This is an open access article published under an ACS AuthorChoice License, which permits copying and redistribution of the article or any adaptations for non-commercial purposes.
http://pubs.acs.org/journal/aelccp
Single-Crystal MAPbI3 Perovskite Solar Cells Exceeding 21% Power Conversion Efficiency Zhaolai Chen,†,∥ Bekir Turedi,†,∥ Abdullah Y. Alsalloum,†,∥ Chen Yang,† Xiaopeng Zheng,† Issam Gereige,§ Ahmed AlSaggaf,§ Omar F. Mohammed,*,† and Osman M. Bakr*,†
Downloaded via 193.56.65.242 on July 18, 2019 at 04:10:15 (UTC). See https://pubs.acs.org/sharingguidelines for options on how to legitimately share published articles.
†
Division of Physical Sciences and Engineering, King Abdullah University of Science and Technology (KAUST), Thuwal 23955-6900, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia § Saudi Aramco Research & Development Center, Dhahran 31311, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia S Supporting Information *
parasitic nonradiative carrier recombination due to their inherent grain size and surface defects.6,7 In theory, single-crystal perovskites, with their orders of magnitude lower defect density and higher carrier diffusion lengths compared to their polycrystalline counterparts,8−11 offer a chance for PSC technology to overcome the limitation of polycrystalline thin films and get as close as practical to the SQL.12 Unfortunately, because of the challenges with their thickness control and typically device-incompatible solutiongrowth conditions, only a handful of groups have led the charge in the development of single-crystal-based PSCs (SC-PSCs). SC-PSCs reached their highest (PCE of 17.8% with FF of 78.6%) in a 2017 report by Huang and co-workers.13 Here, we realize highly efficient SC-PSCs with PCEs reaching 21.09% and FFs of up to 84.3% (under 1 sun illumination AM 1.5G). These devices, based on a ∼20 μm thick MAPbI3 singlecrystal absorber layer in an inverted p-i-n architecture, set a new record for SC-PSC PCE and a new benchmark for potential FFs that PSCs should aim for, which Pc-PSCs have struggled to achieve. The crystals were grown using a simple solution space-limited inverse-temperature crystal growth method (see the Supporting Information).13,14 The crystal structure and optical absorption edge of these crystals are that of typical MAPbI3 single crystals (see Figures S1 and S2). A scanning electron microscopy (SEM) cross-sectional image of the MAPbI3 SC-PSC (Figure 1a) shows that the active area is pinhole- and grain boundary-free (see also top-view SEM image of the crystal, Figure S3). The smooth surface allows for the full coverage of the charge transport layers, preventing direct crystal-to-metal-electrode contact. The device follows an ITO/poly(triarylamine) (PTAA)/MAPbI3 singlecrystal/C60/bathocuproine (BCP)/copper (Cu) architecture with the corresponding energy band diagram illustrated in Figure 1b. The crystal thickness in devices is typically around 20 μm (see distribution in Figure S4). Figure 1c shows the current−voltage characteristics of our best performing cell. The reverse-scan short-circuit current density (JSC), open-circuit voltage (VOC), and FF are 23.46 mA· cm−2, 1.076 V, and 83.5%, respectively, yielding a PCE of
ABSTRACT: Twenty-micrometer-thick single-crystal methylammonium lead triiodide (MAPbI3) perovskite (as an absorber layer) grown on a charge-selective contact using a solution space-limited inverse-temperature crystal growth method yields solar cells with power conversion efficiencies reaching 21.09% and fill factors of up to 84.3%. These devices set a new record for perovskite single-crystal solar cells and open an avenue for achieving high fill factors in perovskite solar cells.
I
n the past few years alone, hybrid metal halide perovskite materials have revolutionized the field of low-temperatureprocessed solar cells, providing devices with power conversion efficiencies (PCEs) that compete with the most established decades-old commercial photovoltaic technologies. To date, studies on perovskite solar cells (PSCs) have principally been on polycrystalline film PSCs (Pc-PSCs). The record efficiency for Pc-PSCs, currently at 24.2% PCE,1 is still far from their theoretical Shockley−Queisser limit (SQL), which is ∼30.5% PCE for a single-junction cell based on methylammonium lead triiodide (MAPbI3).2 To approach the SQL, it is essential to improve the device’s fill factor (FF) (FF ≈ 90% in the SQL for MAPbI3 PSCs),2 which contributes to the overall PCE. The FF is perhaps the most challenging figure of merit to improve for Pc-PSCs because losses in FF are mainly governed by the ideality factor that is related to nonradiative bulk and interface carrier recombination.3−5 Despite marked efforts in improving the FF, polycrystalline thin films have significant © 2019 American Chemical Society
Received: April 19, 2019 Accepted: May 7, 2019 Published: May 7, 2019 1258
DOI: 10.1021/acsenergylett.9b00847 ACS Energy Lett. 2019, 4, 1258−1259
Energy Express
Cite This: ACS Energy Lett. 2019, 4, 1258−1259
Energy Express
ACS Energy Letters
significantly (see Figure S7). Interestingly, the devices fully recovered after storage in N2 for ∼48 h, suggesting that the decrease is unrelated to perovskite degradation but likely a result of hydration of the single crystal’s surface, leading to poor contacts with the transporting layers.12,15 Our devices exhibit ultrahigh FFs (FFaverage = 82.6% and FFmax = 84.3%; Figure 1f). Our best fabricated, analogous architecture Pc-PSC and SC-PSC have similar VOC; yet despite the higher JSC of the Pc-PSC, the PCE of the SC-PSC ends up being on top because of its superior FF (see Figure S8). We confirmed that the higher FF is not a consequence of the mask area: even when the mask area is small, the Pc-PSC FF barely reaches 80%, which is still below that of SC-PSCs (Figure S9). In summary, we fabricated MAPbI3 SC-PSCs with PCEs reaching 21.09%, which sets a new efficiency benchmark for SCPSCs. While there is still room for larger-area SC-PSCs16 and substantial interfacial optimization, the high PCE and FF highlight the promise of single crystals for advancing perovskite device technology, which could be a parallel development path to the one taken by their polycrystalline counterparts.
