Skip to main content
NCBI home page
ACS Omega logoLink to ACS Omega
. 2020 Sep 9;5(37):23983–23988. doi: 10.1021/acsomega.0c03268

Optimal CdS Buffer Thickness to Form High-Quality CdS/Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Junctions in Solar Cells without Plasma Damage and Shunt Paths

Kyung Soo Cho †, Jiseong Jang †, Jeung-Hun Park §, Doh-Kwon Lee ∥, Soomin Song ⊥, Kihwan Kim ⊥,#, Young-Joo Eo ⊥,#, Jae Ho Yun ⊥,#, Jihye Gwak ⊥,#,*, Choong-Heui Chung †,‡,*
PMCID: PMC7513370  PMID: 32984719

Abstract

graphic file with name ao0c03268_0008.jpg

CdS has been known to be one of the best junction partners for Cu(In,Ga)Se2 (CIGS) in CIGS solar cells. However, the use of thick CdS buffer decreases the short-circuit current density of CIGS solar cells. There are two obstacles that limit the use of ultrathin CdS. The first is plasma damage to CIGS during the preparation of transparent conducting windows and the second is a low shunt resistance due to the direct contact between the window and CIGS via pinholes in the thin CdS buffer. In other words, to avoid plasma damage and shunt paths, we may have to use a CdS buffer that is thicker than necessary to form a high-quality CdS/CIGS junction. This work aims to determine how thin the CdS buffer can be employed without sacrificing device performance while also eliminating the above two obstacles. We investigate the effect of CdS thickness on the performance of CIGS solar cells with silver nanowire-based window layers, which can eliminate both obstacles. An approximately 13 nm thick CdS buffer allows us to achieve high short-circuit current density and fill factor values. To attain an even high open-circuit voltage, an additional CdS buffer with a thickness of 13 nm is needed. The data from this study imply that an approximately 26 nm thick CdS buffer is sufficient to form a high-quality CdS/CIGS junction.

1. Introduction

A standard structure of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 (CIGS) solar cells is ZnO:Al/i-ZnO/CdS/CIGS/Mo, where chemical bath-deposited CdS has been well known to be the most suitable junction partner for CIGS.1−4 In terms of material properties, CdS provides an almost perfect lattice match with CIGS5,6 and a spike-type energy band alignment.7−9 In terms of the chemical bath deposition method, the CIGS surface can be electrically modified,10 and Cd incorporation into CIGS can provide a high-quality junction.11 Furthermore, chemical bath deposition provides conformal coverage of the CIGS surface by CdS.11,12 All of the aforementioned aspects of the chemical bath-deposited CdS are beneficial for minimizing the recombination loss of charge carriers. However, the presence of CdS causes optical absorption loss in the short-wavelength region because of the relatively low band gap of CdS (2.3–2.4 eV). The anticorrelation between light loss and CdS thickness has been reported.13 Nevertheless, it has also been reported that a sufficiently thick CdS buffer is required to achieve high-performance CIGS solar cells.12

It is known that the use of ultrathin CdS for standard CIGS solar cells that have a structure of ZnO:Al/i-ZnO/CdS/CIGS/Mo has been limited to protect CIGS from plasma damage during the preparation of the ZnO:Al window5,6,11,12 and to inhibit shunt paths between the window and CIGS via pinholes in the CdS,14,15 as illustrated in Figure 1a; the above defects result in a low fill factor (FF) and low open-circuit voltage. An alkali post-deposition treatment of CIGS allows the reduction in CdS thickness without sacrificing performance.15,16 However, a nonuniform deposition of CIGS will cause undesirable pinholes in the thin CdS buffer because the nucleation and growth behaviors of the CdS depend on the CIGS surface properties.17

Figure 1.

Figure 1

Open in a new tab

Illustration of (a) a standard CIGS solar cell, where the ZnO:Al/i-ZnO window is prepared by sputtering and shunt paths can be caused because of direct contact between the window and CIGS via pinholes in the CdS buffer. Illustration of (b) a CIGS solar cell with a window of AgNWs and a CdS shell, thus eliminating the chance of sputtering damage and shunt paths to the CIGS layer.

