Jump to content

dtarin

Members
  • Posts

    788
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by dtarin

  1. This can all be done with batch simulation. Advanced simulation > Batch simulation. Prior to running the batch, set the output parameters under Output File, and make sure File name is checked under Output file. You don't need to give any specific name, just have this checked (you will define the output file name in the batch parameter file in the next step). Then proceed to Batch simulation to set the parameters and configure the batch file. 

    2024-06-18_9-58-44.png

  2. 15 hours ago, hritik said:

    When comparing different manufacturers for a particular site, I obtained the  results which are varying. Are there any default parameters for PV loss due to irradiance levels and PV loss due to temperature in PVSYST? On what parameters do these factors depend? These come from the PAN file, resistance values/low-light performance, temperature coefficient

    Is it possible to get gain due to loss from irradiance levels? Not sure what this means

    What should be the ideal values for Module quality losses? There are no ideal values, depends on the one doing the simulation

     

     

     

     

     

  3. Create multiple variants with the different bifacial settings you wish to test (height from ground, albedo), check the box below. Spacing and tilt are a little different, those inputs for bifacial inputs are derived from other places (i.e., shade scene, orientation menu).

     

    image.png.17ecb83fcd03dcaa94b7fd2d55d5917a.png

  4. My guess is that the warning is with respect to the HV portion, which you dont have shown in the image. The OND file doesnt account for LV losses. LV losses are zero since the MV transformer is connected to the inverter. You will define a MV line loss however from the MV inverter(s) to the HV transformer(s). Since the OND file accounts for the MV transformer, maintain 0% in the no-load and full-load loss. 

  5. In my experience, Ga-doped modules are still susceptible to LID, and I have also seen LID loss in TOPCon tests. The LID loss for these types are less than p-type boron-doped modules, but I have not seen zero LID in Ga-doped or N-type TOPCon modules. I am not familiar with HJT type modules. 

  6. Hello, 

    It would be very useful to see two features related to the shading factor table:

    1. Increased resolution in the shading factor table 
      • Allow user to define additional points in the table, or provide additional preset tables with additional values. The purpose of the shading factor table is to reduce simulation time, but it adds additional shading loss. This is fine in principle, but it would be helpful if users could investigate and find that balance between reduced simulation time and reducing the overestimation of shading losses. Additional points in the lower elevations would valuable.  
    2. Allow users to manually enter or import shading factor tables, linear and mod. strings
    3. Allow shading factor tables to be a variable for batch processing. This could be a file reference in a PVsyst-defined format.
      • User-defined/imported shading factor tables could be used in other projects for site characterization and evaluating different scenarios in development. 

    Plants are getting larger, and when modeling trackers with terrain, the simulations times can be quite large, but when using fast mode, the overestimation is not always acceptable depending on the purpose of the simulation. 

  7. You might have undersized your inverters or have too high of losses prior to the injection point. Posting your waterfall results will help identify. 

  8. Running unlimited sheds with a fixed tilt angle, where phi_min = phi_max, does not fix the tilt angle of the tracker, and it continues to backtrack. This was possible in 7.4.2, but has not been since that version. It does not matter whether backtracking is checked or not, or whether it is done through batch mode or regular simulation. 

×
×
  • Create New...