Search the Community

Hello, I have two projects in the same location and the losses horizon shading difference is 1.4%. The horizon profile is similar. In the first, I have the following factors: Albedo factor = 0.87 Diffuse factor =0.96 The horizon losses is 0.4%. In the second, I have the following factors: Albedo factor = 1.00 Diffuse factor = 1.00 The horizon losses is 1.8%. Question: 1) How do these factors affect the shading calculation? 2) How can these factors be defined? 3) Where can these factors be set in PVsyst? Thank you!

Hi all. With the recent update of PVSYST to the 7.4.0 version I have see that the shading electrical losses are too much higher comparing with the previous version. Launching the same simulations of a PV plant (using the same parameters and the same Near Shadows scene, the shadings losses goes from -0.34% (in 7.3 version) to -3.41% (in the version 7.4). Could it be a possible bug? Is is possile to the new version overestimate this kind of losses? Near and far shadow losses factors change too but the value are similar this only happens with the shading electrical losses. Thank you very much.

Hello forum users, i am doing some research on the various Horizon sources available. i have chosen some meteo data i have used for previous projects and i would like to do a series of analysis for each one of them using: 1 - SolarGIS Horizon profile 2 - Meteonorm Horizon (from PVsyst web sources) 3 - PVGIS Horizon (from PVsyst web sources) my goal is to: compare the "far shading losses" and the Horizon line drawings considering the different Horizon data so to have a general overview of the differences between the Horizon datasets; of course my research will also include the study of the manuals and theory behind the definition of the Horizon profile provided by each one of the three Meteo database. i would like to raise a couple of questions: how far has to be an obstacle to be actually considered in the far shadings? considering the high dependency of the horizon from the exact geographical coordinates, are there any suggestion on the horizon profile choice regarding big PV plants? has someone of you undergone some similar studies? have you found some interesting results? also, considering point 2, a question for the software developers: are you considering a possible software update that would allow the user to set different horizon profiles, perhaps linking a single profile to a single subfield? thank you very much in advance for your contribution! Davide

Hi, Just a couple of ideas: 1. It would be useful if one could import geo-referenced shape files for definition of zones. More often then not these areas are received either as an Autocad or Google Earth Kml or Kmz file. Having the possibility to import those will directly specify the project location and will make zone editing a breeze; 2. Since a lot of effort can be put into fine-tuning the shading scene it would be very useful if the said scene could be exported into a CAD program for creation of necessary drawings required for permitting and such. Alternatively, a layout export, at least, would be very handy Sincerely, iulian