The motivation of this work is to examine how thin the CdS buffer can be applied to produce high-performance CIGS solar cells with a device structure that does not exhibit either of the above two obstacles (plasma damage due to the window preparation and shunt paths due to pinholes in the CdS buffer). Recently, we developed silver nanowire (AgNW)-based window layers for CIGS solar cells.18 These AgNW-based window layers are prepared by a damage-free solution process and will not directly contact CIGS even though there are pinholes in the CdS buffer because the nanowires are suspended like a bridge that connects two peaks because of the granular morphology of CIGS, as illustrated in Figure 1b. In this work, we examine the effect of CdS thickness on the performance of CIGS solar cells to determine the optimal thickness of the CdS buffer that is required to form a high-quality CdS/CIGS junction in solar cells with a damage-free solution-processed AgNW window.

2. Experiments

2.1. Fabrication

AgNW-based window layers were prepared on a structure of CdS/CIGS/Mo/glass. Mo, as the bottom electrode (1.2 μm) was deposited on a soda-lime glass substrate using DC magnetron sputtering. Then, CIGS light absorbers (2 μm) were deposited by means of three-stage co-evaporation. Next, CdS buffer layers were prepared using chemical bath deposition. The thickness of the CdS buffer layer was varied by adjusting the deposition time (see Figure S1 in the Supporting Information). To prepare AgNW-based window layers, AgNWs (Agnw-L30, ACS Material) were spin-coated onto the devices, and an additional CdS buffer (denoted as the 2nd CdS buffer and thinner than 10 nm) was added by chemical bath deposition. Details of the device fabrication procedure can be found in our previous works.19,20 To characterize the optical absorption loss of the prepared AgNW networks, the AgNW network was also prepared on a glass substrate.

2.2. Characterization

The sheet resistance of the prepared AgNW network was measured using the four-point probe method. The optical transmittance and reflectance of the AgNW network were measured using a UV–Visible spectrometer (UV-2600, Shimadzu) equipped with an ISR-2600 Plus integrating sphere.

The device structure was characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM). The reflectance of light off the fabricated CIGS solar cells was measured using a UV–Visible spectrometer (UV-2600, Shimadzu) equipped with an ISR-2600 Plus integrating sphere. The external quantum efficiency (EQE) of the CIGS solar cells was measured with an incident photon-to-current conversion efficiency measurement system (PEIPCE 100s, HS Technologies, Korea) after calibration with calibrated silicon (FDS100, THORLABS) and germanium (FDG03, THORLABS) photodiodes. The current density–voltage (J–V) characteristics of the CIGS solar cells were measured using a Keithley 2401 source meter under white light illumination (100 mW/cm2, AM1.5G) generated by a solar simulator (model 11002 SunLite, Abet Technologies).

3. Results and Discussion

We start by discussing our device structure and then the effect of the CdS buffer thickness on the short-circuit current density (JSC), FF, and open-circuit voltage (VOC) of our CIGS solar cells.

3.1. Device Structure

By employing a window layer of AgNWs with a CdS shell, formed by the deposition of the second CdS buffer, to CIGS solar cells, we can remove two obstacles while reducing the thickness of the CdS buffer in CIGS solar cells. The first obstacle is plasma damage to CIGS during the preparation of transparent conducting windows. This obstacle can be removed by preparing the window layer through spin-coating AgNWs and chemical bath deposition of the second CdS buffer. The second obstacle is inhibiting shunt paths because of direct contact between the window and CIGS via potentially present pinholes in the CdS buffer.

We investigated how AgNWs with the second CdS buffer are placed on the device structure. Figure 2a shows cross-sectional TEM images of the AgNWs formed on CdS/CIGS/Mo. Most of the observed AgNWs are not in direct contact with the underlayer because the AgNWs are suspended like bridges because of the rough granular morphology of CIGS, as illustrated in Figure 1b. Furthermore, all of the AgNWs are conformally covered by a CdS shell formed by chemical bath deposition of the second CdS buffer (Figure 2b,c). Therefore, there is almost no possibility that the AgNWs directly contact the CIGS layer even though there are some pinholes in the CdS buffer. The second CdS plays another role in attaching the AgNWs to the device, thus providing robust contact between the AgNW to the CdS buffer (Figure 2d). This AgNW-based window layer has been shown to be successfully applied to CIGS solar cells.18,21

Figure 2.

