Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 18, 2026

In Situ Monitoring of the Accelerated Performance Degradation of Solar Cells and Modules: A Case Study for CuIn,GaSe2 Solar Cells
Published on: October 3, 2018
Maneuvering investigation of theoretical and experimental parameters for Al-doped Cu (In, Ga) Se2 thin film solar
A Ashok1, Karthick Sekar2, D Acosta3
1Sección de Electrónica de Estado Sólido (SEES), Departamento de Ingeniería Eléctrica Cinvestav, San Pedro Zacatenco C.P. 07360 Mexico City Mexico ashokad@cinvestav.mx.
Abstract:
Aluminum-doped copper indium gallium selenide/sulfide (CIGAS) is a favorable absorber material for solar cell applications; however, the number of reports on CIGAS solar cells currently remains limited. In this study, we therefore employed SCAPS-1D software for the theoretical modeling of CIGAS thin film solar cells and investigated the effect of material properties and device configurations on solar cell photovoltaic (PV) parameters. Initially, key parameters such as thickness and charge carrier concentrations of each layer used in CIGAS PV devices were studied and optimized to obtain suitable conditions for high device performance. The impact of the various buffer window layers (BWL)-such as CdS, In2S3, ZnS, ZnSe, In2Se3, V2O5, ZnO, and MgZnO-as well as the back surface field (BSF) layers, including Sb2Se3, AlSb, CuGaSe2, SnS, BaSi2, MoS2, MoSe2, p-Si, CuS, and WSe2, was systematically tested to determine a CIGAS solar cell configuration with greater efficiency. After meticulous optimization, CdS and Sb2Se3 materials were selected as the best BWL and BSF layers for the CIGAS device configuration, respectively, demonstrating a maximum power conversion efficiency (PCE) of 32.2% compared to other chosen materials. Finally, an experimentally obtained CIGAS absorber and CdS buffer material properties were introduced into optimized conditions with and without a BSF layer to further analyze their influence on solar cell performance. This also confirmed that the BSF layer significantly boosts device efficiency compared to the conventional CIGAS device.

