Skip to main content
. 2024 Jan 4;10(1):e24107. doi: 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24107

Table 3.

The detailed analysis of simulated PSCs with different ETL and HTL combinations.

Device architecture JSC (mA/cm2) VOC (V) FF (%) PCE (%)
ZnMgO/CsSnI3/GO-based PSC 35.609 0.6236 78.21 17.37
TiO2/CsSnI3/GO-based PSC 35.604 0.6204 78.18 17.04
ZnO/CsSnI3/GO-based PSC 35.605 0.6201 78.11 17.24
ZnMgO/CsSnI3/Spiro-OMeTAD 35.515 0.6135 78.02 16.99
TiO2/CsSnI3/Spiro-OMeTAD 35.482 0.6024 77.89 16.64
ZnO/CsSnI3/Spiro-OMeTAD 35.480 0.6018 77.78 16.60