Figure 2

Open in a new tab

Cross-sectional TEM images of (a) CIGS solar cell with AgNWs and CdS shells, (b) enlarged image of the area marked by the blue-dashed square in (a), (c) enlarged image of the area marked by the red-dashed circle in (a), and (d) enlarged image of the area marked by the red-dashed square in (c).

3.2. Shunt Resistance and FF

To provide further evidence that our device has a structure almost free of shunt paths, we investigated the shunt resistance (Rsh) of CIGS solar cells as a function of the CdS buffer thickness when less than 50 nm (Figure 3). The shunt resistances were obtained using a simplified one-diode model for solar cells from the light current density–voltage (J–V) curves of the CIGS solar cells (see Figure S2 in the Supporting Information).22Rsh was 74 Ω cm2 when there was no CdS buffer. This low value should be from the AgNWs directly contacting the CIGS layer because there was no CdS buffer between them. By inserting a thin 10 nm CdS buffer between the AgNWs and CIGS, Rsh was dramatically increased to values larger than 1000 Ω cm2 (Figure 3a). This Rsh value was sufficiently high; thus, there was almost no deterioration in the device performance.

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Open in a new tab

(a) Shunt resistance (Rsh) and (b) FF values of the CIGS solar cells as a function of the CdS buffer thickness. The AgNWs with CdS shells effectively removed the possible presence of shunt paths so that high FF values could be obtained even with the thin, 13 nm CdS buffer.

Among the device parameters of JSC, FF, and VOC, FF was the most sensitively affected by Rsh. FF was ∼31% because of Rsh being as low as 74 Ω cm2 when there was no CdS buffer. By inserting a thin, 10 nm CdS buffer between the AgNWs and CIGS, the FF value was dramatically increased to 64%. This result indicated that our AgNWs with CdS shells effectively removed the possible presence of shunt paths so that high FF values could be obtained even with the thin, 10 nm CdS buffer. When the CdS buffer thickness was between 13 and 49 nm, the FF value was maximized and showed similar values of 67–69% (Figure 3b).

3.3. Short-Circuit Current Density (JSC)

Figure 4 shows the measured JSC values as a function of the CdS buffer thickness. The JSC value was as small as 8.5 mA/cm2 when there was no CdS buffer between the AgNWs and CIGS. By inserting the thin, 10 nm CdS buffer between the AgNWs and CIGS, the JSC value was dramatically increased to 25.4 mA/cm2. When the thickness of the CdS buffer was between 13 and 49 nm, the JSC was maximized and showed similar values of 29.1–30.6 mA/cm2.

Figure 4.

Figure 4

Open in a new tab

Short-circuit current density measurements of the CIGS solar cells as a function of the CdS buffer thickness. When the CdS buffer was thicker than 13 nm, the JSC value was maximized and showed similar values of 29.1–30.6 mA/cm2.

The JSC value is not affected by Rsh. Instead, the JSC value is mainly determined by optical and recombination losses. We investigated the effect of the CdS buffer thickness on the optical and recombination losses. As shown in Figure 5a, the optical losses occurred because of the reflectance off the device surface, the absorption by the window, and the absorption by CdS. Photons that reach the CIGS layer generate electron–hole pairs. Some of the generated charge carriers are not collected but lost by recombination. The collected charge carriers contribute to the EQE. The spectra of the reflectance off the device surface (Figure S3a) and the EQE spectra of the cells (Figure S3b) as a function of the CdS buffer thickness can be found in the Supporting Information. The optoelectronic data (Figure S3c) and the SEM image (Figure S3d) of the AgNW network prepared on glass also can be found in the Supporting Information. The detailed procedure for obtaining each loss can be found in an earlier work.18,23

Figure 5.

Figure 5

Open in a new tab

(a) Illustration of the optical and recombination losses and the EQE in a CIGS solar cell. The optical losses include the reflectance off the device surface and the absorption losses by the window and CdS buffer. (b) Recombination loss, (c) light absorption loss by CdS, (d) reflectance loss, and (e) calculated JSC obtained from the EQE values of the CIGS solar cells as a function of the CdS buffer thickness.

The recombination loss is indicative of the quality of the CdS/CIGS junction. Figure 5b shows the recombination loss as a function of the CdS buffer thickness. The recombination loss was as large as 21.7 mA/cm2 when there was no CdS buffer between the AgNWs and CIGS. The absence of the CdS buffer between them induced the highly defective AgNW/CIGS interfaces to work as strong recombination centers. By inserting the thin, 10 nm CdS buffer between the AgNWs and CIGS, the recombination loss was dramatically decreased to 5.4 mA/cm2. When the CdS buffer thickness was between 13 and 49 nm, the recombination loss was minimized and showed similar values of 3.2–3.4 mA/cm2. These results showed that the CdS buffer must be at least 13 nm thick to minimize the photocurrent loss by recombination.

As expected, the light absorption loss by CdS (the CdS and second CdS buffers) continually increased with the thickness of the CdS buffer (Figure 5c). On the other hand, the reflectance loss continually decreased with increasing CdS buffer thickness (Figure 5d). The reflectance off the bare CIGS surface was larger than that off the CdS/CIGS surface.24 Thus, it was likely that the CdS-covered CIGS decreased the reflectance off the device surface by increasing the thickness of the CdS buffer. The calculated JSC from the measured EQEs showed the same behavior as the measured JSC obtained from the light J–V curves discussed earlier (Figure 5e).

3.4. Open-Circuit Voltage (VOC)

VOC is a measure of the amount of recombination in the device. Among the following device parameters, JSC, FF, and VOC, VOC is the most sensitively affected by the thickness of the CdS buffer.12 Therefore, the amount of recombination should be largely determined by the thickness of the CdS buffer. Figure 6a shows VOC as a function of the CdS buffer thickness. The VOC value was as small as 0.319 V when there was no CdS buffer between the AgNWs and CIGS. With increasing thickness of the CdS buffer, VOC continuously increased to 0.625 V until the thickness of the CdS buffer increased to 26 nm. Further increasing the thickness of CdS rarely changed VOC, which indicated that the CdS/CIGS junction formation was completed when the thickness of the CdS buffer was 26 nm. Compared to the thickness of the CdS buffer (13 nm) to achieve high maximum values of JSC and FF, the thick CdS buffer (26 nm) was required to achieve a high maximum VOC.

Figure 6.

Figure 6

Open in a new tab

(a) Open-circuit voltage and (b) reverse saturation current density obtained from the light J–V curves of the CIGS solar cells as a function of the CdS buffer thickness. When the CdS buffer was thicker than 26 nm, both the open-circuit voltage and the research saturation current density showed maximum values.

The reverse saturation current density Jo, which is directly related to the amount of recombination in the solar cell, varied by the orders of magnitude with the thickness of the CdS buffer. With increasing thickness of the CdS buffer, Jo continually decreased until the thickness of the CdS buffer was increased to 26 nm (Figure 6b). This trend was similar to the trend of VOC and was hardly affected by further increasing the thickness of the CdS buffer. This result indicates that an approximately 26 nm thick CdS buffer is sufficient to form a high-quality CdS/CIGS junction that exhibits high values of the tested solar cell parameters, namely, the short-circuit current density, FF, and open-circuit voltage.

4. Conclusions

We investigated how a thin CdS buffer can form a high-quality CdS/CIGS junction in CIGS devices with AgNW-based window layers. This device structure can eliminate two obstacles (plasma damage to CIGS and shunt paths via pinholes in the CdS buffer). The data from this study show the following:

  • A 13 nm thick CdS buffer provides such a high Rsh (>1000 Ω cm2) that the device produces a maximum FF.

  • The 13 nm thick CdS buffer also produces a maximum JSC and a minimum recombination loss.

  • The approximately 13 nm thick CdS buffer was required to even achieve a maximum VOC compared with achieving the maximum JSC and FF values.

  • An approximately 26 nm thick CdS buffer provides a high-quality CdS/CIGS junction.

Acknowledgments

This research was supported by the framework of the Research and Development Program of the Korea Institute of Energy Research (KIER C0-2401) and the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) that is funded by the Ministry of Science and ICT (grant no. NRF-2019R1F1A1058917).

Supporting Information Available

The Supporting Information is available free of charge at https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acsomega.0c03268.

