Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12633-017-9649-3
ORIGINAL PAPER
Study of the Enhancement of the Efficiency
of the Monocrystalline Silicon Solar Cell by Optimizing
Effective Parameters Using PC1D Simulation
Galib Hashmi1 · Abdur Rafique Akand2 · Mahbubul Hoq2 · Habibur Rahman1
Received: 16 December 2016 / Accepted: 2 October 2017 / Published online: 4 January 2018
© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018
Abstract In this paper, simulation of a monocrystalline sil-
icon solar cell was done using PC1D software. The impact
of different solar cell parameters, with their effects on
power and efficiency, has been investigated. For a p-type
monocrystalline silicon wafer, with an area of 10 × 10 cm2
and a thickness of 300 μm, initial simulation shows a
12.10% efficient solar cell. To optimize the simulation
experimentally obtained data has been used in the textur-
ization process. It is seen that the textured surface reduces
reflection and increases the efficiency of the solar cell at
least 1–2%. From the simulation it is seen that the optimum
value of p-type doping concentration is 1 × 1017 cm−3 and
n-type doping concentration is 1 × 1018 cm−3 . 200.3 μm
diffusion length is considered as optimum. Both sides tex-
tured wafer with pyramid height of 2–3 μm and equal angles
of 54.74 degrees produces the best result in simulation. An
anti-reflection coating with 2.019 refractive index and a
thickness of 74 nm is considered as optimum. By optimiz-
ing the effective parameters, a 20.35% efficient solar cell
has been achieved by simulation.
Keywords Solar cell · Doping concentration ·
Anti-reflection coating (ARC) · Diffusion length ·
Texturing
 Galib Hashmi
galib 90@yahoo.com
1 Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering,
University of Dhaka, Dhaka, Bangladesh
2 Institute of Electronics, AERE, Bangladesh Atomic Energy
Commission, Savar, Dhaka, Bangladesh
1 Introduction
The total power consumption of the world in 2015 was more
than 20,000 TWh [1], moreover, the statistics show that the
demand for energy is increasing all over the world. To cope
with this demand, one of the possible solutions is to utilize
energy efficient solar cells. It is expected that energy effi-
cient solar cells will contribute a significant portion of the
energy investment in the future.
Solar cells have come a lot further since 1839, when
French experimental physicist Antoine-César Becquerel
discovered the photovoltaic effect [2]. Still, efficiency of the
solar cell is limited, and commercially available solar panel
efficiency is about 13%. In all the cases of solar cell fab-
rication, the experimental procedure proves to be difficult
for understanding, sometimes phenomena are not observ-
able or measurements are impractical. Furthermore, even
a little change in the solar cell fabrication process can be
too expensive. Because change in any aspect of the fabri-
cation process is a difficult task, for this reason simulation
has gained importance over the past few years and allowed
the designers to change different parameters of the system
thus enabling them to fabricate and observe the behavior of
the system [3]. Not only that, simulation has also enabled
the researchers to study and observe their theoretical inves-
tigations [4]. Last but not the least, it has vastly extended
the range and depth of application with minimum cost, and
provided better understanding of how the devices operate.
PC1D is a commercially available software most com-
monly used for solar cell modeling [5]. This software is cur-
rently used by many companies and universities such as the
University of New South Wales, Australia. Here the PC1D
version 5.9 has been used to simulate an energy efficient
monocrystalline silicon solar cell. The simulation also gives
insight about the range and impact of doping concentration,
diffusion length, texturing and anti-reflection coating.
1654
2 Simulation of Monocrystalline Solar Cell
Efficient and accurate modeling requires all the parame-
ters of the solar cell to be involved, but for simplicity and
to understand the impact of the parameters, some of the
parameters like texturing and anti-reflection coating are not
considered at first. Typically a solar cell thickness varies
from 100 to 500 nm and normally the area is of 10 × 10 cm2
or 12.5 × 12.5 cm2 [6]. So, a p-type silicon wafer, with an
area of 10 × 10 cm2 and thickness of 300 μm was selected
