4.8 Article

Rb Diffusion and Oxide Removal at the RbF-Treated Ga2O3/Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Interface in Thin-Film Solar Cells

Journal

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
Volume 15, Issue 45, Pages 53113-53121

Publisher

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.3c11165

Keywords

Cu(In,Ga)Se-2 thin-film solar cells; RbF postdepositiontreatment; ammonia-based rinse; photoelectron spectroscopy; HAXPES; chemical structure; surface oxides; gallium oxide buffer layer

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In this study, the chemical structure of the Cu(In,Ga)Se-2 (CIGSe) thin-film solar cell absorber surfaces and their interface with a Ga2O3 buffer layer were investigated. The effects of different treatments on the chemical composition and impurities at the absorber surface were analyzed using various spectroscopic techniques. The results suggest that a specific rinsing step can effectively remove impurities and alter the chemical composition of the absorber layer.
We report on the chemical structure of Cu(In,Ga)Se-2 (CIGSe) thin-film solar cell absorber surfaces and their interface with a sputter-deposited Ga2O3 buffer. The CIGSe samples were exposed to a RbF postdeposition treatment and an ammonia-based rinsing step, as used in corresponding thin-film solar cells. For a detailed chemical analysis of the impact of these treatments, we employed laboratory-based X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy, X-ray-excited Auger electron spectroscopy, and synchrotron-based hard X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy. On the RbF-treated surface, we find both Rb and F, which are then partly (Rb) and completely (F) removed by the rinse. The rinse also removes Ga-F, Ga-O, and In-O surface bonds and reduces the Ga/(Ga + In) ratio at the CIGSe absorber surface. After Ga2O3 deposition, we identify the formation of In oxides and the diffusion of Rb and small amounts of F into/onto the Ga2O3 buffer layer but no indication of the formation of hydroxides.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.8
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available