Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

improve temperature response #75

Open
mikofski opened this issue May 4, 2018 · 0 comments
Open

improve temperature response #75

mikofski opened this issue May 4, 2018 · 0 comments

Comments

@mikofski
Copy link
Contributor

mikofski commented May 4, 2018

problem

despite the improvements made by improvements to Isat2 by @chetan201 in #64, there is still a systematic bias with temperature.

proposal

Other models have an additional temperature dependence on either band gap (DeSoto 5-parameter model) or ideality factor (PVSyst). IMHO I think that temperature dependence of band gap is makes sense because some materials have indirect band gaps which means that elevating carriers from the valence band to the conduction band is sensitive to temperature.

band gap temperature dependence

DeSoto 5-parameter model has coefficients for each device physics that can be used to estimate the effective temperature dependence of the band gap using this relation:

E_g = EgRef * (1 + dEgdT*(Tcell_K - Tref_K))

where coefficients EgRef and dEgdt are must be the same for fitting and predicting:

device EgRef dEgdT
Si 1.121 -0.0002677
CdTe 1.475 -0.0003
CIS 1.010 -0.00011
CIGS 1.15 ????
GaAs 1.424 -0.000433
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant