Leaderboard

1. More control when drawing lines: snap to 10cm or input to drive line length 2. Snap to mid point of line - the ridge of a roof is almost always in the middle 3. ctrl+Z to undo 4. better control when rotating the camera position 5. Higher resolution on panels when zoomed out 6. Default project image zoomed out enough to show whole array Keep up the good work PVSOL team.

As simple "ctrl Z" or undo button would be extremely nice! Greetz Johan

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

Hat schon jemand "UNDO" gesagt ?

Hallo, ein praktisches Feature wäre, wenn man in der 3D-Planung häufig verwendete Unterkonstruktionen Projektübergreifend abspeichern könnte. Dadurch müsste man diese bei verschieden Projekten nicht immer wieder neu erstellen. Ist hierzu etwas angedacht?

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.

- would like to see an undo button as discribed above. (or at least be able to lock a complex building and their surroundings, so one misclick doens't destroy your work) - need more options for EV. (e.g. distance travelled per week day, range according new WLTP system) - while the software perfectly suits my technical needs, it seems lackluster/old as a client proposal. - could we have a blanc page in the customer presentation where we can add project or installer specific additional information. - some presentation pages need additional (customizable) information. (while a graph or scheme or just some numbers wth a title above will be very clear for us, a customer most of the time doens't know what he is looking at) - file size of the presentation should be smaller, but pictures should still be high res. - would like to be able to send an electronic presentation to a customer with some analytics possibilities. (where do customers actualy look at?) - easier construction of "complex" buildings. (depth of building schould be addapted to the angle and dimensions of the roof area being used for the array)

Der wird bei der Doku auf der Seite Ertragsprognose angezeigt. Hier beispielhaft (Wert ist gering, da es einen Teil Fassadenmodule gibt).

Try adjusting these two values and you will have it.

When rotating an object, deactivate collisions while doing so. I am often unable to rotate something because it hits another object while rotating. Also, it would be more intuitive if the object would rotate around it’s geometric centre, and not it's base point.

Hallo zusammen, Ich sehe auch eine dringende Notwendigkeit darin, dass man Wärmepumpen zusätzlich als Verbraucher anlegen kann. Bei unseren Anlagen haben wir zu 80% Kunden, die eine Wärmepumpe haben oder planen eine anzuschaffen und ihren Bedarf in den Simulation berücksichtigt sehen wollen. Oder gibt es eine Möglichkeit das Problem zu umgehen? Würde mich über ein life hack von Valentin freuen. Gruß, Iza

Many buildings have a lot of edges and must be drawn manually. But for these structures, it is not possible to add for instance tilting in several directions (which is possible for normal rectangular polygons that can be drawn). This is useful as most buildings have some tilt on the roof for water drainage: either with water chutes / gutter at the sides (like a gabled roof with low angle), or in the middle (opposite of gabled roof, as illustrated in the attached picture). Some buildings have several of these as well. PVSOL needs an option to add this, so that the correct incidence angle of irradiance on the PV modules is achieved.

Was ist der Unterschied zwischen Bibern und PV Sol? Biber verkraften mehr als 50 Bäume. Galgenhumor beiseite: - mein Wunsch: Begrenzungen von PV-Sol vergrößern. Ich meine sowas wie Modulanzahl, Bäume usw., das wär oft echt gut!

Would be great for the Production Forecast graph to show specific kWh values each month. For example:

Idee Teilanlage als Bestand deklarieren und damit die Wirtschaftlichkeit einer Erweiterung transparent machen können. Sprich: Die Erzeugung der Teilanlage der Bestands-PV (Wechselrichter mit Module) wird zunächst von dem Lastprofil abgezogen, anschließend wird die Rechnung mit der Risiduallast durchgeführt wie gehabt.

