Spectral Correction accounts for —the difference between the module’s spectral response and the actual incident solar spectrum. PV modules are rated under a reference spectrum (AM1.5G), but the real spectrum varies with atmospheric conditions (e.g., , ). Different module technologies (e.g., crystalline silicon, CdTe) have different spectral responses, causing them to over- or under-perform relative to their rating depending on the incident spectrum. PlantPredict implements four spectral correction approaches: No Spectral Shift, Monthly Override, Single-Variable Models (technology-specific), and Two-Variable Model. The spectral correction factor Uspectr is a multiplier applied to effective irradiance after corrections.
The user specifies a spectral loss percentage for each month. The percentage is converted to a correction factor:Uspectr=1−100Lspectr,monthwhere Lspectr,month is the user-entered spectral loss (%) for the current month. A positive value represents a loss (e.g., 2% → Uspectr=0.98); a negative value represents a spectral gain (e.g., −1% → Uspectr=1.01).
These models rely on atmospheric parameters, including precipitable water. If precipitable water cannot be determined (precipitable water, , and all missing from the weather file), all single-variable models default to Uspectr=1—including the Sandia model.
Typically used for crystalline silicon (c-Si) modules, but applicable to any technology with user-defined polynomial coefficients:Uspectr=a0+a1⋅AM′+a2⋅(AM′)2+a3⋅(AM′)3+a4⋅(AM′)4where [a0,a1,a2,a3,a4] are user-defined Sandia polynomial factors and AM′ is the pressure-corrected air mass.
Recommended for First Solar CdTe modules:Uspectr=c0+c1⋅ec2(W+c3)c4where W is the precipitable water (cm) and coefficients depend on module series:
Six-parameter model from Lee and Panchula, accounting for pressure-corrected air mass AM′ and precipitable water W:Uspectr=b0+b1AM′+b2W+b3AM′+b4W+b5WAM′b0 through b5 are user-defined coefficients specific to the module technology.To ensure numerical stability, precipitable water is clamped to a minimum of 0.1 cm and air mass is clamped to a maximum of 10. If precipitable water cannot be determined (precipitable water, relative humidity, and dewpoint all missing from the weather file), the model defaults to Uspectr=1.
Using the Gueymard (1994) model, which uses absolute temperature TK=Ta+273.15 (Kelvin) throughout.First, the apparent water vapor scale heightHv (km) is calculated. This represents the height of an equivalent column if all atmospheric water vapor were compressed to surface-level density.Hv=0.4976+1.5265273.15TK+e13.6897273.15TK−14.9188(273.15TK)3Next, the surface water vapor densityρv (g/m³) is calculated from relative humidity RH (%) and temperature:ρv=100⋅TK216.7⋅RH⋅e22.33−TK4914−10.922(TK100)2−0.39015100TKFinally, precipitable water W (cm) is the product of scale height and vapor density, where the factor 0.1 converts from (km × g/m³) to cm of liquid water (with water density = 1000 kg/m³):W=0.1⋅Hv⋅ρv
When only dewpoint temperature Td is available, relative humidity is calculated using the August-Roche-Magnus approximation for es (hPa). The saturation vapor pressure is the maximum water vapor pressure that air can hold at a given temperature—at the dewpoint, the air is saturated (RH=100%).The ratio of saturation vapor pressures at dewpoint and ambient temperature gives relative humidity:RH=100⋅es(Ta)es(Td)where the saturation vapor pressure follows the August-Roche-Magnus equation:es(T)=c0⋅ec2+Tc1⋅Twith T in °C and coefficients depending on PlantPredict version:
Software Version
c0
c1
c2
≤ 10
6.11
17.1
234.2
≥ 11
6.1094
17.625
243.04
Version 11+ uses the improved coefficients from Alduchov and Eskridge (1996), which provide less than 0.4% error over the range -40°C to 50°C.
Then calculate W from RH using the Gueymard method above.
King, D. L., Boyson, W. E., & Kratochvil, J. A. (2004). Photovoltaic array performance model. SAND2004-3535, Sandia National Laboratories. DOI: 10.2172/919131
Lee, M., & Panchula, A. (2016). Spectral correction for photovoltaic module performance based on air mass and precipitable water. 2016 IEEE 43rd Photovoltaic Specialists Conference (PVSC), 1351-1356. DOI: 10.1109/PVSC.2016.7749836
Gueymard, C. (1994). Analysis of monthly average atmospheric precipitable water and turbidity in Canada and Northern United States. Solar Energy, 53(1), 57-71. DOI: 10.1016/0038-092X(94)90175-9
Alduchov, O. A., & Eskridge, R. E. (1996). Improved Magnus form approximation of saturation vapor pressure. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 35(4), 601-609. DOI: 10.1175/1520-0450(1996)035%3C0601:IMFAOS%3E2.0.CO;2