Jump to content

gpuy

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    10

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. gpuy
    Thanks André. I would like to know if: Do you have any model verification for the Ground reflection on front side? Is it possible to neglect the Ground reflection on front side during a simulation?
  2. gpuy
    Hi, I was wondering why with monofacial modules, although the Ground reflection on front side is neglected, the Global incident in coll. plane depends on the albedo coefficient. I've read what states here about the albedo Physical models used > Irradiation models > Transposition model (pvsyst.com) , but I don't get which is the difference between these 2 albedo contributions. Regards, Guillermo
  3. gpuy
    Thank you for your support, Michele. Since recomputing the shading factor tables didn´t change anything, I´would like to send you the project. Shall I do that via email?
  4. gpuy
    Thank you for your answer Michele. I´ve checked the ShdBLss (Loss on the beam component), ShdDLss (Loss on the diffuse component), and ShdALss (Loss on the albedo component). They represent the next porcentage of the total shading loss: ShdBLss: 20% ShdDLss: 38% ShdALss: 42% Since ShdBLss > 0, is it still normal to have electrical losses according to strings of 0%?
  5. gpuy
    I would like to know if there is a reason for not obtaining "electrical loss acc. to string" when using a Horizontal Tracking System and simulating as "According to Module Strings", regardless of the "fraction for electrical effect". With fixed structures, there is "electrical loss acc. to string" when simulating as "According to Module Strings", since shadows generate mismatch of electrical response of the modules in series and strings in parallel. I was expecting the same for Horizontal Tracking Systems (despite backtracking) since once there are shadows ("near shadings: irradiance loss" is not 0), the mismatch of electrical response of the modules would cause a loss.
  6. gpuy
    I´ve realised the problem happens only with PAN files provided by manufacturers (no default checkboxes checked), and it doesn´t happen with PAN files from the database. Thank you very much for your support, Michele. Regards, Guillermo.
  7. gpuy
    Thanks for your answer. How could I check if the module I´m using has standard one-diode parameters?
  8. gpuy
    Sorry, I attached screenshots from 2 different projects. But I assure you that´s not the problem as you will see:
  9. gpuy
    With certain modules, the PV loss due to irradiance level changes when changing the module degradation loss. This only happens when the module degradation loss is changed from 0% to 0.4% but it doesn´t happen for changes from 0.4% to bigger values. But since the PV loss due to irradiance level stands for the low module efficiency with low irradiances... shouldn´t it remain constant?
×
×
  • Create New...