Andrew

Hi, I have a N-S tracker, with an azimuth of 15deg. Is it possible to accurately model backtracking with this azimuth by defining the azimuth in the shading object setting? When I try this method I am getting high electrical losses... I saw a post from 2016 indicating this needs to rather be modelled with a 0deg azimuth, with the shading scene then rotated by 15deg. When I try this method the impact to the in-plane irradiation is minimal, which surprised me. What is the current recommended approach, and are there any shortfalls to watch out for? Cheers, Andrew

Thanks Andre, To confirm, is the Voc for this check calculated at 1000W/m2? And can this be set for other irradiation levels in PVsyst? If not, is it valid to use the irradiation correction below to test the Voc at different irradiation levels? Considering that at the sites minimum temperatures, the irradiation is likely to be low.

To calculate Voc, we've trypically taken the cell temperature into account (which is related to irradiation and ambient temperature). In a current project the inverter manufacturer is recommending that in addition we should be considering the impact of irradiation on Voc following the relationship V0c = kT/q*ln(I_L/I_0+1). Does PVsyst consider this impact in calculating the Voc under minimum ambient site conditions, and if not is it valid to consider for furture versions? In my current project it makes the difference between 29 modules per string and 30. Many thanks, Andrew

Hi Yann Yes, version 5.60. The problem only occurs when I use a network drive (I've tried several) and it doesn't matter which computer accesses it. I've tried a few options with Andre, but not luck!

Hi All There are several of us working on PVsyst in our office and so we moved the central PVsyst Data directory to a common network location. This seemed to work, but having reinstalled PVsyst on a few machines I am getting the following error when I open the 'System' tab. Violation d'acces a l'adresse 005DD10E dans le module 'PVSYST5.exe'. Lecture de l'adresse 00000068 Translated as: Access violation at address in module 005DD10E 'PVSYST5.exe'. Reading address 00000068 I also can't open the inverter / Module database as the programme hangs. Has anyone come across this and found a fix?

Hi, Most high quality modules these days have a positive tolerance for nominal power. However, the factory flash tests themselves generally have a tolerance of +-3% and thus the nominal power may be less than the flash test result. Should this flash test tolerance generally taken into account in the Module Quality Loss input? Regards Andrew