Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Renewable Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/renene

Development of a novel solar PV module model for reliable power

prediction under real outdoor conditions
Manish Kumar a, Prashant Malik b, Rahul Chandel b, Shyam Singh Chandel b, *
a
Department of Electronics and Communication Engineering, University Institute of Technology, Himachal Pradesh University, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, 171005, India
b
Photovoltaic Research Group, Centre of Excellence in Energy Science and Technology, Shoolini University, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, 173212, India

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Accurately predicting and validating the power output of commercial solar PV power plants, remains an
Solar energy important research topic despite numerous studies already conducted. The precision and reliability of power
Photovoltaics prediction depends on the accuracy of the solar cell parameter values used in the model. A novel analytical
Solar cell parameters
technique has been developed in this study for PV power prediction, which employs one and two diode models
PV module model
Solar power prediction
with 3, 5, and 7 parameters. This new model only requires the manufacturer sheet data and has been validated
through indoor and outdoor experiments. The performance of an experimental PV system is evaluated using the
proposed solar cell models under varying irradiance and temperature levels. Additionally, the predicted output
solar power was experimentally validated under real outdoor conditions in India with higher accuracy. The 7-
parameter solar cell model is found to be the most accurate with the least RMSE of 0.02, followed by the 5
and 3-parameter models with RMSEs of 0.04 and 0.07, respectively. Compared to previous methods, the present
new model predicts PV power with higher accuracy and lower percentage error. Finally, the study also identifies
follow-up photovoltaic research areas.

finite element simulations to analyze the energy band regulation and

1. Introduction
The augmentation of energy demand, environmental concerns, rise
in fossil fuel prices and depletion of fossil fuel resources are the main
reasons for emphasis on the expansion of renewable resources for energy
generation [1]. Solar energy is most widely source utilized for electricity
production due to its accessibility and economic viability. The power
estimation accuracy of solar PV plants prior to the installation is an
important area of research. The large-scale deployment, technology,
advancement in solar panel efficiency led to the progress of power
estimation models to be tested under real outdoor conditions.
Researchers around the world are extensively working on increasing
the efficiency of solar cells such as Zhao et al. [2] developed a new type
of ultrathin-film solar cell that uses surface plasmon resonance to
enhance its efficiency. The researchers are able to achieve a theoretical
efficiency of 18.97% with a cell that was only 0.9 μm thick, which is a
significant improvement over the existing ultrathin-film solar cells. Zhao
et al. [3] discussed a novel design for a solar energy absorber based on
titanium (Ti) nano-rings. The design utilizes the surface plasmon reso­
nance (SPR) effect to achieve high absorption of solar radiation across a
wide range of wavelengths and angles of incidence. Zhang et al. [4] used
photothermal conversion efficiency of the material, finding that the
germanium plating is able to effectively regulate the bandgap of the ZnO
nanorods to enhance the absorption of visible light. Overall, the study
suggests that germanium plated ZnO nanorod arrays could be a prom­
ising material for efficient solar energy conversion. Although, contin­
uous research is going on to increase the efficiency of solar cells at
laboratory level, yet the estimation and prediction of solar cell perfor­
mance under real out door conditions, is still a major research area
investigating the field level power prediction. Solar cell parameter
extraction using innovative PV mathematical models, is one of the key
elements for the performance evaluation of solar cells under real out
door conditions.
Several solar cell models have been developed in the literature, but
model performance is highly dependent on solar cell parameter values
[5,6]. However, all of these parameters used for power estimation, are
not given in datasheets. Therefore, determination of accurate values of
these parameters for various PV power prediction models is of great
relevance.The single and double diode models are found sufficiently
accurate for solar cell representations [7–12]. The prediction models
based on one diode model mostly uses 3, 4 and 5- parameters and as­
sume trivial recombination loss in space charge region but two diode

* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: sschandel2013@gmail.com (S.S. Chandel).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2023.119224
Received 23 January 2023; Received in revised form 29 March 2023; Accepted 22 August 2023
Available online 23 August 2023
0960-1481/© 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
M. Kumar et al. Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

