search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Grain Boundary Properties


Figure 3 : SEM plan view images and EBSD inverse pole fi gures (IPFs) of the CIGS surface for the three devices. (a–c) SEM surfaces images of Devices 1–3. (d–f) Corresponding inverse pole fi gures from etched CIGS surfaces (IPF raw data) for Devices 1–3. The red, green, and blue refer to grains with <001>, <102>, and <112> orientations. The average AFM surface roughness (Ra) values for the cells were 60.1 nm, 73.8 nm, 94.7 nm, respectively. Note that the SEM images and IPF maps were not from the same areas. No cleaning steps were applied to these IPF maps. Image width = 7.5 µm.


figure (IPF) coloring for easy visual- ization of the different orientations. Figures 3 d to 3 f show the IPFs for the three different as-received CIGS. Inverse pole figures here use a coloring scheme for the orientation of each grain similar to that for cubic grains ( Figure 4 ). The color of each grain is used as a description of crystal orientation, and an abrupt orientation change (change in color) defines a grain or phase boundary. For most samples, it was not possible to collect EBSD data from all locations because of the sample roughness as shown in Figures 3 d to 3 f. A signifi cant portion of the IPF maps appear “black” in color, indicating a low confi dence index (< 0.1), which means that the patterns collected from these regions could not be indexed with a high level of certainty. T e reason for this is oſt en poor pattern quality, but in this case the reason was attributed to the high surface roughness which blocks some of the scattered electrons from reaching the detector. Note that Device 1 was relatively smooth (Ra = 60 nm) compared to the other fi lms, and most of the


2018 May • www.microscopy-today.com


Figure 4 : (a) Quadrant of stereogram and (b) standard triangle showing the coloring scheme used in IPFs for tetragonal symmetry with c/a ratio = 2.0.


grains could be indexed. Devices 2 and 3 had higher average surface roughness values (Ra = 74 nm and 94 nm), and many areas could not be indexed.


Surface preparation of devices . Mechanical polishing methods using colloidal silica techniques were first attempted to reduce the surface roughness of the samples, but this resulted in poor EBSD pattern quality due to mechanical damage near the surface. Thus, focused ion-beam milling was


35


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68