Appl. Phys. A 69, 119–129 (1999) / Digital Object Identifier (DOI) 10.

1007/s003399900062
Applied Physics A
Materials
Science & Processing
 Springer-Verlag 1999

III-V compounds for solar cell applications

A.W. Bett1 , F. Dimroth2 , G. Stollwerck2 , O.V. Sulima3
1 Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems ISE, Oltmannsstr. 5, D-79100 Freiburg, Germany
(Fax: +49-761/458-8250, E-mail: andreas.bett@ise.fhg.de)
2 Freiburg Materials Research Centre, Stephan-Meier-Str. 21, D-79104 Freiburg, Germany
3 on leave from Ioffe Institute, Polytechnicheskaya 26, 194021 St. Petersburg, Russia

Received: 1 March 1999/Accepted: 28 March 1999/Published online: 24 June 1999

Abstract. Research activities in the field of III-V solar cells shown efficiencies beyond 30% and are expected to reach the
are reviewed. III-V compound semiconductors are used for 40% barrier in the future.
space solar cells, concentrator solar cells, and in thermopho- This paper reports on the progress and current research
tovoltaic generators. The epitaxial growth of ternary and areas of III-V materials for photovoltaics. It is divided into
quaternary material by MOVPE and LPE allows us to re- three sections. Section 1 refers to important research aims,
alize various band gaps. Multi-junction solar cells with dif- applications and markets for III-V solar cells. Section 2 de-
ferent band gaps are necessary to obtain efficiencies larger scribes the present status of the metalorganic vapor phase
than 30%. Recent results of the III-V solar cell research at epitaxy (MOVPE) growth of III-V solar cells at Fraunhofer
the Fraunhofer ISE are presented. A mechanically stacked ISE. Results of GaAs and GaInP solar cells are presented.
GaAs/GaSb tandem concentrator solar cell achieved an ef- The third section deals with the technology of high-efficiency
ficiency of 31.1% under 100 × AM1.5d. An efficiency of mechanically stacked tandem concentrator solar cells de-
23% for a two-terminal concentrator module (486 cm2 ) with veloped at Fraunhofer ISE. Low-cost technologies were used
Fresnel lenses has been measured under realistic outdoor to produce the p-n structures. Two systems are of current in-
conditions. terest: GaAs/GaSb and Al0.26 Ga0.74 As/Si. The top cells are
produced by liquid phase epitaxy (LPE) processes. The p-n
PACS: 71.55.Eq; 81.05.Ea; 85.30.De junction of the GaSb cell is fabricated by a Zn vapor phase
diffusion technique. The efficiency of the GaAs/GaSb tan-
dem cell is 31.1%, which is the highest value for cells pro-
III-V compounds are the basic materials for modern opto- duced without metalorganic vapor phase epitaxy (MOVPE)
electronic devices. Apart from this, they often show superior technology. Special emphasis is given to the growth technolo-
properties compared to Si in the field of microelectronics, for gies and the demands for concentrator application.
example high-speed transistors.
In the field of solar cells, GaAs has higher theoretical and
practical efficiencies than Si. According to well-accepted effi-
ciency tables, GaAs has already shown an efficiency of 25.1%
compared to 24.0% in the case of Si [1]. In addition, the
radiation hardness of III-V solar cells is better. As a conse-
quence, solar cells based on III-V compound semiconductors
are becoming increasingly dominant for space applications.
On the terrestrial solar cell market the less expensive silicon
is still the most widely used material, but the application of
high-concentration systems opens new perspectives for III-V
materials in this field as well. The required area of semicon-
ductor material in these systems can be reduced by up to three
orders of magnitude compared to conventional flat modules,
so that high-efficiency III-V solar cells become cost-efficient.
In addition, the broad spectrum of ternary and quater-
nary III-V compounds, that can be grown lattice-matched on
GaAs or Ge substrates (see Fig. 1), offers a wide range of
possibilities for advanced device structures such as mono-
lithic multi-junction cells. These novel concepts have already Fig. 1. Band gap versus lattice constant for different III-V materials
120
1 Research activities in III-V compound materials
1.1 GaAs-based space cells
The highest reported efficiency for a single-junction GaAs
solar cell is 25.7% (AM1.5g, 0.25 cm2 ) [2]. High efficiency
is one reason why markets such as solar cells for satellites
show an ongoing increase in the use of GaAs. The broad-
ening of the commercial satellite market is caused by new
demands for telecommunication. According to estimations,
50%–70% of the satellites under construction are equipped
with III-V solar cells [3]. In the case of space solar cells the
high radiation resistance is another major advantage of III-
V materials. In this context, two definitions of efficiencies
are commonly used in the space community. The beginning-
of-life (BOL) efficiency is measured directly after cell pro-
duction. The end-of-life (EOL) efficiency is defined as the
efficiency after the end of the satellite mission in space (5
to 15 years [4]). The BOL efficiency is lowered in space
due to the exposure to high-energy proton and electron flu-
ences. The magnitude of the fluences depends on the alti-
tude and inclination of the satellites. Irradiation experiments
using 1 MeV electrons and fluences between 3 × 1014 e/cm2
and 1 × 1015 e/cm2 show an efficiency decrease to 75%–65%
for Si and 85%–76% for GaAs/Ge [5]. A high EOL effi-
ciency of space cells is important for diminishing the overall
system cost and weight of satellites. The weight is an issue
because the launch cost of satellites in the low-earth orbit
(up to 2000 km) is 11 000 $/kg, and up to 66 000 $/kg in the
geosynchronous earth orbit [4].
The GaAs space solar cells are grown by metalorganic va-
por phase epitaxy (MOVPE) on Ge substrates. Ge is nearly
lattice-matched to GaAs (see Fig. 1). Therefore, an epitax-
ial growth of GaAs with sufficient quality is possible. Ge
substrates are less expensive compared to GaAs and exhibit
more mechanical strength. The substrate can be thinned to
80 µm saving weight for the main load of the satellites.
According to estimations of a Ge substrate supplier, the
world-wide consumption of Ge substrates for solar cells is
more than 6000 m2 [6]. The next generation of satellites will
be equipped with GaInP/GaAs/Ge dual- and triple-junction
cells [7, 8]. The first satellite equipped with such cells was
launched in 1997 [9]. Details of multi-junction cells are given
below in Secs. 1.4 and 3.
Another interesting approach to increase both efficiency
and radiation resistance is the use of space concentrator cells.
An additional advantage of the concentrator concept is the re-
duction of expensive semiconductor area by a factor similar
to the concentration ratio. Concentrator space solar cells and
modules are under development [10, 11].
1.2 GaAs on Si substrate
The weight and cost issue is the driving force for the research
of GaAs growth on Si substrates. Especially in the late 80s
a lot of research work was performed in this field [12–14].
The main problems arising from the heteroepitaxial growth
are:
– antiphase domains due to a polar on a non-polar material
growth,
– high dislocation densities due to a large lattice-mismatch
of 4%,
– wafer bowing and cracks due to thermal mismatch.
There was a permanent progress in improving the GaAs ma-
terial quality by introducing special growth techniques, such
as thermocyclic growth, thermocyclic annealing [15, 16] or
strained superlattices [17, 18]. Solar cells made of MOVPE-
grown GaAs on Si substrates achieved an efficiency of 18.3%
(AM0) [19]. Recently monolithic tandem cells of AlGaAs on
active Si could achieve efficiencies of 21.2% (AM0) on active
area [20].
1.3 InP-based space cells
InP is another III-V material under investigation for space
applications. InP has an even higher radiation hardness com-
pared to GaAs [5], however it is more expensive. Due to
the higher cost, InP solar cells play a negligible role in the
present space market and are not commercially available.
There might be a market for InP solar cells in the future
because the next generation of communication satellites is
expected to be launched in the medium earth orbit (2000 to
10 000 km height) [21]. These orbits are located in the midst
of the Van Allen radiation belts characterized by the highest
radiation intensities.
The highest reported InP space solar cell efficiency is
19.9% (AM0) [4]. Worldwide about a dozen research groups
are working on the development of InP solar cells. The main
topics of investigation are heteroepitaxy, radiation stability
testing, hydrogen passivation, and optimization of the emitter
structure. The comparably high price of InP bulk material in-
hibits a homoepitaxial approach. Therefore, some heteroepi-
taxial thin-film approaches are pursued to combine low-cost
substrates with the high radiation hardness of InP. Three dif-
ferent substrates are under investigation: GaAs, Ge, and Si.
The lattice-mismatch between InP and Si is 8% and 4% in
respect to GaAs or Ge (see Fig. 1). The most interesting con-
cept is InP on Si due to the low substrate costs. With the
help of GaAs or graded Inx Ga1−x As intermediate layers the
number of dislocations originating from the lattice-mismatch
can be greatly reduced. The trap concentration due to lattice-
mismatch can also be reduced from about 1014 cm−3 to about
1012 cm−3 with a hydrogen treatment [22]. The highly dislo-
cated material is somewhat predamaged, so that the radiation
damage is rather small. The highest efficiency of a InP/Si so-
lar cell is 13.0% (AM0) [23].
A drawback of InP is that no lattice-matched window
layer for surface passivation is available. Therefore, the emit-
ter structure is of high significance. Several structures are
investigated with very thin p+ emitters (30 nm) or p+ p emit-
ters with a total thickness of 250 nm [24], or n+ emitters
(25 nm) [25].
1.4 Multi-junction cells
So far, only single-junction cells were discussed. In order
to enhance solar cell efficiencies to values higher than 26%,
new concepts have to be considered. The III-V semiconduc-
tors crystallizing in the zincblende structure have an import-
ant impact for increasing solar cell efficiencies beyond 30%:
 121

the band gap of the material can be designed by growing
ternary and quaternary alloys lattice-matched to a substrate
(see Fig. 1).
This allows us to develop solar cells having multiple p-n
junctions in different semiconductor materials. In this case
the solar spectrum can be used more efficiently. The opti-
mized band gaps for triple-junction or quattro-junction solar
cells have been calculated theoretically for different spec-
tra [26, 27]. For example, the efficiency limit calculated by
detailed balance theory is 53.6% for a AM1.5d spectrum and
a four-junction device. The necessary materials should have
band gaps of 0.71 eV, 1.13 eV, 1.55 eV, and 2.13 eV [26]. The
calculations show that a band gap of 1.0–1.1 eV is essential
for tandem- as well as for triple- and quattro-junction solar
cells. From Fig. 1 one can see that there is no commonly used
material available which is lattice-matched to Ge or GaAs.
However, recently it was shown that the quaternary material
GaInAsN having a band gap energy in the range of 1.0 eV can
be grown lattice-matched to a GaAs substrate [28, 29]. The
quality of this promising material is still not sufficient and has
to be improved for solar cell applications.
Multiple-junction cells can be realized in two prin-
cipal ways: mechanically stacked or monolithically inte-
grated. The highest reported efficiency of a monolithical
one-sun GaInP/GaAs tandem cell is 30.3% (AM1.5g) [30]
and 26.9% (AM0) [31]. A two-terminal InP/InGaAs tan-
dem cell has achieved an efficiency of 22.2% (AM0) [32].
Monolithical GaInP/GaAs/Ge triple cells achieved 25.8%
(AM0) [8]. Another triple cell consisting of a monolithical
tandem GaInP/GaAs cell stacked on a InGaAs cell grown
on InP achieved an efficiency in the range of 33%–34%
(AM1.5g) [33]. The given efficiencies can only be some ex-
amples of the broad spectrum of the multi-junction approach.
the concentrator module technology is so far somewhat im-
mature. Problems related to accurate tracking [39], soil-
ing [40], cheap and enhanced optics [41, 42], and spectrum
adapted multi-junction solar cells [43–45] are subjects of cur-
rent research. Prototype concentrator systems with medium
level concentration (up to 250 suns) and 20 kWp using Si
solar cells [35] are already available. BP Solar is currently
constructing a concentrator solar power plant with 480 kWp
on the Spanish island of Tenerife. A prototype module for this
plant was developed within the framework of the European
project EUCLIDES [46]. Parabolic mirrors as concentrating
optics with one-axis tracking were used. This demonstrates
that concentrator technology is of large interest and may be-
come an important technology for the future solar power
market.
In this respect, III-V multi-junction solar cells as de-
scribed in Sect. 1.4 are attractive for high concentration lev-
els (> 500 suns). Figure 2 shows our modeling results of
efficiency limits versus band gap of the top and bottom
cell. The calculations were performed assuming a 500 sun
concentration and the AM1.5d spectrum. The cell tempera-
ture is 315 K. Only radiative recombination is considered.
A maximum efficiency of > 40% is expected. Practical effi-
ciency of 35% should be achievable in the very near future.
The highest reported efficiency for monolithic GaInP/GaAs
is 30.2% (AM1.5d, 115–260 suns) [47]. InP/GaInAs three-
terminal concentrator cells achieved an efficiency of 31.8%