- Lizenzübertragung auf andere Geräte, ggf. mit Onlinezwang Ich arbeite gerade spontan notgedrungen aus dem Homeoffice mit Fernzugriff auf meinen PC im Büro per VPN wegen der Lizenz. Das ist grausam langsam und sporadisch stürzt leider auch das PV-SOL dabei mit den Grafikfehlermeldungen ab. Daher wäre es schön wenn die Lizens für einen Anwender auf mehreren Geräten laufen könnte. Es ist schwer zu erklären warum man zwei oder mehr Lizenzen für einen Anwender anschaffen soll, nur weil verschiedene Geräte an unterschiedlichen Orten durch einen Anwender genutzt werden. Da die Software beim Start sowieso nach Hause telefoniert, könnte auch der status aktiv/inaktiv protokolliert werden und bei Doppelnutzung eines Accounts der Start verwehrt werden. Oder habe ich eine andere Lösung für diese Anforderung übersehen?

Hallo Daniel, Wenn ich Sie richtig verstehe (mein Deutsch ist nicht sehr gut, ich habe das übersetzt), möchten Sie die Stückliste in eine csv-Datei exportieren. Es könnte einfacher sein, wenn ich nur einen Screenshot zeige, wo Sie es tun. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Jimmy

Hallo, es wäre praktisch wenn in der 3D-Visualisierung und einem geöffnetem Dialogfeld der Zoom mit dem Mausrad an der Stelle des Mauszeigers rein und raus zoomen würde anstatt an einer fixen Position. Also so, als ob das Dialogfeld nicht geöffnet wäre.

Hi Sondre. Yes. When you're in the "module configuration" view you're actually able to drag panels around. All panels are automatically numbered when you do the inverter config and they'll keep their number no matter where you move them. And the string go in order of panel number. Here's a screenshot of your desired result. An alternative method is in "cable plan" where you can use the "Sketch module cables" tool. Just select the tool and start at the first panel and draw the string going over each module in order. I prefer to move the panels in the module configuration view but I think both are equally valid.

Hello everyone, please share your best image/design created with PV Sol. Why? - To show and explain the best ways to create visually attractive solar systems. This is mine created with amazing PV Sol; A new-build housing development in the UK - instead of roofing with attractive expensive Cornish slate, the contractor wants to reduce their material costs by installing in-roof panels and experiment with how 'green' they could get. We were able show the contractor thier project in PV Sol by;Importing the site plan, altering the orientation and referencing elevation plans to recreate the neibourhood. Orange buildings highlight PV systems within public view, lighter buildings highlight PV systems with limited public view, grey buildings highlight properties outside consideration. The image went down so well it was reported the contractor specially printed this at poster size to show and tell to Prince Charles of Wales.

Martin, I was genuinely thinking it was my fault the data was not being adopted, that I had done something wrong. It never crossed my mind this could be the intended behaviour by design. The logical approach (at least to me) would be to use 3D to take precise length measures and then adopt them into the 2D design. I always assumed this was the case. As it is it makes absolutely no sense at all, I can't understand why was this module designed like this, and I see it's not just me. What you're saying is that all of the trouble of designing combiner boxes, different cable sections, strings combined into arrays, etc, it all disappears into ONE SINGLE magic number. Just as @timgreen13 pointed out, one is expecting to see cable losses by section, see individual string lengths and losses, etc, because if not then what's the point of all that detailed "painting"? We need to check if individual strings and individual arrays are above our own loss thresholds, to be able to correct them if necessary. Having just one global loss number won't let you see that, you might even have 5% losses in one string branch and get 0,8% global losses in the system. Again I'm in the position of having this powerful software (PVSOL) I paid for that won't do basic functionality, and having to go back to freeware manufacturer software (SUNNY DESIGN) to get some of the design steps done. After fine tuning the strings and cable sections on SUNNY DESIGN I will have to go back to PVSOL and try to input MPPT equivalents... can you see how cumbersome this is? The more I work with PVSOL the more frustrated I get, really, it should be the opposite. You guys do the most difficult part, the math simulations, to unimaginable precision (congrats on that!), and then fail at the most basic functionality and design elements. Go figure...

