An analysis of the surface potential of monocrystalline silicon solar cell using kelvin probe force microscopy

International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)
Volume 10, Issue 12, December 2019, pp. 578-588, Article ID: IJMET_10_12_053
Available online at />ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359
© IAEME Publication

AN ANALYSIS OF THE SURFACE POTENTIAL
OF MONOCRYSTALLINE SILICON SOLAR
CELL USING KELVIN PROBE FORCE
MICROSCOPY
G. Osayemwenre
Department of Physics, University of Fort Hare,
Discipline of Mechanical of Engineering,
University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
F. Inambao*
Discipline of Mechanical of Engineering,
University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa
/>*Corresponding Author Email:
ABSTRACT
This paper investigates the effect of defects on the electrical properties of
monocrystalline silicon solar cells (mono-Si/m-Si). It characterises work function in
terms of surface potential (SP) using scanning probe microscopy (SPM), and Kelvin
probe force microscopy (KPFM) in force modulation mode, as opposed to the usual
amplitude modulation mode. A decrease in SP poses a huge challenge for the
reliability of photovoltaic (PV) solar cells because of the effect of long-term
degradation on the cells which reduces the efficiency of PV devices. In this study, SP
was obtained by measuring localised work function with KFPM and then defect
localisation and characterisation were carried out with SPM to shed light on the
origin of the defects. Furthermore, an in-depth comparison of the SP measurements
from identified defective and non-defective regions of the solar cell was carried out to
quantify the effect of defects on the SP of the cell.
Keywords: Scanning probe microscopy (SPM), Kelvin probe force microscope

(KPFM), Monocrystalline silicon solar cell (mono-Si), Interfaces, p-n junction,
Surface potential (SP).
Cite this Article: G. Osayemwenre and F. Inambao, An Analysis of the Surface
Potential of Monocrystalline Silicon Solar Cell using Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy.
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology 10(12), 2019,
pp. 578-588.
/>
/>
578




An Analysis of the Surface Potential of Monocrystalline Silicon Solar Cell using Kelvin Probe
Force Microscopy

1. INTRODUCTION
Over the last two decades from when Kelvin probe force microscopy (KPFM) was invented, it
gained increasing relevance [1]. Today, its applications relate to semiconductors, nanodevices, various photovoltaic (PV) technologies and electronic devices. KFPM is used for
measuring work function at a nanoscale level and charge distribution at an atomic scale level
[2-5]. Its technique is a combination of atomic force microscopy (AFM) and Kelvin probe.
Except when it is otherwise stated, the images presented in this study as scanning probe
microscopy (SPM), are AFM images. KPFM has different scanning modes such as contact
and non-contact. In this study, all measurements were taken in the non-contact mode and in
most cases, in the tapping mode. In the contact mode, the cantilever makes contact with a
sample during scanning but this is not the case with the non-contact mode. In the tapping
mode there is minimal contact which does not cause damage to the interface of a sample. The
tapping mode is generally preferred because of the fragile nature of the interfaces of solar cell
samples and it is commonly used for structural characterisation. Therefore, all samples were
measured in the tapping mode with high-resolution imaging without damaging the tip of the

cantilever. During scanning, care was taken to select a special probe in which oscillation was
above the surface of the sample at the right resonant frequency. The SPM technique depends
on a micro sharp tip that deflects an incoming laser as a result of its interaction with a sample.
With the aid of a photodiode sensor, the reflected laser is detected and analysed. The analysed
signal includes both the normal and lateral deflections [6]. The results are presented as a
three-dimensional map in nano-scale resolution. The conductive nature of the sharp tip of the
cantilever helps to focus the incident laser beam for better spatial resolution [7–9]. Due to its
numerous advantages as a non-destructive tool, KFPM is used to measure material work
function or its evolution known as surface potential (SP). It can also be used to study surface
charge distribution [10, 13-14]. The basic theory of the KFPM is its ability to evaluate
material work function from contact potential difference (CPD) of sample surfaces and
cantilever tips. The CPD between the conductive cantilever and the surface of a sample is the
change in their electronic parameters. The electrical properties of PV cells at nano scale are
better characterised with the KFPM, which also provides the morphological information about
analysed materials. A KFPM uses two vibrating electrodes that are joined to the cantilever
and an analysed sample to form a capacitor when the applied current is a direct current (DC).
This causes the reference electrode to vibrate and a proportionate current is generated
according to Eq. 1.

