Next Article in Journal
Nanosponges for Drug Delivery and Cancer Therapy: Recent Advances
Previous Article in Journal
Crystalline Biomimetic Calcium Phosphate Coating on Mini-Pin Implants to Accelerate Osseointegration and Extend Drug Release Duration for an Orthodontic Application
Previous Article in Special Issue
TiO2/CuO/Cu2O Photovoltaic Nanostructures Prepared by DC Reactive Magnetron Sputtering
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Nanomaterials
Volume 12
Issue 14
10.3390/nano12142441
nanomaterials-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Sputtered Ultrathin TiO2 as Electron Transport Layer in Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cell Technology

by
Susana Fernández
*,
Ignacio Torres
* and
José Javier Gandía
Departamento de Energía, CIEMAT, Avenida Complutense 40, 28040 Madrid, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Nanomaterials 2022, 12(14), 2441; https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12142441
Submission received: 31 May 2022 / Revised: 23 June 2022 / Accepted: 14 July 2022 / Published: 16 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Solar Cells Based on Titanium Dioxide Nanomaterials)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
This work presents the implementation of ultrathin TiO2 films, deposited at room temperature by radio-frequency magnetron sputtering, as electron-selective contacts in silicon heterojunction solar cells. The effect of the working pressure on the properties of the TiO2 layers and its subsequent impact on the main parameters of the device are studied. The material characterization revealed an amorphous structure regardless of the working pressure; a rougher surface; and a blue shift in bandgap in the TiO2 layer deposited at the highest-pressure value of 0.89 Pa. When incorporated as part of the passivated full-area electron contact in silicon heterojunction solar cell, the chemical passivation provided by the intrinsic a-Si:H rapidly deteriorates upon the sputtering of the ultra-thin TiO2 films, although a short anneal is shown to restore much of the passivation lost. The deposition pressure and film thicknesses proved to be critical for the efficiency of the devices. The film thicknesses below 2 nm are necessary to reach open-circuit values above 660 mV, regardless of the deposition pressure. More so, the fill-factor showed a strong dependence on deposition pressure, with the best values obtained for the highest deposition pressure, which we correlated to the porosity of the films. Overall, these results show the potential to fabricate silicon solar cells with a simple implementation of electron-selective TiO2 contact deposited by magnetron sputtering. These results show the potential to fabricate silicon solar cells with a simple implementation of electron-selective TiO2 contact.

1. Introduction

Titanium dioxide (TiO2) is a low-cost non-toxic n-type semiconductor extensively used in a wide-range of applications such as optical and anti-reflection coatings [1,2], capacitors for microelectronic devices [3], photocatalysis [4,5], and solar cells [6,7]. This large variety of applications is feasible mainly due to its suitable optoelectronic and photocatalytic properties, its high chemical stability, and its wide band gap (~3.2 eV) [8]. Regarding its structure, TiO2 can exist as an amorphous layer or as one of three crystalline phases: anatase (tetragonal, a = 0.3785 nm, c = 0.9514 nm), rutile (tetragonal, a = 0.4594 nm, c = 0.2958 nm), and brookite (orthorhombic, a = 0.9184 nm, b = 0.5447 nm, and c = 0.5145 nm) [9]. It is well known that the functional properties of the TiO2 films are strongly dependent on the phase in which the material is found. Among them, the most stable phase is rutile, which results when preparation temperatures are above 800 °C. On the other hand, if deposition is done at temperatures below 350 °C, the obtained thin-films are generally amorphous, whereas films deposited at higher temperatures can develop the anatase phase. Finally, the brookite phase rarely develops. It is possible to exert a certain degree of control over the oxygen vacancy and the carrier concentration in order to enhance the desirable properties depending on the application field [8]. For example, doping the material with suitable metal ion dopants (Al, Nb, Sn, Ge, and Ni, among others) has proven to be an effective method for adjusting the material properties for their application into photovoltaic devices or photocatalysis and pollution sensors [10,11,12].
In the photovoltaic sector, TiO2 can be used in several applications, such as antireflection coating [1]. However, its role as an electron transport layers (ETL) has garnered most of the attention, with multiple examples of solar cell structures demonstrating TiO2’s capabilities. The halide perovskite solar cell (PSC) technology in particular has adopted mesoporous TiO2 films as ETL to obtain state-of-the-art solar cells. For example, PSC champions cells in [13] achieved power conversion efficiencies (PCEs) of 23.4% through suitable interfacial engineering. Dye-sensitized solar cells [6] and PSC [13,14] are typical examples were TiO2 is used extensively, but there are other photovoltaic technologies that also use the selective contact concept based on TiO2, such as Cu(In,Ga)Se2 (CIGS), with examples reaching PCEs of 9.9% [15].
Low-cost and low-temperature solar cells require new device architectures that enable the use of easily available and cost-effective materials for making devices more competitive. In this sense, silicon heterojunction (SHJ) technology is compelling because its fabrication already avoids high-temperature steps while reaching record performance [16]. The development of SHJ solar cells with novel selective contacts other than the doped hydrogenated amorphous silicon (a-Si:H) layer is a current innovative concept [17]. The main advantages of this concept stem from avoiding (i) dopants, (ii) high-temperature processing, and (iii) hazardous gas precursors. Recently, ultrathin TiO2 layers were successfully incorporated into SHJ solar cells as a hole-blocking interface acting as ETL [18,19,20,21]. Relative to n-type c-Si, TiO2 has a small conduction band offset (ΔEc ≈ 0.05 eV), which allows electrons to pass through it, and a large valence-band offset (ΔEv ≈ 2.0 eV), which results in holes being blocked [22]. Such ETL implementation into the heterostructures offers a path towards photovoltaic technologies that use relatively simple and near-room fabrication techniques.
TiO2 thin films can be deposited by different techniques such as chemical vapor deposition (CVD), atomic layer deposition (ALD), dip coating, spin coating, spray pyrolysis, e-beam evaporation, and magnetron sputtering [23,24,25,26]. Among them, the method that reports the best results in the aforementioned application is ALD [24,27]. This is because it provides a uniform deposition with controllable stoichiometry and thickness, but at the expense of a very low deposition rate. Thus, regarding this last parameter, the sputtering technique can be considered a good alternative because of its potential for upscaling over large areas at considerably higher deposition rates [27,28,29]. This method has garnered great interest since it can yield either highly porous or dense films at a relatively low temperature. However, the main drawback of this technique is the damage caused at the interface during the sputtering process due to ion bombardment. This effect negatively affect the performance in the final device, and it should be minimized.
In this work, we validate the use of magnetron sputtering, a non-conventional deposition technique for the fabrication of ultrathin TiO2, and its application as ETL in the SHJ technology. TheTiO2 thin films are fabricated at room temperature (RT), varying the Argon (Ar) working pressure that aims to control the damage caused by the ion bombardment, as well as the deposition time. In this way, we successfully fabricated a collection of different solar cells and studied the effect of Ar pressure and deposition time on the main parameters, mainly the open-circuit voltage (Voc) and the fill factor (FF). The results successfully show the implementation of the full-area electron-selective TiO2 contacts into the SHJ solar device. Moreover, these results highlight the potential of the magnetron sputtering deposition technique to fabricate this kind of selective contacts for SHJ technology, opening up a new possibility to implement its large-area scale manufacturing.

