0
Research Papers

Stress and Fracture Analyses of Solar Silicon Wafers During Suction Process and Handling

[+] Author and Article Information
S. Saffar

Department of Structural Engineering,
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim 7491, Norway

S. Gouttebroze

SINTEF Materials and Chemistry,
Oslo 0314, Norway

Z. L. Zhang

Department of Structural Engineering,
Norwegian University of Science and Technology,
Trondheim 0314, Norway

Contributed by the Solar Energy Division of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF SOLAR ENERGY ENGINEERING: INCLUDING WIND ENERGY AND BUILDING ENERGY CONSERVATION. Manuscript received February 11, 2014; final manuscript received November 24, 2014; published online January 8, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Santiago Silvestre.

J. Sol. Energy Eng 137(3), 031010 (Jun 01, 2015) (6 pages) Paper No: SOL-14-1060; doi: 10.1115/1.4029451 History: Received February 11, 2014; Revised November 24, 2014; Online January 08, 2015

Solar wafer/cell breakage depends on the combination of the stresses generated in the handling and the presence of structural defects such as cracks. Suction process is a common loading during silicon wafer handling. This paper presents a systematic static and dynamic analysis of the suction process. Optimum suction pad diameter and locations are obtained by minimizing the stress distribution under both static and dynamic loading, and the effect of the impact time on the crack driving force is also investigated in this optimum situation. The results show that the four pads configuration with diameter of 20 mm placed in a rhombus shape with 18 and 38 mm diagonal lengths yields lowest maximum principle stress among the cases analyzed. In the dynamic fracture analyses, the maximum J integral appears at 800 and 1400 μs for continued holding and unloading cases after reaching the maximum load, respectively. The J integral for the unloading cases are always smaller than the holding cases. It has been found that when the impact time is longer than 3 s and 5600 μs the dynamic fracture mechanics analysis of the suction impact process can be replaced by a static fracture mechanics analysis for the holding and unloading cases, respectively.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Moller, H. J., Funke, C., Rinio, M., and Scholz, S., 2005, “Multicrystalline Silicon for Solar Cells,” Thin Solid Films, 487(1–2), pp. 179–187. [CrossRef]
Möller, H. J., 2004, “Basic Mechanisms and Models of Multiwire Sawing,” Adv. Eng. Mater., 6(7), pp. 501–513. [CrossRef]
Schoenfelder, S., Ebert, M., Landesberger, C., Bock, K., and Bagdahn, J., 2006, “Investigations of the Influence of Dicing Techniques on the Strength Properties of Thin Silicon,” Microelectron. Reliab., 47(2–3), pp. 168–178. [CrossRef]
Rupnowski, P., and Sopori, B., 2009, “Strength of Silicon Wafers: Fracture Mechanics Approach,” Int. J. Fract., 155(1), pp. 67–74. [CrossRef]
Brun, X. F., and Melkot, S. N., 2009, “Analysis of Stresses and Breakage of Crystalline Silicon Wafers During Handling and Transport,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, 93(8), pp. 1238–1247. [CrossRef]
Popovich, V. A., Yunus, A., Janssen, M., Richardson, I. M., and Bennett, I. J., 2010, “Effect of Silicon Solar Cell Processing Parameters and Crystallinity on Mechanical Strength,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, 95(1), pp. 97–100. [CrossRef]
Kotousov, A., Lazzarin, P., Berto, F., and Harding, S., 2010, “Effect of the Thickness on Elastic Deformation and Quasi-Brittle Fracture of Plate Components,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 77(11), pp. 1665–1681. [CrossRef]
Wortman, J. J., and Evans, R. A., 1965, “Young's Modulus, Shear Modulus, and Poisson's Ration in Silicon and Germanium,” J. Appl. Phys., 36(1), pp. 153–156. [CrossRef]
Chao, C. C., Chleboski, R., Henderson, E. J., Holmes, C. K., and Kalejs, J. P., 1991, “Fracture Behavior of Silicon Cut With High Power Laser,” Proceedings of the Material Research Society Symposium, Vol. 226, MRS, Pittsburgh, PA, pp. 363–368.
Dhere, N. G., 2007, “Toward GW/Year Production of CIGS Within the Next Decade,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, 91(15–16), pp. 1376–1382. [CrossRef]
Dominguez, P. S., and Fernandez, J. M., 2005, “Introduction of Thinner Monocrystalline Silicon Wafers in an Industrial Cell-Manufacturing Facility,” Proceedings of the 20th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference, Barcelona, Spain, June 6–10.
Wang, P. A., 2006, “Industrial Challenges for Thin Wafer Manufacturing,” Proceedings of the Fourth World Conference on Photovoltaic Energy Conversion, May 7–12, Waikoloa, HI, Vol. 1, IEEE, Piscataway, NJ, pp. 1179–1182.
