Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Heliyon
journal homepage: www.cell.com/heliyon

A qualitative Design and optimization of CIGS-based Solar Cells

with Sn2S3 Back Surface Field: A plan for achieving 21.83
% efficiency
Md. Ferdous Rahman a, b, *, Md. Kamrul Hasan a, Mithun Chowdhury a,
Md. Rasidul Islam c, Md. Hafijur Rahman d, Md. Atikur Rahman d,
Sheikh Rashel Al Ahmed e, Abu Bakar Md. Ismail b, Mongi Amami f,
M. Khalid Hossain g, Gamil A.A.M. Al-Hazmi f
a
Advanced Energy Materials and Solar Cell Research Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Begum Rokeya University,
Rangpur, 5400, Bangladesh
b
Solar Energy Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Rajshahi, Rajshahi, 6205, Bangladesh
c
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, Bangamata Sheikh Fojilatunnesa Mujib Science & Technology University, Jamalpur, 2012,
Bangladesh
d
Department of Physics, Pabna University of Science and Technology, Pabna, 6600, Bangladesh
e
Department of Electrical, Electronic and Communication Engineering, Pabna University of Science and Technology, Pabna, 6600, Bangladesh
f
Department of Chemistry, College of Sciences, King Khalid University, P.O. Box 9004, Abha, Saudi Arabia
g
Institute of Electronics, Atomic Energy Research Establishment, Bangladesh Atomic Energy Commission, Dhaka, 1349, Bangladesh

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Conventional Copper Indium Gallium Di Selenide (CIGS)-based solar cells are more efficient than
Back Surface Field (BSF) second-generation technology based on hydrogenated amorphous silicon (a-Si: H) or cadmium
Tin sulfide (Sn2S3) telluride (CdTe). So, herein the photovoltaic (PV) performance of CIGS-based solar cells has been
CIGS-Based solar cell
investigated numerically using SCAPS-1D solar simulator with different buffer layer and less
Non-toxic buffer layer
expensive tin sulfide (Sn2S3) back-surface field (BSF). At first, three buffer layer such as cadmium
SCAPS-1D
Thin-film solar cell sulfide (CdS), zinc selenide (ZnSe) and indium-doped zinc sulfide ZnS:In have been simulated
with CIGS absorber without BSF due to optimized and non-toxic buffer. Then the optimized
structure of Al/FTO/ZnS:In/CIGS/Ni is modified to become Al/FTO/ZnS:In/CIGS/Sn2S3/Ni by
adding a Sn2S3 BSF to enhanced efficiency. The detailed analysis have been investigated is the
influence of physical properties of each absorber and buffer on photovoltaic parameters including
layer thickness, carrier doping concentration, bulk defect density, interface defect density. This
study emphasizes investigating the reasons for the actual devices’ poor performance and illus­
trates how each device’s might vary open-circuit voltage (VOC), short-circuit current density (JSC),
fill factor (FF), power conversion efficiency (PCE), and quantum efficiency (QE). The optimized
structure offers outstanding power conversion efficiency (PCE) of 21.83 % with only 0.80 μm
thick CIGS absorber. The proposed CIGS-based solar cell performs better than the previously
reported conventional designs while also reducing CIGS thickness and cost.

* Corresponding author. Advanced Energy Materials and Solar Cell Research Laboratory, Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
Begum Rokeya University, Rangpur, 5400, Bangladesh.
E-mail address: [email protected] (Md.F. Rahman).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22866
Received 29 July 2023; Received in revised form 20 November 2023; Accepted 21 November 2023
Available online 25 November 2023
2405-8440/© 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

1. Introduction

The solar cell is a compulsory requirement for obtaining efficient, affluent, highly proficient, and low-cost electrical energy con­
verted from sunlight [1–3]. At present, Copper Indium Gallium di-Selenide (CIGS) based thin-film solar cell (TFSC) is demanding due
to cost-effectiveness and high-power conversion efficiency in the world energy society. The outdoor performance of CIGS is superb and
the conversion efficiency is sufficiently high [4–6] and in CIGS-based solar cells, this chalcogenide material is the ideal choice for the

List of abbreviations

CIGS Copper indium gallium selenide

CZTS Copper zinc tin sulfide
CdS Cadmium sulfide
ZnSe Zinc selenide
ZnS:In Indium doped zinc sulfide
Sn2S3 Tin Sulfide
FTO Fluorine-doped Tin Oxide
BSF Back surface field
VOC Open circuit voltage
JSC Short circuit current
FF Fill factor
PCE Power conversion efficiency
SD Single-Donor
SA Single-Acceptor
CdTe Cadmium telluride
DOS Density of States
TFSCs Thin film solar cell
SC Solar cell
PDT post-deposition treatment
Eg Band gap
PV Photovoltaic
HTL Hole transport layer
ETL Electron transport layer
QE Quantum efficiency
C–V Capacitance-Voltage
SRH Shockley read hall
VB Valence band
CB Conduction band

p-type absorber layer [7]. Although CIGS has a high manufacturing cost, it outperforms other than thin-film technologies like a-Si: H
and CdTe solar cells in terms of performance [8–10]. When the rare and costly materials like Gallium (Ga) and Indium (In) are used, the
price is high. Due to this reason the CIGS layer would be as thin as possible [11]. The four elements such as copper (Cu), indium (In),
gallium (Ga), and selenium (Se) are formed CIGS. According to reports, CIGS has an absorption coefficient of 105 cm− 1 and a band gap
(Eg) of 1.1 eV [12,13]. Adjusting the Ga/In ratio on the CIGS absorber the band gap can be simply couturier from 1.02 eV to 1.69 eV [6,
7].
CdS is the most usually used buffer layer in CdTe and CIGS SC [3,5]. However, Cadmium (Cd) is toxic and thus not an eco-friendly
material [8,9]. CdS have a band gap of 2.4 eV [5] and absorb photons in light wavelengths from 270 to 520 nm [14]. Hence, it is
essential to find alternative non-toxic buffer layers of comparatively higher band gap materials which will help in transmitting more
photons to the absorber layer. For this purpose, various non-toxic and low-cost materials such as indium sulfide (In2S3), indium
(In)-doped zinc sulfide (ZnS: In), and zinc selenide (ZnSe) can be applied. ZnS: In is a promising buffer layer for TFSCs [15,16]. ZnS: In
with a band gap of 3.1 eV [17] gives better performance than CdS with better lattice matching [8,9]. Furthermore, the ZnSe shows
optimum performance with a band gap of 2.9 eV [18]. Imam et al. improve the efficiency 21.15 % of CIGS TFSC replaced by the
conventional i-ZnO layer with ZnO1-xSx [19,20] and using different types of HTL boosting the efficiency above 25 % [21–23]. Reported
experimental efficiencies of CIGS TFSC have been found to be 19.2 % [24], 19.9 % [25]. Moreover, the PCE of 22.6 % has been
achieved with the CdS buffer layer using post-deposition treatment (PDT) [26]. To date, M. A. Green et al. shows the highest PCE of
23.6 % has been confirmed for CIGS-based TFSC [27]. There is also an article reporting with a PCE of 23.85 % for Cd-free CIGS TFSC.
Using numerical analysis, theoretical efficiencies have found above 20 % [12,28]. Many researchers have been used the range of 1–2.5
μm of the CIGS layer as an ideal value [28]. Moreover, The PCE was obtained 21.3 % using ultra-thin CIGS/Si structure, where Si used
as a second absorber layer with thickness of 1 μm [12,29]. Furthermore, the efficiency of 24.45 % has been achieved by adding a SnS
BSF layer of thickness 0.3 μm [30]. On the other hand Imam et al. develop the efficiency of 26.1 % [31], 30 % [32], 35.6 % [33], and

2
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 1. The proposed CIGS based structure and energy band diagram (a) without, and (b–d) with BSF.

