Achievement of over 17% efficiency with 30&amp;#x00D7;30cm&lt;sup&gt;2&lt;/sup&gt;-sized Cu(InGa)(SeS)&lt;inf&gt;2&lt;/inf&gt; submodules

Sugimoto, H.; Yagioka, T.; Nagahashi, M.; Yasaki, Y.; Kawaguchi, Yoshihiro; Morimoto, Takeshi; Chiba, Y.; Aramoto, T.; Tanaka, Yoshiaki; Hakuma, H.; Kuriyagawa, S.; Kushiya, Katsumi

doi:10.1109/pvsc.2011.6186681

Cited by 21 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Thin film solar cells based on CuIn 1‐x Ga x Se 2 (CIGS) are now arriving to a mature state that allow them to be fully manufactured at an industrial scale. Proof of this are the several records that different companies have achieved, there is MiaSolé's 1 m 2 with 15.7% module , TSMC Solar's 1.09 m 2 15.7% module , Solar Frontier's 30 × 30 cm 2 sub‐module with 17.2% efficiency , and Solibro's 16 cm 2 mini‐module with an efficiency of 18.7% , just to name a few. There were recent improvements at the laboratory cell level as well, and the world record is now 20.4% on a flexible substrate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn_1‐xGa_xSe₂ using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

Salomé

Fjällström

Szaniawski

et al. 2014

Progress in Photovoltaics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Until this day, the most efficient Cu(In,Ga)Se2 thin film solar cells have been prepared using a rather complex growth process often referred to as three‐stage or multistage. This family of processes is mainly characterized by a first step deposited with only In, Ga and Se flux to form a first layer. Cu is added in a second step until the film becomes slightly Cu‐rich, where‐after the film is converted to its final Cu‐poor composition by a third stage, again with no or very little addition of Cu. In this paper, a comparison between solar cells prepared with the three‐stage process and a one‐stage/in‐line process with the same composition, thickness, and solar cell stack is made. The one‐stage process is easier to be used in an industrial scale and do not have Cu‐rich transitions. The samples were analyzed using glow discharge optical emission spectroscopy, scanning electron microscopy, X‐ray diffraction, current–voltage‐temperature, capacitance‐voltage, external quantum efficiency, transmission/reflection, and photoluminescence. It was concluded that in spite of differences in the texturing, morphology and Ga gradient, the electrical performance of the two types of samples is quite similar as demonstrated by the similar J–V behavior, quantum spectral response, and the estimated recombination losses. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn_1‐xGa_xSe₂ using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

Salomé

Fjällström

Szaniawski

et al. 2014

Progress in Photovoltaics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Further potential for increasing efficiency arises from a window optimization by replacing the commonly used CdS buffer by more transparent materials as Zn(S,O). An already industrially established deposition method for the Zn(S,O) buffer layer for commercially available CIGS modules is the so‐called chemical bath deposition (CBD) . An overview about the current status and further developments in the area of buffer layers for CIGS‐based solar cells is given by Naghavi et al .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

New reaction kinetics for a high‐rate chemical bath deposition of the Zn(S,O) buffer layer for Cu(In,Ga)Se₂‐based solar cells

Hariskos

Menner

Jackson

et al. 2012

Progress in Photovoltaics

117

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We report on a new chemical bath deposition kinetics for the zinc sulfide oxide Zn(S,O) buffer layer as used in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 (CIGS)‐based solar cells. The new approach allows at high rates a better control of the growth kinetics, the step coverage on the rough CIGS surface, and the [S]/([S]+[O]) ratio in the film. Layer thicknesses as needed for buffer layer applications can be grown at moderate temperatures of 60–80 °C within 5–8 min. Applying this high‐rate Zn(S,O) buffer in CIGS/Zn(S,O)/(Zn,Mg)O/ZnO:Al devices, we realized highly efficient small area solar cells, 30 × 30 cm2 submodules, and 60 × 120 cm2 full‐size modules. Copyright © 2012 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

show abstract

“…As the market leader of CIS-based technology, Solar Frontier K.K., a 100% subsidiary of Showa Shell Sekiyu K.K., has been working on improving the efficiency of 90 × 120cm 2 -sized commercial modules by applying basic knowledge and techniques established through research with 30 × 30cm 2 sized submodules. We previously reported that 17.2% of aperture area efficiency had achieved by improving uniformity across respective layers and by reducing the optical loss of the ZnO window [4]. In this paper, we would like to describe the improved efficiency of 17.8% brought by review of the band profile of the absorber layer.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Achievement of 17.5% efficiency with 30 × 30cm<sup>2</sup>-sized Cu(In,Ga)(Se,S)<inf>2</inf> submodules

Nakamura

Chiba

Kijima

et al. 2012

2012 38th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The efficiency of 17.8% on a 30 × 30cm 2 -sized Cu(In,Ga)(Se,S) 2 (CIS)-based thin-film submodule was achieved. The device structure is same as our previous works; monolithically integrated CIS-based cells on a Modeposited glass substrate with a Zn(O, S, OH) x buffer and a ZnO window. Current Progress was mainly brought by review of the band profile of the absorber layer. More specifically, fine tuning of the grading of Ga/(Ga+In) and S/(Se+S) ratio turned out to improve the value of V oc × J sc by a factor of as much as three percent.

show abstract

Achievement of over 17% efficiency with 30×30cm<sup>2</sup>-sized Cu(InGa)(SeS)<inf>2</inf> submodules

Cited by 21 publications

References 2 publications

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn_1‐xGa_xSe₂ using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn_1‐xGa_xSe₂ using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

New reaction kinetics for a high‐rate chemical bath deposition of the Zn(S,O) buffer layer for Cu(In,Ga)Se₂‐based solar cells

Achievement of 17.5% efficiency with 30 × 30cm<sup>2</sup>-sized Cu(In,Ga)(Se,S)<inf>2</inf> submodules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Achievement of over 17% efficiency with 30&#x00D7;30cm<sup>2</sup>-sized Cu(InGa)(SeS)<inf>2</inf> submodules

Cited by 21 publications

References 2 publications

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn1‐xGaxSe2 using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn1‐xGaxSe2 using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

New reaction kinetics for a high‐rate chemical bath deposition of the Zn(S,O) buffer layer for Cu(In,Ga)Se2‐based solar cells

Achievement of 17.5% efficiency with 30 &#x00D7; 30cm<sup>2</sup>-sized Cu(In,Ga)(Se,S)<inf>2</inf> submodules

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Achievement of over 17% efficiency with 30×30cm<sup>2</sup>-sized Cu(InGa)(SeS)<inf>2</inf> submodules

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn_1‐xGa_xSe₂ using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

A comparison between thin film solar cells made from co‐evaporated CuIn_1‐xGa_xSe₂ using a one‐stage process versus a three‐stage process

New reaction kinetics for a high‐rate chemical bath deposition of the Zn(S,O) buffer layer for Cu(In,Ga)Se₂‐based solar cells

Achievement of 17.5% efficiency with 30 × 30cm<sup>2</sup>-sized Cu(In,Ga)(Se,S)<inf>2</inf> submodules