Sopori, B., Sheldon, P., and Rupnowski, P., 2006, “Wafer Breakage Mechanism(s) and a Method for Screening ‘Problem Wafers',” Proceedings of the 16th Workshop on Crystalline Silicon Solar Cells and Modules, Aug. 6–9, pp. 129–138.
Kalthoff, J. F., 1985, “On the Measurement of Dynamic Fracture Toughness–A Review of Recent Work,” Int. J. Fract., 27(3–4), pp. 277–298. [CrossRef]
Freund, L. B., 1976, “Dynamic Crack Propagation,” The Mechanics of Fracture, American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York, pp. 105–134.
Freund, L. B., 1972, “Crack Propagation in an Elastic Solid Subjected to General Loading—I. Constant Rate of Extension,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 20(3), pp. 129–140. [CrossRef]
Freund, L. B., 1972, “Crack Propagation in an Elastic Solid Subjected to General Loading—II. Non-Uniform Rate of Extension,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 20(3), pp. 141–152. [CrossRef]
Freund, L. B., 1973, “Crack Propagation in an Elastic Solid Subjected to General Loading—III. Stress Wave Loading,” J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 21(2), pp. 47–61. [CrossRef]
Freund, L. B., 1990, Dynamic Fracture Mechanics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK.
Kanninen, M. F., and Polar, C. H., 1985, Advanced Fracture Mechanics, Oxford University Press, New York.
Rose, L. R. F., 1976, “Recent Theoretical and Experimental Results on Fast Brittle Fracture,” Int. J. Fract., 12(6), pp. 779–813. [CrossRef]
Atkinson, C., and Eshlby, J. D., 1968, “The Flow of Energy Into the Tip of Moving Crack,” Int. J. Fract. Mech., 4(1), pp. 3–8. [CrossRef]
Sih, G. C., 1970, “Dynamic Aspects of Crack Propagation,” Inelastic Behavior of Solids, McGraw-Hill, New York, pp. 607–633.
Freund, L. B., 1972, “Energy Flux Into the Tip of Extending Crack in Elastic Solid,” J. Elasticity, 2(4), pp. 341–349. [CrossRef]
Moran, B., and Shih, C. F., 1987, “A General Treatment of Crack Tip Contour Integrals,” Int. J. Fract., 35(4), pp. 295–310. [CrossRef]
Atluri, S. N., 1982, “Path-Independent Integrals in Finite Elasticity, With Body Force, Inertia, and Arbitrary Crack Face Conditions,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 16(3), pp. 341–369. [CrossRef]
Kishimoto, K., Aoki, S., and Sakata, M., 1980, “On the Path-Independent J-integral,” Eng. Fract. Mech., 13(4), pp. 841–850. [CrossRef]
Anderson, T. L., 1991, “Fracture Mechanics–Fundamentals and Applications,” CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Chen, C. P., and Leipold, M. H., 1980, “Fracture Toughness of Silicon,” Am. Ceram. Soc. Bull., 59, pp. 469–472.
Claudia, F., Eckehard, K., Meinhard, K., and Joachim, M. H., 2004, “Biaxial Fracture Test of Silicon Wafers,” Adv. Eng. Mater., 6(7), pp. 596–598. [CrossRef]
Chao, C. C., Chleboski, R., Henderson, E. J., Holmes, C. K., Kalejs, J. P., and Gross, T. S., 1991, “Fracture Behavior of Silicon Cut With High Power Laser,” Proc. Mater. Res. Soc. Symp., 226, pp. 363–368. [CrossRef]

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The effect of pad number on the maximum principle stress

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Maximum principle stress distributions for different pad numbers for (a) static and (b) dynamic analyses

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Finite element mesh of the cracked model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Load and boundary conditions for (a) a static and (b) a dynamic model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Schematic plot of loading versus support and pad diameter

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The effect of distance between the pads on the maximum principle stress

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Schematic plot of the effect of pad distance on wafer stress distribution

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

The effect of pad distance in y axis on the stress distribution for the case with two pads fixed in x axis

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Typical stress distribution around the crack tip

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Types of loading after reaching the maximum load

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

The variation of normalized J integral versus time for the holding case (the load is held after the maximum impact load)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

The variation of normalized J integral versus time for the unloading case (the load is removed after the maximum impact load)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Maximum normalized J integral versus impact time: comparison between the loading and unloading cases

Tables

Errata

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In