sheds or tables ?

[exterior64]

Hi All,

I am a new user with a site of approx 6.5ha. Field is flat with 4 straight boundaries in a polygon shape and a bunch trees in one corner….

I have tried a shed field with 31 sheds that gets me a reasonable area of coverage, but a large unoccupied triangle of land. Next I tried to establish a zone and fill with tables, which got better utilisation and allowed me to orient due south but crashed the system, so maybe my tables were too short …. which is correct / best approach sheds or tables ? and is there an optimum dimension for a table ?

[dtarin]

There is no straight answer. Dimensions for a table depends on different factors like cost, the conditions of the ground, type of racking, type of modules, size of system, etc. Sheds will give you a more accurate estimate when partitioning into strings and calculating electrical loss due to electrical effect; the table method will slightly underestimate this. Tables give more flexibility in being able to position on top of ground objects, you can use them in zones, etc.

If you zone is very large, it could be why it is crashing. Break it up into N zones, get one section into position, then work on another. Once created, you can copy all the modules and paste and position. Also if you provide images it can help to provide an answer.

[André Mermoud]

Sheds or tables are exactly the same: the "Tables" is our new vocabulary for defining one mechanical shed.

A table is basically a mechanical frame, with an array of PV modules on it. The mechanical frame may exceed the PV modules (Frame Left/right/Top/Bottom).

Now PVsyst sometimes uses "Sheds" for an array of tables, but it may also be an array of domes, etc.

For very big scenes you are advised to use tables as big as possible, for diminishing the shading calculation time.