Journal of Power and Energy Engineering, 2017, 5, 30-40

http://www.scirp.org/journal/jpee
ISSN Online: 2327-5901
ISSN Print: 2327-588X

Comparison between SiC- and Si-Based

Inverters for Photovoltaic Power Generation
Systems

Yuji Ando1, Yasuhiro Shirahata1, Takeo Oku1*, Taisuke Matsumoto1, Yuya Ohishi1,
Masashi Yasuda2, Akio Shimono3, Yoshikazu Takeda3, Mikio Murozono4
1
Department of Materials Science, The University of Shiga Prefecture, Shiga, Japan
2
Collaborative Research Center, The University of Shiga Prefecture, Shiga, Japan
3
Kyoshin Electric Company Limited, Kyoto, Japan
4
Clean Venture 21 Corporation, Kyoto, Japan

How to cite this paper: Ando, Y., Shira- Abstract

hata, Y., Oku, T., Matsumoto, T., Ohishi,
Y., Yasuda, M., Shimono, A., Takeda, Y. 100-W class power storage systems were developed, which comprised spheri-
and Murozono, M. (2017) Comparison cal Si solar cells, a maximum power point tracking charge controller, a li-
between SiC- and Si-Based Inverters for
thium-ion battery, and one of two different types of direct current (DC)-alter-
Photovoltaic Power Generation Systems.
Journal of Power and Energy Engineering, nating current (AC) converters. One inverter used SiC metal-oxide-semicon-
5, 30-40. ductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) as switching devices while the other
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jpee.2017.51003 used Si MOSFETs. In these 100-W class inverters, the ON resistance was con-
Received: November 1, 2016
sidered to have little influence on the efficiency. Nevertheless, the SiC-based
Accepted: January 10, 2017 inverter exhibited an approximately 3% higher DC-AC conversion efficiency
Published: January 13, 2017 than the Si-based inverter. Power loss analysis indicated that the higher effi-
ciency resulted predominantly from lower switching and reverse recovery
Copyright © 2017 by authors and
Scientific Research Publishing Inc. losses in the SiC MOSFETs compared with in the Si MOSFETs.
This work is licensed under the Creative
Commons Attribution International Keywords
License (CC BY 4.0).
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ Silicon Carbide, Solar Cell, Inverter, Photovoltaic Device, Maximum Power
Open Access Point Tracking, Lithium-Ion Battery

1. Introduction
Modern power device requirements include a high blocking voltage, a low ON
resistance, a high switching frequency, and good reliability. These requirements
have led to great interest in power devices based on wide gap semiconductors
such as GaN and SiC [1] [2] [3]. The main advantage of wide gap semiconduc-
tors is their very high electric field capability. Wide gap semiconductors possess

DOI: 10.4236/jpee.2017.51003 January 13, 2017

 Y. Ando et al.

high critical field strengths. This means that a thinner epi layer is required to
block the same voltage compared with Si devices. Thus, switching devices with
much lower ON resistances can be fabricated using GaN or SiC. A lower ON re-
sistance improves the efficiency of inverters due to reduced conduction and
switching losses, and also decreases the module size due to the increased power
density. The high electron mobility of GaN allows switching operations with
higher frequencies, which also decreases the module size because of the smaller
passive components. The excellent thermal stability of SiC and GaN should ena-
ble devices based on these materials to operate at high temperatures. The im-
provement in system performance that can be achieved by an improvement in
device performance is an important consideration for such devices. Considerable
research has focused on developing power converters using SiC devices in an at-
tempt to answer this question [4]-[11]. A comparative study for Si- and SiC-
based power converters was also reported in [12] [13]. In these papers, the pow-
er converters were examined as a stand-alone equipment. Concerning photovol-
taic power applications, however, performances of total systems using these con-
verters should be also compared.
In this study, Si- and SiC-based inverters were compared with respect to per-
formance of the total system including solar cell panels, a maximum power point
tracking (MPPT) controller, and a storage battery as well as the inverter. We de-
veloped photovoltaic power generation systems based on two different direct
current (DC)-alternating current (AC) converters. One inverter contained SiC
metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect transistors (MOSFETs) as switching de-
vices while the other inverter contained Si MOSFETs. Stabilities of electrical
power and DC-AC conversion efficiencies of the SiC- and Si-based systems were
measured and compared. The compositions of power losses were also analyzed
to understand the physical origin of the conversion losses in these systems. The
capacity of handling power was set at around 100 W to enable portability.
Lightweight spherical Si cell panels [14] were used as the power source. Spherical
Si cells that are lightweight, flexible, and economical are suitable for self-sus-
taining energy systems such as portable electronic devices, solar-powered cars,
and emergency power supply systems. This study also aimed to evaluate the fea-
sibility of the photo-voltaic power generation system based on spherical Si cells
and the SiC-based inverter.

