JOURNAL OF APPLIED PHYSICS 107, 124516 共2010兲

Al–Si alloy formation in narrow p-type Si contact areas for rear passivated
solar cells
Elias Urrejola,1,a兲 Kristian Peter,1 Heiko Plagwitz,2 and Gunnar Schubert2
1
International Solar Energy Research Center (ISC) Konstanz, Rudolf-Diesel-Str. 15, D-78467 Konstanz,
Germany
2
Sunways AG, Macairestrasse 3-5, D-78467 Konstanz, Germany
共Received 9 March 2010; accepted 2 May 2010; published online 28 June 2010兲
For high efficiency silicon solar cells, the rear surface passivation by a dielectric layer has
significant advantages compared to the standard fully covered Al back-contact structure. In this
work the rear contact formation of the passivated emitter and rear cell device structure is analyzed.
Contrary to expected views, we found that the contact resistivity of fine screen printed Al fingers
alloyed on narrow p-type Si areas depends on the geometry of the Al–Si alloy formation below the
contacts, and decreases by reducing the contact area, while the contact resistance remains constant.
At the solar cell level, the reduction in the contact resistivity leads to a minimization of the fill factor
losses. At the same time, narrow Al–Si alloy formations increased the passivated area below the
contacts, improving the optical properties of the rear side, reducing the short-circuit current and
open-circuit voltage losses. Scanning electron microscopy analysis of the Al–Si alloy geometry is
performed, in order to understand its influence on the contact resistivity. The analysis presented in
this article has application in Al–Si alloying processes and advanced solar cells concepts,
like back-contact and rear passivated solar cells. © 2010 American Institute of Physics.
关doi:10.1063/1.3437070兴

I. INTRODUCTION above limits is chosen for the screen printing openings on

In advanced solar cell concepts, where the reduction in
the Si material thickness and the improvement of the rear
contact are a design consideration, a rear passivation layer
together with local back contacts formation are incorporated
at the rear, in order to further increase the solar cell
efficiency.1–5 The effect of the rear contact for the passivated
emitter and rear cell 共PERC兲 关first presented by Blakers et
al.,1 see Fig. 1共a兲兴 is reduced by reducing its contact area.
Interesting publications have been made recently about local
aluminum point and line contacts on the rear side passivation
of solar cells.2,6–8 Other publications have been made on the
analysis of Al–Si alloy formations.9,10
In this study, the contacting of the screen printed Al fin-
gers is made to the substrate via fine lines through the rear
passivation layer 共dielectric barrier兲 covering about 9% of
the rear surface. This rear passivated surface means in pho-
tovoltaics an improvement of the internal charge carrier re-
flection compared to a fully covered Al–area, improving the
efficiency of the solar cell. The recombination is reduced,
improving the reflection of carriers into the bulk and the
metallization of the Al-paste is minimized. The contact for-
mation takes place in the narrow dielectric barrier openings
where the Al–Si alloy is formed.
For the design of the PERC cell in this work, the geom-
etry of the opening lines was limited to less than 200 ␮m
width, otherwise the solar cell will have too much losses. On
the other hand, dielectric openings of typically less than
50 ␮m are hard to realize using commonly used laser or
screen printed technology. In this article, a range between the
a兲
Electronic mail: elias.urrejola@isc-konstanz.de.
p-type Si material 共50, 75, 100, and 125 ␮m兲. On these di-
electric openings, variable Al finger widths are screen printed
in order to analyze the influence of the contact geometry and
the Al–Si alloy formation on the contact resistance.
The aim of this article is to understand the Al–Si alloy
formation under local contacts for PERC solar cells and its
influence on the minimization of the contact resistivity. Scan-
ning electron microscopy 共SEM兲 and energy dispersive x-ray
spectrometry 共EDS/EDX兲 are used, identifying the structure,
penetration, and geometry of the samples. The fully covered
Al layer screen printed on the dielectric barrier is replaced by
screen printed Al fingers, in order to gain an understanding
of the influence of the Al-paste amount on the formation of
the alloy and reduction in contact resistivity.
The contact resistivity, or specific contact resistance, is
defined as the reciprocal of the derivative of current density
with respect to voltage. It has the units m⍀ cm2 and charac-
terizes the contact independent of contact area.11 In other
words, it is the contact resistance normalized by the area.
The total contact resistance in ⍀ is given by the applied
voltage divided by the current which flows from one body to
another.12 It can also be obtained by dividing the contact
resistivity value by the contact area.
II. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
The work presented in this paper and its experimental
observation is based on the contact formation between Al
and Si at the rear of the PERC solar cell 关see Fig. 1共a兲兴. This
solar cell presents a passivated n-layer 共P-diffused emitter兲 at
the front and a dielectric passivated p-Si layer with local
contact formation at the rear. In the back-contact area the

0021-8979/2010/107共12兲/124516/5/$30.00 107, 124516-1 © 2010 American Institute of Physics

Downloaded 17 Dec 2010 to 140.112.24.170. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
 124516-2 Urrejola et al.
local Al–Si alloy 共lines兲 and the high positive doped layer
called the back-surface field 共BSF兲 are found.
Figure 1共b兲 presents the cross-section model of the al-
loyed junction structure at the rear of the PERC solar cell for
the contact resistance and Al–Si alloy analysis 关see rectangle
in Fig. 1共a兲, inverted兴. p-type multicrystalline silicon wafers
of 156⫻ 156 mm2 and resistivity of 1.5 ⍀ cm are selected
for this study. The cleaning of the samples is completed in a
sodium hydroxide bath to remove as cut damage or texture
on the surface. Later on, a dielectric barrier is deposited on
the back of the p-type Si wafers. Since the Al-paste used is
not firing through a dielectric stack, this barrier is selectively
opened by screen printing of a phosphorus containing etch-
ing paste. The activation of the etching properties is done by
drying the wafers slowly 共4 min兲 on a belt furnace at
330 ° C. The cleaning of the etching paste is completed after
a few seconds in an ultrasonic bath with deionized water and
0.2% potassium hydroxide.
In Fig. 1共b兲, d1 represents the dielectric barrier opening
width where the Al–Si alloy is formed and d2 represents the
screen printed Al finger width. The different layers 共mea-
sured by SEM, EDS/EDX兲 formed after the alloying of Al on
p-type Si are: the Al matrix layer in porous state 关共a兲 Al–17%
Si兴 formed by Al-spherical particles, Si, Al2O3, and other
lower concentrated defects; the strong Al–Si alloy formation
关共b兲 eutectic layer Al–12.6% Si 共Ref. 13兲兴; and the BSF 关共c兲
composition Si–1% Al兴.
Due to the spreading of 30 to 45 ␮m of the etching
paste during the drying, the real values for the dielectric
barrier opening widths, d1, after optical microscopy analysis,
are: 80, 110, 135, and 170 ␮m. The Al fingers are deposited
exactly centered on the dielectric barrier openings by a
screen printing process based on optical alignment. For each
dielectric opening, four different Al finger widths are printed.
The real values for d2, after optical microscopy analysis, are:
600, 700, 800, and 900 ␮m. This values are based on previ-
ous experiments, that have shown a minimum for the screen
printed Al finger width, in order to achieve deeply formed
Al–Si alloys, and a reduction in the absolute contact resis-
tance to 1.1 ⍀.
While the Al fingers are wider than the dielectric open-
ing widths 共d2 Ⰷ d1兲, the overlapped Al material, on each
side of the dielectric openings, is high 关共d2–d1兲/2兴. The al-
loying is completed after the firing of the wafer in a lamp-
Downloaded 17 Dec 2010 to 140.112.24.170. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
J. Appl. Phys. 107, 124516 共2010兲
FIG. 1. 共Color online兲 共a兲 Structure of the PERC solar
cell. The surface texturing is not shown. 共b兲 Cross-
sectional diagram of the alloyed junction structure of
screen printed Al fingers at the rear of the PERC cell
关see rectangle 共a兲, inverted兴, not in scale. d2: Al finger
width. d1: dielectric barrier opening width 共d2 Ⰷ d1兲.
The layers formed after the alloying are: 共a兲 Al matrix,
共b兲 Al–Si alloy, and 共c兲 BSF.
heated conveyor belt furnace set above the eutectic tempera-
ture of Al, 577 ° C.14 A special specimen preparation by laser
cutting and cleaning leads to high-quality cross sections
SEM micrographs.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Figure 2 shows the transmission line model15 measure-
ments results for the contact resistivity ␳c of a 700 ␮m Al
finger width 共d2兲, alloyed on four different dielectric barrier
opening widths 共d1: 80 to 170 ␮m兲. The error bars show the
variation in ␳c for the different firing conditions. Also the
total contact resistance R is plotted, which is not increasing
for broader openings, as expected. The results show a depen-
dence of the contact resistivity on the dielectric barrier open-
ings but less on the firing temperature. The same results were
found for different Al finger widths 共300 to 1000 ␮m兲 on
mc-Si and CZ-Si material. We did not find any published
measurements that show a dependence on the contact area
for the contact resistivity but on the doping and
temperature.11,16 Due to that, our expectation was to observe
a no dependence of the contact resistivity for the Al fingers
on the contact area. Thus, our measurements are in contra-
diction to the expected results.