Nomenclature

DM Diode model
SR Series resistance
GWO Grey wolf optimizer
LICS Linear independent current source
k Boltzmann constant
Irs Reverse saturation current
Rshu Shunt resistance
IL Light generated current
G Solar radiation Fig. 1. Equivalent circuit for the 3-parameter ideal one-diode model.
ki Current temp. coefficient
TDM Two diode model problems associated with PSO. Malik et al. [22] proposed the PV power
ODM One diode model prediction model and observed that degradation factor influence the
CS Cuckoo search accuracy of the model. Yu et al. [23] suggested enhanced JAYA
T Cell or module temp algorithm-based parameter extraction technique to estimate the 5 and 7-
q Electron charge parameter values for one and two DM, respectively. When compared to
n Ideality factor other -known models, the results are found to be more reliable and
Rser Series resistance accurate.
Ns Number of solar cells in series Yu et al. [24] developed a model based on hybrid approach using
GSTC Solar radiation at reference condition GWO and CS to extort the parameters values of one and two DM. The
EgSTC Band gap energy at STC results show better accuracy over other single or hybrid parameter
extraction algorithms. Xu and Jin [25] have utilized the stepwise linear
search based least square method to detect the 4 parameters of ODM.
The outcomes revealed that proposed technique is more accurate for a
models consider recombination losses also, thus two diode models lesser number of unknown parameters. Boutana et al. [26] examined
consider 7- parameters. However, extraction of PV parameters is a very seven different analytical and numerical based approaches for parame­
challenging and intricate task because of their nonlinearity and implied ters extraction. The study reveals that numerical techniques-based ap­
behavior which is presented in this study. proaches are highly reliant on initial guess of parameters values, which
are difficult to estimate without any other appropriate method. The
1.1. Brief literature review literature has recommended a number of parameter extraction tech­
niques and majority of these required variety of information from the
Different methods have been developed for parameter identification manufacturer, which is not readily available and is also complex in
and power estimation by different researchers which are discussed in the nature. Therefore, an accurate PV power prediction model development
literature review along with identifying research gaps in this section. with limited input information and simple in nature is a challenging
The DC parameters can be determined in two ways: one using optimi­ task.
zation algorithm and curve fitting technique and the other using nu­
merical or analytical approach.
Chennoufi et al. [13] proposed a TDM with a hybrid approach for the 1.2. Novelty and contribution of the study
identification of 7- parameters and output power prediction. Dolara
et al. [14] presented one diode model and thermal model to predict the The study presents a novel analytical technique resulting in devel­
power and cell temperature. The study also revealed that model accu­ oping improved solar cell models with 3, 5, and 7-parameters to predict
racy is highly reliant on calibration data and cell temperature. Senturk power by photovoltaic (PV) systems. The new model requires only the
and Eke [15] identified the series resistance value using empirical manufacturer sheet data and is validated through indoor and outdoor
relation and used current, voltage curve to estimate the primary value of experiments. The accuracy of the 3, 5, and 7-parameter models, is
SR. Normally the current-voltage curve is not supplied by the producer compared under low, intermediate, and extreme irradiance values,
and there is always a chance of error to calculate the numerical value which are not generally considered. The study also compares the real-
from a graphical image. time performance of the different models. Finally, the study compares
To ascertain the parameters of ODM, Ridha et al. [16] recommended the results of the power prediction by these models with earlier models
a boosted Harris Hawk’s Optimization based model. The result com­ to establish the accuracy.
parison with other developed model shows better accuracy with higher The manuscript is presented as follows: the 3, 5 and 7- parameters
stability. Arabshahi et al. [17] extracted 5- parameters of ODM with the models are defined in section 2; the methodology for parameter esti­
help of a hybrid approach based on analytical and optimization algo­ mation and power prediction is presented in section 3 followed by
rithm. The proposed model estimated results show a great accord with experimental setup description in section 4. Following that, section 5
experimental findings. Rasheed and Shihab [18] suggested that basic gives the findings and discussions, and part 6 concludes the results with
Newton Raphson method with some improvement could be a good so­ suggestions for further research.
lution with least iteration to resolve non-linear equations of ODM.
Toledo et al. [19] identified the 5- parameters of one diode using the 2. Overview of different solar cell models
data point collection from I–V curve. Abdulrazzaq et al. [20] calculated
5- parameters of a ODM using four different techniques and further A solar cell is represented electrically using one or two diode models.
comparison also has been done. The comparative analysis revealed that However, the parameters of these diode models are unknown and need
Newton–Raphson and least square fitting-based techniques results are to be determined for the output estimation of a Photovoltaic module.
more precise. Bana and Saini [21] developed a PSO based extraction The electrical representations of solar cell have 3, 5 or 7 unknown pa­
model for the identification of one diode model parameters, but pre­ rameters. Therefore, these diode models are also known as 3, 5 and 7-
mature convergence and population diversity loss are two major parameter models.

2
M. Kumar et al. Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

2.3. Seven parameter model

The 7-parameter TDM has been developed to have a more realistic

model, as shown in Fig. 3. It considers into account the recombine loss in
the space depletion region by adding another parallel diode to the ODM.
It is made up of distinct diodes (D1 and D2) associated in parallel to Rshu
and Rser [31–35].
An implicit nonlinear equation can be used to determine the char­
acteristic equation of a 7-parameter model as follows
[ ( ) ] [ ( ) ]
q(V + IRser ) q(V + IRser )
Fig. 2. Equivalent circuit for 5-parameter model.
I = IL − Irs1 exp − 1 − Irs2 exp − 1
n1 kT n2 kT
V + IRser
− (3)
2.1. Three parameter solar model Rshu

As shown in Fig. 1, an ideal example of solar cell is an ideal one diode
3-parameter model. The ODM is the furthermost used circuit-based PV
model among various modeling techniques in the literature, which en­
tails of a LICS in parallel to a diode. The linear independent current
source is usually referred as light generated current source (IL ). The
diode signifies the recombination in quasi-neutral region and to explain
the current passing through a diode, the Shockley diode equation is
commonly employed [27–32].
The nonlinear equation shown below can be utilized to compute the
characteristic equation of a 3-parameter model:
[ ( ) ]
qV
I = IL − Irs exp − 1 (1)
nkT
where q is the electron charge (1.6*10− 19 C), T is solar cell or module
temperature in Kelvin, n is the ideality factor, Irs is the reverse saturation
current,k denotes the Boltzmann constant and
IL , Irs and n are three un-identified parameters that’s why the model
is named as 3- parameters model.
2.2. Five parameter model
The components of the 5-parameters model include a diode, a linear
independent light-produced current source (IL ), shunt resistance (Rshu ),
and series resistance (Rser ). Fig. 2 depicts the ODM with 5- parameters.
Series resistance results from ohmic contact between semiconductor and
metallization of solar cells, while shunt resistance is the amount of
current that leaks across the junction.
An implicit and nonlinear equation can be used to determine the
characteristic equation of a 5-parameter model as follows
[ ( ) ]
q(V + IRser ) V + IRser
I = IL − Irs exp − 1 − (2)
nkT Rshu
The IL , Irs , n, Rser , and Rshu are the 5 important unknown parameters
and the reasons for naming this model as 5- parameters model.
where n1 , n2 Irs1 and Irs2 are ideality factors and reverse saturation cur­
rents of D1 and D2, respectively. The IL , Irs1 , Irs2 , n1 , n2 , Rser , and Rshu are
7- unknown parameters thus it is named as 7- parameter model.
3. Methodology
The accurate power prediction from solar cell models is sturdily
dependent on the accurate calculation of their unknown parameters. In
this paper, three different models are being implemented for the output
power estimation. Analytical solutions have been developed to find the
unidentified parameters of these 3 different models and discussed in
detail in this section. The methodology followed is described in Fig. 4.
3.1. Parameter determination for PV modules
A PV module comprises of a series of solar cells to provide high
power and voltage with integrated bypass diodes to prevent hot spots
and avalanche breakdown. By multiplying the solar cell characteristics
by Ns , the I–V characteristics of the photovoltaic module can be ob­
tained. In this section parameter models for PV modules are described.
3.1.1. Three parameter model for PV module
The characteristic equation of PV module in 3- parameter model can
be determined at specified irradiance and temperature from the
following equation for current:
[ ( ) ]
qV
I = IL − Irs exp − 1 (4)
Ns nkT
where, V and I signify the terminal voltage and current, respectively.
The solar cell parameters, such as n, Irs , and IL are unknown, The PV
module manufacturers only provide data on Vm and Im , Isc , and Voc under
STC. As a result, these values are utilized to extract the unknown pa­
rameters. In this study, the analytical solutions have been developed for
parameter extraction under the STC conditions as follows:
Under short circuit condition the value of V = 0 and I = Isc , and one
can write Eq. (4) as
IL = Isc (5)

The V = Voc and I = 0 under open circuit condition; and putting Eq. (5)
( )
into Eq. (4) and neglecting numeric 1 in Eq. (4) as exp NqV oc
s nkT
≫1; thus,
after necessary rearrangement, one can write Eq. (4) as
( )
qVoc
Irs = Isc exp − (6)
Ns nkT

The V = Vm and I = Im at MPP and putting these values and Eqs. (5) and
( )
(6) into (4) and neglect numeric 1 in Eq. (4) as exp NqV oc
s nkT
≫1, thus one
can write Eq. (4) as

Fig. 3. Equivalent circuit for 7-parameter model.

