White Paper To Mok - FINAL-1

Technical Report
Optimization of Multi-Junction Solar Cells

For Operation Inside
Ultra-High Concentration Photovoltaic (UHCPV) Module
October 19, 2004
Submitted to
Mok Industries
As the final deliverable under Spectrolab Sales Order # 5926
Prepared By
Raed A. Sherif, Ph.D.

Manager, Terrestrial Photovoltaic Products
Phone (818) 838-7479
rsherif@spectrolab.com
Hector L. Cotal, Ph.D.

Photovoltaic Research Scientist
Richard R. King, Ph.D.

Manager, Solar Cell Research & Development
1
The data in this report are controlled by the terms of the Non-Disclosure Agreement between Mok
Industries & Spectrolab, and by the Terms and Conditions of Sale for Spectrolab Sales order # 5926.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.0 Background Page 3
2.0 Performance Optimization of Triple-Junction Solar cells Pages 4-14

2.1 Gridline Optimization
2.2 Tunnel Junctions
2.3 Optimum Solar Cell Total Area
2.4 Thermal Effects on the Maximum Power
2.5 Wafer Power Output
2.6 Heat Reduction from Attenuation of Incident Solar Spectrum
3.0 Performance Optimization of Dual-Junction Solar Cells Pages 15-17

4.0 Product & Process Improvements Pages 18-23

4.1 Tunnel Junction Improvements
4.2 Pursuit of Higher Cell Efficiencies
4.2.1 Metamorphic Solar Cells
4.2.2 Solar Cells with 4, 5, and 6 Junctions
4.3 Scribe & Break Process Development
4.4 Reducing the Ge Wafer Cost
5.0 Concentrator Cells Cost Projection Pages 24-25
6.0 Summary & Conclusions Page 26
2
1.0 Background
High concentration photovoltaic (HCPV) modules using high-efficiency multi-

junction (MJ) cells have been sought because they have the potential of
generating electricity at competitive prices. The key to generating cheap
electricity from HCPV modules is to increase the module output per a given
collector area without increasing the area of the (more expensive)
semiconductor. Hence, the cell efficiency is a critical parameter in reducing the
cost of the overall module ($/Watt). Equally important is how much concentrated
sunlight can the solar cell take without causing degradation to its performance.
As the concentration level on the cell increases, heat dissipation becomes more
demanding. The tunnel junction inside the cell will be more likely to fail as the
current density increases beyond a certain level. Further, series losses at the
higher current levels may cause the cell to operate below its intended peak
efficiency.
Mok Industries seeks to develop Ultra-High Concentration Photovoltaic (UHCPV)

modules. This study is funded by Mok Industries and is intended to address
issues associated with operation of MJ cells under concentration levels between
1000 to 5000 suns. Specific issues related to this are: solar cell performance
optimization, heat dissipation, and economics.
In this study, we consider performance optimization of triple-junction solar cells.

We also consider optimization of dual-junction cells. In both cases we consider
the impact of filtering part of the infrared (IR) radiation so that less thermal
energy is absorbed in the solar cell (reducing the amount of heat that will need to
be dissipated).
3
2.0 Performance Optimization of Triple-Junction Solar Cells
Performance optimization for the solar cells under any concentration level
requires optimization of the cell front grid lines (so that there is enough metal to
carry the current without incurring too much I2R losses, but not too much metal
so as to keep the obscuration losses to a minimum too). Under ultra-high
concentration, e.g., 1000-5000 suns, the tunnel junctions inside the solar cells
also need to be optimized to ensure that proper tunnel junctions with high peak
tunneling currents are used to support the high current densities generated within
the electrically active junctions. Under concentration levels of 1000-5000 suns, it
is expected that temperature effects will likely dictate how large the solar cell can
be, for it can be practically impossible to cool down the cells if the cell area is in
the order of 1cm x 1cm.
In this study, we will focus our attention on performance optimization of today’s

GaInP/GaInAs/Ge triple-junction cells whose cross-section is shown in Fig. 1. We
will consider cell sizes that are under 0.3cm x 0.3cm. This is guided by the
results of the thermal analysis and by some power calculations that will be
discussed at later sections.
contact
AR
n+-Ga(In)As
n-AlInP window l
el
n-GaInP emitter C
p
To
GaInP top cell p-GaInP base
el
nn
Tu
g
p-AlGaInP BSF -E
i de
p++-TJ W
Wide-bandgap tunnel junction n++-TJ
l
n-GaInP window el
C
n-Ga(In)As emitter e
dl
id
M
p-Ga(In)As base
Ga(In)As middle cell
n
io
ct
un
p-GaInP BSF lJ
n ne
p++-TJ Tu
Tunnel junction n++-TJ
n-Ga(In)As buffer
Buffer region
l l
nucleation Ce
m
n+-Ge emitter tto
Bo
Ge bottom cell p-Ge base
and substrate
contact
Fig. 1: Cross-Section of a triple-junction solar cell
2.1 Gridline Optimization
This entails computing a number of loss components that affect the power output
of the cell such as the amount of metal deposited on the front surface, its
obscuration (or shadowing), sheet resistance across the plane of the front face of
the semiconductor, I2R heating through gridlines and bus bar(s), contact
4
resistance between the front metal and the semiconductor and tunnel junction
losses. Figure 2 shows a graph of the relative power loss of triple junction
concentrator solar cell for 1000, 3000 and 5000 suns for a 0.1cm x 0.1cm cell.
100
Total Cell Area = 0.1 cm x 0.1 cm

