Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270

https://doi.org/10.1007/s10825-018-1266-x

Fast and accurate PV model for SPICE simulation

Hamdy Abdelhamid1 · Ahmed Edris2 · Amr Helmy3 · Yehea Ismail4

Published online: 30 October 2018

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Abstract
This paper presents a complete model for photovoltaic modules able to accurately predict the I–V characteristics at different
levels of temperature and irradiance. The model greatly reduces the computational effort needed to extract the five parameters
of the one-diode model by applying five boundary conditions based on data provided by the manufacturer only. The model
equations are reduced to only two simultaneous equations of two unknowns (series resistance, Rs , and shunt resistance, Rsh ),
which converge in five iterations on average. The model parameters are extrapolated to account for temperature and irradiance
variations. The model is matched very well with the experimental data obtained from different commercial PV modules. The
proposed I–V model has least root mean square error of (0.0031) compared to other works. The model is implemented in
Verilog-A to be used inside SPICE simulators. The model in Verilog-A is integrated in Cadence-SPECTRE circuit simulator
and tested with a boost converter.

Keywords Cadence · Newton–Raphson · PV model · Shunt resistance · Series resistance · SPICE · Verilog-A

1 Introduction is very important in the design of modern efficient solar power

Solar energy is a major player in the area of renewable energy,
not only due to its sustainability and power potential but also
for its wide applications at many scales. Hence, understand-
ing solar energy and how to efficiently harvest its power has
become a crucial topic. Photovoltaic cells (PV) are the main
devices to harvest solar energy. Developing mathematical
models to predict how PV cells act under different environ-
mental conditions and the amount of power they can provide
B Hamdy Abdelhamid
habdelhamid@zewailcity.edu.eg;
hamdy.abdelhamid@gmail.com
1 Center for Nano-electronics and Devices, Center for
Nano-Technology, Zewail City of Science and Technology,
October Gardens, 6th of October, Giza 12578, Egypt
2 Center for Nano-electronics and Devices, Zewail City of
Science and Technology, October Gardens, 6th of October,
Giza 12578, Egypt
3 University of Science and Technology, Zewail City of
Science and Technology, October Gardens, 6th of October,
Giza 12578, Egypt
4
Center for Nano-electronics and Devices, American
University in Cairo/Zewail City of Science and Technology,
October Gardens, 6th of October, Giza 12578, Egypt
systems and solar power management circuits.
The one-diode model (Fig. 1) is widely accepted as a
good representation of solar cells that provides reasonable
compromise between simplicity and accuracy. An attempt
to refine that model by adding another diode construct-
ing what is called the two-diode model [1] is found in the
literature. This refinement introduces more computational
complexity and needs more input data with a little gain in
the accuracy; therefore, the one-diode model is a practical
choice. Nonetheless, the one-diode model is easier to be
parametrized based on the common solar module datasheet
information only.
Modeling PV modules using the one-diode model based
on module datasheet information often starts with identifying
the model parameters at standard test conditions (STC) and
then extrapolates these parameters to other temperature and
irradiance levels. The data normally available in PV module
datasheets are the short-circuit point (V = 0, I = Isc ), the
open-circuit point (V = Voc , I = 0) and the maximum
power point (V = Vm , I = Im ). The datasheet includes other
parameters such as the short-circuit temperature coefficient
(K I ), the open-circuit temperature coefficient (K V ) and the
number of cells connected in series and parallel (Ns and Np ,
respectively).

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270
Fig. 1 Equivalent circuit of a solar cell
There are always two problems in extracting the five
parameters (as will be discussed in Sect. 2) of the one-diode
model based solely on datasheet information. Most manufac-
turers provide information about three distinguished points
on the output curve of the module which helps to construct
four boundary conditions on the model equation, while the
model needs five boundary conditions to calculate the five
parameters in a deterministic way. The second problem is
the transcendental nature of the model equation which leads
to computational complexity and makes it hard to get explicit
expressions for the model parameters in terms of values from
the datasheet. Numerous ways exist in the literature dealing
with those two problems. Some works tried to eliminate one
of the boundary conditions either by neglecting one of the
parameters completely usually Rs or Rsh [2,3] or by assuming
the value of one of the parameters usually the ideality factor
[4,5]. The main disadvantage of the latter way is the incom-
patibility with different modules of different technologies for
which the ideality factor is different and the model becomes
unsuitable to be applied for all modules. Other interesting
ways [6–11] tackle the problem by introducing numerical
methods, sophisticated algorithms and numerical functions
like Lambert function [7,9]. Besides the inherent approxi-
mations of these methods, they may require special software
engines to implement their routines making them unattractive
for simple models needed by applications like the design of
power management circuits. Other methods introduced by
[12–16] and the second method of [5] required additional
information not usually provided by manufactures like the
slope of the curve at short-circuit and open-circuit points. A
great survey was introduced in [13] on numerous panels to
find empirical expressions for these slopes. In [5], the authors
adopted these empirical expressions of [13] to present elegant
five explicit expressions for the five parameters, but again
the empirical values depend on the type of the cell which
degrades the accuracy and generality of their model.
Assuming that the entire I–V curve is available, a curve fit-
ting or optimization algorithm such as in [17–20] can be used
to determine the model parameters. A comparative evaluation
of such methods can be found in [21,22]. But these techniques
are not suitable for simple datasheet-based models. Only two
methods in the literature pose the fifth boundary condition
without requiring information outside the datasheet. The first
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
261
one [23] uses the temperature coefficient of the open-circuit
voltage found in module datasheet to find an extra point on
the curve but at another temperature and uses it to construct
the final fifth equation. The method uses iterative methods to
solve five simultaneous nonlinear equations which is not an
easy mathematical task. This method also gives no solution
for a large number of modules as demonstrated in [4]. The
same equations are adopted in [24], and with the help of Lam-
bert function, explicit expressions for the five parameters are
obtained. However, this method needs a special software able
to implement Lambert function. The second method [25–27]
takes the reciprocal of the slope of the output curve at the
short-circuit point to be equal to the shunt resistance and
uses it as the fifth boundary condition. This study employs
the last method [25–27] to construct the five equations needed
to extract the five parameters based only on datasheet infor-
mation and without neglecting or assuming any parameter in
advance that may differ from panel to the other. By means of
analytical manipulation, the five sets of equations are reduced
to only two equations in two unknowns—the series resis-
tance (Rs ) and shunt resistances (Rsh )—that need to be solved
simultaneously. This reduction to just two equations made it
so easy to implement a simple routine to solve them without
the need for any special equation solver. The proposed study
provides the least computational effort among the authors
embracing the same concept and can be deployed in a com-
pact manner paving the way for this model to be written in
hardware modeling languages like Spice or Verilog-A for
integration in circuit simulators for the sake of aiding in the
design of other power electronics circuits. This paper is orga-
nized as follows: Section 2 introduces the one-diode model,
identifies its parameters and shows how datasheet informa-
tion is utilized to formulate a set of equations to help calculate
model parameters. Section 3 presents the proposed technique
for extracting the model parameters and how to extend the
model to predict the effect of temperature and irradiance vari-
ations. Finally, Sect. 4 validates the model by comparing the
results with previous works and some commercial PV panels.
2 Five-parameter model (single-diode
model)
The single-diode model as shown in Fig. 1 consists of four
building blocks. A current source, Iph , represents the pho-
tovoltaic action; the cell itself is represented by a diode
depicting the ideal recombination current from the diffusion
and recombination of electrons and holes in (p) and (n) sides
of the cell (Shockley diffusion theory). It also consists of a
series resistance Rs and a shunt resistance Rsh accounting
for different sources of losses and none idealities. A simple
circuit analysis of the circuit in Fig. 1 reveals the following
123
262 Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270

equation for the current voltage (i.e., I–V ) relation. used the slope of the I–V curve either at the short-circuit
    point or at the open-circuit point as the fifth boundary con-
V + I · RS V + I · RS dition, but this piece of information is not usually provided
I = Iph − Io · exp −1 − (1)
n · Vt Rsh by manufacturers. In [23], the open-circuit temperature coef-
ficient (K V ) is used to calculate Voc at another temperature
where Io is the reverse saturation current of the diode, n is a different from the (STC) condition. Recognizing the tem-
non-dimensional constant called the ideality factor describ- perature dependence of the model parameters (more details
ing the diode’s deviation from the Shockley diffusion theory is presented in Sect. 3), (4) may be used again as the fifth
and V and I are the output voltage and the output current, equation. Reference [4] implemented the model introduced
respectively. Vt is the thermal voltage equaled to (k · T /q). T by [23] for a large number of solar modules, and concluded
is the temperature, and k is Boltzmann constant. Finally, q is that this scheme gives unphysical values for the parameters
the electron charge. Obviously, prior to the use of this model for many modules. In [25–27], another condition for the fifth
to simulate the cell behavior, it is necessary to identify the equation is embraced without demanding any information
five parameters, Iph , Io , Rs , Rsh and n. To calculate them, five outside the datasheet. They approximated the slope of the
boundary conditions extracted from the solar cell I–V curve I–V curve through the reciprocal of the shunt resistance.
are needed. These boundary conditions can be obtained either This approximation is justified in “Appendix.” In [4], it is
from the manufacturer’s data or by taking measurements, but argued in the light of a survey conducted on a large number
this work is concerned about models based on datasheet given of PV panels that this method converges to real physical val-
data. As previously mentioned, the data normally available in ues for the model parameters for most panels and only 3% in
PV module datasheets is the short-circuit point (V = 0, I = the survey failed unlike the equations of [23]. Thus, in this
Isc ), the open-circuit point (V = Voc , I = 0), the maximum work, we endeavored to present a model based on the latter
power point (V = Vm , I = Im ), the short-circuit tempera- approximation for the fifth boundary condition with mini-
ture coefficient (K I ), the open-circuit temperature coefficient mum computational effort as revealed in the next section.
(K V ) and the number of cells connected in series and parallel The approximated slope of the I–V curve through the shunt
(Ns and Np , respectively). By direct substitution of the afore- resistance used by [25–27] is given as
mentioned three points into (1), the following three equations
can be obtained, δI 1
    | I =Isc ,V =0 = − (7)
Vm + Im · RS Vm + Im · RS δV Rsh
Im = Iph − Io · exp −1 −
n · Vt Rsh
(2)
   
Isc · RS Isc · RS 3 The proposed model
Isc = Iph − Io · exp −1 − (3)
n · Vt Rsh
    Most of the models based on the one-diode model start
Voc Voc
Iph = Io · exp −1 − (4) by extracting the parameters at STC (conditions at which
n · Vt Rsh
datasheets are provided). The next step is to use some sort of
The maximum power point has another property that can translation equations to extrapolate the values of the param-
be used to get another boundary condition. For this point to eters to any other different temperature or irradiance. The
be actually the maximum power point, the derivative of the following subsections illustrate these two steps.
power curve at this point must be zero or,
3.1 Extraction of the parameters at STC
δI Im
|P = − (5)
δV m Vm
Starting from five Eqs. (2), (3), (4), (6), (7) and after some
Finding the derivative of (1) then substituting from (5), the mathematical manipulation (see the “Appendix”), the follow-
fourth equation can be obtained as ing two equations in two unknowns Rs and Rsh are obtained

   
Im Io Vm + Im · RS 1 Im F1 = exp[k2 · ln(k1 ) − k1 − k3 · ln(k1 ) = 0 (8)
= · exp + · 1 − Rs ·
Vm n · Vt n · Vt Rsh Vm F2 = exp[k2 · ln(k1 ) − 1 − k4 · ln(k1 ) = 0 (9)
(6)
where
The final boundary condition is the crucial one as no fur-
 
ther information can be extracted from the previous three Rsh − Rs Im · (Rsh + Rs ) − Vm
points. Several works [12–15] and the second method of [5] k1 = · (10)
Rs Vm − Im · Rs

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270 263

Voc − Isc · Rs not the case in the presented model. Exploiting the fact that
k2 = (11)
Vm + Rs · (Im − Isc ) the temperature coefficient of open-circuit voltage, K v , can
 
Rsh − Rs Im · (Rsh + Rs ) + (Vm − Voc ) be used to calculate Voc at any desired temperature, (4) could
k3 = · (12)
Rs Vm + Rs · (Im − Isc ) be rearranged to predict Io at different temperature values
 
Rsh − Rs Isc · (Rsh + Rs ) − Voc [12,25] as
k4 = · (13)
Rs Vm + Rs · (Im − Isc )  
Voc + K v · (T − T@STC )
Io (T ) = Iph (T ) −
By solving (8) and (9) simultaneously, the values of Rs Rsh
  (18)
and Rsh are obtained. The other three parameters n, Io and −Voc − K v · [T − T@STC ]
·exp
Iph can be calculated explicitly through the expressions given n · Vt
by (14), (15) and (16), respectively.
where Iph (T ) used in (18) excludes the irradiance depen-
Vm + Rs · (Im − Isc ) dence of Iph . If the irradiance dependence was included,
n= (14)
Vt · ln(k1 ) the open-circuit voltage would be kept constant as long
 
Rs · n · Vt −Isc · Rs as the temperature is constant irrespective of any variation
Io = · exp (15)
Rsh (Rsh − Rs ) n · Vt in irradiance. Other works such as the one presented in
 
Isc · Rs Isc · Rs [28], add irradiance dependence to Voc through the term
Iph = Isc + Io · exp −1 + (16) A ∗ Vth ∗ ln(G/G @STC ) which has the same mathematical
n · Vt Rsh
effect on (Voc ) as removing the irradiance dependence of
3.2 Effect of temperature and irradiance on model (Iph ) in (18).
parameters In order to make the presented model complete, a way
has to be advised to solve (8) and (9). Newton–Raphson
In the previous sections, the extracted model parameters are algorithm is a good candidate for this task as it is simple
defined at the STC. In this section, we extended the model to enough to be implemented without the need to use special
account for the irradiance and temperature effects. It is well software. Newton algorithm is an iterative algorithm which
established, [23], that in the case of the one-diode model the starts with an initial guess and then linearizes the equations
temperature and irradiance dependence can be represented about the guess and solves them (linearly); to find an update
through the photon current, Iph , and the diode saturation cur- for the guess, it then repeats till a certain convergence criteria
rent, Io , while keeping the other three parameters Rs , Rsh and are met. (There is a unique set of roots.) Applying Newton
n constant. The photon current, Iph , has a linear dependence method to solve (8) and (9), it is found that the following two
on irradiance, while its temperature dependence can be taken equations should be evaluated iteratively until a final solution
as the temperature dependence of the short-circuit current, for Rs and Rsh that meets the convergence criteria is found,
[23], which is provided in datasheet through the temperature
coefficient of short-circuit current, K I . So the photon cur- f 12 · F2 − f 22 · F1
Rsk+1 = + Rsk (19)
rent at any temperature or irradiance is calculated from the f 11 · f 22 − f 12 · f 21
following equation k+1 f 21 · F1 − f 11 · F2
Rsh = + Rsh
k
(20)
f 11 . f 22 − f 12 · f 21
  G
Iph (T , G) = Iph@STC + K i (T − T@STC ) · (17)
G @stc where the superscript k refers to the current guess and k + 1
is the new guess, F1 and F2 as given in (8) and (9), respec-
The parameter G is the irradiance (W/m2 ), and T is the tively. The terms f 11 , f 12 , f 21 and f 22 are the elements of the
temperature. The subscript STC denotes the value of the Jacobean and given as f 11 = δδ FR1s , f 12 = δδRFsh1 , f 21 = δδ FR2s ,
term at standard test conditions. Iph@STC is the value cal- f 22 = δδRFsh2 .
culated in the previous section, (16). G @STC and T@STC are One thing remains to implement Newton algorithm, the
the values of irradiance and temperature at which the man- initial guess. Rs and Rsh being the subject of (8) and (9) have
ufacturers provide their measurements in datasheet (usually a great advantage as they (Rs , Rsh ) are closely related to the
1000 W/m2 and 298 K, respectively). In many works such reciprocal of I–V curve slope at open-circuit and short-circuit
as [23], the temperature dependence of the diode saturation points, respectively. Exploiting this information and with the
current is determined through the diode theory. But, this does help of the three known points (i.e., Voc , Isc , Vm and Im ), (21)
not always predict the temperature dependence of the open- and (22) are used to find a starting guess for Rs and Rsh , or
circuit voltage as given in datasheet through K v . The model
introduced by [23] does not have this problem because K v is Voc − Vm
used to construct one of the boundary conditions, but this is Rs_init = (21)
10 · Im

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

264 Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270

10 · Vm and MSX-60 datasheet information. Other works such as in

Rsh_init = (22)
Isc − Im [8] generated data at different temperatures and irradiance
Table 1 shows the number of executed iterations by New- for these modules using two different models from the lit-
ton method to solve (8) and (9) for different commercial solar erature, i.e., models [2,23]. The two models given by [2,23]
modules. Rs_i and Rsh_i refer to the initial guess calculated represent two major schools or ways in extracting the param-
by means of (21) and (22). Rs−f and Rsh−f are the final values eters of the one-diode model. The first extracts the whole five
after the convergence of the method is achieved. The aver- parameters of the model based on datasheet information only
age number of iterations found is about 5.5 making the high (which is rival to the presented method), while the latter uses
efficiency and speed of the method very evident. To sum up, explicit equations by simplifying the model to lesser num-
the procedure to implement the model will be as follows: ber of parameters. Based on the results obtained from [8],
Table 3 states the five parameters calculated by the model in
– Initialize Rs and Rsh through (21) and (22), respectively. [23] (adapted from [8]) and the proposed model for the men-
– Evaluate the right-hand side of (19) and (20) using the tioned solar modules. The difference between the calculated
current guess of Rs and Rsh to update the current values. values especially for Rs and Rsh comes from the difference in
Repeat this step till the difference between two successive the boundary conditions each model uses to extract the model
values meets the convergence criteria. parameters as explained in Sect. 2. The real measure for any
– Use (14) and (16) to find the rest of parameters at STC model is the I–V characteristics it predicts, so based on results
and then use (17) and (18) to update Io and Iph for the from [8] Tables 4 and 5 shows the main characteristic points
new operating temperature and irradiance. (Voc , Isc , Im , Vm and Pm ) at different temperatures and irra-
diance predicted by models in [2,23] and the proposed model
4 Results and discussion for KC200GT and MSX-60 solar modules, respectively.
It is observable from these data sets that they all agree at
In order to validate the proposed method as a convenient way STC (1000 W/m2 and 298 K) which is predicted as they all
to model real solar modules compared to other models, the solve for the same inputs at these conditions. But at other con-
proposed method is used to model the commercial KC200GT ditions of temperature and irradiance, the proposed model is
and MSX-60 solar modules. Table 2 shows the KC200GT found to give an intermediate values between the values pre-
dicted by [2,23]. This is an indication that the proposed model
provides good results which may be close to real measure-
Table 1 Number of iterations needed by Newton method to solve (8)
and (9) for different solar modules
ments of the investigated modules. To test that allegation,
MSX-60 module datasheet provides an additional parame-
Module Rs_i Rsh_i Rsf Rshf Iters.
ter for the temperature coefficient of maximum power (K p ).
BP 330J 0.235955 1050 0.448171 1149.82 5 This parameter is given in datasheet to be (0.5 ± 0.05)%/◦ C.
BP-MSX120 0.235955 1087.1 0.472777 1365.83 4 Figure 2 compares the maximum power calculated by the
KC200GT 0.086728 438.333 0.217152 951.927 5 proposed model (in dashes) swept against temperature (from
MSX-60 0.114286 570 0.16952 637.564 4 298 to 350 K) and the maximum power calculated using the
PWP 201 0.452796 1056.73 1.31294 582.25 8 upper and lower values of K p . It is apparent the predicted
SQ175-PC 0.185859 737.5 0.362905 653.357 6
power lies within the values calculated using manufacturer
CNPV-5M 1.60714 6000 2.01439 3421.4 5
data for all the simulated temperature range.
For the KC200GT module, the I–V curve predicted by the
GES-5M5 1.44828 5800 1.55139 3385.99 5
proposed model is compared to experimental data taken from
SP70 0.115294 366.667 0.324196 321.209 7
I–V curve provided by module datasheet. This is shown in
Table 2 Datasheet parameters for KC200GT and MSX-60 modules,
Fig. 3 at different temperatures and Fig. 4 at different irradi-
K I is given as absolute value not relative value as in datasheet ance. This comparison proves the acceptable accuracy of the
model in predicting real behavior of solar module at different
Datasheet parameters KC200GT MSX-60
conditions. The accuracy may not be perfect at the region of
Voc (V) 32.9 21.1 curvature around the point of maximum power largely due to
Isc (A) 8.21 3.81 the inherent limitations of the one-diode model, yet the accu-
Vm (V) 26.3 17.1 racy is still great for all practical purposes and comparable to
Im (V) 7.61 3.5 similar models and even superior. An extra validation for the
K i (A/Co) 0.003179 0.00247 model is made using the Photowatt-PWP 201 solar module
K v (V/Co) − 0.123 − 0.0799 (Photowatt, Bourgoin-Jallieu, France) [5,29]. The module is
Ns 54 36 composed of 36 cells connected in series. The main char-

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270 265

Table 3 Model parameters for

Model parameters KC200GT MSX-60
KC200GT and MSX-60 solar
modules calculated by DESOTO De Soto et al. [23] Proposed De Soto et al. [23] Proposed
model [23] (Adapted from [8])
and the proposed model Rs () 0.3355 0.2171 0.3862 0.16952
Rsh () 160.1 951.927 146.2 637.564
Io (A) 4.2571e−10 1.71e−7 2.4246e−10 3.295e−07
Iph (A) 8.22721 8.211 3.82006 3.80101
n 75.114 72.455 32.4 50.5609

Table 4 Calculated
G (W/m2 ) 1000 800 600 400 200 1000 1000
characteristic points for
T (k) 298 323 348
KC200GT module at different
operating conditions [8] De Soto et al. [23]
Voc (V) 32.91 32.6 32.20 31.63 30.674 29.827 26.71
Isc (A) 8.21 6.57 4.930 3.28 1.644 8.289 8.368
Vm (V) 26.30 26.46 26.54 26.47 26.01 23.205 20.15
Im (V) 7.61 6.098 4.581 3.058 1.53 7.600 7.55
Pm (W) 200.21 161.43 121.62 80.96 39.82 176.36 152.29
Saloux et al. [2]
Voc (V) 32.9 32.33 31.61 30.58 28.83 29.82 26.75
Isc (A) 8.21 6.568 4.926 3.28 1.642 8.2894 8.368
Vm (V) 26.42 25.9 25.23 24.29 22.69 23.29 20.250
Im (V) 7.580 6.055 4.5329 3.013 1.498 7.529 7.448
Pm (W) 200.28 156.85 114.38 73.2 34.003 175.37 150.82
Proposed model
Voc (V) 32.9 32.483 31.94 31.18 29.87 29.82 26.75
Isc (A) 8.21 6.568 4.926 3.284 1.642 8.289 8.36
Vm (V) 26.3 26.19 25.97 25.55 24.61 23.21 20.21
Im (V) 7.61 6.087 4.561 3.033 1.503 7.560 7.476
Pm (W) 200.14 159.46 118.49 77.49 36.98 175.55 151.16

acteristic points measured at 45◦ —of the module [5]—are
included in Table 6.
The PWP 201 solar module is used as a benchmark by
many works [5,29–33] checking their models. Table 7 illus-
trates the extracted parameters by the mentioned authors—
regenerated from [5] along with the results of the proposed
model. The I–V curve measurements of the module can be
found in [5,29].
Using the extracted parameters for different authors
(Table 7), the data for PWP 201 are generated for every model
and then the difference between the calculated current and
the measured current (given by [5]) is graphed in Fig. 5. The
graphed data show that the proposed model has the least dif-
ference between all the other methods. To absolutely compare
the results, many authors [5,29] use the normalized root mean
square error (RMSE) and its absolute version is defined in
(23) as follows:

1
m
RMSE = · (Icalc,i − Imeasured,i )2 (23)
m
i=1
where m is the number of points used from the I–V curve.
Icalc,i and Imeasured,i are, respectively, the calculated current
using the model and the measured current at some point I. The
RMSE (23) with respect to experimental data of PWP 201
solar module is calculated for all the models listed in Table 7
and the proposed model. The results are included in Table 8.
The proposed model clearly has the lowest error among the
investigated methods.
5 Verilog-A model implementation
As stated in the introduction section, modeling PV modules
is so important in the design of circuits handling the power of
solar cells, i.e., regulating their output voltage or current and
trying to track maximum power point. Several works exist in

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

266 Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270

Table 5 Calculated
G (W/m2 ) 1000 800 600 400 200 1000 1000
characteristic points for
T (k) 298 323 348
MSX-60 module at different
operating conditions [8] De Soto et al. [23]
Voc (V) 21.10 20.89 20.64 20.27 19.65 19.09 17.07
Isc (A) 3.81 3.049 2.288 1.526 0.763 3.87 3.93
Vm (V) 17.1 17.15 17.147 17.04 16.69 15.06 13.07
Im (V) 3.50 2.804 2.106 1.405 0.703 3.52 3.534
Pm (W) 59.850 48.092 36.11 23.95 11.74 53.12 46.20
Saloux et al.[2]
Voc (V) 21.10 20.744 20.285 19.63 18.53 19.10 17.10
Isc (A) 3.810 3.048 2.2860 1.524 0.762 3.87 3.93
Vm (V) 16.98 16.65 16.230 15.63 14.62 14.94 12.97
Im (V) 3.52 2.813 2.106 1.40 0.696 3.52 3.50
Pm (W) 59.81 46.85 34.18 21.89 10.18 52.64 45.47
Proposed model
Voc (V) 21.1 20.807 20.42 19.89 18.96 19.1 17.1
Isc (A) 3.8 3.04 2.28 1.52 0.76 3.861 3.923
Vm (V) 17.1 16.922 16.67 16.27 15.50 15.08 13.12
Im (V) 3.5 2.795 2.089 1.384 0.380 3.50 3.484
Pm (W) 59.85 47.317 34.85 22.53 10.54 52.81 45.73

Fig. 2 Power maximum calculated by the proposed model (PMcalculated )

and the power maximum predicted using the upper (Pm+) and lower
(Pm−) bounds of the datasheet parameter Kp for MSX-60 module for Fig. 3 I–V Characteristic for KC200GT module under varying temper-
temperature range (298–350K) ature for the proposed model and measurements at 1000 W/m2

the literature that use hardware description languages (HDL)

to describe controllers of photovoltaic systems [35,36]. How-
ever, none has modeled the photovoltaic cells themselves.
Mainly because HDL models digital circuits. Verilog-A is
an HDL dedicated to model circuits and analog circuits.
It is realized that the proposed model in this work, through
the steps illustrated in the list at the end of Sect. 3, is used to
construct a complete model for a solar module using Verilog-
A hardware modeling language. The Verilog-A-based model
is then integrated in Cadence virtuoso (SPECTRE) circuit
simulator. The model is a circuit element with two outputs
representing the positive and negative pins of solar module. It
has 10 input parameters, the first 8 parameters are datasheet
parameters (Voc , Isc , Vm , Im , K i , K v , Tref and G ref ) which
essentially define the solar module used within a specific
model instance and the last two parameters are user input
parameters (T , G) which determine the operating condition
for the cell. Although the two datasheet parameters (Tref and
G ref ) are usually the same for most solar modules, i.e., 298 K
and 1000 W/m2 , respectively, it is important to include them
as input parameters as in some cases solar manufacturers
may provide their measurements at different conditions like
the PWP 201 solar module examined in the previous section
(318 K). It is worth noting that these input parameters are
instance-based parameters that can be easily changed from

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270 267

Fig. 4 I–V Characteristic for KC200GT module under varying irradi-

ance for the proposed model and measurements at 25 ◦ C
Fig. 5 The difference between the calculated current (by the proposed
model and other different authors) and the measured current of PWP
Table 6 Parameters of PWP 201 solar module 201 module

Voc (V) Isc (A) Vm (V) Im (V)

16.7785 1.0317 12.6490 0.9120
instance to another enabling the use of different solar mod-
ules in the same circuit schematic or design. The model starts
by implementing the algorithm described in Sect. 3 to find the
model parameters at the desired (operating) temperature and
irradiance, and then calculates the output current and voltage
through a contribution statement executing model Eq. (1).
This contribution statement is the one responsible for deter-
mining the output current and voltage based on the electrical
load attached to the module. Characteristic points (Voc , Isc ,
Vm , Im and Pm ) of the module at the chosen operating condi-
tions are also calculated within the model independent of the
actual output of the cell which depends on loading conditions.
This helps to see the effect of temperature or irradiance on
these characteristic points individually like the one presented
in Fig. 2 which sweeps Pm against temperature. Actually, all
the data generated in this work are obtained using the Verilog-
A implementation of the proposed model.
In order to test the model as a viable circuit element, a
model instance is interfaced with a boost converter circuit.
The boost converter operates in discontinuous conduction
mode (DCM) with L = 100 nH, 40% duty cycle and load =
200 . There is a 47 uF capacitance as an interface between
the PV source and the converter to be able to provide
large instantaneous current, and 12 cells in parallel from
SLMD481H08L solar module are used. The output current
and voltage of the model for transient analysis are included
in Fig. 6. During operation, the irradiance was changed from
1000 to 600 W/m2 to test the response of the model. It is
worth noting that despite the logarithmic relation between
the irradiance and produced voltage, the presence of a boost
converter at the interface of the Verilog-A module would
cause the operation to be at 350 mV. The boost converter
aims to maximize the voltage and current product. Hence,
it changes the voltage to operate the solar cell at the cur-

Table 7 Model parameters for PWP 201 solar module calculated by the proposed model and other different authors
Model n Rs () Rsh () Io (A) Iph (A)

Proposed model 46.013 1.312 582.25 1.67e−6 1.0340

Cubas et al. [5] 45.195 1.353 559.680 1.32e−6 1.0342
Phang et al. [30] 63.36 0.083 561.034 6.40e−5 1.0319
Easwarakhanthan et al. [29] 48.45 1.205 549.450 3.28e−6 1.0318
AlHajri et al. [32] 48.288 1.205 714.285 3.17e−6 1.0313
Bouzidi et al. [31] 48.186 1.203 555.555 3.07e−6 1.0339
El-Naggar et al. [33] 48.82 1.198 833.333 3.66e−6 1.0331
Peng et al. [34] 48.322 1.213 625.00 3.22e−6 1.0313

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

268 Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270

Table 8 The root mean square error calculated by the proposed model model is then integrated into Cadence virtuoso (SPECTRE)
and other works with respect to experimental data of the solar module circuit simulator. The model is successfully tested within the
Model RMSE SPECTRE simulation and proved to work perfectly for sim-
ulating real behavior of solar modules and sensitive to any
This work 0.0031273
changes in environmental conditions.
Cubas et al. [5] 0.004351419
Phang et al. [30] 0.052517635 Acknowledgements This research was partially funded by Zewail City
Easwarakhanthan et al. [29] 0.00665825 of Science and Technology (ZCST), ITIDA ITAC program, Academy
of Scientific Research and Technology in Egypt (ASRT), Deepen Local
AlHajri et al. [32] 0.004860459
Manufacturing in Electronics Industry Alliance (DLMEI).
Bouzidi et al. [31] 0.005179024
El-Naggar et al. [33] 0.004568553
Peng et al. [34] 0.008156697
7 Appendix

To explain the validity of the approximation made in the fifth

boundary condition (7). Assuming the actual slope can be
written as in (24), where Rsho is used to indicate the actual
slope.

δI 1
| I =Isc ,V =0 = − (24)
δV Rsho

Substituting in the derivative of (1) and rearranging the

terms:
 
1 1 Io Isc · Rs
− = · exp (25)
Rsho − Rs Rsh n · Vt n · Vt
Fig. 6 The Verilog-A model output current and voltage when interfaced
with a boost converter. The irradiance is changed during operation from
1000 to 600 W/m2 at 298 K The exponential term in 25 is very small [5] in value com-
pared to the other terms which gives,

rent that would maximize that product. It is found that the Rsho = Rsh + Rs (26)
model works perfectly in simulating real behavior of solar
module and accounting for any changes in environmental
The series resistance Rs is roughly two orders of magni-
conditions. The small ripples encountered in the output are
tude less than the shunt resistance Rsh in most solar modules,
mainly because of the switching cycles of the boost converter.
so can be neglected in (26) which finally justifies (7). Now
replacing Rsho with Rsh , (25) may be written as

6 Conclusion  
Rs · n · Vt Isc · Rs
Io = · exp − (27)
Rsh · (Rsh − Rs ) n · Vt
A simple and accurate model for PV behavior is introduced
The model uses five boundary conditions to construct sys-
Replacing Iph in (2) and (3) by its expression from (4)
tem equations to extract model parameters based on datasheet
gives (28) and (29), respectively.
parameters. The system is further reduced to two equations
that can be solved using any software routine. The model     
Voc Vm + Im · Rs
accounts for the effect of temperature and irradiance vari- Io · exp − exp
ations on the I–V characteristics. The proposed model was n · Vt n · Vt
verified with commercial modules and other models from Vm − Voc + Im · (Rs + Rsh )
= (28)
the literature. Matched results with the commercial modules R
   sh  
for different temperatures and irradiance are obtained, and Voc Isc · Rs
Io · exp − exp
the least error is found compared to other works. Finally, a n · Vt n · Vt
complete model for a solar module using Verilog-A hard- Isc · (Rs + Rsh ) − Voc
ware modeling language is presented. The Verilog-A-based = (29)
Rsh

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270 269

Substituting for Io from (27) in (28), (28) and (6): 11. Mahmoud, Y., El-Saadany, E.F.: A photovoltaic model with
reduced computational time. IEEE Trans. Ind. Electron. 62(6),
     3534–3544 (2015)
Voc − Isc · Rs Vm + (Im − Isc ) · Rs
exp − exp 12. Brano, V.L., Orioli, A., Ciulla, G., Gangi, A.D.: An improved five-
n · Vt n · Vt parameter model for photovoltaic modules. Solar Energy Mater.
1 Rsh − Rs Solar Cells 94, 1358–1370 (2010)
= · · [Vm − Voc + Im · (Rs + Rsh )] 13. Orioli, A., Gangi, A.D.: A procedure to calculate the five-parameter
n · Vt Rs model of crystalline silicon photovoltaic modules on the basis of
(30) the tabular performance data. Appl. Energy 102, 1160–1177 (2013)
 
Voc − Isc · Rs 1 Rsh − Rs 14. de Blas, M., Torres, J., Prieto, E., Garcia, A.: Selecting a suitable
exp =1+ · model for characterizing photovoltaic devices. Renew. Energy 25,
n · Vt n · Vt Rs 371–380 (2002)
· [Isc · (Rs + Rsh ) − Voc ] (31) 15. Khan, F., Baek, S.-H., Park, Y., Kim, J.H.: Extraction of diode
 
Vm + Rs · (Im − Isc ) Rsh − Rs parameters of silicon solar cells under high illumination conditions.
exp = Energy Convers. Manag. 76, 421–429 (2013)
n · Vt Rs 16. Khalifa, A.E., Elhamid, H.A., Swillam, M.A.: Optimal design of
 
Im · (Rs + Rsh ) − Vm intermediate reflector layer in micromorph silicon thin-film solar
· (32) cells. J. Nanophotonics 10, 046006 (2016)
Vm − Im · Rs 17. Lim, L.H.I., Ye, Z., Ye, J., Yang, D., Du, H.: A linear identification
of diode models from single i–v characteristics of PV panels. IEEE
Now Eqs. (30) , (31) and (32) are three equations in three Trans. Ind. Electron. 62, 4181–4193 (2015)
unknowns Rs , Rsh and n. Using (32) to get n in terms of Rs 18. Soon, J.J., Low, K.-S.: Photovoltaic model identification using
particle swarm optimization with inverse barrier constraint. IEEE
and Rsh , where K 1 is given by (10). Replacing n in (30) and Trans. Power Electron. 27, 3975–3983 (2012)
(31) from (33) two Eqs. (8) and (9)—proposed in Sect. 3—in 19. Jordehi, A.R.: Enhanced leader particle swarm optimisation
two unknowns Rs and Rsh are obtained. (ELPSO): an efficient algorithm for parameter estimation of pho-
tovoltaic (PV) cells and modules. Solar Energy 159, 78–87 (2018)
20. Jadli, U., Thakur, P., Shukla, R.D.: A new parameter estimation
Vm + Rs · (Im − Isc )
n · Vt = (33) method of solar photovoltaic. IEEE J. Photovolt. 8, 239–247 (2018)
ln(k1 ) 21. Hachana, O., Hemsas, K.E., Tina, G.M., Ventura, C.: Comparison
of different metaheuristic algorithms for parameter identification
of photovoltaic cell/module. J. Renew. Sustain. Energy 5, 053122
(2013)
References 22. Zhu, H., Yu, C., Lu, L., Lian, W., Yao, J., Hu, Y.: Research on param-
eter distribution features of photovoltaic array under the cover and
1. Ishaque, K., Salam, Z., Taheri, H.: Simple, fast and accurate two- shadow shading conditions. Int. J. Photoenergy 2018, 1–14 (2018)
diode model for photovoltaic modules. Solar Energy Mater. Solar 23. De Soto, W., Klein, S., Beckman, W.: Improvement and validation
Cells 95(2), 586–594 (2011) of a model for photovoltaic array performance. Solar Energy 80,
2. Saloux, E., Teyssedou, A., Sorin, M.: Explicit model of photo- 78–88 (2006)
voltaic panels to determine voltages and currents at the maximum 24. Batzelis, E.I., Papathanassiou, S.A.: A method for the analytical
power point. Solar Energy 85, 713–722 (2011) extraction of the single-diode PV model parameters. IEEE Trans.
3. Khezzar, R., Zereg, M., Khezzar, A.: Modeling improvement of Sustain. Energy 7, 504–512 (2016)
the four parameter model for photovoltaic modules. Solar Energy 25. Sera, D., Teodorescu, R., Rodriguez, P.: PV panel model based
110, 452–462 (2014) on datasheet values. In: 2007 IEEE International Symposium on
4. Laudani, A., Fulginei, F.R., Salvini, A.: Identification of the one- Industrial Electronics. IEEE (2007)
diode model for photovoltaic modules from datasheet values. Solar 26. Ding, K., Zhang, J., Bian, X., Xu, J.: A simplified model for pho-
Energy 108, 432–446 (2014) tovoltaic modules based on improved translation equations. Solar
5. Cubas, J., Pindado, S., Victoria, M.: On the analytical approach for Energy 101, 40–52 (2014)
modeling photovoltaic systems behavior. J. Power Sources 247, 27. Chatterjee, A., Keyhani, A., Kapoor, D.: Identification of photo-
467–474 (2014) voltaic source models. IEEE Trans. Energy Convers. 26, 883–889
6. Carrero, C., Ramírez, D., Rodríguez, J., Platero, C.: Accurate and (2011)
fast convergence method for parameter estimation of PV generators 28. Park, J.-Y., Choi, S.-J.: Datasheet-based circuit parameter extrac-
based on three main points of the i–v curve. Renew. Energy 36, tion method for maximum power point simulation of photovoltaic
2972–2977 (2011) array. In: 2015 9th International Conference on Power Electronics
7. Ghani, F., Duke, M., Carson, J.: Numerical calculation of series and ECCE Asia (ICPE-ECCE Asia). IEEE (2015)
and shunt resistances and diode quality factor of a photovoltaic cell 29. Easwarakhanthan, T., Bottin, J., Bouhouch, I., Boutrit, C.: Nonlin-
using the lambert w-function. Solar Energy 91, 422–431 (2013) ear minimization algorithm for determining the solar cell parame-
8. Lun, S. Du, C., Xu, C.: An explicit i–v model of solar cells based ters with microcomputers. Int. J. Solar Energy 4, 1–12 (1986)
on padé approximants. In 2016 Chinese Control and Decision Con- 30. Phang, J., Chan, D., Phillips, J.: Accurate analytical method for the
ference (CCDC). IEEE (2016) extraction of solar cell model parameters. Electron. Lett. 20(10),
9. Peng, L., Sun, Y., Meng, Z.: An improved model and parameters 406 (1984)
extraction for photovoltaic cells using only three state points at 31. Bouzidi, K., Chegaar, M., Bouhemadou, A.: Solar cells parameters
standard test condition. J. Power Sources 248, 621–631 (2014) evaluation considering the series and shunt resistance. Solar Energy
10. Mahmoud, Y.A., Xiao, W., Zeineldin, H.H.: A parameterization Mater. Solar Cells 91, 1647–1651 (2007)
approach for enhancing PV model accuracy. IEEE Trans. Ind. Elec-
tron. 60, 5708–5716 (2013)

123

Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.

270
32. AlHajri, M., El-Naggar, K., AlRashidi, M., Al-Othman, A.: Opti-
mal extraction of solar cell parameters using pattern search. Renew.
Energy 44, 238–245 (2012)
33. El-Naggar, K., AlRashidi, M., AlHajri, M., Al-Othman, A.: Sim-
ulated annealing algorithm for photovoltaic parameters identifica-
tion. Solar Energy 86, 266–274 (2012)
34. Peng, L., Sun, Y., Meng, Z., Wang, Y., Xu, Y.: A new method for
determining the characteristics of solar cells. J. Power Sources 227,
131–136 (2013)
123
Content courtesy of Springer Nature, terms of use apply. Rights reserved.
Journal of Computational Electronics (2019) 18:260–270
35. Rezk, A.A., Helmy, A., Ismail, Y.: VHDL implementation of a
power management algorithm for PV-battery system. In: 5th Inter-
national Conference on Energy Aware Computing Systems &
Applications. IEEE (2015)
36. Rezk, A.A., Helmy, A., Abdallah, A., Ismail, Y.: VHDL imple-
mentation of maximum power point tracking algorithms. In: 2013
IEEE 20th International Conference on Electronics, Circuits, and
Systems (ICECS). IEEE (2013)
Terms and Conditions
Springer Nature journal content, brought to you courtesy of Springer Nature Customer Service Center GmbH (“Springer Nature”).
Springer Nature supports a reasonable amount of sharing of research papers by authors, subscribers and authorised users (“Users”), for small-
scale personal, non-commercial use provided that all copyright, trade and service marks and other proprietary notices are maintained. By
accessing, sharing, receiving or otherwise using the Springer Nature journal content you agree to these terms of use (“Terms”). For these
purposes, Springer Nature considers academic use (by researchers and students) to be non-commercial.
These Terms are supplementary and will apply in addition to any applicable website terms and conditions, a relevant site licence or a personal
subscription. These Terms will prevail over any conflict or ambiguity with regards to the relevant terms, a site licence or a personal subscription
(to the extent of the conflict or ambiguity only). For Creative Commons-licensed articles, the terms of the Creative Commons license used will
apply.
We collect and use personal data to provide access to the Springer Nature journal content. We may also use these personal data internally within
ResearchGate and Springer Nature and as agreed share it, in an anonymised way, for purposes of tracking, analysis and reporting. We will not
otherwise disclose your personal data outside the ResearchGate or the Springer Nature group of companies unless we have your permission as
detailed in the Privacy Policy.
While Users may use the Springer Nature journal content for small scale, personal non-commercial use, it is important to note that Users may
not:

1. use such content for the purpose of providing other users with access on a regular or large scale basis or as a means to circumvent access
control;
2. use such content where to do so would be considered a criminal or statutory offence in any jurisdiction, or gives rise to civil liability, or is
otherwise unlawful;
3. falsely or misleadingly imply or suggest endorsement, approval , sponsorship, or association unless explicitly agreed to by Springer Nature in
writing;
4. use bots or other automated methods to access the content or redirect messages
5. override any security feature or exclusionary protocol; or
6. share the content in order to create substitute for Springer Nature products or services or a systematic database of Springer Nature journal
content.
In line with the restriction against commercial use, Springer Nature does not permit the creation of a product or service that creates revenue,
royalties, rent or income from our content or its inclusion as part of a paid for service or for other commercial gain. Springer Nature journal
content cannot be used for inter-library loans and librarians may not upload Springer Nature journal content on a large scale into their, or any
other, institutional repository.
These terms of use are reviewed regularly and may be amended at any time. Springer Nature is not obligated to publish any information or
content on this website and may remove it or features or functionality at our sole discretion, at any time with or without notice. Springer Nature
may revoke this licence to you at any time and remove access to any copies of the Springer Nature journal content which have been saved.
To the fullest extent permitted by law, Springer Nature makes no warranties, representations or guarantees to Users, either express or implied
with respect to the Springer nature journal content and all parties disclaim and waive any implied warranties or warranties imposed by law,
including merchantability or fitness for any particular purpose.
Please note that these rights do not automatically extend to content, data or other material published by Springer Nature that may be licensed
from third parties.
If you would like to use or distribute our Springer Nature journal content to a wider audience or on a regular basis or in any other manner not
expressly permitted by these Terms, please contact Springer Nature at

onlineservice@springernature.com