3
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

37.1 % [34] with using different types of CIGS based tandem cell.
Literature review indicates that 1–4 μm thick CIGS are usually used as absorber layers also this analysis of works states that the PCE
of CIGS-based TFSC is less than 28 % and 24 % for theoretical and experimental cases, respectively [35]. It is evident that as the CIGS
absorber layer’s thickness increases, solar cells will cost more. So, herein we proposed tin sulfide (Sn2S3) as a novel BSF for CIGS-based
solar cells which reducing the CIGS absorber layer thickness and cost. Sn2S3 is used in TFSCs applications because of its band gap of
1.09 eV–1.11 eV and good stability [36]. Sn2S3 includes Sn (Tin) and S (Sulfer) which are both abundant on earth, therefore adding a
thick layer of Sn2S3 can significantly reducing the cost of industrial CIGS solar cells. Sn2S3 is regarded as the ideal absorber material for
solar cells from experimental and theoretical perspectives [36]. Actually, we have developed a non-toxic, affordable, and environ­
mentally friendly semiconductor heterostructure for a CIGS-based solar cell. Furthermore, revealing the double junction solar cell’s
capacity to absorb the majority of incident solar photons, specifically the capacity to absorb longer-wavelength photons via effective
BSF layer-mediated sub-band gap trail-state absorption. On the other hand, the modifications made to the traditional cell structure are
primarily intended to address the issue of the ultrathin CIGS layers’ insufficient absorption of the incident light. The employment of
new materials as a BSF layer has resulted in additional alterations to the fundamental structure. On the other hand, the modifications
made to the traditional cell structure are primarily intended to address the issue of the ultrathin CIGS layers’ insufficient absorption of
the incident light. The employment of new materials as a BSF layer has resulted in additional alterations to the fundamental structure.
Numerous scholarly publications have suggested methods for enhancing the performance of ultrathin CIGS cells by assuming that the
sole cause of the decline in efficiency would be optical losses. Almost all, the creative approaches looked at to get over this problem
resulted in changes to the typical cell structure and the use of new BSF [37]. This work demonstrates that, when compared to
alternative BSF-aided structures, Sn2S3 is the best BSF layer for CIGS solar cells [36]. After first simulating process is done then, we
replaced the CdS buffer to make it Cd-free by inserting layers of X = ZnS: In and ZnSe, giving alternative novel FTO/X/CIGS/Sn2S3
heterojunction solar cells and then optimized the thicknesses of those buffer layers. The CIGS layer has been optimized by varying the
thickness, doping concentration, defect density and interface defect density with various buffer layers. The thickness and doping
concentration of the Sn2S3 BSF layer has also been optimized. We have optimized the back and front electrodes amongst various metals
and finally Nickel (Ni) and Aluminum (Al) have been used as back and front electrodes in our proposed cells. At last, we have studied
our three proposed solar cells for optimized structure. Our proposed CIGS-based solar cells give PCEs of 21.83 %, 21.72 % and 20.77 %
with ZnS: In, CdS and ZnSe buffers, respectively, proclaiming superior performances to the CIGS-based solar cells reported earlier [38].

2. Device and simulation of proposed solar cells

Numerical designing approach plays an important task in thoughtful the device outputs to recognize the highly efficient PV cell. To
scheme and evaluate polycrystalline TFSCs, the one-dimensional SCAPS-1 simulator has been taken as a promising tool in the scientific
community of solar energy research [39]. The SCAPS-1D program can execute the simulation of a solar device including up to seven
various semiconductor layers. This numerical method also quantitatively evaluates the heterojunction TFSCs by utilizing a group of
parameters for numerous materials. In addition, it may effectively elucidate device characteristics assessed by other scientists with the
entered likeness parameters of the employed films in the simulator and then the model achieves reliability. There are several research
works have been reported in exploring the viewpoint of discovering heterojunction PV devices with the numerical simulations by the
SCAPS-1D software [40–45]. In their attempts, the PV performance parameters such as Voc, Jsc, FF, efficiency, and spectral responses
measured experimentally and theoretically are validated. In the earlier studies, it has been uncovered that the numerically obtained
device outputs are exactly same to the experimental results, and thereby verifying the validity of the SCAPS-1D simulator [43–47].
Thus, the faithful SCAPS-1D tool can be efficiently expended to model and simulate heterojunction PV structures without any defeat of
generality. In this analysis, the SCAPS-1D simulation software has been carried out to design and simulate the TFSC. The practically
available material’s parameters stated in the former investigations have been employed by considering all perception desirable to
acquire best performance of the anticipated PV device structure. The optimized structure (Al/FTO/ZnS:In/CIGS/Ni) and energy band
diagram is displayed in Fig. 1(a) without BSF. Furthermore three proposed solar cell structures (Al/FTO/X/CIGS/Ni) (X = CdS, ZnSe
and ZnS:In) and energy band diagram are depicted in Fig. 1(b-d) with BSF. The p-type CIGS absorber has an Eg of 1.1 eV [12], the
n-type CdS buffer layer has an Eg of 2.4 eV [48], and the Eg for the FTO window layer is 3.3 eV [48]. The back Nickel (Ni) contact layer
is set with CIGS absorber layer (without BSF) and set with Sn2S3 BSF layer (with BSF). The traditional ZnO window layer has been
altered by the FTO (SnO2: F) layer having Eg of 3.6 eV. There are three layers: a buffer layer made of n-type (NA = 1 × 1018 cm− 3) with
thickness of 0.05 μm, an absorber layer made of p-type (NA = 1 × 1013 cm− 3) CIGS that is thickness of 0.8 μm, and Sn2S3 is used as a BSF
of p+-type (NA = 1 × 1018 cm− 3) that is thickness of 0.05 μm in this proposed solar cell structure. As the front and back grid contact
Aluminum (Al) and Nickel (Ni) were used with work function (WF) of 4.2 eV and 5.04 eV, respectively [8]. Due to the construction of
solar cells, the work function is varied from 4 eV to 5 eV, and the results demonstrate that as the work function value developed, the
efficiency also increased because a more significant work function value enhances band alignment of the rear surface. Due to a
considerable energy-level disparity at the absorber metal contact, which can result in the formation of a Schottky junction and a
decrease in device efficiency, the device performance can be negatively impacted below 4 eV. The greatest efficiency was attained
because the work function was above 5 eV [49,50].
The absorber layer, composed of copper, indium, gallium, and selenium, absorbs photons to create electron-hole pairs. While the
valence band is full with electrons, the conduction band is empty. The energy gap between them, or band gap, makes it possible to
absorb photons with the required amount of energy. The gradient of the band gap and the fluctuations in the work functions cause the
absorber layer to develop an intrinsic electric field. This field is used to separate and gather the electron-hole pairs that photons create.
A p-n junction frequently forms in the absorber layer, which facilitates the separation and transportation of charge carriers. While the

4
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

front contact serves as the hole collector, allowing for light transmission, the back contact, or a transparent conductive oxide layer,
functions as an electron collector [51].
At first we proposed the cell structure FTO/CdS/CIGS/Sn2S3 which comprises toxic buffer layer of CdS. So, we have replaced the
toxic CdS buffer of the baseline case with various non-toxic buffer layers such as ZnSe and ZnS: In. ZnSe. The proposed Cd-free CIGS
structure contains with 0.8 μm thick absorber, 0.05 μm thick Sn2S3 BSF grown on a back Nickel (Ni) contact layer. Table 1 shows the
input parameters used for simulation at 300 K. Entire simulation was carried out under global air mass AM 1.5G spectrum at a one sun
illumination of 100 mW/cm2.
The band alignment reveals the amount of current flowing via the hetero-junction. The suggested cell’s energy band diagram is also
shown in Fig. 1 (a-d) utilizing simulation-derived data from the “SCAPS Energy Band Panel.” Each material’s bandgap and layer
thickness are obvious. This illustration illustrates how our suggested solar cell would be able to deliver the necessary results of an
effective one.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Different buffer layers study

The comparison impact of three buffer layers with absorber thickness with BSF layer investigation of CIGS solar cell is shown in
Fig. 2. At first we simulated proposed CIGS solar cell with toxic CdS buffer and we have replaced the toxic CdS buffer of the baseline
case with various non-toxic buffer such as ZnSe and ZnS:In using the same thickness, doping, and defect densities. Furthermore it has
been found that ZnSe and ZnS:In are the best alternative buffer layers for the CIGS solar cell. Table 2 summarizes the output parameters
of the solar cell with different buffer layers. From Table 2, it is seen that all three-buffer layers give almost the same short-circuit
current and open-circuit voltage.
But comparatively higher values of PCE and FF have been attained by ZnS:In buffer layers. The efficiency improvement may also be
supported by determining the lattice mismatch which discuss in details in this manuscript in the section of 4.1.3 [53]. Hence, it can be
concluded that ZnS:In is the appropriate alternative buffer layers for CIGS solar cell.

