PID Issues in BI-FACIAL MODULES

Elucidating Potential-induced Degradation in Bifacial PERC
Silicon Photovoltaic Modules

Wei LUOa,b,*, Peter HACKEc, Kent TERWILLIGERc, Tian Shen LIANGa,d, Yan WANGa,
Seeram RAMAKRISHNAa,b, Armin G. ABERLEa,d and Yong Sheng KHOOa
Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore, National University of Singapore, Singapore
a
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore
c
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, United States
d
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, National University of Singapore, Singapore
ABSTRACT
This paper elucidates the behavior and underlying mechanism of potential-induced degradation
(PID) on the rear side of p-type monocrystalline silicon bifacial passivated emitter and rear cell
(PERC) photovoltaic modules. At 50°C, 30% relative humidity and -1000 V bias to the solar cells
with aluminium foil on the rear glass surface, the rear-side performance of bifacial PERC modules
at standard testing conditions (STC) degraded dramatically after 40 hours with a 40.4%, 36.2%
and 7.2% loss in maximum power (Pmpp), short-circuit current (Isc) and open-circuit voltage (Voc),
respectively. The front-side STC performance, on the other hand, showed less degradation; Pmpp,
Isc and Voc dropped by 12.0%, 5.2% and 5.3%, respectively. However, negligible degradation was
observed when the solar cells were positively biased. Based on I-V characteristics,
electroluminescence, external quantum efficiency measurements and the effective minority-carrier
lifetime simulation, the efficiency loss is shown to be caused by the surface polarization effect;
positive charges are attracted to the passivation/antireflection stack on the rear surface and reduce
its field effect passivation performance. Extended PID testing to 100 hours showed an increase in
device performances (relative to 40 hours) due to the formation of an inversion layer along the rear
surface. In addition, replacing ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer with polyolefin elastomer films
significantly slows down the progression of PID, whereas a glass/transparent backsheet design
effectively protects the rear side of bifacial PERC modules from PID. Furthermore, PID on the
rear side of bifacial PERC modules is fully recoverable, and light greatly promotes recovery of the
observed PID.
Keywords: photovoltaic module reliability; potential-induced degradation; surface passivation degradation; bifacial
PERC silicon solar cell; light-induced recovery.
*Corresponding author. Email address: serlw@nus.edu.sg (Wei Luo). Postal address: National University of
Singapore, 7 Engineering Drive 1, Block E3A, #06-01, Singapore 117574, Singapore.
1. INTRODUCTION
Bifacial solar cell concepts have received tremendous interest due to their ability to generate
additional energy from the albedo. Depending on geographical locations, ground-cover scenarios
and mounting configurations, a bifacial solar module can potentially produce 5% to 25% extra
electricity per year compared with its monofacial counterpart [1, 2]. In addition, the bifacial solar
cell technology is a perfect match with the glass/glass module design, which may offer a better
long-term reliability than the conventional glass/backsheet structure, thereby further reducing the
levelised-cost-of-electricity and carbon footprints of photovoltaics (PV) [3]. While bifacial solar
Pursuant to the DOE Public Access Plan, this document represents the authors' peer-reviewed, accepted
manuscript. The published version of the article is available from the relevant publisher.
cell concepts are mainly applied on n-type silicon wafers, such as the passivated emitter and rear
totally diffused (PERT), and heterojunction solar cells in the PV industry, p-type bifacial
passivated emitter and rear cell (PERC) technology is gaining importance [4]. Several large PV
manufacturers have started the mass production of bifacial PERC solar cells/modules in 2017 [5-
8]; the production requires only slight modifications to the existing PERC production line [4].
With a growing interest in the PV industry in bifacial PERC technologies, it is imperative to
investigate their reliability by accelerated stress testing to ensure a 25-year or greater lifetime in
the field. In this paper, the behaviour and underlying mechanism of potential-induced degradation
(PID) in p-type monocrystalline silicon (mono-Si) bifacial PERC modules are extensively studied.
PID has been reported in various silicon PV technologies [9], such as the conventional p-type
solar cells (aluminium back surface field, Al-BSF) [10-17], n-type PERT solar cells [18, 19] and
interdigitated back-contact (IBC) solar cells [20-22]. For p-type solar cells with an n+/p front
junction, PID-shunting (PID-s) has been identified as the root cause for PV efficiency loss when
the solar cells are negatively biased relative to the frame or the front module surface [14, 23, 24].
PID-s mainly impacts the fill factor (FF) of solar cells/modules due to a significant reduction in
the shunt resistance (Rsh), whereas the open-circuit voltage (Voc) and short-circuit current (Isc) are
less impacted. On the other hand, for the n-type wafer-based solar cells with a p+/n (such as n-
PERT and IBC with a floating emitter) or n+/n (such as SunPower IBC) front junction, the surface
polarization effect (also known as degradation of the surface passivation, PID-p) is commonly
believed to be responsible for performance degradation [18-22]. This degradation process leads to
a significant drop in Isc and Voc, whereas FF is only marginally influenced. But in case of full-size
modules, FF also falls largely because of the mismatch between the various degraded cells [22].
A recent study also demonstrated that a noticeable loss in FF (more than 3% absolute loss) was
induced to n-type PERT bifacial silicon solar cells after accelerated PID testing [19]. Furthermore,
PV modules that are subjected to the surface polarization effect (or PID-p) often reach a saturation
state where a maximum degradation in maximum power (Pmpp), Isc and Voc is caused [18, 19].
PID effects on p-type mono-Si bifacial PERC solar cells/modules have not been investigated
yet, especially on the rear side. These solar cells have an n+/p front junction, which is known to be
susceptible to PID-s from previous studies [14, 23]. Therefore, we focus on the PID effects on the
rear side of bifacial PERC solar cells/modules and aim to provide insights on the following aspects:
1) the root causes for PV efficiency loss;
2) the extent of efficiency loss to the rear side and its impacts on the front-side performance;
3) potential module-level solutions to mitigate PID; and
4) the recovery process under dark and illuminated conditions.
2. EXPERIMENTAL DESIGN
Commercial p-type mono-Si bifacial PERC solar cells (156 mm × 156 mm) were obtained and
fabricated into frameless 1-cell modules (20 cm × 20 cm) with four terminals at the Solar Energy
Research Institute of Singapore. Three types of modules were fabricated, as summarized in Table
I. The ethylene-vinyl acetate copolymer (EVA) films have good resistance to PID-s based on the
manufacturer’s datasheet (volume resistivity > 1 × 1015 Ωcm); the polyolefin elastomer (POE)
films are highly resistant to PID-s, as verified in our previous work [19]; the transparent backsheet
foil has a structure of coating/polyester/primer; and the glass is of the low-iron type. The Al foil
PID test method was used to accelerate the progression of PID in PV modules, as shown in Figure
1. The front module surface was maintained at the same potential as the solar cell to prevent any
electric field over the front glass and induce PID only on the rear. When the rear-side Al foil is
+1000 V, the solar cell is negatively biased; and when the rear-side Al foil is -1000V, the solar
cell is positively biased. The climate chamber was set at 50°C and 30% relative humidity. All
samples were preconditioned outdoor (> 15 kWh/m2) before any PID stress.
To measure the PV performance loss due to PID, the modules were briefly removed from the
climate chamber to perform I-V measurements at standard testing conditions (STC, an irradiance
of 1000 W/m2 with a spectrum of AM1.5G and a cell temperature of 25°C) and at a low irradiance
of 200 W/m2 with a class A+A+A+ flash system. The non-illuminated side was covered with a
black cloth to minimize its contribution. Dark I-V characteristics (both forward and reverse biased),
external quantum efficiency (EQE), electroluminescence (EL) and suns-Voc were also measured to
investigate the PID behavior of the modules.
The recovery process was also studied in detail. PID-degraded samples (type-A) were placed in
three different conditions to regenerate: (1) at the room temperature and in the dark (~24°C, one
sample), (2) at an elevated temperature and in the dark (50°C, two samples), and (3) at the room
temperature (~24°C, one sample) with light exposure (xenon arc lamp) on the rear side of the
bifacial modules. The light intensity on the modules was approximately 900 W/m2 with 6.8% of
ultraviolet (UV, 280 to 400 nm), which maintained the sample temperature at around 48°C. No
voltage is applied to the solar cells in all recovery scenarios. I-V characteristics at STC were
measured at different time intervals to monitor the recovery process.
3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.1. PID stress with negatively biased solar cells
The PID behavior of three type-A bifacial PERC modules when the solar cells were negatively
biased is summarized in Figure 2. From the rear-side STC measurements, the Pmpp degraded by
more than 40% after 40 hours, which can be mainly attributed to a 36.2% and 7.2% loss in Isc and
Voc, respectively. The degradation was more pronounced when flash tested at the low irradiance
condition (200 W/m2), with a 58.0%, 51.6% and 10.4% drop in Pmpp, Isc and Voc, respectively.
Since the light intensity on the rear side of bifacial modules in the field is typically a fraction of
that on the front side [25], PID on the rear side of the bifacial PERC modules could potentially
annihilate the advantage of the bifacial PERC concept. The front-side performance was also
significantly influenced. The front-side Pmpp at STC degraded by 12.0% after 40 hours, mainly due
to a 5.2% and 5.3% loss in Isc and Voc, respectively. Similarly, the performance degradation at 200
W/m2 was also greater than that at STC for the front side. For all measurements, FF was less
impacted, compared to Pmpp, Isc and Voc. Furthermore, extended PID testing beyond 40 hours and
to 100 hours showed an increase in Pmpp, Voc and Isc (Figure 2), which was also more evident at the
low irradiance level.
Dark I-V measurements at reverse bias voltage showed slight changes in Rsh (Figure 3), but Rsh
was still very high at different stages of PID (> 14,000 Ωcm2, calculated by linear fitting of the
dark I-V curve under reverse bias); therefore, it has negligible effects on the device performance.