2. Materials and Methods

We deposited the TiO2 thin films in a commercial UNIVEX 450B sputtering system from Leybold (Leybold GmbH, Cologne, Germany). This system is equipped with four magnetron sources, two operated by direct current (DC) and two by radio-frequency (RF). They are placed in a confocal geometry with respect to the substrate holder in order to ensure good film homogeneity. For TiO2 deposition, we used a 4-inch diameter TiO2 ceramic target provided by Neyco (Vanves, France) with a purity of 99.99% that is placed on the RF gun. The sputtering process of TiO2 was carried out at RT, with a base pressure of 10−5 Pa and in an oxygen-free environment. During the deposition, the substrate rotated at 20 r.p.m., and 9N5 Ar was used as inert gas. Its flux was controlled by an MKS mass flow controller (MKS Instruments, Andover, MA, USA) and was set to either 5 or 25 sccm, corresponding to working pressures of 0.17 Pa and 0.89 Pa, respectively. Finally, the RF power (RFP) value was set to 50 W to minimize the damage caused by ion bombardment, and the deposition time varied from 1 to 14 min.
Prior to their implementation as ETL in solar cells, 30–40 nm TiO2 thin films were co-deposited on resistive Corning glass (Corning Inc., New York, NY, USA) and polished n-type float zone c-Si wafers <100> to evaluate their topography and structural and optical properties. The structure of the thin films was determined with a PANalytical X’Pert Pro X-ray diffraction system (XRD), configured with a vertical Theta wide angle goniometer that uses the CuKα radiation (45 kV/40 mA). The goniometer operates in grazing incidence (GI) configuration with a Goebel-type parallel beam mirror on the incident beam side and a linear X’Celerator detector in receiving slit mode attached to a parallel plate collimator on the diffracted beam side. The patterns were obtained at a fixed incident angle of ω = 2.5° in parallel beam geometry and in an angular range of 20° < 2θ < 80°. The topography was evaluated using a multimode (SPM, Veeco-Digital Instruments) atomic force microscopy (AFM) in tapping mode using silicon nitride AFM tips (OTR8, Veeco). The layer roughness was quantified by the root-mean-square (RMS), determined in 5 × 5 μm2 2-dimensional (2D) AFM micrographs. The chemical composition of the TiO2 thin films deposited onto Si substrates was determined using a JEOL JSM 7600F Schottky field emission scanning electron microscope (SEM) equipped with an “in-lens” electron detector for energy dispersive X-ray (EDX) analysis, which can be operated up to a 30 kV acceleration voltage.
The optical transmittance (T) spectra of the TiO2 films were measured at RT and normal incidence in the wavelength range 300–2500 nm with a UV/Visible/NIR PerkinElmer Lambda 1050 spectrophotometer. These spectra were used to determine the bandgap of the TiO2 thin films. According to the Beer–Lambert law, T values and the absorption coefficient (α) are related by the following expression (1) [30,31]:
α = 1 d ln 1 T
where d is the film thickness, obtained by profilometry in previous material optimization processes. In TiO2 thin films, according to previously reported results, the absorption has an indirect transition (n = 2) [30,31]. The optical band gap energy Eg from the indirect transition can be estimated through the extrapolation of the linear part of the curve (hνα)1/2 vs hν given by Equation (2), to zero
( h ν α ) 1 / 2 = A ( h ν − E g )
where α is estimated from (1) and A is a constant.
Finally, the SHJ solar cells were fabricated using 280 μm-thick double-side polished n-type float zone c-Si wafers <100> with a resistivity of 1–5 Ω·cm. The silicon wafer was dipped for 1 min in 2% HF to remove the native oxide just before loading it into a two-chamber plasma-enhanced chemical vapor deposition (PECVD) commercial reactor from Electtrorava s.p.a. (Venaria, Italy). To ensure an excellent surface passivation, 5 nm-thick intrinsic a-Si:H layers were deposited on both sides. As a hole-selective contact, 10 nm p-type a-Si:H layer was deposited on the front side of the wafer, whereas the back electron-selective-contact was performed with different thicknesses of a TiO2 thin film. A back full-area Al metal electrode was evaporated in a commercial UNIVEX 300 thermal evaporation system from Leybold (Leybold GmbH, Cologne, Germany), while on the front side, an 80 nm-thick indium tin oxide (ITO) transparent front contact was sputtered at RT from a In2O3:SnO2 (90/10 wt.%) ceramic target placed on the DC gun. To complete the solar cells, a Ti/Ag metal grid was evaporated on top of the ITO layer. The current-voltage (IV) characteristics of the devices were measured under illumination, calibrated at AM1.5G conditions and 100 mW/cm2, using a class A solar simulator (Steuernagel SC575). Transient photoconductance decay measurements were performed by using the Sinton Instrument WCT-120 (Sinton Instruments Inc., Boulder, CO, USA) to evaluate the effect of the TiO2 layer on the passivation layer.

