Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-ndw9j Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T05:29:37.631Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Modeling TPV Devices Based on Exact Analytical Solution of the Generalized Shockley – Queisser Model

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 December 2018

Andrei Sergeev ,
Sunny Karnani  and
C. Mike Waits
Andrei Sergeev*
Affiliation:
U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Adelphi, Maryland 20783, USA
Sunny Karnani
Affiliation:
U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Adelphi, Maryland 20783, USA
C. Mike Waits
Affiliation:
U.S. Army Research Laboratory, Adelphi, Maryland 20783, USA
*
*(Email: [email protected])
Get access

Abstract

Exact solution of the generalized Shockley – Queisser model provides simple and effective tool for modeling of photovoltaic (PV) and thermophotovoltaic (TPV) devices with advanced photonic management. This formalism takes into account spectral characteristics of absorption/emission and a variety of recombination processes in semiconductor cell. In the current work we generalize this formalism to devices with non-ideal light reflectors used for light recycling and trapping. As an example, we investigate effects of the light management in InGaAsSb TPV converters (0.53 eV bandgap) with back surface reflector and with an additional front surface scattering layer, which provides Lambertian trapping of photons. We calculate the output power (efficiency) and investigate tradeoff between photon absorption and Auger recombination processes as a function of the device thickness. Finally, we compare performance of these TPV devices with the performance of traditional devices.

Keywords

energy generationphotovoltaicphotonicrecycling
Type
Articles
Information
MRS Advances , Volume 4 , Issue 16: Energy-Transfer, Storage and Conversion , 2019 , pp. 905 - 911
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2018 

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

REFERENCES

Yablonovitch, E., Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 2059 (1987).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Green, M. A. and Bremner, S. P., Nature Materials 16, 23 (2017).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Xiao, T. P., Yablonovitch, E., Proc. SPIE 10758, 107580H (2018).Google Scholar
Wang, X, Khan, M. R., Gray, J. L., Alam, M. A., and Lundstrom, M. S., IEEE Photovoltaics 3, 737 (2013).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Vos, A., Thermodynamics of Solar Energy Conversion, (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2008).Google Scholar
Rau, U. and Kirchartz, T., Nature Materials 13, 103 (2014).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Polman, A. and Atwater, H. A., Nature Materials 13, 104 (2014).Google Scholar
Charache, G. W., Baldasaro, P. F., Danielson, L. R. et al., J. Appl. Phys. 85, 2247 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dashiell, M. W., Beausang, J.F., Ehsani, H. et al., IEEE Electron Devices 53, 2879 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sergeev, A. and Sablon, K., Phys. Rev. Applied, accepted (2018).Google Scholar
Lambert, J. H., Acta Helveticae physico-mathematico-anatomico-botanico-medica, Band III, 128 (1758).Google Scholar
Green, M. A., Prog. Photovolt: Res. Appl. 10, 235 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yablonovitch, E., J. Optical Society of America 72, 899 (1982).CrossRefGoogle Scholar