  • Thickness of the chemical bath-deposited CdS as a function of deposition time; light J–V curves of the CIGS solar cells as a function of the CdS buffer thickness; spectra of the reflectance off the device surface and the EQE spectra of the cells as a function of the CdS buffer thickness; and optoelectronic data and the SEM image of the AgNW network prepared on glass (PDF)

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

Supplementary Material

ao0c03268_si_001.pdf (267.1KB, pdf)

References

  1. Feurer T.; Reinhard P.; Avancini E.; Bissig B.; Löckinger J.; Fuchs P.; Carron R.; Weiss T. P.; Perrenoud J.; Stutterheim S.; Buecheler S.; Tiwari A. N. Progress in Thin Film CIGS Photovoltaics–Research and Development, Manufacturing, and Applications. Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 2017, 25, 645–667. 10.1002/pip.2811. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Jackson P.; Wuerz R.; Hariskos D.; Lotter E.; Witte W.; Powalla M. Effects of Heavy Alkali Elements in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Solar Cells with Efficiencies up to 22.6%. Phys. Status Solidi RRL 2016, 10, 583–586. 10.1002/pssr.201600199. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  3. Cheng T.-M.; Cai C.-H.; Huang W.-C.; Xu W.-l.; Tu L.-H.; Lai C.-H. Efficiency Enhancement of Cu(In,Ga)(S,Se)2 Solar Cells by Indium-Doped CdS Buffer Layers. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 18157–18164. 10.1021/acsami.0c02416. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. Kreikemeyer-Lorenzo D.; Hauschild D.; Jackson P.; Friedlmeier T. M.; Hariskos D.; Blum M.; Yang W.; Reinert F.; Powalla M.; Heske C.; Weinhardt L. Rubidium Fluoride Post-Deposition Treatment: Impact on the Chemical Structure of the Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Surface and CdS/Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Interface in Thin-Film Solar Cells. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2018, 10, 37602–37608. 10.1021/acsami.8b10005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  5. Canava B.; Guillemoles J.-F.; Yousfi E.-B.; Cowache P.; Kerber H.; Loeffl A.; Schock H.-W.; Powalla M.; Hariskos D.; Lincot D. Wet Treatment Based Interface Engineering for High Efficiency Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Solar Cells. Thin Solid Films 2000, 361–362, 187–192. 10.1016/S0040-6090(99)00861-5. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Siebentritt S. Alternative Buffers for Chalcopyrite Solar Cells. Sol. Energy 2004, 77, 767–775. 10.1016/j.solener.2004.06.018. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  7. Niemegeers A.; Burgelman M.; De Vos A. On the CdS/CuInSe2 Conduction Band Discontinuity. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1995, 67, 843. 10.1063/1.115523. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Chung C.-H.; Bob B.; Song T.-B.; Yang Y. Current-Voltage Characteristics of Fully Solution Processed High Performance CuIn(S,Se)2 Solar Cells: Crossover and Red Kink. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2014, 120, 642–646. 10.1016/j.solmat.2013.10.013. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Jang J.; Su Lee J.; Hong K.-H.; Lee D.-K.; Song S.; Kim K.; Eo Y.-J.; Ho Yun J.; Chung C.-H. Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Thin Film Solar Cells with Solution Processed Silver Nanowire Composite Window Layers: Buffer/Window Junctions and Their Effects. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2017, 170, 60–67. 10.1016/j.solmat.2017.05.051. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Jiang C.-S.; Noufi R.; Ramanathan K.; Moutinho H. R.; Al-Jassim M. M. Electrical Modification in Cu (In,Ga) Se 2 Thin Films by Chemical Bath Deposition Process of CdS Films. J. Appl. Phys. 2005, 97, 053701. 10.1063/1.1856217. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  11. Nakada T.; Kunioka A. Direct Evidence of Cd Diffusion into Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Thin Films during Chemical-Bath Deposition Process of CdS Films. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1999, 74, 2444–2446. 10.1063/1.123875. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Contreras M. A.; Romero M. J.; To B.; Hasoon F.; Noufi R.; Ward S.; Ramanathan K. Optimization of CBD CdS Process in High-Efficiency Cu(In,Ga)Se2-Based Solar Cells. Thin Solid Films 2002, 403–404, 204–211. 10.1016/S0040-6090(01)01538-3. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  13. Orgassa K.; Rau U.; Nguyen Q.; Schock H. W.; Werner J. H. Role of the CdS Buffer Layer as an Active Optical Element in Cu(In, Ga)Se2 Thin-Film Solar Cells. Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 2002, 10, 457–463. 10.1002/pip.438. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Scheer R.; Messmann-Vera L.; Klenk R.; Schock H.-W. On the Role of Non-Doped ZnO in CIGSe Colar Cells. Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 2012, 20, 619–624. 10.1002/pip.1185. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  15. Friedlmeier T. M.; Jackson P.; Bauer A.; Hariskos D.; Kiowski O.; Wuerz R.; Powalla M. Improved Photocurrent in Cu(In,Ga)Se 2 Solar Cells: From 20.8% to 21.7% Efficiency with CdS Buffer and 21.0% Cd-Free. IEEE J. Photovolt. 2015, 5, 1487–1491. 10.1109/JPHOTOV.2015.2458039. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  16. Chirilă A.; Reinhard P.; Pianezzi F.; Bloesch P.; Uhl A. R.; Fella C.; Kranz L.; Keller D.; Gretener C.; Hagendorfer H.; Jaeger D.; Erni R.; Nishiwaki S.; Buecheler S.; Tiwari A. N. Potassium-Induced Surface Modification of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Thin Films for High-Efficiency Solar Cells. Nat. Mater. 2013, 12, 1107–1111. 10.1038/nmat3789. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Witte W.; Abou-Ras D.; Hariskos D. Chemical Bath Deposition of Zn(O,S) and CdS Buffers: Influence of Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Grain Orientation. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013, 102, 051607. 10.1063/1.4788717. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  18. Lee S.; Lee J. S.; Jang J.; Hong K.-H.; Lee D.-K.; Song S.; Kim K.; Eo Y.-J.; Yun J. H.; Gwak J.; Chung C.-H. Robust Nanoscale Contact of Silver Nanowire Electrodes to Semiconductors to Achieve High Performance Chalcogenide Thin Film Solar Cells. Nano Energy 2018, 53, 675–682. 10.1016/j.nanoen.2018.09.027. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Lee S.; Cho K. S.; Song S.; Kim K.; Eo Y.-J.; Yun J. H.; Gwak J.; Chung C.-H. Fabrication of Robust Nanoscale Contact between a Silver Nanowire Electrode and Cds Buffer Layer in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Thin-Film Solar Cells. J. Visualized Exp. 2019, 2019, 2–7. 10.3791/59909. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  20. Chung C. H. Method to Determine the Recombination Characteristics of Minority Carriers in Graded-Band-Gap Solar Cells. Phys. Rev. Appl. 2019, 12, 024060. 10.1103/PhysRevApplied.12.024060. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Lee S.; Jang J.; Park T.; Park Y. M.; Park J. S.; Kim Y. K.; Lee H. K.; Jeon E. C.; Lee D. K.; Ahn B.; Chung C. H. Electrodeposited Silver Nanowire Transparent Conducting Electrodes for Thin-Film Solar Cells. ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2020, 12, 6169–6175. 10.1021/acsami.9b17168. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  22. Hegedus S. S.; Shafarman W. N. Thin-Film Solar Cells: Device Measurements and Analysis. Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 2004, 12, 155–176. 10.1002/pip.518. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Winkler M. T.; Wang W.; Gunawan O.; Hovel H. J.; Todorov T. K.; Mitzi D. B. Optical Designs That Improve the Efficiency of Cu2ZnSn(S,Se)4 Solar Cells. Energy Environ. Sci. 2014, 7, 1029–1036. 10.1039/c3ee42541j. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  24. Lee S.; Jang J.; Park J. S.; Oh Y. J.; Chung C. H. Data on the Effect of CdS on the Lateral Collection Length of Charge Carriers for Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Solar Cells with Mesh Transparent Conducting Electrodes. Data Br. 2020, 29, 105352. 10.1016/j.dib.2020.105352. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Associated Data

This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

Supplementary Materials

ao0c03268_si_001.pdf (267.1KB, pdf)

Articles from ACS Omega are provided here courtesy of American Chemical Society

RESOURCES