To gain an understanding of these phenomena, part of
the extended SEM analysis performed in cross-sectional mi-
crographs is shown in Fig. 3. During the alloying process of
FIG. 2. 共Color online兲 Total contact resistance R not increasing for broader
openings 共y-axis at the right兲, and contact resistivity ␳c关m⍀ cm2兴 of a
700 ␮m Al finger width, d2, alloyed on four different dielectric barrier
opening widths, d1. The error bars represent the variation in ␳c for different
firing conditions 共y-axis at the left兲.
 124516-3 Urrejola et al.
a Figure 2 shows an increase in the contact resistivity of
20µm
b tion. By increasing the ratio of the printed Al finger width to
40µm
c the alloy presents an inhomogeneous geometry formed by
50µm
d After etching off the Al matrix and Al–Si alloy of Fig.
d1a=50µm d1c=150µm d1b=50µm
FIG. 3. 共Color online兲 Cross-sectional SEM micrographs. The BSF 共up to
10 ␮m deep兲 is marked and formed few micrometers underneath the dielec-
tric barrier. 共a兲, 共b兲, and 共c兲 show a 700 ␮m Al finger width printed on
80 ␮m, 170 ␮m, and 250 ␮m dielectric barrier openings, respectively. 共d兲
view of 共c兲 after complete removal of the Al–Si alloy and Al matrix, using
hydrofluoric acid 共HF兲 and hydrochloric acid 共HCl兲.
Al on Si 共see the Al–Si simple eutectic system, presented by
Ref. 14兲, the solid Al particles change to liquid state above
the eutectic temperature, starting to alloy locally on the Si
surface 共showed by Ref. 17 and by our pre-experiments兲.
The reduction in the dielectric barrier opening width for
thick printed Al fingers causes a higher flow of Al material in
to the Si wafer, as shown in Fig. 3共a兲. Since the Al-paste used
does not fire through the dielectric barrier, the offered mate-
rial overlap of Al alongside the dielectric opening is strongly
attracted into the Si substrate 共the same was observed by Ref.
10兲. Consequently, the liquid Al penetrates in to the open-
ings, alloying deeply with the Si substrate. This explains
why, after the cooling down of the material, a strong Al–Si
alloy formation is found in the bulk and below the contacts,
compared to a fully covered Al back-surface for standard
solar cells processing. This strong Al–Si alloy formation is
present below narrow dielectric opening areas for Al finger
widths wider than 500 and 50 ␮m thickness.
Downloaded 17 Dec 2010 to 140.112.24.170. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
J. Appl. Phys. 107, 124516 共2010兲
approximately 8 to 16 m⍀ cm2, after increasing the dielec-
tric barrier opening widths, d1, from 80 ␮m to 170 ␮m,
respectively, with a fill factor loss of about 1% calculated for
a 10% rear side metallized area. As a direct consequence of
this result, the cross-section of the alloyed junction structure
showed differences in the geometry of the alloy, as shown in
Figs. 3共a兲 and 3共b兲, respectively. Since the same screen
printed Al mass, the same Si material and firing conditions
were used for this experiment, the reduction in the contact
resistivity is due to the geometry of the Al–Si alloy forma-
the dielectric barrier opening width, the alloying of Al into
the Si material is increased 共penetrates deeper兲 and the con-
tact resistivity is reduced.
For a narrow dielectric opening, a homogeneous Al–Si
alloy and BSF are formed deeply in the barrier opening. The
BSF layer is found 5 to 8 ␮m deep below the eutectic form
and extend underneath the dielectric layer. For a wider di-
electric opening, with the same firing and Al finger geometry,
two strong alloy formations at the edges and a planar surface
in between. By further increasing the dielectric barrier open-
ing width the Al–Si alloy starts to separate into two identical
forms at the open edges, because of the high offered material
overlap of Al-paste alongside the contact openings. This is
clearly shown in Fig. 3共c兲, for a dielectric barrier opening of
250 ␮m.