2. Materials and Methods

Figure 1 shows a schematic of the photovoltaic power generation systems. We
previously reported two systems capable of operating independently, based on
two different DC-AC converters [15] [16] [17]. One inverter contained Si
MOSFETs as switching devices (Daiji Industry, SXCD-300) while the other con-
tained SiC MOSFETs. The SiC-based inverter was prepared by replacing Si
MOSFETs (Fairchild, FQPF16N25C) [18] in SXCD-300 with SiC MOSFETs
(Rohm, SCT2120AF) [19]. The inverter consisted of a front stage DC-DC con-
verter followed by a second stage DC-AC converter. The Si MOSFETs of the

31
Y. Ando et al.

MPPT Li DC/AC Inverter

Load
controller battery (SiC-FET)

Solar cell Power meter

MPPT Li DC/AC Inverter

Load
controller battery (Si-FET)

Solar cell Power meter

PC

Figure 1. Schematic of the photovoltaic power generation systems consisting of spherical

Si solar cells and Si- or SiC-based DC-AC converters.

DC-DC part exhibited a very low ON resistance of 4 mΩ, so SiC MOSFETs were
introduced only in the DC-AC part. The input and output powers of these in-
verters were monitored synchronously by two power meters (Hioki, PW3336).
The measurement interval was 200 ms and reported data are the average mea-
surements over each minute. The spherical Si solar cell panels (Clean venture
21, CVFM-0540T2-WH) wired in parallel were used as the power source. The
maximum operating current and voltage for a single solar panel were 3.34 A and
16.2 V, respectively. The operating point was controlled to maximize the output
power, with the aid of an MPPT controller (EPsolar, Tracer-2215BN). The
MPPT stabilized the electricity by charging and discharging Li-ion batteries
(O’Cell, IFM12-200E2). Filament lamps were used as the load. The temperature,
humidity (Hioki, LR5001) and solar radiation power (Uizin, UIZ-PCM01-LR)
were monitored simultaneously during measurements.

3. Results
3.1. Stability of Electricity
Figures 2(a)-(d) show examples of the variation in voltage, current, power, and
DC-AC conversion efficiency, respectively, for the SiC- and Si-based inverters.
The load power was set at 90 W. Figure 3(a) and Figure 3(b) show the variation
in solar radiation power and in temperature and humidity, respectively, during
the measurements shown in Figure 2. In accordance with lowering of the solar
radiation power after 14:30, a voltage reduction of the Li-ion battery became sig-
nificant in the Si inverter system, which resulted in a gradual decrease in the in-
put voltage (Vin). However, the input power (Pin) was almost kept constant due
to the constant load power, and hence, the input current (Iin) was gradually in-
creased. This kind of behavior was less significant in the SiC inverter system
where the conversion efficiency was higher than that of the Si inverter system.
Concerning the output voltage (Vout), current (Iout), and power (Pout), no fluctua-
tion was observed in both systems. The DC-AC conversion efficiency increased

32
 Y. Ando et al.

(a) (b)
16 160 14 1.4
Vin SiC Pload = 90 W
14 Vin Si 140 12 1.2
Iout Si
12 120 10 Iout SiC 1

Vout (V)
Vin (V)

Iout (A)
Iin (A)
10 100 8 0.8
Vout Si Iin Si
Vout SiC
8 80 Iin SiC
6 0.6
Pload = 90 W
6 60 4 0.4
9:30 10:30 11:30 12:30 13:30 14:30 9:30 10:30 11:30 12:30 13:30 14:30
Time Time
(c) (d)
150 100
Pload = 90 W
90 Eff. SiC
130 Pin Si

Efficiency (%)
Power (W) Pin SiC
110 80 Eff. Si

90 70
Pout Si
Pout SiC
70 60
Pload = 90 W
50 50
9:30 10:30 11:30 12:30 13:30 14:30 9:30 10:30 11:30 12:30 13:30 14:30
Time Time

Figure 2. Variation in (a) voltage, (b) current, (c) and power at input and output termin-
als, and (d) DC-AC conversion efficiencies, of Si and SiC-based inverters at a load power
of 90 W.