3
M. Kumar et al. Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

( )
q(Vm − Voc ) Im to the implicit character of the equations used to calculate these
exp =1− (7)
Ns nkT Isc parameters,
At MPP, V = Vm and I = Im , substituting these values and Eq. (10)
Taking natural log on both sides and after necessary rearrangements,
into (9), one obtains
one can write Eq. (7) as ( ) [ ( ) ( )]
Rser q (Voc ) q (Vm + Im Rser ) Voc − Vm
q(Vm − Voc ) Im 1 + = Irs exp − exp +
n= [ ( )] (8) Rshu Ns n k T Ns n k T Rshu
Ns kT ln 1 − IIscm (13)
Since Rshu ≫Rser so 1 + RRshu ser
can be approximated as 1 and Isc ≫RVshu oc
.
Thus, IL , Irs and n of 3- parameters model can be determined from Eqs. ( ) ( )
(5), (6) and (8) and further can be utilized for power estimation. Furthermore, exp Ns n k T ≫exp Ns n k T is valid; thus, Irs can be written
q (Voc ) q (Isc Rser )

( )
3.1.2. Five parameter model for PV module as Irs = Isc exp − Nqs (Voc )
nkT
. Thereafter, by putting this Irs and ignoring RVshu
oc

The characteristic equation of PV module in 5- parameters model can in the Eq. (10), one can simplify the Eq. (10) as IL = Isc . Finally,
be determined at specified irradiance and temperature as follows substituting Irs and IL into Eq. (13) and VocR−shuVm ≈ 0 in Eq. (13), one can
[ (
q(V + IRser )
) ]
V + IRser obtain the first equation for maximum power point current (Im ). Sub­
I = IL − Irs exp − 1 − (9) sequently, as we know that at each I–V curve point, the output power of
nNs kT Rshu
a PV module is P– – VI, and its voltage derivative is dP = I + V dI . For
dV dV
The above expression is unable to estimate the I–V characteristics maximum value
⃒
dP ⃒
= 0, therefore the equation dP = I + V dI can
since parameters like n, Irs , IL , Rser and Rshu are unknown. To identify
dV P=Pm dV dV
then be rewritten as dV
dI
= − Im
. Now dV
dI
can get by differentiating Eq. (9)
these five unknown parameters, the analytical solutions have been Vm

developed under the STC conditions and these are as follows: with respect to V, and one can derive dV
dI
= − VImm at MPP. Further, the dV
dI
=
( )
The V = Voc and I = 0 at O.C condition; and after rearranging the Eq. − Vm can be modified by substituting Rshu 1 − Rser Vm ≈ 0 and one can
Im 1 Im

(9), one can obtain the IL as

obtain the second equation for maximum power point current (Im ). Now,
[ ( ) ]
q (Voc ) Voc rearranging the first and second equations of Im , one can obtain the
IL = Irs exp − 1 + (10)
Ns n k T Rshu equations for Rser and n as follows
Vm 2V − Voc
Where V = 0 and I = Isc at S.C condition; putting these values and Eq. Rser = − [ (m ) ] (14)
Im (Isc − Im ) ln 1 − Im + Im
(10) into (9) Isc (Isc − Im )
[ ( ) ( )]
q (Voc ) q (Isc Rser ) Voc − Isc Rser
Isc = Irs exp − exp + (11) q(2V − V )
Ns n k T Ns n k T Rshu n= [ ( m ) oc ] (15)
Ns k T ln 1 − IIscm + (IscI−mIm )
Using Eq. (11), one can obtain the Irs as ⃒
Under S.C conditions, dI ⃒
dV I=Isc V=0
=− 1
Rsho
(Slope of I–V curve under
I (R + R ) − V
Irs = [ sc( shu ) ser ( oc )] (12) short circuit conditions) [36]. However, one can assume Rsho ≈ Rshu .
⃒
Rshu exp Nqs (Voc )
nkT
− exp qN(Is scn Rk serT ) Based on these observations, one can write dV
dI ⃒
as
I=Isc V=0

The value of IL and Irs can only be calculated, if Rser , n and Rshu are
known. Some assumptions must be made to compute Rser , n and Rshu due

Fig. 4. Flow Chart for PV parameter estimation and power prediction.

4
M. Kumar et al. Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

[ ( )] ( ) ( )
1 1 q Irs q (Isc Rser )
= + exp (16) Rser
= α exp
q (Isc Rser )
+ β exp
q (Isc Rser )
(23)
[Rshu − Rser ] Rshu Ns n k T Ns n k T Rshu (Rshu − Rser ) Ns k T 2 Ns k T
( )
Using Eqs. (14) and (15) and Irs = Isc exp − q (Voc )
Ns n k T
, one can [ ]
q 1 [Rser {Im +Isc (A− 1)}− A Voc +Vm ]+Im +Isc (A− 1)
calculate Rshu from Eq. (16) as follows: where and
Rshu
α= Ns k T[A exp(qN(V oc )
− exp(q (Vm +Im Rser ) β =
sk T ) Ns k T )]
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅ [ ]
√ Rser 1
√ [Rser {Im +Isc (B− 1)}− B Voc +Vm ]+Im +Isc (B− 1)
(17)
q
( )
Rshu = √ .
Rshu
q Irs
Ns a k T
exp qN(Is scn Rk serT ) 2 Ns k T[B exp(2
q (Voc )
Ns k T)] )− exp(
q (Vm +Im Rser )
2 Ns k T

