All Activity

Hi, There is no object management window in PVsyst 6, so I assume you are using a more recent version. Which version are you using ? I have tried to see if solution 1 had a bug in version 8.0.19, but everything works fine. You are probably correct that solution 2 may have an issue sometimes. The zone tool is rather old and sometimes misbehaves. Solutions 1 and 3 should be equivalent.

PVsyst V6.2.16 I have a 2P project, half cell with 28 modules in series (string length). I can define partitioning in 3 different ways but the results of shading animation is not the same and also the iso diagram is not the same. I included the screen shots below for all there methods. Please advise on which method is the best method to use for partitioning.

Dear Jianguo Chen, Thank you for your feedback. I share your understanding : both dialogues, with those parameters, should lead to the same results. For me the correct plot is your top screenshot, from the menu "One shaded Module". I noted that this problem seems to happen only with "Twin-half-Cut" module: If I select a "In length" module, both dialoguess give me the same results I think therefore there is a problem with the calculation of the electrical layout in this specific dialog. I will create an issue to investigate it further and fix this problem in a future version.

For a TMEIC inverter we are using, the enhanced power you mention doesn't show up in the plot unless we check "Allows overpower." Is that usually the case?

In both versions an issue may happen for systems using the power shifting strategy with transformers losses. The issue happens when most of the PV production is diverted to the battery or most of the grid injection comes from the battery. In these cases the AC losses computation may lead to unrealistic values. This issue will be corrected in the next release. In the meantime, users are strongly advised to use PVsyst 8.0.17 for projects using power shifting.

Hello, You find a full explanation and a summery of common cases in the following PVsyst help page: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/project-design/shadings/electrical-shadings-module-strings/partition-in-strings-of-modules.html?h=partitio#up-to-748

Can anyone explain how to define the partitioning (nb. of rectangles in height and nb. of rectangles in width and also the height and width) if I have a 4 string tracker, 3 string tracker and 2 string tracker (Single axis E-W tracking) and modules in 1 portrait in a table? How will it change for landscape orientation or if I have 2 portrait orientation? How does it affect the shading scene?

Has this already been implemented?

I am not sure I understand your question. If you are looking for PVGIS 5.3 data using the SAHARA3 model, you can just download it from here: https://re.jrc.ec.europa.eu/pvg_tools/en/tools.html

No the tracker angles are the same. The interpolation profile is only a profile Shading factor = f(tracker angle). Therefore the only changes are in shading factors (for diffuse and albedo).

Dear Prof.André Mermoud： Recently, I have utilized PVsyst 8.0.19 for simulating the IV curves of BC modules under module-level and string-level shading scenarios. Given some inconsistencies identified in the string-level results, I wish to arrange a discussion with you on this matter. I increased the Arev factor of BC module to over 1000, and first simulated cell shading at the module level with 1 cell shaded. The results showed a 35% power reduction. When I used the string simulation tool to replicate the same number of shaded cells—i.e., a string configuration with one module per string and 1 cell shaded—the results displayed a significant discrepancy. Does it a bug? Does the Arev factor of BC modules fail to take effect at the string level? thanks! Best regards!

Thanks Michele, With different interpolation limits, would this mean that the tracker angles should be slightly different across the day, even at the same time stamp? The average tracker angles are the same across the middle of the day - is the difference being lost in a rounding error? Cheers

For a instalation i need to adapt my Weather data to PVGIS SARAH3: Sandia method last 10 years. i once dit it with PVGIS 5.2 sarah2 but idont find how to re create it?

Hello, You can find an article in our help that discuss the PR calculations: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/project-design/results/performance-ratio-pr.html?h=pr Kind regards

Hello, In the new version, an additional PR column was added for bifacial panels. My question is how the PR is calculated, and whether the simulation takes into account irradiation on both the front and rear sides of the panel. In addition, in your opinion, which PR value is the most accurate and correct one to use?

When creating your site, you can simply write or copy your values in the "Monthly weather data" tab

Hi the reason is in the calculation of diffuse and albedo shadings. For more information you can see here: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/project-design/shadings/calculation-and-model/diffuse-losses-with-tracking-systems.html This calculation creates an interpolation profile based on the available tracker positions. By changing the tracker limit, the support pointss of the interpolation profile are shifted, thus leading to (in principle slightly) different shading values.

I have monthly weather data for TMY data (Meteonorm 7.3). Could you please advise how to input this data into PVsyst and how to display it in the simulation report? The available data includes monthly ambient temperature and global horizontal irradiation, as shown below: Month Ambient Temperature (°C) Global Horizontal Irradiation (kWh/m²) January 7.5 92 February 8.8 106.5 March 12.7 159.7 April 16.6 187.7 May 21.2 230 June 24.5 242 July 26.8 245.3 August 26.2 225.1 September 23.5 182.9 October 20.5 144.6 November 13.7 104.7 December 9.5 87.2 Year 17.6 2007.7

In your print screen you see all the details of the number of modules in each sub-array and each table assign to the defined orientations. The difference between your print screen and the video is that the folders are collapsed. Click on the small minus icon collapse the folder and see the total of modules in the system/3D scene for each orientation. If they do not match, you need to add/substract the modules defined in the 3D scene, or in the system.

Hi PVSyst team, I've been doing some investigation into the effect of how energy production is affected by changing the SAT tracker angle limit from 50deg to 60deg. I've created a project with a SAT with +/-50 degrees tracking limit (PhiAng). I've copied this project and changed the tracking limit to +/-60 degrees (PhiAng). No other parameter or input was changed - same weather file, same components, no changes to tracker geometry, 3D model or site configuration. Interestingly, output reduces slightly with a +/-60 degrees limit. While investigating this reduction, it appears that I'm getting a difference in effective irradiance components between the 50 degree and 60 degree simulations at times when the trackers are at the same phi angle. I'm assuming that the difference in calculated effective irradiance components is then driving the differences seen in temperatures, current and energy production. I have attached a screenshot of a single timestamp for both simulations, and a comparison of effective irradiance components and PhiAng across an entire day. At the time shown (11 am, southern hemisphere summer), the two systems should be in *identical* states (same weather data, same system definition, geometry and layout, well outside any periods of backtracking), any ideas why changing the only tracker angle limit would result in these different calculated irradiance values? Thanks

I've watched the video, but the video does not show how to match the number of modules between the 3D fields and subarrays... how do I make my orientations management tool window look like the one in the video??

In the 3D scene you can define each table by modules. In the Orientations management you find detailed information about what is defined for each orientation In the following youtube tutorial you find examples of how to define a 3D scene and how to navigate in the window: On our website you can do a request for a training sessions on various topics: https://www.pvsyst.com/en/training/consulting/

Also, I am noticing the following limitation of the software: in the 3D scene there is a way to specify the width and the length of a PV surface while in the system definition there is only an option to specify the area of a PV surface making the whole process of matching the number of PV modules between the 3D scene and the system definition cumbersome at best... unless I am missing something

Dear @PranavK, this is new to us and unfortunately I cannot say much without looking at the project. Can you send it over at support@pvsyst.com ?

Thank you for your response, but the reason why I posted to this forum is because I could not correct the errors myself. Is there a way to request a call via MS Teams so I can share my computer screen and someone from PVsyst support will provide the assistance?