Skip to content

Conversation

@kandersolar
Copy link
Member

  • [ ] Closes #xxxx
  • I am familiar with the contributing guidelines
  • [ ] Tests added
  • [ ] Updates entries in docs/sphinx/source/reference for API changes.
  • Adds description and name entries in the appropriate "what's new" file in docs/sphinx/source/whatsnew for all changes. Includes link to the GitHub Issue with :issue:`num` or this Pull Request with :pull:`num`. Includes contributor name and/or GitHub username (link with :ghuser:`user`).
  • [ ] New code is fully documented. Includes numpydoc compliant docstrings, examples, and comments where necessary.
  • Pull request is nearly complete and ready for detailed review.
  • Maintainer: Appropriate GitHub Labels (including remote-data) and Milestone are assigned to the Pull Request and linked Issue.

Continuing in a broader thrust of developing our user guide section. Previously:

@kandersolar kandersolar added this to the v0.13.2 milestone Nov 3, 2025
+-------------------------------------------+--------+------------+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Model | Type | Transient? | Inputs |
| | | +----------------+---------------------+------------+----------------+
| | | | POA irradiance | Ambient temperature | Wind speed | Downwelling IR |
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Do you think "IR" is obvious or should we include a note defining the acronym?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

include a note IMO

Comment on lines +79 to +80
Currently, pvlib provides no functionality for fitting parameter values
using measured temperature.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we should at least mention the conversion capabilities in GeneralLinearModel

@adriesse
Copy link
Member

adriesse commented Nov 4, 2025

One thing that could be added is the parameter conversion from one model to another. Please leave this open for a few weeks as I'd like to comment more.

Co-authored-by: Cliff Hansen <cwhanse@sandia.gov>
Temperature models predict one of two quantities:

- *module temperature*: the temperature as measured at the back surface
of a PV module. Easy to measure, but usually a few degrees less
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
of a PV module. Easy to measure, but usually a few degrees less
of a PV module. Easy to measure, but usually less

I prefer not to add this pseudo–/semi-quantification, in case anyone misunderstands and really extracts a quantitative difference here that they then overgeneralize. If it's less we can just say less, and if we want to explain a relation we can do that.

Comment on lines +22 to +23
Cell temperature is typically thought to be slightly higher than module
temperature.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
Cell temperature is typically thought to be slightly higher than module
temperature.

Shall we delete this? It seems to be covered in the point above that I commented on separately. It also reads a bit disjointed to me

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants