11. Wafer Silicon-Based Solar Cells, Part II

The following content is
provided under a Creative Commons license. Your support will help
MIT OpenCourseWare continue to offer high quality
educational resources for free. To make a donation or
view additional materials from hundreds of MIT courses,
visit MIT OpenCourseWare at ocw.mit.edu. PROFESSOR: All right. Why don't we go ahead and
get this started here? We have a cornucopia of
different silicon materials out in front here in
display, and we'll walk through some
of them shortly. What I wanted to do right
at the beginning of class was to give a little bit of
an update on quiz number two. Some of you have probably
seen this already and are aware that
on Thursday we're expecting a short
little decision tree as to how to process your
solar cell to obtain the lowest dollars per watt peak. So this little exercise– it
will last for about a month– is coincident with
our technology section of the class.

So remember, we went
through the fundamentals. Now we're on the technologies. And then finally, in the
cross-cutting themes. So coincident with the
technologies portion is designing your own
solar cell and optimizing the dollars per watt. So this will entail actually
fabricating a solar cell, which is kind of fun. And Joe will be your guide
throughout this process, so you'll be able to actually
take a piece of bare silicon and finish up with a device,
a rudimentary device, but something to take a picture
yourself, post on Facebook, that sort of thing.

You design your own solar cell. So the idea isn't
only to optimize for the performance
of the solar cell, but we decided to throw
in a little curve ball and design for
dollars per watt peak. Now this is a little bit
of a contrived exercise since we've arbitrarily chosen
what dollars are associated with each different
process step, but it's not too unlike what you
would face in actual industry if you had real data coming
off a production line and knew exactly what it
cost for each process step. So instead of having 30 plus
components in a more detailed cost model, we've
decided to simplify it to this little
diagram right here. So this is a flow chart
for the fabrication process of your solar cell. You'll start with a wafer. It has a certain cost
associated with it. You'll have some
decisions to make concerning light
management, whether you want to texture
your front surface or whether you want to
leave it bare and reflective like this right here.

So whether you want a
reflective front service or you want to
texture it, there's a certain costs
associated with it. So you can probably go to some
online resource, like PVCDROM, and use their simulator or the
one you've already constructed for homework number
two, and calculate what the predicted efficiency
boost should be if you texture your front surface. Keep in mind on this very
simple solar cell here, we have no
anti-reflection coating. So the texturization
is pretty much all you've got for
light management.

Next, on the emitter,
the choice is whether to make a deep
emitter or a shallow emitter. The text goes into
that in some detail. But your decision is basically
if you make a shallow emitter, you have less
Auger recombination in that front region. And so your blue response to
the device will be better. But you run the risk when you
do your contact metalization of firing through that
very shallow emitter and shunting your device. Whereas, if you decide
to go for a deep emitter, it stays longer inside
of the furnace because of the phosphorus will diffuse
deeper inside of the device. You blue response
will be poorer, but you'll have less
risk of shunting. So it's up to you to
use all of the tools that you've assembled so far
to make a value-based judgment whether or not it makes
sense to go with this or that as your selection choice. And finally, narrow
and wide fingers, this you can probably
guess already pertains to series resistance
and shading losses. So these are all
representative of trade-offs, trade-offs in terms
of the technology and trade-offs in terms of cost.

And you have all the tools
necessary to calculate or estimate what these
outputs should be based on what you've learned so far. And so by Thursday,
what we've asked you to do is to make an
estimate of what technology pathway your company
is going to pursue. Remember, you want to
optimize the dollars per watt. You want to minimize
that quantity, which means you want to reduce
the number of dollars you invest in your solar cell. But you also want to
increase the watt peak that you get out of it. And so at the end
of the day, it'll be a performance/cost
trade-off in each of these different
process steps right here. And sometimes it won't
be entirely obvious which one to choose because
so many factors will converge.

And so it'll be up to you
to make an engineering decision, a professional
judgment, as to which path you should pursue. Since it is kind of–
you know, there's a little element of
competition in here, so we decided the
dollars per watt peak shouldn't be completely
neglected at the end and we all get
certificates of merit and all feel good
about ourselves. We decided it should be worth
some part of the grade, but not such a large
portion of the grade that everybody's freaking
out and saying, oh my gosh, I don't have the right
tools to make this decision. I feel like I'm not
being graded fairly. So the portion of
dollars per watt is really only going
to be affecting 10% of the final grade
of quiz number two. And so it will be based
on a ranking system where the highest one will
be 100% and so forth. But just 10% of your grade.

So it's enough to,
I would say, create maybe a sting of the
pride if you don't happen to hit the highest
performance metric, but not enough to sting the actual
final grade of your class, which will be one lumped quiz,
quiz one, home works, final, and so forth. Right? Any questions about
quiz two so far? Yes, Jessica? AUDIENCE: I
completely understand, but there's even a
note in number three under the deep emitter. And you guys say,
any numbers you should give as
far as [INAUDIBLE] or are they responsible
for [INAUDIBLE]. It seems like its
lacking some numbers. And I understand
optimization, but I'm having trouble putting
just how much better. And it say it'll be much more
effective if you do etching. Well, how much is
much more effective? PROFESSOR: Oh, the
etching for the– AUDIENCE: For the etching,
we gave a rough [INAUDIBLE]. So you can look that up.

AUDIENCE: I did look that up. And for the other ones, is there AUDIENCE: So that one, you can
get a pretty good estimate for. AUDIENCE: OK. For the other ones, is there
going to be a [INAUDIBLE] AUDIENCE: In terms of
shunting your device, it's really hard to predict
the shock resistance. But if you do shunt your
device, you essentially ruin it. So I would just take
that into account. You're not going to
get exact answers.

But you can do your best
to estimate [INAUDIBLE] resistance from the [INAUDIBLE]
spacing and your emitter thinness. PROFESSOR: Yeah. Believe it or not,
you might feel like you don't have
the tools right now to get quantitative
answers, but you do. You have a number
of the tools here to get, say, 90% the way there. And in engineering,
90% of the way there is well beyond what you'll
actually face in the field.

So that's pretty good. If you have specific
questions about what would be a good
resource to look up about this, what would be a good
resource to look up about that, send an email. And what I'll do, if I receive
something in that nature, I'll respond to the
class so that everybody has benefit to that
information and no one person is particularly advantaged. So it's worth a try. If it's something that was just
covered yesterday in lecture, I might be a little
bit more reticent. But if it is something
to the effect of, gee, how would the
lifetime improve with these different gettering
scenarios, sure, absolutely. We can give you a
little hand there. But everything else,
you should definitely have that information
available so far. This is meant to be a fun
exercise, but also one that illustrates the
trade-offs involved with designing solar cells. And trade-offs very
similar to this are evaluated on a
daily basis in industry, or perhaps not quite as often
as they should be in industry.

But at some point, they were. And the designer of
the manufacturing line made those judgment calls. OK. So again, the pre-analysis,
what is due on Thursday is 20% of the grade. The dollars per watt peak
metric, at the end of the day, is only 10% of the grade. It's meant to really serve
as a stimulus, a little bit of competition, but not
meant to really harm you if you happen to not
achieve a good value there. And this is meant to be
an educational mission, so the solar cell efficiency
analysis at the end is really heavily weighted. We'll be walking through
some of the characterization tools in the
laboratory so you can determine what exactly went
wrong with your devices and quantify them.

And that'll be a
real chance for you to get a tutorial of how
solar cells are not only made– you'll be there when
they're actually fabricated– but also how they're analyzed
and how they're assessed. So it's up to you to really
grab this opportunity. Maybe if you're working
in your own devices and want to bring
some of them along, you're welcome to
do that as well. We won't take up the time when
everyone else is in the room, but we might stay
longer afterward and help you walk through
the analysis as well. And what we've done, just
to resituate ourselves, we talked about the
silicon feedstock, right? So we chatted about
how you go from quartz in the ground and the
carbon-baring feedstock material to the purified, highly
purified, silicon feedstock material. This right here is
probably on the order of somewhere between
8, 9, or 10 nines pure, very, very pure material,
this Siemens-grade polysilicon right here in my hand. And you've taken a look
at this during last class, so you have a sense of what
it is up close and personal.

Silicon, in fact, has
been so well refined that, for a period of
time, NIST, the National Institutes of Standards
in Technologies, they were thinking about
redefining the unit of mass in terms of a silicon
boule, essentially a silicon sphere, that would be polished
down to about 4 nanometers mean surface roughness
with a very low defect density, isotopically
pure silicon to serve as a new
standard for mass because it could just
be purified so well and because their standard
reference units were beginning to shift relative
to all the others around the world,
the one in Paris relative to the ones that were
stored in Washington and Delhi and others around the world. The values of the mass were
shifting as a function of time when they would perform
these round-robin. So either the mass
in Paris was changing or everybody else was changing. This obviously was
unacceptable for an institute that was focused on standards. And so they decided
to reformulate the standard for mass. I'm not quite sure where that
project currently stands. So if anybody has
further information about the NIST unit of mass,
I'd be happy to hear it.

But that gives you an idea of
how well-purified silicon can be and how well-controlled
it can be as well. During the integrated
circuit fabrication, which uses this ultra
purity silicon to produce very nice single crystal wafers
like this one right here, the investment per gram of
silicon can be on the order a few tens or even low hundreds
of dollars per gram of silicon and still turn a profit.

But in the solar cell,
on the other hand, you can invest, at
most, a few tens of cents per gram of silicon. This is because
the solar cell has to compete against bulk power. That's its
competition coming out of the wall right over there. So the solar cell has to be
able to be produced much more cheaply. And as a result,
typically thinner wafers are used and less expensive
starting materials and faster growth methods, resulting in
more defect-rich materials. So one group decided, gee,
the embedded cost in the wafer is just so large,
it's just so large that we have to make it thinner. And we have to avoid using these
ingots, like this one right here, from which
these wafers are sawn. So your wafers are sawn
out of the ingot like this, like shown. During the process, about 50% of
the silicon is lost to sawdust.

And they said, well, let's
develop a better way. Let's extrude the
wafers directly out of liquid molten silicon
and make ribbons of silicon instead. That way, we don't
have the sawdust, and we don't have to have this
expensive ingot solidification step. So ribbon growth
has been explored since the 1970s at least. And the advantages is that
you have no kerf loss, in other words, no sawdust, due
to wire sawing and, hence, more efficient silicon utilization.

Immediately out of the gate,
if your wafer yields are comparable, you get
about a factor of 2 gain because this wafer right here
is about 170 microns thick. And the sawdust is around
170 microns as well. So that's about a
factor of 2 if you're able to produce a
ribbon of silicon directly out of the melt. The disadvantage is that
traditionally there's been lower material
quality and, hence, lower performance
because of the thermal stresses during
growth of a very, very thin foil or thin fin. The thermal stresses
can be larger, resulting in plasticity,
resulting in dislocations and other defects that can
reduce minority carrier lifetime. And traditionally, there has
been as well a higher capex. And a third disadvantage,
traditionally, in ribbon has been that the form factor
or the shape of the wafer has just been different
than the ingot material. Why is that important? Well, if you're trying to
displace the dominant design, the wafer, you would do well to
make your wafer the same size and shape as the
dominant design. Why is that? Well, if you want to make a cell
out of it or solar cell device, you'd want to make
sure that you can take advantage of the same
manufacturing equipment.

And that's just a
plug-in-and-play, drop-in replacement. If you require customization
of the downstream components on the cell in the
module level, you'll wind up having to invest more
money in those processes, which might counteract the
advantage that you get out of using less silicon. Yes, Ashley? AUDIENCE: What's capex? Is it– PROFESSOR: Oh, capex. Capex stands for capital
expenditure, capital equipment expenditure. And that relates to the
cost of the equipment that is typically– well, in the
business world, typically one undergoes what's called an
accelerated depreciation where you amortize the cost of the
equipment over five years but then assume that it runs
over a longer period, maybe 7, 10 years or so
giving you profit back.

So in layman's terms,
what this means is capex is the equipment
cost, in other words. And then you just take
the cost of the equipment and parse it out. For each wafer you produce,
you allocate a portion of equipment cost to that. So let's take a little
walk through history and go back to some
of the earliest methods of ribbon growth. So one of the earliest
forms of ribbon growth was the so-called edge
supported ribbon, also known as string ribbon. And there were developments
of this general technology in different places. Ely Sachs, former
professor here at MIT, now founder and CTO of 1366
Technologies just up the road in Lexington, developed
the string ribbon material here at MIT in the
early 1980s, late 1970s. And the general idea
was to use two filaments like so that would be
passed through a crucible.

And then the silicon
would flow in between those two filaments
much like soapy water flows between the little
circle when you blow bubbles. So a meniscus would form here
and then eventually solidify into a solid piece
of silicon, and you'd have edge-supported ribbon,
otherwise known as string ribbon because you're
using the strings to define the edge of the ribbon. So I have a wafer here, an
example of a wafer here, a string ribbon sample. Oh, here it is. It's hiding from me.

So this is an example of
one of those materials. Here we go. And like usual, it's good
to handle these wafers with some care almost
like a photograph. So here's an example
of a string ribbon wafer, one particular wafer
that was laser cut out of a growing ribbon. As you can see, this larger
ribbon right here– these can grow up to be
a few meters long. They're rather long. You can pick them up if you
have gloves on your hands. And they're quite
flexible at that length. You could actually
even bend them with a radius of curvature
of about a couple of meters. So the reason you wear
gloves, obviously, is to prevent your fingers
some soiling the wafer. We talked about sodium
contamination and other forms of contamination. Silicon is nontoxic,
so it won't affect you. It's really you
affecting the wafer, much like putting
fingerprints all over a nice, clean photograph. So there were
similar technologies developed by Ted [INAUDIBLE]
at NREL out in Colorado.

But the general idea
is shown right here. Now some of the earliest
edge-supported ribbon samples were developed back in 1970s. It really took a
while before they were commercialized in full. And that was done through
Evergreen Solar, which was founded in 1994 by Jack
Hanoka, Rich Chlebowski, and– oh, goodness–
Mark Farber. So the three of them a
co-founded Evergreen Solar. And they developed the
string ribbon growth process shown right over here. Eventually two ribbons face
to face, and now four ribbons side by side. So this was called the
Gemini because there were two ribbons face to face. And then eventually,
the quad process were four ribbons edge to edge. And you can see the
conventional ingot multi-crystalline silicon.