for solar cell simulation. The doping concentration of a
monocrystalline silicon wafer varies from 1 × 1012 cm−3 to
1 × 1020 cm−3 as shown in Fig. 1 [7]. High doping concen-
tration in a p-type wafer increases Voc (open circuit voltage)
but at the cost of damaging the crystal [8]. So, moderate
doping is generally used in a p-type silicon wafer. Thus the
doping concentration of the p-type silicon wafer has been
randomly adjusted to 5 × 1016 cm−3 at first.
By using a four point probe instrument it is seen that
normally p-type wafer sheet resistivity varies from 0.01 to
10 .cm. Because of variation in doping concentration, the
sheet resistivity varies. The sheet resistivity decreases with
the increase of doping concentration. For doping concen-
tration 5 × 1016 cm−3 , the p-type wafer sheet resistivity
is 0.3441 .cm [9]. So 0.3441 .cm was considered at
first for simulation. The doping level of the emitter (n-
type) has been randomly adjusted to 1 × 1019 cm−3 to
form a p-n junction. For 1 × 1019 cm−3 the emitter (n-type)
sheet resistance is 26.11 / (ohms/square). 26.11 /
was considered as the sheet resistance of the emitter. Nor-
mally the thickness of the emitter (n-type) varies from
1–2 μm. So in this simulation, the thickness of the emitter
was adjusted to 2 μm and uniform doping profile condi-
tion has been assumed. Diffusion length must be less than
the thickness of the p-type material. The thickness of the
p-type wafer is selected as 300 μm and, at first, diffusion
length was randomly considered, 144.3 μm. To observe the
impact of the antireflection coating (ARC), ARC was not
applied at first. To emulate the sun, AM (Air Mass) −1.5 G
condition was selected. Also, to see the time progression,
the number of time steps was selected as 100. After running
the simulation, it is seen that the efficiency of the solar cell
is 12.10%.
Low doping Moderate doping Heavy doping
12 14 16 18 20
10 10 10 10 10
-3
Dopant Concentration [cm ]
Fig. 1 Range of doping concentration
Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660
In Fig. 2, the blue line shows the I-V curve and the red
line shows the P-V curve of the 12.10% efficient solar cell.
The current (I) versus voltage (V) curve of a solar cell shows
all the possible combinations of its current and voltage
outputs, whereas, the power (W) versus voltage (V) curve
shows all the possible combinations of its power and voltage
outputs. The point in the I-V curve where voltage and cur-
rent is maximum is called the maximum power point (MPP).
In the P-V curve MPP is the point where power has the high-
est value. In both I-V and P-V curves the maximum power
point is represented as Pm. Also the maximum voltage and
maximum current is designated as Vm and Im. The val-
ues of short circuit current (Isc), open circuit voltage (Voc),
Im, Vm, Pm, efficiency and fill factor are shown in Table 1.
3 Impact of Doping Concentration
The doping concentration of the p-type silicon wafer was
changed to find out the optimum doping concentration and its
impact on the efficiency of the solar cell. At first, doping
concentration of the emitter (n-type) was kept fixed at 1 ×
1019 cm−3 . Then the p-type silicon wafer doping concentration
was changed in the simulation. After completion of the simu-
lation, data was tabulated in Table 2 and the I-V curve due to
different doping concentrations was drawn and is shown in
Fig. 3. In Fig. 3, blue, red, green, violet, yellow, brown and
black color respectively represents the following doping con-
centrations, 1 × 1014 cm−3 , 1 × 1015 cm−3 , 1 × 1016 cm−3 ,
1 × 1017 cm−3 , 1 × 1018 cm−3 and 5 × 1016 cm−3 .
From the simulated data, in Table 2 and from Fig. 3,
it is seen that increasing doping concentration does not
always increases efficiency. Especially when, the p-type sil-
icon wafer doping concentration is more than or closer to
the doping concentration of the n-type wafer, efficiency
drastically decreases. Because of excessive doping, excess
minority carrier lifetime is reduced, thus the minority carrier
diffusion length is also reduced [10]. Also, carrier mobil-
ity decreases with increasing total dopant concentration thus
reducing efficiency [11]. Low p-type doping concentration
I-V and P-V Curve
2.5
2
1.5
(A)
1 (W)
0.5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Voltage(V)
Fig. 2 I-V and P-V curve of 12.10% efficient solar cell
Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660 1655

Table 1 Data of 12.10 % efficient solar cell I-V curve with various p-type doping concentration

3
Isc Voc Vm Im Pm FF Efficiency doping
1x10^14
2.5 doping
2.28 A 0.636 V 0.56 V 2.16 A 1.21 W 0.835 12.10% 1x10^15
2 doping

Current (A)
1x10^16
doping
1.5 1x10^17
doping
1 1x10^18
also shows an unfruitful result. Here, from the simulation, doping
1x10^19
optimum p-type doping concentration has been found to be 0.5 doping

1 × 1017 cm−3 . As p-type doping concentration varies from

1 × 1012 cm−3 to 1 × 1020 cm−3 [7], the optimum p-type
doping concentration falls in this range.
Next, by keeping p-type doping concentration fixed at
5 × 1016 cm−3 , n-type doping concentration has been var-
ied in the PC1D simulation. After that both p-type and
n-type doping concentration were varied. The results are
tabulated in Table 3 and I-V curves drawn as shown in
Figs. 4 and 5. In Fig. 4, black, red, green, brown, yel-
low and blue color represents n-type doping concentrations
1×1019 cm−3 , 1×1020 cm−3 , 1×1018 cm−3 , 1×1017 cm−3 ,
5 × 1018 cm−3 and 5 × 1017 cm−3 , respectively. In addition,
in Fig. 5 black, blue and red color respectively represents
n-type doping concentration as 5 × 1017 cm−3 , 1 ×
1018 cm−3 and 1 × 1019 cm−3 and p-type doping concentra-
tion as 5 × 1016 cm−3 , 1 × 1017 cm−3 and 1 × 1017 cm−3 .
It is seen from Table 3, Figs. 4 and 5 that optimum dop-
ing concentration of the p-type wafer is 1 × 1017 cm−3 and
n-type is 1 × 1018 cm−3 . At that doping concentration max-
imum efficiency is 12.94% with fill factor value 0.8395.
Note that, for n-type doping concentration 1 × 1021 cm−3
and p-type doping concentration 5 × 1016 cm−3 transient
convergence failure occurs as shown in Table 3. The tran-
sient convergence failure indicates error in the result [12]
i.e. convergence for a transient simulation cannot provide a
solution using the PC1D simulation. This can be caused by
numerous factors like time steps, non-linearity etc. Mainly
because the solar cell is a non-linear model for those param-
eters it is unable to provide a result and for that transient
convergence failure occurs.
5x10^16
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Volatge (V)
Fig. 3 I-V curve with various p-type doping concentration (n-type
doping concentration fixed at 1 × 1019 cm−3 )
4 Impact of Diffusion Length
The key in improving the efficiency of solar cells lies in
increasing the minority-carrier lifetime [13]. Moreover, the
relationship between minority carrier lifetime and diffusion
length is
√
L = Dτ [14].
Where L is the diffusion length in meters, D is the diffu-
sivity in m2 /s and τ is the lifetime in seconds. If diffusion
length is increased, minority carrier lifetime is increased,
thus the efficiency of the solar cell is increased. However,
for a monocrystalline silicon solar cell, typically the diffusion
length is 100–300 μm [14]. Moreover, the diffusion length
must be less than the thickness of the p-type material [15].
As p-type wafer thickness is 300 μm, the maximum value of
diffusion length is considered to be 200.3 μm. By observing
some actual wafer specifications it is seen that the minimum
minority carrier lifetime is 10 μs [16] (equivalent to diffu-
sion length 130.5 μm). So, a diffusion length of 130.5 μm
is also used in the simulation. Lastly, the lowest value of dif-
fusion length 100 μm is used in the simulation. It is seen
from Table 4 that with optimum doping concentration and
having 200.3 μm diffusion length the efficiency of the solar

