Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 09/27/2020 in all areas

  1. Hi Marin! Regarding your number 2, I imported a terrain model (I have no need for this myself at the moment, just wanted to try it) and got it to work kind of good in 10 minutes. I'm sure that someone else can make this much better than what I have done in this mock-up. Just wanted to show that it's possible to do and that it may be easier than step #2 if the environment is complex.
    2 points
  2. Never mind Martin. I accidentally used a broken 3D model when I finally got the textures to work. Here's a picture of Valentin Software HQ with some added solar panels to the building next door.
    2 points
  3. Hi there! What format you are using for your 3D model? Here is a document with a list of supported formats: https://www.valentin-software.com/wp-content/uploads/legacy-downloads/sonstiges/en/3d-recherche-rev-01-en.pdf I have had the best results using .dae or .obj files in the past. However, I have found 3D models to be very unreliable (invisible walls that casting shade, module areas floating mid-air after saving the file etc.) so personally I try to avoid them when ever possible. Hope this helps. Regards, Frido
    2 points
  4. If anyone else have this problem, I fixed it by exporting the Blender model as an .obj file. Thank you.
    2 points
  5. To my knowledge, the system operator receives Ausfallvergütung only under special conditions, like when Einspeisevergütung or Direktvermarktung fails. Even then, the operator has to apply for Ausfallvergütung to receive the compensation. So these are very special cases and I don't think it's possible to calculate in PVSol
    2 points
  6. Main input parameter for this is "electricity tariff from grid" which one provides as input
    2 points
  7. Hi PVSOL team. I have had a quick play with the 2021 update. Are there any further features soon to arrive? I was really hoping for a few helpful features in the 3D modelling. As 90% of the time all that is required is a rectangular building outline with a line down the centre for a ridge some minor improvements would really help- -Snap to 90 degrees (or a rectangle drawing tool) -Snap to centre point for drawing ridge (or an "auto-ridge" feature) Thanks James
    2 points
  8. Good afternoon, I think it would be a good idea if Valentin software developers make a wish list in the Forum for the users so they can have a feedback of what is more important and required by the costumers/users and if they are mentioned very often try to include them in the following releases. Here are my wishes ? 1- More stand alone inverter/chargers/components brands, as Victron, Steca, Ingeteam, Solarwatt 2- Bigger area to develop bigger projects 3 - A better relation with 3D software as Sketch-up 4 - The possibility of include some images/pictures or even text in the final report (for clients would be interesting if we can include in one only document the pictures of a visit for example or special information) 5 - BIM/ifc files compatibility. Thanks for your attention. Kind regards
    1 point
  9. Hi Paul, in 3D you are able to simulate about 7,500 mounted modules or 10,000 roof parallel modules. with non-3D you are able to simulate 100,000 modules per module area. 700MWp were simulated successfully. Best regards, Frederik
    1 point
  10. Dies empfinde ich auch zunehmend als Problem. Würde mich über eine Lösung (gerne auch neg. Lastprofile) freuen.
    1 point
  11. Hi Trond! Just import a 3d model into the 3d design and tick the "use as terrain model" box. The issue then becomes to define mounting surfaces on the terrain. You can either draw mounting surfaces or have them automatically determined (beta). You can also tinker with the auto-settings to perhaps get better results. Hope that helps.
    1 point
  12. Hi Endika, there are some lines in your file where data is missing: Other than that, the file should be fine. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  13. Dear Paul, thank you for the project. The problem here is the limitation of the MC box (multicluster box). It can only connect to a maximum of 12 three-phase clusters of Sunny Islands and to a maximum of 360 kW of PV power. https://www.sma.de/en/products/battery-inverters/multicluster-boxes-for-sunny-island.html And PV*SOL doesn't support more than one MC box at a time. So I would suggest to break your 5MW project down into a smaller unit, let's say 250 kW, a 1/20th of your current project. You would calculate with 575 PV modules, smaller PV inverters, a load of 32,5 kW and then you can configure the battery system accordingly. Finally you would have to scale up the results by 20, manually. Sorry that we can't provide a different solution, but this is as it is right now. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  14. Dear Ben, the electrical load profiles we provide in PV*SOL have various origins. Here is an overview that I just compiled: Name EN Description Source 1-person household Load Profile Generator 2 person household with one child Load Profile Generator 2-person household Load Profile Generator 2-person household with 2 children Load Profile Generator BDEW commercial load profile (G1) Business, weekdays 8 am to 6 pm (i.e. offices, doctor's offices, workshops, administrative units) BDEW BDEW load profile business (G2) Business with high or primary use in the evening (i.e. sport clubs, fitness studios, night clubs) BDEW BDEW load profile business (G3) Continual business operation, i.e. cold warehouses, pumps, sewage treatment facilities (cold warehouses, pumps, sewage treatment facilities) BDEW BDEW load profile business (G4) Shop/Hairdresser BDEW BDEW load profile business (G5) Bakery with shop attached BDEW BDEW load profile business (G6) Weekend operations (i.e. cinemas) BDEW BDEW load profile business (GO) General