Here, the different
steps forming the ingot, eventually slicing, and so
forth and the string ribbon process here being much
simplified in correspondence. So not only was the
process simpler, but you'd use about
half as much silicon. And here's Rick Wallace,
the inventor and developer of the Gemini process,
up there showing one of these longer meter-length
ribbons with some flexibility. So the company had
a joint venture with REC and Q-Cells,
Norwegian and German companies respectively, to form
a factory in Germany. REC would supply the
silicon feedstock, Evergreen the growth
technology here, and Q-Cell some of the
cell fabrication expertise. And very recently,
Evergreen Solar encountered some
financial difficulties– we'll get into that during the
third section of the course when we talk about
cross-cutting themes– and is in the process of
filing for bankruptcy. So this process– so Sovello is
continuing as its own company, but the Evergreen plant here in
Massachusetts in Marlborough, about an hour west of here,
has effectively shut down.

So that was the trajectory
of this particular technology through commercialization
and ultimately not making it. If you would like,
my personal opinion about why Evergreen
never quite took off, yes, there are some
technical factors, but as well it failed to
grow fast enough to keep up with the rest of the
industry and scale with the rest of the industry. And part of that
can be traced back to the mid 2000s when
silicon was scarce, the inability to source
the feedstock material. Yeah? AUDIENCE: Excuse me. Can you back one slide? PROFESSOR: Sure. It takes a while. It's a big file. OK. AUDIENCE: How do you seal the
space between the filaments and the bottom of the crucible? PROFESSOR: Right there, right? AUDIENCE: Yeah. PROFESSOR: Since this is your
graphite crucible right here and these are your
filaments popping up through the graphite, the beauty
is you don't have to seal that.

The surface tension of silicon
is greater than that of water. So if you've ever filled up
water to the top of a glass and seen that
meniscus that forms, the silicon meniscus would
be even higher than that. AUDIENCE: Oh, that's cool. PROFESSOR: Yeah. It's pretty nifty. AUDIENCE: So I'm imagining
just like molten metal. You don't want that
spilling out the bottom. PROFESSOR: No. AUDIENCE: That's really cool. OK. Cool. PROFESSOR: Yeah. AUDIENCE: Are the
ribbons a single crystal? Or are there grain
boundaries in them? PROFESSOR: Yeah. So let me show you the
actual ribbon right here, and you can inspect
it first hand. These do indeed have
grain boundaries. So what I'll do is I'll place
the ribbon inside of here for ease of carrying around.

If you'd like to take
it out, feel free. They're more where
this came from. So in case there was a little
accident along the way, don't feel too bad. The growth of an ingot
is about one to two days, but you get thousands
of wafers out. The growth of a wafer itself–
if the growth rate was around, say, let's pick a number
somewhere between 2 and 5 centimeters
per minute, then it would take–
let's see, with this, you have a 15
centimeter wafer– it would take somewhere on
the order of four minutes to grow wafer. And you'd have a faster
growth of single wafers from the ribbon process, of
course, lower throughput. The silicon utilization of
the wafer growth process was a lot higher than
that of the ingot growth. Some smart people
realized along the way that you could grow
these ribbons vertically, but you encountered
the following problem. During the growth
of– here you go. During the growth of
a vertical ribbons, if this was the ribbon
growing vertically– it should be straight.

Apologies. There we go. Let's make sure we're
good engineers here. And so this is meant to
represent a growing ribbon. This is the liquid, and this is
the solid silicon right here. The growth velocity would be
in this direction right here. So you're growing the ribbon out
of the melt. This is your melt. This is the ribbon
that's growing up. You're looking at the
cross section right here, so looking at the
ribbon edge on. So you're pulling it
in this direction, so the growth velocity is here.

And the direction of
latent heat of fusion extraction– so you have liquid
silicon solidifying here. During the solidification
process, there's heat released. And that heat has
to be conducted up the solid and then radiated
outward from the fin, from this thin ribbon. So the direction
of heat extraction is also parallel to the
direction of growth. What that means is
the growth velocity will be limited by the speed
at which you can extract heat up the ribbon and
then radiated outward.

So there are many
ideas tossed around about potentially
growing in media that are able to extract
heat [INAUDIBLE] transport. You can use your imagination. But ultimately, growth
continues in air, and you're limited to, at
most, around 5 centimeters per minute growth velocity
because of the extraction of latent heat. If you try to grow
faster than that, you'll eventually just pull
the solid off of the liquid. It'll dissociate much like
pulling an ice cube off of a top of a glass of water. Surface tension won't be able
to hold the two together. So you have here a conundrum. How do you grow faster? If you want to
increase the throughput and instead of spending
minutes to grow wafer, you'd like to grow a wafer per
second, how do you do that? Well, one group of folks thought
about this a bit and said, well, what if we do this? If we take our growth velocity
and in some way, shape, or form now our growth
velocity is going to be perpendicular to the
direction of heat extraction, what would that
geometry look like? And they came up
with something that looked a bit like
this right here, a horizontal growth mechanism.

So you see the [INAUDIBLE]
interface is now at an angle. It's almost vertical at
this point, a slight angle. And the pull velocity is
almost perpendicular to it. So now, you're able,
in theory at least, to grow much, much faster. This was a schematic
of the ribbon growth on silicon process. There's also another
company called AstroPower that developed silicon film. It was later purchased
by General Electric. So these technologies were
developed with the intent of pulling very, very fast. And indeed, you can
literally extrude the silicon at around 49 meters per second.

But the problem about
this is that you wind up with very small grains and very
poor crystalline quality when you try to grow at the speeds. And so it winds up being a
metallurgical problem of how do you ensure the proper
grain size when you're growing using these technologies? So there is some
work in that regard, but never really took off
in commercial production. Yeah? AUDIENCE: So does
pulling at a lower speed with the horizontal
ribbon increase your quality by increasing
your grain size? Or is it not really– PROFESSOR: If you're able
to control the nucleation and growth process at the
very beginning, theoretically, that could be possible. AUDIENCE: OK. PROFESSOR: Yeah, question? AUDIENCE: You had mentioned form
factor for these wafers before. PROFESSOR: Yeah? AUDIENCE: So is there like
a standard form factor for solar cell manufacturing? PROFESSOR: Yep. So the standard form factor
today is akin to this one right here. It's about a 15.6
by 15.6 centimeter squared lateral dimension
form factor for the wafer.

And I can pass this
one around as well. This right here is what's
called a "pseudo-square." You can see the edges
are kind of rounded off. And that's because it came
from a CZ wafer like this one. It was just chopped out of it. Let me see if these
two are coincidence. It would be a– oh, yeah. Look at that. So you can see where the
solar cell actually came from. So that's the standard
diameter of a, say, linear dimension, usually
rectilinear shape, a square.

And the multi-crystalline
silicon ingot material are typically of
this size as well. And you can already see
that these wafers that I have up here are a bit small. These were the previous
generation size. I believe these are 12.5
by 12.5 centimeter squared. Most laboratory devices
that you and your colleagues will manufacture are
on the order of 1 by 1 centimeter or
smaller because– well, because of a variety of factors.

One is the transparent
conducting oxide as we saw in our
homework problem. We're limited in how big we can
make the device by the sheet resistance of that
transparent conducting oxide. Another problem that
we typically run into is just that we're
not able to deposit uniformly over a large area. We don't have a deposition
equipment for it in our labs.

We're there trying to
optimize a new material. We don't necessarily worry about
making module-sized devices out of it. Yeah, question? AUDIENCE: Is there a
reason why the form factor is different than that
used for device manufacturing? PROFESSOR: Sure. AUDIENCE: Like [INAUDIBLE]
uses circular wafers. PROFESSOR: Yeah. So if we were to imagine a
bunch of circular wafers inside of this module over here, you
can imagine the circular wafers side by side.