80
Fractional Power Loss (%)
5000 Suns 3000 Suns 1000 Suns
60
40
20
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Gridline Spacing (µm)
Fig. 2: Triple-Junction solar cell grid line optimization for a

0.1cm x 0.1cm cell
The plot for 1000 suns shows that the grid pitch (or separation) should be 157.5
µm apart for the solar cell to attain a combined minimum loss in power. For this
case, the total power loss is 15.34% and can be considered as the percentage
loss relative to a solar cell with “ideal” 0% loss. At 3000 suns, the power loss
increases to 24.69% with a 96.5 µm-pitch, and at 5000 suns, the loss rises to
30.65% with a 76.2 µm-pitch.
Bus Bar
Included in the calculations was a bus bar width that was selected as 60 µm and
remain fixed throughout the calculations. The length was allowed to vary but the
width was selected so that it would be narrow enough to minimize obscuration
and large enough to allow wire bonding. Some wire bonding characteristics will
be described below.
Gridline Width
The modeling was performed with the narrowest gridline width possible as
allowed by Spectrolab’s current processing capabilities. Note that narrow gridline
width reduces obscuration of which is a significant loss mechanism for the small
cells modeled in this study. To achieve further reduction in gridline width, the
photolithography process would have to be modified to account for narrow
gridline width fabrication.
5
Sheet Resistance
An important parameter that contributes to power loss at high concentration
levels is the sheet resistance. The plots in Fig. 2 are based on a sheet
resistance of 500 Ω/square. Figure 3 shows how smaller values of the sheet
resistance can affect the power loss. The difference in power loss between 500
Ω/square and 100 Ω/square is 3.5%. For 3000 and 1000 suns the difference
becomes 2.9% and 1.8%, respectively.
100
5000 SUNS MODEL
Sheet rho = 500 Ohms/sq
80

60
40
20
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Fig. 3: The effect of sheet resistance on the fractional power

loss of a triple-junction solar cell.
Contact Resistance
Values of ρc for the plots in Figs 2 and 3 were based on a value of 2x10-4 Ω cm2.
Several values that ranged from 2x10-4 Ω cm2 to 5x10-6 Ω cm2 were included in
the models for the 1000, 3000 and 5000 suns for comparison. Significant
changes in the power loss were observed for values of ρc below 2x10-4 Ω cm2,
and were more pronounced for the modeled case of 5000 suns, which is shown
in Fig. 4. Values of ρc for 1000, 3000 and 5000 suns are illustrated in Table 1.
The end result is that ρc needs be reduced by at least an order of magnitude to
achieve higher solar cell performance.
Table 1: Power loss as a function of contact resistance for 1000,

3000, and 5000 suns concentration
Concentration % Power Loss
Contact Resistance Values (Ω cm2)
2x10-4 1x10-5 5x10-6
1000 15.34 7.90 5.50
3000 24.69 12.68 8.67
5000 30.65 15.83 10.77
6
50
5000 SUNS MODEL

40

Cont Res = 0.0002 Ohms cm2
Cont Res = 0.00001 Ohms cm2
30 Cont Res = 0.000005 Ohms cm2

20
10
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Fig. 4: Noticeable change in the total power loss with

increasing contact resistance at 5000 suns.
Wire Bond Pad Resistance

The modeling took into account the pad resistance of the gold wire bond for
typical FP2 25 µm diameter wire as described on Kulicke & Soffa (KnS)
Industries web site. The wire bond pad resistance is < 1 Ω. There are many
types of wires of different material. Gold is selected in this study for compatibility
since the topmost front metal layer of the solar cell bus bar is normally comprised
of gold. The wire electrical resistivity as referenced in KnS site is 3.24 µΩ-cm.
Spectrolab has demonstrated that wire bonding is a viable method to use for
concentrator solar cells in the past.
2.2 Tunnel Junctions
The solar cell structure is grown in the Metal Organic Vapor Phase Epitaxy
(MOVPE) reactors. The epitaxial layers grown in the MOVPE reactors must
balance the peak current output from each electrically active junction (since each
subcell of the triple-junction cell are in series). Each pair of junctions is bridged
by a tunnel-junction allowing current to flow with ease between the electrically
active junctions.
The primary characteristic of a tunnel junction is its peak tunneling current. This
is the maximum current density for which a tunnel junction operates without
severely hindering cell performance. Current flow between each pair of
electrically active junctions is limited by the peak current density (Jp) of the tunnel
junction. Figure 5 illustrates a graph approximating the tunnel junction
7
characteristics in the present tunnel junction used in the triple-junction structure.
The Jp from this particular tunnel junction is approximately 75 A at 0.16 V.
100
Peak Current ≡ J p
80
60
J (A/cm )
2
40
0.10 V;
20 69 A/cm
2
0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
V (V)
Fig. 5: Tunnel junction characteristics in a triple-junction cell

(plot is for Eg = 1.9-2.0 eV)
For a concentrator cell operating at 5000 suns, the current density at maximum
power (Jmp) for this cell design is 69 A/cm2. In Fig. 5, the voltage drop that
corresponds to this Jmp is about 0.10 V, and would be manifested in the form of
power loss in the cell performance due to this component. Although the voltage
drop is somewhat low, its Jp is not high enough as Jp should be 2- but preferably
3-times higher than Jmp of 69 A/cm2. Since variations in the growth of tunnel
junctions can occur, these factors give a margin of safety to compensate for such
variations. Since Jp is low, this particular tunnel junction would not be suitable for
a concentrator cell at 5000 suns. (This was confirmed experimentally by studies
done with concentrated light coming out of a fiber shining light on smaller areas
of the cell. Occasional tunnel junction failures were reported at concentration
levels slightly above 2200 suns.)
It is clear that we need to define a tunnel junction that has peak tunneling current
of at least 140 A/cm2 (but preferably higher than 200 A/cm2). The peak tunneling
current is dependent on the band gap (Eg) of the semiconductor: the lower the
Eg, the higher the Jp. The choice of Eg, however, is one where Eg should be low
enough to allow for high Jp (and low voltage drops) but high enough to reduce
light absorption in the tunnel junction.
The plot in Fig. 5 is representative of a tunnel junction with Eg of 1.9 to 2.0 eV.
Some tunnel junctions that fall in the category of high Jp and low Eg could be the
AlGaAs/InGaAlP, AlGaAs/GaInP and AlGaAs/GaAs ternary and quarternary
8
systems. By proper adjustment of the Aluminum, Gallium and Indium
compositions, the desired tunnel junctions with lower Eg can be developed with Jp
above 200 A/cm2. This is clearly a development effort that must be undertaken
by Spectrolab in any future work with Mok Industries to make multi-junction cells
operate reliably under concentrations of 3000-5000 suns.
2.3 Optimum Solar Cell Total Area
It is important to keep in mind that when it comes to heat removal from a device,
there are two parameters to consider: (a) the power density expressed as W/cm2,
and (b) the magnitude of the power itself in Watts.
Concentration levels of 1000-5000 suns correspond to approximately 70-350

Watts/cm2 (assuming 30% cell conversion efficiency). These are extremely high
numbers in terms of power density that will be very difficult to remove while
maintaining a reasonable cell operating temperature (preferably below 100 deg.
C) with passive cooling. Fortunately, however, by keeping the cell size very
small, the absolute value of power is still manageable. Figure 6 shows a plot of
the projected cell operating temperature rise above ambient vs. levels of
concentration for different cell sizes (assuming 1 sun = 1000 W/m2 and that the
cell conversion efficiency is 35%).
160
Cell Temperature above ambient
140
120
100 1mmx1mm cell

(deg. C)
2mmx2mm cell
80
3mmx3mm cell
60
40
20
0
0 2000 4000 6000
Concentration
Fig. 6: Finite element projections of cell temperature rise above ambient for different cell
sizes under different concentration
9
The data in this curve are based on a 3-dimensional finite element model that
assumes the cell to be soldered directly to a heat spreader made of copper.
Direct soldering of the cells to Cu is usually not practiced for larger cells (e.g.,
1cm x 1cm) since the coefficient of thermal expansion (CTE) of Cu is much
higher than that of the MJ cell. Under repeated temperature cycling, large
expansion mismatch can lead to breakage of the cell and/or the solder joint
between the cell and the heat spreader (leading to loss of cooling and thermal
runaway). For smaller cell sizes, however, direct boding can take place without
incurring too much thermal stresses.
The heat spreader has dimensions of 5cm x 5cm and its thickness is 0.2cm. Heat
removal from the back of the heat spreader occurs by natural convection (i.e.,
passive cooling) with the heat transfer coefficient assumed to be 100 W/m2-deg
C, which is typical of natural heat convection. From the curves in Fig. 6, it is clear
why the cell size should be limited to under 2mm x 2mm under concentration
above 3000 suns.
Another factor to consider in the selection of cell area is the current level
produced by the cell. Smaller cells will have smaller current generated and,
hence, smaller I2R losses). Figure 7 shows the power loss vs. the total solar cell
area for 1000, 3000 and 5000 suns.
40
1000 Suns 3000 Suns 5000 suns
35
% Power Loss
30
25
20
15
Minimum Power Loss
10
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 0.06
2
Total Cell Area (cm )
Fig. 7: Power loss vs. total cell area at different

concentration
10
Higher operating cell temperature reduces the cell conversion efficiency, which
occurs mostly because of reduction in cell operating voltage. The dependence of
Vmp on temperature plays a crucial role on the performance of concentrator solar
cells. If heat is not dissipated adequately, Vmp will drop and the power output of
the cell will also drop. Table 2 shows the expected drop in cell voltage and
power as temperature goes up. The data is based on experiments conducted at
Spectrolab for concentrator cells 0.55cm x 0.55cm with the maximum current
(Imp) scaled to the 0.1cm x 0.1cm and 0.2cm x 0.2cm cells.
Table 2: The effect of temperature on Vmp and power at 1000 suns. Imp =
0.516A for 0.2cm x 0.2cm and Imp = 0.121A for 0.1cm x 0.1cm
Parameter Operating Temperature (oC)
25 45 65 85
Vmp (V) 2.68 2.59 2.50 2.41
Pmp (W)
Cell A =0.1cm x 0.1cm 0.32 0.31 0.30 0.29
Pmp (W) 1.38 1.34 1.29 1.24
Cell A =0.2cm x 0.2cm
Please note that the temperature coefficient of Imp has been ignored for the
calculations in Table 2, as it is much smaller than the impact of temperature on
voltage.
Previous discussions focused on individual cells. The smaller the cells, the easier
the heat dissipation is and the smaller the I2R losses are. In smaller cells,
however, the ratio of the bus bar to the active cell area is larger; hence, on a
wafer level, smaller cells will correspond to larger loss of wafer active area (and
hence lower power). Since the ultimate objective of any concentrating PV system
is to reduce the cost of electricity generation ($/Watt), the wafer power output
must be taken into account when deciding on the optimum cell area.
A 10cm diameter Ge wafer is used for growing epitaxial layers to form the
terrestrial concentrator structure. If we eliminate the unusable wafer area (about
3mm from the outer edge of the wafer), then we can obtain:
- 0.1cm x 0.1cm cells total = 6,219 cells per wafer
- 0.2cm x 0.2cm cells total = 1,613 cells per wafer
11
At 5000 suns, assuming 25 C cell operation (which is impractical to achieve in
actual module operation, but represents standard test conditions), the following
power is achieved from each cell and wafer.
Standard Test Condition

Power of 0.1cm x 0.1cm cell = (Imp = 0.52A) x (Vmp = 2.68V) = 1.4 Watts/cell
Power of a whole wafer = 1.4 (W/cell) x 6,219 (cells/wafer) = 8.67 kW/wafer
This clearly favors the use of the larger cell (the 0.2cm x 0.2cm) over the smaller
cell (the 0.1cm x 0.1cm). In actuality, however, the smaller cell will operate at
lower temperature, as suggested by Fig. 6. Including the temperature effects
(and assuming 25 deg. C ambient), we obtain the following power.
Real Temperature Test Condition

In other words, the fact that the smaller cell will operate at lower temperature
made the use of either cell almost equivalent in terms of total wafer power.
2.6 Heat Reduction from Attenuation of Incident Solar Spectrum
It was found from the above analysis that if the temperature were the same, a
0.2cm x 0.2cm cell will be more favorable to 0.1cm x 0.1cm cells (resulting in
higher power per wafer). In this section, we investigate ways of reducing the
amount of thermal radiation by cutting off the unusable (and some of the usable
portion) of incident infrared (IR) in the terrestrial spectrum. Figure 8 shows the
AM1.5G terrestrial spectrum along with the spectral response of each subcell in
the triple junction solar cell.
It can be seen that the GaInP/GaInAs/Ge triple-junction solar cell uses most of
the spectrum from 350 to 1900 nm. Since there is no absorption, and therefore
no contribution to current generation above 1900 nm, this portion of the IR can
be cut off or filtered with no effect on solar cell performance. Calculation of the
irradiance of this portion of the unusable spectrum at 1-sun is 0.0039 W/cm2. In
other words, by cutting off the wavelength at 1900nm, which targets only the
unusable IR in the solar spectrum, we will reduce the heat generation in the solar
cell by about 4%.
12
1 Top Cell
Middle Cell
0.8 B ottom Cell
Norm Parameters Normalized Low AOD

AM1.5D Spectrum
0.6
Cut Off
0.4
0.2
0
300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500
Wavelength (nm)
Fig. 8: Spectral response of top, middle and bottom subcells

together with the standard AM1.5G terrestrial spectrum as
proposed by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL.)
Marker shown is at 1900 nm.
We now go back to the 3-dimensional finite element model and calculate what
that means to the cell temperature (assuming everything else being the same).
The data is shown in Table 3, which is expressed as the drop in temperature
(relative to the case with no IR filtering).
Table 3: Reduction in cell operating temperature due to cutting

off wavelength above 1900 nm
Drop in Temperature (deg. C)
Cell Size 1000 Suns 3000 Suns 5000 Suns
0.1cm x 0.1 cm 0.2 0.6 1.2
0.2cm x 0.2 cm 0.6 1.7 3.5
0.3cm x 0.3cm 1.01 2.9 5.8
Further efforts can be made to cut off some of the usable portion of the IR below
1900 nm. In fact, this can be done without degrading the performance of the
triple-junction cell because the Ge subcell in the current triple-junction cell stack
produces excess current above what the top and middle subcells are producing.
Accordingly, the Ge subcell spectral response could be reduced by about 25%
with minimal impact to cell performance. This corresponds to cutoff of
13
wavelengths above 1310 nm. By doing so, we can reduce the amount of heat
generation in the solar cell by about 12%.
We now go back to the 3-dimensional finite element model and calculate the
reduction in cell operating temperature. The results are summarized in Table 4.
In this table, we assume that the cell conversion efficiency remains unchanged at
35%.
Table 4: Reduction in cell operating temperature due to cutting

off wavelength above 1310 nm
Drop in Temperature (deg. C)
Cell Size 1000 Suns 3000 Suns 5000 Suns
0.1cm x 0.1 cm 0.6 1.7 3.5
0.2cm x 0.2 cm 1.8 5.2 10.5
0.3cm x 0.3cm 3.0 8.6 17.4
Any further reduction in IR will impact the cell efficiency. The concern with this is
that it could lead to starvation of IR light in the Ge subcell, and would not produce
the current needed for optimum triple-junction solar cell operation.
14
3.0 Performance Optimization of Dual-Junction Solar Cells
The difference between today’s triple-junction and dual-junction solar cells is that
the latter has no active Ge subcell. In other words, we have more leverage of
reducing the cell operating temperature by cutting off more of the wavelength
without impacting the cell conversion efficiency. The drawback is obvious: dual-
junction solar cells have lower conversion efficiency.
For the dual-junction cell, the energy of the spectrum that is absorbed by the top
and middle subcells is between 350 and 880 nm. Since there is no absorption
and therefore contribution to current generation above 900 nm, this portion of the
IR can be cut off or filtered with no effect on solar cell performance, as shown in
Fig. 9. The irradiance of this portion of the unusable spectrum is calculated as
0.0286 W/cm2 for 1 sun. In other words, we can reduce the thermal energy
absorbed in the solar cell by about 29% if we cutoff absorption of wavelength
above 900 nm.
1 Top Cell
Cut Off
Middle Cell
0.8
Norm Parameters
Normalized Low AOD

AM1.5D Spectrum
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
300 500 700 900 1100 1300 1500 1700 1900 2100 2300 2500
Wavelength (nm)
Fig. 9: Spectral response of top and middle subcells together with the
standard AM1.5G terrestrial spectrum as proposed by the National
Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL.)
The 3-dimensinal finite element model is then used to project the dual-junction
cell operating temperature, with- and without filtering. The results are shown in
Fig. 10.
15
180
Cell Temperature above ambient 160 0.1cmx0.1cm cell, no
filtering
140 0.2cmx0.2cm cell, no
120 filtering
0.3cmx0.3cm cell, no
(deg. C)
100 filtering
80 0.1cmx0.1cm cell,
with filtering
60
0.2cmx0.2cm cell,
40 with filtering
0.3cmx0.3cm cell,
20
with filtering
0
0 2000 4000 6000
Concentration
Fig. 10: Projected dual-junction cell temperature without- and with filtering of the
spectrum
The thermal effects for dual-junction cells are equivalent to that of triple-junction
cells. Dual-junction cells Vmp is approximately 0.3V less than that of triple-
junction cells. Table 5 is a repeat of Table 2 with the assumption that all voltages
decrease by 0.3 V and are independent of the concentration level.
Table 5: The effect of temperature on Vmp and power at 1000 suns. Imp =
0.516A for 0.2cm x 0.2cm and Imp = 0.121A for 0.1cm x 0.1 cm
Parameter Operating Temperature (oC)
25 45 65 85
Vmp (V) 2.38 2.29 2.20 2.11
Pmp (W)
0.29 0.28 0.27 0.26
0.1cm x 0.1 cm DJ cell
Pmp (W)
0.2cm x 0.2cm DJ cell
1.23 1.18 1.14 1.09
16
We follow a similar exercise to the one we did for the triple-junction cell at 5000
suns.
Standard Test Condition

This clearly favors the use of the larger cell (the 0.2cm x 0.2cm) over the smaller
cell (the 0.1cm x 0.1cm).
Real Temperature Test Condition

This suggests that the smaller cell is better due to the higher temperature
operation of the larger cell.
If, however, we filter the wavelength to bring the cell temperature down, we
obtain:
In other words, the larger cells become slightly more favorable or just about
equal to the smaller cell.
17
4.0 Product & Process Improvements
The previous sections focused on performance optimization of existing cell

technologies, taking into account the impact of filtering of the unused portions of
the solar spectrum to lower the cell operating temperature. In this section, we
discuss the development efforts that need to be undertaken in order to ensure a
reliable operation of MJ cells in ultra-high concentration modules and to achieve
lower $/Watt.
4.1 Tunnel Junction Improvements
It was already mentioned in the previous section that existing tunnel junctions
were not designed to handle the current densities associated with ultra-high
concentration regimes. Rather, they were designed to handle concentration
under 1000 suns, although they may be able to perform at concentration levels
up to 2000 suns.
The pursuit of tunnel junctions to operate in ultra-high concentration regimes is

one development effort that needs to be pursued. This will include study of wide-
bandgap tunnel junctions, such as AlGa(In)As/ GaInP, AlGa(In)As/ AlGaInP,
AlGa(In)As/ AlGa(In)As, AlGa(In)As/ Ga(In)As, Ga(In)As/ Ga(In)As, etc., to
determine improved doping methods in these materials, achieve the highest
practical peak tunneling currents, and the lowest voltage drop across the tunnel
junction at the incident light concentration of interest, while maximizing
transparency of the tunnel junction through the use of wide-bandgap materials
and reducing layer thickness.
4.2 Pursuit of Higher Cell Efficiencies
In the calculation of cell output power, we assumed a triple-junction cell efficiency

of 35% and a dual-junction cell efficiency of 31%. Higher cell efficiencies of 40-
45% are possible and they can be pursued if sufficient funding is available.
Spectrolab proposes to accelerate its research into high-efficiency multi-junction

solar cells for use in terrestrial concentration systems, to push the cell efficiency
up to a target efficiency of 45% under the terrestrial solar spectrum at
concentration. As high as present-day triple-junction cell efficiencies are, the
tremendously leveraging effects of high efficiency to reduce the concentrating
optics and balance-of-system costs make it highly desirable to push the
efficiency as close to theoretical limits as possible. There are 2-approaches that
we plan to pursue to reach a 45% efficiency goal: (i) metamorphic solar cell
structures, and (ii) solar cells with 4, 5, or 6 junctions.
18
4.2.1 Metamorphic Solar Cells
Lattice-matched (LM) Ga0.5In0.5P/GaInAs/Ge 3-junction (3J) solar cells are the