I(t )  VCPDC cos t

(1)

where  is the frequency of vibration, the generated current is I( t ) , C is the variation
in the capacitance, and VCPD is the contact potential existing between plates.
The micrograms presented in the results section include the images obtained from SPM
and KFPM when voltage was applied to the grounded electrode of the sample with the
cantilever fixed at a constant current and the AFM operating in frequency modulation mode
[15-16]. It is worth noting that at a constant height, the image corresponding to the tip height
must operate in a predefined current [16]. In most measurements, an oscillation amplitude of

0.5 Armstrong at zero voltage is encouraged. For the accuracy of results, slow scans are
encouraged throughout operation to minimise noise level during the scanning processes.
KPFM images are mapped through recorded spectra on the lateral grid of every single point in
a parallel plane of the surfaces of samples [17]. Unlike the conventional surface probing of
materials to determine work function, this study investigated the electrical properties of the
samples via their cross-sectional areas. To get the actual electrical behaviour of different

/>
579




G. Osayemwenre and F. Inambao

regions of the monocrystalline silicon solar cell (mono-Si) samples, it is preferable to analyse
their cross sectional areas. The justification for the cross sectional probing is the limitation
experienced by SPM when acquiring deep information. SPM is limited to the few nanometres
(about 4 nm to 10 nm) that are below the surfaces of samples, especially when performed
under an ultra-high vacuum (UHV) environment. This is evident from Rosenwaks et al.’s
work which revealed that KFPM in ambient air can only measure defects of less than 2 nm
below the surface of a sample [18]. In the case of optical and electron microscopy, when the
device is equipped with the right parameter it can detect depth signals which can provide
information about deep or bulky defects. Nevertheless, in the case of SPM, deep profiles can
only be accessed when cross-sectional measurements are performed. These types of electrical
measurements done across the layers of samples help to distinguish bulk effects from surface
contributions [19-20].

2. METHODS AND MATERIALS
Five mono-Si solar cells were assessed by visual inspection for defects with one being found

to show defects. This cell was further subjected to infrared (IR) inspection to see if there were
hotspots in the defective region of the cell (the IR inspection is reported in detail in a previous
study [21]). From this mono-Si cell, two samples were prepared (one from a defective region
and one from a non-defective region) for further investigation at nanoscale level using SPM
and KFPM. The samples were cleaved, prepared and published via their cross sections so as
to have full access to their interfaces. The reason for the above procedure was to correlate
visual defects with intrinsic defects (also known as bulk defects) to see if any relationship
existed between them. This study found that most surface defects did not have bulky defect
origins. However, in a few cases, surface phenomena can be due to deep defects and it is
believed that such a defect can negatively affect the electrical behaviour of solar materials or
devices. To ensure that a close to actual experimental and industrial environment was
achieved, all measurements were taken at room temperature without vacuum using SPM and
KFPM in non-contact/tapping modes with a frequency of 257 kHz and spring contact of 25
N/m. Figure 1 presents the optical image of the mono-Si samples. The final samples were
prepared from similar regions and were analysed to see if such defects are detrimental to the
elecrical behavoiur of mono-Si.
KPFM allows topography and surface potential measurements to be conducted
simultaneously on the sample spot. For the SPM and KFPM measurements, a single electrical
bias was performed in the range of -2 V to 1.5 V and applied between the p+ and the n-side
contacts of the sample. A set up voltage of 0.35 V was used for all measurements while the pside was grounded. The KPFM measures the change between the work function of a sample
and the tip work function through the amplitude of the cantilever when a laser is beamed on
the edge of the cantilever [13].
Thus, the work function of the samples was measured with KPFM and this provided the
surface potential of each sample. The measurements were used to assess the electrical
properties across the cross-sectional areas of the samples. Furthermore, two regions of the
solar cells were cleaved. The cleaved samples were labelled ‘defective’ and ‘non-defective’
samples, and their cross-sectional areas were mechanically polished using diamond grinding
disks to achieve a smoothness of less than 40 nm, with a smoothness of 15 nm being
achieved. This reduced roughness helped to facilitate better electrical measurements since the
effect of topography image imprint was reduced because of the smooth surface topography.