That was how they were
done at once upon a time. Obviously you
didn't have 8-inch. It was much smaller. Or a 6- or 8-inch. This would be a 6-inch wafer. But the wafers were
a little smaller, but you still have
circular wafers and a lot of dead space in between. So as you can see, because
of the rounded edges, the packing density is very low. The equivalent would
be, say, oranges at a market where they're
all stacked on top of another and you have all this
dead space in between. And so the idea was to optimize
between the cost of the silicon and the cost of the encapsulant
materials by shaving away a little bit of the
silicon and losing that– and perhaps recycling
it, to be honest– and the encapsulant
materials, where you have this dead space
in between the wafers, a small amount of
it, where you have glass and encapsulant but
no active device underneath.

Another interesting
development, as you can see just from the device point
of view– so this would be an Evergreen string
ribbon wafer right here, as you can see. And this right here,
a larger area device. Does anybody notice a
difference besides the shape? In particular, I lead
you to the busbars. How many of those
thick, vertical lines appear down the wafer? AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] PROFESSOR: This has two,
and this has three, right? AUDIENCE: Yeah.

busbars– the optimization of these busbars– this one
has three– that's really to minimize series resistance. Because now that I
have a larger wafer, you have so much current flowing
through it, being generated, that the series resistance
through those very thin metal wires would end up resulting
in large power losses, essentially heat
instead of electricity. And so they added
the third busbar, even though it increased the
shading, to reduce the series resistance losses. So you can see these
optimization problems are used quite frequently in solar. Let me go back one step. There was an
interesting question about could we grow
single crystals using the vertical ribbon growth. This is a technology. And I don't know if
there are actually any of these, many of these
samples left in the world.

They're quite rare. So I do ask if you
want to come up here, take some care with it. This is a dendritic web sample. So this technology went out
of commercial manufacturing, I believe, in 2005. Must have been. Or 2004. It was developed
by Westinghouse, which is used to be one of the
powerhouses in solar located in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. They had a very
active solar activity. It was a kind of a crucible
out of which many solar experts then went into diaspora
around the United States and set up their own
activities elsewhere. And one of the technologies
that they developed was a single crystalline ribbon
technology like this right here. And if you look very closely,
it really is a single crystal. The growth methods
to make this, though, was extremely intricate. It involved, among other things,
control of the temperature, of the liquid silicon to within
1/100 of a degree Celsius at melting temperature, which is
an extreme feat of engineering.

The uptime of these
pieces of equipment, meaning the growth
time, was around 50%. And the other 50% of
the time, the operators were trying to make it work. So it grew very,
very thin material. It wasn't able to scale
to the form factors that we see nowadays. The throughput was quite low. The cost was high. And so it didn't quite make
it, but from an engineering point of view, it was a
marvel in terms of what they were able to accomplish. So history of crystalline
silicon development is riddled with these
technologies that didn't quite make it with these
materials that were extremely inventive,
extremely ingenuitive. But at the end of the day,
the dollars per watt peak just couldn't continue to
justify their existence.

And there were a number of
factors that could contribute to making that happen. So in terms of wafer
fabrication in general– this includes both the
wafers out of ingot materials but also ribbons–
where do I personally see this field going? These are some notes. So in terms of cost,
the cost per watt peak can be reduced by using
cheaper starting materials. That means instead of using this
expensive Siemens poly, perhaps an upgraded metallurgical
silicon process. Growing or sawing
thinner wafers. Growing, for example,
on a ribbon technique. Sawing, maybe making the saws
themselves thinner but more robust so that they
don't snap as they're pulling through the material
at about 5 meters per second in that slurry with the silicon
carbide or diamond grit.

Very challenging
engineering as well. This second bullet
point right there can be encapsulated in a larger
team called improved silicon materials utilization. In other words, the
grams of silicon that you use to produce a
watt peak of a solar cell. So improving that
number right there. Increasing furnace
throughput– that means increasing ingot size,
growth, speed, and so forth. There are many people
right now trying to grow these
ingot right here up to a ton, one metric
ton, so 1,000 kilograms.

That would mean for
the full-sized wafers, you would have something on
the order of 6 by 6 bricks. It's pretty large, a
pretty large ingot. Maybe even 7 by 7. And improving the
material quality so that you can
improve efficiency, efficiency being a huge leverage
over the entire cost structure. Because if your solar cell is
able to produce more power, that means that you use less
encapsulant, and less material, and so forth per unit power
produced, and even less labor to install it and
less racking and framing materials downstream. The scaling issues, so
polysilicon production is currently– well,
this is higher now. It's about 100,000
metric tons per year. And about half of that–
well, about a quarter of that, now, maybe a third is for
the semiconductor industry, about 3/4 for the PV industry. The slurry and the
silicon carbide grit needed for wire sawing
is, at some point, going to become an issue.

These are huge
volumes of waste that need to be transported
through the factories. And of course, the silicon loss
due to wire sawing and ingot casting, resulting in
only 50% of the silicon here in this ingot being
used in the actual wafers to make solar cells. The technology
enablers– using lower– let's put it this–
lower cost feedstocks. You can't compromise
on quality ultimately, so this is a little bit of
a false choice right here. Using lower cost
feedstocks produced by the upgraded metallurgical
route, for example. Producing and
handling thinner wafer and growing faster, larger,
higher quality ingots. And there's a lot
of innovation to be had in this space right here. I believe the numbers
in the last quarter, start-up companies raised
on the order of $250 million from venture capital. And that wasn't including
a new $50 million deal that was just announced
of a company attempting to produce upgraded
metallurgic grade silicon through liquid
routes, purification. This was just announced
this past week, if you go to Greentech Media. So there's still a lot of
active innovation in this area despite the current
market conditions.

And those of you who are
looking for jobs right now, if you're clever, you'll
find them here in this space. Any questions so
far about wafers? Yes? AUDIENCE: Does laser
cutting cause as much dust? PROFESSOR: Does laser
cutting cause as much dust? So let's walk through that. If we're thinking about
the ribbon growing from, say– from this
ribbon right here, I'm going to extract this wafer. So I need to make an
incision horizontally right around this
point right here.

If you look at the total
height, the wafer's around 15 centimeters long. And the laser cut
itself is something on the order of
maybe, oh– I'm going to guess– a few tens
of microns, maybe 100 microns in that order. And so that the amount of
kerf loss in that regard would be 100 microns over 15
centimeters, so a relatively insignificant fraction. If you're trying to chop up
this using a laser, yes, then you would have
significant losses.

But since you're growing
that ribbon straight out of the melt, the
laser cuts themselves are a very small fraction
of the total silicon. Yep? AUDIENCE: Can the sawdust be
collected and remelted then? PROFESSOR: Wonderful question. Can the sawdust be collected
and remelted again? There was a lot of work done
to try to figure that out. At that point, the
sawdust is mixed with this glycol-based slurry,
and with the silicon carbide grit, and with fragments of iron
coming from the stainless steel wire, and nickel and
chromium and other impurities inside of the wire.

And so a lot of the
work was focused on separation of those different
constituents, shall we say. And when the silicon prices were
very high, maybe in 2007, 2008, when the spot prices
were $500 a kilogram, there was a large
incentive to use every single drop of silicon
you had including separation. But in recent years,
the incentive to do that has really dropped. And the one company I knew
that had a very active slurry recycling program let it go. So there may be companies out
there that are looking into it, but I'm not aware
of their activities. OK. Let's hop forward into
cells and devices. So now we've talked
about the market shares of different technologies,
feedstock refining, wafer fabrication, how we make these
wonderful different pieces of silicon.

