All Activity

Yes sorry, in the Peak shaving option, the consumption of the stored energy is not supposed to arise the next day after Sunrise. This could indeed be improved, but delivering 50 MW to the grid just in the morning when the sun is shining doesn't make much sense, and is not a usual requirement.

Dear Shivam, I need to investigate your project, so could you please send it to us as a zip file at "support@pvsyst.com" by following this process: File - Export projects - select the project Regards, Muhammed Sarikaya

Dear Irakli, I don't quite understand your question. Could you be more specific about what exactly you want to do? Regards, Muhammed Sarikaya

I am using inverter "SUN2000-115KTL-M2" which has maximum AC power 125 kva at cosf 1 and 115 kva nominal power. I am going to configure the inverter on maximum power 125 kva. How should I reflect this in PVsyst, because PVsyst calculates generation on 125 kva? Thanks in advance

Dear Swonno, On first V8 run, PVsyst copy your V7 files (located in folder PVsyst7.0_Data) in a new folder (PVsyst8.0_Data). From this point, this new folder is the used to store your V8 work. You can always import V7 data when you work with PVsyst V8 using the import component command but you cannot import V8 data when you work with PVsyst V7. Pvsyst is not designed to read files from a later version (the same way as Excel 97 – 2003 cannot read .xlsx files). You can always read all Pvsyst file formats when you use the last version of Pvsyst but there is no guarantee that you can read new files using an old Pvsyst version. You can find more detailed information about user data in PVsyst help: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/getting-started/file-organisation/user-data/index.html Best regards.

Hi Katinka, Would you share the total height of the mounting (from ground to top of the panel) and latitude of your solar site?

When I import some pvsyst 8.x projects , I can't see them. (I can see pvsyst 8.x project at the fisrt page but can't find while i import the project.)

Hello PVSyst team and Users, Happy New Year,, I'm trying to move PVSyst 8.x version these days but a lttile bit afriad of many feautres to adjust. Back to the business, I am currently using PVSyst 7.4 version to design and simulate but once I open PVSyst 8.x version at the first page I can't see previous projects that i had worked in PVSyst 7.4. Moreover, Even some projects that i worked in PVSyst 8.x I can't see also. Can you guide me how can i see the projects ? Thank you

Hi! Thank you for responding

how to get 280 ah capacity and 97 kwh stored energy with this spec of batt

After importing PVC file, getting this error, "Orientation #2 "Tracking horizontal axis, Azim. 0.0°, Average": No attached subarray in the System part!". But in the orientation tab, every parameter is the same. See below snip. There are two orientations one has backtracking and another with average. I deleted orientation 1 from the 3D scene and all trackers from orientation 1 to orientation 2 with average and selected average from the pop-up received. What is the reason behind it even when all parameters are the same?

@Edwin Tellez In this case, you should define two "identical" orientations. Assigning one sub-array to the first and another to the second, corresponding to the 2V and 3V arrangements respectively, will let you combine the two geometries. In v8, it is possible to work with different backside geometries in the same variant ("Bifacial models") provided they are in different orientations.

@Vamsee Since v8, it is now possible to have multiple bifacial orientations, or a mix of bifacial and monofacial orientations (the latter do not require defining a backside geometry). As long as they belong to different orientations, you can have a sub-array with bifacial modules, and another sub-array with monofacial modules. However, it is not possible to define spectral corrections sub-array by sub-array. It is therefore not really recommended mixing CdTe and Bifacial modules, at the moment. I will add this feature to our request list.

