Characterization of antireflection moth-eye film

on crystalline silicon photovoltaic module

Noboru Yamada,1,* Toshikazu Ijiro,1 Eiko Okamoto,2 Kentaro Hayashi,2
and Hideki Masuda3
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Nagaoka University of Technology, Nagaoka, Japan
2
Mitsubishi Rayon Co. Ltd., Tokyo, Japan
3
Department of Applied Chemistry, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Hachioji, Japan
*noboru@nagaokaut.ac.jp

Abstract: We have characterized antireflection (AR) moth-eye films placed

on top of crystalline silicon photovoltaic (PV) modules by indoor and
outdoor experiments and examined improvements in conversion efficiency.
The effects of the ratio of diffuse solar irradiation to total solar irradiation
(diffusion index) and incident angle on efficiency have been quantitatively
analyzed. Using computer simulations, yearly efficiency improvements
under different installation conditions have been projected. We have shown
that the use of AR moth-eye films offers the best advantages. Further,
vertical tilt angle installation leads to the highest efficiency improvement,
whereas spectral matching with the PV modules influences the efficiency
improvement.
©2011 Optical Society of America
OCIS codes: (310.1210) Antireflection coatings; (040.5350) Photovoltaic; (350.6050) Solar
energy.

References and links

1. J. Kim, D. Inns, K. Fogel, and D. K. Sadana, “Surface texturing of single-crystalline silicon solar cells using low
density SiO2 films as an anisotropic etch mask,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 94(12), 2091–2093 (2010).
2. D. Kumar, S. K. Srivastava, P. K. Singh, M. Husain, and V. Kumar, “Fabrication of silicon nanowire arrays
based solar cell with improved performance,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells (2010),
doi:10.1016/j.solmat.2010.04.024.
3. V. V. Iyengar, B. K. Nayak, and M. C. Gupta, “Optical properties of silicon light trapping structures for
photovoltaics,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 94(12), 2251–2257 (2010).
4. S. A. Boden, and D. M. Bagnall, “Sunrise to sunset optimization of thin film antireflective coatings for
encapsulated, planar silicon solar cells,” Prog. Photo. 17(4), 241–252 (2009).
5. M. F. Schubert, F. W. Mont, S. Chhajed, D. J. Poxson, J. K. Kim, and E. F. Schubert, “Design of multilayer
antireflection coatings made from co-sputtered and low-refractive-index materials by genetic algorithm,” Opt.
Express 16(8), 5290–5298 (2008).
6. H. Sai, Y. Kanamori, K. Arafune, Y. Ohshita, and M. Yamaguchi, “Light trapping effect of submicron surface
textures in crystalline Si solar cells,” Prog. Photo. 15(5), 415–423 (2007).
7. S. A. Boden, and D. M. Bagnall, “Optimization of moth-eye antireflection schemes for silicon solar cells,” Prog.
Photo. 18(3), 195–203 (2010).
8. S. A. Boden, and D. M. Bagnall, “Nanostructured biomimetic moth-eye arrays in silicon by nanoimprint
lithography,” Proc. SPIE 7401, 7410J (2009).
9. C.-H. Sun, P. Jiang, and B. Jiang, “Broadband moth-eye antireflection coatings on silicon,” Appl. Phys. Lett.
92(6), 061112 (2008).
10. C. G. Bernhard, “Structural and functional adaptation in a visual system,” Endeavor 26, 79–84 (1967).
11. P. B. Clapham, and M. C. Hutley, “Reduction of lens reflection by the moth-eye principle,” Nature 244(5414),
281–282 (1973).
12. D. G. Stavenga, S. Foletti, G. Palasantzas, and K. Arikawa, “Light on the moth-eye corneal nipple array of
butterflies,” Proc. R. Soc. B-Biol,” Science 273, 661–667 (2006).
13. A. Gombert, W. Glaubitt, K. Rose, J. Dreibholz, B. Bläsi, A. Heinzel, D. Sporn, W. Döll, and V. Wittwer,
“Subwavelength-structured antireflective surfaces on glass,” Thin Solid Films 351(1-2), 73–78 (1999).
14. A. Kaless, U. Schulz, P. Munzert, and N. Kaiser, “NANO-moth-eye antireflection pattern by plasma treatment of
polymers,” Surf. Coat. Tech. 200(1-4), 58–61 (2005).
15. S. J. Choi, and S. Y. Huh, “Direct structuring of a biomimetic anti-reflective, self-cleaning surface for light
harvesting in organic solar cells,” Macromol. Rapid Commun. 31(6), 539–544 (2010).
16. T. Yanagishita, K. Yasui, T. Kondo, Y. Kawamoto, K. Nishio, and H. Masuda, “Antireflection polymer surface
using anodic porous alumina molds with tapered holes,” Chem. Lett. 36(4), 530–531 (2007).

