denizurla

Hello André, This is great news and I am really happy that you looked into this issue. When should we expect a new release 6.31 with the correction? Best Regards, Deniz

Hello, Unfortunately installation of V6.26 didnt solve my simulation speed problem as I was expected to. Does anyone else have the same problem with large shading scenes? I have uploaded a picture of where I am having difficulty. Shading table creation takes around 45 minutes, which is reasnable but "Hourly Simulation Progress" takes around 5-6 hours for a system size of 20MW with 10 central inverters. Shading scene includes around 2000 objects (module tables and trees). I would appreciate any feedback on this issue. Regards, Deniz slow simulation process

Hello Andre, Thank you very much for your answer. Were you able to check if the simulation recalculates the shading table? I saw that you have a new update V6.26 and I read in the "Software Development", you have a development called "Big shading systems: optimized a time-consuming verification.". I didn't update my V2.25 but will the update make simulation with big shading scenes faster? Regards, Deniz

Dear Bruno, I find the new functions of the PVsyst V6.25 very good and also the speed of swithcing interfaces is increased considerably in comparison to V6.2+. However, I still find the simulation process much slower in comparison to V6.19. I am working with very large Helios3D files. I should say that the "optimized shading calculation" helps to create the shading table much faster but when I move to the simulation, it feels like the PVsyst is running again a shading table calculation, which takes too long (5-6 hours for a project with around 1500 objects) I tested the same simulation without the Shading Scene and the simulation took just couple of minutes. (Projects have central inverters) For the simulations, I set the parameters in the Near Shading definition window as follows: Use in Simualtion --> "According to module strings" and Calculation mode "Fast (Table)" Why do you think that the simulation takes too long even though I created the shading table beforehand? I would appreciate your feedback.

Hello, I would like to install a previous version of PVsyst 6 instead of the last available version. Currently the last available version is PVsyst 6.24 and I would like to install version 6.12. Can I install previous minor versions of the same version? Thank you very much. Deniz

Hello, When I conduct a simulation without any shading drawing, PVsyst 6.19 calculates the result in a short time without any problem even for very large projects. However for large projects with a drawing (imported from Helios) for Near Shading (100% Electrical) analysis, calculation takes a very long time. I am aware that the table creation according to module strings from a large drawing takes a long time depending on the number of objects and the size of the plant. I would expect though, after I created the Shading table according to strings, actual simulation would not take too much time. At least this was the case in PVsyst 6.12. I am facing now a second long calculation period, even though the table is already created for shading analysis. Is this a common problem on PVsyst 6.19? Or am I missing a point on the simulation interface, maybe I should uncheck or check something, which is different than 6.12? I woud appreciate any feedback on this topic. Best Regards, Deniz

Hello, Performance Ratio calculation of PVsyst for grid connected large-scale PV systems is clear to me, since it depends on the following formula " PR = E_Grid / (GlobInc * Pnom) ". This PR value is also shown in the report at the "Main Simulation Results". I thought that,if I want to create the same PR value from the "Loss diagram over the whole year (Arrow diagram)", I should multiply the loss percentages. However it seems like the PR value created by multiplying the loss percentages from Loss Diagram is around 0,7% (not for every project) lower than the PR value shown at the "Main Simulation Results". Does this difference come from rounding the involving values? How should this difference be explained? Best Regards, Deniz

Should we consider electrical mismatch losses, if the thin-film modules placed in landscape?

Hello, I am trying to import a Helios 3D file into the PVsyst and execute a simulation. I can import the Helios file of a 6-7 MWp PV system, however it crushes down, when I try to simulate it. I can define the field partitions, I can create the table "Module Strings Shading Factor", which takes a very long time and sometimes PVsyst crushes during the process. Which size of PV plant designs would you recommend to use for this import process, in order work with the simulations fluently? Thanks, Deniz