3共c兲, the shape of the alloy formation in the Si substrate is
found, as demonstrated in Fig. 3共d兲. Two strong Al–Si alloy
formations are deep formed at the edges of the dielectric
barrier opening, and depend on the offered material overlap
of Al-paste alongside the dielectric opening. The width of
these two Al–Si alloy formations remains constant 共d1a
= d1b ⯝ 50 ␮m兲 and does not change for wider dielectric
openings. Between these two formations a planar surface ap-
pears and its width varies proportional with the dielectric
opening width 共d1c兲. This shallow alloyed area is normally
found at the rear of a standard solar cell process 共10 ␮m
deep兲, after the alloying of a fully covered Al surface. As
presented by the arrows in Fig. 3共d兲, the Al–Si alloy appears
after the cooling down of the Al–Si in liquid phase, which
were strongly attracted from each side of the barrier opening
into the Si-bulk material. The thickness of the Al finger mass
共50 ␮m for Al fingers wider than 500 ␮m兲, overlapped on
the left and on the right of the dielectric opening, is respon-
sible for the width 共d1a and d1b兲 of the homogeneous Al–Si
alloy formation. In other words, if the dielectric barrier open-
ing 共d1兲 formed by etching paste is wider than the optimum
need for a lower contact resistivity 共80 to 100 ␮m兲, two
Al–Si alloys appears at the edges 共d1a + d1b ⯝ 100 ␮m兲 of
the dielectric opening, separated by the shallow alloyed sur-
face 共d1c兲 in between. Comparing this analysis with the con-
tact resistance results, the planar surface is not needed in the
development of solar cells because it contributes to a high
contact resistivity. If this variable planar surface is removed
from each opening presented in Fig. 2, the contact resistivity
of the screen printed Al fingers on p-Si areas should be con-
 124516-4 Urrejola et al.
FIG. 4. 共Color online兲 共a兲 Cross-sectional SEM micrographs after HF, HCl
etching of the Al matrix, and Al–Si alloy for a sample printed without
alignment. 共b兲 Schematic cross-section of the experiments done for this
article, not in scale 共d2 Ⰷ d1兲. Top: Al–Si alloy homogeneous formed for
narrow dielectric barrier openings; middle: two alloys formed at the opening
edges for wider contact areas and the same Al mass; and bottom: the Al–Si
alloy depends on the ratio: Al finger width to dielectric barrier opening
width.
stant. The contact resistivity should be constant for the same
Al mass alloyed on narrower contact areas than the presented
in this work.
Additional experiments were performed, in order to
demonstrate that the Al–Si alloy formation depends on the
ratio of printed Al finger width to the dielectric barrier open-
ing width. A thick Al finger width d2 was screen printed on a
narrow dielectric opening width d1, without applying align-
ment for the screen printing process, as shown in Fig. 4共a兲.
More Al-paste amount is present overlapped the right side of
the opening, compared to the left. A stronger Al–Si alloy
formation is found at the edge on the right side, where more
Al mass has penetrated during the firing process. The forma-
tion of the Al–Si alloy is then improved by the ratio of
printed Al finger width to dielectric barrier opening width.
Figure 4共b兲, summarizes the experiments done in this
work. In the top, the optimal structure for PERC cells on
p-type Si solar cells is presented 共50 to 80 ␮m dielectric
opening width, 700 ␮m Al finger width兲. The higher the
ratio d2/d1 共Al finger width to dielectric barrier opening
width兲, the deeper the Al–Si alloy formation and lower the
contact resistivity. In the middle, wider openings areas leads
to a planar surface between two Al–Si alloy formations, in-
fluencing on a high contact resistivity. In the bottom: the
Al–Si alloy formation depends strong on the Al mass amount
overlapped on the dielectric barrier.
Summarizing, the following influences on the contact
resistivity have been reported: first, by increasing the ratio of
the printed Al finger width to the dielectric barrier opening
width, the alloying of Al into the Si material is increased.
The contact resistivity is reduced by increasing this ratio.
Downloaded 17 Dec 2010 to 140.112.24.170. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions
J. Appl. Phys. 107, 124516 共2010兲
Second, identical Al–Si alloy formations with equal width
appear at each of the two edges of the dielectric barrier open-
ing for wider opening widths than 100 ␮m for Al fingers
wider than 500 ␮m, where the thickness is about 50 ␮m. If
the opening width is increased further, a planar surface is
formed between these two Al–Si alloy formations 共as in stan-
dard solar cells with fully covered Al rear surface兲, which
increases the contact resistivity.
IV. CONCLUSION
We have shown, that in a PERC structure with screen
printed aluminum fingers on the back, the contact resistivity
depends on the dielectric opening areas, where the Al–Si
alloy is formed. In contrary to our predictions the most shal-
low dielectric barrier opening results in the lowest contact
resistivity of 8 m⍀ cm2. At the solar cell level a reduction in
the contact area for screen printed Al fingers lead to a reduc-
tion in the fill factor losses. At the same time, narrow Al–Si
alloy formations minimized the impact of broader opening
on the optical properties of the rear side, increasing the di-
electric passivated area below the contacts, and reducing the
short-circuit current and open-circuit voltage losses.
To obtain a low contact resistivity we conclude that a
very narrow contact area is required for the design of the
back contacts of the PERC cell. As a consequence, less sur-
face is metallized and the area with high recombination un-
der the metal contacts is minimized. The analysis presented
in this work has application in Al–Si alloying processes and
advanced solar cells concepts, like PERC and back-contact
solar cells, where the minimization of the resistance losses
and the improvement of the back-side 共contacts and passiva-
tion兲 are a solar cell design consideration.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors gratefully acknowledge the financial support
by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research
under Contract No. 03SSF0335I and Merck for the kind sup-
ply of the etching paste.
1
A. W. Blakers, A. Wang, A. M. Milne, J. Zhao, and M. A. Green, Appl.
Phys. Lett. 55, 1363 共1989兲.
2
S. W. Glunz, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 90, 3276 共2006兲.
3
G. Agostinelli, P. Choulat, and G. Beaucarne, Proceedings of the fourth
IEEE WCPEC, Waikoloa, USA, 2006 共unpublished兲, p. 2.
4
P. Choulat, G. Agostinelli, F. Duerinckx, and G. Beaucarne, Proceedings
of the 22nd EUPVSEC, Milan, Italy, 2007 共unpublished兲, p. 1011.
5
6
S. H. Lee, Sol. Energy 83, 1285 共2009兲.
U. Zastrow, L. Houben, D. Meertens, A. Grohe, T. Brammer, and E.
Schneiderlochner, Appl. Surf. Sci. 252, 7082 共2006兲.
7
E. E. Bende, I. Cesar, I. Romijn, and A. W. Weeber, Proceedings of the
33rd IEEE PVSC, San Diego, USA, 2008 共unpublished兲, p. 6.
8
I. Cesar, E. Bende, G. Galbiati, L. Janßen, A. A. Mewe, P. Manshanden,
A. W. Weeber, and J. H. Bultman, Proceedings of the 24th EUPVSEC,
Hamburg, 2009 共unpublished兲, p. 21.
9
R. Bock, J. Schmidt, R. Brendel, H. Schuhmann, and M. Seibt, J. Appl.
Phys. 104, 043701 共2008兲.
10
A. Uruena, J. John, G. Beaucarne, P. Choulat, P. Eybe, and G. Agostinelli,
Proceedings of the 24th EUPVSEC, Hamburg, Germany, 2009 共unpub-
lished兲, p. 1483.
11
D. K. Schroder and D. L. Meier, IEEE Trans. Electron Devices 31, 637
共1984兲.
 124516-5 Urrejola et al. J. Appl. Phys. 107, 124516 共2010兲

12
G. Windred, J. Franklin Inst. 231, 547 共1941兲. 15
H. H. Berger, Solid-State Electron. 15, 145 共1972兲.
13 16
M. Warmuzek, Aluminum-Silicon Casting Alloys: Atlas of Microfracto- C. Y. Chang and Y. K. Fang, Solid-State Electron. 14, 541 共1971兲.
graphs 共ASM International, Materials Park, OH, 2004兲, pp. 1–2. 17
F. Huster, Proceedings of the 20th EUPVSEC, Barcelona, Spain, 2005
14
J. L. Murray and A. J. McAlister, J. Phase Equilib. 5, 74 共1984兲. 共unpublished兲, p. 1466.

Downloaded 17 Dec 2010 to 140.112.24.170. Redistribution subject to AIP license or copyright; see http://jap.aip.org/about/rights_and_permissions