1.5 Terrestrial concentrator solar cells

It is well accepted that higher efficiencies are helpful to re-

duce the overall system costs. Nevertheless, in spite of the
possibility to obtain ultrahigh efficiencies with multi-junction
III-V solar cells their costs are still too high compared to Si
solar cells. Therefore, one-sun terrestrial application of high-
efficiency multi-junction devices is obviously not economi-
cal. Optical concentration of sunlight onto small solar cells
can overcome this economic obstacle. In addition, GaAs and
some other III-V materials have a better thermal stability of
the efficiency: GaAs − 0.02%/K [34], Si − 0.07%/K [35].
GaAs or multi-junction III-V concentrator solar cells oper-
ating at elevated temperature, which is unavoidable at high
concentration ratios, surpass greatly the performance of Si
cells.
It was calculated that technologically reasonable concen-
tration ratios of 500 to1000 for a single-junction GaAs will
lead to energy costs in the range of 0.1 ECU/kWh for sites
such as Madrid [36]. This value is believed to be a margin for
a significant penetration of photovoltaics into the power plant
market.
GaAs concentrator cells working up to 1500 suns with ef-
ficiencies close to 25% have been fabricated recently [37].
A demonstration concentrator module with GaAs solar cells Fig. 2. Calculated AM1.5d efficiencies for 500× concentrator tandem cells
for 942 suns fabricated some years ago achieved an efficiency versus band gap of the top and bottom cell. a Mechanical stacked. b Mono-
of 22.3% (outdoor 791 W/m2 direct, 11 ◦ C) [38]. However, lithically integrated
122
(AM1.5d, 50 suns) [48]. Fraas et al. reported an efficiency
of > 35% (AM1.5d, 100 suns) for a GaAs/GaSb mechanic-
ally stacked tandem [49]. This efficiency was corrected due
to Sandia recalibration some years later to 32.6% (AM1.5d,
100 suns) [1].
In Sect. 2 of this paper we will report on the status of con-
centrator tandem solar cell research at Fraunhofer ISE. We
are investigating the mechanically stacked and monolithically
integrated approach.
1.6 Thermophotovoltaic cells – low band gap cells
Thermophotovoltaics (TPV) is another application for III-V
photovoltaic cells. Figure 3 shows a scheme of the TPV ap-
proach. In principal, solar photovoltaic is a special case of
the more general TPV. The sun is roughly a 6000 K black-
body radiator at 1.5 × 108 km away from the receiver. Due to
the large distance, the intensity of the sunlight is diluted lead-
ing to the terrestrial solar constant of 1000 W/m2 . In TPV
one uses an artificial radiator very close (centimeters) to the
receiver. This leads to a high illumination intensity in the
range of several tens of kW/m2 . Consequently, the photo-
voltaic cell has to deal with a high power density similar to
a concentrator solar cell. Greybody radiators with tempera-
tures below 2000 K or selective radiators (rare earth oxides
such as erbia, ytterbia) are used in TPV systems. The peak
emissions of these greybodies are in the infrared. That is
why low band gap materials such as GaSb (0.7 eV) and the
lattice-matched quaternaries of InGaAsSb (0.5 eV − 0.7 eV)
as well as InGaAs/InP (0.55 eV − 0.7 eV) are of interest. As
an advantage, the band gap of the cell can be adapted to the
emisson of the used artificial radiator. A good overview of the
TPV activities and the related research can be found in the
proceedings of the NREL TPV conferences [50–53].
1.7 Multi-quantum-well cells
III-V multi-quantum-well (MQW) solar cells have been
under development for several years. The MQW cell was
suggested [54] in order to enhance the efficiency of single-
junction solar cells. The basic idea is to use MQWs be-
tween the p- and the n-doped layer in order to extend the
absorption to longer wavelengths and conserve the high open-
circuit voltage of the bulk material. There is still a discussion
concerning the possibility of such an enhancement. Araújo
et al. calculated by detailed balance theory that no effi-
ciency enhancement can be expected [55, 56], whereas other
Fig. 3. Scheme of two different TPV approaches. a Selective emitter as
radiator in combination with adapted solar cells. b Greybody radiator in
combination with filter and low-band-gap cells
groups [57] use different theoretical models to prove this ef-
fect. Apart from the expected efficiency enhancement, the
current matching in monolithical multi-junction solar cells
can be achieved by the application of MQWs [58]. The
change of the absorption behavior due to the introduction of
the pseudomorphically strained thin layers into the bulk ma-
terial gives a new degree of freedom for the design of such
cells.
2 MOVPE growth of III-V solar cells at Fraunhofer ISE
2.1 Experimental
Single-junction III-V solar cell structures are grown by low-
pressure MOVPE. An Aixtron 2600G3 planetory reactor with
a capacity of five times four-inch wafers is used. Arsine,
phosphine, trimethylgallium, trimethylindium in solution,
and trimethylaluminum are used as sources for the V- and
III-components, respectively. Palladium-purified hydrogen is
used as the carrier gas and dimethylzinc and silane (2% in hy-
drogen) are the dopant sources. Point-of-use purifiers are used
for the hydride gases. The total hydrogen flux was 12 l/min,
the reactor pressure 100 mbar, and the growth temperature
700 ◦ C. The growth rate was about 5 µm/h. Epi-ready (100)
GaAs wafers with 6◦ and 2◦ off orientation in [011] were
used.
A typical epitaxially grown p-on-n GaAs solar cell struc-
ture is shown in Fig. 4. First, a GaAs buffer layer is grown
on the n-doped substrate. The next layer is the back surface
field of the solar cell. It can be a highly doped n++ layer or
a Bragg reflector designed for a maximum reflectivity near
the band edge of GaAs. Next, the n-doped base layer and
the p-doped emitter are grown. Finally, a passivation win-
dow layer of a high-band-gap material such as Ga0.51 In0.49 P,
Al0.8 Ga0.2 As or (Al0.7 Ga0.3 )0.51 In0.49 P followed by a highly
doped GaAs cap layer are deposited.
The nip-Ga0.51 In0.49 P (in the further text: GaInP) solar cell
structure was grown lattice-matched (∆a/a < 150 ppm) on
a p-doped GaAs substrate (Fig. 5). The back surface field is
a highly doped GaInP layer. The base is slightly p-doped. We
introduced a nominally undoped layer (intrinsic layer). The
n-doped emitter is very thin. Al0.51 In0.49 P was used as the
window layer material. A highly n-doped GaAs cap layer is
applied to obtain a good electrical contact.

ON (B"T

DBQ

Q

Y
DN

ON "M(B"T
PS
(B*O1
PS
"M*O1
Q

Y
DN

ON (B"T

FNJUUFS

Q

Y
DN

ŒN (B"T

CBTF

O

Y
DN

ON #4'
PS
#SBHHSFGM
Q

Y
DN

ON (B"T
CVGGFS

O

Y
DN

ŒN (B"T
TVCTUSBUF
O
Y
DN
Fig. 4. Typical GaAs solar cell structure grown by MOVPE technology
 123


