Multi-Terminal GaInP/GaInAs/Ge Solar Cells for Subcells Characterization
, Farah Ayari 1,2, Paul Ferreol 1,2, Corentin Jouanneau 1,2, Artur Turala 1,2, Solene Moreau 1,2, Maïté Volatier 1,2, Vincent Aimez 1,2, Simon Fafard 1,2, Abdelatif Jaouad 1,2, Maxime Darnon 1,2,* and Gwenaëlle Hamon 1,2Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsThe article passes on the factors affecting the performance of triple junctions solar cells by adjusting the area size of the device. However, there are some problems in the article and experimental design.
1. The change of the area of the device leads to the increase of the current gap, and the largest photocurrent density is instead the bottom layer structure, and the smallest photocurrent density is instead the smallest. Shouldn't it be the other way round so that the currents match. Thus getting maximum efficiency output?
2. There is a serious error in the illustration of Figure 3, which should be an i-V curve in light, but the author labelled dark I-V curve. This is completely wrong. The author does not give the I-v curve without light. This needs to be added.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: 
Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsIn this work, the authors propose a fabrication process for InGaP/InGaAs/Ge multi-terminal multi-junction solar cells (MTMJSC) on commercial wafers based on selective wet etching. The authors made some trial. But I still have some questions:
1. In abstract, the words “ (MTMJSC)” appear twice. Grammar error in Line 3, “individual basis the subcells”... So many grammar errors in text, too. Pls check the manuscript very carefully for these unnecessary errors. Under current writing style, the manuscript is not publishable even if the data is so good.
2. References are not in the same format.
3. Line 118, “a measurement artifact has been observed”. The authors do not explain the reason, and donot give the solution.
4. Is light scattering strong in the multi-junction solar cell?
5. The solar cell’s power conversion efficiency of 21% is low. It is no need to study this multi-junction cell.
Comments on the Quality of English LanguageEnglish is really poor.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Round 2
Reviewer 1 Report
Comments and Suggestions for AuthorsAs I reviewed earlier, the author needs to make important changes in the structure of the article, the scientific analysis and also the discussion. When the authors cannot change the sequence and structure of the three devices. Then a clear and detailed analysis should be given on the available data. But the authors did not give this scientific analysis and judgment.
Author Response
Please see the attachment.
Author Response File: Author Response.docx
Reviewer 2 Report
Comments and Suggestions for Authorsthe manuscript is revised according to the comments.
Comments on the Quality of English Languageenglish is OK
Author Response
Reviewer 2 did not suggested any modifications to our article.
