According to module layout

[dtarin]

Andre,

Do you have any comment on why there is at times a large difference between the according to module layout and according to strings method, and which is the most accurate method of approximating shading losses? I have rooftop systems where the according to strings method projects shading losses 1.5% to 2.0% higher or more compared to according to module layout. For an entire portfolio, this is significant.

I have read elsewhere about running both methods: 100% elec. effect according to strings and module layout, finding the ratio between the two, and using that as the new electrical effect. Is this the proper method for utilizing the according to module layout method? Am I misunderstanding the use of the according to module layout method as a standalone method for calculating shading losses?

[André Mermoud]

The calculation "According to module strings" is an upper limit. You can modify its weight by the factor "Fraction for electical effect".

Please see the help "Project design > Shadings > Near Shadings: Main dialog > Partition in module strings".

You get it by the orange questionmark button next to this option. You are strongly advised to use these buttons (or F1) when you have a doubt.

[dtarin]

Thank you for the reply. The help does not provide much guidance in determining this weight factor. I am more concerned with how and when to utilize the according to module method for calculating shading losses. I cant seem to get an answer on if it is the most accurate method to estimate shading losses, or if it is something else. If the according to strings method is the upper limit, is the according to module layout the lower limit, and the best estimate somewhere in between?