spelland74 Posted August 27, 2015 Share Posted August 27, 2015 Hello,I have been using the batch mode of PVsyst to run several meteo files for a project. With previous versions, this was working fine. In the current version, somehow PVsyst is running the first simulation in the batch twice instead of once, and doesn't do the last simulation. I have tried various solutions and been unable to fix this. I am giving an example of input batch parameters below (I have changed the files a bit to protect client privacy). In that example, when I run this batch file, the TMY gets simulated twice rather than once, and everything else is offset. The 2014 .met file does not get simulated.Best regards,Sophie--Batch parameters file (site name modified)PVsyst simulations Batch mode;Simulation parameters definition;File Modified on 27/08/15 12:11;;Project ;;;Site TMY;Variants based on;;VC0;Detailed losses;;Please define the parameters to be varied for each run;Don't modify anything in the column titles !;Only the lines beginning by "SIM_" will be executed;;Ident;Meteo data;Simul;;;*.MET file;Comment;;;;;;;SIM_1; Site_TMY.MET;Detailed losses;;SIM_2; Site_2000.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_3; Site_2001.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_4; Site_2002.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_5; Site_2003.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_6; Site_2004.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_7; Site_2005.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_8; Site_2006.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_9; Site_2007.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_10; Site_2008.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_11; Site_2009.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_12; Site_2010.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_13; Site_2011.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_14; Site_2012.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_15; Site_2013.MET;Detailed losses;;;SIM_16; Site_2014.MET;Detailed losses;;;;;Don't forget to close this file in EXCEL before returning to PVsyst for executing the simulation !!!;; Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spelland74 Posted August 27, 2015 Author Share Posted August 27, 2015 I have just downloaded again version 6.3.8 and can confirm that there is no issue running my simulation with the batch parameter file I showed in the previous post. The issue only occurs for 6.3.9, so I believe there is a bug in the 6.3.9 batch algorithms. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Wittmer Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 Yes, there seems to be something wrong there. I will look into it right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jforbess Posted August 31, 2015 Share Posted August 31, 2015 I also have had this problem, and welcome it getting resolved ASAP. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jforbess Posted February 3, 2016 Share Posted February 3, 2016 I just updated to 6.41 and have found that the issue has changed. I run multiple meteo files, and run each meteo file with a change of a parameter. Now when I run multiple meteo files in batch, the first run of a meteo file uses the correct meteo file, but the following runs use the first year I specified. Ident Meteo data Mod. quality Simul Error GlobHor T_Amb GlobInc FTransp E_Grid PR *.MET file loss Comment kWh/m² °C kWh/m² kWh [%] >>SIM_1998_01 SiteName_1998.MET 0.0 Base Case 1998 Year 1 1545 15.25 1948 1.261 177748415 0.8147 SIM_1998_10 SiteName_1998.MET 4.4 Base Case 1998 Year 10 1545 15.25 1948 1.261 171547707 0.7863 SIM_1998_20 SiteName_1998.MET 9.0 Base Case 1998 Year 20 1545 15.25 1948 1.261 164347079 0.7533 >>SIM_1999_01 SiteName_1999.MET 0.0 Base Case 1999 Year 1 1568 14.51 1994 1.272 184156118 0.8245 SIM_1999_10 SiteName_1999.MET 4.4 Base Case 1999 Year 10 1545 15.25 1948 1.261 171547707 0.7863 SIM_1999_20 SiteName_1999.MET 9.0 Base Case 1999 Year 20 1545 15.25 1948 1.261 164347079 0.7533 >>SIM_2000_01 SiteName_2000.MET 0.0 Base Case 2000 Year 1 1621 13.65 2104 1.298 194100553 0.8235 SIM_2000_10 SiteName_2000.MET 4.4 Base Case 2000 Year 10 1545 15.25 1948 1.261 171547707 0.7863 SIM_2000_20 SiteName_2000.MET 9.0 Base Case 2000 Year 20 1545 15.25 1948 1.261 164347079 0.7533 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bruno Wittmer Posted February 9, 2016 Share Posted February 9, 2016 In fact the variants were not being properly restored after each batch run step.This is now fixed for the coming version 6.42.Thank you for reporting the issue. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
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