3. Results

In the following Section 3.1, we first detail the structural, chemical, and optical characteristics of the TiO2 thin films deposited at two different working pressure regimes before reporting, in Section 3.2, the results on solar cells with ultra-thin TiO2 layer acting as ETL.

3.1. Characterization of TiO2 Layer Fabricated by Magnetron Sputtering

To characterize the structural, morphological, and optical properties of the TiO2 layers, 30–40 nm nominal thick thin films were deposited by RF magnetron sputtering onto glass substrates. Table 1 summarizes the sputtering deposition parameters of the TiO2 thin films that are considered as a reference in this work. The layers were grown without external substrate heating, and no post-process heat treatment was used.
The deposition rate varied with the Ar gas flux, decreasing when the pressure increased, as expected. The mean free path of the sputtered species (dm) and the sputtering pressure (P) are related to the following formula [32]:
d m = 2.33 × 10 − 20 T ( P γ 2 )
where T is the temperature and γ is the molecular diameter. According to Equation (3), as the pressure increases, the mean free path decreases and the sputtered atoms undergo a large number of collisions, losing part of their kinetic energy. This has a several effects on the growing film. On one hand, the deposition rate decreases as seen in Table 1, due to a reduction in the rate at which the atoms reach the substrate. Furthermore, since the atoms reaching the surface also have a lower energy and thus mobility, the high deposition pressure can also influence the nucleation and growth mode of the layer, causing porosity in the microstructure [33]. On the other hand, the lower energy of the particles reaching the substrate also mean that reduced damage to the structure underneath is expected [32].
Figure 1 depicts the GI-XRD scans of the samples S1 and S2. Regardless of the Ar gas flux, no characteristic peaks due to a crystalline phase appeared in the scans, indicative of films with an amorphous structure. The broad shoulder observed in the patterns around 25° corresponded to the amorphous glass. This amorphous structure is attributed to the low surface mobility that the adatoms have on the surface regardless of the sputtering conditions used because the deposition was carried out at RT.
Figure 2 shows the AFM data used to evaluate the topography of the surfaces of samples S1 and S2. The 3-dimensional (3D) and 2D AFM micrographs shown in Figure 2 were taken in a scan area of 0.5 × 0.5 μm2. This figure also includes the profiles extracted along two different arbitrary lines on the surface. Table 2 summarizes the quantitative analysis of the roughness deduced from AFM images. The values of the average roughness (Ra), root-mean-square (RMS), and image surface area difference, defined as the difference between the image’s 3D surface area and 2D projected surface area, are included. The image surface area difference is a very useful parameter since it gives an idea about the sharpness of the surface. These parameters were obtained by processing the images with the Nanoscope analysis software 2.0. In both cases, the RMS values were in the order of Å, attributed to their amorphous nature. Both samples showed a granular morphology, although slight differences were observed depending on the working pressure: the surface of sample S1 was slightly smoother and more compact, with a very homogeneous profile across the surface, while the surface of sample S2 was rougher and more granular, with the presence of protrusions of 2–3 nm in height. The protrusions present in sample S2 are responsible for the higher image surface area difference obtained for sample S2, and its formation can be attributed to the higher probability of atom agglomeration due to the loss of mobility on the surface at higher pressures. Ultimately, the observed changes in surface morphology when the sputtering pressure was increased are indicative of a reduction in film density [33,34].
Chemical analysis of the as-deposited TiO2 layers on silicon substrate was carried out by EDX to confirm the presence of the binary oxide. Figure 3 pictures the EDX spectra acquired for the samples S1 (a) and S2 (b). The most intense peak observed at 1.74 keV came from the silicon substrate. The identified titanium (Ti) peaks were clearly observed at 4.50 and 4.93 keV, belonging to Ti Kα and Ti Kβ, respectively. An additional very weak Ti peak appeared at 0.39 keV, corresponding to Ti Lα. Finally, the oxygen (O) peak was also observed at an energy of 0.52 keV (O Kα) [35]. A very low percentage of Ti was calculated from these measurements, together with a non-stoichiometric O concentration, as is summarized in Table 3.
The large O content obtained could be in part due to [36]: (i) the extremely thin TiO2 layer, demonstrated by the intensity of the Si peak that dominated the spectra with respect to the peaks related to the thin film, and/or (ii) the absorption of O species such as OH and H2O. In this sense, the greater O content found in sample S2 suggests a higher presence of these absorbed species, mainly attributed to their higher roughness and less compact structure (see Figure 2 and Table 2), which is expected to favor the absorption of such foreign species.
The transmittance spectra of samples S1 and S2 are pictured in Figure 4a. The normalized average transmittance values at the visible wavelength range of 400–800 nm were close to 98% in both cases. This means that the slightly higher surface roughness of sample S2 did not contribute meaningfully to the light scattering. The indirect optical band gap (Eg) of the TiO2 films was determined using the relation of Tauc’s, depicted in Figure 4b.
The Eg values obtained were 3.54 eV (sample S1) and 3.64 eV (sample S2) [9]. This blue-shift of 0.10 eV observed in sample S2 can be attributed to a combination of two effects: (i) the scattering losses because of its rougher surface, and (ii) the possible higher number of oxygen defects/vacancies created during the growth as consequence of the slower deposition rates [37]. While in the proof-of-concept cells fabricated in this work the TiO2 layers were deposited on the back contact, this tuning of band gap could be very beneficial for the design of rear-emitter solar cells.

