Jump to content

laurahin

Members
  • Posts

    7
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Great, I'll give it a go. These are 1P tracker tables that were created individually then copied. I tried to change them by selecting all of these objects and using "Modify selected objects." I have a second question, which is why you have to click on the parameter you want to change twice to enter the new value in the "Modify selected objects" interface. Why can't you just enter it on the line instead of spawning a popup box?
  2. I made a shading scene with groups of trackers using strings of 26 modules and now the designer has requested an update to 25. I thought I would be able to change all of the tracker groups at once, but the results never match my inputs. For example, there are groups with three strings, i.e., 78 modules per row. When I select multiple groups and put in 75 for the length in modules, they all change to 160. If I also enter 1 for height (not needed but...) then I get 36 modules in width. Has anyone else had this experience? Am I going to have to change the string length separately for every group??
  3. dtarin -- Thanks for the time you spent on your reply. I agree that the difference in production when you change the order of IAM and soiling losses should be small. However, applying the IAM loss first doesn't make physical sense. If sunlight is blocked by dirt, it never reaches the glass, so is not affected by IAM loss. So the incoming irradiance should first be reduced by the soiling loss before applying the IAM loss. Changing the order shows that you understand these processes (and should make the calculation ever so slightly more accurate). So I would recommend that to the PVsyst folks.
  4. Hi, It's happened fairly frequently in our group that the specification of table sizes in the shading scene has changed when we reopen a PVsyst project to do an update (could be days or months since the original project was completed). Tables that were defined in terms of numbers of modules are now defined in terms of sensitive area. We have to go back and compute what the numbers should be, then change all of the settings ("by module," "number in x," "number in y," and sometimes orientation as well). This requires a great deal of effort. For example, I had to recreate 60 separate groups of tables today because I couldn't modify several of them at once. Can this be fixed? Note: This is separate from the problem that the objects sometimes move relative to the background upon closing and reopening PVsyst. At least in that case groups of tables usually move together so it's faster to fix. Thanks, Laura H.
  5. Is it true that the losses are applied in the order shown in the waterfall diagram? If so, why is the IAM loss applied before the soiling loss when the IAM loss only occurs when the light impinges on the module surface? By definition, light doesn't reach the panel if it encounters soiling. I don't know how much difference this would make to the overall calculation, but the current ordering doesn't make physical sense. Thanks.
  6. Thanks. I'll check it out. Life has improved since 2014, then?
  7. Would it be possible to just allow limited functions, like building shading scenes, at the same time a simulation is running? It's inconvenient to be completely unable to work in the meantime. Thanks.
×
×
  • Create New...