Furthermore, the two samples were placed on a sample holder of a good electrical contact
after the right-hand side of the sample was ground with a silver (Ag) paste. Throughout the
scanning process, the tip work function was unchanged and the change observed between the

/>
580




An Analysis of the Surface Potential of Monocrystalline Silicon Solar Cell using Kelvin Probe
Force Microscopy

tip and the sample was the change in the work function of the sample; this is known as surface
potential. For precision, a second scan was conducted after each scan with the sample in the
same condition to ensure that the tip had not degraded following the series of scans
performed.
(b)

(a)
Figure 1. Optical microscopy images of a mono-Si solar cell. (a) shows the landing position; the red
boxes indicate possible bulk defect regions and (b) shows Ag finger and landing position; the black
box represents the region without defect.

3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS
The topography images were taken at different magnifications to demonstrate structural
damage. The structural imperfection is clearly seen in Figure 2 (d and e) below, while the 3D
image of Figure 2 (b-e) is shown in Figure 2 (f-i). The morphological images in 2D (Figure 2
a-e) became clearer as the scanned areas decreased, hence the topography images were better
examined in a smaller area.

(a)

(c)

(b)

(e)

(d)

(f)

/>
(g)

581




G. Osayemwenre and F. Inambao

(i)

(h)

Figure 2. Topography images of part of the mono crystalline silicon solar cell with different
magnifications under standard room temperature. (b), (c) (d) and (e) are topographies at 10 m, 5m,
1m and 496 nm magnification respectively; (f), (g) (h) and (i) are the 3D topography images of ‘b’

‘c’ ‘d’ and ‘e’ respectively.

Figure 2 shows the topographies of the defective and non-defective sample of the mono-Si
solar cell. The scan provided spatial dimension images at different magnifications to detect
possible structural defects. Figure 2 (d-e) indicates the topography also known as the height
sensor which shows some granular variations in a few areas of the image. Such features are
usually difficult to see clearly when a large area is scanned. For the mechanical measurement
(topography), scans were conducted in the tapping mode. This mode is very soft, hence it has
less effect on the samples and as such the surface roughness is as a result of structural
deformation which may be due to degradation. It is observed that the interface region has
different topography roughness due to inhomogeneous degradation experienced by the monoSi cell. The cross-sectional area of the samples used for SP measurements are presented in
Figure 3 below. To maintain the electronic property of the layers during the scanning process,
the non-contact mode was preferred to avoid the degradation of the interfaces of the samples.
(a)

(b)

Figure 3. 3D topography images of (a) non-defective sample and (b) defective sample, used for the
electrical characterisation.

The micrograph presented in Figure 3 includes the images of the topographies of the
defective and non-defective samples. They are similar except for their roughness. The
maximum height of the non-defective sample was 12 nm and that of the defective was 57.6
nm. The minimum height roughness of the non-defective and defective samples used for the
electrical characterisation were 5 nm and 16.2 nm respectively. It was observed that the
brighter side of Figure 3a did not to correspond with height because of charge accumulation,
which had no effect on the electrical behaviour of the sample.

3.1. Surface Potential Measurement
The most viable parameter for defect analysis is electrical, hence the electrical measurement

of the samples are presented in this section. In section 3 the measurements presented are all
mechanical, but here only electrical analysis from KFPM is presented.

/>
582




An Analysis of the Surface Potential of Monocrystalline Silicon Solar Cell using Kelvin Probe
Force Microscopy

(b)

(a)

Figure 4 KPFM images of mono-Si (a) non-defective sample, (b) defective sample in 2D

Figure 4 presents the 2D image of the samples in Figure 3 obtained from the surface potential
measurements. Two distinct regions are seen with the p-Si corresponding with the brighter
side. The dark side corresponds with the n-Si at a lower potential, and the depletion region is
not clearly seen. The results in 2D show a clear demarcation between the pn junction of the
mono-Si solar cell for the non-defective and defective samples without illumination. The 3D
version of these images is presented below.
(a)

(b)

Figure 5. KPFM images of mono-Si (a) non-defective sample, (b) defective sample in 3D