ON (B"T

DBQ

O

Y
DN

ON "M*O1
Q

Y
DN

ON (B*O1

FNJUUFS
O

Y
DN

ON (B*O1

VOEPQFE

ON (B*O1

CBTF

Q

Y
DN

ON (B*O1

#4'
Q

Y
DN
(B"T
CVGGFS

Q

Y
DN

ON

ŒN (B"T
TVCTUSBUF
Q
Y
DN
Fig. 5. Typical GaInP solar cell structure grown on GaAs substrate by
MOVPE technology
GaAs and GaInP structures were processed to solar cells.
Photolithography was used to define the front grid structure of
the solar cells. TiPdAg (5 nm/10 nm/100 nm) contacts were
evaporated sequentially and annealed at 380 ◦ C for 2 min.
The rear contact is made of AuGe (12% Ge). The contacts
are electroplated with Au. The GaAs cap layer is removed
on the active cell area by means of selective etching (citric
acid + H2 O(1 : 1wt)/H2 O2 = 3 : 1). An optimized double-
layer antireflection coating (ARC) of MgF2 /TiO2 is used to
minimize the reflection losses.
2.2 Results and discussion of MOVPE-grown structures
Various GaAs solar cell structures with different
Al0.85 Ga0.15 As and GaInP window layer thicknesses were
investigated for cells with p-n and n-p polarity. Each polar-
ity has its specific advantages and disadvantages. Figure 6
shows the measured external quantum efficiencies (EQE) of
p-n GaAs solar cells with different window layers. The de-
pendence on the Al0.85 Ga0.15 As thickness is clearly visible
in the short-wavelength part of the spectrum. The thickness
of the thin window layer influences the reflectivity of the
cell. Therefore, the thickness of the optimized ARCs must be
slightly changed. However, the cells shown in Fig. 6 have the
same ARC leading to the differences in the EQEs.
The exchange of Al0.85 Ga0.15 As to GaInP as the window
material is clearly visible in the EQE (Fig. 6). The thick-
ness of the GaInP layer was 30 nm. The higher absorption
in the direct GaInP material lowers the EQE in the range
from 450 nm to 650 nm. However, the efficiency world record
of 25.7% AM1.5g for a GaAs solar cell (see Table 1) was
achieved with a GaInP window layer for a 0.25-cm2 n-p
cell [2]. In comparison, 25.1% was achieved on a 4-cm2 de-
vice using an Al0.85 Ga0.15 As window layer [1].
The EQE of the cells shown in Fig. 6 has a high value of
> 94% in the spectral range from 600 nm to 900 nm. Con-
sidering the losses due to grid shadowing (roughly 4%) and
reflectivity (< 1%), one can conclude that the internal collec-
tion efficiency is close to 100%.
The structure of the back surface field was also varied.
A highly doped layer or a Bragg reflector was used. The
Bragg reflector consists of a five Al0.3 Ga0.7 As/GaAs-stack in
order to enhance the light reflectivity near the band edge of
GaAs. It was found that this Bragg reflector works very effi-
ciently. Therefore, it was possible to design GaAs solar cells
having a solar active layer (emitter and base) thickness of
< 2 µm. Such cells are very useful for space applications be-
cause they are expected to exhibit a higher radiation hardness.
Andreev et al. have shown the benefits of a Bragg reflector
for a 2.5-µm-thin solar cell [59]. Table 1 gives an overview of
obtained efficiencies for different GaAs solar cell structures.
Figure 7 shows the measured EQE curves of a GaInP
solar cell. We have introduced a nominally undoped layer
as suggested by Tsai [60]. The intrinsic layer is slightly n-
doped in the order of ≈ 1 × 1015 cm−3 . This layer between
the n-doped emitter and p-doped base helps to enhance the
collection efficiency of minority carriers due to the extended
electrical field. In addition, the intrinsic layer reduces the in-
fluence of the Zn diffusion from the base into the n-doped
emitter during the growth of the subsequent layers. Figure 7
shows calculations of what part of a AM1.5g spectrum is
absorbed in which layer. It is obvious that a large part of
the incoming light is absorbed in the 500-nm-thick intrinsic
layer. Table 1 summarizes the efficiency values for GaInP so-

Table 1. Efficiencies of GaAs and GaInP solar cells grown by MOVPE tech-
nology at Fraunhofer ISE. The used material of the window layer is given
in brackets. For comparison, the world-record efficiencies are shown

GaAs, 1.4 eV Spectrum Area/ Voc / Isc / FF/ η/

cm2 mV mA/cm2 % %

PN-GaAs (AlGaAs) AM1.5g 1 1036 27.5 85.1 24.2

PN-GaAs (AlGaAs) AM1.5g 8 1038 26.9 83.5 23.4
PIN-GaAs (AlGaAs) AM1.5g 8 1038 27.1 82.9 23.3
PN-GaAs (GaInP) AM1.5g 1 1035 26.7 84.3 23.3
PN-GaAs (AlGaAs) AM0 1 1041 34.0 84.7 21.9
PIN-GaAs (AlGaAs) AM0 8 1042 33.5 81.3 20.7
GaAs (AlGaAs) [1] AM1.5g 4 1022 28.2 87.1 25.1
NP-GaAs (GaInP) [2] AM1.5g 0.25 1039 28.5 86.8 25.7
GaInP, 1.88 eV
NIP-GaInP (AlInP) AM1.5g 1 1324 13.9 79.9 14.7
Fig. 6. External quantum efficiency of GaAs solar cell structures. Two cells PN-GaInP (AlInP) AM1.5g 8 1398 12.5 72.6 12.7
have a Bragg reflector and a Al0.85 Ga0.15 As window layer thickness of NIP-GaInP (AlInP) AM0 1 1331 17.2 80.6 13.5
30 nm and 40 nm. The third cell has an GaInP back surface field and win- NP-GaInP (AlInP) [61] AM1.5g 1 1391 15.1 87.9 18.5
dow layer
124
Fig. 7. Measured external QE (dots) and calculated absorption of the
AM1.5g spectrum (lines) in different layers of the GaInP solar cell
lar cells. The maximum efficiency reported in literature was
18.5% at AM1.5g [61]. The Fraunhofer ISE has achieved
14.7% (AM1.5g) so far. This efficiency is limited by the fill
factor. Further improvement of fill factor and efficiency will
be achieved with different layer structures and a suitable front
grid design.
3 Mechanically stacked tandem concentrator solar cells
3.1 Experimental
3.1.1 Al0.26 Ga0.74 As solar cell. The Al0.26 Ga0.74 As solar cell
structure was produced by a LPE process. A special two-melt
multi-substrate crucible was developed. The temperature ver-
sus time diagram of the process is shown in Fig. 8. At first,
a Ga-based melt with Sn (8.34 at. %), Al (0.29 at. %) and As
(1.37 at. %) is homogenised at 820 ◦ C and saturated at a tem-
perature of 810 ◦ C. The 30–50-µm-thick n-doped base layer
of the solar cell structure is grown by cooling technique. In
order to get a better wetting, the melt is 5 ◦ C supersaturated
before contacting the substrate. After 15 min of an isother-
mal contact a temperature ramp of 0.8 ◦ C/min is initiated.
After removing the first melt at 735 ◦ C, a second Ga-based
with Al (1.0 at. %), Zn (0.62 at. %), As (0.21 at. %) is used to
form the p-n junction and to grow an Al0.8 Ga0.2 As window
layer isothermally at 740 ◦ C. The window layer has a high Al-
content of 80% in order to have a high transmission for the
incident light and to lower the surface recombination velocity.
The GaAs substrate has to be removed under the ac-
tive area of the Al0.26 Ga0.74 As solar cell. Otherwise, a part
of the light for the Si bottom cell is lost due to absorp-
tion in the GaAs substrate. Therefore, a two-step etching
process was developed [62]. In a first etching step 300 µm
of the 350 µm GaAs under the active layer are etched with
H2 SO4 /H2 O2 /H2 O = 2 : 1 : 1 at 60 ◦ C in 15 min. In a sec-
ond step a slower but selective etchant NH3 /H2 O2 (1 : 35) was
used. The etching process is monitored by placing a LED with
an emission wavelength of 770 nm under the sample. This
visible light can penetrate trough Alx Ga1−x As layers with
x > 11%. If the whole solar cell is transparent for the LED
light, the etching process is interrupted.
3.1.2 LPE-EBR GaAs solar cell. Figure 2 shows that
a GaAs/GaSb tandem concentrator cell is one of the most
promising approaches to achieve maximum efficiencies. Both
cells can be fabricated by relatively simple technologies. The
heteroface Al0.8 Ga0.2 As/GaAs top cell structure is grown
using the isothermal etchback regrowth LPE (LPE-EBR)
method. A conventional H2 -purified LPE system was used.
A Ga-based melt contains Al (2.4 at. %) and Zn (0.7 at. %).
The melt is saturated with respect to arsenic at a temperature
of 850 ◦ C. After homogenisation the melt is in contact with
a GaAs substrate for 40 min at 865 ◦ C. Three main processes
take place: first, the melt etches the GaAs substrate back due
to the undersaturation of the melt. Second, Zn diffuses into
the n-doped GaAs substrate material forming the p-n junc-
tion, and third, a thin AlGaAs layer is isothermally grown
due to the difference in the chemical potentials between sub-
strate and melt. More details of this process were published
elsewhere [63, 64]. In order to improve the throughput of this
method, special multi-wafer crucibles were developed [65].
The simple structure of the solar cell is shown in Fig. 9.
It is noteworthy that no back surface field and a relatively
thick emitter of 2 µm is used. An efficiency of 23.3% AM1.5g
and 25.8% 100 × AM1.5d [66] was achieved with this type of
solar cell. In addition, the thick emitter is helpful in the case
of concentrator application. The sheet resistance is reduced
Fig. 8. Temperature–time diagram for the growth
of an Al0.26 Ga0.74 As solar cell structure on
a GaAs substrate
 125

