herminator

Thank you Michele. I will double check it and let you know.

Hi, Implementing the same pitch = 5.1m for SAT trackers using PVCASE and pure PVSYST led to significant difference in global incident. For PVCASE scene this always much lower value. Both tested with 7.2 and 7.3 version considering backtracking. 1644 vs 1541! Azimuth for trackers = 0. Has anybody faced the same problem? Cheers.

Hi both, Thank you for the prompt reply. It seems that this is bug in the reporting section. I guess it doesn't affect results.

HI, I have noticed that once introducing the pitch as 5.65m for SAT with backtracking I got a difference it the report as below: 5.65!=5.69 What is the reason as in the trackers and ground parameters I also have 5.65m. Please advise why there difference and what can be an impact on final yield. Regards-Maciej

Thank you. Thus I wont use Irradiance optimization for a while. BR MP

Dears, I have recently upgraded my PVSYST to 7.3 Recalculation of the same project variant calculated before in 7.2.21 provided totally different yields. Need to add that former calculation is more trustworthy. Does anybody has similar bug expierience? Screeenshots depicting the difference are attached. Difference is huge. Please look at the system power distribution. 1804 - PVSYST 7.2 1478 - PVSYST 7.3 M

Hi both, I noticed that there is a significant difference between TMY and related monthly GHI values when data is downloaded by PVSYST embedded function: VALUES: And natively downloaded data from PVGIS site: Could you elaborate on this. Many thanks in advance. Regards-Maciej

Hello, It seems I have similar problem to Adrien. May anyone send me a sample AUTOCAD file ( I am using the 2012version) which I could later transform using .fbx converter and upload it to PVsyst. I just want to know how I should define the material for faces to be recocnized correctly as PV fields. Regards - M