X-ray fluorescence measurements of thin film chalcopyrite solar cells

Klenk, M.; Schenker, O.; Probst, Uwe; Bücher, E.

doi:10.1016/s0927-0248(99)00014-8

Cited by 36 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Using the CIGS composition data of ICP‐AES, reproducible semi‐quantified data on the CIGS composition were quickly obtained by using XRF and EPMA. In addition, XRF was also found to be a suitable and reliable method for compositional determination of the atomic percent of the CIGS samples, because XRF provides large penetration depth of x‐rays and gives an average value of the bulk sample . Atomic force microscopy (AFM) images were used to investigate the influence of the roughness on the depth profile of SIMS.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Characterization of Cu(InGa)Se₂ (CIGS) thin films in solar cell devices

Lim

Lee

Won

et al. 2012

Surface & Interface Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cu(InGa)Se 2 (CIGS) thin-film solar cells are expected to be the next generation of solar cells because of their economical manufacturing cost and high yield process. In order to develop an efficient thin-film CIGS structure, however, a quantitative composition analysis of major elements is necessary. Quantitative analysis of CIGS was carried out by means of inductively coupled plasma-atomic emission spectrometry (ICP-AES), x-ray fluorescence, a wavelength-dispersed electron probe microanalysis (EPMA), and dynamic SIMS. The ratio of each element that comprises CIGS was determined by an ICP-AES analysis, which was performed by dissolving the entire CIGS sample. A reproducible and rapid semi-quantified analysis of CIGS can be conducted by using x-ray fluorescence and electron probe microanalysis and comparing the results to the certified composition of ICP-AES. Quantitative analysis data for CIGS were also obtained from SIMS depth profiling, and the relative sensitivity factor value was calculated by using the mole fraction of ICP-AES as a reference value for the composition. The atomic force microscopy results indicate that the reproducibility of the SIMS analysis was related to the surface roughness of the CIGS sample.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 78%

Characterization of Cu(InGa)Se₂ (CIGS) thin films in solar cell devices

Lim

Lee

Won

et al. 2012

Surface & Interface Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This is fully justified because the penetration ranges in matter of radiation from the rhodium anode and of the escape depth of the excited Zn K˛are of the order of micrometres, 17,18 whereas the thickness of the studied ZnO aggregates is in the nanometre range. On the other hand, absolute XRF quantification is done by relying on the standard apparatus calibration 19 to determine the AOS XRF of ZnO on the surface.…”

Section: X-ray Fluorescence Spectrometry Quantificationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Determination of amount of substance for nanometre‐thin deposits: consistency between XPS, RBS and XRF quantification

Martín-Concepción

Yubero

Espinós

et al. 2003

Surface & Interface Analysis

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Quantification on the nanometre scale is a key task in quality control and for the development of new materials in nanotechnology. In this paper we have studied the consistency in the determination of the amount of substance found by XPS peak shape analysis, Rutherford backscattering spectroscopy (RBS) and x-ray fluorescence spectrometry (XRF). To this end, ZnO was deposited by plasma-enhanced chemical vapour deposition on the three substrates. Four different sets of samples were produced, with the amount of ZnO deposited in the range 1-10 nm. From XPS analysis it is found that ZnO grows in the form of islands on all three substrates. For each system, the analysis was done independently with two XPS peaks from the overlayer with widely different kinetic energy and one XPS peak from the substrate. The growth mechanism found from analysis of each of the three peaks was consistent and the total amount of determined ZnO material was identical to within 15%. The root-mean-square deviation from the XPS quantification of the relative AOS was 20% for XRF and 16% for RBS. Because the absolute amount of substance determined from analysis of the three XPS peaks for each sample was consistent, it is concluded that the energy dependence of the applied inelastic mean free paths (taken here from the empirical TPP-2M formula) is correct. It was found that the absolute amounts of substance determined by RBS and XRF are consistently factors of 2.1 and 1.5 lower than the that determined by XPS peak shape analysis. It is suggested that the main reason for this large discrepancy is inaccuracy in the applied 'effective' inelastic electron mean free path.

show abstract

“…Thus, a precise measurement of elemental concentrations is essential in the development and production of CIGS solar cells. For the elemental analysis of CIGS layer, X-ray uorescence (XRF) had been investigated 3,4 and commercialized successfully. However, the XRF measurement generally provides an average concentration over the depth of a thin lm.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%