The Rser and Rshu are two unknowns in two nonlinear equations i.e.
Once the values of n, Rser and Rshu are known, one can compute the Irs Eqs. (22) and (23). As a result, solving Eqs. (22) and (23) simultaneously
and IL . can identify these two unknown parameters, although acceptable initial
The Eqs. (14), (15) and (17) provides the values of Rser , n and Rshu and values of these unknowns are required. The initial values of Rser can be
then Eqs. (10) and (12) provides the values of IL and Irs . Finally, the 5 taken as zero whereas the initial value of Rshu can be determined by
parameters of the ODM can be determined using these five analytical assuming Rser = 0.
equations and which are used to estimate the power. The initial value of Rshu can obtained by putting Rser = 0 into Eqs.
(20) and (21) and expression of dV dI
= − VImm . Thereafter, doing some
3.1.3. Seven parameter model for PV module mathematical modifications, initial value of Rshu can be expressed as
The characteristic equation of PV module in 7- parameters model can follows
be determined at specified irradiance and temperature as follows
Vm (X + Y) − Voc (DX + CY)
[ ( ) ] [ ( ) ] Rshu = (24)
q(V + IRser ) q(V + IRser ) Isc {X (1 − D) + Y (1 − C)} − Im (X + Y)
I = IL − Irs1 exp − 1 − Irs2 exp − 1
Ns n1 kT Ns n2 kT { ( ) ( )}
V + IRser where X = Ns k T C exp qNs(VkocT) − exp qNs(VkmT) .
− (18)
Rshu { ( ) ( )}
q (Voc ) q (Vm )
Y = 2 Ns k T D exp − exp
where n1 , n2 , Irs1 , Irs2 , IL , Rser and Rshu are unknown parameters so 2 Ns k T 2 Ns k T
analytical solutions have been derived to calculate these 7- parameters
( ) ( )
at STC. q (Vm − Voc ) q (Vm − Voc )
C = exp and D = exp
Shockley diffusion theory states that the ideality factors n1 and n2 can 2 Ns k T Ns k T
be treated as 1 and 2, respectively [37,38]. In light of the fact that V =
The final Rser and Rshu can be determined by using Rshu from Eq. (24)
Voc and I = 0 under open circuit conditions, one can express IL as follows
and Rser = 0 as initial values for Eqs. (22) and (23). Thereafter, the
by rearranging Eq. (18)
values of IL , Irs1 , Irs2 can be determined by putting the final values of Rser
[ ( ) ] [ ( ) ]
q (Voc ) q (Voc ) Voc and Rshu in the Eqs. (19)–(21), respectively.
IL = Irs1 exp − 1 + Irs2 exp − 1 + (19)
Ns k T 2 Ns k T Rshu
3.2. Parameter determination under real outdoor varying conditions
At short circuit condition, V = 0 and I = Isc ; additionally,
( ) ( ) ( ) ( )
exp 2q N(Vs ock )T ≫exp q2(INscs RkserT) , exp qNs(VkocT) ≫exp q (INscs kRTser ) , are valid. Using The parameters determined applying analytical techniques in section
these values and putting Eq. (19) into (18), one can obtain the equation 3 are at STC conditions because manufacturer also provides values of
for short circuit current (Isc ). Likewise, at maximum power point, V = datasheets at STC and the solar cell n parameters are affected by
Vm and I = Im , so using these values and putting Eq. (19) into (18), one continuously varying outdoor solar radiation and temperature condi­
can obtain the equation for maximum power point current (Im ). Now, tions. Therefore all these parameters are to be determined at real outside
solving the equations of Isc and Im with each other, one can obtain the situations using the expressions given below [39,40].
expressions for Irs1 and Irs2 as follows Eq. (25) is used to calculate IL under real conditions
( )
1 G
Irs1 =
Rshu
[Rser {Im + Isc (A − 1)} − A Voc + Vm ] + Im + Isc (A − 1)
( ) ( ) (20) IL = IL,STC [1 + ki (T − TSTC )] (25)
GSTC
A exp qNs(VkocT) − exp q (VNm s+IkmTRser )
The ideality factor variation with temperature can be neglected i.e.
1
[Rser {Im + Isc (B − 1)} − B Voc + Vm ] + Im + Isc (B − 1) n = nSTC , n1 = n1,STC and n2 = n2,STC .
(21) The following relations (26–28) are used to estimate Irs .
R
Irs2 = shu ( ) ( )
B exp 2qN(Vs ock )T − exp q (V2mN+Is mk TRser )
[ ]3 ( [ ])
T q Eg,STC Eg
( ) ( ) Irs = Irs,STC exp − (26)
TSTC nk TSTC T
where, A = exp q (Vm2− VNocs +I
kT
m Rser )
and B = exp q (Vm − NVs ock+ITm Rser ) .
⃒ [ ]3 ( [ ])
The dV
dP ⃒
= 0 at STC and can be reorganized as dV dI
= − VImm . Now, T q Eg,STC Eg
(27)
P=Pm
Irs1 = Irs1,STC exp −
differentiating Eq. (18) with respect to voltage can determine the term TSTC n1 k TSTC T
dV, and one can write dV = − Vm at MPP. Furthermore, the V = 0, I = Isc ,
dI dI Im
⃒ [ ]3 ( [ ])
1
and dI ⃒
=−
dV I=Isc V=0 at short circuit condition. However, one can as­
Rsho Irs2 = Irs2,STC
T
exp
q Eg,STC Eg
− (28)
TSTC n2 k TSTC T
sume Rsho ≈ Rshu . Based on these observations, one can express
⃒
dV I=Isc V=0 . Thereafter, putting the Eqs. (20) and (21) into the expres­
dI ⃒
⃒ where, band gap energy Eg can be determined as
sions of dV
dI
= − VImm and dV
dI ⃒
, one can obtain the following equations
I=Isc V=0
Eg = Eg,STC (1 − 0.0002677(T − TSTC )) (29)
( ) ( )
Im q (Vm + Im Rser ) q (Vm + Im Rser ) 1
= α exp + β exp + The Rser are given as
Vm − Rser Im Ns k T 2 Ns k T Rshu
(22)

5
M. Kumar et al. Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

5. Results and discussion

The predicted parameter values and power output using 1 and 2

diode solar cell models are presented, validated, and discussed in this
section.

5.1. Parameters identification

The values of identified 3, 5 and 7- solar cell parameters for Maha­

rishi make Solar PV module for proposed diode models (Table 1). The
parameters are evaluated using the analytical approach after solving the
non-linear equations in MATLAB as described in previous section.

5.1.1. Parameter determination and validation of 3, 5, and 7-parameter

models at STC
The estimated values of Voc , ISC , Vmp , Imp , Pmp using the proposed 3, 5
and 7- parameter models are matched with the actual producer provided
data at STC, to find the accuracy of proposed models. The comparison
between estimated and actual values at STC are displayed in the Table 2.
The present study calculated the 7 parameters at STC of the TDM
Fig. 5. Experimental setup for PV module model validation.
using the above derived expressions, in which the values of ideality
[ ( )] factors n1,STC and n2,STC are taken as 1 and 2 respectively. The overall
Rser = Rser,STC
T
1 − 0.217 ln
G
(30) comparison among the manufacturer data sheet values and estimated
TSTC GSTC values using 3, 5 and 7 parameters models show that 7- parameter model
has the better accuracy with least % errors for all PV parameters, which
GSTC
Rshu = Rshu,STC (31) are used to analyze the power output under actual conditions. The
G comparison between simulated and manufacture data sheet based I–V
and P–V curves have also been created for the chosen modules under a
4. Experimental set-up
range of irradiance conditions and at fixed module temperatures of
25 ◦ C, as shown in Fig. 6.
The authentication of the proposed models is carried out using an
Further, another evaluation is also done at changing module tem­
outdoor experimental setup.
perature and static solar irradiance value of 1000 W/m2, The I–V and
P–V curves is displayed in Fig. 7.
4.1. The testing setup
Figs. 6 and 7 show the accuracy levels of 3, 5 and 7- parameter
models at different radiation and temperature levels. In first case, when
An experimental setup was installed at the roof top of CEEE building
sun intensity varies from 200 to 1000 W/m2 at fixed temperature, the 3,
at NIT Hamirpur for the authentication of solar cell models under out­
5- parameter models underestimate the values up to 600W/m2 and
door conditions, as shown in Fig. 5. The setup comprises of 2 similar
overestimates above 800 W/m2, which makes a difference from the
18Wp multi-crystalline silicon PV modules inclined at optimum tilt 31◦
manufacturer provided I–V and P–V curve datasheets. In second case,
for the location [41]. The solar radiation, power and temperature data
temperature differs from 25 to 75 ◦ C with constant solar radiation and
are recorded at a fixed 30-min interval using calibrated instruments.
I–V and P–V curves are drawn to check the model’s accuracy at varying
temperatures. Overall, all the parameters show a better matching with
manufacturer curves. However, it is discovered that the 7-parameter
model is closer to the actual values.

Table 1
Identified 3, 5 and 7- parameters for a PV module at STC.
Parameters 3 5 7

IL (A) 1.276000000000000 1.27628207 1.277142613

Irs1 (A) or Irs (A) 1.135894337978910* 10− 6
5.274187358858407* 10− 8
1.469209092414822* 10− 11

n1 or n 1.79897923257433 1.474661399 1
Irs2 (A) – – 4.841873879914631* 10− 7

n2 – – 2
Rser (Ω) – 0.67034532 1.273514237
Rshu (Ω) – 3032.94 1421.58

Table 2
Assessment of manufacturer supplied datasheet and model predicted values under STC.
Parameters Datasheet 7- Parameter Model 5- Parameter Model 3- Parameter Model 3- Parameter % 5-Parameter % 7- Parameter %
values predicted value predicted value predicted value Error Error Error

Isc (A) 1.276 1.276 1.2743 1.2749 − 0.0862 − 0.1332 − 7.8369E-05

Voc (V) 23.17 23.165 23.164 23.1642 − 0.0250 − 0.0258 − 0.0215
Im (A) 1.186 1.1859 1.1731 1.1807 − 0.4436 − 1.0817 − 0.0014
Vm (V) 18.76 18.76 18.9814 18.7574 − 0.0138 1.1800 − 0.0001
Pm (W) 22.249 22.249 22.2684 22.1476 − 0.4558 0.0871 4.4945E-05

6
M. Kumar et al. Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

Fig. 6. I–V and P–V comparison of 3, 5 and 7- parameters models with the manufacturer datasheet at distinct irradiance range and stable module tempera­
ture (25 ◦ C).

Fig. 7. I–V and P–V comparison of 3, 5 and 7- parameters models with the manufacturer datasheet at distinct module temperatures and stable irradiance level.

5.2. Validation of 3, 5, and 7- parameter models at STC with previous cell model results published in the literature for parameter estimation
studies using Photowatt-PWP201 [42] and Kyocera KD245GH PV modules for
one and two diode models respectively at STC. The comparison of results
Furthermore, the present models are also compared with other solar of proposed models with other methods are presented in Tables 3 and 4

Table 3
Comparison of current ODM with previous methods for Photowatt-PWP201PVmodule.
Model IL (A) Irs (A) Rser (Ω) Rshu (Ω) n Calculated Pm (Wp) % error

Present Method 1.0348 2.1209*10¡05 0.8340 180.5625 1.6962 11.69 1.3

Cubas et al. [42] 1.0342 1.3214*10− 06 1.3535 559.6804 1.2554 10.753 6.6
AlHajri et al. [43] 1.0313 3.1756*10− 06 1.2053 714.2857 1.3414 10.725 6.8
Bouzidi et al. [44] 1.0339 3.0760*10− 06 1.2030 555.5556 1.3385 10.710 6.9
AlRashidi et al. [32] 1.0441 3.4360*10− 06 1.1968 555.5556 1.3496 10.797 6.2
Wei et al. [45] 1.0286 8.3010*10− 06 1.0755 1850.1000 1.4512 10.716 6.9
El-Naggar et al. [46] 1.0331 3.6642*10− 06 1.1989 833.3333 1.3561 10.744 6.7
Peng et al. [47] 1.0313 3.2212*10− 06 1.2132 625.0000 1.3423 10.684 7.2
Gong et al. [48] 1.0305 3.4823*10− 06 1.2013 981.9822 1.3512 10.754 6.6
Mostafa et al. [49] 1.0321 2.7735*10− 06 1.2281 789.7152 1.3274 10.761 6.9
Suwanarat et al. [50] 1.0337 1.9119*10− 06 1.3792 825.8902 1.3280 11.07 3.9
Sattar et al. [51] 1.0323 2.5127*10− 06 1.2392 744.7016 1.3689 11.220 2.6
Saadaoui et al. [52] 1.030766 3.0162*10− 06 1.2191 906.2754 1.3360 11.760 6.9