Table 2 Data of solar cell with various p-type doping concentration

Material Doping concentration Short circuit current (Isc) Open circuit voltage (Voc) Max power (W) Fill factor (FF) Efficiency

P-type 5 × 1016 cm−3 2.275 A 0.6364 V 1.210 W 0.835745022 12.10%

P-type 1 × 1016 cm−3 2.311 A 0.5953 V 1.138 W 0.827192207 11.38%
P-type 1 × 1014 cm−3 2.439 A 0.4891 V 0.7964 W 0.667608394 7.964%
P-type 1 × 1015 cm−3 2.343 A 0.5363 V 1.006 W 0.800604257 10.06%
P-type 1 × 1017 cm−3 2.258 A 0.6526 V 1.236 W 0.838778836 12.36%
P-type 5 × 1017 cm−3 2.184 A 0.6597 V 1.208 W 0.838431943 12.08%
P-type 1 × 1018 cm−3 2.116 A 0.6543 V 1.160 W 0.837848325 11.60%
P-type 1 × 1019 cm−3 1.592 A 0.5952 V 0.6917 W 0.729981392 6.917%
P-type 1 × 1020 cm−3 −9.166e-5 A 2.196e-10 V – – –
1656 Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660

Table 3 Data of solar cell with various n-type and p-type doping concentration

Doping concentration Doping concentration Short circuit Open circuit Max power Fill factor Efficiency
(n-type) (p-type) current (Isc) voltage (Voc) (W) (FF)

1 × 1019 cm−3 5 × 1016 cm−3 2.275 A 0.6364 V 1.210 W 0.835745022 12.10%

1 × 1020 cm−3 5 × 1016 cm−3 1.433 A 0.6079 V 0.7232 W 0.830194943 7.232%
1 × 1021 cm−3 5 × 1016 cm−3 1.058 A – 0.5046 W Transient convergence failure
1 × 1018 cm−3 5 × 1016 cm−3 2.335 A 0.6412 V 1.263 W 0.843573546 12.63%
1 × 1017 cm−3 5 × 1016 cm−3 2.356 A 0.6410 V 1.263 W 0.836315286 12.63%
5 × 1018 cm−3 5 × 1016 cm−3 2.334 A 0.6395 V 1.248 W 0.836128804 12.48%
5 × 1017 cm−3 5 × 1016 cm−3 2.356 A 0.6412 V 1.263 W 0.836054427 12.63%
1 × 1018 cm−3 1 × 1017 cm−3 2.334 A 0.6604 V 1.294 W 0.839510940 12.94%
1 × 1019 cm−3 1 × 1017 cm−3 2.258 A 0.6526 V 1.236 W 0.838778836 12.36%