3.2. SHJ Devices

SHJ devices with TiO2 films as electron-selective contacts were fabricated using the exact same conditions as those described in Section 3.1 but with different deposition times. Table 4 compiles the deposition times used, as well as the estimated thicknesses (as deduced from the deposition rates measured in thicker films) of the TiO2 films.
Sputtering can cause damage to the underlying films not only due to ion bombardment but also due to high-energy plasma luminescence [38,39]. In the particular case of SHJ cells, UV plasma radiation contributes to a reduction of the electronic passivation provided by the a-Si:H films due to the creation of dangling bonds upon the rupture of Si-Si and Si-H bonds. Fortunately, in the case of ITO sputtering, the passivation quality can be almost fully recovered after short hot-plate annealing at temperatures compatible with the SHJ technology (i.e. 190–200 °C). To study the effect of TiO2 sputtering on passivation quality, the effective minority carrier lifetime (τeff) of each sample was monitored at an excess carrier density of 1015 cm−3 before and after TiO2 deposition. Figure 5 shows the relative changes in τeff with respect to the value τ0 measured before TiO2 deposition (but after front ITO deposition and a subsequent anneal to recover de damage due to ITO sputtering) in the as-deposited stage and after a 10 min anneal in a hot-plate at 200 °C.
As can be seen from the as-deposited results, the passivation quality drops drastically even after 1 min plasma. Further increasing the deposition causes further degradation of the passivation, but at a much lower pace. For all the data gathered, the degradation is slightly lower in the high-pressure regime. Since both ion bombardment and plasma luminescence are responsible to the degradation caused by sputtering processes, it appears that the higher pressure does indeed limit ion bombardment to an extent.
By annealing the samples for 10 min at 200 °C, τeff increases from the as-deposited state, as occurs after ITO deposition. The relative recovery is higher for the films deposited in the high-pressure regime, which we attributed to the lower damage produced by the passivation when using the high-pressure regime. For the higher deposition times, the short anneal does not fully recover the passivation regardless of the pressure regime, implying that the sputtering damage is not entirely reverted. However, for deposition times lower than 3 min, in the case of the high-pressure regime, and 1 min, in the case of the low-pressure regime, the measured τeff shows an improvement of up to 20% over the samples with only a-Si:H and ITO. This improvements at the lowest deposition times hints at a field-effect passivation on top of the chemical passivation provided by the a-Si:H films [40]. Nevertheless, since the effect is not sustained over thicker films, it is clear that it is not strong enough to counteract the damage generated but for the thinnest films. As an example, Figure 6 shows τeff measured for the 1 min TiO2 films deposited in both pressure regimes as well as for a standard SHJ device with n-doped a-Si:H film at the electron contact. The better field effect passivation provided by the n-doped a-Si:H layer is apparent in these results since τeff is slightly better for the standard SHJ structure.
Following the TiO2 deposition, the devices were completed by evaporating a full area aluminum back contact and a silver grid onto the front ITO. Additionally, a control cell with the aluminum back contact directly evaporated onto the a-Si:H(i) layer was fabricated for comparison. The solar cells were then measured under calibrated illumination and the solar cells parameters (FF, Voc, Jsc) extracted. Figure 7 displays the values of FF and Voc as a function of TiO2 deposition time for the solar cells studied. We did not observe any meaningful variations with TiO2 in Jsc and have thus omitted the data from Figure 7.
Even though the TiO2 films deposited in the high-pressure regime showed improved surface passivation, the Voc in the final devices did not depend on the deposition regime. Instead, Voc depended solely on the TiO2 thickness/deposition time, as shown in Figure 7. Voc reached a maximum of 660-665 mV after 1–2 nm of TiO2 (1–3 min depositing time) covered the a-Si:H(i) layer and then declined progressively for thicker films. Voc follows a similar trend to that of τeff for thicker films and hence we can apply the same arguments. As the deposition time increases, the damage due to the sputtering process generates recombination centers that do not revert upon annealing and degrades the passivation and the measured Voc. On the other hand, the measured Voc values when TiO2 is used are all considerably higher than when Al is directly deposited onto the a-Si:H(i) layer. We can thus hypothesize that, even though the AFM analysis of thicker films indicated a decrease in film density with increasing deposition pressure, both deposition regimes yield TiO2 films sufficiently dense as to block the majority of the incoming Al atoms from reaching the a-Si:H(i) layer and the c-Si surface. Otherwise, the passivation would drastically deteriorate, which does not seems to be the case from the Voc values obtained [41]. Finally, is worth pointing out that although the measured Voc is lower than what is typically obtained in standard SHJ solar cells (>700 mV), this is in line with the results obtained for passivated TiO2 contacts deposited by ALD [42].
The deposition pressure has a clear effect on the FF though. TiO2 films deposited at 0.89 Pa yield solar cells with consistently higher FF than cells with TiO2 deposited at 0.17 Pa. Furthermore, cells with TiO2 deposited in the high-pressure regime also present a higher FF than the control cell (as long as the TiO2 thickness is below ~7 nm, i.e., below 14 min deposition time), while cells with TiO2 deposited in the low-pressure regime show FF values systematically lower than the control cell. Interestingly, the IV curves of the cells with low-pressure-deposited TiO2 all display a marked S-shaped curve. On the other hand, the IV curves obtained for the cells with high-pressure-deposited TiO2 behave normally or have a much less pronounced S-shape. As an example, Figure 8 pictures the IV characteristics of the best solar cells obtained with TiO2 as the electron-selective contact, as well as the characteristics of the control cell and a standard SHJ cell fabricated with similar a-Si:H layers.
The large influence of deposition pressure on the IV characteristics must be related to the differences in TiO2 thin films properties. The data obtained from the material characterization showed that TiO2 films deposited in the high-pressure regime had a higher porosity. In addition, the modest FF values measured in the fabricated solar cells suggest very high resistivity for these films. Higher porosity would facilitate the incorporation of Al atoms inside the film during the contact formation, creating parallel low-resistivity paths, reducing the overall film resistivity and explaining the trend in FF with deposition pressure and film thickness.

4. Conclusions

This works aims to validate magnetron sputtering as a deposition technique to fabricate ultrathin TiO2 layers as selective contacts for silicon heterojunction solar cell technology. Prior to the incorporation of the thin films as full-area ETL into the solar cell, the main properties of 30–40 nm-thick TiO2 films, fabricated at room temperature and at different working pressures, were determined. The results show amorphous TiO2 thin films, with a morphology clearly determined by the effect of pressure. When implementing the TiO2 into a device, good control of both the pressure and the deposition time is essential to minimize the damage caused to it. A very thin TiO2 layer is essential to maintain the passivation quality provided by the intrinsic a-Si:H film, and high deposition pressure is found to be decisive in order to reach the best FF. These results validate the potential of such deposition techniques to fabricate full-area selective contacts in silicon solar cell technology, thanks to the proper optimization of the pressure and the deposition time. Thus, it could be very profitable to incorporate them into large-area scale manufacture.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, I.T. and S.F.; methodology, I.T. and S.F.; validation, I.T. and S.F.; formal analysis, I.T. and S.F.; investigation, I.T. and S.F.; resources, J.J.G.; data curation, I.T. and S.F.; writing—original draft preparation, I.T. and S.F.; writing—review and editing, J.J.G.; project administration, S.F. and J.J.G.; and funding acquisition, S.F. and J.J.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación, grant number PID2019-109215RB-C42 (SCALED).

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors acknowledge the technical support in the XRD characterization given by M. Belén Gómez-Mancebo and F. García from División Química (CIEMAT).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Afzal, A.; Habib, A.; Ulhasan, I.; Shahid, M.; Rehman, A. Antireflective Self-Cleaning TiO2 Coatings for Solar Energy Harvesting Applications. Front. Mater. 2021, 8, 687059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Salvaggio, M.G.; Passalacqua, R.; Abate, S.; Perathoner, S.; Centi, G.; Lanza, M.; Stassi, A. Functional nano-textured titania-coatings with self-cleaning and antireflective properties for photovoltaic surfaces. Sol. Energy 2016, 125, 227–242. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Gyanan; Mondal, S.; Kumar, A. Tunable dielectric properties of TiO2 thin film based MOS systems for application in microelectronics. Superlattices Microstruct. 2016, 100, 876–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Fujishima, A.; Zhang, X.; Tryk, D. TiO2 photocatalysis and related surface phenomena. Surf. Sci. Rep. 2008, 63, 515–582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Basavarajappa, P.S.; Patil, S.B.; Ganganagappa, N.; Reddy, K.R.; Raghu, A.V.; Reddy, C.V. Recent progress in metal-doped TiO2, non-metal doped/codoped TiO2 and TiO2 nanostructured hybrids for enhanced photocatalysis. Int. J. Hydrog. Energy 2020, 45, 7764–7778. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Aboulouard, A.; Gultekin, B.; Can, M.; Erol, M.; Jouaiti, A.; Elhadadi, B.; Zafer, C.; Demic, S. Dye sensitized solar cells based on titanium dioxide nanoparticles synthesized by flame spray pyrolysis and hydrothermal sol-gel methods: A comparative study on photovoltaic performances. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2020, 9, 1569–1577. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Dubey, R.S.; Jadkar, S.R.; Bhorde, A.B. Synthesis and Characterization of Various Doped TiO2 Nanocrystals for Dye-Sensitized Solar Cells. ACS Omega 2021, 6, 3470–3482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  8. Lourduraj, S. Titanium Dioxide Versatile Solid Crystalline: An Overview. In Assorted Dimensional Reconfigurable Materials; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Poddar, N.P.; Mukherjee, S. Characterization of TiO2 thin films deposited by using dc magnetron sputtering. Carbon Sci. Technol. 2016, 8, 8. [Google Scholar]
  10. Alem, A.; Sarpoolaky, H. The effect of silver doping on photocatalytic properties of titania multilayer membranes. Solid State Sci. 2010, 12, 1469–1472. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Athira, K.; Merin, K.T.; Raguram, T.; Rajni, K.S. Synthesis and characterization of Mg doped TiO2 nanoparticles for photocatalytic applications. Mater. Today Proc. 2020, 33, 2321–2327. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Waghchaure, R.H.; Koli, P.B.; Adole, V.A.; Pawar, T.B.; Jagdale, B.S. Transition metals Fe3+, Ni2+ modified titanium dioxide (TiO2) film sensors fabricated by CPT method to sense some toxic environmental pollutant gases. J. Indian Chem. Soc. 2021, 98, 100126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Seo, S.; Shin, S.; Kim, E.; Jeong, S.; Park, N.-G.; Shin, H. Amorphous TiO2 Coatings Stabilize Perovskite Solar Cells. ACS Energy Lett. 2021, 6, 3332–3341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Homola, T.; Pospisil, J.; Shekargoftar, M.; Svoboda, T.; Hvojnik, M.; Gemeiner, P.; Weiter, M.; Dzik, P. Perovskite Solar Cells with Low-Cost TiO2 Mesoporous Photoanodes Prepared by Rapid Low-Temperature (70 °C) Plasma Processing. ACS Appl. Energy Mater. 2020, 3, 12009–12018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Hsu, W.; Sutter-Fella, C.M.; Hettick, M.; Cheng, L.; Chan, S.; Chen, Y.; Zeng, Y.; Zheng, M.; Wang, H.P.; Chiang, C.C.; et al. Electron-Selective TiO2 Contact for Cu(In,Ga)Se2 Solar Cells. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 16028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  16. Green, M.A.; Dunlop, E.D.; Hohl-Ebinger, J.; Yoshita, M.; Kopidakis, N.; Hao, X. Solar cell efficiency tables (Version 58). Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 2021, 29, 657–667. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Nagamatsu, K.A.; Avasthi, S.; Sahasrabudhe, G.; Man, G.; Jhaveri, J.; Berg, A.H.; Schwartz, J.; Kahn, A.; Wagner, S.; Sturm, J.C. Titanium dioxide/silicon hole-blocking selective contact to enable double-heterojunction crystalline silicon-based solar cell. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 106, 123906. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Lee, Y.-T.; Lin, F.-R.; Pei, Z. Solution-Processed Titanium Oxide for Rear Contact Improvement in Heterojunction Solar Cells. Energies 2020, 13, 4650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Boccard, M.; Yang, X.; Weber, K.; Holman, Z.C. Passivation and carrier selectivity of TiO2 contacts combined with different passivation layers and electrodes for silicon solar cells. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE 43rd Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), Portland, OR, USA, 5–10 June 2016; pp. 2403–2407. [Google Scholar]
  20. He, J.; Ling, Z.; Gao, P.; Ye, J. TiO2 Films from the Low-Temperature Oxidation of Ti as Passivating-Contact Layers for Si Heterojunction Solar cells. Sol. RRL 2017, 1, 1700154. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Li, F.; Sun, Z.; Zhou, Y.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, Q.; Dong, G.; Liu, F.; Fan, Z.; Liu, Z.; Cai, Z.; et al. Lithography-free and dopant-free back-contact silicon heterojunction solar cells with solution-processed TiO2 as the efficient electron selective layer. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2019, 203, 110196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Avasthi, S.; McClain, W.E.; Man, G.; Kahn, A.; Schwartz, J.; Sturm, J.C. Hole-blocking titanium-oxide/silicon heterojunction and its application to photovoltaics. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013, 102, 203901. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  23. Matkivskyi, V.; Lee, Y.; Seo, H.S.; Lee, D.-K.; Park, J.-K.; Kim, I. Electronic-beam evaporation processed titanium oxide as an electron selective contact for silicon solar cells. Curr. Appl. Phys. 2021, 32, 98–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Masmitjà, G.; Ros, E.; Almache-Hernández, R.; Pusay, B.; Martín, I.; Voz, C.; Saucedo, E.; Puigdollers, J.; Ortega, P. Interdigitated back-contacted crystalline silicon solar cells fully manufactured with atomic layer deposited selective contacts. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2022, 240, 111731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Saheed, M.S.M.; Mohamed, N.M.; Singh, B.S.M.; Perumal, V.; Saheed, M.S.M. DC magnetron sputtered TiO2 thin film as efficient hole blocking layer for perovskite solar cell. In Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE Regional Symposium on Micro and Nanoelectronics (RSM), Batu Ferringhi, Malaysia, 23–25 August 2017; pp. 46–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Chen, Z.; Dündar, I.; Oja Acik, I.; Mere, A. TiO2 thin films by ultrasonic spray pyrolysis. IOP Conf. Ser. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2019, 503, 012006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Zhu, H.; Zhang, T.-h.; Wei, Q.-y.; Yu, S.-j.; Gao, H.; Guo, P.-c.; Li, J.-k.; Wang, Y.-x. Preparation of TiO2 electron transport layer by magnetron sputtering and its effect on the properties of perovskite solar cells. Energy Rep. 2022, 8, 3166–3175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Chen, C.; Cheng, Y.; Dai, Q.; Song, H. Radio Frequency Magnetron Sputtering Deposition of TiO2 Thin Films and Their Perovskite Solar Cell Applications. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 17684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  29. Zhang, M.; Chen, J.; Xuan, W.; Song, X.; Xu, H.; Zhang, J.; Wu, J.; Jin, H.; Dong, S.; Luo, J. Comparison of sputtering and atomic layer deposition based ultra-thin alumina protective layers for high temperature surface acoustic wave devices. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2021, 15, 4714–4724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Rahman, K.H.; Kar, A.K. Effect of precursor concentration of microstructured titanium-di-oxide (TiO2) thin films and their photocatalytic activity. Mater. Res. Express 2019, 6, 096436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. López, R.; Gómez, R. Band-gap energy estimation from diffuse reflectance measurements on sol–gel and commercial TiO2: A comparative study. J. Sol-Gel Sci. Technol. 2011, 61, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Dave, V.; Dubey, P.; Gupta, H.O.; Chandra, R. Influence of sputtering pressure on the structural, optical and hydrophobic properties of sputtered deposited HfO2 coatings. Thin Solid Film. 2013, 549, 2–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Eufinger, K.; Janssen, E.N.; Poelman, H.; Poelman, D.; De Gryse, R.; Marin, G.B. The effect of argon pressure on the structural and photocatalytic characteristics of TiO2 thin films deposited by d.c. magnetron sputtering. Thin Solid Film. 2006, 515, 425–429. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Wang, Y.-H.; Rahman, K.H.; Wu, C.-C.; Chen, K.-C. A Review on the Pathways of the Improved Structural Characteristics and Photocatalytic Performance of Titanium Dioxide (TiO2) Thin Films Fabricated by the Magnetron-Sputtering Technique. Catalysts 2020, 10, 598. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Augustowski, D.; Kwaśnicki, P.; Dziedzic, J.; Rysz, J. Magnetron Sputtered Electron Blocking Layer as an Efficient Method to Improve Dye-Sensitized Solar Cell Performance. Energies 2020, 13, 2690. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hotový, I.; Pullmannová, A.; Predanocy, M.; Hotový, J.; Rehácek, V.; Kups, T.; Spiess, L. Structural and morphological investigations of TiO2 sputtered thin film. J. Electr. Eng. 2009, 60, 4. [Google Scholar]
  37. Shei, S.-C. Optical and Structural Properties of Titanium Dioxide Films from and Starting Materials Annealed at Various Temperatures. Adv. Mater. Sci. Eng. 2013, 2013, 545076. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Demaurex, B.; De Wolf, S.; Descoeudres, A.; Charles Holman, Z.; Ballif, C. Damage at hydrogenated amorphous/crystalline silicon interfaces by indium tin oxide overlayer sputtering. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2012, 101, 171604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  39. Le, A.H.T.; Dao, V.A.; Pham, D.P.; Kim, S.; Dutta, S.; Thi Nguyen, C.P.; Lee, Y.; Kim, Y.; Yi, J. Damage to passivation contact in silicon heterojunction solar cells by ITO sputtering under various plasma excitation modes. Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 2019, 192, 36–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Yang, X.; Bi, Q.; Ali, H.; Davis, K.; Schoenfeld, W.V.; Weber, K. High-Performance TiO2-Based Electron-Selective Contacts for Crystalline Silicon Solar Cells. Adv. Mater. 2016, 28, 5891–5897. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Li, S.; Pomaska, M.; Lambertz, A.; Duan, W.; Bittkau, K.; Qiu, D.; Yao, Z.; Luysberg, M.; Steuter, P.; Köhler, M.; et al. Transparent-conductive-oxide-free front contacts for high-efficiency silicon heterojunction solar cells. Joule 2021, 5, 1535–1547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Acharyya, S.; Sadhukhan, S.; Panda, T.; Ghosh, D.K.; Mandal, N.C.; Nandi, A.; Bose, S.; Das, G.; Maity, S.; Chaudhuri, P.; et al. Dopant-free materials for carrier-selective passivating contact solar cells: A review. Surf. Interfaces 2022, 28, 101687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g001 550
Figure 1. GI-XRD scans of the TiO2 thin films deposited on glass at different Ar gas fluxes.
Figure 1. GI-XRD scans of the TiO2 thin films deposited on glass at different Ar gas fluxes.
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g001
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g002 550
Figure 2. 3D and 2D surface topography images of the TiO2 thin films deposited on glass, and profiles extracted along two different arbitrary lines on the surface at (a) 5 sccm (sample S1) and (b) 25 sccm (sample S2) Ar fluxes.
Figure 2. 3D and 2D surface topography images of the TiO2 thin films deposited on glass, and profiles extracted along two different arbitrary lines on the surface at (a) 5 sccm (sample S1) and (b) 25 sccm (sample S2) Ar fluxes.
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g002
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g003 550
Figure 3. EDX spectra of TiO2 thin films deposited at pressures of (a) 0.17 Pa and (b) 0.8 Pa.
Figure 3. EDX spectra of TiO2 thin films deposited at pressures of (a) 0.17 Pa and (b) 0.8 Pa.
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g003
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g004 550
Figure 4. (a) Transmittance spectra and (b) Tauc’s plot for the TiO2 films deposited at 0.17 (red dash line) and 0.89 Pa (blue line).
Figure 4. (a) Transmittance spectra and (b) Tauc’s plot for the TiO2 films deposited at 0.17 (red dash line) and 0.89 Pa (blue line).
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g004
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g005 550
Figure 5. Relative change in effective minority carrier lifetime, τeff, with respect to the value τ0 measured before TiO2 deposition, obtained in SHJ precursors with different TiO2 film thickness deposited at low pressure (red triangles) and high pressure (blue circles). Open symbols correspond to the data measured in as-deposited films, while closed symbols represent the data obtained after annealing the samples in a hot plate at 200 °C for 10 min.
Figure 5. Relative change in effective minority carrier lifetime, τeff, with respect to the value τ0 measured before TiO2 deposition, obtained in SHJ precursors with different TiO2 film thickness deposited at low pressure (red triangles) and high pressure (blue circles). Open symbols correspond to the data measured in as-deposited films, while closed symbols represent the data obtained after annealing the samples in a hot plate at 200 °C for 10 min.
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g005
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g006 550
Figure 6. Injection-level-dependent effective lifetimes of the SHJ precursors with the electron selective contact consisting of a thin intrinsic a-Si:H layer capped with a TiO2 film deposited in the low-pressure regime or high-pressure regime. For comparison, data for a standard SHJ cell precursor (with n-doped a-Si:H as the electron selective layer) are also included.
Figure 6. Injection-level-dependent effective lifetimes of the SHJ precursors with the electron selective contact consisting of a thin intrinsic a-Si:H layer capped with a TiO2 film deposited in the low-pressure regime or high-pressure regime. For comparison, data for a standard SHJ cell precursor (with n-doped a-Si:H as the electron selective layer) are also included.
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g006
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g007 550
Figure 7. (a) Voc and (b) FF values of the solar cells fabricated with TiO2 layers with different thicknesses (deposition time) deposited in the two pressure regimes studied. Data for the control cell with the aluminum back contact directly evaporated onto the a-Si:H(i) layer is also shown for comparison (lines are included as a guide to the eye).
Figure 7. (a) Voc and (b) FF values of the solar cells fabricated with TiO2 layers with different thicknesses (deposition time) deposited in the two pressure regimes studied. Data for the control cell with the aluminum back contact directly evaporated onto the a-Si:H(i) layer is also shown for comparison (lines are included as a guide to the eye).
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g007
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g008 550
Figure 8. Current-voltage characteristics of the best solar cells fabricated with TiO2 films deposited in the two pressure regimes studied. For comparison, characteristics of the control solar cell with the aluminum back contact directly evaporated onto the a-Si:H (i) layer and a standard SHJ cell are also included.
Figure 8. Current-voltage characteristics of the best solar cells fabricated with TiO2 films deposited in the two pressure regimes studied. For comparison, characteristics of the control solar cell with the aluminum back contact directly evaporated onto the a-Si:H (i) layer and a standard SHJ cell are also included.
Nanomaterials 12 02441 g008
Table
Table 1. Deposition parameters used for the sputtering of the TiO2 layers.
Table 1. Deposition parameters used for the sputtering of the TiO2 layers.
SampleAr Flux (sccm)Pressure (Pa)RFP (W)Deposition Time (min)Rate (nm/min)
S150.1750600.70
S2250.8950600.55
Table
Table 2. Average roughness Ra, root-mean-square RMS, and image surface area difference of the sputtered TiO2 layers.
Table 2. Average roughness Ra, root-mean-square RMS, and image surface area difference of the sputtered TiO2 layers.
SampleRa (Å)RMS (Å)Image Surface Area Difference (%)
S194.71190.088
S21952570.332
Table
Table 3. Chemical analysis from EDX.
Table 3. Chemical analysis from EDX.
SampleTi (%at)O (%at)Ti:O Ratio
S10.334.820.07
S20.376.100.06
Table
Table 4. Deposition times and estimated thicknesses of the TiO2 films used as electron selective contacts in silicon heterojunction solar cells. The deposition rates used for estimating the thicknesses were 0.73 nm/min and 0.55 nm/min for the low-pressure and for the high-pressure regime, respectively.
Table 4. Deposition times and estimated thicknesses of the TiO2 films used as electron selective contacts in silicon heterojunction solar cells. The deposition rates used for estimating the thicknesses were 0.73 nm/min and 0.55 nm/min for the low-pressure and for the high-pressure regime, respectively.
RegimeDeposition Time (min)Estimated Thickness (nm)
Low-pressure
(0.17 Pa)		10.7
32.2
64.4
High-pressure
(0.89 Pa)		10.6
31.7
73.8
147.7
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Fernández, S.; Torres, I.; Gandía, J.J. Sputtered Ultrathin TiO2 as Electron Transport Layer in Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cell Technology. Nanomaterials 2022, 12, 2441. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12142441

AMA Style

Fernández S, Torres I, Gandía JJ. Sputtered Ultrathin TiO2 as Electron Transport Layer in Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cell Technology. Nanomaterials. 2022; 12(14):2441. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12142441

Chicago/Turabian Style

Fernández, Susana, Ignacio Torres, and José Javier Gandía. 2022. "Sputtered Ultrathin TiO2 as Electron Transport Layer in Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cell Technology" Nanomaterials 12, no. 14: 2441. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12142441

APA Style

Fernández, S., Torres, I., & Gandía, J. J. (2022). Sputtered Ultrathin TiO2 as Electron Transport Layer in Silicon Heterojunction Solar Cell Technology. Nanomaterials, 12(14), 2441. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12142441

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop