Reports in Evaluation mode VS Licensed

[Saeedsolar]

Hello.

I am going to buy a premium license, but before that i want to be confident about bellow isues :

1 - Is there any difference between simulation and reports in evaluation mode VS licensed software ?

2 - I simulated our real project which has two strings, one with mono and one with poly 250W Yingli modules. But at the reports, production of two systems was the same. In real, mono string is producing 7% more energy. So what could be the reason ?

3 - Do we need to use paid weather data (Location : Iran) whereas Meteonorm 7.1 is available until 2000 only for a few sites ?

Thanks.

[André Mermoud]

1 - Is there any difference between simulation and reports in evaluation mode VS licensed software ?

The capabilities of the software are exactly the same in "Evaluation mode" and in the the licensed mode.

2 - But at the reports, production of two systems was the same.

In the simulation, the production result is mainly related to the STC specifications of your modules. If these are the same the result will be the same.

In real, mono string is producing 7% more energy. So what could be the reason ?

I don't know what allows you to affirm this. If the production is 7% better with Mono crystalline modules, it is because the STC values of these modules are 7% better.

Do we need to use paid weather data ?

It depends on what you want to do. An evaluation from Meteonorm V7.1 is quite sufficient for the first evaluation and the optimization of your system.

Now paid data (especially for a set of 10 + years) may indeed be useful if you want to estimate the evolution along the future years (P50-P90 estimation). But nothing ensures that these data will better represent the present and future weather.

Paid data for a specific year are useful also if you need real data for the present time, for a direct comparison of your simulated data with respect to measured ones.