Research Progress on Homogeneous Fabrication of Large-Area Perovskite Films by Spray Coating

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The Authors present an interesting overview of the current scientific achievements devoted to the technological properties of spray coating important for the development of perovskite solar cells. Based on scientific papers published in scientific journals since 2012, the advantages of spray coating over the spin coating method have been presented, which may favor the acceleration of the industrialization of perovskite photovoltaic cells.

The paper is very interesting and written in good English. The title of the paper is concise and the abstract is a precise summary of the contents. The literature study listed is comprehensive.  Scientific quality of the review paper is good with a high “impact” to the field. I recommend the paper for publication after minor, technical improvements.

I suggest that the Authors check if the top panel of Figure 5, showing the SEM images (page. 8) does not refer to Figure 4?

Or maybe the caption to Fig. 4 should read (according to reference [29]):

PV Characteristics of Spray-Coated and Spin-Coated CsPbI 2 Br Perovskite Solar Cells and Submodules (A and B) J-V curves of spray-coated (A) and spin-coated (B) devices with device aperture area varying from 0.096 to 112 cm². J-V curves are plotted on a per-cell basis. (C) Comparison of the PV parameters for spray- and spin-coated devices as a function of device area.

Please check if the caption to upper panel of Fig.5 should read (according to reference [29]):

Large-Area Coating of CsPbI₂Br Perovskite Films. (A and B) Photograph (A) and SEM images (B) of CsPbI₂Br thin film by spin coating. (C and D) Photograph (C) and SEM images (D) of CsPbI₂Br thin film by spray coating. The substrate area is about 6 cm 3´8 cm.

 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Lamberti and others submitted the review article titled, “Achieving uniformity in large-scale perovskite solar cells manufacturing: the challenge of spray coating” in Crystals journal. In this review, the authors present the technological features of SC relevant to PSCs development and critically discuss the key points on which to address the focus for achieving optimal and reliable performances. This review can help in the commercialization of perovskite solar cells but also can contribute to the development of scale-up methodologies.

In its current form, the article cannot be accepted for publication unless it goes through a thorough revision. I recommend the authors address the following major comments and suggestions.

In the abstract, please highlight the quantifiable facts related to covering the research gap in this area. It is good to mention the reasons at the beginning of the abstract however please further focus on the potential of the findings in the proposed review article.

I believe the introduction is too long in reference to the discussed topic. It is suggested to include some recent studies in the introduction section, discussing the potential disadvantages of spin-coated perovskite absorbing layers.

The coating techniques mentioned on page#2 (lines 50-66) can be further elaborated. Since, the proposed topic is covering only coating techniques (i.e., spray coating). Thus, it is essential to mention the characteristics of other techniques to highlight the superiority of spray coating with related references. I suggest adding a Table or illustration comprising all other techniques that will be advantageous to the readers. 

At the beginning of section 2, please mention why achieving uniformity is important in perovskite solar cells. The same comment applies to other sections.

There is a need to provide a comparative table based on the characterization techniques for large-area perovskite solar cells.  

Based on the length of the article, I recommend modifying the title by mentioning it as a mini-review. 

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

I am satisfied with the answers. It can be accepted now.