dtarin

It may not be supported on your version of PVsyst anymore.

Under hidden parameters, change your settings to the following, the error will go away.

Last comment regarding helios 3d and trackers from PVsyst: https://forum.pvsyst.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=4188&p=9810&hilit=helios+3d+trackers#p9810

Not really. You can copy the first page and paste into excel as image (need to resize), or save pdf, and convert to excel. With Adobe it converts pretty well.

I would suggest using a custom format, I did not have success either with the method you tried.

What is the equipment you are using?

I just simulated with module layout using 1.25MWDC. I got a warning but I just pressed ok and proceeded. Check these settings. The first setting is just an warning. The second setting is for error. This is in Hidden Parameters > System Design Parameters, Losses, Shadings

This has already been answered in your other post. https://forum.pvsyst.com/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=4663

I believe it sets the number of inverters to a default according to settings when DC AC ratio exceeds something. It will set the number of inverters to get rid of any warning you might have regarding DC AC ratio. I'm not too familar with the use nominal power option, I dont see that on the inverters I use. I check set Pnom ratios the same when inputs in the inverter are shared (jumpered). If your inverter is not configured this way (each input is independent), you would not set it.

That is generally true during optimizations. Higher tilt will result in higher shading losses. The other factor to take into account is snow losses if your site experiences snow, as a higher tilt will result in lower snow losses. But in general, yes, you will see shading losses outweigh the irradiance gain from increasing the tilt, although I wouldnt rely on the PVsyst optimization, and actually run the simulation at the different tilts to find exact result. The optimizations can be a good starting point for analysis.

There are more variables to consider on a site specific basis, and when comparing different locations. If you are looking at a single site, and comparing changes in GHI year to year, a decrease in GHI may correlate to an increase in diffuse, lower temperature, etc, which depending on system and equipment, may not give the relationship you've calculated. It also depends on system design. High DC AC ratio site may not give the same result, shading losses may be different, etc. So, not quite, at least we don't, due to the uniqueness of each project.

Use MPPT share. When you select MPPT share, it will go by the number of MPPT inputs, not inverters, so total you will have 18 (for each inverter).

0-9, A-Z from what I've seen, so 36? Never tested it though.

That is interesting. Without knowing the details of the simulation (partition size, tree height and design, table dimensions/orientation, location,etc), I would say that it is likely that as the modules move in closer to one another, they experience a higher near shading beam loss, but no additional electrical string activation. Since the beam loss increases but there is no additional string activation, the string loss comes down since that additional area of the array is now a light loss rather than an electrical one.

Unless you model a single row, you cannot.

Generally we see the PF of solar plants set to leading, to absorb vars from the grid, so var flow direction is opposite of the watt flow direction when the solar plant is producing. The utility should send a letter specifying the requirement according to the interconnection agreement.

Set to realistic view, click view > save the view for the report, save and close, run model.

Check the values to see if they match.

It can be considered a shading object if you check the box in the objects properties "enable object to cast shadow" or something similar. Then it will be considered solid object. If you use it, without this check, it will still change the module placement and as such, their shading, POA, etc.

I was able to run with your settings. Under project settings, change "limit overload loss for design" to 60% (something higher than your DC AC ratio), and in hidden parameters > System Design Parameters, Losses, Shadings, scroll down to solaredge section and change SolarEdge Inverters: Authorized Overload to 60%

Run with 20, set a grid limit to match lower # of inverters? Dont separate grid limit losses so they show together with clipping losses

Which average temperature are you referring to?

Perez is the standard in industry. See additional posts here: https://forum.pvsyst.com/viewtopic.php?t=4596

I cannot say, in my test (v6.84) there was no change to GlobInc. In a fixed tilt system on flat ground (no terrain), the only parameter that will affect GlobInc is system tilt if I recall correctly.

https://forum.pvsyst.com/viewtopic.php?f=30&t=483&p=2124&hilit=perez#p2124 https://forum.pvsyst.com/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=477&p=2104&hilit=perez#p2104 https://www.pvsyst.com/help/models_meteo_transposition.htm?zoom_highlightsub=transposition