3.1.1. Absorber layer (CIGS) thickness variation effect

Case-I. Without BSF (Sn₂S₃)
The impact of the CIGS absorber layer thickness on the PV performance of the optimized cell is depicted in Fig. 3 with and without
BSF. The CIGS absorber layer’s thickness was changed from 0.1 μm to 3 μm for our optimized cell FTO/ZnS:In/CIGS and in this time, all
other optimized value was constant in Table .1 with temperature 300 K. Furthermore single sunlight spectrum was chosen performed
in this investigation.
When the thickness of the CIGS absorber layer growths the major portion of photons from the incident solar power are absorbed due
to this circumstance directs rising efficiency (η) [54]. Efficiency ranges was varied from (6.25–19.40) % for absorber thickness
(0.1–3.0) μm. The CIGS cell shows FF is 77.30 %, VOC is 0.4919 V, JSC is 42.33 mA/cm2 and η is 16.09 without BSF for optimized
absorber thickness of 0.80 μm. Fig. 3 illustrates how efficiency rises with thickness and also a correlation is shown between the VOC and
JSC.
Case-II. With BSF (Sn₂S₃)
The high doping impurity carrier concentration at the rear side of the structure drives minor charge carriers (electrons) away from
the high recombination back metallic contact layer. The BSF layer is added with active absorber layer in the optimized structure that

Table 1
Provides the simulation input values for the solar cell’s layer’s parameters.
FTO [52] CIGS [2,5,30,31] Sn2S3 [36] CdS [5,31,32] ZnSe [8,14,17] ZnS: In [9,33,34]
Parameter (unit)

Thickness (μm) 0.05 0.8* 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05

Band gap (eV) 3.6 1.1 1.09 2.4 2.9 3.1
Electron affinity (eV) 4 4.2 4.26 4.4 4.1 4.13
Dielectric permittivity 9 13.6 12.50 10 10 8.2
CB effective DOS (cm− 3) 2.2 × 1018 2.2 × 1018 1.0 × 1019 2.2 × 1018 1.5 × 1018 6.35 × 1018
VB effective DOS (cm− 3) 1.8 × 1019 1.8 × 1019 1.0 × 1019 1.8 × 1019 1.8 × 1019 6.03 × 1019
Electron thermal velocity (cm/s) 107 107 107 107 107 107
Hole thermal velocity (cm/s) 107 107 107 107 107 107
Electron mobility (cm2/V-s) 100 100 25 100 50 250
Hole mobility (cm2/V-s) 25 25 100 25 20 40
Donor density ND (cm− 3) 1019 0 0 1018 1018 1018
Acceptor density NA (cm− 3) 0 1 × 1013* 1 × 1018* 0 0 0
Defect type SA SD SD SA SA SA
Defect density (cm− 3) 1015 1014* 1015 1015 1015 1015

Note: * is a variable field.

5
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 2. Comparison impact of three buffer layers with absorber thickness with BSF.

Table 2
Photovoltaic parameters of the solar cell with different buffer layers.
S/N Buffer layer VOC (V) JSC (mA/cm2) FF (%) η (%)
1 CdS 0.6194 42.56 82.38 21.72
2 ZnSe 0.6086 42.54 80.22 20.77
3 ZnS:In 0.6202 42.55 82.71 21.83 (Optimized)

has a greater doping concentration. The BSF layer in the current study is positioned attached to the CIGS absorber layer and has a
doping density of 1 × 1018 cm− 3. The contact between the p+ type Sn₂S₃ and the p-type CIGS produce an electric field. These electric
fields form a barrier that prevents the minority carriers from flowing to the rear surface. The Sn₂S₃ BSF layer will increase the short
circuit current while simultaneously reducing the dark current by reflecting the minority carriers. The BSF layer minimizes surface
recombination speed, improving the performance of solar cells [53].
At first we changed the thickness of the Sn₂S₃ BSF from 0.01 to 1 μm and all other optimized value is constant in Table .1. After a
preliminary analysis, we discovered that cell efficiency stabilized in the region from 0.05 μm to 1 μm. As a result, Sn₂S₃ BSF layer was
tuned to be 0.05 μm thin. However, the optimized CIGS solar cell provide an efficiency is 21.83 %, JSC is 42.55 mA/cm2, VOC is 0.62 V
and FF is 82.71 at the same thickness of 0.8 μm. The efficiency is greatly improved while maintaining the same absorber layer
thickness. The main contention is that both Sn₂S₃ and CIGS serve as absorbers for solar cells can be explored, the Sn₂S₃ layer assisting in
increasing photon energy absorption within the cell. More electron-hole pairs can be produced as a result of the ability to absorb a large
number of photons [55].
High-cost components used in CIGS-based solar cells include Indium and Gallium [9]. Therefore, it is not advisable to produce
absorbers with significant CIGS thickness. Thus, we can reduce the use of Ga and In materials by reducing the thickness of the CIGS. In
the end, it will result in decreased material manufacturing costs. The cost-effective new architecture solar cell has a higher efficiency

6
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 3. The impact of changing CIGS absorber thickness with and without BSF of optimized buffer ZnS:In.

than earlier models. Our research can help manufacturers of CIGS solar cells make decisions that are in their best interests. In this
study, a slightly higher Jsc is observed for the CIGS solar cell with BSF layer than the cell without BSF layer at thin absorber layer in
Fig. 3. The development of dark current due to insignificant built-in potential at the absorber/BSF junction may be the possible reason
for the insufficient current density by adding BSF layer in the heterojunction CIGS solar cell.
However, the CIGS cell shows FF of 77.30 % with VOC of 0.4919 V, JSC of 42.33 mA/cm2, and η of 16.09 % without BSF for
optimized absorber thickness of 0.80 μm. On the other hand, the optimized CIGS solar cell provides an efficiency of 21.83 % including
JSC of 42.55 mA/cm2, VOC of 0.62 V, and FF of 82.71 % at the same thickness of 0.8 μm. It is revealed that the efficiency is improved
considerably in the proposed CIGS PV device with BSF layer while maintaining the same absorber layer thickness in both cases. In
Fig. 3, we can see that the efficiency of the cell with BSF layer is enhanced rapidly with increasing the absorber thickness from 0.1 to
0.8 μm and then is almost saturated. On the other hand, η of the PV device without BSF is changed somewhat beyond the CIGS absorber
layer of 0.8 μm. According to the simulation results in Fig. 3, it can also be realized that the thickness should be required more than 3.0
μm to reach the maximum efficiency for the CIGS solar cell without BSF layer as compared to that of the cell with BSF layer. The
selection of wider absorber will enhance the overall cost of the TFSC. Therefore, the optimal thickness of 0.8 μm is selected in both
cases.
On the other hand, understanding how certain materials can create effective barriers despite seemingly unfavorable properties is
crucial for the optimization of solar cell performance. It’s crucial to take into account a few elements that can help the Sn2S3 BSF layer
establish an appropriate barrier height in this case: Dangling bonds at the CIGS surface could be influenced by the Sn2S3 layer. The
Sn2S3 layer can lower recombination rates by passivating these flaws, which helps to create an efficient barrier. However, quantum
mechanical phenomena like tunneling might also be in operation. Even while Sn2S3 bulk characteristics could indicate a lower barrier,
at the nanoscale, quantum phenomena can have a distinct impact on electron transport [56]. Additionally, engineering specific defects
in the Sn2S3 layer can be a deliberate strategy to tailor its properties at the interface. Defects may act as trapping centers for charge
carriers, contributing to the effective barrier.

