c.katharotiya

Hello, Thank you for your reply. I have rade that tread, which you suggested me. As you said in that tread, we can achieve a similar result by creating two separate sub-arrays, one for each orientation, then attribute the strings to the same inverter. In this case, we would have each string with only one orientation. Therfore, PVsyst does not result module mismatch loss in simulation report. However, in real case, we would have mixed orientation in one physical string and module mismatch loss occures. what would be the another approach to set up string configiration (by considering mixed orientation)?

Hello, How to difine virtual sub-array in one physical sub-arrry in terms of using solar edge optimizer with East-West orientations to get the module mismatch loss in the simulation report? In my case, I have 1 string with 20 modules, and 2 strings with 33 modules. I know, that I can't define a mix orientation in a subfield but Could you please let me know what would be the best solution? Please see the attached pdf with string plan. Thank you in adavace! Bregenzer Str._stringing-report.pdf

Hello, Even If I recompue and then ran the simulation, I have received the same result values of near shading loss and a bit lower value of electrical loss. I have again attached the simulation results and shading diagrams for version 8.0.5. If I ran the simulation now in V7.4.8, Near shading loss: -3.05 & Ele. loss: -0.82%. I have also attached the simulation results and shading diagrams for version 7.4.8. The issue still persists. Thank you!

Hello, when I ran the simulation with same inputs even in new version 8.0.5, I have received the almost same result values of near shading loss and electrical loss as I received in version 8.0.3. I even found out a bit higher result values in new version 8.0.5. I have attached the simulation results and shading diagrams for version 8.0.5. I would appreciate if you address this point and return quickly for this point. Thank you!

Hello, I have worked on project which is tracker PV system. If I run the same simulation with same inputs in Version 7.4.8 and Version 8.0.3, there is a huge gape of Near shading loss value and Electrical loss value in both versions. I have attached the simulation results and shading diagrams for both version. Is there any bug in the software or due to update? Thank you

Hello, Is there any update that what is the reason behind getting different result value in version 7 and 8?

Hello, There is no bug in the multi-MPPT features. As I saw the video of Multi-MPPT and Power Sharing, It is just Workaround to share the different sizes of strings within the correct number of MPPT inputs and then everything seems to be fine. Thank you so much for sending me this video.

Hello, Good afternoon I am using PVsyst version 7.4.5 right now. Recently, I was working on a project capacity of 2008.55 kWp. It consisted of an East-West orientated PV system. I used the multi-MPPT feature to distribute the different sizes of strings. Having done the simulation, there was very high value of Inverter Loss over nominal inv. power (more than 2%). On the other hand, when I did not use the multi-MPPT feature and distributed the different sizes of strings within whole inverters, there was a very low value of inverter loss over nominal inv. power (-0.09%). Is there any bug in the software when it comes to using the multi-MPPT feature for the East-West PV System? Thank you