(a) (b)
1.2 50 100
Solar radiation (kW・m-2)

1.0 Temperature (℃) 40 80

Temp.

Humidity (%)
0.8 30 60

0.6 20 Humid. 40

0.4 10 20

0.2 0 0
9:30 10:30 11:30 12:30 13:30 14:30 9:30 10:30 11:30 12:30 13:30 14:30
Time Time

Figure 3. Variation in (a) solar radiation power and (b) temperature and humidity, dur-
ing the measurements shown in Figure 2.

from 83.4 to 86.5% using the SiC-based inverter. Thus, losses were reduced from
16.6 to 13.5% using the SiC-based inverter. This efficiency improvement in the
SiC inverter was considered as a result of reduced switching and reverse recov-
ery losses in the SiC MOSFETs, which are discussed in the next section.
Figure 4(a) and Figure 4(b) show another example of the variation in power
and DC-AC conversion efficiency, respectively, for Si- and SiC-based inverters.
The load power was set at 10 W. In this case, discharge of the Li-ion battery was
hardly observed. The currents (Iin and Iout) and voltages (Vin and Vout) were al-
most constant throughout a whole measurement, but an initial decrease was ob-
served in the input power (Figure 4(a)), which would be due to an initial varia-
tion of the efficiency. Besides, there was no significant difference in the efficien-
cies of the SiC- and Si-based inverters, as shown in Figure 4(b). Under low out-
put power conditions (Pout < 20 W), the efficiency was predominantly deter-
mined by the non-load losses due to the transformers in the DC-DC converter
circuit, the electrolytic capacitors of the filter circuit, and so on. Since the present

33
Y. Ando et al.

(a) (b)
20 80
Pload = 10 W

16 Pin SiC 70
Eff. Si

Efficiency (%)
Power (W)
12 Pin Si 60
Eff. SiC
8 50
Pout Si
Pout SiC
4 40
Pload = 10 W
0 30
10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00
Time
Time

Figure 4. Variation in (a) input and output powers and (b) DC-AC conversion efficien-
cies of Si- and SiC-based inverters, at a load power of 10 W.

SiC inverter was provided by just replacing a Si switch in the Si inverter with a
SiC switch, non-load losses were considered to be invariable between them,
and hence, no significant difference was expected in the efficiencies under low
output power conditions.

3.2. Conversion Efficiencies

Two different measurements were carried out to study the influence of output
power on the DC-AC conversion efficiency. One was the step load measure-
ment, where the load power was increased stepwise from 5 to 179 W, and held at
each step for 5 min. The other was the steady state measurement, where the load
power was kept constant, and the DC-AC conversion efficiency was determined
by time average for 1 or 2-hour duration measurements after the initial variation.
Figure 5(a) and Figure 5(b) show the results for the step load and steady state
measurements, respectively. In these figures, DC-AC conversion efficiencies are
plotted with respect to the output power. In Figure 5(b), the output power de-
pendence was obtained by setting the constant load value to be 5, 10, 20, 54, 90,
120, 154, and 179 W. For the step load measurement, the efficiencies at an out-
put power of 54 - 179 W were approximately 86 and 81% for the SiC- and
Si-based inverters, respectively. The difference in the efficiencies of the SiC- and
Si-based inverters was approximately 5%, which decreased to approximately 3%
under steady state measurement. This may have been attributed to the fact that
the initial variation was more significant for the Si-based inverter than the SiC-
based inverter. The decrease in efficiency at the low output power region also
suggested the presence of non-load losses that were independent of the load power.