On the other hand, the dark I-V characteristics at high forward bias voltages (> 0.65 V) indicated
no sign of an increase in series resistance (Figure 3). This was further supported by comparing the
difference in pseudo-FF and actual FF before and after PID stress, where FF loss due to the series
resistance effects reduced. In addition, different from PID-s that causes shunts across the n+/p
junction, no visible localized defect was induced to the bifacial PERC solar cells based on EL
measurements (Figure 4). Nevertheless, a reduction of the EL intensity was observed across the
solar device after 40 hours of PID stress. An increase in EL intensity was also seen after 100 hours
of PID testing, which is consistent with the illuminated I-V measurements (Figure 2).
Furthermore, EQE measurements confirmed that it was the rear region of the bifacial PERC
solar cells that was damaged by PID. The front-side EQE measurements showed substantial EQE
losses in the wavelength range of 800 to 1200 nm (Figure 5A), whereas the short-wavelength
response (300 to 500 nm) was not influenced. This confirms increased recombination of carriers
at the rear surface of the device due to PID. On the other hand, the rear-side EQE measurements
showed a large EQE loss for all wavelengths from 300 to 1200 nm (Figure 5B), with a particularly
strong reduction for wavelengths below 800 nm. These results provide further confirmation that
the rear region of the cell was severely damaged by PID, and that it even caused EQE losses for
the long-wavelength light entering the solar cell through the rear surface.
Based on the experimental observations, it is strongly believed that the root cause of the
performance loss is due to the surface polarization effect (or PID-p) at the cell’s rear surface. As
shown in Figure 6, positive charges, such as sodium ions from the rear glass and possibly ionic
charges at the Si/passivation interface due to contamination, are driven into the AlOx/SiNx stack
when the solar cells are at negative potential relative to the rear glass pane of the module. One of
the AlOx layer’s roles is to provide field effect passivation by repelling minority-carrier electrons
in p-type Si wafers from the surface with its high fixed negative charge density. As positive charges
migrate into the AlOx/SiNx stack, they diminish the field passivation effect of the AlOx layer [26].
The theory is also validated with the numerical simulation results using the extended Shockley-
Read-Hall model [27, 28], where the effective minority carrier lifetime of p-type wafers decreases
with a reduction in the negative charge density (Figure 7A). With more positive charges
accumulating in the AlOx/SiNx stack, minority-carrier electrons are attracted to the surface (a
depletion region along the rear surface), whereby they can easily recombine with the majority-
carrier holes at the surface; this, in turn, will lead to further losses in Pmpp, Voc and Isc (Figure 7B).
As for the change in FF when PID-p progresses, several factors could have played a role, such as
the uncertainty of the measurements, FF loss due to an increase in recombination [29], changing
in FF loss due to series resistance effects and the injection-level dependence of the bulk lifetime
and the rear surface recombination velocity [30].
Furthermore, as positive charges continue to migrate into the AlOx/SiNx stack, an inversion
layer of electrons is created along the rear surface of p-type Si wafer. Under such a condition, the
majority-carrier holes are pushed away from the rear surface, leaving behind only one type of
carrier (minority-carrier electrons); consequently, this leads to a decrease in the rear surface
recombination velocity and an increase in the effective carrier lifetime of the Si wafer (Figure 7B).
This explains the partial recovery of the device performance after 100 hours of PID testing (relative
to 40 hours, Figure 2). Note that, the inversion phenomenon was not observed on the front-side of
n-type PERT bifacial silicon modules [19]. The difference may be attributed to the fact that the
rear side of bifacial PERC solar cells has no diffusion layer, so there are fewer carriers to
compensate to achieve inversion. In contrast, a highly-doped layer (p+) exists underneath the front
surface passivation layer of n-type PERT solar cells. The diffused layer strongly reduces the charge
effects from the passivation layer stack, and thus no increase in performance is observed after
extended PID testing.
As shown in Figure 2, we also observed that the efficiency loss was more pronounced at the low
irradiance condition. The injection-level dependent behavior could be associated with the fact that
the quality of surface passivation is strongly dependent on the excess carrier concentration (i.e.,
injection level). Aberle et al. demonstrated that for p-type silicon lifetime samples, the effective
surface recombination velocity decreases with an increasing excess carrier concertation [28].
Moreover, the injection-level dependent recombination property is complicated by the amount of
fixed charge in the passivation layer. Increasing the positive charge density leads to a change in
the injection-level dependence of the effective surface recombination velocity [28]. As discussed
above, the surface charge density in the AlOx/SiNx stack changes as PID-p develops, which results
in a change in the injection-level dependence of the rear surface recombination velocity and is
likely to be responsible for the poor low-light performances.
3.2. PID stress with positively biased solar cells
When the solar cells were positively biased relative to the rear module surface, negligible
changes in the performance were observed for the three tested samples (type-A) after 100 hours of
PID testing (see Table II). Under such a condition, negative charges are attracted towards the rear
side of the solar cells, which then accumulate in the AlOx/SiNx stack. Generally, these negative
charges help to repel the minority-carrier electrons in the bulk from the rear silicon surface and
thus increase the PV performance. However, the AlOx passivation layer already contains a large
density of negative charges [32-34]; hence, adding additional negative charges has a negligible
effect on the efficiency of the solar cells. As shown in Figure 7A, the wafer’s effective lifetime
increases with an increase in the negative charge density until reaching the saturation value as the
charge density reaches about -2 × 1012 cm-2. Beyond this threshold value, the bulk and front surface
recombination become the limiting factors for the effective lifetime of the silicon wafer, whereas
the recombination at the rear surface has only a minor influence on the solar cell performance.