highest-efficiency photovoltaic cells yet demonstrated for terrestrial
concentrators, as well as for space power systems. However, the GaInP/GaInAs
bandgap combination is still far from optimum for the AM1.5D terrestrial
spectrum, and even higher efficiencies are possible by increasing the indium
composition of the GaInP and GaInAs subcells. This lowers the bandgap of each
material, thereby tuning the resulting spectral responses of the GaInP and
GaInAs subcells for more efficient conversion of the solar spectrum. The higher
indium composition results in a larger lattice constant than the Ge substrate, so
that the GaInP and GaInAs subcells are lattice-mismatched to the Ge substrate.
The lattice mismatch can produce threading dislocations in the crystal lattice, but
the dislocations can be largely accommodated in a graded buffer region, so that
the active cell regions have relatively low dislocation density. Such devices, in
which a new lattice constant is established at which device layers can be grown
relaxed and with a minimum of dislocations, are termed metamorphic (MM)
devices.
The ideal efficiency of 3J MM solar cells is shown as a function of the middle cell
bandgap in Fig. 11, for the AM1.5 Direct, low-AOD standard spectrum for
terrestrial concentrator cells adopted by the National Renewable Energy
Laboratory (NREL), at 1 sun and at 500 suns. The theoretical efficiency for these
3J cells limited by radiative recombination is well over 50% at 500 suns, so that
even with grid shadowing and resistive losses, efficiencies above 45% can be
achieved.
110 55
1.305 1.414 eV
100 50
Ideal Efficiency (%) and 10X Voc (V) of
Integrated Current Density in Spectrum
90 45 3J Cell Limited by Radiative Recomb.
80 40
70 35
(mA/cm2)
60 30
50 25
40 20
30 15
AM0
AM1.5 Direct, low-AOD
20 10
Ideal Eff., AM1.5D low-AOD, 1 sun
Ideal Eff., AM1.5D low-AOD, 500 suns
10 Voc X 10, AM1.5D low-AOD, 1 sun 5
Voc X 10, AM1.5D low-AOD, 500 suns
0 0
0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Photon Energy Corresponding to Middle Cell Bandgap (eV)
Fig. 11: Efficiency of a Metamorphic triple junction cell as a function of the middle cell
bandgap for space and terrestrial spectrum
19
4.2.2 Solar Cells with 4, 5, and 6 Junctions
Solar cells with 4, 5, and 6 junctions are designed to divide the solar spectrum in
a more advantageous partition than the conventional 3-junction
GaInP/GaInAs/Ge solar cells, fundamentally increasing the energy conversion
efficiency. The finer division of the solar spectrum by these cells permits three
fundamental improvements in the conversion efficiency. First, fewer photons are
absorbed in subcells with a bandgap much smaller than the photon energy,
reducing energy losses as photogenerated carriers thermalize down to the
conduction and valence band edges. Second, the lower current density of each
subcell allows a ~1.1 eV GaInNAs subcell to be used, thus making use of the
excess photogenerated current density in the Ge subcell for conventional 3-
junction cells. Third, the lower current density reduces the total resistive losses
in the cell by more than a factor of two. The low-current operation of 5- and 6-
junction solar cells is an important advantage for reducing resistive power loss in
concentrator solar cells.
Figure 12 shows the cross sections of baseline 5- and 6-junction cells. The
baseline 5-junction design has a bandgap combination of
2.00/1.70/1.41/1.10/0.67 eV while the 6-junction design has a bandgap
combination of 2.00/1.80/1.60/1.41/1.10/0.67 eV. While the two designs share
many similarities, the key difference occurs in the “splitting” of the 1.7 eV subcell
of the 5-junction design into two subcells with 1.8 eV and 1.6 eV bandgaps for
the 6-junction design.
contact
AR AR
cap
contact
AR AR (Al)GaInP Cell 1 2.0 eV
cap wide-Eg tunnel junction
(Al)GaInP Cell 1 2.0 eV GaInP Cell 2 (low Eg)

wide-Eg tunnel junction 1.8 eV
wide-Eg tunnel junction
AlGa(In)As Cell 2
1.7 eV AlGa(In)As Cell 3
1.6 eV
wide-Eg tunnel junction wide-Eg tunnel junction
Ga(In)As Cell 3 Ga(In)As Cell 4

1.41 eV 1.41 eV
tunnel junction tunnel junction
GaInNAs Cell 4 GaInNAs Cell 5

1.1 eV 1.1 eV
tunnel junction tunnel junction
Ga(In)As buffer Ga(In)As buffer
nucleation nucleation
Ge Cell 5 Ge Cell 6
and substrate and substrate
0.67 eV 0.67 eV
back contact back contact
5-junction 6-junction
Fig. 12: Cross-Section of a 5- and 6-junction solar cell

20
The bandgaps of the component subcells in a 6-junction cell along with plots of
the available current density in the AM0 (space), AM1.5G (terrestrial one-sun),
and AM1.5 Direct, low-AOD (terrestrial concentrator) solar spectra as a function
of wavelength are illustrated in Fig. 13. The area under the spectrum curve in a
specific wavelength range gives the maximum current density of a subcell for that
span of wavelengths. The areas delineated by the subcell bandgaps are
comparable in size, allowing series-interconnected subcells to be current
matched.
Theoretical efficiencies for this type of cell at 500 suns exceed 50%, and practical
solar cells are expected to be able to reach over 45% for terrestrial
concentrators.
2.0 1.8 1.6 1.41 eV 1.1 eV 0.67 eV

100 100
90 90
Current Density per Unit Wavelength

80 80
70 AM0 70
(mA/cm m)
60 AM1.5G 60
2
AM1.5 Direct, low-AOD
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
0 0
350 550 750 950 1150 1350 1550 1750 1950
Wavelength (nm)
Fig. 13: Division of standard solar spectra by the bandgaps of the 6 subcells in a 6-
junction cell.
4.3 Scribe & Break Process Development
The ultra-high concentration modules require that the solar cell size be kept as
small as 0.2cm x 0.2cm or less, as we have seen from the temperature
projections with- and without IR filtering. In doing so, the number of cells out of a
single wafer is in the order of thousands, with the number of cuts needed to
separate the solar cells being a major cost driver if we continue to use traditional
cutting methods; namely, saw dicing. Rather, we must pursue alternative cutting
21
methods similar to those used in the microelectronics industry, i.e., scribe-and-
break.
Previous preliminary studies have shown that to accomplish scribe-and-break

successfully, the front and back metal thicknesses need be substantially
reduced. Typical bus bar, gridline and back metal thicknesses are several
microns in height. It has been recommended that the metal thickness layers
should be about several thousand Angstroms for the scribe-and-break process.
This will have an impact on the gridline optimization process we discussed
previously. Figure 14 shows an example of the relative power loss at 5000 suns
when the metal thickness layer is reduced from 5 µm to 5000 Å. The increased
loss from the difference in metal layer height is only 1.9%--an acceptable loss.
100
5000 SUNS MODEL
Metal Thickness = 5 microns
80
Metal Thickness = 5000 Angstroms

60
40
20
0
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Fig. 14: The effects of the front contact metal thickness on the
fractional power loss of concentrator solar cells.
Once a scribe-and-break process is developed and qualified for the small

concentrator cells, we will need to develop processes for wafer level test and
pick-and-place for the cells. These activities are critical to reducing the cell
fabrication cost and ensuring a competitive $/Watt.
4.4 Reducing the Ge Wafer Cost
Concentrator solar cells are grown on Ge wafers. The Ge wafers represent

roughly about 25-30% of the solar cell cost. So far, most of concentrator solar
22
cells are built on high-quality (i.e., low defect counts) Ge wafers. The choice of
low-cost Ge wafers may lead to lower cell fabrication costs without impacting the
cell quality. This effort will entail purchase of several batches of low-cost Ge
wafers with different defect levels, growing epitaxial structures on these wafers
and fabricating and testing them into concentrator cells. By associating the
performance and reliability of the different cells to the different wafers, we should
be able to set acceptable specs for terrestrial wafers.
Another radical way of reducing the cost of cell fabrication is to develop a

process to remove the epitaxial layer grown on top of the Ge wafer, and then re-
use the wafer for another growth run. This is a process that is at its infancy;
hence, it will require major development to bring down to reality. However, if
successful, it may have serious consequences on reducing the costs of MJ solar
cells.
In this regard, scientists just developed an ultra-thin 2J GaInP/GaAs space solar

cell with 25% efficiency. The procedure involves the growth of GaInP and
GaInAs epitaxial layers on a substrate, perhaps Ge. Then the epilayers are lifted
off and transferred to a metal film where the film now acts as the substrate. The
top GaInP subcell is quite thin. The disadvantage of this process, however, is
that to make the GaAs layer as thin as possible to increase flexibility, the GaAs
current starts to plummet due to its thin layer. Current generation is proportional
to light absorption. The thicker the layer, the more light is absorbed, and the
higher the current. Although the layers are thin, this appears to be a minor
setback as the metal substrate serves to reflect light back into the junctions of the
GaInP and GaAs layers. This produces more photo-generated carriers, i.e.
electrons (and holes) that contribute to the generation of current. Reports are
based on a 4cm x 7cm GaInP/GaAs dual-junction cell that corresponds to total
layer thicknesses between and 1 and 2 µm (Ge wafer thickness is 0.007 inches).
23
5.0 Concentrator Cells Cost Projections
We now turn our attention to the economics equation for ultra-high concentrator
cells in sizes of 0.1cm x 0.1cm and 0.2cm x 0.2cm. The cell cost is expressed in
terms of $/Watt. Keep in mind that in this chart, the Watts are calculated at 25
deg. C operation (standard test conditions). Figure 15 shows the projected cell
cost for today’s triple-junction cells, while Fig. 16 shows the projected cost for a
45% cell.
$0.30
$0.25
Cell Price ($/Watt)
$0.20 1000 suns

3000 suns
$0.15
5000 suns
$0.10
$0.05
$0.00
1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000
Total cell area (cm^2)
Fig. 15: Projected Cell Cost (for today’s triple-junction cells)
$0.25
$0.20
Cell Price ($/Watt)
1000 suns
$0.15
3000 suns
5000 suns
$0.10
$0.05
$0.00
1,000 10,000 100,000 1,000,000 10,000,000
Total cell area (cm^2)
Fig. 16: Projected Cell Cost (for 45% cell)