cell is 13.75%. It should be noted that if diffusion length is
increased more the efficiency will increase but for a realistic
approach the diffusion length is considered to be 200.3 μm.
5 Texturization and its Impact on the Solar Cell
Texturization on the solar cell is done to reduce reflection
and enhance light absorption. Texturization normally cre-
ates an uneven surface, that is pyramid-like structures form
on the surface of the p-type wafer as shown in Fig. 6.
Texturization is normally done using a wet chemical
recipe. Here, a cleaned p-type wafer was textured using
0.763 wt% KOH–4 wt% IPA solution. Generally pyramid
height varies from 1–6 μm. By using a stylus surface pro-
filometer the height of the peak of the pyramids was mea-
sured. The result shows pyramid height lies in the range of
1–3.5 μm. Also from the SEM image, pyramid angles were
measured using triangle maker software. Although pyramid
angle being equilateral is theoretically possible but practi-
cally isosceles pyramid structures are formed. Measurement
shows isosceles pyramids having equal angles of maximum
Various Ntype Doping Concentration with fixed
5x10^16 cm-3 ptype doping concentration
doping
2.5
ntype
1x10^19
doping
2 2.5
ntype
1x10^20
doping
Current (A)
54.74◦ . Pyramids having equal angles of 48◦ have also been
found as shown in Fig. 7.
Taking the value from the practically obtained data tex-
turization was done in the simulation. Both front surface and
back surface texturization, only front surface texturization,
and only back surface texturization procedures were done.
Also, pyramid heights and angles were changed in the sim-
ulation. Simulation shows that the front and back surface
textured wafer, having pyramids with height 2–3 μm and
having an equal angle of 54.74◦ has the maximum efficiency
of 14.02%. Similar results have also been found for only
front surface texturing, but as only one-sided texturing is a
difficult and costly procedure and after the diffusion process
it is difficult to identify the textured surface, both surface
texturing is considered optimum. All the results from the
simulation are tabulated in Table 5. It suffices to say textur-
ization increases at least 1% to 2% efficiency of the solar
cell.
6 Impact of Anti-reflection Coating
The anti-reflection coating (ARC) shows the most signif-
icant change in efficiency in this simulation. To design
OPTIMUM DOPING CONCENTRATION
doping ntype
5x10^17
doping ptype
5x10^16

1.5 2
ntype
CURRENT (A)

1x10^18 doping ntype

1.5
1 doping 1x10^18
ntype doping ptype
1x10^17 1 1x10^17
0.5 doping
ntype
0.5 doping ntype
5x10^18
1x10^19
0 doping doping ptype
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 ntype 0 1x10^17
Voltage(V) 5x10^17 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
VOLTAGE (V)
Fig. 4 I-V curve with various n-type doping concentration (p-type
doping concentration fixed at 5 × 1016 cm−3 ) Fig. 5 I-V curve of solar cell with optimum doping concentration
Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660 1657

the ARC layer the following equations [15] were used to

Efficiency

12.94%
13.75%
12.45%
determine, the thickness and refractive index of the ARC
layer.

Refractive index of ARC is ηAR = ηair ∗ ηsi (λ0 )

0.839510940

0.857172718
λ0

0.84249973
And the thickness of ARC is d =
Fill factor
4 ∗ ηAR
(FF) Using both equations, thickness and refractive index of
the ARC layer are tabulated in Table 6.
Varying the refractive index and thickness the simulation
Max power

efficiency of the solar cell was calculated and tabulated as

1.294 W
1.375 W
1.245 W
shown in Table 7. It is seen that if the thickness of the ARC
(W)

layer is 74 nm then the maximum efficiency of 20.35% can

be achieved. If the thickness of the ARC layer is higher (e.g.
100 nm) than or lower than (e.g. 68 nm) 74 nm then the
voltage (Voc)
Open circuit

efficiency decreases. That is for 74 nm thickness the solar

0.6604 V
0.6744 V
0.6522 V

spectrum is absorbed more effectively.