business (weighted mean of profiles G1-G6) BDEW BDEW load profile household (H0) BDEW BDEW load profile agriculture (L0) Agriculture (weighted mean value of profiles L1 and L2) BDEW BDEW load profile agriculture (L1) Agricultural operations with milk/secondary income livestock BDEW BDEW load profile agriculture (L2) Other agricultural operations BDEW Brasil Centro Oeste Solarize Brasil Nordeste Solarize Brasil Norte Solarize Brasil Sudeste Solarize Brasil Sul Solarize Colombia Amazonia Solsta Colombia Andina Solsta Colombia Caribe Solsta Colombia Orinoquia Solsta Colombia Pacifico Solsta Household, seasonal course comparable with standard profile Load profile 31 HTW Berlin Household, load profile with high night proportion Load profile 67 HTW Berlin Household, load profile with high summer proportion Load profile 26 HTW Berlin Household, Load profile with high percentage of morning hours Load profile 68 HTW Berlin Household, Load profile with low percentage of nighttime hours Load profile 61 HTW Berlin Household, load profile with low summer proportion Load profile 12 HTW Berlin Household, Load profile with low percentage of morning hours Load profile 48 HTW Berlin Household, diurnal course comparable with standard profile Load profile 17 HTW Berlin Load profile with constant load Constant load throughout the year, e.g. broadcasting station Heat pump Base year 2011 Heat Pump System with Space Heating (air/water) GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating (brine/water, geothermal collector) GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating (brine/water, geothermal probe) GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating (water/water) GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating and Domestic Hot Water (air/water) GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating and Domestic Hot Water (air/water) with Heating Element GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating and Domestic Hot Water (brine/water, geothermal collector) GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating and Domestic Hot Water (brine/water, geothermal probe) GeoT*SOL Heat Pump System with Space Heating and Domestic Hot Water (water/water) GeoT*SOL Sources: Load Profile Generator Created with the LoadProfileGenerator (https://www.loadprofilegenerator.de/) HTW Berlin University of Applied Sciences: „Representative electrical load profiles of residential buildings in Germany with a temporal resolution of one second“, dataset, Berlin, 2015 GeoT*SOL Created with GeoT*SOL 2020 R1 Solsta provided by Solsta SAS, data from XM (Colombian electricity market administrator) Solarize provided by Solarize BDEW Standard load profiles of German BDEW (German Association of Energy and Water Industries) I hope that helps. I will try to find the time to update the help also in the near future. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  15. Hallo AMB, nein, eine Analyse der Blendeinwirkung ist mit PV*SOL leider nicht möglich. Ich würde aber gerne den Kontakt zur DGS Berlin-Brandenburg empfehlen, die haben sich viel mit Blendgutachten beschäftigt: https://www.dgs-berlin.de/solarservices-gutachten/angebote-solarservices Viele Grüße, Martin
    1 point
  16. Wenn man das ganze Gebäude 0,5m tiefer macht, wird auch das Dach länger. Man erzeugt damit quasi einen für die Belegung nutzbaren Dachüberstand, nur ist er graphisch nicht als Überstand sichtbar.
    1 point
  17. Hi James, sorry for not replying to you earlier. Yes, we are already looking into this and hope to have it fixed for the upcoming release PV*SOL premium 2021 R7. If it is a server issue that we can fix right away, we will let you know. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  18. Hi Jordn, in PV*SOL we always simulate years without leap day. So if you import a leap year, the leap day is filtered out so that the year can be simulated. With half-hourly values, these are the 48 values that are missing. The total energy is thus reduced by the energy consumption of that one day. If you want to keep the original total annual energy amount, you could enter that value in the annual energy field after importing the profile. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  19. Hi Yash, please refer to this thread: Your file uses SPACE characters instead of TAB characters at the marked spots: I hope this helps! Best regards, Frederik
    1 point
  20. Hi Martynas, you could manage it this way: Set your from-grid tariff to the normal price you have to pay. Additionally set the feed-in tariff to 5 cents below the from-grid tariff. This way the costs are included. Best regards, Frederik
    1 point
  21. Hallo mlo, nein. Aber der Plan lässt sich als SVG exportieren und mit https://inkscape.org/ bearbeiten. Viele Grüße, Frederik
    1 point
  22. Hello Santiago Fondoso, what system do you use (A1, A2, ...)? I delivered energy depends on the temperatures in the tank and in the collectors. On the other hand you have more losses, if the temperature in the tank rises due to more collectors. Kind regards
    1 point
  23. Hello Santiago Fondoso, I assume you took the System A7 or A7.1. It is correct that it is the total number of selected tanks, but connected in parallel. On your drawing you connected all systems in a row. Kind regards
    1 point
  24. Liebes PV Sol Team, Ich weiß wir sind lästig, aber ich würde mich ebenso über ein Lastprofil einer Klimaanlage freuen. Vielleicht kommt ihr in den nächsten Monaten dazu. Liebe Grüße, Jacob
    1 point
  25. Da ich das gleiche Problem hatte und das hier das erste Google-Ergebnis war: Bei mir lag es daran, dass das in Windows eingestellte Dezimaltrennzeichen gleich dem Symbol für Zifferngruppierung war (bei mir beides "."). Diese sollten natürlich verschieden sein. War also kein Fehler des Programms sondern des Anwenders.
