mmonesterio

I set all the orientations the same, however the program makes the changes from landscape to portrait all by itself after i save and then try to correct the "error" posted. Why is it changing orientations? I know that i am saving correctly.

I am using V6.53 and created single axis tracker 3D model. the Array is made up of many two-row trackers, the minimum for backtracking requirement. i need to do this because elevation between trackers change +-6 inches but i have not implemented this element yet. All the trackers are adjacent to each other with the identical pitch, and using the same dimension module. They are all on the same plane. When i save the 3D models i get this error notice: Error capture Ive repeatedly gone back to correct as noted in the Error, however i cannot find differences between the trackers., in the Basic screen: the layout is showing correct parameters across all tracking arrays, and backtracking is activated. the Sensitive PV Area is also correct across all tracking arrays as well as the tracker frame parameters. in the By modules screen: the orientation changes from landscape to portrait and consequently the number of modules by itself !. I re-enter correct orientation and modules then hit "Adjust to modules". When i save the shading definition the shading factor Tables is greyed out and the Error repeats. I have saved the shading definition as instructed using the file menu and at times giving it a new name to no success.

Created projects using the Hays transposition, saved and closed. Reopened then changed to the Perez within the project (not preferences) and re-ran the model. Report showing "Hays" model. When i create a new model, no problem. I have a bunch of existing models which i need to change from Hays to Perez without having to recreate all of them again. thanks, Mario Today i found if the near shading is turned off, then switching between Hays and Perez works as it should (and displays on the report correctly). This points to a software glitch, as we should be able to run Perez model with near shading. my guess is the report has a glitch. Running the models with the near shading and just changing between Hays and Perez shows the model is working correctly because production is different (minutely higher) with Perez, just not showing the correct Transposition on the report.

I reviewed a previous posting which almost gets me there (What is the P50-P90 probabilistic production ?) however i have a slightly different twist that i'm trying to resolve: Using the TMY typical year i can model the P50-P90 (energy)for year 1, however how would i adjust energy statistically for year 10 or 20?. Assuming year 1 P50 production would escalate to year 20 due to confidence over time. I can get the Mean and Variance(RMS) from the first year's 8760 however not sure how i would apply that to adjust for year 2,3...

Thanks Andre. I was able to create two sub arrays and model without any hitch. However the issue is regarding defining each sub array within the 3d model. If i have 1000 250-watt modules on a rolling hill, a percentage of the modules will be oriented not due south. On the second sub array i have 5000 300-watt modules also on a rolling hill, again a percentage will have easterly and westerly orientation etc.... This model would need to identify the correct quantity and location of each sub array on the 3d model in order to most accurately model the system. If PVsyst cannot do this at this time, can you explain how it does treat each sub array and what the model does.

I'm importing a project from Helios which contain an array with two different module types (300W & 230W). How do i define the different modules on the 3d model in PVsyst in order to accurately generate production. Note: field is rolling hills. Thanks