Hi Ahmad Elghobashy, the performance ratio is the ratio between the actual pv energy and the theoretical maximum pv energy. The actual pv energy is, as you have already mentioned, the "PV energy (AC) minus standby use", but the theoretical maximum is not the "Rated PV Energy", because there are already some influences on the radiation like soiling and reflection. The correct formula for the performace ratio (PR) is: PR = ("PV energy (AC) minus standby use") / (" Global Radiation at the Module" - "Reflection on the Module Interface") * module area * module efficiency )) In your case, that would be: PR = 114,960.40 kWh /[(2,041.7 kWh/m² - (- 33.13 kWh/m²)) * 414.11 m² * 0.1681] PR = 0.79594 = 79.6 % Kind regards, Marcel

Hi, I was wondering, is there an option to undo changes in PV SOL, other than not saving and simply opening the last saved version of your file? Something in the line of Ctrl+Z in MS Office. Thanks!

Hallo its_dd, ein Gebäude mit Mansardendach erstellen Dachgeschoss1 an gewünschte Werte anpassen Dachgeschoss2 an gewünschte Werte anpassen Gebäude kopieren Anschließend das gedrehte Gebäude kollisionsfrei schalten und in das vorherige Gebäude schieben Mit Hilfe von Sperrflächen lassen sich die nutzbaren Modulflächen eingrenzen Ich habe mir es beim zweiten Teil einfach gemacht und das gleiche Gebäude ein zweites Mal genutzt. Das ließe sich natürlich schöner machen. Freundliche Grüße, Frederik

In diesem Fall ist die wohl interessantere Zeile "kumulierter Cashflow". Hier kann man ablesen, wie groß der Unterschied bei Investition und Erlöse/Einsparungen in Summe ist. Wobei sich natürlich nur dann ein Unterschied ergibt, wenn man die Kosten für die Wechselrichter manuell eingetragen hat. Gibt man stattdessen einen Pauschalwert an (€ / kWp) an, werden die höheren Kosten für größere Wechselrichter nicht berücksichtigt. Hier ein etwas älterer Beitrag zu dem Thema unter- / überdimensionieren: https://www.sma-sunny.com/7-gruende-warum-man-pv-generatoren-groesser-auslegen-sollte/ Auch wenn ich den jetzt nicht zu 100% unterschreiben würde, zeigt auch dein Beispiel, dass Wechselrichter mit 10% weniger Nennleistung nur einen Verlust von weniger als 0,5% ergeben. Trotzdem "gewinnt" in diesem Fall der größere Wechselrichter, da der spez. Jahresertrag minimal höher ist.

Negative Auswirkungen? 4 Wechselrichter brauchen mehr Platz als 2, haben einen etwas höheren Verkabelungsaufwand und die Anschaffungskosten werden auch höher sein. Davon ab sehe ich kein Problem darin, die Generatoren zu überdimensionieren, auch im 120-140%-Bereich. Solange die Grenzen hinsichtlich Eingangsspannung etc. des WR nicht überschritten werden. Grüße

Ich vermisse ein richtiges Handbuch. Das letzte ist schon etliche Jahre alt, die Online-Hilfe ist lückenhaft. Einige der Parameter für die Definition von Komponenten in der Datenbank sind nicht erläutert oder definiert. Das macht es für die Ersteller von Komponenten schwierig, diese korrekt anzulegen. Schön wäre ein Glossar / Nomenklatur, in der alle vorkommenden Begriffe und Parameter erläutert und definiert sind (Definitionsgleichung und Erläuterung, wie dieser Parameter in die Simulation eingeht). Ich glaube, dann gäbe es auch weniger fehlerhafte technische Daten in der Datenbank.

Hey everyone, since there isn't much information about Intune and PV*SOL, I'd like to share some updated knowledge, for anyone in need: To Update PV*SOL you can simply run the setup file for the newer versoin on the machine with the older version. You can get the newest version here: Download Testversionen | Valentin Software (valentin-software.com) (If the License Key of the User is already registered on the machine, it will automatically run the licensed version) I've also had the issue of corrupted files, when I updated from 2024 R2 to 2024 R3. I simply fixed it by running the setup file twice on the machine. My install.cmd file which is the setup file for Intune: (Yes, it installs twice just in case) START /W setup_pvsolpremium_2024_3.exe /LANG=DE /VERYSILENT ECHO Back from setup_pvsolpremium_2024_3.exe START /W setup_pvsolpremium_2024_3.exe /LANG=DE /VERYSILENT ECHO Back from setup_pvsolpremium_2024_3.exe The Uninstall command: %programfiles(x86)%\Valentin EnergieSoftware\PVSOL premium 2024\unins000.exe" /SILENT This only deinstalls the specific version (depends on the year) inside it's path. Therefore you might want to uninstall the older version of the previous year, after the new version was successfully deployed. Detection Rule: The Developers created a text file of requiered files inside %programfiles(x86)%\Valentin EnergieSoftware\PVSOL premium 2024\RequiredFilesProgramData.txt if you want to make sure the program will run after a successfull installation, you might want to include one of these. Here are my Detection Rules: File Path: %programfiles(x86)%\Valentin EnergieSoftware\PVSOL premium 2024\ File or Folder: PVSOLpremium.exe Detection Method: File exists Associated with a 32-bit app on 64-bit clients: YES File Path: %programdata%\Valentin EnergieSoftware\MeteoSyn\meteonorm\8.2\ File or Folder: acsd_all4_mes_c.txt Detection Method: File exists Registry Path: HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\WOW6432Node\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Uninstall\PVSOL premium 2024_is1 Value Name: DisplayVersion Detection Method: String Comparison Operator: Equals Value: 2024.3 Associated with a 32-bit app on 64-bit clients: YES → The Value of the Registry DisplayVersion changes with each update Dependencies: Photo Plan → automatically install To get Photo Plan to run I had to extract the MSI out of the setupPhotoPlan.exe from this Link https://downloads.valentin.de/photoplan/setupPhotoPlan.exe . Simply run setupPhotoPlan.exe and leave the Setup Window open. Afterwards you can find the Photo Plan.msi File in %localappdata%\Temp . Now you can package a Win32 App with the Photo Plan.msi as the setup file. Intune will fill out the remaining fields automatically. Reminder: If you mix Win32 Apps and Line-Of-Business-Apps in your ESP, Autopilot might fail. Have fun !

For flat roof installations: Is it possible to choose if the distance between mounting support can be on the high side vs. the low side? See example attached

Hi reebal, nein, das ist derzeit leider nicht möglich. Wir haben das schon einige Zeit auf der Liste, aber zur Zeit kann ich leider keinen Ausblick geben, wann wir das Feature implementieren werden. Beste Grüße, Martin

Hi Patrik I am using a DJI Mavic 2 enterprise and take a lot (>100) of overlapping pictures. Than I use WebODM to create a 3D model after that you need to clean up the model with Meshmixer for PV*Sol usage. For my purposes these 3D models arre sufficient. Greetz Johan

Wir planen jetzt immer mehr Anlagen bei welchen ein Teil der Anlage als Überschusseinspeisung, und ein Teil für Volleinspeisung genutzt werden soll. Das bedeutet ein Dach, ein Netzanschluss, aber zwei verschiedene Vergütungen/Messkonzepte. Es wäre super wenn man dies auch in PV*Sol darstellen könnte, jetzt muss man zwei Anlagen planen, die Vergütungstaife per Hand anpassen, gemeinsame Kosten der Anlagen auf die beiden Simulationen aufteilen....

