unilhexio

Hi! I could see what you're telling here. Sometimes I get the "Error" message when use different pitches in a simulations, and sometimes I didn't and I could do the simulation as usual. The way to perform the simulation is to adjust the advanced parameter "Pitch RMS limit for bifacial 2D models". It is 0.10 m by default. I don't know the impact of increasing this number, but it allows the simulations to be done.

Hi, When creating a complete new shading scene based in Single horizontal axis trackers, backtracking strategy is not working although it has been checked and activated. Just previus saved projects from previous PVsyst versions are working with backtracking.

I agree... as I could see, major differences between both versions are: - IAM losses - far shadings / Horizon losses (same PV modules and horizon profile, of course) Other minor changes are included in transposition model. Would be great an explanation about this from PVsyst team. Regards.

But the option is available for the batch mode...

Hi, I am having problems when trying to simulate (in batch mode) several axis tilts for single axis trackers. When simulation starts, PVsyst error is shown reagarding the orientation definition does not match with required tilt: "All tracking parameters should match the "Orientation" definition., here : Tilted Axis tracking: the axis orientations don't match." Only the case when both tilts are the same is done, This makes that this tool has no sense for this case. Please, can somebody from PVsyst staff review this issue? Regards.

That would be great!

Thank you. Yes, I could confirm that the final result was right.

Hi! I have seen a very srange behavior as can be seen in the following screenshot: https://i.ibb.co/8P62mB9/Screen-Shot-02-15-19-at-01-31-PM.jpg How can I have a positive unused energy with a Grid power limitation at the injection point?

You can import it by downloading .epw file from PVGIS website and selecting "canada EPW (CWEC)" as external data source.

In my case, this issue is involving a -0.2% of horizon shading losses.

I was importing a horizon profile from PVGIS when I realised that the coordinates used in project are not the same than the coordinates of the meteo database. In the first picture you can see the site coordinates and in the second picture you can see the truncated coordinates for the project: https://image.ibb.co/hZzc20/Screen-Shot-11-19-18-at-09-58-AM.jpghttps://image.ibb.co/kdj220/Screen-Shot-11-19-18-at-09-57-AM.jpg This leads to a different horizon profile. Both locations are separated by 432 meters, enought to have a different horizon impact.

In the final report, the required values for propability distribution are not shown in the final report: https://image.ibb.co/jCuwiA/Screen-Shot-10-23-18-at-08-08-AM.jpg https://image.ibb.co/gE3dwV/Screen-Shot-10-23-18-at-08-09-AM.jpg As you can see in the above pictures, I requested P75 value, but P90 is shown in the final report.

Yes, it was fixed.

In the latest update, AC circuit Vac is directly related with Iron loss: https://image.ibb.co/cpL9ay/Screen_Shot_05_30_18_at_08_26_AM.jpg This is, I can not set the injection voltage to 230 kV, for example, because I obtain too high Iron losses and an error message. (2 Vac in injection point is 200% in Iron losses; in the same way 20 Vac is 2000% in Iron losses!!)

I have found this object ("Bifacial Ground Object" in the shading scene construction. I supposed that this tool would create a ground object that reflects a part of incident irradiation, but I don't see any difference considering it or not. I can not find any topic about this in PVsyst help. Can you clarify this, please?

This is a new software limitation. I can remember how I did it in former PVsyst versions (see http://forum.pvsyst.com/viewtopic.php?f=24&t=2349).

Would be wondouful if someone from PVsyst does any comment about this...

NEW ISSUE: I tried to introduce a negative pitch in v6.68, and a red warning says: "The pitch between trackers is too low". So, how can I do this now?

Hello, MicheleANE, it seems that it works like this. It is not very intuitive, but as a temporary solution it is valid for me. Thank you! Regards!

Still does not work with the new update v 6.68.

In V6.67 / results / Predef.graphs / System loss diagram, the monthly results are not shown: https://image.ibb.co/dLJ28m/Screen_Shot_01_30_18_at_04_58_PM.jpg "monthly values" button does not do anything.

In v6.67, some dialogues appears in french, independently of the chossen language: https://image.ibb.co/enPAhm/Screen_Shot_11_20_17_at_10_35_AM.jpg

Thanks a lot. It works!

Can you revise this, please?

I think they do... In the final output in Meteonorm software, it is specified "Variability of GH/ year". Evenmore, they give a value for the uncertainty.