The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Comparison of 1700-V SiC-MOSFET and Si-IGBT Modules Under Identical Test Setup Conditions
Abstract
In this article, a detailed hard switching behavior comparison between a 1700-V silicon carbide metal-oxide-semiconductor field-effect-transistor and a 1700-V silicon insulated-gate bipolar-transistor module was performed in an identical low inductance commutation circuit for comparable driving conditions. To accomplish this, devices using same module formats were used and carefully selected to match thermal characteristics in the exact same commutation circuit. Furthermore, a simulation of the modules in inverter operation based on the experimental results and complimented by datasheet based on-state values and Foster thermal models has been performed to study losses, junction temperatures, and current utilization. These results are further discussed highlighting advantages and limitations regarding these state-of-the-art SiC devices versus relative cost when contrasted with a comparable Si-based device.
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Because of the low switching frequency of IGBTs in high-power applications, the power stack loss is dominated by static current [13] when compared with short turn-on and turn-off transient times.”
From Simulation-Assisted Design of a Power Stack for Improving Static Current Sharing Among Three IGBT Modules Connected in Parallel (2022) · cites this paper as [13]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 18
- 10.1109/TPEL.2018.2834345 · DOI
- rabkowski, 0, Comparison of the power losses in 1700?V Si IGBT and SiC MOSFET modules including reverse conduction, Proc 17th Eur Conf Power Electron Appl, 1
- rodrigues, 0, Characterization of 1.7 kV SiC MOSFET modules for medium/high power current source inverter in photovoltaic applications, Proc Int Exhib Conf Power Electron Intell Motion Renewable Energy Energy Manage, 1
- acharya, 0, Comparison of 1.7?kV, 450?A SiC-MOSFET and Si-IGBT based modular three phase power block, Proc IEEE Energy Convers Congr Expo, 5119
- 2007, Insulated Gate Bipolar Transistor
- schon, 2013, The Measurement of High Impulse Voltage and Currents, 69
- 10.1109/TPEL.2017.2655491 · DOI
- 10.1109/TIE.2017.2721882 · DOI
- negishi, 0, 3.3 kV all-SiC power module for traction system use, Proc Int Exhib Conf Power Electron Intell Motion Renewable Energy Energy Manage, 1
- ishikawa, 2017, Development of rolling stock inverters using SiC, Hitachi Rev, 66, 155
- mcbryde, 0, Performance comparison of 1200?V silicon and SiC devices for UPS application, Proc 36th Annu Conf IEEE Ind Electron Soc, 2657
- wang, 0, Performance comparison of 1200?V 100?A SiC MOSFET and 1200?V 100?A silicon IGBT, Proc IEEE Energy Convers Congr Expo, 3230
- catellani, 0, Characterization of 1.2?kV silicon carbide (SiC) semiconductors in hard switching mode for three-phase current source inverter (CSI) prototyping in, Proc Int Exhib Conf Power Electron Intell Motion Renewable Energy Energy Manage, 1
- 10.1109/ITEC.2016.7520242 · DOI
- 10.1109/TPEL.2013.2279950 · DOI
- 10.1109/INTLEC.2015.7572439 · DOI
- wintrich, 2015, Application Manual Power Semiconductors
- 10.1109/63.602562 · DOI
Cited by
Li, Z.-F., Nishida, N., Aoki, H., Shibata, H., Liao, C.-C., & Huang, M.-S. (2022) · IEEE Access · doi:10.1109/access.2022.3144575 · Cited by 9
Metadata
- Authors
- Fuentes, C. D., Kouro, S., & Bernet, S.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications
- Published
- 2019-11
- Volume
- 55
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 7765-7775
- ISSN
- 0093-9994
- 1939-9367
- Cited by
- 52
- References
- 0
- Licence
- Funders
- Conicyt (CONICYT-PCHA/Doctorado Nacional/2015-21151279)
- AC3E (CONICYT/FB0008)
- Smithsonian Environmental Research Center (CONICYT/FONDAP/15110019)
- Fondo Nacional de Desarrollo Científico y Tecnológico (1191532)
- Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Comparison of 1700-V SiC-MOSFET and Si-IGBT Modules Under Identical Test Setup Conditions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tia.2019.2934713
- The paper
- Fuentes, C. D., Kouro, S., & Bernet, S. (2019). Comparison of 1700-V SiC-MOSFET and Si-IGBT Modules Under Identical Test Setup Conditions. IEEE Transactions on Industry Applications. https://doi.org/10.1109/tia.2019.2934713
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.
