By Topic

Surface Passivation of Boron-Diffused p-Type Silicon Surfaces With (1 0 0) and (1 1 1) Orientations by ALD Al _{2} O _{3} Layers

Sign In

Cookies must be enabled to login.After enabling cookies , please use refresh or reload or ctrl+f5 on the browser for the login options.

Formats Non-Member Member
$31 $13
Learn how you can qualify for the best price for this item!
Become an IEEE Member or Subscribe to
IEEE Xplore for exclusive pricing!
close button

puzzle piece

IEEE membership options for an individual and IEEE Xplore subscriptions for an organization offer the most affordable access to essential journal articles, conference papers, standards, eBooks, and eLearning courses.

Learn more about:

IEEE membership

IEEE Xplore subscriptions

7 Author(s)
Wensheng Liang ; Centre for Sustainable Energy Syst., Australian Nat. Univ., Canberra, ACT, Australia ; Weber, K.J. ; Dongchul Suh ; Phang, S.P.
more authors

Boron-diffused p+/n/p+ and undiffused silicon samples with (1 0 0) and (1 1 1) orientations passivated by aluminum oxide (Al2O3) that is synthesized by atomic layer deposition (ALD) have been investigated. Emitter saturation current densities of ~24, 29, and 33 fA/cm2 were obtained for (1 0 0) samples with symmetrical 85Ω/□ B diffusions that were passivated by plasma-assisted, H2O-based, and O3-based ALD Al2O3, respectively. Compared with undiffused samples, it was found that the additional surface doping from the diffusion reduces recombination at the Al2O3/Si interface in the case of relatively low surface boron concentrations (<; 2×1019 cm-3). The degree of surface passivation that is observed on (1 0 0) surfaces was generally better than on (1 1 1) surfaces, particularly for undiffused samples, but this difference effectively disappeared following the application of more negative charge by corona charging. From capacitance- voltage measurements, it was found that Al2O3 films on substrates with a (1 0 0) orientation display a higher negative fixed charge density Qf than films on (1 1 1) samples. On the other hand, the interface state density Dit was not strongly influenced by surface orientation of the substrate. It appears that the difference in negative charge density is at least partly responsible for the differences in the observed passivation.

Published in:

Photovoltaics, IEEE Journal of  (Volume:3 ,  Issue: 2 )