S Groenveld

Thank you for your answer. This particular project is in the town Hilversum, Netherlands where the lat is around 52°. This project is a project with panels laying in the south direction, while normally we do project where the panels are in an East-West configuration. Therefore my question about what I would 'normally' see in the results. In the pictures added is a simulation report from one of our more standard projects and here you can see the -0,69% Global incident in coll. plane I was talking about. Do you know why PVsyst gives me this percentage? Is this a correct value and if not, do you know how it should be or how to get this? Thank you in advance.

Hello, I have a question regarding way too high Global incident in coll. plane after simulating one of our projects I'm working on. In this project the factor stated above seem to be far too high since normally this is normally about -0,70% and now it is more than +14%. This is seen on page 7 in the simulation report. This is not the first time happening in recent time and I would like to know why this occurs and how I could get rid of this? Thank you in advance. Greetings, Stijn Groenveld

Where can I find PV-syst ready solar data from the last 10 years? I am curious to what you guys use for getting your meteo data into PV-syst from recent years. Thank you in advance.

Hi PV-syst, I am working on a project where I tried to copy a variant of a system and I come across a problem. When putting the difinitions in System on my last sub-array there is a red code error like so in the picture. On the other picture is the old variant seen which still works fine with exactly the seem proporties. The only thing I changed is 180 degree turned the model because this was the only thing still needing to be done. Now I can't continue and it looks like some sort of a bug. This all happend after I did an update with PV-syst to the newest version. I would like some help with this. Many thanks in advance. Greetings.

Hi PV-syst, I am quite new to PV-syst and the forum. While working with some newer panels I have noticed that the PR of the system ended up lower than with the older panels. When looking into this I discovered that the newer panel had an AR Coating instead of no AR Coating on the old panel, it could also be that maybe in the PAN file the AR coating from the old panel was never defined. You (or atleast I) would think that the IAM losses would be lower on panels with an AR Coating but this didn't seem to be the case. I would like to know why this is or how it happens? So we can have the most accurate simulations in the future. Thank you in advance. The old panel in question is Jinko Tiger 6TL3, the newer can be any with AR Coating.