7 Result and Discussion

Short circuit
current (Isc)

The result shows that with p-type doping concentration

2.334 A
2.420 A
2.227 A

1 × 1017 cm−3 , n-type doping concentration 1 × 1018 cm−3 ,

diffusion length 200.3 μm, both sides textured wafer (pyra-
mid height 2–3 μm and equal angle of 54.74◦ ) and with
anti-reflection coating thickness of 74 nm and refractive
Minority carrier

index 2.019, maximum efficiency of 20.357% was achieved.

lifetime (μs)

These optimum parameters are compared with published

literature and it is found that the values are feasible as
24.18
5.822

shown in Table 8. In Fig. 8, the blue curve represents the

10

I-V curve of the solar cell with no ARC and texturing. The
red curve represents the I-V curve of the solar cell with no
ARC but with texturing. Last but not least the green curve
Diffusion length
(Micrometer)

represents I-V of the solar cell with ARC and texturing. The
130.5
200.3
Table 4 Data of solar cell with different diffusion (DL ) length

100
Doping concentration

1 × 1017 cm−3
1 × 1017 cm−3
1 × 1017 cm−3
(p-type)
Doping concentration

1 × 1018 cm−3
1 × 1018 cm−3
1 × 1018 cm−3
(n-type)

Fig. 6 Textured wafer

1658 Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660

(a) 54.74° (b) 48°

Fig. 7 Isosceles pyramid angles

Table 5 Data of textured solar cell

Doping concentration 1 × 1018 cm−3 Short circuit Open circuit Max power Fill factor Efficiency Efficiency increased
(n-type), 1 × 1017 cm−3 current (Isc) voltage (Voc) (W) (FF)
(p-type) DL = 200.3
(1.402−1.375)
Not textured 2.420 A 0.6744 V 1.375 W 0.84250 13.75% 1.375 ∗ 100 = 1.96364%
Textured 2.466 A 0.6748 V 1.402 W 0.84252 14.02%
Front and back surface textured
Angle 54.74◦
Depth 3 μm
(1.402−1.375)
Textured 2.466 A 0.6748 V 1.402 W 0.84252 14.02% 1.375 ∗ 100 = 1.96364%
Front and back surface textured
Angle 54.74◦
Depth 2 μm
(1.402−1.375)
Textured 2.466 A 0.6748 V 1.402 W 0.84252 14.02% 1.375 ∗ 100 = 1.96364%
Front and back surface textured
Angle 54.74◦
Depth 1 μm
(1.401−1.375)
Textured 2.465 A 0.6747 V 1.401 W 0.84238 14.01% 1.375 ∗ 100 = 1.8909%
Front and back surface textured
Angle 54.74◦
Depth 5 μm
(1.395−1.375)
Textured 2.454 A 0.6747 V 1.395 W 0.84254 13.95% 1.375 ∗ 100 = 1.454545%
Front and back surface textured
Angle 48◦
Depth 3 μm
(1.402−1.375)
Textured 2.466 A 0.6748 V 1.402 W 0.84252 14.02% 1.375 ∗ 100 = 1.96364%
Front surface textured
Angle 54.74◦
Depth 2 μm
(1.395−1.375)
Textured 2.420 A 0.6744 V 1.374 W 0.84189 13.74% 1.375 ∗ 100 = 1.454545%
Back surface textured
Angle 54.74◦
Depth 2 μm
Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660 1659

Table 6 Thickness and

refractive index of ARC layer Wavelength Refractive index of silicon Refractive index of Thickness
(nm) [17] ARC (nm)

25 1.69 1.301538 48.02013

30 5.05 2.248333 33.35805
40 5.58 2.363684 42.30685
50 4.29 2.071956 60.32948
55 4.07 2.019158 68.09768
60 3.93 1.984691 75.578
65 3.84 1.960612 82.88228
70 3.77 1.942679 90.08181
75 3.72 1.929508 97.17505
80 3.68 1.918593 104.24
90 3.62 1.9026 118.2574
1000 3.57 1.889444 132.31

Table 7 Data of anti-reflection layer coated solar cell

Doping concentration 1 × 1018 cm−3 Short circuit Open circuit Max power Fill factor Efficiency
(n-type), 1 × 1017 cm−3 (p-type) current (Isc) voltage (Voc) (W) (FF)
DL = 200.3 (Textured)

