Chen

What are the testing conditions for Arev? thanks!

thanks！

Dear Prof.André Mermoud： Recently, I have utilized PVsyst 8.0.19 for simulating the IV curves of BC modules under module-level and string-level shading scenarios. Given some inconsistencies identified in the string-level results, I wish to arrange a discussion with you on this matter. I increased the Arev factor of BC module to over 1000, and first simulated cell shading at the module level with 1 cell shaded. The results showed a 35% power reduction. When I used the string simulation tool to replicate the same number of shaded cells—i.e., a string configuration with one module per string and 1 cell shaded—the results displayed a significant discrepancy. Does it a bug? Does the Arev factor of BC modules fail to take effect at the string level? thanks! Best regards!

OK， thanks

what does the C0 C1 C2..C5 mean？ thanks!

Dear PVsyst team： For the Imp/Vmp contributions 80/20%， is there any relevant literature to support the value of this parameter? Thank you！

OK,thanks

Ok，I wonder if our software can be considered this.

Dear sir： For the bi-facial module system , when calculating the cable loss of strings, should the current on the rear side of the modules be considered in our software？ thanks！

OK， u are welcome

Dear sir： I found that the inclination angles of the two are not the same. Is it a bug?THANKS

OK，thanks very much！

Dear sir： Can you take a look at this problem? Why is the backside mismatch loss calculated separately from the front side, rather than being added to the front side like irradiation. thanks！

When I completely shade the front side of the module and allowed the back side to receive light, I found that the loss due to weak light was relatively high.

OK，Thank you for your detailed answer.