Unlike the 2D images presented in Figure 4, the depletion region in the 3D images
presented in Figure 5 is clearly seen. The charging effect on the n-Si is observed in Figure 5b,
the charged region corresponding with the effect indicated by the black rectangular shape in
Figure 3a. The identification of the area of interest was confirmed by the topography profiles
obtained from the mechanical characterisation of the samples which was done before the
commencement of the electrical measurement. This allowed the positioning of the edge of the
sample. In each measurement, an average of 35 consecutive horizontal scan lines was used to
reduce noise effect from the surface potential measurement. According to Narchi et al [22],
multiple AFM images have the ability to drift. As such, the line profiles presented in Figure 6
(a and b) below are from the region of the samples with the most identified areas.
/>
583




G. Osayemwenre and F. Inambao
300

200

Surface potential (mV)

100

Surface potential (mV)

Non-defective sample

(a)

0

-100

-200

-300
0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

300
250
200
150
100
50
0
-50
-100
-150

-200
-250
-300
-350
-400
-450
-500
-550

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

(b)

0.0

3.0

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

0.5

1.0

200
180
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
-20
-40
-60
-80

-100
-120

60

40

(c)
20

0

-20
4

6

2.0

2.5

3.0

8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

(d)

0.0

10

Distance (µm)

O riginP ro 8

Defective sample i-Si region

Surface potential (mV)

Surface potential (mV)

80

2

1.5

Distance (m)

Distance across the interface (µm)

0

Single line profile of the
no defective sample

O riginP ro 8 E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

O riginP ro 8

E valuation

0.2

0.4

0.6

Distance (m)

0.8

1.0

Figure 6. Surface potential line profiles across the cross sections of mono-Si solar cell under room
condition for: (a) non-defective sample, (b) defective sample; (c) inside the depletion region of the
sample presented in Figure 6 (a) and (d) inside the depletion region of the sample presented in Figure
6 (b).

Each profile showed good coherent features as expected from a photo-voltage
measurement. In Figures 6 (a and b) the profiles showed higher surface potentials in the p-Si
layer with band bendings in the intrinsic layers, while the n-Si layer showed the lowest
surface potential. In the defective sample, the surface potential decreased in both the p-Si and
n-Si layers because of the effect of degradation. Furthermore, two different regions in the
samples (inside the intrinsic layers) were scanned and the results are presented in Figures 6 (c
and d). In Figure 6d, the surface potential showed a high noise level related to thermal
fluctuations. According to Narchi, this level of noise even after averaging is unexpected in a
perfect intrinsic layer like the one in Figure 6c [22-24].
The results in Figures 6b and Figure 6d show a huge discrepancy in the surface potential
of the sample from the non-defective region; this is not expected [22, 25]. Theoretically the
observed discrepancy may be due to the measuring device degradation phenomenon, like tip
oxidation or abrasion. However, the precautions taken and the use of frequency-modulated
KPFM (FM-KPFM) in the non-contact mode in this work eliminated the above assumption.
Therefore, an abnormal phenomena capable of affecting the opto-electrical property of the
sample might have occurred for the reasons stated below. Firstly, layer and interface
delamination; this allows particle migration to form an unintended doping effect. Thus, it
could form an n-dope or p-dope and create an n-n, a p-p or an n-p-n junction instead of a p-n
junction. Secondly, it could be because of a high concentration of the interface defect layer
/>
584

An Analysis of the Surface Potential of Monocrystalline Silicon Solar Cell using Kelvin Probe
Force Microscopy

between the p-Si and n-Si sides. If the latter had happened in this case it would have led to
electrical fluctuations across the interface regions and produced inhomogeneous potential
behavours, which when controlled could produce good fluctuations. Hence, KFPM can also
be used to study impurity concentration or impurity photovoltaic effect in PVmaterials.
As described above, the variations of surface potentials across i-Si regions can be
measured with KPFM. These types of measurements at nanoscale together with an electrical
nanodevice can be used to study defects in such regions and the application can be used in a
wide range of PV cells. The net surface potential presented above provides the overall
performance of the sample. However, scanning only the intrinsic layer provides a better view
of its spatial resolution and therefore is more advantageous for analysing the interfacial
degradation of the samples. Some areas in the 3D image of the SP image obtained from the iSi region showed lower values than those obtained from the non-defective sample. This is
because the region had a weak bonding strength as revealed by previous studies. Hence, the
AFM laser beaming from the cantilever led to the formation of imprints in the sample. Such
features of laser on surface potential measurements can be linked to previous identifications
and discussions by Osayemwenre et al and Feijfar et al [26-27]. Another reason is due to the
closeness of the p-Si and i-Si junctions to the edge of the region since a-Si is a pin device.
Literature revealed that the carrier transport at this region via the interface provides an Ohmic
conduction path. The Voc in this affected region dropped as seen from the surface potential
values.
The two samples (defective and non-defective) in this work were examined to show the
existence of photo-signal degradation. In each case, a slow scan was used to obtain reliable
results that are reproducible. As earlier stated, tip oxidation, sample modification during the
measurements and laser-induced effects were not found on the surface of the samples. Tip