Hi chudy14, if it only for illustration purposes you could try to increase the limit of the maximum allowed number of modules. Close PV*SOL, open the ini file ("C:\Users\USERNAME\Documents\Valentin EnergieSoftware\PVSOL premium 2023\PVSOL.ini") and locate the line that says <MaxAnzModule>10000</MaxAnzModule> Try to change the value to a higher one and then re-open PV*SOL. Keep in mind that you may run into performance issues, but sometimes it works (depending on the machine and the actual project). Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

Hallo Akram Ich versuchs mal: Die Einspeisung kannst du nicht entfernen. Der Grund warum "nur" 40% der erzeugten Energie für den Eigenverbrauch verwendet wird ist, weil zum Zeitpunkt der Erzeugung schlicht nicht mehr selbst brauchen kannst. D.h. Tagsüber wenn die Sonne scheint erzeugst du mehr als du zu diesem Zeitpunkt selbst verwenden kannst. Und dieser Überschuss geht dann als Einspeisung ins Netz. Mindestens theoretisch könntest du ohne Einspeisung arbeiten wenn du immer weniger Erzeugen würdest als du selbst verbrauchst, in der Praxis ergibt das aber keinen Sinn. Viele Grüsse Oliver

Guten Tag, folgende Verbesserungsvorschläge: 1.1 DRINGEND: Performance Update: Multicore Nutzung. Für eine kleinere 500kWP Dachanlage (ohne Speicher etc.) sind 45 Minuten Simulationszeit nötig, wobei der Rechner noch lange nicht ausgelastet ist. 1.2 Lastgänge von Elektroautos einfügbar (wie bei Lastgängen von Gebäuden) 2. Hinzufügen eines Inhaltsverzeichnisses für die Dokumentation 3. Moduldegeneration global einstellbar machen bzw. hinterlegen der Moduldegeneration anhand der Datenblätter der Module 4. Berechnung der Kabellängen bei DC-Verlust innerhalb der Strings (Bekannt sind ja die Modulmaße sowie die Anzahl und die Anordnung), was zusätzlich ist ist die individuelle Verkabelung ab dem Stringfeld... 5. Mehrere Standardwerte für Verschmutzung der PV-Module (Landwirtschaftlich geprägt, städtisch etc.) mit Grundwerten von Pollenflug etc. 6. Hochauflösende Bilder der 3D-Visualsierung möglich machen (nicht abhängig von Bildschirmauflösung)

Hello, I Have checked compatibility** from Enphase IQ-7A-72-2 with *SPR P3 385Wp panel. It says it is possible till 15A max. (Panels* are 10,63A Rated Current*** (Impp) & 11,3A Short-Circuit Current (Isc) (+/−3%). **https://www4.enphase.com/nl-nl/compatibiliteit-micros#results But in PV Sol after 10,2A it refuse to accept this combination. I know why this happen. Because the small letters from enphase datasheet: ""3. Maximum continuous input DC current is 10.2A."" Strange that Sunpower sells this combination with garranty.... how? And i cannot select this combination after copy this inverter and adjust limit settings in PV Sol from ***10,2A to 11A. First i thougt it was a fault in PV Sol. But now i see it is because the Enphase specs. I will contact them. Now PV sol will not suggests the Enphase micro inverter. Just someting to share. Where sometimes it gets stuck in work preparation. Regards, Martijn (OTG.energy)

Hi Pietro, @TurtlesOGhad the same problem about a month ago, see the post here:

HI Jimmy, yes this is possible. Please refer to this thread here: Kind regards, Martin

Hi Robert, Unfortunately it isn't directly. But you can use a virtual machine to emulate windows which then can run PV*SOL. Here's a post asking the same with a developer response.

