (V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF (%)

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 491

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

FOR ETL: (a)

23.5

(a)

26.71

23.0

eta(%)

26.70 26.69

22.5

eta(%)

22.0 26.68

21.5

26.67 26.66

21.0

26.65

0

2

4

6

8

10

8

10

8

10

Spiro-MeOTAD thickness(um)

26.64 0

2

4

6

8

10

Cu20 thickness(um)

(c) 32.4576

(c)

32.54

32.4574

Jsc(mA/cm2)

32.53

JSC(mA/cm2)

32.52 32.51 32.50

32.4572 32.4570 32.4568

32.49

32.4566 32.48

32.4564

32.47 32.46

32.4562 0

32.45 0

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

Spiro-MeOTAD thickness(um)

10

Cu20 thickness(um)

(b)

(b)

0.88510

1.01064 0.88508

1.01062 V0C(V)

V0C(V)

0.88506

1.01060

0.88504 0.88502

1.01058

0.88500

1.01056

0.88498

1.01054 0

0

2

4

6

8

10

2

4

6

Spiro-MeOTAD thickness(um)

Cu20 thickness(um)

(d)

81.2240

(d) 82

81.2238 81.2236

80

FF(%)

FF(%)

81.2234 81.2232 81.2230

78

76

81.2228 81.2226

74

81.2224 81.2222 0

2

4

6

8

72

10

0

Cu20 thickness(um)

Fig.4 Dependence of layer thickness of Cu2O on PCE (%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF (%)

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

2

4

6

8

10

Spiro-MeOTAD thickness(um)

Fig.5 Dependence of layer thickness of Spiro-MeOTAD on PCE (%), Voc (V), Jsc (mA/cm2), FF (%)

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 492

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

FOR PEROVSKITE LAYER(CH3NH3SnI3): (a)

27.4 27.2

30

27.0 25

eta(%)

26.8 26.6

20 eta(%)

26.4 26.2

15

26.0 10

25.8 5

25.6 0

2

4

6

8

10

CuO thickness(um)

0 0

2

4

6

8

10

CH3NH3SnI3 thickness(um)

(b) 0.99 1.10

0.98

1.05

0.96

1.00

VOC(V)

VOC(V)

(b)

0.97

0.95

0.95

0.94 0.90

0.93 0.85 0

0.92

2

4

6

8

10

CH3NH3SnI3 thickness(um)

0

2

4

6

8

10

(c)

CuO thickness(um) 40 35

(c)

30

JSC(mA/cm2)

33.4

Jsc(mA/cm2)

33.2

33.0

25 20 15 10

32.8

5 32.6

0 0 32.4 0

2

4

6

8

2

4

6

8

10

CH3NH3SnI3 thickness(um)

10

CuO thickness(um) 86

(d)

(d) 86.0

85

85.5

84

FF(%)

FF(%)

85.0 84.5 84.0

83

82

83.5

81 83.0 0

2

4

6

8

80

10

0

CuO thickness(um)

2

4

6

8

10

CH3NH3SnI3 thickness(um)

Fig.6 Dependence of layer thickness of CuO on PCE(%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF(%)

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

Fig.7 Dependence of layer thickness of CH3NH3SnI3 on PCE(%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF(%)

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 493

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

2-EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE

(a) 30

25

30

eta(%)

(a)

eta(%)

25

20

20

15

15

10

10

5 300

400

500

600

700

T(K)

5 300

400

500

600

700

T(K) 85

(d) 80

(b)

1.1

75

1.0

70

VOC(V)

FF(%)

0.9 0.8

65 60

0.7 55

0.6 50

0.5

45 300

400

0.4

500

600

700

T(K) 300

400

500

600

700

T(K)

(c) 32.485

(c)

32.480

JSC(mA/cm2)

32.500

JSCmA/cm2)

32.495 32.490

32.475 32.470 32.465

32.485 32.460

32.480 32.455

32.475 300

400

32.470

500

600

700

T(K)

32.465 300

400

500

600

700 1.1

T(K)

(b) 1.0

(d)

0.9

VOC(V)

85 80

0.8 0.7

75 0.6

FF(%)

70

0.5

65

0.4 300

60

400

500

600

700

T(K) 55 50

Fig.9 Effect of temperature on PCE(%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF(%) of ZnO/ CH3NH3SnI3/ Spiro-MeOTAD

45 300

400

500

600

700

T(K)

Fig.8 Effect of temperature on PCE(%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF(%) of TiO2(variable) CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O ; ZnO(variable) / CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O ; WS2(variable)/ CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O ; ZnO/ CH3NH3SnI3/ Cu2O(variable)

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 494

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

Table 5: Comparison between different perovskite parameters with the current study.

30

(a)

eta(%)

25

20

ETL

HTL

Perovskite layer

JSC(mA/cm2)

VOC(V)

FF(%)

eta(%)

Ref

15

Zn2SnO4

SpiroOMeTAD

CH3NH3SnI3

32.30

1.185

64

24.3

[18]

10

TiO2

CuO2

MAPbI2Br

31.4

0.89

76.7

22

[19]

5

TiO2

SpiroOMeTAD

CH3NH3SnI3

32.76

0.82

74

20.08

[18]

TiO2

CBTS

CsPbI3

21.07

0.997

85.21

17.90

[4]

TiO2

CuO2

CH3NH3SnI3

34

0.99

71.30

24.54

[16]

ZnO

CuO

CH3NH3SnI3

33.41

0.98

83.13

27.28

This work

0 300

400

500

600

700

T(K)

1.0

(b)

0.8

3. CONCLUSIONS

VOC(V)

0.6

0.4

This study analyses environment friendly perovskite solar cells by focusing on their efficiency. Different – different HTL and ETL has been successfully analyzed with the help of SCAPS 1D. As per the findings, ZnO as HTL and CuO as ETL are best suitable for non-lead based perovskite solar cells.

The influence of different HTLs and ETLs thickness on PCE (eta),VOC,JSC and FF was studied, similarly influence of temperature is also studied with the help of SCAPS 1D. SCAPS 1D software gives us a fair results about the thickness and temperature of different layers of solar cells to get more efficient perovskite solar cell.

0.2

0.0 300

400

500

600

700

T(K)

(d) 90 80

FF(%)

70 60 50

REFERENCES

40 30 300

400

500

600

[1]

M. Khalid Hossain et al., “Combined DFT, SCAPS-1D, and wxAMPS frameworks for design optimization of efficient Cs2BiAgI6-based perovskite solar cells with different charge transport layers.” [Online]. Available: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4595-6367

[2]

A. K. Mishra and R. K. Shukla, “Effect of humidity in the perovskite solar cell,” Mater. Today Proc., vol. 29, no.

July, pp.

836–838, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.matpr.2020.04.872.

[3]

F. Ji, G. Boschloo, F. Wang, and F. Gao, “Challenges and Progress in Lead-Free Halide Double Perovskite Solar Cells,” Sol. RRL, vol. 2201112, 2023, doi: 10.1002/solr.202201112.

[4]

M. Khalid Hossain et al., “Effect of various electron and hole transport layers on the performance of CsPbI 3based perovskite solar cells: A numerical investigation in DFT, SCAPS-1D, and wxAMPS frameworks.”

[5]

M. Burgelman, P. Nollet, and S. Degrave, “Modelling polycrystalline semiconductor solar cells,” Thin Solid Films, vol. 361, pp. 527–532, 2000, doi: 10.1016/S00406090(99)00825-1.

[6]

A. Niemegeers and M. Burgelman, “MODELLING OF ac-

700

T(K)

(c)

32.65

32.60

JSC(mA/cm2)

32.55

32.50

32.45

32.40

32.35 300

400

500

600

700

T(K)

Fig.10 Effect of temperature on PCE (%), Voc(V), Jsc(mA/cm2), FF(%) of ZnO/ CH3NH3SnI3/ CuO

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 495

International Research Journal of Engineering and Technology (IRJET)

e-ISSN: 2395-0056

Volume: 10 Issue: 12 | Dec 2023

p-ISSN: 2395-0072

www.irjet.net

CHARACTERISTICS SOLAR CELLS,” IEEE Photovoltaics Spec. Conf., no. april, pp. 901–904, 1996.

[7]

[18] R. Tala-Ighil Zaïr, C. Oudjehani, and K. Tighilt, “SCAPS

Simulation for Perovskite Solar Cell,” J. Sol. Energy Res. Updat., vol. 8, pp. 21–26, 2021, doi: 10.31875/24102199.2021.08.3.

J. Verschraegen and M. Burgelman, “Numerical modeling of intra-band tunneling for heterojunction solar cells in scaps,” Thin Solid Films, vol. 515, no. 15 SPEC. ISS., pp.

6276–6279, 2007, doi: 10.1016/j.tsf.2006.12.049.

[8]

M. Burgelman, K. Decock, S. Kheli, and A. Abass, “Author ’ s personal copy Advanced electrical simulation of thin fi lm solar cells,” Thin Solid Films, vol. 535, pp. 296–301, 2013.

[9]

P. K. Patel, “Device simulation of highly efficient ecofriendly CH3NH3SnI3 perovskite solar cell,” Sci. Rep., vol.

11, no. 1, Dec. 2021, doi: 10.1038/s41598-021-82817-w.

[19] S. Sajid, S. Alzahmi, I. Ben Salem, and I. M. Obaidat,

“Guidelines for Fabricating Highly Efficient Perovskite Solar Cells with Cu2O as the Hole Transport Material,” Nanomaterials, vol. 12, no. 19, 2022, doi: 10.3390/nano12193315.

[10] S. Abdelaziz, A. Zekry, A. Shaker, and M. Abouelatta,

“Investigating the performance of formamidinium tinbased perovskite solar cell by SCAPS device simulation,” Opt. Mater. (Amst)., vol. 101, no. February, p. 109738, 2020, doi: 10.1016/j.optmat.2020.109738.

[11] F. Anwar, S. Afrin, S. S. Satter, R. Mahbub, and S. M. Ullah,

“Simulation and performance study of nanowire CdS/CdTe solar cell,” Int. J. Renew. Energy Res., vol. 7, no.

2, pp.

885–893, 2017, doi: 10.20508/ijrer.v7i2.5688.g7068.

[12] M. A. Moon, H. Ali, and F. Rahman, “Investigation of thin-

fi lm p -BaSi 2 / n -CdS heterostructure towards semiconducting silicide based high ef fi ciency solar cell,” 2020.

[13] S. Kazim, “IKERBASQUE, Basque Foundation for Science,

Bilbao, 48013, Spain. 3,” vol. 2.

[14] I. Chabri, A. Oubelkacem, and Y. Benhouria, “Numerical

development of lead-free Cs2TiI6-based perovskite solar cell via SCAPS-1D,” E3S Web Conf., vol. 336, pp. 1–8, 2022, doi: 10.1051/e3sconf/202233600050.

[15] K. Sobayel et al., “A comprehensive defect study of

tungsten disulfide (WS2) as electron transport layer in perovskite solar cells by numerical simulation,” Results Phys., vol. 12, no. March, pp. 1097–1103, 2019, doi: 10.1016/j.rinp.2018.12.049.

[16] M.

A. Salih, M. A. Mustafa, and B. A. A. Yousef, “Developing Lead-Free Perovskite-Based Solar Cells with Planar Structure in Confined Mode Arrangement Using SCAPS-1D,” Sustain., vol. 15, no. 2, Jan. 2023, doi: 10.3390/su15021607.

[17] A. B. Coulibaly, S. O. Oyedele, N. R. Kre, and B. Aka,

“Comparative Study of Lead-Free Perovskite Solar Cells Using Different Hole Transporter Materials,” Model.

Numer. Simul. Mater. Sci., vol. 09, no. 04, pp. 97–107, 2019, doi: 10.4236/mnsms.2019.94006.

© 2023, IRJET

|

Impact Factor value: 8.226

|

ISO 9001:2008 Certified Journal

|

Page 496