IAM losses higher with newer modules?

[S Groenveld]

Hi PV-syst,

I am quite new to PV-syst and the forum. While working with some newer panels I have noticed that the PR of the system ended up lower than with the older panels. When looking into this I discovered that the newer panel had an AR Coating instead of no AR Coating on the old panel, it could also be that maybe in the PAN file the AR coating from the old panel was never defined. You (or atleast I) would think that the IAM losses would be lower on panels with an AR Coating but this didn't seem to be the case. I would like to know why this is or how it happens? So we can have the most accurate simulations in the future. Thank you in advance.

The old panel in question is Jinko Tiger 6TL3, the newer can be any with AR Coating.

[dtarin]

Verify your IAM loss against a third party test report, and enter manually if necessary under detailed losses. PAN files can have any IAM profile entered into them before you receive it, which may or may not be based on a valid third party test.

[linkeshd]

It has come to my attention while digging into this issue that the Sandia model database has not been updated for a long time.  In fact, it seems to no longer be supported by Sandia National Labs, NREL, Sunspot, or other initiatives.  PVSyst has allowed the selection of the Sandia model for modules which are not in the database (apparently), but I would love to see some feedback from the PVSyst developers - is the Sandia Model Database for the IAM selection valid anymore?

[Stéphane Metz]

Some answers are given here: https://forum.pvsyst.com/topic/2667-sandia-model-database-no-longer-supported