7
M. Kumar et al. Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224

Table 4
Comparison of current double diode model with previous methods for Kyocera KD245GH PV module.
Model IL (A) Irs1 (A) Irs2 (A) n1 n2 Rser (Ω) Rshu (Ω) Calculated Pm (Wp) % error

Present method 8.9202 2.7637*10 ¡10

6.4751*10 ¡06
1.0000 2.0000 0.2834 247.9658 245.2513 0.0096
10
Phang et al. [53] 8.9105 2.9374*10− 8.6766*10− 06 1.0004 2.0008 0.2982 120.2800 238.5255 2.7435
10
Chan et al. [54] 8.9107 3.2868*10− 3.1907*10− 06 1.0004 2.0008 0.3083 120.2101 241.7315 1.4363
10
Enebish et al. [55] 8.9335 3.5748*10− − 1.1878*10− 06 1.0004 2.0008 0.3163 120.1507 245.0988 0.0633
10
Hovinen [56] 8.9334 3.5687*10− − 1.0926*10− 06 1.0004 2.0008 0.3152 120.1540 245.1014 0.0622
10
Ishaque et al. [57] 8.9304 3.6142*10− 3.6142*10− 10 1.0004 1.2004 0.2990 130.4742 245.0976 0.0638
06
Gupta et al. [58] 8.9100 3.8684*10− 1.0022*10− 05 1.7901 1.7901 0.2729 ∞ 227.2472 7.3421
10
Hejri et al. [38] 8.9201 3.1573*10− 6.2900*10− 06 1.0004 2.0008 0.2819 247.5760 245.1016 0.0621
10
Orioli & Gangi [59] 8.9337 1.8084*10− 1.9062*10− 10 0.9732 1.564 0.3192 120.1628 244.92 0.136

Fig. 8. Comparison of 3, 5, 7- parameters projected power with measured output power.

correspondingly. The maximum power is estimated using present one
and two diode models at STC using calculated parameter values. Finally,
the % error is calculated between estimated power and actual power for
proposed models. The overall % error is compared with other models. As
can be seen from Tables 3 and 4, the % error is found least in both one
and two diode models as compared to previous proposed models in
literature.
5.3. Validation of models with experimental results
The output estimation from the proposed models under real outdoor
conditions relies on better approximation of PV parameters at STC. In
the present study, all proposed parameters models have shown good
agreement with estimated and actual measured values at STC but ac­
curacy under real outdoor conditions is the main objective of the model
development. The detailed discussion on experimental validation of
proposed parameter models, is presented in this section.
5.3.1. Comparison of experimental and predicted ODM and TDM results
under clear, cloudy, and moderately cloudy day conditions
The experimental results are obtained at 30-min regular interval
during 9.30 a.m. to 5.00 p.m. period on 3/5/2016, 4/5/2016 and 5/5/
2016. By comparing the findings, 3, 5, and 7 parameter models’ output
power values are estimated. On May 3, there was a mix of partial and full
cloud cover, but it was mostly cloudy for major part of the day. The
evenings of the May 4 and 5 were cloudy, but largely a clear day. Fig. 8
compares projected output power to experimentally observed output
power at diverse solar radiation levels.
The experimental investigation shows that predicted power values of
using propsed models are very near to the real measured values. The 3-
parameter-based model is found more accurate at low solar (0–300 W/
m2) radiation with average % error of 8.5% as compared to the average
% error of 12.20% at higher solar radiation. The error is found low at
lower solar radiation because the 3- parameter model does not consider
Rser and Rshu . At low radiation values, there is a little change in series and
shunt resistances, which can be ignored [22] whereas the 5 and 7- model
parameter accuracy is very less affected from radiation variations. The
RMSE is calculated with using equation (32) to identify the overall best
model among all presented models.
√̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅̅
√N
√∑
√ (PPre − PActual )2
√
RMSE = i=1 (32)
N
The RMSE is calculated for all developed models and 7- parameter
model is found to be most accurate with RMSE value 0.02 followed by 5
and 3- parameters models with RMSE values 0.04 and 0.07, respectively.
6. Conclusions
This study presents PV panel parameter and output power estimation
using a novel analytical approach using 3, 5 and 7-parameter single and
double solar cell models. The 3, 5 and 7-solar cell parameter-based
models are developed for PV modules and compared to identify the
most accurate model. The predicted parameter values are also validated
with the manufacturer datasheet values at STP. The experimental vali­
dation of models is done with site specific ground measured solar radi­
ation and temperate data to check the accuracy of the estimated PV
power output under real outdoor conditions. Following are the major
findings from the study:
• The PV parameter determination analysis under STC conditions
show that all developed solar cell models show a good agreement
with predicted and manufacturer data sheet values with least % er­
rors but overall, the accuracy of 7- parameter model is found to be
highest with least % error.
• The experimental validation of developed models shows that 3 and 5
parameter models can predict the output PV power with RMSE

8
M. Kumar et al.
values 0.07 and 0.04, but 7- parameter model has highest accuracy
level with least RMSE 0.02.
• A comparison of models using one and two diodes with other existing
models, shows that the developed models in this study give better
results.
• The I–V and P–V curves simulated with 7- parameter model, are
found to be almost similar to the manufacturer supplied I–V and P–V
curves, which validates the accuracy of 7- parameter model.
• Thus, the developed seven-parameter solar cell model may be used
for identifying parameters and accurately forecast power at any
place in the world.
Follow up research areas
A number of parameter and PV power estimation models are avail­
able in literature but the technological advancements in solar cell types,
are also trending thus, there is need for follow-up research studies in this
area especially for developing single and double diode models for thin
films and bi-facial PV panels. A hybrid model could also be developed
for all available PV technologies. This can be enhanced further by
adding PV degradation, efficiency, and additional influencing factors
like partial shading, hot spot formation, wind speed effects, etc. and
utilized for large solar PV power plant power forecasting [60] with
better accuracy, which is underway.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Manish Kumar: Conceptualization, Methodology, Writing – original
draft. Prashant Malik: Investigation, Data curation, Validation. Rahul
Chandel: Investigation, Data curation, Writing – review & editing.
Shyam Singh Chandel: Conceptualization, Writing – review & editing.
Declaration of competing interest
I hereby declare that we don’t have any known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
References
[1] P. Malik, M. Awasthi, S. Sinha, Biomass-based gaseous fuel for hybrid renewable
energy systems: an overview and future research opportunities, Int. J. Energy Res.
45 (3) (2021) 3464–3494.
[2] F. Zhao, J. Lin, Z. Lei, Z. Yi, F. Qin, J. Zhang, L. Liu, X. Wu, W. Yang, P. Wu,
Realization of 18.97% theoretical efficiency of 0.9 μm thick c-Si/ZnO
heterojunction ultrathin-film solar cells via surface plasmon resonance
enhancement, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 24 (8) (2022) 4871–4880.
[3] F. Zhou, F. Qin, Z. Yi, W. Yao, Z. Liu, X. Wu, P. Wu, Ultra-wideband and wide-angle
perfect solar energy absorber based on Ti nanorings surface plasmon resonance,
Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 23 (31) (2021) 17041–17048.
[4] C. Zhang, Y. Yi, H. Yang, Z. Yi, X. Chen, Z. Zhou, Y. Yi, H. Li, J. Chen, C. Liu, Wide
spectrum solar energy absorption based on germanium plated ZnO nanorod arrays:
energy band regulation, Finite element simulation, Super hydrophilicity,
Photothermal conversion, Appl. Mater. Today 28 (2022), 101531.
[5] M. Kumar, A. Kumar, An efficient parameters extraction technique of photovoltaic
models for performance assessment, Sol. Energy 158 (2017) 192–206.
[6] P. Malik, S.S. Chandel, A new integrated single-diode solar cell model for
photovoltaic power prediction with experimental validation under real outdoor
conditions, Int. J. Energy Res. 45 (1) (2021) 759–771.
[7] R. Abbassi, A. Abbassi, A.A. Heidari, S. Mirjalili, An efficient salp swarm-inspired
algorithm for parameters identification of photovoltaic cell models, Energy
Convers. Manag. 179 (2019) 362–372.
[8] R. Abbassi, A. Boudjemline, A. Abbassi, A. Torchani, H. Gasmi, T. Guesmi,
A numerical-analytical hybrid approach for the identification of SDM solar cell
unknown parameters, Eng. Technol. Appl. Sci. Res. 8 (3) (2018) 2907–2913.
[9] A. Orioli, An accurate one-diode model suited to represent the current-voltage
characteristics of crystalline and thin-film photovoltaic modules, Renew. Energy
145 (2020) 725–743.
[10] D. Wei, M. Wei, H. Cai, X. Zhang, L. Chen, Parameters extraction method of PV
model based on key points of IV curve, Energy Convers. Manag. 209 (2020),
112656.
[11] F. Adamo, F. Attivissimo, A. Di Nisio, M. Spadavecchia, Characterization and
testing of a tool for photovoltaic panel modeling, IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 60 (5)
(2011) 1613–1622.
9
Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224
[12] T. Ma, H. Yang, L. Lu, Development of a model to simulate the performance
characteristics of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules/strings/arrays, Sol.
Energy 100 (2014) 31–41.
[13] K. Chennoufi, M. Ferfra, M. Mokhlis, An accurate modelling of Photovoltaic
modules based on two-diode model, Renew. Energy 167 (2021) 294–305.
[14] A. Dolara, S. Leva, G. Manzolini, Comparison of different physical models for PV
power output prediction, Sol. Energy 119 (2015) 83–99.
[15] A. Senturk, R. Eke, A new method to simulate photovoltaic performance of
crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules based on datasheet values, Renew. Energy
103 (2017) 58–69.
[16] H.M. Ridha, A.A. Heidari, M. Wang, H. Chen, Boosted mutation-based Harris
hawks optimizer for parameters identification of single-diode solar cell models,
Energy Convers. Manag. 209 (2020), 112660.
[17] M.R. Arabshahi, H. Torkaman, A. Keyhani, A method for hybrid extraction of
single-diode model parameters of photovoltaics, Renew. Energy 158 (2020)
236–252.
[18] M.S. Rasheed, S. Shihab, Modelling and parameter extraction of PV cell using
single-diode model, Adv. Energy Convers. Mater. (2020) 96–104.
[19] F.J. Toledo, J.M. Blanes, V. Galiano, A. Laudani, In-depth analysis of single-diode
model parameters from manufacturer’s datasheet, Renew. Energy 163 (2021)
1370–1384.
[20] A.K. Abdulrazzaq, G. Bognár, B. Plesz, Evaluation of different methods for solar
cells/modules parameters extraction, Sol. Energy 196 (2020) 183–195.
[21] S. Bana, R. Saini, A mathematical modeling framework to evaluate the
performance of single diode and double diode based SPV systems, Energy Rep. 2
(2016) 171–187.
[22] P. Malik, R. Chandel, S.S. Chandel, A power prediction model and its validation for
a roof top photovoltaic power plant considering module degradation, Sol. Energy
224 (2021) 184–194.
[23] K. Yu, J.J. Liang, B.Y. Qu, X. Chen, H. Wang, Parameters identification of
photovoltaic models using an improved JAYA optimization algorithm, Energy
Convers. Manag. 150 (2017) 742–753.
[24] K. Yu, J.J. Liang, B.Y. Qu, Z. Cheng, H. Wang, Multiple learning backtracking
search algorithm for estimating parameters of photovoltaic models, Appl. Energy
226 (2018) 408–422.
[25] Y. Xu, W. Jin, Improvement of parameter identification method for the