Now we're going to talk
about going from a wafer into a solar cell device. So just to situate
ourselves, raw material, silicon feedstock, the module
in the system over here. In the middle, we have
the wafer to the cell. And this is the portion
of discussion forthwith. Cell processing. Let's have a look at this. Again, it's a very
different world now in a cell fab line then
it was in the crystallisation environment. So in wafer fab, which
means wafer fabrication and the section of
the company dedicated to producing wafers and ingots,
it was a little bit more dirty. You had forklifts moving
these big crucibles around with chunks of silicon
in it, operators coming by with garden hoses
and washing down furnaces after they're finished.

Here in the cell
fab line, it looks almost more like a clean room. Almost, I say,
because these folks aren't in full bunny suits. They're usually just with
jackets with booties. Sometimes you see
them with hair nets as well to protect from hair
and other particulate matter from getting inside
of the tools. But by and large, the
wafers are brought in. And either in a series
of inline processes– this is a wafer,
wafer, wafer, wafer. So there are four
wafers across moving through what looks
like an etch tank to do the texturization
on the wafers. Whereas in wafer fab,
it was pretty dirty. In cell fab, it
looks pretty clean. You have a combination
of these inline processes like this one shown here. We have wafers on conveyor
belts moving through lines. And batch processes, where
little robots [? pick in ?] places, line wafers up
inside of crucibles or boats, and insert them into furnaces
for batch processing. So this is the crystalline
silicon cell fabrication. In on one side go
bare wafers like this, and out the other side come
fully processed solar cell devices.

So the very first step
after wafer sawing is the saw damage etch. After the sawing process,
you have subsurface damage, something on the order
of 5 to 10 microns deep beneath the
wafer's surface. And keep in mind these are
only about 170 microns thick. So you have subsurface damage
that needs to be removed. And you can take advantage
of the subsurface damage by etching it in such a way
that you etch along the damage and form texturization.

So it's a bit of
a two-in-one here. You clean the wafer, you
create your texturization, and you remove
your saw damage so that when you lift your
wafer, the wafer doesn't break because there's some
hairline fracture caused by the silicon carbide grit. After you have
your wafer– so you start with your p-type wafer. And this represents
the cross section of the wafer from the
backside of the eventual cell to the front side of
the eventual cell, about 170 microns thick. Wide would be something on
the order of 15.6 centimeters in a real device. We're just looking at a
small section of it here.

So as we walk through the
different steps of cell fab, we'll see them evolve over here. The first step after
the saw damage etch is to do what's called an
emitter diffusion, to create your p-n junction. Straight out of the
box, the p-n junction is created after
the saw damage etch. And typically, what we do is
deposit a lower resistance or more highly doped– that's
why we have the 2 pluses here, that means very highly
doped– emitter right underneath where the eventual
contact metalization will go.

That's to reduce the
contact resistance. That's to create the
tunneling junction between the semiconductor
and the metal. OK. So we have the high
resistance emitter over here. This is representative
of a shallow emitter. You remember in
your quiz two you have this decision whether
to take a shallow or deep. This architecture, which
is used in industry, actually combines the
best of both worlds. It has a shallow emitter over
most of the solar cell device to improve the blue response,
minimize Auger recombination. But it also has a deeper emitter
right underneath the contact metalization to prevent
shunting and to reduce contact resistance. AUDIENCE: I assume we have
to choose one or the other.

PROFESSOR: You have to choose
one or the other unfortunately. To create this– it's really to
create the combination, what's called a selective emitter. It's an emitter because
it's the charge separation portion of the device. But it's also
selective in the sense that you selectively place
these low resistance portions across in a geometric fashion
underneath your eventual contact metalization. You have at the end
of this diffusion process what's called a
phosphorus silicate glass etch, PSG, Phosphorus
Silicate Glass etch. After defusing in the phosphorus
in the gaseous form, what you'll do– or
actually, you'll watch it being done, since it's
happening inside of a furnace. This phosphorus-based gas will
deposit a thin glassy layer on the surface of
the sample, which then needs to be etched
off or removed before you can do further processing.

So that's what the phosphorus
silicate glass etch is about. Then there's a nitride or a
silicon nitride anti-reflection coating that's placed
on the front surface. And as we calculated
in lecture number two, this silicon nitride
coating is only how thick? About? AUDIENCE: 70 nanometers. PROFESSOR: 70 nanometers, right? It's really, really thin. But yet, that's enough to create
that quarter wave interference effect that leads to a very
blue looking solar cell device.

So the reason they
looked blue is because of that
anti-reflection coating. We are going to omit the ARC
coating in our design for quiz number two. It requires silane gas,
which we don't have access to down here in the laboratory. We'd have to go to either
[? NTL ?] or Harvard CNS to get that deposited. So because we want this to
be a hands-on experience, we don't to take the
wafers out of your hands, do some magic off to the
side, and bring them back and say, oh, here you go. Because your level of
ownership in the process just plummets in order of
magnitude in the process. We want you to be able to
see it every step of the way.

So we omit the anti-reflection
coating in our quiz number two. But in commercial
production, that's done. And people pay a lot of
attention to that step. And finally, the metalization
is deposited on the sample and fired. Now, the metalization,
how is it deposited? We'll see in a few slides
what the screen printing process looks like. And then, we'll actually
do it ourselves. You'll press the
button on the tool and deposit your
metal on yourself. But the metalization
is typically deposited onto the devices on
the front side and on the back. The front side, you have to line
up– in commercial production– line up with the low resistance
portion of the emitter so that you are able to
extract the full benefit from the selective
emitter design and not shunt your
device elsewhere. And on the back contact,
this is typically aluminum. The aluminum, some
of the aluminum will indiffuse into the silicon
and create a p-plus region in the back side here, which
is a minority carrier blockade layer.

It pushes the electrons
away from the back junction and toward the emitter. And so it prevents back
surface recombination. So you see every
single little step of the solar cell fabrication. A lot of smart people spend
a lot of time thinking about, gee, how do I optimize two
or three things at once? Question up there? AUDIENCE: So both the front
side and backside metalization is [INAUDIBLE] PROFESSOR: No the front side
metalization in this case– thank you for that
clarification– the front side metalization in
this case would be silver or silver-based paste.

And in most
commercial production, this silver-based paste
includes metal oxides. It could be glassy frit. It could be lead oxide. It could be some
combination of elements. That is able to etch through the
silicon nitride anti-reflective coating. This is only 70
nanometers thick, but silicon nitride is
a very strong material. It's a ceramic material. So you have to be able to etch
through the silicon nitride and make electrical contact
with the silicon underneath. And some of the earliest screen
printed metalization cells that got in the range of 15%
or 16% efficiency only made electrical contact
about 10% of the silicon. But it was enough to have these
percolation paths for current to flow up into
the metalization. It's a miracle that
it works at all. But it's a very effective,
cheap manufacturing process that, nevertheless,
is still being used in commercial
production today, even among some of the highest
efficiency cell architectures. And so for each of these
different processing steps, somebody had to sit
there and think deeply about optimization of
different functions.

The [? aluminium ?] on
the backside, somebody had to think about,
gee, how do I prevent the wafer from
bowing, bowing too much, due to coefficient
of thermal expansion mismatch between the
aluminium and the silicon? Somebody had to think about, how
do I create the right eutectic with the silicon– the
aluminum silicon eutectic is around 577
degrees Celsius– so that you create a good ohmic
contact on the backside? How do I diffuse in a certain
amount of the aluminum to create this back surface
field to prevent back surface recombination? How do I get the right
back surface reflectance of the light coming
off of here so that I have multiple optical
bounces through my device and so forth? So a lot of optimization goes
into making a solar cell device to get the Liebig's
law of the minimum, to get each plank Liebig's
law as high as you possibly can so you can achieve a
high device performance.

