Lazare Fesnien

Hi, An improvement in version 7 has been made on this subject. For more details please read: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/inverter_multi_mppt.htm?zoom_highlightsub=second+input https://www.pvsyst.com/help/multi_mppt_use.htm

Hi, This is not an "error". it is the manufacturer who has inserted these components into the database under this name. If you check Impp x Vmpp = Pnom, this corresponds to the Pnom defined in the file. File names are different for each manufacturer

Hi, Inverters with Unbalanced MPPT inputs : Some special inverters (namely in the Tripower series of SMA) have 2 MPPT inputs with very different powers. In practice this is very useful as you can define an array without much constraints about the module number on the main input, and one string with the remaining of your modules to be installed - whatever their number - on the secondary input. This feature is part of the Inverter's definition. With these very special unbalanced inverters, when defining a sub-array you will have the choice between "Main" and "Secondary" MPPT inputs. In principle you should define sub-arrays for the same number of "Main" and "Secondary" inputs (i.e. use all the available inputs). However the button "adjust" gives the opportunity of not using the secondary input. Please check with the manufacturer that this is really possible with the real inverters you are using. At the design time, the nominal powers of each input are evaluated according to the maximum currents specified for each MPPT inputs. This may sometimes lead to unacceptable overload losses. If this warning is red (error), you have to increase the allowed overload energy loss in the "Project's" parameters (button "Albedo-Settings"). At the Simulation time, the power sharing (as mentioned above for normal MPPT inputs) is automatically performed as function of the PV modules connected in each sub-array. The Pnom of each MPPT input is evaluated just before the simulation.

Hi, Sorry, with stand-alone systems, only one sub-array is possible. Therefore one only orientation. This is a limitation of PVsyst, that we should improve in the year.

Hi, This is probably due to a problem when defining your component. For more details, a youtube video is available on our channel:

Hi, Details are available in the loss diagram and in the graphs. For more information on this topic, please read: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/self_consumption.htm?zoom_highlightsub=Self+consumption https://www.pvsyst.com/help/tariffs.htm?zoom_highlightsub=Self+consumption https://www.pvsyst.com/help/gridstorage_self_cons.htm?zoom_highlightsub=Self+consumption

Hi, EArray = Effective energy at the array output E_Grid = Energy injected into the grid For more details on energy management with self-consumption please read: https://www.pvsyst.com/help/self_consumption.htm?zoom_highlightsub=Self+consumption

Hi, Is this for a "grid connected" or "stand alone" simulation? Should your battery park be able to cover all of your needs or only a part? A tool in PVsyst is available to calculate the energy stored in your battery bank.

Hi, It will be necessary to pay attention to the maximum current of each MPPT in order to respect the current and the maximum power admissible by the inverter

Hi, Yes, for this you must define or import a load profile from the "self-consumption" tab

Hi, For this type of question, please contact http://support@pvsyst.com directly.

Hi, Indeed it is a hard limit of PVsyst. Stand alone systems are normally intended for small installations (house, village etc....). As you have chosen a universal regulator, it automatically adapts to all your different configurations.

Hi, When you have a different number of strings on the MPPT inputs, you should create one sub-array for each configuration (for example one sub-array for the MPPTs with a single string, and another one for the MPPTs with two strings). Then, in ‘power sharing’, you tell PVsyst which sub-arrays belong to the same inverter and how the power of the inputs is balanced.

Hi, Sorry for the inconvenience, this is due to a bug in an older version. These issues have been resolved in our new releases