photovoltaic cell, Optik-Int. J. Light Electron. Opt. 132 (2017) 134–141.
[26] N. Boutana, A. Mellit, V. Lughi, A.M. Pavan, Assessment of implicit and explicit
models for different photovoltaic modules technologies, Energy 122 (2017)
128–143.
[27] V.L. Brano, A. Orioli, G. Ciulla, A. Di Gangi, An improved five-parameter model for
photovoltaic modules, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 94 (8) (2010) 1358–1370.
[28] C. Carrero, D. Ramírez, J. Rodríguez, C. Platero, Accurate and fast convergence
method for parameter estimation of PV generators based on three main points of
the IV curve, Renew. Energy 36 (11) (2011) 2972–2977.
[29] W. De Soto, S. Klein, W. Beckman, Improvement and validation of a model for
photovoltaic array performance, Sol. Energy 80 (1) (2006) 78–88.
[30] F. Ghani, M. Duke, J. Carson, Numerical calculation of series and shunt resistances
and diode quality factor of a photovoltaic cell using the Lambert W-function, Sol.
Energy 91 (2013) 422–431.
[31] M. Kumar, A. Kumar, Performance assessment and degradation analysis of solar
photovoltaic technologies: a review, Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 78 (2017)
554–587.
[32] M. AlRashidi, M. AlHajri, K. El-Naggar, A. Al-Othman, A new estimation approach
for determining the I-V characteristics of solar cells, Sol. Energy 85 (7) (2011)
1543–1550.
[33] B.C. Babu, S. Gurjar, A novel simplified two-diode model of photovoltaic (PV)
module, IEEE J. Photovoltaics 4 (4) (2014) 1156–1161.
[34] A.A. Elbaset, H. Ali, M. Abd-El Sattar, Novel seven-parameter model for
photovoltaic modules, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 130 (2014) 442–455.
[35] A. Hovinen, Fitting of the solar cell IV-curve to the two diode model, Phys. Scripta
T54 (1994) 175, 1994.
[36] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, John Wiley &
Sons, 2013.
[37] D.S. Chan, J.C. Phang, Analytical methods for the extraction of solar-cell singleand
double-diode model parameters from IV characteristics, IEEE Trans. Electron. Dev.
34 (2) (1987) 286–293.
[38] M. Hejri, H. Mokhtari, M.R. Azizian, M. Ghandhari, L. Soder, On the parameter
extraction of a five-parameter double-diode model of photovoltaic cells and
modules, IEEE J. Photovoltaics 4 (3) (2014) 915–923.
[39] M. Farhoodnea, A. Mohamed, T. Khatib, W. Elmenreich, Performance evaluation
and characterization of a 3-kWp grid-connected photovoltaic system based on
tropical field experimental results: new results and comparative study, Renew.
Sustain. Energy Rev. 42 (2015) 1047–1054.
[40] H. Tian, F. Mancilla-David, K. Ellis, E. Muljadi, P. Jenkins, A cell-to-module-toarray
detailed model for photovoltaic panels, Sol. Energy 86 (9) (2012) 2695–2706.
[41] P. Malik, S.S. Chandel, Performance enhancement of multi-crystalline silicon
photovoltaic modules using mirror reflectors under Western Himalayan climatic
conditions, Renew. Energy 154 (2020) 966–975.
[42] J. Cubas, S. Pindado, M. Victoria, On the analytical approach for modeling
photovoltaic systems behavior, J. Power Sources 247 (2014) 467–474.
[43] M.F. AlHajri, K.M. El-Naggar, M.R. AlRashidi, A.K. Al-Othman, Optimal extraction
of solar cell parameters using pattern search, Renew. Energy 44 (2012) 238–245.
[44] K. Bouzidi, M.A.B.A. Chegaar, A. Bouhemadou, Solar cells parameters evaluation
considering the series and shunt resistance, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cell. 91 (18)
(2007) 1647–1651.
M. Kumar et al.
[45] H. Wei, J. Cong, X. Lingyun, S. Deyun, Extracting solar cell model parameters
based on chaos particle swarm algorithm, in: 2011 International Conference on
Electric Information and Control Engineering, IEEE, 2011, April, pp. 398–402.
[46] K.M. El-Naggar, M.R. AlRashidi, M.F. AlHajri, A.K. Al-Othman, Simulated
annealing algorithm for photovoltaic parameters identification, Sol. Energy 86 (1)
(2012) 266–274.
[47] L. Peng, Y. Sun, Z. Meng, An improved model and parameters extraction for
photovoltaic cells using only three state points at standard test condition, J. Power
Sources 248 (2014) 621–631.
[48] W. Gong, Z. Cai, Parameter extraction of solar cell models using repaired adaptive
differential evolution, Sol. Energy 94 (2013) 209–220.
[49] M. Mostafa, H. Rezk, M. Aly, E.M. Ahmed, A new strategy based on slime mould
algorithm to extract the optimal model parameters of solar PV panel, Sustain.
Energy Technol. Assessments 42 (2020), 100849.
[50] S. Suwanarat, P. Phetphun, P. Prabpal, P. Yupapin, Simple and efficient estimation
of I–V photovoltaic using nonlinear curve fitting equivalent circuit model in
Lambert W function form, J. Comput. Electron. 21 (3) (2022) 666–674.
[51] M.A.E. Sattar, A. Al Sumaiti, H. Ali, A.A.Z. Diab, Marine predators algorithm for
parameters estimation of photovoltaic modules considering various weather
conditions, Neural Comput. Appl. 33 (2021) 11799–11819.
[52] D. Saadaoui, M. Elyaqouti, K. Assalaou, S. Lidaighbi, Parameters optimization of
solar PV cell/module using genetic algorithm based on non-uniform mutation,
Energy Convers. Manag. X 12 (2021), 100129.
10
Renewable Energy 217 (2023) 119224
[53] J. Phang, D. Chan, J. Phillips, Accurate analytical method for the extraction of solar
cell model parameters, Electron. Lett. 20 (10) (1984) 406–408.
[54] D.S. Chan, J.C. Phang, Analytical methods for the extraction of solar-cell singleand
double-diode model parameters from IV characteristics, IEEE Trans. Electron. Dev.
34 (2) (1987) 286–293.
[55] N. Enebish, D. Agchbayar, S. Dorjkhand, D. Baatar, I. Ylemj, Numerical analysis of
solar cell current-voltage characteristics, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 29 (3) (1993)
201–208.
[56] A. Hovinen, Fitting of the solar cell IV-curve to the two diode model, Phys. Scripta
T54 (1994) 175, 1994.
[57] K. Ishaque, Z. Salam, H. Taheri, Simple, fast and accurate two-diode model for
photovoltaic modules, Sol. Energy Mater. Sol. Cells 95 (2) (2011) 586–594.
[58] S. Gupta, H. Tiwari, M. Fozdar, V. Chandna, March. Development of a two diode
model for photovoltaic modules suitable for use in simulation studies, in: Power
and Energy Engineering Conference (APPEEC), 2012 Asia-Pacific, IEEE, 2012,
pp. 1–4.
[59] A. Orioli, A. Di Gangi, A procedure to evaluate the seven parameters of the two-
diode model for photovoltaic modules, Renew. Energy 139 (2019) 582–599.
[60] R. Chandel, S.S. Chandel, Performance analysis outcome of a 19-MWp commercial
solar photovoltaic plant with fixed-tilt, adjustable-tilt, and solar tracking
configurations, Prog. Photovoltaics Res. Appl. 30 (1) (2022) 27–48.