j.meier

Hello, we have a similar issue, thats why I post it here. We have tried to import a shading scene with 2 different tilts (15° and 20°). If imported, PVsyst also builds the average tilt. Would it be possible to differentiate in 5° steps? It would be really helpful to be able to import a shading scene with different tilts. Best reagds

You can try this https://www.pvsyst.com/previous-versions and I suggest if you update PVsyst always choose the option "parallel install" and not "upgrade". I have experienced a lot minor annoying problems since PVsyst 6.4.. thy get fixed one by one, but I am glad, that I still have my 6.3.9 version installed. Best regards

Hi all, we have the same problem here. Best regards,

Hi André, any new information on that? It has been a while since i send the Helios file.

Dear PVsyst team, I ran into some trouble with importing shading scenes from Helios 3D in the new PVsyst version (6.4.). At a first glance, everything looks fine. But when I save the scene and close the editor erverything seems still to be ok. But as soon as I go back to the editor and read this scene I saved before, a lot of shading objects disappear. I tried the same in v6.39 and here everything seems to be good. Is it possible that this is caused tue to the now faster calculation of the shading table? I hope I was able to explain the problem. Best regards

I did send an example project. Do you have any update regarding this topic? I noticed that the difference still occurs in PVsyst 6.41.

Hi all, thanks for the new v6.40 and all the improvements I have seen so far, but: I have noticed that since I have updated to 6.40 the shadings: electrical loss acc to stings are twice as high as for PVsyst 6.39. I used the same simulation variant, same system same losses, just recalculated the shading table and noticed that these losses increased from around 1% to around 2%. Was the loss calculation underestimated in the older versions or is there another special reason for this? Can you please explain this change? Looking forward for your reply.

Hi, I was wondering about the timestamp in the output file. If I want to check the average between 11-12 which value shall I take 11 or 12?

Ok, thanks for your answer. I hope this will be possible once. ;)

I have got a short question regarding the ground objects tool. Is it possible to Place a Tracker system instead of normal modules with this tool? This would be really helpful.

Hi, I noticed a small bug regarding OND files since I have updated to v. 6.38. In some cases I get the message that the inverter is invalid. If I open the OND file the "Power Threshold" of the inverter is 0. This explains the message. (By the way, the OND file is from the PVsyst Database). Interesting to see that if I open the same Inverter in the same Workspace (should be the same OND file) in PVsyst 6.37 it shows the correct value. I noticed this beavoir for ABB PVS800-57-1000kW. But I recognized this bug in some other OND files too.

Hi, I could imagine that this might be helpful in a case like this: You are working in a international operating company and using the newest version of PVsyst 6 to create a projekt or to help a colleague out. Than you export the project and send it over to your colleague lets say in asia. But he isn't using the newest version, he will have truble to read the project. Thats just a case, I could imagine.

Hi, I'm missing the Iso-shadings diagram on some PDF-Printouts sinsce 6.37. Thanks for help.

Thanks, but unfortunately this doesn't help.

Hi, I have a problem, PVsyst dosen't notice that i defined two different orientations in the 3-D shading scene. I'm using PVsyst 6.34

Hi, I really like your new feature the “ground object” for defining a 3-D shading scene. But I have some suggestions to make this tool even more helpful. Would it be possible to import a DGM from Helios and automatically define it as a ground object? That would be really great. A second suggestion is, that it would be really helpful to have the opportunity to perform a Batch-Simulation with respect to the 3-D shading parameter (keeping limit angle and so on) if you define a ground object and table zone. I can imagine that it is quite complicated if the tables for example don’t fit into the defined table zone when the pitch is changing, but displaying a message that this happens in the result-file of the batch would be helpful enough. Would this be possible?

Hi, I have a problem with multi-Mpp's since updating to 6.3.3 It seems that this tool doesnt work properly at the moment. (See Picture) I would aspect a Pnom Ratio of 1.144. It seems to be correct, if I check the checkbox for Multi MPP and double the ammount to 300 then it seems to be correct. But I don't trust it completely, because the simulation result with this seems to be realy bad. If I unceck the checkbox, after doubeling the amount to 300 I would aspect the Pnom ratio to fall below 1, but this dosn't happen, but the global Inverter power does double (as aspected). Do I understand something wrong or is there a bug within the calculation? Another point is, if I change the OND-file and just use one MPP, it seems to be plausible and the simulation gives a plausible value too, but I don't feel really comfortable by changing the OND-file.

I'm using 6.3.2.

Hi, I have some problems with the 3-D-shading scene. It doesn't update the changes I have made in the construction tool. I chose the tilt of 20° but it shows me only 0° (see screenshot attached) May this have anything to do with the Sub-arrays I have defined in the system definition? Thanks for your help.

Hello, today I was trying to rebuild the PR calculation and found this. PR = E_Grid / (GlobInc * Pnom) When I open our .PAN file the "Internal Model results tool" displays an Pmpp of 262.1 W for a 260 W Pnom module. Does this mean, that if we have STC during simulation PVsyst calculates a power of 262.1 W for this module? If that's the case wouldn't we calculate an overestimated PR if we use 260 W as Pnom instead of 262.1 W Thanks for help.