7
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

3.1.2. CIGS acceptor density impact on solar cell performance

The acceptor density (NA) of the CIGS layer has been changed from 1 × 1011 cm− 3 to 1 × 1018 cm− 3 due to find out optimized value
of NA, at that time all other optimized value was constant in Table .1 and shown in Fig. 4. In this investigation period VOC increases
from 0.6197 to 0.6964 V, JSC goes down from 42.56 to 35.63 mA/cm2, FF improved up from 82.62 to 83.42 %, and efficiency declined
down from 21.79 to 20.7 %. After detail investigation we got the optimized acceptor density is 1 × 1013 cm− 3 for CIGS absorber. In
Fig. 4, it can be seen that the PV performance parameters are almost identical below the acceptor density of 1015 cm− 3 for the CIGS
absorber with and without BSF layer. On the other hand, the device outputs are changed at high doping density. However, it is very
hard to achieve such high doping level in absorber materials experimentally. Therefore, in order to avoid complexity and to reduce
expense, this simulation work is done with a reasonable and low absorber doping level of 1 × 1013 cm− 3.
However, at higher acceptor density the decrease of photocurrent due to dominance of recombination of photo generated holes
pairs. On the other hand the improved of Voc created from increased build-in-potential at lowering fermi-level at greater acceptor
concentration and thereby larger band offset associate with inferior doping level at the buffer to absorber interface [57,58].

3.1.3. The influence of bulk defects density of proposed CIGS solar cell
The impact of bulk defect density in the CIGS layer on the photovoltaic performances of the solar cell is investigated by changing
the value 1 × 1011 cm− 3 to 1 × 1018 cm− 3, which is shown in Fig. 5. After investigation and optimization we got 1 × 1014 cm− 3 is the
optimized defect density for CIGS absorber. The value of VOC, JSC, FF, and PCE has been reduced while increasing the value of defect
density. The enhancement of the defect increments the recombination rate, subsequently developing the reverse saturation current and
due this result the overall PV performance are decayed [59].

3.1.4. The influence of resistances on the proposed CIGS structure

The impact of series (Rs) and shunt (Rsh) resistances on the proposed solar cell structure with and without BSF is shown in Fig. 6.
The all PV performance is influenced by parasitic resistances such as series (Rs) and shunt (Rsh) resistances. The series resistances of the

Fig. 4. The impact of acceptor density of proposed CIGS solar cell structure with and without BSF.

8
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 5. The impact of defect density with variation of CIGS absorber with and without BSF.

structure create due to the bulk resistance and as well as the front and rear metallic resistance. On the other hand, the shunt (Rsh)
resistances created from different carrier recombination path due to manufacturing defect [60]. The cell structure of course has a lower
Rs and greater Rsh due to improved highly efficient solar cell. Here, the shunt resistance, Rsh, was set at 105 Ω-cm2, while the value of
the RS was varied from 0 Ω-cm2 (ideal case) to 7 Ω-cm2. It is shown in Fig. 6(a), the Voc and Jsc are almost no changed with variation of
Rs. However, it is noticed that the FF and PCE are extremely influenced by the increment of Rs. The FF is reduced from 81.66 to 35 %
and PCE decreased from 21.83 to 11.54 % with the variation of Rs (0–7 Ω-cm2), respectively. Finally, it is shown that smaller Rs is
create efficient cell structure, which is good agreement with the reputed report [60,61]. We have changed Rsh from 10 to 1 × 107
Ω-cm2, while keeping the series resistance Rs constant at 0.5 Ω-cm2. The all PV parameter of the suggested solar cell is initially
increased and then be inclined to saturated, which is shown in Fig. 6(b). For the suggested solar cell with the Sn2S3 layer, we showing
that efficiency changed from 4.31 % to 21.00 % with respect to the rise in Rsh, which is good agreement with the reputed literature
[60].

3.1.5. Impact of interface defect density on proposed solar cells

The impact of the interface defect density of Sn₂S₃/CIGS and CIGS/ZnS:In on the proposed solar cell structure is shown in Fig. 7(a)
and (b). From figure, it is notice that how interface defect density (Nit) impact the proposed cell structure performance. In the current
study, the impact of the interface defect density at both ETL/CIGS and BSF/CIGS are investigated in details on the proposed structure.
The opportunity of finding carriers at the interface increases with a rise in the interface state density (Nit) between ETL/CIGS and BSF/
CIGS. Consequently, carriers are more likely to be seized by their regional counterparts, as a result in low Jsc which reduction the PCE.
On the other hand, the enhancement of the interface defect increments the recombination rate, subsequently developing the reverse
saturation current and due to this result the overall PV performance are decayed on the proposed solar cell [61]. Finally, it is noticed
that the optimized value of the defect density both of CIGS/ZnS:In and Sn₂S₃/CIGS interface is 1010 cm− 2. In Fig. 7, the efficiency may

9
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 6. The impact of (a) series (Rs), and (b) shunt (Rsh) resistances on the characteristics of PV parameters of proposed structure with and
without BSF.

appear similar between interface defect densities of 1010 cm− 2 to 1014 cm− 2, the considerations mentioned above, such as carrier
transport, contact resistance, material stability, and manufacturing consistency, make the optimization of 1010 cm− 2 a preferred choice
in the CIGS solar cells. This optimization strategy aims to enhance the overall performance, reliability, and long-term viability of the
solar cell technology.
The rectifying characteristics of a junction in highly efficient thin film solar cells can be evaluated by analyzing impact of interface
quality. In order to realize the proposed CIGS heterojunction thin-film solar cells, the interface defect density is changed from 1010 to 1
× 1018 cm− 2 to reveal the trend of the significance of the interface quality. The interface defects such as shallow or deep trap centers
can be induced during fabrication of the thin-film solar cells [62]. The defects at interface could act as charge trap centers for
photo-excited electrons, which affect the electrons injection and electron-hole recombination at the interface [63]. In Fig. 7, it can be
observed that the power conversion efficiency changes insignificantly for the interface defect density below 1016 cm− 2. This unaffected
region may be attributed to the shallow defect states located at the interface. The shallow defect dominates to slow down the charge
transport and electron-hole recombination at the interface. In addition, the series resistance may also be increased significantly with
the increment of interface defect [64]. The outputs of the solar cell should be degraded by increasing series resistance. However, the
series resistance doesn’t have great effect on short-circuit current density Jsc, and thus resulted in the almost constant efficiency with
variation of defect density.

3.1.6. Operating temperature impact

The temperature (T) effect is investigated to compare the performance of the proposed CIGS solar cell with and without BSF and
shown in Fig. 8. Furthermore the T was changed from 300 K to 475 K to investigate the correlation between T and PCE of the proposed
CIGS cell. From Fig. 8 it is clearly shown that VOC, FF and PCE are drastically decline with increasing temperature with and without
BSF, while the JSC values remain almost unchanged. Higher temperatures lead to poorer efficiency because of temperature-dependent

10
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 7. The influence of the interface defect density of (a) Sn₂S₃/CIGS and (b) CIGS/ZnS:In.

factors for example electron-hole mobility, carrier concentrations, and energy band gaps, which is good agreement with the reputed
works [59].

