4.5 Article

Impact of Standard Cleaning on Electrical and Optical Properties of Phosphorus-Doped Black Silicon

期刊

IEEE JOURNAL OF PHOTOVOLTAICS
卷 8, 期 3, 页码 697-702

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JPHOTOV.2018.2806298

关键词

Black silicon; etching; nanostructure; phosphorus emitter; RCA clean; standard clean

资金

  1. project BLACK under umbrella of SOLAR-ERA.NET by the Finnis Funding Agency for Innovation TEKES [2956/31/2014]
  2. Aalto ELEC Doctoral School
  3. Jenny and Antti Wihuri Foundation
  4. Finnish Cultural Foundation
  5. Tiina & Antti Herlin Foundation
  6. Walter Ahlstrom Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Black silicon (b-Si) has been estimated to considerably growitsmarket share as a front texture of high-efficiency silicon solar cells. In addition to excellent optical properties, high-efficiency cell process requires extreme cleanliness of the bulk material, and thus cleaning of b-Si surfaces is often a critical process step. While standard clean (SC) 1 solution efficiently removes possible contamination from wafer surfaces, we show here that it may cause challenges in b-Si solar cells. First, the silicon etch rate in SC1 solution is shown to depend on the phosphorous concentration and as high rate as similar to 1.4 nm/min is observed on planar emitter surfaces. When extending the study to b-Si, which has much larger surface area in contact with the cleaning solution, even higher volumetric Si consumption occurs. This is observed in significant changes in emitter doping profiles, for instance, a 10 and 30-min cleaning increases the sheet resistance from 47 to 57 Omega/square and 127 Omega/square, respectively. Furthermore, the SC1 solution alters substantially the nanostructure morphology, which impacts the optics by nearly doubling and more than tripling the surface reflectance after a 30 and 60-min immersion, respectively. Thus, uncontrolled cleaning times may impair both the electrical and optical properties of b-Si solar cells.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据