So hopefully, this
walk through now, you can have an appreciation
for the difficulty that some of your colleagues
face at solar cell fabrication plants. Finally, as last
steps– I mean, this is a real miniature
cross section in the lateral
dimension right here. We only have two contact
metalization fingers. If you look at this solar
cell device right here, we have several dozen, right? If I were to make a vertical
cross section through it, you'd see several
dozen contact fingers. But this is just meant
to be a caricature. So on the edge here,
we have edge isolation. And what this is doing is
preventing shunting pathways from going around to the back. So it's preventing
the emitter from being able to make electrical contact
to the backside of the device. And this is typically
done by inserting a trench, a laser-based
trench, just– gosh, it must be on the order of half
a millimeter from the edge. I'm going to pass this around,
this solar cell device right here.

And if you look
very, very carefully, it's literally a few hundred
microns from the edge at most. You may be able to see the
edge isolation, the trench that is formed by the laser. But it's very difficult to see. So I'll pass this finished
device around as well. And feel free to
pick it up and look at the backside
and the front side. On the back, you'll
see some silver paths in the middle of
all that aluminum. And if anybody has ever
tried to solder to aluminum, you know exactly why those
silver pads are there.

It's so you can solder
to them and make contact to the back of one
device and contact it to the front of the next. And you'll notice
that they're aligned, so the back pads are
aligned with the front. So I'll pass this
around right here. Yes, Ashley? AUDIENCE: I assume
that in order to go in terms of where you want
to put the edge isolation, do you want it as
far out as possible so you're not losing
that edge part.

But you also need to
make sure you're actually making a full [INAUDIBLE]. There's some optimization– PROFESSOR: Exactly. AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] PROFESSOR: Exactly. If your laser edge isolation
machine isn't well-calibrated, you're losing area, active
area, of your solar cell, hence your current output
is going to be lower. Because you know your solar cell
has a certain current density, a certain, say, milliamps
per square centimeter. But then if your area, if
you're square centimeter is smaller, because
you're cutting too far away from the edge, you're
throwing away good material. This isn't the trench
all the way through. It's just electrical isolation. So essentially, this material
over here still exists. It's still hanging
on to the device, but it's electrically isolated. This trench here is only about
a couple of microns deep. And you're losing area. This area over here
is not contributing to the photocurrent
of your device. Any electron making it up
into the emitter over here will just stay there and
recombine eventually.

It won't be able to be
pulled out of the device. A funny, but true story–
there was a company once that I worked with
to solve a problem. And they were getting
lower efficiencies in their new process. And they couldn't figure
out for the life of them why they were getting
lower efficiencies. They checked everything,
everything, everything, everything. And it turned out that they
were cutting their wafers to a slightly larger size
than they were before.

Actually, it was a
slightly smaller size, because it was a
lower efficiency. And their tester had embedded in
it a fixed number for the area. It wasn't measuring the area
of each wafer independently. It just had a fixed number
for the area of the cell. And so it was dividing
the total current output by a bigger area than
what was actually there. And so it was "measuring"
a lower efficiency than what actually the
cell was outputting. So again, these
geometric parameters can come up and
bite you if you're so fixated on the electrical
performance parameters. Testing and sorting. So after you create
your device, you have this beautiful solar cell. And just from simple electrical
engineering and maybe as an extreme example if you're
stringing Christmas lights together, you know that
if you have one bad apple, it can drag down the performance
of the entire string, right, if you're
connecting these in series. And so it makes sense to
test each of the cells individually and make sure
that you sort them together with their like cousins.

So if you have high
performance cells, you bin them all together. And you make models of the
high performance cells. These will be high
performance modules. The bad apples you put
together with the bad apples and so forth. And that way you can extract
the maximum value out of the product you've created. You take your good
cells, you put them into a higher efficiency module. It looks exactly the same,
but its producing more power, so you can sell that module at
a higher price than you would, say, a lower power
output module. OK. So that's what the test
and sort is all about. Turnkey solar cell
fabrication lines, very common since the mid 2000s. There are companies–
Centrotherm, gosh, [INAUDIBLE], Roth & Rau, others that were
producing either turnkey equipment or even turnkey lines
for the entire fabrication line. Even a local company,
Spire, just up the road here in Massachusetts. These typically consisted
of wafer inspection systems on the input side. You don't want to invest
any money in a wafer that's ultimately going
to break, so you want to be able to inspect your
wafers coming in to make sure that they're high enough
quality to be worthy of your cell investment.

Next, you have wet processing
to do the texturization. That's shown right there. Saw damage texturization. And these are
typically inline tools with little ceramic rollers,
some pretty nasty acids being use. Silicon is like a rock. And if you want
to etch the rock, you need to have some pretty
strong solutions, some very high or very low pH, very basic
or very acidic respectively.

And most of the time, in
multi-crystalline silicon, we use an acidic solution. It textures the
wafer independent of grain orientation. For the single
crystal materials, we use a basic solution that
is isotropic or anisotropic in nature. It creates nice little pyramids. So here, you see the wafers
being drawn over an etch bath. And very small
quantities of liquid are used per wafer
in this arrangement. You just coat the wafer's
surface, and that's about it. If you were to do
it in a batch mode, you need a big bath
like a bathtub. And you dunk your
wafers inside of it.

So that would be the bathtub. This would be the
shower equivalent. So more water efficient. In this case, acid efficient. And then the cells come
out on the other side and go into the emitter
diffusion process. And these are a
series of furnaces. We'll see one such furnace
over the course of quiz two when we make our solar cells. So this is the phosphorus
diffusion furnace right here. The wafers are typically loaded
into boats and then inserted into furnace where phosphorus
containing gas, POCL3, also called "pah-cul," is
flown into the chamber. The chlorine components
and the oxygen dissociate from the
phosphorus, which is then driven into the wafer. The oxygen reacts
with the silicon, creates that phosphorus
silicate glass on the surface. And the phosphorus is driven
into the solar cell creating the p-n junction,
creating your device.

And here's an example of
Czochralski wafers being loaded into the phosphorus diffusion
furnace and then out again, just showing the
degree of automation of some of these furnaces. This showing a
stack not dissimilar from the one in the
laboratory downstairs in building 35 where we'll be
doing our phosphorus diffusion. So the next– after we have our
p-n junction– the next step would be to create the
anti-reflection coating. And this is done by a process
called Plasma Enhanced Chemical Vapor Deposition,
or PECVD for short. And in the PECVD process, you
flow in silane gas and ammonia. Silane is silicon with a bunch
of hydrogens, four of them. And ammonia is nitrogen
with a bunch of hydrogens. And the nitrogen and the silicon
react on the wafer's surface and create the silicon
nitride coating.

The hydrogens, 90% of
it, evaporates off. But about 10% of
it hangs around. Between 1% and 10% go into the
wafer or stay at the interface there and eventually are driven
into the wafer passivating bulk defects. So again, a multitude
of different things going on at the same time. Eventually, the
visible effect is that you've created your
anti-reflection coating. The wafers go in looking shiny
and come out looking blue.

