Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-wq2xx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T16:08:25.975Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

GaAs Based InAs/InGaAs Quantum Dots-in-a-Well Solar Cells and Their Concentration Applications

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 January 2011

Kai Yang
Affiliation:
kyang99@gmail.com, University of New Mexico, Center for High Technology Materials, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
Mohamed A El-Emawy
Affiliation:
mo1emawy@unm.edu, University of New Mexico, Center for High Technology Materials, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
Tingyi Gu
Affiliation:
tgu@unm.edu, University of New Mexico, Center for High Technology Materials, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
Andreas Stintz
Affiliation:
astinz@chtm.unm.edu, University of New Mexico, Center for High Technology Materials, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
Luke F Lester
Affiliation:
luke@chtm.unm.edu, University of New Mexico, Center for High Technology Materials, Albuquerque, New Mexico, United States
Get access

Abstract

Quantum dot (QD) solar cells have been actively investigated recently since they have been theoretically shown to have the potential to realize high conversion efficiencies. However, very little research has analyzed the effect the dots have on the transport or recombination effects in the device. In this paper, we report the I-V and spectral response characteristics of InAs/InGaAs “dots-in-a-well” (DWELL) solar cells and compared them with GaAs control cells. The QD cells show higher short circuit density (Jsc) and better long-wavelength efficiency compared to the control cell. By comparing the dark current behavior of the QD cells to the GaAs control cells, we have conservatively estimated the concentration level at which the QD solar cells would surpass GaAs control devices.

The quantum dot solar cells are grown by molecular beam epitaxy using the DWELL technique and a standard pin structure. The control cell structure is similar to the QD one except that there are no InAs dots or surrounding InGaAs quantum wells. The light I-V characteristics were measured under AM1.5G at 100 mW/cm2 illumination. The control cell has a Voc of 0.89V and a Jsc of 9.1 mA/cm2. The InAs QD solar cell has a Voc of 0.68 V and a Jsc of 12.2 mA/cm2. The QD cell has about a 33% larger short circuit current density compared to the GaAs control cell, which is mainly due to the higher photon absorption rate related to the DWELL structure. The spectrum response data show that the GaAs control cell and the QD cell have similar external quantum efficiency (EQE) in the visible to near-IR range (400-870nm). Beyond the GaAs absorption edge (870nm), the QD solar cell shows extended response with much higher measured EQE up to ˜1200 nm. This is strong evidence of the contribution from the InAs QDs and InGaAs QWs, the latter being the primary contributor to the increased Jsc.

We calculated the “local” ideality factor from measured dark IV data, and then substituted it into a single diode equation to get the “local” reverse saturation current. Whereas the GaAs control shows the typical monotonically decreasing ideality from 0.3 to 0.8V, a linearly increasing ideality is observed in the QD cell. Based on the measured dark currents, and neglecting series resistance, we extrapolated the IV curves to higher voltages and found that they intercept at ˜2×104 mA/cm2. Dividing the intercept point Jdark by the Jsc of the QD cell conservatively estimates the light concentration (˜1400×) above which the QD cell would have a higher Voc than the GaAs cell assuming additivity applies. This result is mainly attributed to the unique carrier transport properties that are introduced into the solar cell devices that utilize QDs.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2010

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 Luque, A. and Marti, A., Phys. Rev. Lett. 78, 5014 (1997).Google Scholar
2 Laghumavarapu, R.B., El-Emawy, M., Nuntawong, N., Moscho, A., Lester, L.F., and Huffaker, D. L., Appl. Phys. Lett. 91, 243115 (2007).Google Scholar
3 Hubbard, S. M., Cress, C. D., Bailey, C. G., Raffaelle, R. P., Bailey, S. G., and Wilt, D. M., Appl. Phys. Lett. 92, 123512 (2008).Google Scholar
4 Hubbard, S. M., Raffaelle, R., Robinson, R., Bailey, C., Wilt, D., Wolford, D., Maurer, W., and Bailey, S., Mater. Res. Soc. Symp. Proc. 1017-DD, 13–11 (2007).Google Scholar
5 Tomic, S., Jones, T.S., and Harrison, N.M., Appl. Phys. Lett. 93, 263105 (2008)Google Scholar
6 Stintz, A., Liu, G. T., Gray, A.L., Spillers, R., Delgado, S.M., and Malloy, K.J., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 18(3), 1496 (2000)Google Scholar
7 Liu, G.T., Stintz, A., Li, H., Malloy, K.J. and Lester, L.F., Electronics Letters, 35, 1163 (1999)Google Scholar
8 Raghavan, S., Rotella, P., Stintz, A., Fuchs, B., and Krishna, S., Appl. Phys. Lett. 81, 1369 (2002)Google Scholar
9 Ekins-Daukes, N.J., Adams, J., Ballard, I.M., Barnham, K.W.J., Browne, B., Connolly, J.P., Tibbits, T., Hill, G., and Roberts, J.S., Proc. SPIE, Vol.7211, 72110L1–L11 (2009).Google Scholar
10 Tibbits, T.N.D. et al, Proc. 31st IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, Orlando, USA, (2005)Google Scholar