4. Loss Analysis
The conduction loss of an inverter consists of contributions from a field-effect
transistor (FET) (Pfet) and a body diode (BD) implemented between the source
and drain (Pbd). Assuming a sinusoidal load current, Pfet and Pbd are expressed by
[20]:
1 D 
Pfet = Rds × I 2 ×  + cos θ  (1)
 8 3π 

34
 Y. Ando et al.

(a) (b)
100 100
ΔEff = 4-6% ΔEff = 2-4%
90 90

80 80

Efficiency (%)

Efficiency (%)
70 70

60 60
Step load Steady state
50 50
Meas. SiC Meas. SiC
40 40
Meas. Si Meas. Si
30 30
0 40 80 120 160 200 0 40 80 120 160 200
Pout (W) Pout (W)

Figure 5. DC-AC conversion efficiencies versus output power for Si- and SiC-based in-
verters measured under (a) step load and (b) steady state conditions.

and

1 D 
Pbd =I × V f ×  − cos θ  (2)
 8 3π 

where Rds, Vf, I, D, and θ are the ON resistance of the FET, forward voltage of
the BD, peak load current, modulation index, and power factor angle, respec-
tively. The switching loss of the FET consists of contributions from the turn-on
loss (Pon) and turn-off loss (Poff), which are expressed by [20]:

V I
Pon = K g × Eon × × × f sw (3)
Vt I t

and

V I
Poff = K g × Eoff × × × f sw (4)
Vt I t

where Kg, V, and fsw are the correction factor, peak load voltage, and switching
frequency, respectively. Eon and Eoff are the turn-on and turn-off losses, respec-
tively, for the test voltage Vt and current It. The reverse recovery loss of the BD is
expressed by:

1
Prr= I rr × V × trr × f sw (5)
8

where Irr and trr are the reverse recovery current and reverse recovery time, re-
spectively. The total loss Ptot of the DC-AC converter is then given by:

Ptot = Pfet + Pbd + Pon + Poff + Prr + Pnl (6)

where Pnl is the non-load loss.

Table 1 summarizes the electrical characteristics for the SiC and Si MOS-
FETs operated at T = 25˚C. These parameters were taken from data sheets for
SCT2120AF [19] and FQPF16N25C [18]. Although no data were available for
Eon and Eoff in [18], the switching times were approximately three times larger
in FQPF16N25C than in SCT2120AF. For Eon and Eoff in FQPF16N25C, the

35
Y. Ando et al.

Table 1. Electrical characteristics of SiC and Si MOSFETs at T = 25˚C.

Property Symbol Unit SiC Si Remarks

FET ON-resistance Rds Ω 0.11 0.22 Almost independent of Id

FET turn-on loss Eon μJ 60 180 Measured at Vt = 300 V, It = 10 A

FET turn-off loss Eoff μJ 40 120 Measured at Vt = 300 V, It = 10 A

BD forward voltage Vf V 2.15 0.73 Averaged for If = 0.1 - 1 A

BD reverse recovery time trr ns 33 260 Almost independent of If

corresponding values in SCT2120AF were multiplied by three and used as an

assumption. An increase in the forward current I across BD tended to result in
an increase in Irr. However, the short lifetime of minority carriers in SiC meant
that Irr was significantly suppressed in the SiC MOSFETs compared with in the
Si MOSFETs. In this calculation, this effect was introduced by assuming that Irr
= I/3 for the SiC MOSFETs and Irr = 3I for the Si MOSFETs [21].
Figure 6 shows modeled DC-AC conversion efficiencies with respect to the
output power (V = 141.4 V, fsw = 20 kHz, D = 1, cosθ = 1, Kg = 1). In the calcula-
tions, the loss due to the front stage DC-DC converter was taken into account,
and the DC-DC efficiency was assumed to be 90% for both inverters. The non-
load loss was assumed to be 5 W. Measured steady state DC-AC conversion effi-
ciencies are also shown. The calculations showed an approximate 2% improve-
ment in the saturated efficiency of the SiC-based inverter compared with the
Si-based inverter. This value was somewhat smaller than the measured value of
approximately 3%. This discrepancy would arise from an efficiency degradation
due to the self-heating effect occurring in the Si inverter, which was not included
in the present analysis. As shown in Figure 6, measured efficiency of each in-
verter was gradually decreased by increasing the output power, and it deviated
from the corresponding calculation. This tendency seemed to be more signifi-
cant in the Si inverter compared with the SiC inverter. Judging from the lower
thermal resistance of SiC MOSFETs (0.7 KW−1 for junction to case [19]) com-
pared with Si MOSFETs (2.89 KW−1 for junction to case [18]), these behaviors
were seemingly due to the self-heating effect of the switching devices. Enhanced
self-heating effect in the Si MOSFETs should degrade their current drivability,
and hence, lower the efficiency of the Si inverter. We presume this effect was re-
sponsible for the clear decrease in the efficiency of the Si inverter under high
output power conditions (Pout > 100 W).
Figure 7(a) and Figure 7(b) show the dependence of total power loss on the
output power of the SiC- and Si-based inverters, respectively. DC-DC converter
losses and non-load losses are not included in Figure 7. The DC-AC converter
loss in the SiC-based inverter was estimated to be one-third of that in the Si-
based inverter.
Figure 8 shows the contribution of power loss elements (FET conduction loss
Pfet, BD conduction loss Pbd, turn-on loss Pon, turn-off loss Poff, and reverse re-
covery loss Prr) in the SiC- and Si-based inverters occurring at output powers of