3.3. Module-level solutions to mitigate PID
As demonstrated in Section 3.1, catastrophic failures can be caused to bifacial PERC modules
under high-voltage stress; therefore, it is essential to identify potential solutions to alleviate the
PID-p effects. As a possible solution, we used POE films to replace EVA films as the encapsulation
material. The rear-side Pmpp of type-B modules (defined in Table I) at STC had degraded by ~10%
after 40 hours of PID (negative bias to the solar cells), showing a significant improvement
compared to that of type-A modules (Figure 8). A reduction for the front-side STC performance
loss can also be achieved with POE films (-4.5% versus -12% of type-A samples in terms of Pmpp).
Extended PID testing of 100 hours further verified less degradation to the types-B modules than
for type-A modules (Figure 8). The improved PID-p resistance of type-B modules is largely due
to a higher volume resistivity of the POE films at the stress conditions. The leakage current density
for type-B samples was measured at (1.05 ± 0.06) µA/m2 after achieving the steady state, whereas
for type-A samples, it was (1.75 ± 0.07) µA/m2 at the 50°C stress temperature.
The experiments show that using POE films significantly slows down the progression of PID-p
in bifacial PERC modules, but a significant loss was still seen. Another approach to mitigate PID-
p on the rear side of bifacial PERC modules is to use a transparent backsheet foil (type-C samples)
instead of a glass pane. The transparent backsheet foil also allows the light to enter from the rear
side (i.e., module bifaciality), but it has a much higher volume resistivity than a glass pane. Three
type-C samples were PID-stressed (negative bias to the solar cells) and the results are summarized
in Table III. It can be seen that the rear-side Pmpp at STC only dropped by 1.3% after 100 hours of
accelerated testing, indicating a significant improvement in terms of PID-p stability compared with
the glass/glass design. However, glass/backsheet modules are more prone to moisture penetration,
when compared to glass/glass module structure [35]; a higher moisture ingress is likely to result
in higher PID sensitivity in from a long-term perspective by reducing the volume resistivity of the
encapsulants. Also, moisture is associated with several other types of failures such as delamination,
yellowing and corrosion of metallization, which are often observed in fielded PV modules [36].
Besides, the weathering performance and durability of transparent backsheets are generally worse
than that of glass panes. Therefore, the idea of replacing the rear glass pane with a transparent
backsheet foil to protect the rear side of bifacial PERC modules from PID-p needs to be further
investigated with long-term outdoor experiments. Nonetheless, the glass/backsheet module design
shows a superior PID-resistance (on the rear side of a bifacial module) than the glass/glass structure
in accelerated chamber PID testing with Al foil.
3.4. Recovery of PID
The PID-influenced samples were regenerated under three different scenarios, as described in
Section 2. Figure 9 shows the recovery of a degraded module under an indoor environment without
light exposure. A drop in Pmpp was seen at the early stage, which further confirms the surface
polarization theory elaborated in Section 3.1. As the recovery process initiates, positive charges
are gradually released (or neutralized) from the AlOx/SiNx stack. The instability of extrinsic
charges in the SiNx dielectric layer is well documented in the literature [37-39]. Consequently, the
surface state transits from inversion to depletion, leading to a loss in PV efficiency. With more
positive charges being released from the dielectric films, significant PV performance gains were
observed. After 30 days in the indoor environment, the rear-side STC Pmpp, Voc and Isc had
recovered to 80.4%, 96.0% and 83.5% of the initial values, respectively. Moreover, the front-side
STC Pmpp, Voc and Isc had recovered to 92.2% and 96.6%, 97.1% of the initial values, respectively.
It is also found that light exposure accelerates the PID-p recovery process by comparing the
regeneration of two sets of samples (with or without illumination, described in Section 2). A
complete recovery in PV performance was seen for the module exposed to the artificial light for 5
hours (Figure 10), whereas the other set of samples recovered to ~96% of their initial values (rear-
side STC Pmpp) after 100 hours by dark storage at a slightly higher temperature. These modules
were degraded to a similar extent before recovery (~40% loss in the rear-side STC Pmpp). The light-
induced recovery (LIR) was also evident from the EL images of a degraded sample captured after
the EQE measurements, where an increase in EL signals was observed from the EQE-measured
area (Figure 11). Note that, in this case, the EQE was measured with a different system to the one
used for Figure 5. The LIR phenomenon could be possibly ascribed to the photoconductivity of
the SiNx film, which increases with light intensity [40]; therefore, positive charges introduced by
PID-p can be easily discharged from the AlOx/SiNx stack. Ay and Tolunay demonstrated that for
hydrogenated amorphous SiNx films with various nitrogen concentrations, their steady-state
photoconductivity at 300 K increases with the light intensity [40]. The illumination source was a
light-emitting diode, having an emission band centred at a wavelength of 630 nm. For example,
the electrical conductivity of a particular SiNx film increased from ~9×10-9 to ~3×10--5 Ωcm, when
the light intensity raised from 0 to 1×1017 photons/cm2s [40]. This result underlines the importance
of including illumination as a stress factor, in addition to temperature, humidity and voltage, in the
IEC 62804 TS standard [41, 42] as well as for mathematical modeling of PID progression in the
field [43-46].
4. CONCLUSIONS
We presented the behavior and the underlying mechanism of PID on the rear side of p-type
mono-Si bifacial PERC silicon PV modules. Under the test conditions of 50°C, 30% relative
humidity and -1000 V bias to the solar cells with Al foil on the rear module surface, the rear-side
STC performance of bifacial PERC modules (using EVA films) had degraded dramatically after
40 hours with a 40.4%, 36.2% and 7.2% loss in Pmpp, Isc and Voc, respectively. The front-side STC
performance was also significantly impacted, where Pmpp, Isc and Voc had dropped by 12.0%, 5.2%
and 5.3%, respectively. The loss was even more pronounced for flash test measurements with 200
W/m2 light intensity, for both the front and the rear sides. In addition, extended PID testing of 100
hours showed an increase in device performance (relative to 40 hours). However, a negligible
degradation was observed when the solar cells were biased positively. EL measurements revealed
no visible localized damage to the samples, and EQE measurements confirmed that the rear-side
of the bifacial solar cells was damaged. Combined with the effective carrier lifetime simulation of
p-type Si wafers, we showed that the PV efficiency loss is caused by the surface polarization effect
(or PID-p) at the rear surface of the solar cell; positive charges are attracted to the AlOx/SiNx stack
and eliminate the field effect passivation of the passivation layer stack. As more charges are
trapped in the AlOx/SiNx stack, an inversion layer is created along the rear silicon surface, which
explains the PV performance increase after 100 hours of PID stress. Furthermore, two module-
level PID solutions were explored to mitigate PID-p. We showed that replacing EVA with POE
films significantly slows down PID-p, whereas a glass/transparent backsheet design effectively
protects the rear side of bifacial PERC modules from PID-p in accelerated chamber PID testing
with Al foil. Finally, we found that PID-p of the rear side of bifacial PERC modules can be fully
recovered, and that the recovery can be significantly accelerated by illuminating the rear module
surface. Given the rapid LIR, PID-p on the rear side of bifacial PERC modules should not be a
critical problem for PV systems with large operating voltages.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to thank Karl Georg Bedrich, Greg Perrin, Ke Cangming, Steve Rummel,
Chai Jing, Saw Min Hsian, Cai Yutian, Alinsod Ryan Alcain, and Carlos Enrico Cobar Clement
for their contribution in module fabrication, PID testing, image processing, characterization, and
discussions. The work at the Solar Energy Research Institute of Singapore (SERIS) was sponsored
by the National University of Singapore (NUS) and Singapore’s National Research Foundation
(NRF) through the Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB). The work at National
Renewable Energy Laboratory was supported by the U.S. Department of Energy under Contract
No. DE-AC36-08GO28308 with Alliance for Sustainable Energy, LLC, the Manager and Operator
of the National Renewable Energy Laboratory.
REFERENCES
[1] J.P. Singh, T.M. Walsh, A.G. Aberle. Performance investigation of bifacial PV modules in the tropics, in 27th
European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition, Frankfurt, Germany, 2012, pp. 3263-3266.
[2] U.A. Yusufoglu, T.M. Pletzer, L.J. Koduvelikulathu, C. Comparotto, R. Kopecek, H. Kurz. Analysis of the Annual
Performance of Bifacial Modules and Optimization Methods. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics 2015; 5:320-328.
[3] W. Luo, Y.S. Khoo, A. Kumar, J.S.C. Low, Y. Li, Y.S. Tan, Y. Wang, A.G. Aberle, S. Ramakrishna. A
comparative life-cycle assessment of photovoltaic electricity generation in Singapore by multicrystalline silicon
technologies. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 2018; 174:157-162.
[4] T. Dullweber, C. Kranz, R. Peibst, U. Baumann, H. Hannebauer, A. Fülle, S. Steckemetz, T. Weber, M. Kutzer,
M. Müller, G. Fischer, P. Palinginis, H. Neuhaus. PERC+: industrial PERC solar cells with rear Al grid enabling
bifaciality and reduced Al paste consumption. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 2016; 24:1487-
1498.
[5] Aiko Solar bringing P-type mono PERC and bifacial cells to module manufacturers. Available in https://www.pv-
tech.org/editors-blog/aiko-solar-bringing-p-type-mono-perc-and-bifacial-cells-to-module-manufactu. Acessed on 22
December 2017.
[6] Innovative double-glass bifacial PERC modules by JA Solar yield cost-effectively for PV systems. Availabe in
https://www.pv-tech.org/guest-blog/innovative-double-glass-bifacial-perc-modules-by-ja-solar-yield-cost-effect.
Accessed on 22 December 2017.
[7] Trina Solar launches 60-cell mono-PERC ‘DUOMAX Twin’ bifacial 300W module. Availabe in https://www.pv-
tech.org/products/trina-solar-launches-60-cell-mono-perc-duomax-twin-bifacial-300w-module. Accessed on 22
December 2017.
[8] LONGi Solar Hi-MO2 bifacial mono-PERC module reaches 360-365W in 72-cell configuration. Availabe in
https://www.pv-tech.org/products/longi-solar-hi-mo2-bifacial-mono-perc-module-reaches-360-365w-in-72-cell-co.
Accessed on 22 December 2017.
[9] W. Luo, Y.S. Khoo, P. Hacke, V. Naumann, D. Lausch, S.P. Harvey, J.P. Singh, J. Chai, Y. Wang, A.G. Aberle.
Potential-induced degradation in photovoltaic modules: a critical review. Energy & Environmental Science 2017;
10:43-68.
[10] P. Hacke, M. Kempe, K. Terwilliger, S. Glick, N. Call, S. Johnston, S. Kurtz, I. Bennett, M. Kloos.
Characterization of multicrystalline silicon modules with system bias voltage applied in damp heat, in 25 th European
Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition, Valencia, Spain, 2010, pp. 3760 - 3765.
[11] P. Hacke, R. Smith, K. Terwilliger, S. Glick, D. Jordan, S. Johnston, M. Kempe, S. Kurtz. Testing and analysis
for lifetime prediction of crystalline silicon PV modules undergoing degradation by system voltage stress. 38th IEEE
Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), Austin, TX, USA, 2012, pp. 1-8.
[12] D. Lausch, V. Naumann, O. Breitenstein, J. Bauer, A. Graff, J. Bagdahn, C. Hagendorf. Potential-Induced
Degradation (PID): Introduction of a Novel Test Approach and Explanation of Increased Depletion Region
Recombination. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics 2014; 4:834-840.
[13] D. Lausch, V. Naumann, A. Graff, A. Hähnel, O. Breitenstein, C. Hagendorf, J. Bagdahn. Sodium outdiffusion
from stacking faults as root cause for the recovery process of potential-induced degradation (PID). Energy Procedia
2014; 55:486-493.
[14] V. Naumann, D. Lausch, A. Hähnel, J. Bauer, O. Breitenstein, A. Graff, M. Werner, S. Swatek, S. Großer, J.
Bagdahn. Explanation of potential-induced degradation of the shunting type by Na decoration of stacking faults in Si
solar cells. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 2014; 120:383-389.
[15] W. Luo, P. Hacke, J.P. Singh, J. Chai, Y. Wang, S. Ramakrishna, A.G. Aberle, Y.S. Khoo. In-Situ
Characterization of Potential-Induced Degradation in Crystalline Silicon Photovoltaic Modules Through Dark I-V
Measurements. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics 2017; 7:104-109.
[16] J. Oh, S. Bowden, G. TamizhMani. Potential-Induced Degradation (PID): Incomplete Recovery of Shunt
Resistance and Quantum Efficiency Losses. IEEE Journal of Photovoltacis 2015; 5:1540-1548.
[17] V. Naumann, C. Brzuska, M. Werner, S. Großer, C. Hagendorf. Inverstigations on the formation of stacking fault-
like PID-shunts. Energy Procedia 2016; 92:569-575.
[18] S. Yamaguchi, A. Masuda, K. Ohdaira. Changes in the current density–voltage and external quantum efficiency
characteristics of n-type single-crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules with a rear-side emitter undergoing potential-
induced degradation. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 2016; 151:113-119.
[19] W. Luo, Y.S. Khoo, J.P. Singh, J.K.C. Wong, Y. Wang, A.G. Aberle, S. Ramakrishna. Investigation of Potential-
Induced Degradation in n-PERT Bifacial Silicon Photovoltaic Modules with a Glass/Glass Structure. IEEE Journal of
Photovoltaics 2018; 8:16-22; doi: 10.1109/JPHOTOV.2017.2762587.
[20] A. Halm, A. Schneider, V.D. Mihailetchi, L.J. Koduvelikulathu, L.M. Popescu, G. Galbiati, H. Chu, R. Kopecek.
Potential-induced Degradation for Encapsulated n-type IBC Solar Cells with Front Floating Emitter. Energy Procedia
2015; 77:356-363.
[21] V. Naumann, T. Geppert, S. Großer, D. Wichmann, H.-J. Krokoszinski, M. Werner, C. Hagendorf. Potential-
induced degradation at interdigitated back contact solar cells. Energy Procedia 2014; 55:498-503.
[22] R. Swanson, M. Cudzinovic, D. DeCeuster, V. Desai, J. Jürgens, N. Kaminar, W. Mulligan, L. Barbarosa, D.
Rose, D. Smith. The surface polarization effect in high-efficiency silicon solar cells, in 15th International Photovoltaic
Science and Engineering Conference (PVSEC-15), Shanghai, China, 2005, pp. 410-411.
[23] S.P. Harvey, J.A. Aguiar, P. Hacke, H. Guthrey, S. Johnston, M. Al-Jassim. Sodium Accumulation at Potential-
Induced Degradation Shunted Areas in Polycrystalline Silicon Modules. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics 2016; 6:1440-
1445.
[24] S. Spataru, P. Hacke, D. Sera, C. Packard, T. Kerekes, R. Teodorescu. Temperature-dependency analysis and
correction methods of in situ power-loss estimation for crystalline silicon modules undergoing potential-induced
degradation stress testing. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications 2015; 23:1536-1549.
[25] C. Deline, S. MacAlpine, B. Marion, F. Toor, A. Asgharzadeh, J.S. Stein. Assessment of Bifacial Photovoltaic
Module Power Rating Methodologies - Inside and Out. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics 2017; 7:575-580.
[26] A.G. Aberle, S. Glunz, W. Warta. Field effect passivation of high efficiency silicon solar cells. Solar Energy
Materials and Solar Cells 1993; 29:175-182.
[27] A.S. Grove, D.J. Fitzgerald. Surface effects on p-n junctions: Characteristics of surface space-charge regions
under non-equilibrium conditions. Solid-State Electronics 1996; 9:783-806.
[28] A.G. Aberle, S. Glunz, W. Warta. Impact of illumination level and oxide parameters on Shockley-Read-Hall
recombination at the Si‐SiO2 interface. Journal of Applied Physics 1992; 71:4422-4431.
[29] A. Khanna, T. Mueller, R.A. Stangl, B. Hoex, P.K. Basu, A.G. Aberle. A Fill Factor Loss Analysis Method for
Silicon Wafer Solar Cells. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics 2013; 3:1170-1177.
[30] H. Hieslmair, J. Appel, J. Kasthuri, J. Guo, B. Johnson, J. Binns. Impact of the injection-level-dependent lifetime
on Voc, FF, ideality m, J02, and the dim light response in a commercial PERC cell. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research
and Applications 2016; 24:1448-1457.
[31] Sentaurus. 2010.03 ed., Synopsys Inc., Mountain View, CA; 2008.
[32] B. Hoex, J.J.H. Gielis, M.C.M.v.d. Sanden, W.M.M. Kessels. On the c-Si surface passivation mechanism by the
negative-charge-dielectric Al2O3. Journal of Applied Physics 2008; 104:113703.
[33] G. Dingemans, W.M.M. Kessels. Status and prospects of Al2O3-based surface passivation schemes for silicon
solar cells. Journal of Vacuum Science & Technology A: Vacuum, Surfaces, and Films 2012; 30:040802.
[34] G. Dingemans, P. Engelhart, R. Seguin, F. Einsele, B. Hoex, M.C.M.v.d. Sanden, W.M.M. Kessels. Stability of
Al2O3 and Al2O3/a-SiNx:H stacks for surface passivation of crystalline silicon. Journal of Applied Physics 2009;
106:114907.
[35] M.D. Kempe. Modeling of rates of moisture ingress into photovoltaic modules. Solar Energy Materials and Solar
Cells 2006; 90:2720-2738.
[36] M.A. Quintana, D.L. King, T.J. McMahon, C.R. Osterwald, Commonly observed degradation in field-aged
photovoltaic modules, in 29th IEEE Photovoltaic Specialists Conference, New Orleans, LA, USA, 2002, pp. 1436-
1439.
[37] K.J. Weber, H. Jin. Improved silicon surface passivation achieved by negatively charged silicon nitride films.
Applied Physics Letters 2009; 94:063509.
[38] Y. Yang, M.H. White. Charge retention of scaled SONOS nonvolatile memory devices at elevated temperatures.
Solid-State Electronics 2000; 44:949-958.
[39] M.H. White, Y. Yang, P. Ansha, M.L. French. A low voltage SONOS nonvolatile semiconductor memory
technology. IEEE Transactions on Components, Packaging, and Manufacturing Technology: Part A 1997; 20:190-
195.
[40] İ. Ay, H. Tolunay. Steady-state and transient photoconductivity in hydrogenated amorphous silicon nitride films.
Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 2003; 80:209-216.
[41] Internation Electrotechnical Commission. IEC 62804-1:2015 Photovoltaic (PV) modules - Test methods for the
detection of potential-induced degradation - Part 1: Crystalline silicon, 2015.
[42] P. Hacke, R. Smith, K. Terwilliger, G. Perrin, B. Sekulic, S. Kurtz. Development of an IEC test for crystalline
silicon modules to qualify their resistance to system voltage stress. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and
Applications 2014; 22:775-783.
[43] P. Hacke, S. Spataru, K. Terwilliger, G. Perrin, S. Glick, S. Kurtz, J. Wohlgemuth. Accelerated Testing and
Modeling of Potential-Induced Degradation as a Function of Temperature and Relative Humidity. IEEE Journal of
Photovoltaics 2015; 5:1549-1553.
[44] M.B. Koentopp, M. Kröber, C. Taubitz. Toward a PID Test Standard: Understanding and Modeling of Laboratory
Tests and Field Progression. IEEE Journal of Photovoltaics 2016; 6:252-257.
[45] C. Taubitz, M. Schütze, M. Kröber, M.B. Koentopp. Kinetic description and modelling of potential induced
degradation, in 28th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference and Exhibition, Paris, France, 2013, pp. 3321 -
3323.
[46] C. Taubitz, M. Schütze, M. Kröber, M.B. Koentopp. Potential induced degradation: model calculations and
correlation between laboratory tests and outdoor occurrence, in 29th European Photovoltaic Solar Energy Conference
and Exhibition, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2014, pp. 2490-2494.