oxidation and sample modification could not have been possible because different tips of the
same specifications and calibrations were used for each sample. For the surface induced
illumination, all conditions for each scan and the laser intensities were kept constant
throughout measurements. The only possible explanation for the surface potential decrease is
that it could be due to defect or trap effects previously studied by Zhang et al [10, 28]. The
hypothesis of defects is supported by the nonexistence of the interface junction between the iSi and n-Si layers in the defective sample. This makes the band bending less pronounced or
absent as obtained in Figure 6d; this is similar to Kikukawa’s report on the effect of surface
states on band bending [6, 21, 29].

3.2. The Electrical behaviour Path across the P-N Junction
The results from the 3D images in Figure 5b showed a drift in the surface potential when the
non-defective sample was compared with the defective sample. The range of drifts varies
from one region to another; in this case, the variation was less than 100 mV. 1000 nm area in
the interface region of each of the sample was scanned to see if there were changes in the
band bending. Hence the interested is on the curves smoothness and not on the value of the
SP, hence the scanned region in the depletion region are not on same scale. Figure 6b shows a
different shape that was contrary to the expected result as an undulated shape was observed.
The surface potential line seemed like a contamination of interface; this is not because of
interface modification but because of changes in an inbuilt electrical field. Such an effect is
not attributable to change in the work function that results from inhomogeneous surface, but
to the available electrostatic field due to charging [8, 16, 17, 29]. Built in electrical charge
normally influences KFPM at the interface region material [17, 29. The tip and sample work
functions, when rightly calibrated, are represented in Eq. 2 below. The work function

/>
585

G. Osayemwenre and F. Inambao

measured by KFPM is converted to surface potential. By taking a spatial local derivative of
Eq. 2, Eq. 3 is obtained [24, 30].
Φt − Φs(x, y) = eVsp(x, y)

2

ΔΦs(x, y) = −eΔVsp(x, y)

3

Note that Φs and Φt stand for samples and tip work function respectively, and Vsp is the
surface potential. Figure 6 presents significant information regarding the effect of degradation
inside the p-n junction. Such information can be used to investigate interface defects,
especially in shallow levels, provided the samples are mechanically polished to expose the
various layers.

4. CONCLUSION
In this study, the structural defects and electrical behaviours of a mono-Si cell were examined
via the cell’s cross-sections. SPM and KPFM were used to identify the defective regions of
the samples by measuring the surface potential of samples from a defective region and a nondefective region of a mono-Si cell. As expected, the 2D and 3D images of the surface
potential showed two- and three-stepwise profiles from the p-Si to the n-Si layers
respectively. The 3D image clearly showed the interface between the p-Si and the n-Si layers.
With KPFM the electrical behaviour of the two cleaved samples from a single mono-Si solar
cell was analysed to show the effect of defects on PV cells. The KPFM result of the sample
from the defective region decreased compared to the surface potential of the sample from the
non-defective region. To further explore the effect of degradation on the sample, the depletion
regions were analysed by scanning the layer or region between the p-Si and the n-Si layers. In
addition, a further analysis of the depletion regions showed an abnormal band bending pattern

contrary to what was found in the non-defective region of the cell. Furthermore, the possible
challenges of interpreting KPFM images and profile results are itemised from a range of
physical features. Based on theoretical explanations, most of these features were eliminated.
This novel technique proffers methods that can be used to investigate surface photovoltage
changes in various materials at nanoscale of different crystalline silicon solar and inorganic
hybrid perovskite PV cells. In conclusion, the presence of morphological defect does not
always correspond to bulk defect in a mono-Si solar cell. However, the roughness of the
sample increases in the defective region of a mono-Si cell.

FUNDING
This research received no external funding.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors would like to express their gratitude to the following organization:
University of Fort Hare, University of South Africa, and University of KwaZulu-Natal.

