Hostname: page-component-7c8c6479df-r7xzm Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-28T15:39:51.841Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

14% CdS/CdTe Thin Film Cells with ZnO:Al TCO

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 February 2011

Akhlesh Gupta
Affiliation:
Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, 43606, USA
Alvin D. Compaan
Affiliation:
Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Toledo, Toledo, OH, 43606, USA
Get access

Abstract

An Al-doped ZnO front contact was successfully used for the first time for the fabrication of high efficiency CdS/CdTe thin-film solar cells. The ZnO:Al films were deposited on aluminosilicate glass by RF sputtering from a ZnO:Al2O3 target. The ZnO:Al film has ∼95% average transmission in the visible spectrum with ∼3 ohm/square sheet resistance. The CdS and CdTe thin films were also deposited by RF sputtering and devices were completed with a vapor CdCl2 treatment and evaporated Cu/Au back contacts. The highest processing temperature was 387°C, reached during the vapor CdCl2 treatment. The devices were tested at NREL with efficiency of 14.0% which is a record for an all-sputtered CdS/CdTe solar cell. The ZnO-based cell had JSC of 23.6 mA/cm2 compared to 20.7 mA/cm2 for our recent NREL-tested 12.6% cell on a commercial soda-lime-glass/SnO2:F substrate. Other parameters of the 14% ZnO based cell are: FF = 73.25% and VOC = 814 mV. The improved performance is almost entirely due to higher current because of better optical and electrical properties of ZnO:Al TCO. We report also on relative stability between devices on SnO2:F and ZnO:Al TCO, under one-sun light soak at VOC.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1. Tiwari, A.N., Romeo, A., Baetzner, D. and Zogg, H., Prog. Res. Appl. 9, 211 (2001)Google Scholar
2. Britt, J. and Ferekides, C., Appl. Phys. Lett., 62, 2851 (1993)Google Scholar
3. Manifacier, J.C., Gasiot, J. and Fillard, J.P., J. Phys. E, 9, 1002 (1976)Google Scholar
4. Igasaki, Y. and Saito, H., J. Appl. Phys., 70, 3613 (1991)Google Scholar