PVsyst's forum

Welcome on PVsyst's forum.
It is currently Mon Sep 21, 2020 2:04 pm

All times are UTC+02:00




Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Jun 06, 2017 2:06 am 

Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:46 pm
Posts: 25
Hello, this topic was partly covered in another post, but I would like to start a new thread specific to this topic. When undulations of terrain cause multiple azimuths, is it correct that PVsyst does not allow categorizing those multiple azimuths into a few average ranges? Do they need to be run as a single average for the full site? Is this still true for version 6.62? Does it matter whether using an H2P file, or other source of 3D image?

If this is the case, then the impact of azimuth on production is not fully accounted for when running H2P files. We are considering post-processing methods to estimate this impact based on the exported orientations data. Does anyone have further thoughts on this question?

Thanks very much,
Debbie


Top
   
PostPosted: Thu Jun 08, 2017 12:50 pm 
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2012 11:12 am
Posts: 119
Hello Debbie,

For now PVsyst handles orientations in two ways (in the shadings part) :
- it either tries to group fields into several orientations given a tolerance parameter
- or it uses a single global average when you have imported a scene from an H2P file

This leads to confusing situations when :
- the imported H2P file defines several orientations (like domes, or multiple zones with different azimuths ...) and PVsyst makes its calculations with a single average
- grouping the fields could be a lot more accurate if done manually, which can't be done yet

Also, there is currently no tool to display the current orientations in the shading scene while building it.
We are currently working seriously on this and hope to release it in the next few months, as this is something many users are often asking for.
This new tool we will also display the orientations previously defined in the Project part to make sure both match.


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2017 8:00 pm 

Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:46 pm
Posts: 25
Thank you Sylvain, it's good to know this is an area of active development. It seems like currently the program is taking not the average of the orientations (tilt and azimuth), but the values from the first table. Until a new release that addresses these issues, is there a way to over-ride the requirement that the orientations match in the shading scene and orientation interface so that we can manually set to the average from the "orientations analysis"?

I appreciate your help.

-Debbie


Top
   
PostPosted: Wed Jun 28, 2017 11:58 pm 

Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 7:46 pm
Posts: 25
It appears that I can manually correct to the average azimuth and tilt if I first adjust the detailed simulation verification conditions to allow large orientation angle differences (for example 50 degrees for all the related settings). Perhaps this answers my own question. No actually, it didn't work. During the simulation the numbers were changed back to match the 3D scene.

-Debbie


Top
   
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 4 posts ] 

All times are UTC+02:00


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Limited