No ARC 2.466 A 0.6747 V 1.402 W 0.8426441910261158 14.02%

Thickness 750 nm, RI = 2 3.059 A 0.6801 V 1.756 W 0.844057940251561 17.56%
Thickness 118 nm, RI = 1.9 3.232 A 0.6816 V 1.860 W 0.8443295914098452 18.60%
Thickness 60 nm, RI = 2.071 3.461 A 0.6837 V 1.997 W 0.8439386672539161 19.97%
Thickness 68 nm, RI = 2.019 3.511 A 0.6841 V 2.027 W 0.8439239825584603 20.27%
Thickness 74 nm, RI = 2.019 3.524 A 0.6843 V 2.035 W 0.8438824864402391 20.35%
Thickness 100 nm, RI = 2.019 3.347 A 0.6827 V 1.929 W 0.844202458217777 19.29%

Table 8 Comparison table

Parameters of solar cell Published literature/experimental value Simulated optimum value Remark

P-type doping concentration range
N-type doping concentration range
Diffusion length
Textured wafer pyramid height
Textured wafer pyramid angle
ARC layer thickness
1 × 1012 cm−3 to 1 × 1020 cm−3 [7]
1 × 1012 cm−3 to 1 × 1020 cm−3 [7]
100–300 μm [14]
1–6 μm [18] 1–3.5 μm (Experimental)
60◦ (Theoretical) 54.78◦ (Experimental)
30–135 nm [19]
1 × 1017 cm−3 Optimum value is within the range
1 × 1018 cm−3 Optimum value is within the range
200.3 μm Optimum value is within the range
2–3 μm Optimum value is within the range
54.78◦ Optimum value is within the range
74 nm Optimum value is within the range
1660
SOLAR CELL EFFICIENCY
4 12.1%
3.5
3 Texturing
CURRENT (A)
2.5
2
1.5
1 20.35%,
0.5
0
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
VOLTAGE (V)
Fig. 8 20.35% efficient solar cell I-V curve
blue curve also represents the initial simulation showing a
12.10% efficient solar cell. This solar cell has been opti-
mized by proper application of the ARC and texturization
process thus making a 20.35% efficient solar cell (green
curve).
8 Conclusion
Simulation of a monocrystalline silicon solar cell has been
done by PC1D software. All the optimum solar cell param-
eters used in the simulation are compared with published
literature and it is found that the values are feasible. With
the assist of experimentally obtained values, the texturiza-
tion process has been thoroughly investigated in the PC1D
simulation. It is adequate to say that by applying the tex-
turing effect on the solar cell at least 1–2% increase in
efficiency is to be expected in a real world solar cell fabrica-
tion scenario. It can be claimed that the key accomplishment
is by thoroughly investigating a different process, espe-
cially texturization, and optimizing different parameters in
the PC1D simulation, a more than 20% efficient solar cell
has been obtained. Simulation facilitates us by making bet-
ter decisions, thus it is one of the cost saving strategies
for engineering [20]. Promoting simulation of the solar cell
before actual fabrication may minimize a lot of the cost and
gives an in-depth reason of what to expect by changing the
parameters.
Acknowledgments The authors express their thanks to the Univer-
sity of New South Wales, Australia for providing the PC1D software.
This work has been supported by the scholarship program of the ICT
Division, Ministry of Posts, Telecommunications and IT, Government
of Bangladesh. The authors also thank Bangladesh Atomic Energy
Commission, for giving access to the solar cell fabrication laboratory
for texturization process and Glass and Ceramic Engineering Depart-
ment, Bangladesh University of Engineering Technology for allowing
the use of their laboratory for measurement. Finally, the authors also
express their gratitude to the Faculty of Engineering and Technology
and Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University
of Dhaka for contributing to this kind of research.
