Kebby Posted February 10, 2014 Posted February 10, 2014 I have noticed a large different in results from identical models run in v6.12 and v6.18. The only obvious change i can see is that:6.12: Models used Transposition Perez Diffuse Measured6.18: Models used Transposition Perez Diffuse Erbs, MeteonormThis leads to:6.12: -3.0% Near Shadings: irradiance loss6.18: -1.9% Near Shadings: irradiance lossUltimately this leads to an increase in PR of 0.9%, is there an explanation for this change between these versions?
André Mermoud Posted February 20, 2014 Posted February 20, 2014 For the shading loss changes: If your system involves unlimited sheds: in the version 6.13 to 6.18, there were an error when reading the VCi file. The plane tilt used for the evaluation of the shading effect on the diffuse part was not read correctly, which underestimated the shading loss. This error didn't occur with new calculation versions, or if you opened the "Orientation" dialog before the simulation. This problem has been corrected in the version 6.19.On the other hand, the diffuse model is the same in both cases: just the denomination on the report has been changed. "Measured" was used previously for any values read on an hourly file (whatever the origin, which is not known by PVsyst). Now for most meteo data, the diffuse is indeed issued from a model. Therefore this denomination is not correct. In the new versions we have tried to put some more accurate description when we have an idea of the origin of the data. When creating synthetic data (which uses the Meteonorm algorithm), the diffuse is constructed by the Meteonorm software, using a Liu-Jordan or similar (Erbs) model.
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now