Fig. 9. Scheme of the LPE-EBR heteroface Alx Ga11−x As/GaAs solar cell

Fig. 11. Efficiency versus concentration for LPE-EBR GaAs solar cells
and plays a minor role. The maximum efficiency of 25.8% at in dependence of the contact resistivity. Symbols represent measurements,
100-sun concentration is limited by the contact resistance. lines show modeling results

3.1.3 GaSb solar cell. The pseudo-closed-box method was

have to be developed [69]. The challenge is to find the op-
used to perform a Zn diffusion into a n-doped GaSb substrate.
timum of series resistance and low metal coverage [70]. In
This method is proved to be simple and reliable. The Zn dif-
the case of the LPE-EBR concentrator solar cell the series re-
fusion process has been studied intensively to find out the
sistance is dominated by the contact resistance (see Fig. 11).
optimum process regime [67]. The diffusion process was per-
The contacts are made within the p-doped (≈ 2 × 1018 cm−3 )
formed with the help of a graphite crucible containing pure
Alx Ga1−x As (x ≈ 0.3) layer. In order to reduce the contact
Zn and Sb as vapor sources. The Sb is necessary to suppress
a desorption of Sb from the substrate surface during the pro-
cess. A H2 ambient is used. The diffusion temperature and
time is 480 ◦ C and 1 h, respectively.
The thickness of the diffused p-layer is 0.7 µm and
the surface Zn concentration is 2 × 1020 cm−3 . The diffused
emitter is thinned by means of anodic oxidation [68] to
a thickness of 0.5 µm. Modeling of the GaSb solar cell struc-
ture shown in Fig. 10 demonstrated that the effective surface
recombination velocity is lower than 105 cm/s. No additional
surface passivation layer is necessary in this case.

3.1.4 Technologies for concentrator solar cells. One very im-

portant aspect of a concentrator solar cell is the fact that it
is a high-current-density device. One has to deal with cur-
rent densities of several A/cm2 . Figure 11 shows a typical
dependence of the efficiency versus the concentration for
GaAs-LPE-EBR solar cells. At low concentration the effi-
ciency rises due to the fact that Voc increases ∼ ln(C). At
high concentration levels the efficiency drops because the
resistance losses reduce the fill factor. Therefore, a big is-
sue for concentrator solar cells is to lower the series resis-
tance. One can use more metalization on the front side of
the cell but the higher metal coverage reduces the efficiency.
Special grid designs depending on the applied concentration

Fig. 12. Contact resistivities in dependence of annealing temperature for

different metal alloys on p-doped (2 × 1018 cm−3 ) Alx Ga1−x As/GaAs
(x ≈ 0.3). The open symbols indicate Schottky contact behavior whereas
solid symbols are ohmic contacts. a Contacts using different adhesion ma-
Fig. 10. Scheme of a GaSb photovoltaic cell terials. b Contacts based on Zn−Au
126

resistance different approaches were investigated. A simple
Zn post-diffusion process was developed [71]. This process
leads to a 10 times higher doping concentration at the sur-
face reducing effectively the contact resistance for a given
metal alloy. Moreover, different metal alloys were investi-
gated. Figure 12 shows the specific contact resistivity of dif-
ferent alloys versus the annealing temperature. The annealing
time was always 1 min. The contact resistivity was measured
using the transmission line technique as described in [72].
The open symbols represent contacts showing Schottky be-
havior whereas ohmic contacts are shown by solid symbols.
Ni, Cr, and Ti used as adhesion materials in combination with
Au lead to contact resistivities in the range of 1 × 10−4 Ω cm2
(see Fig. 12a). The AuZn contact exhibits the best perform-
ance concerning the contact resisitivity but the adhesion was
fairly bad. It turns out that CrZnAu exhibits an acceptable
contact resistivity (see Fig. 12b) combined with good adhe-
sion properties.
3.2 Results and discussion
3.2.1 AlGaAs/Si tandem cell. Figure 13 shows measured
EQE curves of AlGaAs solar cells with different emitter
thicknesses. If the emitter thickness is too large (> 1 µm), the
diffusion length in the p-doped emitter is not high enough to
provide good carrier collection. In this case the EQE is lower.
If the emitter thickness becomes too thin, the light with en-
ergy close to the band gap is partly absorbed in the base of the
cell structure. The minority carriers generated in the base can
diffuse towards the p-n junction or towards the substrate. The
latter carriers are lost through recombination because no back
surface field is used. A 1-µm-thick emitter was determined
as optimum for this structure. The diameter of the concen-
trator cell is 4 mm. An efficiency of 16.3% AM1.5g (Voc =
1297 mV, Isc = 14.3 mA/cm2, FF = 0.88) was obtained for
a one-sun application. The maximum efficiency was 17.1%
at C = 30 AM1.5g. After etching of the GaAs substrate the
maximum efficiency was 15.2% obtained at a low concentra-
tion level of seven suns. In this case the high resistance in the
30–50-µm-thick base is the main reason for power losses. No
metal contact was evaporated on the rear side of the 0.13-cm2
active solar cell area in order to achieve a high transmis-
sion. The problem of resistance losses may be overcome by
Ext. Quantum Efficiency (%)
choosing a conductive transparent ITO back contact, applying
a metal grid structure on the rear side, or by decreasing the
cell diameter.
So far, no mechanically stacked Al0.26 Ga0.74 As/Si con-
centrator cell was fabricated. However, a 60-µm-thick
Al0.26 Ga0.74 As layer was grown by LPE. The GaAs substrate
was removed and the front- and rear side were covered with
an optimized ARC. We used this layer as filter for measur-
ing the efficiency of Si concentrator cells. A monocrystalline
0.2-cm2 local back surface field (LBSF) concentrator solar
cell was used [73]. Under the Al0.26 Ga0.74 As filter a 7.9%
(8.9% at C = 20) efficiency was measured for the Si cell.
3.2.2 GaAs/GaSb tandem cell. Figure 14 shows the scheme
of a mechanically stacked GaAs/GaSb tandem concentra-
tor cell. An important aspect of the mechanical stacking
is the optical behavior of the top cell. Figure 15 shows
the measured transmittance and reflectance for two types of
ARC approaches. One GaAs cell uses double-layer ARCs of
MgF2 /TiOx (front side: 115/65 nm; back side: 225/135 nm),
the other one uses a prismatic cover (d ≈ 300 µm, n = 1.48)
and TiOx (65 nm) at the front side and MgF2 /TiOx on the
back side. The prismatic cover reduces effectively the shad-
owing losses of the front grid [74]. Unfortunately, it causes
also some optical losses due to the increase of reflectance
and decrease of transmittance (see Fig. 15). However, the
prismatic cover has an additional advantage. It allows us to
Fresnel lens
Concentrated
Prismatic cover
sunlight
+ Single AR-coating
Double AR coatings
Eg = 1.42 eV GaAs
Cu
Prismatic cover
+ Single AR-coating
Eg = 0.72 eV Cu GaSb
Fig. 14. Scheme of the mechanically stacked GaAs/GaSb tandem concen-
trator cell
Transmittance, Reflectance

80 0,8

60 0,6 Front- and backside: MgF 2 ,TiO x

Transmittance Reflectance

p/n junction depth 0,4 Frontside: PC, TiO x

40 backside: TiO x , MgF 2
1.4 µ m
1.5 µ m 0,2 Transmittance Reflectance
20 1.0 µ m
0.9 µ m
0,0
400 800 1200 1600 2000
0 Wavelength (nm)
400 500 600 700
Wavelength (nm)
Fig. 15. Measured transmittance and reflectance of GaAs top cells using op-
timized ARCs on the front and back side of the active cell area. PC stands
Fig. 13. EQE measurement of AlGaAs solar cells. The emitter thicknesses for prismatic covers which were used to reduce the shadowing losses due to
were varied from 0.9 µm to 1.4 µm the front grid
 127

use a more dense grid structure which reduces the electrical
losses.
Another effect which has to be considered is the reduc-
tion of transmittance due to sub-band-gap free-carrier absorp-
tion. Figure 16 shows experimental results of measured short-
circuit currents of a GaSb cell under different GaAs substrates
with optimized ARCs on both sides. A strong free-carrier ab-
sorption occurs in p-doped material. Therefore, a n-on-p solar
cell is not favorable for mechanical stacking. The substrate
with a n-doping of 2 × 1017 cm−3 shows only little more ab-
sorption than a semi-insulating GaAs material.
The optical losses have to be regarded in combination
with the electrical behavior of the solar cell. One example
is power loss due to high resistance in the base. Figure 17
shows calculations of losses caused by absorption and electri-
cal losses in the base of a typical LPE-EBR GaAs concentra-
tor cell. The calculations assume a concentration of 200 suns
and a 300-µm-thick wafer. The base doping level and the
diameter of the solar cell was varied. The losses are given
in relative percentage to a tandem efficiency of 31%. It turns
15
J sc, GaSb (mA/cm²)
out, that for a 300-µm-thick wafer and a 4-mm-diameter cell
a n-doping level of 2 × 1017 cm−3 is a good compromise.
The best GaAs/GaSb tandem cell achieved an efficiency
of 31.1% at 100 suns. The cell was measured under labora-
tory standard conditions: AM1.5d normalized at 1000 W/m2 ,
25 ◦ C. This is the highest efficiency ever achieved for cells
fabricated without MOVPE technology.
While standard conditions are very valuable for compar-
ing cell efficiencies, it is obvious that realistic conditions are
quite different. At medium latitudes of 40–50◦ such as in
Freiburg (Germany) the direct solar spectrum has normally
less than 1000 W/m2 energy flux. The ambient temperature
and especially the cell temperature is generally higher than
25 ◦ C. Effects of wind speed are of practical interest. There-
fore, we decided to measure module efficiencies under realis-
tic outdoor conditions. We want to stress this point because it
is important for the evaluation of the given results.
In practice, modules with a two-terminal connection are
desirable. The mechanically stacked GaAs/GaSb cell has the
main advantage that the cells can be connected without cur-
rent matching. On the other hand, in a tandem cell design
using monolithically integrated cells such as GaInP/GaAs
a current matching of the two cells is absolutely necessary.
The lower current of the two cells limits the current of the
whole tandem cell. In this case spectral changes of illumina-
tion, for example caused by weather conditions or different

sites, have a large influence on the tandem cell efficiency. In

10 comparison, the mechanically stacked GaAs/GaSb cells are
much more tolerant to spectral changes.
Doping level of GaAs wafers: An optimized interconnection scheme of mechanically
17
semi-insulating 1-2x10 (Sn)
stacked tandem cells is of high importance to reduce addi-
5 18 18 18 tional losses [75]. A test module consisting of 24 GaAs/GaSb
1-2x10 (Te) 3x10 (Si) 3x10 (Zn) tandem cells with a cell area of 0.13 cm2 was manufactured
at the Fraunhofer ISE. Fresnel lenses with an area of 4.5 ×
4.5 cm were used as concentrators. The aperture area of the
0 whole module is 486 cm2 and the geometrical concentra-
200 300 400 500 tion is 160. The following interconnection scheme is used:
GaAs Wafer Thickness (µ m) 24 series connected GaSb cells are connected in parallel to
three strings. Each string consists of 8 GaAs cells connected
Fig. 16. Integrated transmittance under different GaAs wafers measured by in series.
the short-circuit current of a GaSb cell. The thickness, dopants, and doping The tandem module was measured under outdoor condi-
levels were varied
tions. The direct normal incidence was 717 W/m2 , the am-
bient temperature was 22 ◦ C. The solar cell temperature was
measured to be 38 ◦ C. The overall two-terminal module ef-
6 ficiency including optical and electrical losses was 23%. So
far, this is the highest reported efficiency under realistic con-
Resistance Losses (%)

5 ditions for any kind of module. The difference between the

cell efficiency of 31.1% under laboratory test conditions and
4
Absorptance/

ce

the module efficiency of 23% under realistic outdoor condi-

ta n
s is

3 tions was carefully analysed [75]. Improvements are possible

Re

Absorption and a 25% module efficiency seems to be achievable in the

2 Base Doping near future.
17 -3
1 x 10 cm
1 17
5 x 10 cm
-3

18 -3
1 x 10 cm
0 Acknowledgements. The authors wish to thank the “III-V group” at Fraun-
0 5 10 15 20 hofer ISE for the excellent work, support and discussion. We gratefully
acknowledge helpful discussions with Prof. W. Wettling and the continuous
Diameter of Solar Cell (mm) interest and support of our work by Prof. Luther. The Cusanuswerk Bonn,
Germany gave financial support to one of us (G. Stollwerck). The Ger-
Fig. 17. Optical and electrical losses in the base of 200× LPE-ER GaAs man Ministry for Education, Science, Research and Technology (BMBF)
concentrator cell versus diameter of the cell. The losses are given in relative supported the work under contract number 0328554D. The authors are re-
percentage to a 31% tandem solar cell sponsible for the content of the publication.
128
References
1. M.A. Green, K. Emery, K. Bücher, D.L. King, S. Igari: Progr. Photo-
volt. 6, 35 (1998)
2. S.R. Kurtz, J.M. Olson, A. Kibbler: In Proc. 21st IEEE Photovoltaic
Specialists Conference (IEEE, New York 1990) p. 138
3. M. Meyer, R.A. Metzger: Compd. Semicond. 2, 22 (1996)
4. S.G. Bailey, D.J. Flood: Progr. Photovolt. 6, 1 (1998)
5. M. Yamaguchi: J. Appl. Phys. 78, 1476 (1995)
6. M.D. Hont, P. Mijlemans, I. Moerman, P. Deemester: Compd. Semi-
cond. 4, 30 (1998)
7. R.A. Metzger: Compd. Semicond. 2, 25 (1996)
8. N.H. Karam, J.H. Ermer, R.R. King, M. Haddad, L. Cai, D.E. Joslin,
D.D. Krut, M. Takahashi, J.W. Eldrege, W. Nishikawa, B.T. Cavicchi,
D.R. Lillington: In Proc. 2nd World Conference on Photovoltaic So-
lar Energy Conversion, ed. by J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm,
H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint Research Centre, European Commis-
sion, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 3534
9. B.T. Cavicchi, J.H. Ermer, D.D. Krut, D.E. Joslin, M.S. Gillanders,
D.K. Zemmrich: In Proc. 2nd World Conference on Photovoltaic So-
lar Energy Conversion, ed. by J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm,
H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint Research Centre, European Commis-
sion, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 3515
10. V.M. Andreev, A.B. Kazantsev, V.P. Khvostikov, E.V. Paleeva,
V.D. Rumyantsev, M.Z. Shvarts: In Proc. 1st World Conference on
Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (IEEE, New York 1994) p. 2096
11. D.M. Murphy, M.I. Eskenazi: In Proc. 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Special-
ists Conference (IEEE, New York 1997) p. 861
12. J.C.C. Fan, J.M. Poate: Heteroepitaxy on Silicon (Material Research
Society, Pittsburgh, PA 1986)
13. H.K. Choi, R. Hull, H. Ishiwara, R.J. Nemanich: Heteroepitaxy on Sil-
icon, Fundamentals, Structure, and Devices (Material Research Soci-
ety, Pittsburgh, PA 1988)
14. S.F. Fang, K. Adomi, S. Iyer, H. Morkoc, H. Zabel, C. Choi, N. Otsuka:
J. Appl. Phys. 68, R31 (1990)
15. M. Yamaguchi, A. Yamamoto, M. Tachikawa, Y. Itho, M. Sugo: Appl.
Phys. Lett. 53, 2293 (1988)
16. M. Yamaguchi, M. Tachikawa, Y. Itho, M. Sugo, S. Kondo: J. Appl.
Phys. 68, 4518 (1990)
17. M. Yamaguchi, T. Nishioka, M. Sugo: Appl. Phys. Lett. 54, 24 (1989)
18. K. Zieger, G. Hahn, T. Forner, J.S. Im, A. Hangleiter, D. Haase,
A. Dörnen, F. Phillipp, F. Scholz, V. Frese, J. Hilgarth, M. Braun: In
Proc. 13th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by
W. Freiersleben, W. Palz, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm (H.S. Stephens,
Bedford, UK 1995) p. 81
19. Y. Ohmachi, T. Ohara, Y. Kadota: In Proc. 21st IEEE Photovoltaic Spe-
cialists Conference (IEEE, New York 1990) p. 89
20. M. Umeno, T. Soga, K. Baskar, T. Jimbo: Solar Energy Mater. Solar
Cells 50, 203 (1998)
21. R.A. Metzger: Compd. Semicond. 2, 25 (1996)
22. B. Chatterjee, S.A. Ringel, R. Hoffman: Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl. 4,
91 (1996)
23. S.J. Wojtczuk, N.H. Karam, P. Gouker, P. Colter, S.M. Vernon,
G.P. Summers, R.L. Walters, R. Statler: In Proc. 1st World Conference
on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (IEEE, New York 1994) p. 1705
24. R. Hoffman, N.S. Fatemi, P.P. Jenkins, V.G. Weizer, M.A. Stan,
S.A. Ringel, D.A. Scheiman, D.M. Wilt, D.J. Brinker, R.J. Walters,
S.R. Messenger: In Proc. 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Confer-
ence (IEEE, New York 1997) p. 815
25. R.J. Walters, M.J. Romero-Florez, D. Araujo, R. Garcia, S.R. Messen-
ger, G.P. Summers: In Proc. 2nd World Conference on Photovoltaic
Solar Energy Conversion, ed. by J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm,
H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint Research Centre, European Commis-
sion, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 3550
26. A. Marti, G. L. Araújo: Solar Energy Mater. Solar Cells 43, 203 (1996)
27. S. Kurtz: In Proc. 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference
(IEEE, New York 1997) p. 875
28. M. Kondow, T. Kitatani, S. Nakatsuka, M.C. Larson, K. Nakahara,
Y. Yazawa, M. Okai, K. Uomi: IEEE J. Sel. Top. Quantum Electron.
3, 719 (1997)
29. D.J. Friedman, J.F. Geisz, S.R. Kurtz, J.M. Olson: In Proc. 2nd
World Conference on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion, ed. by
J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm, H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint
Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 3
30. T. Takamoto, E. Ikeda, H. Kurita, M. Ohmori: Appl. Phys. Lett. 70,
381 (1997)
31. T. Takamoto, M. Yamaguchi, S.J. Taylor, E. Ikeka, T. Agui, H. Kurita:
In Proc. 26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, New
York 1997) p. 1451
32. W.M. Wanlass, J.S. Ward, K. Emery, A. Duda, T.J. Coutts: In Proc. 1st
World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, (IEEE, New
York 1994) p. 1717
33. T. Takamoto, E. Ikeda, T. Agui, H. Kurita, T. Tanabe, S. Tanaka,
H. Matsubara, Y. Mine, S. Takagishi, M. Yamaguchi: In Proc. 26th
IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, New York 1997)
p. 1451
34. P.E. Gregory, P.G. Borden, M.J. Ludowise, R.J. Owen, N. Kaminar,
R.A. Larue, R.J. Boettcher: Solar Cells 6, 103 (1982)
35. S. Yoon, V. Garboushian: In Proc. 1st World Conference on Photo-
voltaic Energy Conversion (IEEE, New York 1994) p. 1500
36. C. Algora del Valle, V.D. Luque: In Proc. 14th European Photo-
voltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm,
H. Ehmann (H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1997) p. 1724
37. V.M. Andreev, V.P. Khvostikov, V.R. Larionov, V.D. Rumyantsev,
E.V. Paleeva, M.Z. Shvarts, C. Algora: In Proc. 2nd World Conference
on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion, ed. by J. Schmid, H.A. Os-
senbrink, P. Helm, H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint Research Centre,
European Commission, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 3719
38. M.S. Kuryla, M.L. Ristow, L.D. Partain, J.E. Bigger: In Proc. 22nd
IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, New York 1991) p.
506
39. J.C. Arboiro, G. Sala, J.I. Molina, L. Hernando, E. Camblor: In Proc.
2nd World Conference on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion,
ed. by J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm, H. Ehmann, E.D. Dun-
lop (Joint Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy 1998)
p. 2229
40. R. Hammond, D. Srinivasan, A. Harris, K. Whitfield: In Proc. 14th
European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by H.A. Ossen-
brink, P. Helm, H. Ehmann (H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1997) p. 301
41. P. Benitez, J.L. Diaz: In Proc. 2nd World Conference on Photovoltaic
Solar Energy Conversion, ed. by J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm,
H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint Research Centre, European Commis-
sion, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 2237
42. J.L. Alvarez, M. Hernandez, P. Benitez, J.C. Minano: In Proc. 2nd
World Conference on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion, ed. by
J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm, H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint
Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 2233
43. P. Faine, S.R. Kurtz, C. Riordan, J.M. Olson: Solar Cells 31, 259
(1991)
44. S.R. Kurtz, D.J. Friedman, J.M. Olson: In Proc. 1st World Conference
on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (IEEE, New York 1994) p. 2402
45. L.W. James: In Proc. 1st World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy
Conversion (IEEE, New York 1994) p. 2402
46. A. Luque, G. Sala, J.C. Arboiro, T. Bruton, D. Cunningham, N. Mason:
Progr. Photovolt. 5 195 (1997)
47. D.J. Friedman, S.R. Kurtz, K.A. Bertness, A.E. Kibbler, C. Kramer,
J.M. Olson, D.L. King, B.R. Hansen, J.K. Snyder: Progr. Photovolt. 3,
47 (1995)
48. M.W. Wanlass, T.J. Coutts, J.S. Ward, K.A. Emery, T.A. Gessert,
C.R. Osterwald: In Proc. 22nd IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Confer-
ence (IEEE, New York 1991) p. 38
49. L.M. Fraas, J.E. Avery, V.S. Sundaram, V.T. Dinh, T.M. Davenport,
J.W. Yerkes, J.M. Gee, K.A. Emery: In Proc. 21st IEEE Photovoltaic
Specialists Conference (IEEE, New York 1990) p. 190
50. T.J. Coutts, J.P. Benner: The First NREL Conference on Thermophoto-
voltaic Generation of Electricity (AIP321, New York 1994)
51. T.J. Coutts, J.P. Benner: The Second NREL Conference on Thermopho-
tovoltaic Generation of Electricity (AIP358, New York 1995)
52. T.J. Coutts, C.S. Allman, J.P. Benner: Thermophotovoltaic Generation
of Electricity, Third NREL Conference (AIP401, Woodbury New York
1997)
53. T.J. Coutts, J.P. Benner: Thermophotovoltaic Generation of Electricity,
4th NREL Conference (AIP460, Woodbury New York, 1998)
54. K.W.J. Barnham, G. Duggan: J. Appl. Phys. 67, 3490 (1990)
55. A. L. Araújo, A. Marti, F.W. Ragay, J.H. Wolter: In Proc. 12th Euro-
pean Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by R. Hill, W. Palz,
P. Helm, (H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1994) p. 1429
56. F.W. Ragay, A. Marti, G.L. Araujo, J.H. Wolter: Solar Energy Mater.
Solar Cells 40, 5 (1996)