■
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
S Supporting Information *
Figure 1. Characterization of SC-PSCs. (a) Cross-sectional SEM image of a MAPbI3 SC-PSCs. Note that the few nanometer-thick transporting layers at the crystal’s two interfaces are not visible at such magnification. (b) Energy-level diagram for SC-PSCs. (c) J−V curves of the champion cell in forward- (orange) and reverse-scan (blue) modes and the corresponding photovoltaic parameters under 1 sun illumination. (d) EQE spectra with the integrated JSC of the champion cell. (e) Steady-state photocurrent and PCE output at maximum power point with 0.93 V bias for the champion cell. (f) Statistical summary, based on 12 devices, of the photovoltaic parameters of SC-PSCs.
The Supporting Information is available free of charge on the ACS Publications website at DOI: 10.1021/acsenergylett.9b00847. Details of device fabrication and characterization, figures as described in the text, and TOC abbreviations (PDF)
■
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Authors
*E-mail:
[email protected]. *E-mail:
[email protected]. ORCID
21.09% with negligible hysteresis. The corresponding external quantum efficiency (EQE) and integrated JSC are shown in Figure 1d. To exclude the effect of any potential error in aperture area determination, the JSC of the champion device was verified and corrected from the integrated current calculated from the EQE. The calculated JSC from the EQE measurement was only 1.2% lower than that obtained by an I−V scan for the device, which is within the expected error of solar cell J−V measurements. The steady-state maximum power output (SPO) of the champion cell (Figure 1e) shows that the PCE reaches over 21% during the first 10 s of measurement and then stabilizes at ∼20.7% for over 120 s, consistent with the J−V measurement (Figure 1c). A statistical summary of the device characteristics (Figure 1f) attests to the reproducibility of the fabricated cells and their outstanding performance. It is useful to emphasize the experimental precautions, during fabrication and testing, required to achieve the dramatic increase in device performance. First, any spin-coating post-treatment that includes a solvent that might dissolve the chargetransporting layer beneath the active layer was avoided to ensure proper attachment of the single crystal. Second, fabrication, storage, and testing of the devices were conducted in a nitrogen-filled environment to prevent interface hydration that might lead to poor contacts. We observed that efficient SCPSCs can drastically decrease in performance when measured under ambient conditions (22 °C, 50−55 RH); in particular, the JSC markedly decreases while the VOC and FF are largely unaffected (see Figures S5 and S6). Note that when the devices are kept under dry air, the performance does not change
Omar F. Mohammed: 0000-0001-8500-1130 Osman M. Bakr: 0000-0002-3428-1002 Author Contributions ∥
Z.C., B.T., and A.Y.A. contributed equally to this work.
Notes
The authors declare no competing financial interest.
■ ■
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The authors acknowledge funding support from KAUST and Saudi Aramco (grant no. RGC/3/3543-01-01). REFERENCES
(1) NREL Best Research-Cell Efficiencies. https://www.nrel.gov/pv/ cell-efficiency.html. 2019. (2) Pazos-Outón, L.; et al. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2018, 9, 1703−1711. (3) Chen, J.; et al. Adv. Mater. 2018, 1803019. (4) Stolterfoht, M.; et al. Energy Environ. Sci. 2017, 10 (6), 1530. (5) Wu, N.; et al. Energy Technol. 2017, 5, 1827−1835. (6) Stranks, S. D. ACS Energy Lett. 2017, 2, 1515−1525. (7) Sherkar, T. S.; et al. ACS Energy Lett. 2017, 2, 1214−1222. (8) Shi, D.; et al. Science 2015, 347, 519−522. (9) Zhumekenov, A. A.; et al. ACS Energy Lett. 2016, 1, 32−37. (10) Dong, Q.; et al. Science 2015, 347, 967−970. (11) Alarousu, E.; et al. J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2017, 8, 4386−4390. (12) Wang, K.; et al. Joule 2019, 3, 311−316. (13) Chen, Z.; et al. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 1890. (14) Liu, Y.; et al. Adv. Mater. 2016, 28, 9204−9209. (15) Leguy, A. M.; et al. Chem. Mater. 2015, 27, 3397−3407. (16) Liu, Y.; et al. Adv. Mater. 2015, 27, 5176−5183.
1259
DOI: 10.1021/acsenergylett.9b00847 ACS Energy Lett. 2019, 4, 1258−1259