After some archeology, here's a more complete answer : If you were using Unlimited sheds or unlimited trackers, the fraction of unshaded and shaded rear side was correct If you were using trackers on the 3D scene, the fraction of unshaded and shaded rear side was also correct (using the total number of sheds at least). If you were using fixed tilt on the 3D scene, then fraction of shaded rear side was always 2/3, and in that case your analysis is correct. This behavior has been fixed in the 8.0, and improved in the 8.0.6 when you have multiple columns of sheds. In the 8.0.6, you will be able to see and change the number of rows used for the bifacial calculation from the bifacial tool, which should let you try to reproduce the previous behavior if you want to isolate this specific change.

hey, As previously mentioned, i created a pvsyst model with peak shaving storage strategy such that generation above 50MW is sent is batteries. i selected the battery dispatch mode as between a specified time period and set the time as 6pm to 10 pm. But i my output graph the battery is not discharging. Do you know why? Does pvsyst assume a load curve in these type of simulations? (in peak shaving, you don't need to define the load curve)

Hello. For some reason no PV field is attached to your system orientation. If you need help to fix that, please send your 3d file and your exported project as zip to support@pvsyst.com

Hi, thanks for your quick reply. So, for example, if I was simulating 1 row of modules in v7.4.8, then this old version was likely under-estimating the rear diffuse irradiance component, but if I was simulating 4 or more rows then this old version would be over-estimating rear diffuse irradiance? This is because v7.4.8 always assumed 3 sheds?

Hello Lois, Yes this is true, v8.0 applies the orientation selected to the PV tables created, so in your case azimuth = 23. Why don't you reset the azimuth to 0 for your orientation while you create the components of your scene, to work in an "easy" coordinate system and then use the rotate tool for the entire scene to the required azimuth ? like you use to do with v7 ? Regards, Eric

PVsyst doesn't deliver MSI files directly, but it is possible extract them from the EXE setup which includes both 32-bit and 64-bit installers. Run Windows Command Prompt (cmd) and execute the command below: PVsyst-x.x.x.x-setup.exe /extract "<target-folder>" Replace the name of the EXE file with the correct version and <target-folder> with the path to the folder where you want the MSI file to be extracted (for example C:\Folder).

The simulation of PVsyst uses several physical models: irradiance (diffuse from global whern necessary, transposition on tilted plane), shadings, one-diode model for PV module performance, efficiency and power limitation for inverter, different losses, etc. No regressions are involved in this process. ,

PVsyst V8 development was focused on improving the "orientations" management. This includes several modification that could impact the system you described. I cannot give you an exact list, since I don't know your exact project, but I think this one is very likely to generate changes in your results :

Hi, The problem was resolved in version 8.0.6. Thank you!!

Slow can be used on any size system, but simulations will extend to multiple hours for large, complex sites. The main difference that I see between slow and fast (modeling projects in US) is that fast will have higher near shading and lower electrical loss, and for slow, it is the opposite. Not always, but I would say more often than not. In total, shading losses are typically comparable for most sites with fast being slightly higher. Sometimes difference is negligible, but depends on the site; less complex and utility scale will have closer figures. More complex sites with topography, smaller sites with severe shading, will benefit more from slow simulation and the increased accuracy with calculating electrical loss. As for when to use, it depends on your position, project, etc. For utility scale in development stages, fast makes sense, and then moving to slow (or at least benchmarking slow) later on when design is closer to final, prior to financing, construction, etc. If the project is small and simulation time is short, I dont see a reason not to run slow for single, one-off estimates. But if you're doing batch runs, running multiple designs, evaluating different components or weather files, in early stage and need indicative numbers, etc., fast is fine. What's more important is understanding the differences and impacts to simulation results (irradiance, shading, production, etc.), and deciding when to prioritize simulation speed over accuracy and vice versa (and knowing if there even exists material differences).

Hi there, I ran simulations in v7.4.8 before the new year, comparing modelled irradiance in PVSyst for a fixed-tilt vertical bifacial PV system to measurements of reference cells in a vertical bifacial test-site. I was wondering if there are any key differences between v7.4.8 and the latest update with v8 which might impact the results of this comparison? Thank you! Erin

Regarding the bifacial contribution, please see this post : For the azimuth, are you using averaged orientations and/or do you have a specific field topography ? Since most of the reduction seems to come from the bifacial diffuse irradiance contribution, you can try manually setting the number of sheds in the bifacial menu. Setting Number of sheds = 3 should give you a value similar to what you had in V7. I'd suggest not to do so, as the V7.4 results were unrealistically high while results with the V8 should be closer to the reality. But you should be at least be able to validate the reason behind this change.