57. S. Kettenmann, J.F. Guillemoldes: In Proc. 13th European Photovoltaic
Solar Energy Conference, ed. by W. Freiersleben, W. Palz, H.A. Os-
senbrink, P. Helm (H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1995) p. 119
58. A. Freundlich, I. Serdiukova: In Proc. 2nd World Conference on Pho-
tovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion, ed. by J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink,
P. Helm, H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint Research Centre, European
Commission, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 3707
59. V.M. Andreev, O.I. Chosta, V.P. Khvostikov, V.M. Lantratov,
E.V. Paleeva, M.Z. Shvarts: In Proc. 14th European Photovoltaic So-
lar Energy Conference, ed. by H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm, H. Ehmann,
(H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1997) p. 1744
60. C.J. Tsai, W.H. Bloss, K. Zieger, F. Scholz, V. Frese, U. Blieske: In
Proc. 13th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by
W. Freiersleben, W. Palz, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm (H.S. Stephens,
Bedford, UK 1995) p. 918
61. T. Takamoto, E. Ikeda, H. Kurita, M. Ohmori: In Proc. 1st World Con-
ference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion (IEEE, New York 1994)
p. 2402
62. F. Dimroth, A.W. Bett, W. Wettling: J. Cryst. Growth 179, 41 (1997)
63. J.M. Woodall, H.J. Hovel: Appl. Phys. Lett. 30, 492 (1977)
64. A. Baldus, A.W. Bett, U. Blieske, O.V. Sulima, W. Wettling: J. Cryst.
Growth 146, 299 (1995)
65. A. Baldus, A. Bett, U. Blieske, O.V. Sulima, W. Wettling: In Proc.
12th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by R. Hill,
W. Palz, P. Helm (H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1994) p. 1485
66. A.W. Bett, S. Keser, G. Stollwerck, O.V. Sulima, W. Wettling: In Proc.
26th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, New York
1997) p. 1451
129
67. A.W. Bett, S. Keser, O.V. Sulima: J. Cryst. Growth 181, 181 (1997)
68. A.W. Bett, S. Keser, G. Stollwerck, O.V. Sulima: In Proc. Thermopho-
tovoltaic Generation of Electricity, Third NREL Conference, ed. by
T.J. Coutts, C.S. Allman, J.P. Benner (AIP, Woodbury New York 1997)
p. 41
69. U. Blieske, A. Baldus, A. Bett, F. Lutz, T. Nguyen, C. Schetter,
K. Schitterer, O.V. Sulima, W. Wettling: In Proc. 23rd IEEE Photo-
voltaic Specialists Conference (IEEE, New York 1993) p. 1490
70. U. Blieske, A. Bett, T. Duong, C. Schetter, O.V. Sulima: In Proc. 12th
European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by R. Hill,
W. Palz, P. Helm (H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1994) p. 1409
71. A. Blug, A. Baldus, A. Bett, U. Blieske, G. Stollwerck, O. Sulima,
W. Wettling: In Proc. 13th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Con-
ference, ed. by W. Freiersleben, W. Palz, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm
(H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1995) p. 910
72. G.K. Reeves, H.B. Harrison: IEEE Electron. Dev. Lett. EDL-3, 111
(1982)
73. S. Sterk, A. Schönecker, K. Schitterer, W. Wettling: In Proc. 12th Eu-
ropean Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, ed. by R. Hill, W. Palz,
P. Helm, (H.S. Stephens, Bedford, UK 1994) p. 527
74. M. J. O’Neill: In Proc. 19th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference
(IEEE, New York 1987) p. 1402
75. A.W. Bett, G. Stollwerck, O.V. Sulima, W. Wettling: In Proc. 2nd
World Conference on Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conversion, ed. by
J. Schmid, H.A. Ossenbrink, P. Helm, H. Ehmann, E.D. Dunlop (Joint
Research Centre, European Commission, Ispra, Italy 1998) p. 268