Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-gxg78 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T01:53:56.240Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Phase and Interface Stability Issues in Chalcopyrite-Based Thin Film Solar Cells

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

Jean-Francois Guillemoles ,
Thomas Haalboom ,
Tilo Gödecke ,
Frank Ernst  and
David Cahen
Jean-Francois Guillemoles
Affiliation:
ENSCP, Laboratoire d'Electrochimie, Paris, France;
Thomas Haalboom
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Metallforschung, Stuttgart, Germany;
Tilo Gödecke
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Metallforschung, Stuttgart, Germany;
Frank Ernst
Affiliation:
Max-Planck-Institut für Metallforschung, Stuttgart, Germany;
David Cahen
Affiliation:
Dept. of Materials and Interfaces, Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel 76100
Get access

Abstract

How stable are Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells? CuInSe2 is known also as an ionic Cu conductor and the Cu-In-Se system has a rich phase diagram. Two stability-related problems are treated from a thermodynamic point of view: -a- Cu migration, -b- phase segregation. We show how Cu migration imparts self-stabilization on the system. Based on recently reported results on the room temperature phase diagram of CuInSe2, we explain why an overlayer of an ordered vacancy compound (OVC) is not to be expected to appear as a separate phase, even though the surface composition corresponds to that of the I-III3V5 OVC compound.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 485: Symposium G – Thin Film Structures for Photovoltaics , 1997 , 127
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 1998

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] Lubomirski, I., Gartsman, K., D. Cahen., J. Appl. Phys., in pressGoogle Scholar
[2] Guillemoles, J.F. and Cahen, D., Cryst.Res. Technol., 31 (1996) 147 Google Scholar
[3] Schmid, D., Ruckh, M., Grunwald, F., Schock, H.W., J. Appl. Phys., 73 (1993) 2902 Google Scholar
[4] Haalboom, T., Gödecke, T., Ernst, F. et al., Proc.IOP, Proc. 11th ICTMC,in pressGoogle Scholar
[5] Herberholtz, R., Schock, H.W., Rau, U.,. Werner, J. H., Haalboom, T., Gödecke, T., Ernst, F., Beilharz, C., Benz, K. and Cahen, D.. Proc. 26th IEEE PVSC (IEEE, NY, 1998) in press.Google Scholar
[6] Morell, G. et al. Appl. Phys. Lett., 69 (1996) 987 Google Scholar
[7] CuInSe2 and the OVCs (CuIn3Se5) have related structures, hence it is expected that that they give common XRD peaks with comparable intensities (the reflecting planes are similar), as confirmed by the JCPDS files (resp for α and β phases:40–1487 and 42–862).Google Scholar