Real-Time Temperature Estimation of the Machine Drive SiC Modules Consisting of Parallel Chips per Switch for Reliability Modelling and Lifetime Prediction

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1 A more comprehensive comparative analysis is required to explain why the selected parameters, VDS-on and Vth, exhibit superior temperature sensitivity and enhanced noise immunity.

2 Both the look-up table method and the curve-fitting technique adopted in this study are considered conventional data processing approaches. Therefore, the innovation and novelty aspects of these methods require further clarification.

3 How do the authors ensure that the deviations observed in the TSEP are solely attributed to the degradation effects of the power module, rather than other external or operational factors?

4 During the lifetime prediction process, how do the authors account for the time-dependent variations in the electrical parameters, which could significantly affect the accuracy of the reliability assessment?

Author Response

Please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

This manuscript focuses on real-time junction temperature estimation in parallel chip structures of SiC MOSFET modules and further develops reliability modeling and lifetime prediction based on the estimation results. The manuscript is well-structured, logically clear, and combines rigorous experiments with practical engineering applications. It holds significant academic and practical value in the field of high-power-density and wide-bandgap device reliability research. However, the following issues are suggested for revision.

1. The manuscript appears to exceed the reasonable length for the journal. To enhance focus and readability, it is recommended to condense the content. Some parts, such as Figures 9 to 14 (which present similar voltage waveforms), can be moved to “Supplementary Material”.
2. In Section 4, “Double-Pulse Tests,” please clarify: ① Is constant power heating applied during the test? ② How is the thermal imaging calibrated? Additionally, an error analysis of the thermal measurement is suggested—consider using box plots to present variations.
3. In Section 6, “Reliability Modelling and Lifetime Prediction,” the authors applied the Coffin-Manson model but did not compare predicted lifetimes (e.g., failure cycles) with experimental aging results. Including accelerated aging data and comparison with predicted results is recommended.
4. Table 2 compares TSEP methods from three References, all published in 2018. To better demonstrate the advantages of the proposed method, it is recommended to include more recent references from the past five years.
5. The formatting of the references should be standardized. For example, in Reference [2], only the first word of the title is capitalized, while in Reference [1], every word begins with a capital letter.

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

1- How do the authors justify the assumption of symmetric current distribution across paralleled dies during real-time inverter operation, especially under dynamic load conditions where self-heating and aging may affect uniformity?

2- The refinement procedure for Tj estimation under aging effects is theoretically outlined but not validated. Are there any preliminary results, simulations, or estimated timelines for experimental verification?

3- In Section 5.1, EMI-induced false triggering of Vth measurements was observed. Could the authors elaborate on how robust the filtering algorithm is in various high-noise industrial environments, and whether adaptive filtering or redundancy was considered?

4- How does measurement uncertainty in TSEP (±2–3°C for Vth and ±5–6°C for VDSon) propagate into the final lifetime prediction, and what confidence level can be attributed to the 70,275 flight hours estimate?

5- Some of the references are outdated and the authors must update them, Here is a one you can use
[a] https://doi.org/10.1080/21681724.2017.1335782

Author Response

Please see the attachment.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

All comments have been addressed.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

accept