DECLARATION OF CONFLICTING INTERESTS
The authors declare no potential conflicts of interest in respect of this research, authorship
and/or publication of this article.

DATA AVAILABILITY
The data used to support the findings of this study are included within the article. However, in
support of open access research, all underlying data can be accessed upon request via email to
the corresponding author.

/>
586

An Analysis of the Surface Potential of Monocrystalline Silicon Solar Cell using Kelvin Probe
Force Microscopy

REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

[10]

[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

Nonnenmacher, M., O’Boyle, M. P. and Wickramasinghe, H. K. Kelvin Probe Force
Microscopy.
Applied
Physics
Letters,
58(25),
1991,
pp.
2921–2923.
/>Melitz, W., Shen, J., Kummel, A. C. and Lee, S. Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy and its
Application.
Surface
Science
Reports,
66(1),
2011,
pp.
1–27.
/>Doukkali, A., Ledain, S., Guasch, C. and Bonnet, J. Surface Potential Mapping of Biased
pn Junction with Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy: Application to Cross-Section Devices.
Applied Surface Science, 235(4), 2004, pp. 507–512.
Moores, B., Hane, F., Eng, L. and Leonenko, Z. Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy in
Application to Biomolecular Films: Frequency Modulation, Amplitude Modulation, and

Lift
Mode.
Ultramicroscopy,
110(6),
2010,
pp.
708–711.
/>Okamoto, K., Sugawara, Y. and Morita, S. The Imaging Mechanism of Atomic-Scale
Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy and its Application to Atomic-Scale Force Mapping.
Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, 42(11), 2003, pp. 7163–7168.
/>Kikukawa, A., Hosaka, H., and Imura, R. Silicon pn Junction Imaging and
Characterization using Sensitivity Enhanced Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy. Applied
Physics Letters, 66, 1995, pp. 3510. />Barth, C., Foster, A. S., Henry, C. R. and Shluger, A. L. Recent Trends in Surface
Characterization and Chemistry with High Resolution Scanning Force Methods. Advanced
Materials, 23(4), 2011, pp. 477–501. />Sommerhalter, C., Glatzel, T., Matthes, T. W., Jager-Waldau, A. and Lux-Steiner, M. C.
Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy in Ultra High Vacuum Using Amplitude Modulation
Detection of the Electrostatic Forces. Applied Surface Science, 157(4), 2000 pp. 263–268.
/>Douheret, O., Swinnen, A., Berthot S. et al. High-Resolution Morphological and Electrical
Characterisation of Organic Bulk Heterojunction Solar Cells by Scanning Probe
Microscopy. Progress in Photovoltaics: Research and Applications, 15(8), 2007, pp. 713–
726. />Tal, O., Gao, W., Chan, C. K., Kahn, A. and Rosenwaks, Y. Measurement of Interface
Potential Change and Space Charge Region across Metal/Organic/Metal Structures using
Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy. Applied Physics Letters, 85(18), 2004, pp. 4148–4150.
Zerweck, U., Loppacher, C., Otto, T., Grafstrom, S. and Eng, L. M. Kelvin Probe Force
Microscopy of C60 on Metal Substrates: Towards Molecular Resolution. Nanotechnology,
18(8), 2007. />Lee, S., Shinde, A. and Ragan, R. Morphological Work Function Dependence of RareEarth
Disilicide
Metal
Nanostructures.
Nanotechnology,

20(3),
2009.
/>Sadewasser, S., Jelinek, P., Fang C. -K, et al. New Insights on Atomic-Resolution
Frequency-Modulation Kelvin-Probe Force Microscopy Imaging of Semiconductors.
Physical Review Letters, 103(26), 2009. />Sadewasser, S., Glatzel, T., Rusu, M., Jager-Waldau, A. and Lux-Steiner, M. C. HighResolution Work Function Imaging of Single Grains of Semiconductor surfaces. Applied
Physics Letters, 80(16), 2002, pp. 2979–2981. />Ternes, M., Lutz, C. P., Hirjibehedin, C. F., Giessibl, F. J., and Heinrich, A. J., The Force
Needed to Move an Atom on a Surface. Science, 319(5866), 2008, pp. 1066–1069.
/>Albrecht T. R., Grutter P., Horne D., and Rugar D. Frequency-Modulation Detection using
High-Q Cantilever for enhanced Force Microscope Sensitivity, Journal of Applied
Physics, 69(2), 1991, pp. 668–673.

