Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-x5gtn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-01T17:54:05.140Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

New experiments on the relationship between light-induced defects and photoconductivity degradation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Stephan Heck
Affiliation:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, 80401, U.S.A.
Howard M. Branz
Affiliation:
National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Golden, CO, 80401, U.S.A.
Get access

Abstract

We report experimental results that help settle apparent inconsistencies in earlier work on photoconductivity and light-induced defects in hydrogenated amorphous silicon (a-Si:H) and point toward a new understanding of this subject. After observing that light-induced photoconductivity degradation anneals out at much lower T than the light-induced increase in deep defect density, Han and Fritzsche[1] suggested that two kinds of defects are created during illumination of a-Si:H. In this view, one kind of defect degrades the photoconductivity and the other increases defect sub-bandgap optical absorption. However, the light-induced degradation model of Stutzmann et al.[2] assumes that photoconductivity is inversely proportional to the dangling-bond defect density. We observe two kinds of defects that are distinguished by their annealing activation energies, but because their densities remain in strict linear proportion during their creation, the two kinds of defects cannot be completely independent.

In our measurements of photoconductivity and defect absorption (constant photocurrent method) during 25°C light soaking and during a series of isochronal anneals between 25 < T < 190°C, we find that the absorption measured with E ≤1.1 eV, first increases during annealing, then exhibits the usual absorption decrease found for deeper defects. The maximum in this absorption at E ≤1.1eV occurs simultaneously with a transition from fast to slow recovery of photoconductivity. The absorption for E ≤1.1eV shows two distinct annealing activation energies: the signal rises with about 0.87 eV and falls with about 1.15 eV. The 0.87 eV activation energy roughly equals the activation energy for the dominant, fast, recovery of photoconductivity. The 1.15 eV activation energy roughly equals the single activation energy for annealing of the light-induced dangling bond absorption.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2001

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Han, D. and Fritzsche, H., J. Non-Cryst. Sol., 1983. 59&60, p. 397.Google Scholar
2. Stutzmann, M., Jackson, W.B., and Tsai, C.C., Phys. Rev. B, 1985. 32, p. 23.Google Scholar
3.See e.g., Amorphous and Microcrystalline Silicon Technology-1997, 467, 1997, San Francisco, Materials Research Society.Google Scholar
4. Staebler, D.L. and Wronski, C.R., Appl. Phys. Lett., 1977. 31, p. 292.Google Scholar
5. Hirabayashi, I., Morigaki, K., and Nitta, S., Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, 1980. 19, p. L357.Google Scholar
6. Dersch, H., Stuke, J., and Beichler, J., Appl. Phys. Lett., 1981. 38, p. 456.Google Scholar
7. Shepard, K. et al. , Appl. Phys. Lett., 1988. 53, p. 1644.10.1063/1.99937Google Scholar
8. Stradins, P. and Fritzsche, H., Phil. Mag. B, 1994. 69, p. 121.Google Scholar
9. Zhang, Q. et al. in Amorphous Silicon Technology-1994, 336, 1994. Pittsburgh: Materials Research Society.Google Scholar
10. Stradins, P. and Fritzsche, H.. in Amorphous and Microcrystalline Silicon Technology-1997, 467, 1997. San Francisco: Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh.Google Scholar
11. Heck, S. and Branz, H.M., 2001, unpublished.Google Scholar
12. Benatar, L. et al. in Amorphous Silicon Technology-1992, 258, 1992. San Francisco: Materials Research Society.Google Scholar
13. Stradins, P., Kondo, M., and Matsuda, A., IEEE, 2000, in print.Google Scholar
14. Wang, Q., Antoniadis, H., and Schiff, E.A., Appl. Phys. Lett., 1992. 60, p. 2791.Google Scholar
15. Hattori, K. et al. , J Non-Cryst Solids, 2000. 266–269, p. 352.Google Scholar
16. Stradins, P., Fritzsche, H., and Tran, M.. in Amorphous Silicon Technology-1994, 336, 1994. Pittsburgh: Materials Research Society.Google Scholar
17. Schumm, G., Nitsch, K., and Bauer, G.H., Phil. Mag. B, 1988. 58, p. 411.10.1080/13642818808218383Google Scholar
18. Simmons, J.G. and Taylor, G.W., Phys. Rev. B, 1971. 4, p. 502.Google Scholar
19. Qiu, C. et al. , J. Appl. Phys., 1988. 64, p. 7137.Google Scholar
20. Tanielian, M.H., Goodman, N.B., and Fritzsche, H., J. de Physique, 1981. 42, p. C4375.Google Scholar
21. Guha, S., Huang, C.Y., and Hudgens, S.J., Phys. Rev. B, 1984. 29, p. 5995.Google Scholar