Hi Martin, Thank you for the praise. I would love to share my workflow and methods but unfortunately I intend to sell models like these as a service to other businessess since I believe that they're basically among the best in the world and can add great value for certain projects. I can disclose that the data is drone footage and that I've spent well over 500 hours developing a reliable method to make these models work with PVSOL. I've experimented with more than 20 different softwares and changing the settings over and over in each to try to produce the best models. I've had to read through probably thousands of pages of documentation, user manuals and forums until I finally arrived at software, settings and workflow which accomplishes the desired results. There's a lot of manual work that goes into this and creating the above model takes me about 3 days. But it is photo-realistic and with an accuracy of a few centimeters for the roof dimensions and roof objects. Another thing that I really like about it is the ability to make odd shapes that aren't possible in PVSOL and hard to do in SketchUp. It's not in this project but I'm particularity proud of the ability to accurately capture trees with complex shapes, something that is otherwise very hard to model. If no one else figures it out and shares it now that I've shown that it's possible I'll share my methods in 2023, I just need to recuperate my investment first.

Hi Aymen, Here's a download link to that: http://downloads.valentin.de/pvsol/setup_pvsolpremium_2021_3.exe

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.

Wunsch: (Mühsam) erstellte Gebäude und Gebäudeteile als Objekt speichern und in anderen Projekten einfügen können.

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

Hey there, It follows the order Inveter.MPPT.String.Module Hope that answers your question. Cheers!!

The first point mentioned by Jon is an issue since back in 2013. And also the lack of the 3-D-Rotation is definitely not state of the art anymore. Especially for a program with a 4-digit-price. The software maybe was good in the 2000's, but today, 10 - 20 years later? Compare the value-for-money-ratio with AutoCAD or MatLab - PVSol's price is way too high for what is offered. The only good thing is the incredible database - but for somebody like me, travelling a lot and therefore often having problems connecting into the internet, the new policy with only online-database is now getting a pain in my furthest backward part. Overall I believe they are on a quite good way of loosing pace if they don't get into refurbishing their software and marketing policy. My only hope are people like you and me - explaining their needs and hopefully be understood as constructive critcizers.But to be honest... If the way they handled my requests on phone reflects their attitude, I have considerable doubts about helpful progressive changes.

Dear Remu, there are a whole lot of reasons why simulation results differ between PVGIS and PV*SOL. 1. The climate data used is different. Most of all the irradiation data, which has the strongest influence on the results. The standard in PV*SOL are climate data from Meteonorm, while PVGIS uses its own compiled climate data. See these forum threads here: 2. The simulation models (and even the simulation approaches) are completely different. We follow a time-step based approach (in one-hour or one-minute intervals) that is simulating very accurately the irradiation on module, their temperature, shadows and so on, the electrical generation inside the PV module (with the two-diodes model), the interconnection of various modules and the superposition of their IV characteristics, the inverter behaviour, grid behaviour and what not. PVGIS is following a factor based approach, as you can read in their documentation. In the example you posted here, they just apply a loss factor of 15% to the results and that's it. I'd say, PVGIS is more a tool for a first good guess of the energy yield of a PV system. They do a really good job in integrating meteorological data from various sources, and the web interface is superb. You can click very easily on every point in Europe and see how much a average PV system would generate. PV*SOL is more a tool for designing and simulating PV systems that you are really going to build in real life. You can select real world PV modules, inverters, choose and modify their configuration and so on. You can't really compare the tools, as the scope and the input data used are so different. If you want to dig deeper in our simulation models, have a look here: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2020/calculation/ Here is also a link to the documentation of PVGIS: https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/en/PVGIS/docs/methods Hope that helps, Martin

The topics of the webinar: - On-Grid system - with net metering and electric vehicle - MeteoSyn - Load profiles - Photo Plan, Roof view - Polymorphic configuration and power optimizers

Dear Bernard, unfortunately this is not directly possible, no. But you could do the following: copy the data of the horizon line table to the clipboard, paste it in Excel subtract 180 from the azimuth values copy both azimuth and height values to a text file use space as a value separator save the file as *.hor Of course this would only include the horizon line and no near objects. May I ask the use case for the hor-export function? Perhaps we should consider implementing it in the future. Thanks, Martin