4. Output performance of proposed CIGS solar cells

4.1. J-V characteristics of proposed CIGS solar cells

The current-voltage (J-V) and quantum efficiency (QE) characteristic curves of the proposed CIGS solar cells are shown in Fig. 9. It
is noticed that Fig. 9(a) and (b) shows the J-V and QE due to various ETL. On the other hand, Fig. 9(c) and (d) shows the J-V and QE due
to optimized ETL with and without BSF. In the proposed CIGS solar cell structure, the employing of 0.8 μm thick absorber layers
provides the better performance than the traditional CIGS solar cells. The optimized photovoltaic properties with 0.8 μm thick
absorber layers are shown in Table 3 with and without BSF. It is confirmed that after simulating the PV parameters, ZnS:In buffer layer
shows superior performance compared to the other buffer. Our optimized structure shows the voltage (VOC) 0.4919 V (0.62202 V),
short-circuit current density (JSC) 42.33 mA/cm2 (42.55 mA/cm2), fill factor (FF) 82.30 % (82.71 %), and power conversion efficiency
(PCE) 16.09 % (21.83 %) without (with) BSF, respectively. It is interesting to notice that this result also supports the lattice mismatch
value, which is shown in Table 5 and discuss in section 4.1.3 in this manuscript.
Quantum efficiency (QE) is a measurement of how successfully a solar cell or other light-sensitive device turns absorbed light into
electrical current. There are two main ways to analyze quantum efficiency: internal quantum efficiency (IQE) and external quantum
efficiency (EQE). The quantum efficiency (QE) value of a solar cell indicates how much current the PV cell can produce when exposed
to photons of a particular wavelength. The external quantum efficiency (EQE) is a measurement of the number of electrons that can be
extracted from a PV device per incident number of photons [57]. The device’s QE rises as absorber thickness increases because a larger
layer collects more photons. Each material may absorb photons within a specific wavelength range [55].
At a certain wavelength, all the QE curves begin to decline towards zero, Fig. 9(b) and (d) shows the QE curves at a wavelength
range of 300–1500 nm of the base CIGS and modified structures at different ETLs, with and without the BSF layer. All curved lines
begin to reduce until they have zero percent QE at specific wavelengths for the reason that at a particular wavelength range of the
visible light spectrum the materials absorb photons. Moreover, it is observed that the EQE at the wavelength below 500 nm is high.
This may be due to capture of more photons by the absorber layer in the short wavelength range. Thus, this absorbed incident photons
would create a sufficient number of electron-hole pairs. The behavior of the EQE at the short wavelength range is similar to the

11
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 8. Temperature (T) effect of proposed CIGS solar cell with and without BSF.

simulation results reported in the previous works [69–71]. However, Table 4 display the impact of BSF of the related similar research.

4.1.1. The capacitance-voltage (C–V) analysis

To check the consistency of the analysis, the capacitance-voltage (C–V) analysis was carried out at a frequency of 1 MHz. The
depletion and diffusion capacitances are connected to the p-n junctions. Diffusion capacitance predominates at forward bias voltage,
whereas depletion capacitance is bigger in magnitude at reverse bias voltage. As shown in Fig. 10(a), the capacitance of a p-n junction
solar cell is 15 nF cm− 2 at the zero bias voltage. When the polarization potential is increased at a specific frequency and voltage level
the capacitance increases exponentially. This tendency is demonstrated by how insensitive the absorber traps are to all frequencies.
Effective traps do not contribute to reducing the effective charge at the reverse bias, which shows lowers capacitance [53,72].
The Mott-Schottky plot of the PV cell has been illustrated in Fig. (b). The intersection of the 1/C2 plot with the voltage axis yields
the flat-band potential of the proposed SC [53]. The p-type CIGS layer and the space charge area are both primarily occupied by holes,
according to the plot’s negative slope. As a result of exposure to sunlight, PGCs may be the source of the high carrier density in the CIGS
layer. The localized deep states in the absorber layer may be causing the marginal deviation for 1/C2. The main effect is brought on by
the modulation of the majority carriers, not by the influence of the deep states [53,72]. Since the voltage of reverse bias and inverted
square capacitance have a linear relationship, the heterojunction is abrupt in nature, and the built-in potential (Vbi) values are
determined when the straight line intersects the voltage axis at (1/C2 = 0). In our proposed structure the average Vbi = 0.75 V which is
well matched various reputed works [73,74].

4.1.2. Lattice mismatch

The efficiency improvement may also be supported by determining the lattice mismatch between the absorber and buffer layer
using equation (1) [53]:
δ= 2|as − ae | / (as + ae ) (1)

Where, δ, as , and ae are lattice mismatch, substrate and epitaxial thin film lattice constant respectively.
The lattice constant for the various materials has been calculated based on earlier research [75,76]. Lattice mismatch between CIGS
and ZnS is 7.15 %, which is less than that of the ETLs used in earlier investigations. The presence of defect and interface defect density,
which causes carrier losses and a decrease in output voltage, is the main cause of non-radiative recombination [77]. The interface

12
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Fig. 9. (a) J-V characteristics with various ETL layers, (b) Quantum efficiency with various ETL layers, (c) J-V characteristics with and without
optimized ETL layers, and (d) Quantum efficiency with and without optimized ETL layers of proposed CIGS solar cells.

Table 3
Optimized result of proposed CIGS cell with and without BSF.
Cell type CIGS depth (μm) Sn₂S₃ depth (μm) JSC (mA/cm2) Voc(V) FF (%) η (%)
Conventional 0.8 – 42.33 0.4919 77.3 16.09
This work 0.8 0.05 42.55 0.6202 82.71 21.83

Table 4
Influence of back-surface field (BSF) in similar research.
S/N Field of research Absorber BSF η without BSF(%) η with BSF (%)
1 Experimental Si ZnS 6.40 11.02 [65]
2 ” Si Al 12.96 13.75 [66]
3 ” CIGS MoSe2 9 14 [65]
4 Theoretical CZTS CZTS 12.05 14.11 [67]
5 ” CZTSSe SnS 12.30 17.25 [68]
6 ” CIGS Si 16.39 21.30 [12]
7 ” CIGS* Sn2S3* 15.94 20.77 (ETL: ZnSe)
8 ” CIGS* Sn2S3* 15.22 21.70 (ETL: CdS)
9 ” CIGS** Sn2S3** 16.09 21.83 (ETL:ZnS:In)

Note: [*] indicates proposed cell and [**] indicates optimized cell.

13
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Table 5
Lattice mismatch at different ETLs.
Layer Lattice Parameters Lattice Mismatch

a (Å) b (Å) c (Å)

CIGS 5.79 5.79 11.47

CdS 4.11 4.11 6.72 33.79 %
ZnSe 4.00 4.00 6.57 36.56 %
ZnS:In 5.39 5.39 5.39 7.15 %

Fig. 10. Impact of (a) C–V and (b) 1/C2–V curve on proposed CIGS solar cell.

defect density and recombination loss are greatly reduced by the smaller lattice mismatch between ZnS and CIGS. As a result, the
performance characteristics are greatly improved by the addition of the ZnS ETL layer to the CIGS structure. Because of the increase in
minority carrier recombination, the Al/FTO/ZnS:In/CIGS/Ni reference structure exhibits reduced VOC despite the absence of BSF. As a
result, the performance metrics of the device have been impacted.

5. Conclusions

The present study reports on designing CIGS based solar cell with various novel buffer layer. Furthermore, a detailed investigation
was deliberate into the effects of absorber and buffer thickness, defect density, doping concentration, resistances, and temperature on
the proposed cell as a optoelectronic output characteristics using SCAPS-1D. In the beginning, the toxic cadmium Sulfide (CdS) buffer
of the proposed structure FTO/CdS/CIGS/M (M = Ag, Au, Co, Cr, Cu, Mo, Sn, and Ni) has been replaced by various non-toxic buffers:
such as zinc selenide (ZnSe), and indium (In)-doped Zinc Sulfide (ZnS:In). After investigated we recommend the use of Ni as the best
back metal and ZnS:In is the superior buffer in the proposed solar cells. Then we added a 0.05 μm thin novel Sn₂S₃ BSF layer with
optimized structure (Al/FTO/CdS/Sn₂S₃/CIGS/Ni), which significantly reducing the thickness as well as cost of the absorber materials
but enhance the PCE from 16.09 to 21.83 %. This work provides a design guideline on how to utilize an ultra-thin Sn₂S₃ layer as a BSF in
conventional CIGS solar cells to enhance overall performance with a significant reduction in absorber material cost. Present findings
suggest that the possibility of fabricating a low-cost CIGS-based thin-film solar cell (TFSC) near future towards a high efficiency of ≈22
%.

