All Activity

Hallo, can you give more explaination about handrail tilt. I cant get it

The units suggest that this is active power, but please can someone confirm whether this is the case?

Hi, I am struggling with a rather simple problem but is it possible to convert a field with fixed tilt tables directly into domes or tracker ? When I change from fixed tilt to domes in the orientation menu and afterwards try to fill out the zone in the 3D scene, the zone is again filled with fixed tilt tables, even if I change the orientation in the 3D workspace.... Is there another approach how to? When I do the changes in the 3D scende first, I get the error that there's no field Any helping advice would be welcome Kind regards, Toni P.S.: I am using PVsyst vers. 8.0.13

Great question — 15-minute simulation support would be very useful. Hope the team can share if this feature is planned and when we might expect it!

Hi, I am modeling a complex project using various different string lengths and solar optimizers. There are 48 inverter units (these are SolarEdge SE120s, so I am actually modeling 16 inverters with 3x 40kW units in each), and in the global system summary it accurately calculates 1920 kWac. However, in the report, the total power is noted as 1918 kWac. What is causing this discrepancy? Thank you!

Hello, You can import Measured global on plane (GlPMeas) via the "custom file" tool. You then need to define the Orientation definition and here you can define a tracker. PVsyst will reverse engineer (we use the term reverse-transpose) the GHI and DHI. In the end the discrepancy between the original value and the one in the simulation will differ for a given hour of less than a percent. Over the year the difference should be negligible. You should use the Hay transposition for more robust results with the retro-transposition. This is further explained in the following PVsyst help: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/glossary/solar-geometry/plane-orientation.html

What dou you mean by "Types of cables" ? The different types of cable (of a same metal) have in principle the same resistivity, and this is the parameter which determines the power loss. If you are talking about the installation mode: - The resistivity may indeed depend on the cable temperature, and therefore on the installation mode. - The main thing to be considered will be the current limit for a given cross section, which is specified in norms.

Unfortunately, it is not possible to put two different types of string on the same MPPT in PVsyst. You must either approximate the module rated power so that the MPPT are homogeneous, or you should redefine the inverter as having 6 MPPT, although this could somewhat affect the inverter losses.

Hi everyone. I want to ask if it is possible to import GPI data obtained from a PV plant with trackers into PVSYST in order to obtain an aproximation of the energy exported from the plant and compare with the real measured energy of the plant. I tried to import using the PVSYST standard format but it only allows one specific tilt angle for the GPI. Is it possible to import the GPI data obtained from a piranometer installed in the trackers to PVSYST and simulate with this GPI data? Thank you very much.

Thanks for the detailed explanation about AC losses and reference power selection—it was very helpful. Could you also explain how using different types of cables might influence the system's overall resistance and consequently affect the ohmic losses?" If you want, I can create 3 more alternative versions of this question that are concise and professional. Do you want me to do that?

Hi PVSyst Community, Is there a turnaround so I can define this config in the powersharing option in PVSyst? For context, 1A.PCS.7 uses SG4400 as inverter and at 27m/s. It exceeds the 4MPPT capacity of the inverter and the PVSyst reads this configuration as 2 INV instead of 1. MPPT1 - 585W - 81str MPPT2 - 585W - 82str MPPT3 - 585W - 47str 590W - 36 str MPPT4 - 590W - 20 str 595W - 60 str Thanks for the help!

Dear Nikoloz, Here are two videos for the standalone project: Regards,

Dear Toni, don't hesitate to email us your project at support@pvsyst.com so that we can replicate the issue and try to help you.

No currently only a partial selection of variables can be added as monthly tables. However EUseful is actually a composite variable, it is equal to other variables depending on the case. For example, here it should be equal to "Energy from the sun".

Since PVsyst 8.0.17, you have the possibility to use the "power shifting" strategy in Grid storage. If you do so and select "Fixed charging power before exporting" you can set it to charge as much as possible between 8 and 10. If the charging power is higher than the PV production, nothing will be injected to the grid. The main limitation for the moment is that any value you set will be applied every day for the whole year. Time series import should be available starting from PVsyst 8.1.0

Could you please send us your project along with the 3D file at support@pvsyst.com Regards,

Hello is there any video tutorials for standalone systems ? what I could find is only ongrid systems. and also offgrid videos but on "hindi english" which I dont understand

Hi, I have the problem that when I select the "Automatic altitude" and set a distance to ground of 0,8m, PVsyst does not apply it. The panels are still going underneath the topology. Does anymone have a solution or advice ? Kind regards, Toni

thanks for the reply, I tried it but it didn't solve the issue

Hello, I would like to include the variable "EUseful - Useful energy output from the system" in the report but I can’t find it among the available options to select Is there any way to add it? I want this variable because it represents the AC energy delivered to the costumer

Hi is it possible to set or simulate that during 8-10AM the plant will priotize to charge the battery and not inject to grid?

Unfortunately, it’s not possible to import a PVsyst project created in version 8.0.4 into version 7.4.8. PVsyst files are only compatible from lower to higher versions, not the other way around. To open the project, you would need to use PVsyst version 8

Sounds good, I look forward to the results. I would assume that the DIRINT or DIRINDEX model is the best bet, unless you would like to delve into Engerer...

Still present in 8.0.16, don't see mention of correction in 8.0.17 or 8.0.18 release notes.

Hello, In the current version, PVsyst simulation is hourly based. Thus any sub-hourly phenomenon has to be averaged. Sub-hourly simulation should be available in PVsyst 8.1, but the release date is not yet defined (Normally in the beginning of 2026). Nonetheless, we included a sub-hourly clipping correction in PVsyst 8.0, allowing the simulation to consider sub-hourly irradiance fluctuation for clipping. You can refer to the dedicated section in our help page for more information. The last option is to use the so-called pseudo-subhourly simulation. The idea is to run n hourly simulations (in your case n = 60min/30min -> 2 ) then recombine the results. You can find a PDF tutorial about the whole process in our website: Pseudo sub-hourly Simulation Kind regards