36
 Y. Ando et al.

100

90

80

Efficiency (%)
70
Steady state
60 Model SiC
50 Model Si
Meas. SiC
40
Meas. Si
30
0 40 80 120 160 200
Pout (W)

Figure 6. Modeled (lines) and measured (symbols) conversion efficiencies of SiC- and
Si-based inverters with respect to output power.

(a) (b)
200 200

Output power (W)

Output power (W)

100 100
50 50
20 20
10 SiC Inverter 10 Si Inverter
fsw = 20 kHz fsw = 20 kHz
5 5

0 2 4 6 8 10 0 2 4 6 8 10
DC-AC inveter loss (W) DC-AC inveter loss (W)

Figure 7. Dependence of DC-AC converter loss on the output power of the (a) SiC- and
(b) Si-based inverters. DC-DC converter losses and non-load losses are not included.

(a) 5, (b) 10, (c) 20, (d) 50, (e) 100, and (f) 200 W. DC-DC converter losses and
non-load losses are not shown. The main power loss components in these inver-
ters were the switching loss (Pon and Poff) and reverse recovery loss (Prr). De-
creases in these loss elements were responsible for the 2% improvement in effi-
ciency of the SiC-based inverter. The contribution from conduction loss was
more significant at higher output power. However, this calculation suggested
that the loss improvement due to the small Rds in a SiC MOSFET would be ne-
gated by the loss enhancement due to the large Vf of the body diode.
The main application of SiC power devices is multi-kW level converters. A
100-W class converter cannot fully benefit from the low ON resistance of SiC
devices. However, the switching and reverse recovery losses were still improved
in the SiC-converter, as shown in Figure 8, which has yielded the 3% improve-
ment of the DC-AC conversion efficiency in the present 100-W class inverter.
The SiC inverter was prepared by replacing the Si MOSFETs in a conventional
Si inverter with SiC MOSFETs, but the overall circuit remained optimized for
Si MOSFETs. The switching frequency was also set to that of the conventional
Si-inverter value. The switching frequency is related to the electric waveforms
that are controlled by the filter circuit. Thus, simply replacing Si devices with
SiC devices is far from an optimal design. In spite of this, the SiC inverter exhi-
bited an efficiency superior to that of the conventional Si inverter. Optimizing
the circuit is likely to further improve performance. We are currently engaged in
redesigning the inverter circuit, the results of which will be reported elsewhere.

37
Y. Ando et al.

(a) (b)
Si Si

Pfet
Pfet Pfet
Pfet
Pfwd
Pbd Pfwd
Pbd
Pon
Pon Pon
Pon
SiC Pout = 5 W Poff
SiC Pout = 10 W Poff
Poff Poff
fsw = 20 kHz PPrr
rr fsw = 20 kHz PPrr
rr

0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4

Power loss (W) Power loss (W)

(c) (d)
Si Si

Pfet
Pfet Pfet
Pfet
Pfwd
Pbd Pfwd
Pbd
Pon
Pon Pon
Pon
SiC Pout = 20 W Poff SiC Pout = 50 W Poff
Poff Poff
fsw = 20 kHz PPrrrr fsw = 20 kHz PPrr
rr

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Power loss (W) Power loss (W)

(e) (f)
Si Si

Pfet
Pfet Pfet
Pfet
Pfwd
Pbd Pfwd
Pbd
Pon
Pon Pon
Pon
SiC Pout = 100 W Poff SiC Pout = 200 W
Poff Poff
Poff
fsw = 20 kHz PPrrrr fsw = 20 kHz PPrrrr

0 1 2 3 4 0 2.5 5 7.5 10
Power loss (W) Power loss (W)

Figure 8. Contribution of power loss elements (FET conduction loss Pfet, BD conduction
loss Pbd, turn-on loss Pon, turn-off loss Poff, and reverse recovery loss Prr) in SiC- and
Si-based DC-AC converters occurring at output powers of (a) 5, (b) 10, (c) 20, (d) 50, (e)
100, and (f) 200 W. DC-DC converter losses and non-load losses are not shown.