/>
587




G. Osayemwenre and F. Inambao
[17]

[18]

[19]

[20]

[21]

[22]

[23]

[24]

[25]

[26]

[27]

[28]

[29]

[30]

Henkelman G., Johannesson G. and Jonsson H. J. Methods for Finding Saddle Points and
Minimum Energy Paths, In: Schwartz S.D. ed. Theoretical Methods in Condensed Phase
Chemistry. Progress in Theoretical Chemistry and Physics, vol 5. Dordrecht: Springer,
2000, pp. 269–300.
Rosenwaks, P. Y., Saraf, S., Tal, O., Schwarzman, A., Glatzel, D. T., Lux-Steiner, P. D.
M. C. Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy of Semiconductors. In: Kalinin, S. and Gruverman,
A. eds. Scanning Probe Microscopy. New York: Springer. 2007, pp. 663–689.
/>Stegemann B., et al. Passivation of Crystalline Silicon Wafers by Ultrathin Oxide Layers:
Comparison of Wet chemical, Plasma and Thermal Oxidation Techniques. IEEE 7th
World
Conference
on
Photovoltaic
Energy

Conversion,
2018.
/>Marchat, C., Connolly, J. P. Kleider, J-P., Alvarez, J., Koduvelikulathu, L. J. and Puel, J.
P. KPFM Surface Photovoltage Measurement and Numerical Simulation, EPJ
Photovoltaics 10(3), 2019. />Osayemwenre G. O. and Meyer, E. L. Absorption Degradation of Mono-Si and Poly-Si
Solar Cells Due to Hot Spot Formation. Digest Journal of Nanomaterials and
Biostructures, 9(3), 2014, pp. 1199–1206.
Narchi, P., Alvarez, J., Chrétien, P. et al. Cross-Sectional Investigations on Epitaxial
Silicon Solar Cells by Kelvin and Conducting Probe Atomic Force Microscopy: Effect of
Illumination. Nanoscale Research Letters, 11(55), 2016. />Finote, E., Leonenko, Y., Moores, B., Eng, L., Amrein, M. and Leonenko, Z. Effect of
Cholesterol on Electrostatics in Lipid−Protein Films of a Pulmonary Surfactant.
Langmuir, 26(3), 2010, pp. 1929–1935. />Salerno, M. and Dante, S. Scanning Kelvin Probe Microscopy: Challenges and
Perspectives towards Increased Application on Biomaterials and Biological Samples.
Materials 11(6), 2018, pp. 951. />Park, J., Bang, D., K. Jang, Haam, S., Yang, J., and Na, S. The Work Function of Doped
Polyaniline Nanoparticles Observed by Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy. Nanotechnology,
23(36), 2012. />Osayemwenre, G. O., Meyer, E. L and Taziwa, R. T. Investigation of Photovoltage
Variation in Amorphous Silicon Solar Module Interface by Cross-Sectional Scanning
Kelvin Probe Microscopy. Advanced Science Engineering and Medicine, 10, 2018, pp. 1–
6. />Feijfar, A., Hyvl, M., Ledinski, M., Vetushka, A., Stuchlik, J., Kocka, J., Misra, S.,
O’Donnell, B., Foldyna, M., Yu, L., Roca, P. and Cabarrocas, I. Microscopic
Measurements of Variations in Local (Photo) Electronic Properties in Nanostructured
Solar Cells. Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells, 119, 2013, pp. 228–234.
1016/j.solmat.2013.07.04.
Zhang P. and Cantiello, H. F. Electrical Mapping of Microtubular Structures by Surface
Potential
Microscopy.
Applied
Physics
Letters,
95

(11),
2009.
/>Zhang, Z., Hetterich, M., Lemmer, U., Powalla, M., Holschner, H. Cross Sections of
Operating Cu(In, Ga)Se2thin-film Solar Cells under Defined White Light Illumination
Analyzed by Kelvin Probe Force Microscopy. Applied Physics Letters, 102, 2013,
023903. />Herrmann W. M., et al. Operational Behaviour of Commercial Solar Cells under Reverse
Biased Conditions, 2nd WCPEC, Vienna, 1998, pp. 2357-2359.

/>
588