    1 point
  26. Hallo Lis, ja, das geht. Auf der Seite "Anlagenart, Klima und Netz", im Abschnitt Netz lässt sich die Einspeiseabregelung einstellen. Beste Grüße, Martin
    1 point
  27. Hallo Lis, die Wärmepumpenprofile wurden mit GeoT*SOL https://valentin-software.com/en/products/geotsol/ simuliert. Es handelt sich dabei mehr oder weniger um Beispielprofile, da es nicht möglich ist, einen bestimmten Anwendungsfall festzulegen. In PV*SOL ab Version 2021 kann man aber auch eine Luftwärmepumpe im neuen Anlagentyp Thermische Anlage simulieren. Dabei werden die Klimadaten des aktuellen Standorts verwendet. Das Lastprofil "Wohnkomplex" geht auf eine Forschungsarbeit aus der Schweiz zurück ("Warmwasserversorgungen heute; AT Verlag Aarau (Schweiz) 1984"). Von der Verwendung in wissenschaftlichen Arbeiten würden wir von diesem Profil abraten und eher auf die Lastprofile im oberen Bereich (aus Messwerten) verweisen. Beste Grüße, Martin
    1 point
  28. Dear dom bez kostów, I used deepl.com to translate your question into English: Unfortunately, I am not sure what the question is. The translation might be misleading. You can view, edit, save and export the circuit diagram, enter all the electrical devices you want, dimension the cables and so on, no problem. You can do so on the plan and the cabling pages: If this doesn't answer you question, please don't hesitate to ask again. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  29. When you put in value, you need to enter coma but not the dot.
    1 point
  30. Hello, I have a general technical question; is it ok to connect 2 strings with different modules number to one MPPT (18 and 19 for example when using the polystring feature in PV sol). I've read on some forums that there are losses due the voltage mismatch and the MPPT tracks the string with the lowest performance; but is it really a red line for PV designers or it's just not preferable and I can do it only when necessary? Thanks in advance Karam
    1 point
  31. Hi Burak, the 0,4 ct/kWh is the so called "Management Prämie" that shall compensate for the extra cost that a PV system owner has when he or she is opting for the "Direktvermarktung" In the numbers published by the "Bundesnetzagentur" those 0,4 ct/kWh are already included: https://www.bundesnetzagentur.de/SharedDocs/Downloads/DE/Sachgebiete/Energie/Unternehmen_Institutionen/ErneuerbareEnergien/ZahlenDatenInformationen/PV_Datenmeldungen/DegressionsVergSaetze_11-01_21.html They provide an Excel file that you can download, and in there there is a sheet called "Beispiele". There they state: As you can see, the 0,4 ct/kWh are already included (and have to be subtracted if not opting for Direktvermarktung). In PV*SOL, the tariffs are up-to-date and can be used as-is. Notice the 0,4 ct/kWh difference: I would also recommend these pages here, they explain the whole thing quite well: https://www.next-kraftwerke.de/wissen/managementpraemie Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  32. Hi Ricardo, the active power will be capped. The output power clipping is based on the apparent power, say S_max. With cos φ = 1, the system will not produce reactive power, so active power equals apparent power, and the maximum power output is P_max = S_max. When the cos φ is smaller than 1, the maximum active power output will be reduced by this factor (while the maximum apparent output power remains the same), since P_max = S_max * cos φ. Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  33. Dear Ricardo, unfortunately we don't have a detailed explanation of each item of the energy balance yet. But this is a good suggestion, we will put it on our request list for extending the help pages. The "Down-regulation on account of the max. AC Power/cos phi" takes place when the AC power of the PV system is higher than the maximum AC output of the inverter. In this case the inverter has to regulate the output power down to the maximum permissible power (by choosing another poit on the IV characteristics if the PV field on the DC side). The cos phi will reduce the maximum permissible power output of the inverter, of course, if not equal to 1. Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  34. Hey there, There was similar question on this forum already. Hope it helps
    1 point
  35. Hallo, ich würde gern ein Bürogebäude mit Flachdach und dessen Aufbauten mit PV-Modulen bestücken. Leider funktioniert dies nicht so leicht wie ich dachte. Die Treppenhäuser habe ich mittels Brandwände auf dem Flachdach als Körper platziert. Leider bekomme ich auf diesen Körpern dann keine Module platziert, sondern - wenn ich diese aktiviere - nur an den Wänden. Könntet ihr mir bitte weiterhelfen, besten Dank. Hat sich erledigt - die Erstellung mittels Polygon und extrudieren war die Antwort - trotzdem danke.
    1 point
  36. While answering your question and after some tinkering with some bifacial modules: Here are three projects with the same location and inverters and reasonably comparable modules (I attached the projects too): 1. South orientation, non bifacial 2. South orientation (same as first), bifacial 3. East-west orientation (90° inclination), bifacial Where bifacial modules clearly shine is the third project, bifacial east-west 90 degree inclination. Naturally this is one of the most interesting of applications: Agricultural PV systems, perfect due to the doubled area usage plus the flattening effect for system operators. south-nonbifacial.pvprj south-bifacial.pvprj east-west-bifacial.pvprj
    1 point
  37. I Would like to refresh the topic. Two years and the issue isn't fixed yet.
    1 point
  38. Hi Ricardo, could you provide the two project files, please? You can send them with a private message here in the forum. Thanks and kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  39. Hi Marcel, hi Vishnu, as Vishnu already pointed out, there is no undo feature right now in PV*SOL. And yes, we are really aware of how urgent the users of our software want it. We have it on our list, and we will definetely implement it in the future. But I can't give a date for it right now, I am afraid. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  40. Hey Marcel, There is no undo function available in PV*Sol. I remember one of the admins mentioning that implementing undo function is pretty complex. We can consider ourselves lucky should it be on the wishlist -Vishnu
    1 point
  41. Hi Ricardo, ok, this is strange. Usually the user id is not renewed or reset except when you install it on a new device. One quick work around for you would be to copy the module with hidden user id when you open the project file where it is contained. This would make it available for you in other projects as well. I'll ask you to send me some files via private message in order to analyse the problem. Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  42. You can get rid off them by setting the distance to edge to zero in "Edge distances"
    1 point
  43. Hi Himanshu, if you want to compare two PV plant designs, I would recommend the project comparison: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2020/project-comparison/ Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  44. Hi Ricardo, thanks for the project. These are two different module types and if you select all of them, the generator power is calculated from the total number of modules and the lower of the two module powers. This only affects the display, however, the correct generator power will be displayed during interconnection and after exiting 3D. But I will set the issue on our list as it can easily confuse. Thanks for reporting! Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  45. For us, a fixed (or at least globally adjustable) colour scale for the shade frequency analysis would be very useful. So that e.g. 5% of shading has always the same colour for every roof in every project. As it is right now, 5% or even 10% of module shading might appear as a vibrant green, just because a part of the roof (maybe even with no modules) might be shaded very strongly. Not ideal at all. This, along with an option to export these pictures with one press of a button would be very useful to our workflow. As of right now we have to screengrab each and every roof. Edit: exmple picture added.
    1 point
  46. Great ideas all of them, specially the first 3. If I may add another, I'd like to not only have input to enter the exact line length, but also to enter the line relative angle, a bit like what can be done with buildings: That would be very helpful when you need to draw complex buildings and and make sure modules on different roofs are oriented similarly for configuration in the same MPPT. Please see below an example of a rather poor attempt I was working on recently: Keep up the good work and thanks for your timely replies!
    1 point
  47. @Vishnu: Thanks a lot for answering here! We really appreciate it a lot when you help out each other!
    1 point
  48. hey Alberto, I can think of only one reason for this. As you mentioned that you've used two difference modules, there is a chance that "Anti Reflection Coating" is different for the two modules. This is just my assumption, may be there is a better explanation the PV Sol team can provide. Also the "orientation and inclination of module surface" is different for the modules. Is the inclination different for both the cases?. If yes, this is also a reason for different reflection losses. Cheers..!!
    1 point
  49. Hi Karam, no, I would not say that connecting strings with different module numbers is a red line in general. Why not try it out in PV*SOL directly? We calculate the losses due to string mismatch with great accuracy, so you can just see how much energy you loose in you PV system and see for yourself if you can accept these losses. You can also see the resulting IV characteristics of your parallel strings in the results page (under Simulation -> Diagram Editor -> Type of Diaram: Characteristics) Kind regards, Martin
    1 point
  50. Hi What is the formula used to compute Accured Cashflow (cash balance) minus pending loans? I want to try and model my proposal on monthly basis. thanks
    1 point
×
×
  • Create New...