But what's happening
underneath the surface is that some of the hydrogen
is going into the wafer. Hydrogen, the first element on
the periodic table, very tiny. And in the PECVD process,
where you have a plasma, you have hydrogen
ions, which basically means you have a proton
without its electron. And that proton is very fast,
moving through the lattice. There's lots of space for it
to move through the silicon lattice.

And it's also very
reactive because it doesn't have that electron. So whenever it finds a
defect or a dangling bond, it'll usually lodge itself
there, and attach itself, and passivate that defect. And that's what
hydrogen passivation is all about during
the silicon nitride anti-reflective
coating deposition. These are examples of
inline processes for doing an anti-reflection coating. I believe there are a
few different variants of this inline
process, one of which is a sputtering
mechanism to deposit this anti-reflective coating. Of course, then during
sputtering process, you have to worry, as
well, about hydrogen. Do you have the benefit
of hydrogen passivation? Perhaps not as much, so
additional engineering is needed. But the inline process
could be potentially faster and higher throughput than the
batch process using the PECVD.

So again, manufacturing
trade-offs. Next, we have the printing
line and screen printing. So this looks very similar to
screen printing for a t-shirt. Here is a t-shirt being
loaded into a screen printer. And here's a solar cell being
loaded into screen printer. This is a close up of
the screen, of what the screen actually looks like. Here, the screen,
which is comprised of this mesh of metal–
here the screen is bare.

And so the metal
that's deposited on top can go through those
holes in the screen and onto the wafer
underneath it. And here, there's a coating, a
polymer coating of the screen, which prevents the
metal from going through the screen
at those places. So it shades the solar cell
underneath and prevents metals from being deposited there. And you have
fingers and busbars. And those are eventually
the thin little fingers that you see right
here going sideways and the vertical
busbars that you see going vertically right here.

Question? AUDIENCE: Yeah. So when you do these [INAUDIBLE]
emitter [INAUDIBLE] where you have some areas of high
resistance emitters and others of low resistance– PROFESSOR: Yeah. AUDIENCE: Do you use
a screen to shield it. Or do you [INAUDIBLE]. PROFESSOR: Great question. So some of the earliest designs
for the selective emitter–if we go back all the
way up to here. Yeah. To the selective
emitter portion. So the earliest designs
used photoresist process. But I would say nowadays,
there are a few technology options that are much
faster, one of which involves a creation of porous
silicon on certain regions of the wafer that you want
to etch back and create the shallow emitter leaving
the deeper region intact. And that, you could
use a form of shading. You could use a wax even for it. There are a variety
of technology options for achieving that goal.

But in a sense, many of
the selective emitter designs involve a deep
diffusion first and then a partial etch back. For example, creation
of porous silicon and etching that material away. Ashley, you had a question? AUDIENCE: Oh, yeah. So what does "turnkey" refer to? PROFESSOR: Turnkey. Excellent question. So turnkey manufacturing
line– what it refers to is that I'm the vendor
of the equipment. In one case, I
say, here, Ashley. Here's a piece of equipment. It's going to cost
you $1 million. And good luck getting
it set up and running. I'm out of here. I'll see you. AUDIENCE: Right. PROFESSOR: A smarter
company might come along and say, I'm going to
guarantee an output from my piece of equipment. I'm going to
guarantee that you'll be able to make 16.7% solar
cells, 16.7% efficiency.

I will send my engineers
to your factory, and they will help you get the
equipment set up and running. And once it's
running up to spec, then they'll come back home,
and you'll be on your own. And you'll be able to
optimize it further. And so you walk in knowing
that you have this guarantee of a performance. Then you can go to
your financing agency. You can go to Joe
and say, hey, Joe, give me money for
my new factory. I have a guarantee that
I'm going to hit 16.7% and have a pathway
to get to 17.2. My CTO right here thinks–
she's a really small person, and she has a pathway to get
to another 0.5% out of it. And so you can go
to your financier and get money more
easily than, say, in the first
scenario where you're given a piece of equipment
and then the person high tails it out of there.

AUDIENCE: Right. PROFESSOR: So turnkey
refers to the idea that you turn the line on. You essentially turn
the key, and you're getting high performance out. In reality, it takes a month or
two to ramp up to that point. AUDIENCE: Right. PROFESSOR: To get high yields
and to get high performance. But you have the
support of the company there on the ground
helping you achieve that. And the turnkey
lines were actually one of the real reasons why
technology flowed around the planet so quickly. Because up until
about the mid 2000s, high efficiency cell was
limited to a few laboratories and a few companies in the know.

But once turnkey
equipment manufacturers got into to the
mix, they started creating these turnkey
lines and selling the equipment around the
world and the expertise of how to make high efficiency
devices, both the architecture and the processing know-how. And this is how, within
in the last 5 to 10 years, you've seen such an
explosion of companies around the globe in all sorts
of places that traditionally haven't been experts in solar
cell manufacturing suddenly knowing how to
manufacture solar cells. It flows. The know-how flows through
the equipment vendors. So finally, testing and sorting. This is the last stage of
the solar cell manufacturing process. Here, we see a little
pick-and-place. That means a little robot that
picks up wafers and deposits them. The simplest incarnation
is just suction cup. The more fancy ones involve
Bernoulli lifters, essentially pressure differentials
pulling wafers up.

So you have wafers being
loaded onto a conveyor belt, coming off of one conveyor
belt onto another one. And they're moving forward. And what you see right
here in very low resolution are two probes coming down. This, evidently, is a two
busbar cell, not a three busbar cell like this one. The probes come down and make
contact with the busbars. And the probes have
multiple contact points, so the series resistance
along the busbars is not affecting
your measurement. Cell efficiency measurement
is always tricky because depending where
you put your probes, your measurements are going to
change because of the series resistance. So these probes
right here are long, and they contain
multiple contact points. And they're essentially
touching the busbars. And light flashes onto the
device simulating the sun, so simulating AM 1.5 conditions. And an IV curve is
measured, is swept. I can't really tell from the
photograph or from the movie right here whether the IV curve
is being swept at illumination, meaning you're sweeping your
voltage when the cell is illuminated, or whether
the illumination intensity itself is used to
vary the forward bias condition of the cell.

They could be doing
it in one of two ways. But most likely,
what they're doing is they're flashing the lights,
measuring the IV characteristic of the device, and
then sorting the cell based on that performance. It goes into a computer. Efficiency is calculated, just
like you did on your homework. And just like that,
it's calculated. And then, as the cell
moves down the line, the robot knows, oh, that's
the cell that got 16.6. We put it over here. Oh, that next cell got 16.8. We put it over there. Some additional companies sort
their cells based on color because they want to have
the aesthetic appearance of homogeneity
within the module. They want every cell to be
of uniform aesthetic value inside of a module so that you
have a nice, uniform color.

considered [INAUDIBLE]. PROFESSOR: Whether or not
this module right here is considered uniform or
different would depend on you, Jessica. You're the customer,
and you decide whether this is good enough
for you or whether it's not. AUDIENCE: It's not. PROFESSOR: It's not? All right. Well, then we have
to work harder. So the customer requirements
really drive the industry. So some customers
are more discerning. Obviously, if this is going
to large field installation, we have big barbed
wire around it. Who cares as long as
the module's producing high performance? But if it's sitting on
the facade of the train station in downtown
Freiburg, Germany, where every single
person riding the train, entering the station,
sees the modules lining the side of Deutsche
Bahn's headquarters, you want to make sure
that those look nice.