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A118
17. Q. Chen, G. Hubbard, P. A. Shields, C. Liu, D. W. E. Allsopp, W. N. Wang, and S. Abbott, “Broadband moth-
eye antireflection coatings fabricated by low-cost nanoimprinting,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 94(26), 263118 (2009).
18. N. Yamada, O. N. Kim, T. Tokimitsu, Y. Nakai, and H. Masuda, “Optimization of anti-reflection moth-eye
structures for use in crystalline silicon solar cells,” Prog. Photo. 18, 195–203 (2010).
19. H. Field, “Solar cell spectral response measurement errors related to spectral band width and chopped light
waveform,” Twenty-Sixth IEEE Photovol. Spec. Conf., 471–474 (1997).
20. E. Skoplaki, A. G. Boudouvis, and J. A. Palyvos, “A simple correlation for the operating temperature of
photovoltaic modules of arbitrary mounting,” Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 92(11), 1393–1402 (2008).
21. C. Honsberg, and S. Bowden, “PVCDROM, Appendices: Standard Solar Spectra,”
http://www.pveducation.org/pvcdrom/appendicies/standard-solar-spectra.
22. H. Akasaka, N. Hideyo, K. Soga, S. Matsumoto, K. Emura, N. Miki, E. Emura, and K. Takemasa, “Development
of Expanded AMeDAS weather data for building calculation in Japan,” ASHRAE Transactions,” Symposia 106,
455–465 (2000).
23. W. Marion, and K. Urban, “National Solar Radiation Data Base,” http://rredc.nrel.gov/solar/old_data/nsrdb/1961-
1990/tmy2/.

1. Introduction
Photovoltaic (PV) systems that use solar cells to convert solar power to electricity are well
known to have considerable potential to mitigate the current energy and environmental crisis;
however, it is important to improve their efficiency for maximum benefits. The efficiency of
PV systems can be directly increased by reducing the reflections from the surface of solar
cells. As a result, antireflection (AR) coatings have now become essential components of PV
module systems. Crystalline silicon (c-Si) PV cells are presently the most important PV cells
because they have long life and they can be recycled. Many types of AR coatings on c-Si PV
cells have been developed (for example [1–9], ).
A biomimetic moth-eye structure is a superior AR coating that exhibits ultralow
reflections for broadband wavelengths and omnidirectional light incidences [10–15]. The first
artificial moth-eye structure was created by recording the interference patterns of two
coherent laser beams on a photoresist [11]. Recently, various methods have been developed to
create moth-eye-like micro/nanostructures. Master structures with a surface area of 0.5 m2
have been produced by employing a complex holographic optical process or plasma treatment
[13,14]. A dual-scale hierarchical structure, which not only exhibits excellent AR but also
superhydrophobic properties, has been fabricated by a template-mediated UV replica molding
[15]. In a recent study, a high throughput nanoimprint technique using anodic porous alumina
molds [16] was developed in order to deposit a moth-eye structure made of acrylic resin on a
substrate, as shown in Fig. 1. Large-area low-cost moth-eye films can be fabricated with a
roll-to-roll process by using this method. A similar technique has also been reported by [17].
Some researchers have designed the shape of the moth-eye structure for applications to c-Si
PV cells in such a manner that the reflection and absorption can be minimized and
transmission can be maximized over a spectrum range that matches that of c-Si PV cells [18].
Despite such excellent studies, the characterization of a practical scale PV module with
moth-eye AR coating has not been adequately reported yet. In this paper, we report the
characterization of a c-Si PV module having a moth-eye film on its top surface by indoor and
outdoor experiments; further, we report the resulting conversion efficiency improvements. In
particular, the effects of the ratio of diffuse solar radiation to total solar radiation (hereafter,
diffusion index) and incident angle on the conversion efficiency have been quantitatively
analyzed, which, to our knowledge, have never been previously reported till date.
Furthermore, computer simulations based on the experimental results are presented to project
yearly efficiency improvements by the application of the moth-eye film under several
installation conditions.