24
In both graphs, the cell output is calculated at 25 deg. C (standard test condition).
Further, different cost reduction activities have been assumed in the generation
of these charts (when the volume approaches 1,000,000 cm2), including
implementation of scribe-and-break, automated wafer level test. Also, a gradual
reduction in the Ge wafer cost has been assumed.
From this data, it is clear that there is a real need to increase the concentration
level to 3000 suns (big reduction in cost between the 1000 suns case and the
3000 suns case).
25
6.0 Summary & Conclusions
The operation of MJ cells in concentration regimes of 1000-5000 suns will require

that the cells be kept smaller than 0.2cm x 0.2cm in size. This will allow direct
bonding of the cells to heat spreaders, which will provide for efficient heat
dissipation using passive cooling even under concentration of 1000-5000 suns.
We analyzed the impact of filtering the unused portion of the infrared radiation to
reduce the cell temperature. It seems that there is benefit in cutting off
wavelength above 1310 nm for 0.2cm x 0.2cm cells (10 deg C drop in
temperature at 5000 suns), which will have minimal impact on cell performance.
The benefit was much smaller for the 0.1cm x 0.1cm cells, with temperature
reduction under 5 deg. C. However, in dual-junction cells, where the cutoff
wavelength could be as low as 900 nm, the benefit of IR filtering was much more
pronounced.
There are modifications to the MJ cells that will need to take place to enable the
cells to operate reliably under ultra-high concentration levels. They include
modifications to the existing tunnel junction structures since current tunnel
junction structures cannot operate reliably above 1000-2000 suns. They also
include modifications to the metallization schemes to reduce series and contact
resistance and make the MJ cells work efficiently and reliably in ultra-high
concentration modules.
In terms of cost reduction, the fact that the cells are going to be under 0.2cm x
0.2cm in size will require changes to the existing processes from saw dicing to
scribe-and-break methods. Further cost reduction activities will need to focus on
the qualification of lower cost, terrestrial-grade Ge wafers and on the
implementation of automated test methods (enabling tests of the cells on a wafer
level).
By applying all the above improvements, the solar cell cost could be as low as
$0.05 per Watt or even lower at concentration levels above 3000 suns. Further
cost reduction could be driven by developing concentrator cells with 45%
conversion efficiency. Although efforts to achieve 45% cell efficiency require
substantial funding, increasing cell efficiency is very leveraging not just in
bringing down the cell cost but also in bringing down the entire system cost.
26

White Paper To Mok - FINAL-1

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

White Paper To Mok - FINAL-1

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

Technical Report

Optimization of Multi-Junction Solar Cells

October 19, 2004

Raed A. Sherif, Ph.D.

Hector L. Cotal, Ph.D.

Richard R. King, Ph.D.

1.0 Background Page 3

2.0 Performance Optimization of Triple-Junction Solar cells Pages 4-14

3.0 Performance Optimization of Dual-Junction Solar Cells Pages 15-17

4.0 Product & Process Improvements Pages 18-23

5.0 Concentrator Cells Cost Projection Pages 24-25

6.0 Summary & Conclusions Page 26

High concentration photovoltaic (HCPV) modules using high-efficiency multi-

Mok Industries seeks to develop Ultra-High Concentration Photovoltaic (UHCPV)

In this study, we consider performance optimization of triple-junction solar cells.

In this study, we will focus our attention on performance optimization of today’s

Fig. 1: Cross-Section of a triple-junction solar cell

2.1 Gridline Optimization

Total Cell Area = 0.1 cm x 0.1 cm

5000 Suns 3000 Suns 1000 Suns

Fig. 2: Triple-Junction solar cell grid line optimization for a

Sheet rho = 250 Ohms/sq

Sheet rho = 100 Ohms/sq

Fig. 3: The effect of sheet resistance on the fractional power

Table 1: Power loss as a function of contact resistance for 1000,

5000 SUNS MODEL

Fractional Power Loss (%)

Cont Res = 0.00001 Ohms cm2

30 Cont Res = 0.000005 Ohms cm2

Fig. 4: Noticeable change in the total power loss with

Wire Bond Pad Resistance

2.2 Tunnel Junctions

Fig. 5: Tunnel junction characteristics in a triple-junction cell

2.3 Optimum Solar Cell Total Area

Concentration levels of 1000-5000 suns correspond to approximately 70-350

100 1mmx1mm cell

Fig. 7: Power loss vs. total cell area at different

2.5 Wafer Power Output

Standard Test Condition

Real Temperature Test Condition

2.6 Heat Reduction from Attenuation of Incident Solar Spectrum

0.8 B ottom Cell

Norm Parameters Normalized Low AOD

Fig. 8: Spectral response of top, middle and bottom subcells

Table 3: Reduction in cell operating temperature due to cutting

Table 4: Reduction in cell operating temperature due to cutting

Normalized Low AOD

3.1 Thermal Effects on the Maximum Power

Standard Test Condition

Real Temperature Test Condition

The previous sections focused on performance optimization of existing cell

4.1 Tunnel Junction Improvements

The pursuit of tunnel junctions to operate in ultra-high concentration regimes is

4.2 Pursuit of Higher Cell Efficiencies

In the calculation of cell output power, we assumed a triple-junction cell efficiency

Spectrolab proposes to accelerate its research into high-efficiency multi-junction

Lattice-matched (LM) Ga0.5In0.5P/GaInAs/Ge 3-junction (3J) solar cells are the

90 45 3J Cell Limited by Radiative Recomb.

(Al)GaInP Cell 1 2.0 eV GaInP Cell 2 (low Eg)

Ga(In)As Cell 3 Ga(In)As Cell 4

GaInNAs Cell 4 GaInNAs Cell 5

Fig. 12: Cross-Section of a 5- and 6-junction solar cell

2.0 1.8 1.6 1.41 eV 1.1 eV 0.67 eV