Paul G Posted July 21, 2014 Share Posted July 21, 2014 Hello, In PVsyst, I am attempting to run a simulation for a saw-tooth type tracker (horizontal SAT w/ a fixed tilt). From my experience,this should simply be done by selecting "Tracking tilted or horiz. N-S axis" and by choosing the appropriate axis tilt (In my case 10d tilt).See figure below. However, another company we are working with feels that running such a simulation will produce substantially less energy and is missing outon potential annual energy production. They feel that an equatorial tracker at 10 deg is not a "true" equatorial tracker as the latitude of the siteis higher and does not have its axis of rotation parallel to the Earth's axis of rotation. They are insisting on running a "Tracking two axis,Frame NS" simulation in PVsyst instead and setting the min/max frame angle to the same value (in this case 10 deg). See below. If all other variables and loss assumptions are held constant, choosing the "dual axis" simulation while fixing the tilt angle shows ~30 MWh/yr increase in energy production. They state that this is due to PVsyst assuming a smaller angle of incidence than the pseudo equatorial tracker in the morning and evening parts of the day.Can you provide an explanation on the assumptions PVsyst is making that is causing the significant difference in energy production between thetwo simulations? And then based on these assumptions, which is the correct way to simulate a horizontal SAT w/ a fixed tilt?Thank you.Paul G. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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 account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now