5. Conclusion
We developed 100-W class power storage systems composed of spherical Si solar
cells, an MPPT controller, a Li-ion battery, and one of two types of DC-AC con-
verters. One inverter used SiC MOSFETs as switching devices while the other
used Si MOSFETs. Although the circuit was not optimized for the SiC MOSFETs,
the SiC-based inverter exhibited a superior DC-AC conversion efficiency com-
pared with the conventional Si-based inverter. Power loss analysis indicated that
the ON resistance had little influence on the efficiency, and that a reduction in
switching and recovery losses was responsible for the higher efficiency of the
SiC-based inverter. These results demonstrate the feasibility of SiC MOSFETs
even for 100-W class photovoltaic power generation systems.

Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Super Cluster Program of the Japan Science and
Technology Agency (JST).

References
[1] Labedev, A.A. and CHelnokov, V.E. (1999) Wide-Gap Semiconductors for High-

38
 Y. Ando et al.

Power Electronics. Semiconductors, 33, 999-1001.

https://doi.org/10.1134/1.1187823
[2] Monroy, E., Omnès, F. and Calle, F. (2003) Wide-Bandgap Semiconductor Ultra-
violet Photodetectors. Semiconductor Science and Technology, 18, R33-R51.
https://doi.org/10.1088/0268-1242/18/4/201
[3] Okumura, H. (2006) Present Status and Future Prospect of Widegap Semiconductor
High-Power Devices. Japanese Journal of Applied Physics, 45, 7565-7586.
https://doi.org/10.1143/JJAP.45.7565
[4] Burger, B., Kranzer, D. and Stalter, O. (2008) Cost Reduction of PV-Inverters with
SiC-DMOSFETs. Proceedings of the 2008 5th International Conference on Inte-
grated Power Electronics Systems (CIPS 2008), Nuremberg, Germany, 11-13 March
2008, 1-5.
[5] Chinthavali, M., Zhang, H., Tolbert, L.M. and Ozpineci, B. (2009) Update on SiC-
Based Inverter Technology. Proceedings of the 2009 Brazilian Power Electronics
Conference (COBEP 2009), Bonito-Mato Grosso do Sul, Brazil, 27 September-1
October 2009, 71-79. https://doi.org/10.1109/cobep.2009.5347590
[6] Hensel, A., Wilhelm, C. and Kranzer, D. (2011) Development of a Boost Converter
for PV Systems Based on SiC BJTs. Proceedings of the 2011 14th European Confe-
rence on Power Electronics and Applications (EPE 2011), Birmingham, U.K., 30
August-1 September 2011, 1-7.
[7] De, D., Castellazzi, A. Solomon, A., Trentin A., Minami, M. and Hikihara, T. (2013)
An All SiC MOSFET High Performance PV Converter Cell. Proceedings of the 2013
15th European Conference on Power Electronics and Applications (EPE 2013),
Lille, France, 2-6 September 2013, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1109/EPE.2013.6634642
[8] Yamane, A., Koyanagi, K., Kozako, M., Fuji, K. and Hikita, M. (2013) Fabrication
and Evaluation of SiC Inverter Using SiC-MOSFET. IEEE 10th International Con-
ference of Power Electronics and Drive Systems (PEDS 2013), Kitakyushu, Japan,
22-25 April 2013, 1029-1032. https://doi.org/10.1109/PEDS.2013.6527171
[9] Li, L., Li, C., Cao, Y. and Wang, F. (2013) Recent Progress of SiC Power Devices and
Applications. IEEJ Transactions on Electrical and Electronic Engineering, 8, 515-
521. https://doi.org/10.1002/tee.21888
[10] Kim, T., Jang, M. and Agelidis, V.G. (2013) Current Status of Silicon Carbide Power
Devices and Their Application in Photovoltaic Converters. 2013 IEEE ECCE Asia
Downunder (ECCE Asia), Melbourne, Australia, 3-6 June 2013, 555-559.
https://doi.org/10.1109/ECCE-Asia.2013.6579152
[11] Nashida, N., Hinata, Y., Horio, M., Yamada, R. and Ikeda, Y. (2014) All-SiC Power
Module for Photovoltaic Power Conditioner System. IEEE 26th International Sym-
posium of Power Semiconductor Devices & IC’s (ISPSD 2014), Waikoloa, HI, 15-19
June 2014, 342-345. https://doi.org/10.1109/ISPSD.2014.6856046
[12] Burkart, R.M. and Kolar, J.W. (2013) Comparative Evaluation of SiC and Si PV In-
verter Systems Based on Power Density and Efficiency as Indicators of Initial Cost
and Operating Revenue. 2013 IEEE 14th Workshop on Control and Modeling for
Power Electronics (COMPEL), Salt Lake City, UT, 23-26 June 2013, 1-6.
https://doi.org/10.1109/COMPEL.2013.6626462
[13] Sintamarean, C., Blaabjerg, F. and Wang, H. (2013) Comprehensive Evaluation on
Efficiency and Thermal Loading of Associated Si and SiC Based PV Inverter Appli-
cations. IECON 2013—39th Annual Conference of the IEEE Industrial Electronics
Society Vienna, Austria, 10-13 November 2013, 555-560.
[14] Oku, T., Kanayama, M., Ono, Y., Akiyama, T., Kanamori, Y. and Murozono, M.
(2014) Microstructures, Optical and Photoelectric Conversion Properties of Spheri-