Data availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Md. Ferdous Rahman: Writing - review & editing, Writing - original draft, Visualization, Validation, Supervision, Software,
Resources, Project administration, Methodology, Investigation, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Md. Kamrul
Hasan: Writing - original draft, Software, Methodology, Formal analysis, Data curation, Conceptualization. Mithun Chowdhury:
Writing - original draft, Software, Resources, Formal analysis, Data curation. Md. Rasidul Islam: Writing - original draft, Validation,
Software, Formal analysis. Md. Hafijur Rahman: Writing - original draft, Visualization, Validation, Resources, Methodology. Md.

14
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

Atikur Rahman: Writing - original draft, Validation, Methodology, Formal analysis. Sheikh Rashel Al Ahmed: Writing - original
draft, Software, Resources, Formal analysis. Abu Bakar Md. Ismail: Writing - original draft, Software, Resources, Formal analysis.
Mongi Amami: Writing - original draft, Validation, Software, Resources, Funding acquisition. M. Khalid Hossain: Writing - original
draft, Visualization, Methodology, Formal analysis. Gamil A.A.M. Al-Hazmi: Writing - original draft, Validation, Methodology,
Funding acquisition.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to
influence the work reported in this paper.

Acknowledgments

The authors have extended their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia for
funding this work through Research Groups Program under grant number (RGP.2/111/44).

Appendix A. Supplementary data

Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22866.

References

[1] R. Mamta, R. Kumari, K.K. Kumar, Maurya, V.N. Singh, Ideal HTLs may open the door for further development of Sb2Se3 solar cells—a numerical approach,
Sustainability (2023) 15, https://doi.org/10.3390/su151310465.
[2] A. Laidouci, Mamta, V.N. Singh, P.K. Dakua, D.K. Panda, Performance evaluation of ZnSnN2 solar cells with Si back surface field using SCAPS-1D: a theoretical
study, Heliyon 9 (2023), e20601, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e20601.
[3] J. Al Mahmud, M.F. Rahman, kuddus Abdul, M.H. Ali, M.S. Islam, M.D. Haque, S.R. Al Ahmed, M. Mushtaq, A.B.M. Ismail, Design and analysis of SnS 2/WS 2/
V2O5 double-heterojunction toward high performance photovoltaics, Energy Advances (2023) 19–21, https://doi.org/10.1039/d3ya00231d.
[4] S. Alhammadi, H. Park, W.K. Kim, Optimization of intrinsic ZnO thickness in Cu(In,Ga)Se2-based thin film solar cells, Materials 12 (2019), https://doi.org/
10.3390/ma12091365.
[5] S.R.I. Biplab, M.H. Ali, M.M.A. Moon, M.F. Pervez, M.F. Rahman, J. Hossain, Performance enhancement of CIGS-based solar cells by incorporating an ultrathin
BaSi2 BSF layer, J. Comput. Electron. (2019), https://doi.org/10.1007/s10825-019-01433-0.
[6] M.F. Rahman, N. Mahmud, I. Alam, M.H. Ali, M.M.A. Moon, A. Kuddus, G.F.I. Toki, M.H.K. Rubel, M.A. Al Asad, M.K. Hossain, Design and numerical analysis of
CIGS-based solar cell with V2O5 as the BSF layer to enhance photovoltaic performance, AIP Adv. (2023) 1–15, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0138354, 045309.
[7] A. Bouich, B. Hartiti, S. Ullah, H. Ullah, M.E. Touhami, D.M.F. Santos, B. Mari, Experimental, theoretical, and numerical simulation of the performance of CuIn x
Ga (1-x) S 2 -based solar cells, Optik 183 (2019) 137–147, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2019.02.067.
[8] Comparative study of the second generation a-Si:H, CdTe, and CIGS thin-film solar cells, Adv. Mater. Res. (2019). https://dx.doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.
net/amr.1154.102.
[9] M.M.A. Moon, M.F. Rahman, M. Kamruzzaman, J. Hossain, A.B.M. Ismail, Unveiling the prospect of a novel chemical route for synthesizing solution-processed
CdS/CdTe thin-film solar cells, Energy Rep. 7 (2021) 1742–1756, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2021.03.031.
[10] M.F. Rahman, J. Hossain, A. Kuddus, S. Tabassum, M.H.K. Rubel, M.M. Rahman, Y. Moriya, H. Shirai, A.B.M. Ismail, A novel CdTe ink-assisted direct synthesis
of CdTe thin films for the solution-processed CdTe solar cells, J. Mater. Sci. 55 (2020) 7715–7730, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10853-020-04578-7.
[11] A. Depeursinge, D. Racoceanu, J. Iavindrasana, G. Cohen, A. Platon, P.-A. Poletti, H. Muller, Fusing visual and clinical information for lung tissue classification
in HRCT data, Artif. Intell. Med. 229 (2010) ARTMED1118, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
[12] H. Heriche, Z. Rouabah, N. Bouarissa, New ultra thin CIGS structure solar cells using SCAPS simulation program, Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 42 (2017) 9524–9532,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijhydene.2017.02.099.
[13] N. Guirdjebaye, S. Ouédraogo, A. Teyou Ngoupo, G.L. Mbopda Tcheum, J.M.B. Ndjaka, Junction configurations and their impacts on Cu(In,Ga)Se2 based solar
cells performances, Opto-Electron. Rev. 27 (2019) 70–78, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.opelre.2019.02.001.
[14] Y. Ando, S. Ishizuka, S. Wang, J. Chen, M.M. Islam, H. Shibata, K. Akimoto, T. Sakurai, Relationship between bandgap grading and carrier recombination for Cu
(In,Ga)Se2-based solar cells, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 57 (2018), https://doi.org/10.7567/JJAP.57.08RC08.
[15] K. Luo, Y. Sun, L. Zhou, F. Wang, F. Wu, Theoretical simulation of performances in CIGS thin-film solar cells with cadmiumfree buffer layer, J. Semiconduct. 38
(2017), https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-4926/38/8/084006.
[16] A. Shimizu, S. Chaisitsak, T. Sugiyama, A. Yamada, M. Konagai, Zinc-based buffer layer in the Cu(InGa)Se2 thin film solar cells, Thin Solid Films 361 (2000)
193–197, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0040-6090(99)00792-0.
[17] F. Rahman, J. Podder, M. Ichimura, Studies on structural and optical characterization of in-Zn-S ternary thin films prepared by spray pyrolysis, Int. J.
Ophthalmic. Pract. 5 (2011) 79–86.
[18] M. Mahabub Alam Moon, S. Rezwanul Islam Biplab, M. Hasan Ali, M. Ferdous Rahman, M. Sohel Rana, A. Kuddus, Computational investigation of Zn-based
single buffer layers toward Cd-free high-efficiency CIGS thin film solar cells, Journal of Applied Science and Engineering 26 (2023) 1799–1808, https://doi.org/
10.6180/jase.202312.
[19] I. Gharibshahian, S. Sharbati, A.A. Orouji, Potential efficiency improvement of Cu (In, Ga) Se2 thin-film solar cells by the window layer optimization, Thin Solid
Films 655 (2018) 95–104, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsf.2018.04.014.
[20] F. Ghamsari-Yazdel, I. Gharibshahian, S. Sharbati, Thin oxide buffer layers for avoiding leaks in CIGS solar cells; a theoretical analysis, J. Mater. Sci. Mater.
Electron. 32 (2021) 7598–7608, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-021-05476-7.
[21] F.S. Ahmadpanah, A.A. Orouji, I. Gharibshahian, Improving the efficiency of CIGS solar cells using an optimized p-type CZTSSe electron reflector layer, J. Mater.
Sci. Mater. Electron. 32 (2021) 22535–22547, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10854-021-06740-6.
[22] I. Gharibshahian, A.A. Orouji, S. Sharbati, Effectiveness of band discontinuities between CIGS absorber and copper-based hole transport layer in limiting
recombination at the back contact, Mater. Today Commun. 33 (2022), 104220, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2022.104220.
[23] S. Sharbati, I. Gharibshahian, A.A. Orouji, Proposed suitable electron reflector layer materials for thin-film CuIn1− xGaxSe2 solar cells, Opt. Mater. 75 (2018)
216–223, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2017.09.032.