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A119
 (a) (b)
Fig. 1. Moth-eye structure made of acrylic resin. (a) Fabricated moth-eye structure observed
using scanning electron microscopy (SEM). (b) Fabricated rolls of moth-eye film; the rolls
appear green due to the color of the protection film.

2. Indoor experiment
Figure 2 shows comparisons of the reflectances of the moth-eye film and the commercially
available conventional multilayered AR film. Incident angle dependency of spectral
reflectance was measured by using spectrophotometer JASCO V-670 equipped with absolute
reflectance measurement accessory JASCO ARSN-733 which can adjust incident angle to the
film. In order to avoid reflections, the back surfaces of the measured films were roughened by
sandpaper and painted matte-black. It is obvious that the moth-eye film has broadband and
omnidirectional AR performance, that is, very low reflectance. The reflectance has the
maximum values of 1.2% and 5.7% at small (θin = 5°, 1100nm) and large (θin = 60°, 1100nm)
incident angles, respectively, for the primary spectral response range (approximately 400–
1200 nm; peak: around 1000 nm) of the c-Si PV cells [19]. This property implies that the
moth-eye film has the potential to improve the c-Si PV module efficiency during sunrise-to-
sunset operations.
This moth-eye film was practically applied to the top surface of a typical c-Si PV module;
the effective area was 25 cm × 18 cm. The film was manually glued to the top of the PV
module by using a roller device. Figure 3 shows photos and cross-sectional schematics of the
modules with and without the moth-eye film. The average geometry of the moth-eye shape is
also shown. By comparing the photos in Fig. 3(c), it can be observed that the module surface
without the moth-eye film is reflecting the hands of the camera operator, whereas the one with
the moth-eye film is not.
10
9 Moth-eye AR film

8 Multilayered AR film

7
Reflectance [%]

6
5
4 θin = 60 °
3 θin = 30 °
θin = 5 °
2
1
0
400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100
Wavelength [nm]
Fig. 2. Spectral reflectance of moth-eye antireflection (AR) film and the conventional
multilayered AR film. Solid line: moth-eye AR; Dashed line: conventional AR; red: θin = 5°;
blue: θin = 30°; green: θin = 60°.

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A120
 EVA
c-Si cell
(a) (b) (c)
Fig. 3. Photos and cross-sectional schematics of the tested c-Si PV modules (a) with moth-eye
film; (b) without moth-eye; (c) upper: with moth-eye; lower: without moth-eye.

First, an indoor experiment was conducted using a solar simulator. Figure 4(a) shows a
photo of the solar simulator used in the experiment. The modules with and without the moth-
eye film were set on a horizontal test table. The light incident on the modules was diffusive,
or, in other words, the ratio of the diffuse radiation to direct (beam) radiation was
approximately 0.9. To verify the individual differences among the tested modules with respect
to the electric conversion efficiency, the current–voltage (I–V) curve characteristics of each
module were tested before the moth-eye film was applied to each module. A fairly low
individual difference (less than 1.5% of the absolute value of the efficiency) was confirmed.
Individual differences among the measurement systems were also confirmed to be negligible.
Figure 4(b) shows the conversion efficiency at the maximum power with and without the
moth-eye film. The efficiency was averaged by changing the module position on the test table
in order to eliminate the possible effects of the non-uniformity of irradiance. As a result, it
was found that the module efficiency with the moth-eye film was 1.05 times higher than that
of the module without the moth-eye film. During the experiments, the average room and
module temperatures were 25 °C and 41 °C, respectively. For comparison, the resultant
efficiencies in the outdoor experiment (next section) are also shown in Fig. 4(b). The outdoor
efficiency was higher than the indoor efficiency because the indoor module temperature was
approximately 11–16 °C higher than the outdoor module temperature. This trend is consistent
with the reported correlation between the operating temperature and conversion efficiency of
the module [20].
17
without moth-eye
with moth-eye
16
Conversion efficiency[%]

15

14

13

12
Indoor Outdoor
(a) (b)
Fig. 4. Indoor experiment using 1.2 m × 1.2 m solar simulator that meets Class-C ASTM / IEC
/ JIS standards; (a) solar simulator; the temperature inside the room was controlled to be 25 °C;
(b) comparison of conversion efficiency of c-Si PV modules with and without moth-eye film.
The average efficiencies of the same modules in outdoor experiments are also shown for
comparison.

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A121
3. Outdoor experiment
An outdoor experiment was conducted using the same test modules as the indoor experiment.
Figure 5 shows the schematic diagram and photo of the outdoor experiment system. The
modules were placed on a 40° tilted surface facing the south at Nagaoka University of
Technology (lat.: 37.44°N, long.: 138.85°E). A sun tracker EKO STR-21 equipped with a
pyrheliometer (full opening view angle: 5° ± 0.2°) and a pyranometer were used to measure
the direct normal irradiance (DNI) and global normal irradiance (GNI), respectively. The
global irradiation on the tilted surface was also measured by using a pyranometer placed on
the tilted surface with the modules. The incident angle to the modules, θin, was calculated
using the orientation of the tracked surface. The diffusion index was calculated by
(GNIDNI)/GNI.
Figure 6(a) shows the daily variations in the conversion efficiency of the modules
with/without moth-eye film on May 21, 2010, a clear day. The moth-eye film obviously
improved the efficiency during the entire measurement period. Measurements were also
carried out on the other 7 days in May and June. Figure 6(b) shows a histogram of the
measurement hour and efficiency improvement Χ for all measurement data; here, Χ is the
relative improvement ratio of the conversion efficiency, i.e., X = 5 shows that the conversion
efficiency of the module with the moth-eye film is 1.05 times higher than that without the
moth-eye film. The average value of Χ is 5.5. 81% of the measurement hour exists in the
range 3  Χ  7.
Sun tracker
EKO STR-21
with Pyrheliometer
PV module 1~4 and Pyranometer
Pyranometer
Pyranometer

Sun tracker
with Pyrheliometer

Pyranometer

I-V curve tracer PC

EKO MP-160
PV module 1~4

(a) (b)
Fig. 5. Apparatus of outdoor experiment system. (a) Schematic diagram of the system. (b)
Photo of the system. Tilt angle of PV modules is 40°, facing southward.
19 1.2 14
GNI
Conversion efficiency [%]

Solar irradiance [kW/m2]

DNI 1 12
18
10
0.8
17
Hours

8
0.6
16 6
0.4
4
15
w/ moth-eye film 0.2
2 81 %
w/o moth-eye film
14 0 0
8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00 0 2 4 6 8 10
Time X
(a) (b)
Fig. 6. Results of outdoor experiment. (a) Daily variations in conversion efficiency of the
modules with and without moth-eye film on May 21, 2010. (b) Histogram of efficiency
improvement Χ for 8-day experiment. Vertical axis represents measurement hour with respect
to X value.

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A122
 blue 00 °≦ θin ≦30 °
red 30 °＜ θin ≦60 °
7 5
green 60 °＜ θin ≦90 ° λ λ= =800 nm nm
1800
λ λ= =850 nm nm
1850
6 λ λ= =900 nm nm
1900
λ λ= =950 nm nm
1950
4
5 λ λ= =1000
1000nmnm
Moth-eye film
X 4 (Experiment and calculation)

X
3
3

2
2
1 Conventional AR
(Calculation)
0 1
0~0.2 0.2~0.5 0.5~1.0 0 20 40 60
Diffusion index θin [º]
(a) (b)
Fig. 7. Relationship among efficiency improvement X, incident angle, and diffusion index
range. (a) Overall relationship; points: experiment; lines: guide line for the calculated points;
Each experiment and calculation point is mean value over a range of incident angle and
diffusion index; Color legend indicates that each point and line corresponds to a range of
incident angle. (b) Spectral breakdown of the relationship for the moth-eye film.

The incident-angle dependency of the reflectance of the moth-eye film, which is shown in
Fig. 2, indicates that the efficiency improvement Χ can be attributed to the relationship
between the incident angle of the beam solar radiation and the diffusion index. To characterize
this attribution, the experimental data was statistically analyzed. Figure 7(a) shows the
relationship among X, diffusion index, and incident angle of beam solar radiation θin. Not only
experimental results but also projected results for both the moth-eye and conventional AR
films have been plotted for comparison. In computer simulations, the measured incident-angle
dependencies of the reflectance for both films were used to project efficiency improvements
taking into consideration the spectral responses of c-Si cells [19]. In the case of the solar
spectrum, the same fraction as the AM1.5 standard solar spectrum [21] was assumed in the
simulations. Obviously, the projected results are consistent with the experimental results. The
moth-eye film exhibits the best results up to X = 7 with a large incident angle >60° for low
diffusion index <0.2, whereas it tends to converge to X = 5 with small incident-angle
dependency for high diffusion index >0.5. In addition, an interesting characteristic can be
observed in Fig. 7(a). The lowest X of the moth-eye AR film appears in the middle incident
angle range 30° < θin  60° for any diffusion index, whereas in contrast, the lowest X of the
multilayered AR film appears in the lowest incident angle range 0°  θin  30°. To explain the
reasons for this characteristic, we plotted the spectral breakdown of the relationship between
X and θin for the moth-eye film; see Fig. 7(b). X for a wavelength of 1000 nm shows the
lowest improvement in the range 30° < θin < 50°. This is caused by the higher reflectance
trend of the moth-eye film for a longer wavelength range, as shown in Fig. 2. In addition, the
spectral response of c-Si is rather high at around 1000 nm due to its band gap, and this leads
to improved AR performance. Thus, further efficiency improvements can be achieved by the
optimization of spectral matching.
4. Estimation of yearly efficiency improvement
The computer simulations were in good agreement with the abovementioned experimental
results; further, by using the simulations, the yearly efficiency improvement X was estimated
for two installation places, Tokyo and Phoenix (Table 1). The latitudes of these places are
similar, whereas in contrast, their yearly diffusion indexes are different. The tilt angle of the