Hi, The number of modules in series has to match the following conditions: - The minimum array operating voltage (i.e. at max. module operating temperature, 60°C by default) should be above the minimum inverter's operating voltage (Vmin of MPPT range). - The maximum array operating voltage (i.e. at min. module operating temperature, 20°C by default) has to stay below the maximum inverter's operating voltage (Vmax of MPPT range). - The maximum array absolute voltage (i.e. Voc at min. temperature, -10°C by default) has to stay below the absolute maximum inverter's input voltage. - The maximum array absolute voltage (i.e. Voc at min. temperature, -10°C by default) should not overcome the maximum system voltage specified for the PV module. When the desired array configuration doesn't match these requirements, the system is usually not properly sized. Please see the diagram in the "System" definitions, button "Show sizing", which summarizes all these constraints: Design temperatures : These conditions involve design temperatures, which are part of your project and may be changed according to your climate in the definition of the project, option "Albedo and settings". The default values (for each new project) may be redefined in the Hidden Parameters, topic "System design parameters". These are: - Maximum cell temperature in operating conditions, default 60°C, - Summer usual operating conditions, not used for sizing constraints, default 50°C, - Winter minimum cell temperature in operating conditions, default 20°C, - Absolute Cell lower temperature for determining the Maximum possible voltage of the array. The default is set to -10°C for most European countries (best practice rule). For this limit, the cell temperature is considered as the ambient temperature (worst case when the sun suddenly appears on the field). You should define the lowest temperature ever observed during the day for this site.

Hi, Can you describe precisely the error you have?

Hi, We update the database using the requests of the manufacturers, and publish it with each new issue of PVsyst. We can't of course follow all the new products of all manufacturers in the world. We don't want to include data without the acknowledgement of the manufacturer. Nevertheless you can easily create your own components by yourself. The easiest way is to choose a similar existing device in the database, modify its parameters according to the manufacturer's datasheets, and save it under a new name, therefore creating a new file in your database. You have a tutorial for that on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/PVsystTutos, page Component database

Hi, We update the database using the requests of the manufacturers, and publish it with each new issue of PVsyst. We can't of course follow all the new products of all manufacturers in the world. We don't want to include data without the acknowledgement of the manufacturer. Nevertheless you can easily create your own components by yourself. The easiest way is to choose a similar existing device in the database, modify its parameters according to the manufacturer's datasheets, and save it under a new name, therefore creating a new file in your database. You have a tutorial for that on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/PVsystTutos, page Component database

Hi, Sorry for the inconvenience, this is due to a bug present in the version, these various problems have been resolved in our patches

Hi, We update the database using the requests of the manufacturers, and publish it with each new issue of PVsyst. We can't of course follow all the new products of all manufacturers in the world. We don't want to include data without the acknowledgement of the manufacturer. The creation of a pump is quite complex, please send me the technical sheet in PDF format so that I can provide you with the component

Hi, We update the database using the requests of the manufacturers, and publish it with each new issue of PVsyst. We can't of course follow all the new products of all manufacturers in the world. We don't want to include data without the acknowledgement of the manufacturer. Nevertheless you can easily create your own components by yourself. The easiest way is to choose a similar existing device in the database, modify its parameters according to the manufacturer's datasheets, and save it under a new name, therefore creating a new file in your database. You have a tutorial for that on youtube: https://www.youtube.com/c/PVsystTutos, page Component database The optimizer's properties and operating conditions are very specific to each manufacturer. We need a close collaboration with the manufacturer for implementing them in PVsyst.

Hi, This appears if you have defined your inverters by "MPPT input", is this the case?

Hi, When one or several cells are shaded, the whole sub-module becomes reverse-biased, the by-pass diode is activated above the current corresponding to the residual power of the diffuse part. This results in a quite different situation as the previous one: the true Pmpp maximum is decreased in voltage (voltage of each sub-module, plus the diode reverse voltage), but the current remains the same Impp. When you have one only string, the Vmpp of the string is reduced but the Impp current is identical for all modules, so that the Pmpp of the string remains the sum of the Pmpp of all modules. However the voltage of this Pmpp may be (often) below the voltage threshold (VmppMin) of the inverter. With several strings in parallel on a single MPP input, this reduced Vmpp induces a severe mismatch. As a consequence the optimizers don't have anything to recover with partial shadings on a single string.

Hi, This will no doubt be developed soon. At the moment this option is not yet available

Hi, This happens if you pump more than the drill can. The deep well is defined by a dynamic level and a drawdown, if your PV field and your pump are oversized, you will pump faster than the regeneration of the deep well