15
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

[24] K. Ramanathan, M.A. Contreras, C.L. Perkins, S. Asher, F.S. Hasoon, J. Keane, D. Young, M. Romero, W. Metzger, R. Noufi, J. Ward, A. Duda, Properties of
19.2% efficiency ZnO/CdS/CuInGaSe2 thin-film solar cells, Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 11 (2003) 225–230, https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.494.
[25] D.A.R. Barkhouse, O. Gunawan, T. Gokmen, T.K. Todorov, D.B. Mitzi, Yield predictions for photovoltaic power plants:empirical validation,recent advances and
remaining uncertainties, Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 20 (2015) 6–11, https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.
[26] P. Jackson, R. Wuerz, D. Hariskos, E. Lotter, W. Witte, M. Powalla, Effects of heavy alkali elements in Cu(In,Ga)Se2 solar cells with efficiencies up to 22.6, Phys.
Status Solidi Rapid Res. Lett. 10 (2016) 583–586, https://doi.org/10.1002/pssr.201600199.
[27] M.A. Green, E.D. Dunlop, M. Yoshita, N. Kopidakis, K. Bothe, G. Siefer, X. Hao, Solar cell efficiency tables (version 62), Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 31 (2023)
651–663, https://doi.org/10.1002/pip.3726.
[28] B. Barman, P.K. Kalita, Influence of back surface field layer on enhancing the efficiency of CIGS solar cell, Sol. Energy 216 (2021) 329–337, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2021.01.032.
[29] M. Boubakeur, A. Aissat, M. Ben Arbia, H. Maaref, J.P. Vilcot, Enhancement of the efficiency of ultra-thin CIGS/Si structure for solar cell applications,
Superlattice. Microst. 138 (2020), 106377, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spmi.2019.106377.
[30] S. Benabbas, Z. Rouabah, H. Heriche, N.-E. Chelali, A numerical study of high efficiency ultra-thin CdS/CIGS solar cells, African Journal of Science, Technology,
Innovation and Development 8 (2016) 340–342, https://doi.org/10.1080/20421338.2015.1118929.
[31] I. Gharibshahian, S. Sharbati, A.A. Orouji, Design of CuIn1− yGaySe2/Si1 − xGex Tandem solar cells with controlled current matching, IET Optoelectron. 14
(2020) 199–209, https://doi.org/10.1049/iet-opt.2019.0060.
[32] I. Gharibshahian, A.A. Orouji, S. Sharbati, Suitable top cell partners for copper indium gallium selenide-based tandem solar cells to achieve >30% efficiency,
Physica Status Solidi (A) Applications and Materials Science 218 (2021) 1–9, https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.202000796.
[33] I. Gharibshahian, A. Abbasi, A.A. Orouji, Modeling of GaAsxP1-x/CIGS tandem solar cells under stress conditions, Superlattice. Microst. 153 (2021), 106860,
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.spmi.2021.106860.
[34] S. Sharbati, I. Gharibshahian, A.A. Orouji, Designing of AlxGa1-xAs/CIGS tandem solar cell by analytical model, Sol. Energy 188 (2019) 1–9, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.solener.2019.05.074.
[35] M. Mostefaoui, H. Mazari, S. Khelifi, A. Bouraiou, R. Dabou, Simulation of high efficiency CIGS solar cells with SCAPS-1D software, Energy Proc. 74 (2015)
736–744, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2015.07.809.
[36] S. Gohri, J. Madan, R. Pandey, R. Sharma, Performance analysis for SnS- and Sn2S3-based back surface field CZTSSe solar cell: a simulation study, J. Electron.
Mater. 50 (2021) 6318–6328, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11664-021-09152-8.
[37] F.T. Mabvuer, F.T. Nya, G.M. Dzifack Kenfack, A. Laref, Lowering cost approach for CIGS-based solar cell through optimizing band gap profile and doping of
stacked active Layers─SCAPS modeling, ACS Omega (2022), https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c06501.
[38] M.A. Mughal, R. Engelken, R. Sharma, Progress in indium (III) sulfide (In2S3) buffer layer deposition techniques for CIS, CIGS, and CdTe-based thin film solar
cells, Sol. Energy 120 (2015) 131–146, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2015.07.028.
[39] M. Burgelman, P. Nollet, S. Degrave, Modelling polycrystalline semiconductor solar cells, Thin Solid Films 361–362 (2000) 527–532, https://doi.org/10.1016/
S0040-6090(99)00825-1.
[40] C. Doroody, K.S. Rahman, H.N. Rosly, M.N. Harif, F. Haque, S.K. Tiong, N. Amin, Impact of high resistivity transparent (HRT) layer in cadmium telluride solar
cells from numerical simulation, J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 12 (2020), https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5132838.
[41] H. Toura, Y.H. Khattak, F. Baig, B.M. Soucase, M.E. Touhami, Back contact effect on electrodeposited CZTS kesterite thin films experimental and numerical
investigation, Sol. Energy 194 (2019) 932–938, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.11.017.
[42] R. Kotipalli, O. Poncelet, G. Li, Y. Zeng, L.A. Francis, B. Vermang, D. Flandre, Addressing the impact of rear surface passivation mechanisms on ultra-thin Cu(In,
Ga)Se2 solar cell performances using SCAPS 1-D model, Sol. Energy 157 (2017) 603–613, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2017.08.055.
[43] I. Gharibshahian, A.A. Orouji, S. Sharbati, Alternative buffer layers in Sb2Se3 thin-film solar cells to reduce open-circuit voltage offset, Sol. Energy 202 (2020)
294–303, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.03.115.
[44] F. Baig, Y.H. Khattak, S. Beg, B.M. Soucase, Numerical analysis of a novel CNT/Cu2O/Sb2Se3/In2S3/ITO antimony selenide solar cell, Optik 197 (2019),
163107, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2019.163107.
[45] A. Bauer, S. Sharbati, M. Powalla, Systematic survey of suitable buffer and high resistive window layer materials in CuIn1− xGaxSe2solar cells by numerical
simulations, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cell. 165 (2017) 119–127, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2016.12.035.
[46] W. Abdelaziz, A. Zekry, A. Shaker, M. Abouelatta, Numerical study of organic graded bulk heterojunction solar cell using SCAPS simulation, Sol. Energy 211
(2020) 375–382, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2020.09.068.
[47] S. Abdelaziz, A. Zekry, A. Shaker, M. Abouelatta, Investigating the performance of formamidinium tin-based perovskite solar cell by SCAPS device simulation,
Opt. Mater. 101 (2020), 109738, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2020.109738.
[48] C. Frisk, C. Platzer-Björkman, J. Olsson, P. Szaniawski, J.T. Wätjen, V. Fjällström, P. Salomé, M. Edoff, Optimizing Ga-profiles for highly efficient Cu(In, Ga)Se2
thin film solar cells in simple and complex defect models, J. Phys. Appl. Phys. 47 (2014), https://doi.org/10.1088/0022-3727/47/48/485104.
[49] K.K. Mamta, Maurya, V.N. Singh, Influence of buffer layers on antimony selenide based solar cell, Opt. Mater. 126 (2022), 112240, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
optmat.2022.112240.
[50] D. Wang, J. Wu, H. Guo, M. Wu, L. Wu, S. Zhang, J. Ao, H. Wang, Y. Zhang, Tuning the work function of the metal back contact toward efficient Cu2ZnSnSe4
solar cells, Sol. RRL 5 (2021), https://doi.org/10.1002/solr.202000391.
[51] K.K. Mamta, Maurya, V.N. Singh, Sb2Se3/CZTS dual absorber layer based solar cell with 36.32 % efficiency: a numerical simulation, J. Sci.: Advanced Materials
and Devices 7 (2022), 100445, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsamd.2022.100445.
[52] M.D. Haque, M.H. Ali, M.F. Rahman, A.Z.M.T. Islam, Numerical analysis for the efficiency enhancement of MoS2 solar cell: a simulation approach by SCAP-1D,
Opt. Mater. 131 (2022), 112678, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2022.112678.
[53] M.H. Ali, M.A. Al Mamun, M.D. Haque, M.F. Rahman, M.K. Hossain, A.Z.M.T. Islam, Performance enhancement of MoS2 based heterojunction solar cell with
In2Te3 BSF: a numerical simulation approach, ACS Omega (2023), https://doi.org/10.1021/acsomega.2c07846.
[54] M.F. Rahman, M.J.A. Habib, M.H. Ali, M.H.K. Rubel, M.R. Islam, A.B. Abu, M.K. Hossain, Design and numerical investigation of cadmium telluride (CdTe) and
iron silicide (FeSi2) based double absorber solar cells to enhance power conversion efficiency, AIP Adv. 12 (2022) 1–11, https://doi.org/10.1063/5.0108459.
[55] M.K. Hossain, D.P. Samajdar, R.C. Das, A.A. Arnab, M.F. Rahman, M.H.K. Rubel, M.R. Islam, H. Bencherif, R. Pandey, J. Madan, M.K.A. Mohammed, Design and
Simulation of Cs2BiAgI6 Double Perovskite Solar Cells with Different Electron Transport Layers for Efficiency Enhancement, Energy & Fuels, 2023, https://doi.
org/10.1021/acs.energyfuels.3c00181.
[56] I.K.H.R.K.D. Vasileska D. Mamaluy, S.M. Goodnick, Quantum Transport in Nanoscale Devices, Encyclopedia of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology, 2008.
[57] M.F. Rahman, M.M. Alam Moon, M.K. Hossain, M.H. Ali, M.D. Haque, A. Kuddus, J. Hossain, A.B. Abu, Concurrent investigation of antimony chalcogenide
(Sb2Se3 and Sb2S3)-based solar cells with a potential WS2 electron transport layer, Heliyon 8 (2022), e12034, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2022.e12034.
[58] M. Hasan Ali, A.T.M. Saiful Islam, M.D. Haque, M. Ferdous Rahman, M. Khalid Hossain, N. Sultana, A.Z.M. Touhidul Islam, Numerical analysis of FeSi2 based
solar cell with PEDOT:PSS hole transport layer, Mater. Today Commun. 34 (2023), 105387, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mtcomm.2023.105387.
[59] M.K. Hossain, G.F.I. Toki, I. Alam, R. Pandey, D.P. Samajdar, M.F. Rahman, M.R. Islam, M.H.K. Rubel, H. Bencherif, J. Madan, M.K.A. Mohammed, Numerical
simulation and optimization of CsPbI3-based perovskite solar cell to enhance the power conversion efficiency, New J. Chem. 47 (2023) 4801–4817, https://doi.
org/10.1039/d2nj06206b.
[60] M.A. Rahman, Numerical modeling of ultra-thin CuSbS 2 heterojunction solar cell with TiO 2 electron transport and CuAlO 2 :Mg BSF layers, Opt. Mater.
Express 12 (2022) 2954, https://doi.org/10.1364/ome.465498.
[61] A. Hosen, M.S. Mian, S.R. Al Ahmed, Improving the performance of lead-free FASnI3-based perovskite solar cell with Nb2O5 as an electron transport layer,
Advanced Theory and Simulations (2023) 1–13, https://doi.org/10.1002/adts.202200652, 2200652.
[62] F. Wang, S. Bai, W. Tress, A. Hagfeldt, F. Gao, Defects engineering for high-performance perovskite solar cells, Npj Flexible Electronics 2 (2018), https://doi.
org/10.1038/s41528-018-0035-z.