Silicon (2018) 10:1653–1660
References
No ARC,
No
1. World power consumption | Electricity consumption | Enerdata,
Yearbook.enerdata.net (2017) [Online]. Available: https://yearbook.
14.02%
enerdata.net/electricity-domestic-consumption-data-by-region.html.
No ARC, Accessed date: 07 July 2017
Textured 2. Quiebras J (2013) Wet chemical textures for crystalline silicon
solar cells, Ph.D. thesis, Department of Physics, University of
Konstanz, Germany
ARC,
Textured 3. Hosseinpour F, Hajihosseini H (2009) Importance of simulation
in manufacturing. Int J Sociol Behav Educ Econ Bus Indus Eng
3(3):229–232
4. Research and development in simulation-based engineering and
science, Wtec.org (2017) [Online]. Available: http://www.wtec.
org/sbes/. Accessed date: 07 July 2017
5. PC1D, PVEducation (2017) [Online]. Available: http://www.
pveducation.org/pvcdrom/characterisation/pc1d. Accessed date:
07 July 2017
6. Silicon solar cell parameters | PVEducation, Pveducation.org
(2017) [Online]. Available: http://www.pveducation.org/pvcdrom/
design/solar-cell-parameters. Accessed date: 07 July 2017
7. Reading 3: semiconductor materials for solar cells - TU Delft
OCW, TU Delft OCW (2017) [Online]. Available: https://ocw.
tudelft.nl/course-readings/solar-cells-r3-semicon-materials/.
Accessed date: 07 July 2017
8. Ruge I, Graul J (eds.) (1971) Ion implantation in semiconductors.
In: Proceedings of the 2nd international conference on ion implan-
tation in semiconductors, physics and technology, fundamental
and applied aspects May 24–28, 1971, Garmisch-Partenkirchen,
Bavaria, Germany, 1st edn., p. XIV, 508. Springer, Berlin
Heidelberg. ISBN: 978-3-642-80662-9. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-642-80660-5
9. Geerligs L, Macdonald D (2004) Base doping and recombina-
tion activity of impurities in crystalline silicon solar cells. Prog
Photovolt Res Appl 12(4):309–316
10. Brendel R (2011) Thin-film crystalline silicon solar cells. Wiley,
Weinheim
11. Zeghbroeck B (2011) Principles of semiconductor devices,
Ecee.colorado.edu. [Online]. Available: http://ecee.colorado.edu/
∼bart/book/. Accessed date: 07 July 2017
12. Quarles T (1989) Analysis of performance and convergence issues
for circuit simulation
13. Dimitriadis C (1986) Effect of doping concentration on the per-
formance of large-grain polycrystalline silicon solar cell. J Appl
Phys 59(6):2259–2261
14. Hashmi G, Akand M, Basher M, Hoq M, Rahman M (2016) Fab-
rication of crystalline silicon solar cell in Bangladesh: limitations
and remedies. Int J Scientific Eng Res 7(5):581–586
15. Luque A, Sala G, Palz W, Santos G, Helm P (1991) Tenth E.C.
photovoltaic solar energy conference. Springer, Dordrecht
16. Solar wafers for solar cell manufacturing | Targray, Targray (2017)
[Online]. Available: http://www.targray.com/solar/crystalline-cell-
materials/solar-wafers. Accessed date: 07 July 2017
17. Green M, Keevers M (1995) Optical properties of intrinsic silicon
at 300 K. Prog Photovolt Res Appl 3(3):189–192
18. Wang X, Alam M (2013) Estimating pyramid density of a random-
textured surface by capacitance-voltage measurement of c-Si solar
cells. In: 2013 IEEE 39th photovoltaic specialists conference
(PVSC)
19. Dzhafarov T (2013) Silicon solar cells with nanoporous silicon
layer. INTECH Open Access Publisher
20. Aberdeen group white paper: cost saving strategies for engineer-
ing - using simulation to make better decisions, IDGA (2017)
[Online]. Available: https://www.idga.org/intelligence/white-papers/
aberdeen-group-white-paper-cost-saving-strategies. Accessed date:
07 July 2017