So there are differences
depending on where they go and where they're installed. High efficiency
cell architectures. So there are a plethora
of different architectures out there. There are some that, for
example, put all their contacts on the backside, so
there's no shading. And these are interdigitated
positive, negative, positive, negative, positive,
negative contacts here. So this is called an
interdigitated back contact structure. It's used by the company
called Sun Power. And so there's no metalization
loss on the front side.

All your contacts
are on the back. Because lateral
carrier diffusion is involved, meaning
the carriers have to diffuse laterally,
they don't have to diffuse only
one dimensionally, you probably can't use
PC1D to model this cell. You'll have to use a
two-dimensional device simulation like Sentaurus. If anybody has any
two-dimensional device simulation questions, Ashley
right here in the front is our resident expert, so
you're welcome to ask her. AUDIENCE: [INAUDIBLE] PROFESSOR: Yeah. And then there are also
other device architectures which we'll get to during
our thin films discussions. A couple of ancillary
topics, barriers to scale. This is the size of a 1 gigawatt
peak plant manufacturing facility for wafers,
cells, and modules. This is a palm tree right here. These are roads. So you get a sense of scale. This is located in Singapore. It's a company called REC
that has this factory. These are 18-wheelers
right here that are taking the materials out and
selling them to customers. So you get a sense of the
scale of these facilities. They're rather big. And if you say, OK,
this is a gigawatt fab, but we need to be producing on
the scale of terawatts, which are three orders of
magnitude larger in area than this, how big is
that factory going to be? It's about half of the
state of Rhode Island.

Granted, it'll be
distributed throughout many different regions, but
it's a big, big factory. So one of the
interesting questions is, can we produce the
silicon in a faster way that involves less area? Because area generally
relates to capital equipment costs, not
always, but quite typically. If you have a larger
area because you need more equipment in
there, for more equipment, it's a higher cost. So can the production costs
be reduced by a higher throughput growth mechanisms? So instead of using thin film
or crystalline technologies that are currently being used
today– apologies for that. Instead, if we used, let's say,
a float glass-like process. So these would be extruded
pieces of silicon on some bed of–I don't know– liquid
tin would be for float glass, an equivalent for silicon. You could reduce the area by
about two orders of magnitude. And if you envision instead
these high speed printers that print out your reports for
your exam or class notes, they're spitting out 55
pages per minute on 8 and 1/2 by 11 inch squared sheets.

If instead those were 15%
solar cells being printed, you could envision an area the
size of five football fields instead. So this starts opening
the mind that, wow, our way of manufacturing
these solar cells, this discrete process
where it's very segregated– wafer,
cell, and module. Wafer manufacturing
almost like a commodity. Ingot of aluminum. The cell like a device. The module– as we'll see in
a second– like an automobile, an assembly process. If instead we managed to
blend these processes together and reduce the barriers,
the discrete barriers between these
different processes and reinvent the
manufacturing process thereof, we stand to make this a lot
cheaper, and a lot faster, and a lot smaller to produce. We might even have our own
solar cell manufacturing equipment mounted on our desk. When we need to print a solar
cell device or power something, we can produce it right there. So that's kind of the
vision of the future where this might
be going and why bright minds like
yourselves are needed. We talked about silver. We know there's a limit
for how much silver can be used in the front
contact metalization.

We're using about
10% of it right now. And if you're looking
for environmental impact of crystalline
silicon technologies, I've included many
different sites right here that talk about
the environmental impact of solar cell manufacturing
since we have mentioned acids. We have mentioned
gases like silane. We've mentioned CO2 production
when we produce the wafers. We'll talk about this
later on in the class, but in essence, we're looking
at around 1/10 or 1/20 the CO2 intensity of coal. So it's not a zero-emission
source to produce that module, but it certainly is a lot less
than, say, our fossil fuel sources. This declining US
market share has really captured the attention
of politicians lately, the fact that the US
used to comprise 75% of the PV production market.

This is to produce and
manufacture the modules. And today, it's on the order 5%. This is a risen concern
within many in the DOE and today's DOE and government. Meanwhile, the market is
growing substantially. And so an open
question is, what is the future of US market share? If all goes well, we should
have a small Greentech Media article published on this topic
probably within about a week or so, so keep your eyes open. And let me briefly jump
into module manufacturing. Do we have a question? Oh, we're all set. OK.

I'm going to hop into
module manufacturing. It'll be the last five minutes. Just to show you how you go
from the cell to the module, it's an assembly process,
very, very straightforward. We have coming in here sheets
of glass, encapsulate materials. And we'll be able to see
this up close and personal and feel the
materials when we go visit Fraunhofer CSE in
the first week of November. We have a field
trip going up there. That'll be a lot of fun. And the encapsulants
are a lot of fun. They're polymers. They're really tough. You can take the Tedlar
back skin, this white stuff here in the back of the device,
that white skin right there. That's called Tedlar. As the name would suggest,
it comes from DuPont.

It's a polymer. Really, really tough. If try to take some in your
hand and try to tear it, it's nearly impossible, even
for the strongest people here. So it's impermeable,
very strong material. The ethyl vinyl
acetate, or EVA, is a polymer that infuses the
glass in the front side with the cell. And with the Tedlar in
the back, it kind of forms this sticky,
mushy material when you heat it up
above 150 degrees C. And it binds everything together
in what's called a laminate. So let's walk through
that real quick. To get to the point
of a module, we need to take our good
apples with our good apples or our bad apples with our
bad apples, essentially the like-binned cells, and
start stringing them together. That means contacting
the front side with the backside
of adjacent cells.

So the front of one
cell is connected to the back of the next. The front of that one
is connected to the back to the next, and so forth. And they're connected in
series in a big, long string. And that's done at this tabbing,
stringing, and layup table. Typically, this is done by
an automated solder system. I just put the cells together,
and it wires them for you. But usually, there's a manual
inspection process afterward because sometimes the
soldering isn't perfect. A human being is typically there
fidgeting through, making sure that everything is primo. Then we have the
lamination process, which takes those strings. They're very fragile
at this point. They're just solar
cells connected with some solder-coated
wire, so they're very fragile at that point. And these are then laid
up on the top of sheets of the encapsulant
materials and the glass and eventually
laminated together to form that nice package. So at the lamination stage,
coming out of the lamination, we'd have the glass on one side,
the Tedlar in the the back, and the cells in between
encapsulated by the ethyl vinyl acetate, the EVA.

And we wouldn't have
the frame yet around it. And so the put that
frame, we would need essentially a
large machine that takes those pieces
of extruded aluminum and pushes them together around
the edges of the laminate, fixing them on there. And this is the examples of
the tabbing and stringing right there. And let's see, OK. So the framing
materials right here are typically done by machines
in places with high labor costs. And they're done by human
beings pushing them together at regions of low labor cost. And finally, the junction
box is deposited at the end. And the junction
box, what it does is it collects the power
outputs from each of the cells and very conveniently
gives you two leads. So there could be some power
electronics inside of here that allows the current
to flow around this module if this module's under
performing, if it's broken, or if it's shaded.

There would be a bypass diode
inside of the junction box that allows the power to
flow around the module and not get sunk into it. And it also works to
collect the power outputs from all the cells and
produces two leads, which can then be
conveniently plugged into either adjacent modules,
which would be strung in series, or into an inverter,
which would then take the DC power here and convert it into
AC power for your consumption. And that is how a
solar cell is made. So I welcome you to spend a
few minutes at the very end to come up and take a close
look at some of these materials. Ask some further questions. And on Thursday,
we'll start diving into thin film technologies
and talk about how those are made as well.

You May Also Like