Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


developer_fw last won the day on June 9

developer_fw had the most liked content!

About developer_fw

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

developer_fw's Achievements


Newbie (1/14)

  • First Post Rare
  • Collaborator Rare
  • Dedicated Rare
  • Week One Done Rare
  • One Month Later Rare

Recent Badges



  1. Hi Hubert, I answered your email already and hope it reached you. Best regards, Frederik
  2. Hello Jordn, unfortunately without the missing parameters it will not be possible to simulate those products with PV*SOL. Did you try to get more elaborate information by contacting Victron directly? Best regards, Frederik
  3. Hello BartlomiejS, unfortunately this functionality is not existing. We know this is very important and could be a deal breaker, but as stated before the current 3D planning environment won't get this update. Our new 3D design tool currently in development has this functionality already built in. Best regards, Frederik
  4. Hello Vishnu, thank you for the project file. You must not forget the temperature set for the open circuit voltage check, which is not the STC condition of 25°C. Due to the voltage coefficient of the modules the maximum voltage is reached at -10°C: At the moment there is no function to set this temperature automatically based on the climate data. This is on our feature list. You can set this value in the configuration limits. But considering your location, it does not solve the problem of exceeding the voltage limit. I thought the plant might be planned for a warmer location where temperatures don't drop so much. Even under STC conditions (25°), the boundaries are narrowly chosen. A reasonable buffer to avoid overvoltage is very important! I hope this helps. Best regards! Frederik
  5. Hi Vishnu, sorry for the belated answer. Could you be so kind and send the project file via private message here in the forum? Thanks in advance and best regards, Frederik
  6. Hi patrik k, here is the corrected file. If some single string like here is affected: you can select just the string you do want to correct and change the starting point if necessary: After this, the configuration should be correct: Sometimes those manual steps are necessary. I hope this helps! Best regards, Frederik
  7. Hi patrik k, I also tried to change the way the modules are connected by changing starting point and way of connection and after some experimenting it seems that some instructions like the starting point are not always adopted. Sometimes you have to reset the the configuration and start again. Be aware that a selection of the INVerter or the MPPTracker from the list could make a difference in the configuration. I passed this project for further inspection, since sometimes the configuration works and sometimes not. We are identifying the problem. A workaround could be to change the starting point and double check the cable plan again. If you have further questions, feel free to ask! Best regards, Frederik
  8. Hi patrik k, I am sorry, I found out that I am also limited by the messenger storage. I just freed up some space by deleting old messages. Could you send the file again? Thank you in advance! Frederik
  9. Hi Marta, please refer to this thread: Best regards, Frederik
  10. Hi Andres, the energy flow graph is painted with the data from the simulation results. It is not possible to set a strict distribution and let the simulation do the rest, since there are many parameters which influence each other. But you could change your input parameters with every simulation to approximate the desired results. Best regards, Frederik
  11. Hi Faruk, at the moment, this possibility is not baked in into our software. But there are python libraries which you could use to automate your Windows GUI as the next abstraction. Best regards, Frederik
  12. Hi Tayfur, I assume you are trying to achieve a configuration with separate module areas. Like configuring two separate areas as in this example project: After placing the modules onto the module areas, change to the tab module configuration. After selecting all the modules you want to configure of this area, right click and choose Add to 'Define Module Areas' Dialog: Repeat this procedure for all the modules you want to configure. Then all the areas appear in the dialogue Define Module Areas (modules with the hand symbol): Select all the areas which you want to configure together and follow the usual procedure of choosing a suitable inverter. I hope this helps, best regards, Frederik
  13. developer_fw

    Weather data

    Hi Faruk, please refer to our online help: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2021/en/pages/system-type-climate-and-grid/meteosyn/#options and the following thread, which highlights the most common pitfalls: I hope this helps. Best regards, Frederik
  14. Hi unknown1990, I think your hardware is more than sufficient. A short glimpse into the history: PV*SOL 3D in its current state is very aged. Many programming design decisions were not made for future computer hardware from that point of view. Many things of this architecture are difficult or nearly impossible to change and we are at a point where the current 3D will be phased out. The only advice I can give at the moment is to simplify the projects as much as possible. I know that is not a satisfactory answer. That is the current state of affairs. We are working hard on a contemporary 3D that breaks with many current limitations. Then we will make better use of the resources available, especially processor and RAM use, followed by usage of graphic cards. A bridging measure with the next version in 2022 will be: 3D will be outsourced to a separate process in order to make better use of RAM. We hope this will give us some breathing space until the new 3D is ready. I hope you can understand this intermediate state of ours. Best regards, Frederik
  • Create New...