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A123
module was assumed to be 0°, 30°, 60°, and 90° facing the equator. The available weather
data [22,23] were used. In the simulation, the effects of module temperature were neglected
Table 1. Estimated Yearly Efficiency Improvement X of the PV Module Using the Moth-
eye Film.
Tokyo, Japan Phoenix, US-Arizona
Tilt angle
lat. 35.40°N lat. 33.43°N
0° 5.2 (54.7)* 5.0 (99.7)
30° 5.0 (64.2) 4.8 (109.4)
60° 5.0 (58.6) 5.0 (97.7)
90° 5.6 (41.7) 6.0 (66.3)
Yearly average diffusion index 0.41 0.21
* Value in parentheses represents yearly gain of the trapped irradiation in kWh/m 2

0.7
Tokyo, Japan
0.6
(a) Phoenix, US-Arizona

0.5
Diffusion index

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
8
(b) (c)
7

5
X

2
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.
8
(d) (e)
7

5
X

2
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May. Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Fig. 8. Estimated monthly efficiency X of PV module with moth-eye film. (a) Monthly average
of diffusion index; Tilt angle of the module: (b) 0°, (c) 30°, (d) 60°, (e) 90°.

for the sake of simplicity. Table 1 summarizes the estimated yearly efficiency improvement
X. The most relevant finding is that for both places, the tilt angle of 90° (vertical to
horizontal) exhibits the highest improvement. In the case of other tilt angles, the improvement
is almost similar to that in Tokyo and Phoenix. On the other hand, the highest gain of the solar
irradiation trapped by the AR moth-eye film was at the tilt angle of 30°, whereas the lowest
gain was at the tilt angle of 90° for both places. Figure 8 shows the monthly breakdown of the

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A124
estimated X and diffusion index. A close correlation can be observed between X and diffusion
index in the monthly variations. The diffusion index in Tokyo is higher than that in Phoenix,
especially in summer. In the case of the larger tilt angle, this trend caused the lower efficiency
improvement in summer in Tokyo.
5. Conclusions
The performance of a practical-scale moth-eye AR when applied to the top surface of a c-Si
PV module was quantitatively characterized by experiments and computer simulations. The
efficiency improvements obtained when the moth-eye film was used were remarkable when
compared with the performance of non-AR and conventional AR modules. The efficiency
improvement is attributed to an incident-angle characteristic, i.e., the ratio of diffuse solar
irradiation to beam solar irradiation. When the moth-eye film was used, the vertical tilt angle
installation of the photovoltaic module gave the highest efficiency improvement with the
diffusion index ranging from 0.21 to 0.47, whereas the tilt angle close to the latitude led to the
highest gain of the trapped solar irradiation. For the case of the highest gain, efficiency was
improved to approximately 1.05 times higher than that without moth-eye film. Moreover, the
spectral matching with the photovoltaic cell also affected the efficiency improvement. It may
be possible to improve the efficiency further by tuning and optimizing the spectral incident-
angle dependency of the reflectance of the moth-eye film for spectral responses of the coupled
photovoltaic cells. Further research is required to demonstrate the long-term reliability and
durability of moth-eye films and popularize them.

#138826 - $15.00 USD Received 29 Nov 2010; revised 10 Jan 2011; accepted 15 Jan 2011; published 20 Jan 2011
(C) 2011 OSA 14 March 2011 / Vol. 19, No. S2 / OPTICS EXPRESS A125