Jump to content

dtarin

Members
  • Posts

    775
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by dtarin

  1. It would be useful to see some additional features for the uncertainty tool and I would like to suggest the following. 

    1. Allow more user-defined fields for which p-factors to include. There is P50 default, with two additional entries for the user to define. It is common to include P50, P75, P90, P95, and P99 in financial analyses and reporting to Independent Engineers. Therefore, the request is to increase the number of user-defined p-factors available, while not forcing the user to use all of them (a toggle button to activate/deactivate).
    2. Allow the units to be changed from GWh to kWh or MWh.
    3. Allow this data to be exported (to image or excel), similar to how we can export other data such as the shading table or monthly meteo table. 
    4. Allow the user to define whether the results are expressed in energy or in terms of percentages, both under Annual production probability, and on the chart. It is common in industry to post-process for additional considerations outside of PVsyst, so the energy values shown are meaningless/misleading, but the uncertainty tool can still be useful for reporting, especially since the uncertainty calculations themselves are independent. If we are able to export or screenshot the results displaying percentages, it would find more utility. 
      • i.e., P50 - 100%, P90 - 92.4%, P99 - 86.4%, etc. 
  2. There is a glitch in the single line where if the user zooms in on the single-line, the distance labels disappear for the MV and HV runs. To get it back, one must toggle the main labels button. The distances also disappear when printing. 

  3. In general, it looks as though PVsyst has a minimum built in, irrespective of what is stated in the OND file. EArrayMPP must be greater than 0.5% of Pnom, and I think there might also be an irradiance requirement, although I can't find the details at the moment. Changing the setting below did not change behavior in my test. Results were pretty consistent with the 0.5% requirement, but there were four hours where there was inverter output below this. 

     

    image.png.18e157c7a42502aa21d1c0032ec0b1dc.png

     

    2023-04-11_3-57-44.png

  4. This might be because by default you have defined module spacing in the X direction, but the file you imported does not include this (because it is 1 in portrait). So PVsyst first imports the correct orientation and dimensions, but after saving, closing and reopening, it is applying the default module spacing. Since the X dimension + X spacing is greater than the tracker dimensions originally imported, PVsyst is automatically adjusting. It has in my experience changed it to landscape when this occurs, I haven't seen it change to 0 in portrait before. 

    Go into advanced settings and change the following. @Stéphane Degré If PVsyst were to identify 1P vs 2P, it could ignore X spacing in the former.

    image.png.90110b0776eb0102b9c5ea29912f7f58.png

  5. It may have run, but did you check that the results in the waterfall reflect a change in pitch? It's been my understanding one needs to use an array of trackers for this to work. 

     

    image.png.8e4d609c58824c784769b5a56c823c2a.png

  6. This should be under "how to" or another forum category fyi. 

    If you are using a shade scene which has individual trackers (like from a PVC import), you cannot vary pitch in batch mode. Varying pitch in batch simulations only works on regular arrays (in shade scene, go to create > array of trackers) or using unlimited sheds. If you have multiple arrays of trackers, you will likely need them all at the same X coordinate as well or with enough spacing that they wont run into each other. If you're running GCR analysis, these two methods should be sufficient. When using the array of trackers, specifying the tables in backtracking management is not needed. 

×
×
  • Create New...