16
Md.F. Rahman et al. Heliyon 9 (2023) e22866

[63] F. Zhang, W. Ma, H. Guo, Y. Zhao, X. Shan, K. Jin, H. Tian, Q. Zhao, D. Yu, X. Lu, G. Lu, S. Meng, Interfacial oxygen vacancies as a potential cause of hysteresis in
perovskite solar cells, Chem. Mater. 28 (2016) 802–812, https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemmater.5b04019.
[64] Z. Gu, F. Chen, X. Zhang, Y. Liu, C. Fan, G. Wu, H. Li, H. Chen, Novel planar heterostructure perovskite solar cells with CdS nanorods array as electron transport
layer, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cell. 140 (2015) 396–404, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2015.04.015.
[65] N. Kohara, S. Nishiwaki, Y. Hashimoto, T. Negami, T. Wada, Electrical properties of the Cu(In,Ga)Se2/MoSe2/Mo structure, Solar Energy Materials and Solar
Cells 67 (2001) 209–215, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-0248(00)00283-X.
[66] A. Kaminski, B. Vandelle, A. Fave, J. Boyeaux, L.Q. Nam, R. Monna, D. Sarti, A. Laugier, Aluminium BSF in silicon solar cells, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cell. 72
(2002) 373–379, https://doi.org/10.1016/S0927-0248(01)00185-4.
[67] A.E.H. Benzetta, M. Abderrezek, M.E. Djeghlal, Contribution to improve the performances of Cu2ZnSnS4 thin-film solar cell via a back surface field layer, Optik
181 (2019) 220–230, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijleo.2018.12.048.
[68] M.K. Omrani, M. Minbashi, N. Memarian, D.-H. Kim, Improve the performance of CZTSSe solar cells by applying a SnS BSF layer, Solid State Electron. 141
(2018) 50–57, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sse.2017.12.004.
[69] M.M.A. Moon, M.H. Ali, M.F. Rahman, J. Hossain, A.B.M. Ismail, Design and simulation of FeSi2-based novel heterojunction solar cells for harnessing visible
and near-infrared light, Physica Status Solidi (A) Applications and Materials Science 217 (2020) 1–12, https://doi.org/10.1002/pssa.201900921.
[70] S.R. Al Ahmed, A. Sunny, S. Rahman, Performance enhancement of Sb2Se3 solar cell using a back surface field layer: a numerical simulation approach, Sol.
Energy Mater. Sol. Cell. 221 (2021), 110919, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2020.110919.
[71] A. Sunny, S.R. Al Ahmed, Numerical simulation and performance evaluation of highly efficient Sb2Se3 solar cell with tin sulfide as hole transport layer, Physica
Status Solidi (B) Basic Research 258 (2021) 1–14, https://doi.org/10.1002/pssb.202000630.
[72] G.K. Gupta, A. Garg, A. Dixit, Electrical and impedance spectroscopy analysis of sol-gel derived spin, J. Appl. Phys. 123 (2018), 013101.
[73] R. Carron, S. Nishiwaki, E. Shih, C. Yang, M. Ochoa, X. Sun, E. Thomas, F. Empa, A. Tiwari, E. Article, Heat-light soaking treatments for high-performance CIGS
solar cells on exible substrates, Research Square (2022) 1–18.
[74] I.H. Khudayer, Study of physical and optoelectronic properties of CuInSe2/Si heterojunction solar cells, Energy Proc. 119 (2017) 507–517, https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.egypro.2017.07.062.
[75] K. Ravichandran, G. Muruganantham, B. Sakthivel, P. Philominathan, CdS films from two different low cost techniques for solar cell applications – a
comparative study, Surf. Eng. 26 (2010) 590–595, https://doi.org/10.1179/174329409X455403.
[76] Y. Kouhlane, B. Chouial, S. Gagui, B. Hadjoudja, A. Chibani, Growth and study of CuIn1− xGaxSe2 chalcopyrite compounds for solar cell applications, Indian J.
Phys. 88 (2014) 471–475, https://doi.org/10.1007/s12648-014-0441-6.
[77] Hasan, Thermally evaporated Cu2ZnSnS4 solar cells (2010) 8–11, https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3499284, 143508.

17