39
Y. Ando et al.

cal Silicon Solar Cells with Anti-Reflection SnOx:F Thin Films. Japanese Journal of
Applied Physics, 53, 05FJ03-1-7. https://doi.org/10.7567/jjap.53.05fj03
[15] Oku, T., Matsumoto, T., Hiramatsu, K., Yasuda, M., Shimono, A., Takeda, Y. and
Murozono, M. (2015) Construction and Characterization of Spherical Si Solar Cells
Combined with SiC Electric Power Inverter. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1649,
79-83. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4913548
[16] Matsumoto, T., Oku, T., Hiramatsu, K., Yasuda, M., Shirahata, Y., Shimono, A.,
Takeda, Y. and Murozono, M. (2016) Evaluation of Photovoltaic Power Generation
System Using Spherical Silicon Solar Cells and SiC-FET Inverter. AIP Conference
Proceedings, 1709, 020023-1-6. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4941222
[17] Oku, T., Matsumoto, T., Hiramatsu, K., Yasuda, M., Ohishi, Y., Shimono, A., Ta-
keda, Y. and Murozono, M. (2016) Construction and Evaluation of Photovoltaic
Power Generation and Power Storage System Using SiC Field-Effect Transistor In-
verter. AIP Conference Proceedings, 1709, 020024-1-10.
[18] Fairchild Semiconductor (2013) Datasheet of FQPF16N25C—N-Channel QFET
MOSFET.
[19] ROHM Semiconductor (2015) Datasheet of SCT2120AF—N-Channel SiC Power
MOSFET.
[20] Pattnaik, S.K. and Mahapatra, K.K. (2010) Power Loss Estimation for PWM and
Soft-Switching Inverter Using RDCLI. Proceedings of the International MultiCon-
ference of Engineers and Computer Scientists 2010 (IMECS 2010), Hong Kong,
17-19 March 2010, 1401-1406.
[21] ROHM Semiconductor (2014) SiC Power Devices and Modules—Application Note.
http://rohmfs.rohm.com/en/products/databook/applinote/discrete/sic/common/sic
_appli-e.pdf

Submit or recommend next manuscript to SCIRP and we will provide best

service for you:
Accepting pre-submission inquiries through Email, Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, etc.
A wide selection of journals (inclusive of 9 subjects, more than 200 journals)
Providing 24-hour high-quality service
User-friendly online submission system
Fair and swift peer-review system
Efficient typesetting and proofreading procedure
Display of the result of downloads and visits, as well as the number of cited articles
Maximum dissemination of your research work
Submit your manuscript at: http://papersubmission.scirp.org/
Or contact [email protected]

40