10
LIST OF TABLES
Voltage bias to
Module construction Encapsulants
solar cells
A Glass/glass EVA -/+1000 V
B Glass/glass POE -1000 V
C Glass/transparent backsheet EVA -1000 V
Table I: Summary of the different types of bifacial PERC modules that are PID-stressed.
Pmpp Voc Isc FF
Front, STC 99.2% ± 0.2% 100.0% ± 0.0% 100% ± 0.2% 99.4% ± 0.0%
Front, 200 W/m2 99.3 ± 0.6% 99.8% ± 0.1% 100% ± 0.1% 99.5% ± 0.5%
Rear, STC 99.1% ± 0.2% 99.8% ± 0.1% 99.8% ± 0.1% 99.5% ± 0.2%
Rear, 200 W/m2 99.3 ± 0.9% 99.8% ± 0.1% 99.9% ± 0.2% 99.5% ± 0.7%
Table II. Summary of the normalized Pmpp, Voc, Isc and FF of three type-A modules after 100 hours
of PID testing when the solar cells were positivity biased. The values are averages of the three
samples, and the uncertainty represents one standard deviation.
Pmpp Voc Isc FF
Front, STC 99.5% ± 0.3% 99.8% ± 0.2% 99.4% ± 0.2% 100.3% ± 0.5%
Rear, STC 98.7% ± 0.3% 99.9% ± 0.2% 98.4% ± 0.4% 100.3% ± 0.3%
Table III: The front- and rear-side STC performance of type-C modules after 100 hours of PID
testing. The solar cells were negatively biased. The values are average of three samples with the
uncertainty representing one standard deviation.
11
List of figures
Figure 1. Schematic of the PID test setup in a climate chamber (not drawn to scale). A simplified
solar cell structure is drawn. The module leads are shorted. HV denotes the high-voltage power
source.
Figure 2. Summary of the progression of PID in type-A bifacial PERC modules when the solar
cells were negatively biased. The values are averages of three samples with the uncertainty
representing one standard deviation.
12
Figure 3. Dark I-V characteristics of a type-A module before PID and after 40 hours of PID. The
inset shows a magnified view of the dark I-V characteristics at high forward bias voltages (> 0.65
V).
Figure 4. Progression of the EL with PID (type-A sample). For all the measurements, the injected
current was maintained at 1 A, and the camera settings were kept the same.
13
Figure 5. EQE measurements on the same sample (type-A) before and after PID testing. (a) Front-
side EQE measurements, and (b) rear-side EQE measurements. The results were obtained with a
small-beam spectral response measurement system from IVT Solar (model PVE-300) without light
biasing and with the non-illuminated side covered by a black cloth.
Figure 6. Schematic of the accumulation of positive charges on the rear side of a negatively biased
bifacial PERC solar cell (not drawn to scale). BSF, SiNx and AlOx refers to back-surface field,
silicon nitride and aluminium oxide, respectively.
14
Figure 7. SENTAURUS TCAD [31] simulation of the impact of surface charges on the effective
carrier lifetime of p-type Si wafers passivated on both sides. (a) Negative charge density vs
effective lifetime, and (b) positive charge density vs effective lifetime. Δn denotes the excess
carrier concentration. The substrate doping concentration is set as 7.2 × 1015 cm-3 (2.0 Ωcm) with
a bulk lifetime of 1 ms. The electron and hole surface recombination velocities in the surface
recombination model were both set as 100 cm/s. The simulation is an approximation to illustrate
the general trends.
Figure 8. A comparison of the STC performances of type-A and type-B modules after 40 and 100
hours of PID testing. The solar cells were negatively biased. The values are averages of three
samples with the error bar representing one standard deviation. The type-B modules have yet to
reach the surface inversion state after 100 hours due to a slower degradation rate.
15
Figure 9. (a) Power regeneration (measured from the rear) of a PID-degraded type-A module under
the indoor environment (no light exposure and no applied voltage); and (b) power regeneration
(measured from the rear) of two PID-degraded type-A modules at 50°C (no light exposure and no
applied voltage). The values are averages of two samples with the error bar representing one
standard deviation.
Figure 10. Illuminated I-V characteristics at STC of a type-A sample before PID, after PID and
after recovery (both the front and rear side).
16
Figure 11. Front-side EL image of a PID-degraded type-A module captured after EQE
measurements (measured on both the front and rear) with a 4 cm2 square beam and light biasing.
The LIR is shown by the contrast of EL intensity between the EQE-measured area (pink) and the
rest (blue). The intensity colorbar is different from what was used for Figure 6, and the brightness
and contrast of the image are adjusted to highlight the recovered areas.
17

PID Issues in BI-FACIAL MODULES

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PID Issues in BI-FACIAL MODULES

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Elucidating Potential-induced Degradation in Bifacial PERC

Silicon Photovoltaic Modules

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS

3.2. PID stress with positively biased solar cells

3.3. Module-level solutions to mitigate PID

3.4. Recovery of PID

Pmpp Voc Isc FF

Pmpp Voc Isc FF

You might also like