An Analysis for Performance of PERC and TOPCon Modules Under low Irradiance Level
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.52825/siliconpv.v3i.2684Keywords:
Efficiency, Recombination, Series Resistance, Shunt ResistanceAbstract
In this paper, the performances of PERC and TOPCon photovoltaic (PV) modules under low irradiance levels are investigated. It is found that the specific efficiency of TOPCon module is always larger than that of PERC under low light intensities. Meanwhile, as irradiance decreases, this efficiency advantage for TOPCon module become more obvious. To explain this phenomenon, two key aspects are analyzed. First, the recombination parameters of both modules are calculated. It is found that the recombination parameter of PERC module is larger than that of TOPCon module. However, this difference become smaller with the decreasing irradiance. In addition, the series resistance (Rs) and shunt resistance (Rsh) of both modules, along with the rates of efficiencies change with respect to these resistances, are investigated. It is found that PERC modules exhibit higher Rs and Rsh, while the rates of efficiency change with respect to Rs and Rsh for PERC are lower, compared to TOPCon module. Moreover, as the irradiation decreases, the Rs of PERC increases significantly, and the rate of efficiency change with respect to shunt resistance for TOPCon module is decreased more obviously than that of PERC module. Although we have found the module efficiency is more sensitive to changes in Rsh but less sensitive to Rs, the high series resistance disadvantage and high shunt resistance advantage for PERC module are amplified and suppressed, respectively. These above results provide new insights for the investigation and development of PV modules.
Downloads
References
[1] IEC, “Solar photovoltaic energy systems—Terms, definitions and symbols,” IEC TS 61836, 2016.
[2] IEC, “Photovoltaic devices—Procedures for temperature and irradiance corrections to measured I‑V characteristics,” IEC 60891, 2021.
[3] A. G. Aberle, “Surface passivation of crystalline silicon solar cells: A review,” Prog. Photovolt. Res. Appl., vol. 8, no. 5, pp. 473–487, Sep.–Oct. 2000. https://doi.org/10.1002/1099-159X.
[4] A. C. Stuart, E. L. Ratcliff, A. Garcia, S. E. Shaheen, D. S. Ginley, L. J. Richter, N. Kopidakis, and M. F. Toney, “Fluorine substituents reduce charge recombination and drive structure and morphology development in polymer solar cells,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., vol. 135, no. 5, pp. 1806–1815, Feb. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1021/ja309289u.
[5] A. Kassis and M. Saad, “Analysis of multi‑crystalline silicon solar cells at low illumination levels using a modified two‑diode model,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, vol. 94, no. 12, pp. 2108–2112, Dec. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2010.06.036.
[6] N. V. Reich, W. G. J. H. M. van Sark, E. A. Alsema, R. W. Lof, R. E. I. Schropp, W. C. Sinke, and W. C. Turkenburg, “Crystalline silicon cell performance at low light intensities,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells, vol. 93, no. 9, pp. 1471–1481, Sep. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solmat.2009.03.018.
[7] R. M. Corless, G. H. Gonnet, D. E. G. Hare, D. J. Jeffrey, and D. E. Knuth, “On the Lambert W function,” Adv. Comput. Math., vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 329–359, Dec. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02124750.
[8] M. Chegaar, A. Hamzaoui, A. Namoda, P. Petit, M. Aillerie, and A. Herguth, “Effect of illumination intensity on solar cells parameters,” Energy Procedia, vol. 36, pp. 722–729, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.egypro.2013.07.084.
[9] A. Zekry, A. Shaker, and M. Salem, “Solar cells and arrays: Principles, analysis, and design,” in Advances in Renewable Energies and Power Technologies, Elsevier, 2018, pp. 3–56. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-812959-3.00001-0 .
Published
How to Cite
Conference Proceedings Volume
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Baojie Lv, Wangchun Xi, Wenan Tie, Mingzhe Yu, Xixiang Xu, Hong Yang
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Accepted 2025-10-23
Published 2026-01-20