developer_fw

Thank you, it arrived!

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

Hi Marta, please refer to this thread: Best regards, Frederik

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

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

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

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

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

Hallo Fabian, welche Version von Windows ist in Verwendung? Viele Grüße, Frederik

Hi patrik k, could you send the project file via private message here in the forum? Thank you in advance and best regards, Frederik

Hallo fedorov26, was genau soll erreicht werden? Viele Grüße, Frederik

Hallo Fabian, diese Meldung deutet schon darauf hin, dass eventuell keine vollständigen Zugriffsberechtigungen vorliegen oder Dateien nicht gefunden werden können. Eine der beschriebenen Meldungen deuten auf einen Virenscanner hin: Falls ein Virenscanner installiert ist: Kann PV*SOL auf eine Whitelist gesetzt werden? Die genannten Probleme deuten stark darauf hin, dass ein Virenscanner versucht, Dateien wegzuräumen, die PV*SOL benötigt. Ansonsten wäre es noch interessant zu wissen, ob im Windows Event Viewer Meldungen auftauchen. Dieser kann über das Startmenü gestartet werden: Welche Version von Windows wird verwendet? Beste Grüße, Frederik

Hallo Patrice Ahmadi, die Simulationsergebnisse lassen sich auf der Seite Präsentation als CSV-Datei exportieren. Dies ist auch in unserer Onlinehilfe beschrieben: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2021/de/navigationsseiten/praesentation/#simulationsergebnisse Viele Grüße, Frederik

Hallo Wolfgam, es handelt sich um einen Fehler, der durch die Erstellungsreihenfolge der Belegungsflächen entsteht, die auf die 3D-Objekte gezeichnet werden. Ich habe das reparierte Projekt angehängt, dies sollte wieder funktionieren. Der Fehler wird voraussichtlich mit dem nächsten Release behoben. Vielen Dank nochmal für die Rückmeldung. Viele Grüße, Frederik Lichwr-GgeS-14M-Kostal_KORRIGIERT.pvprj

Hello Faruk, Irradiance onto horizontal plane maps to GHI, Diffuse Irradiation onto horizontal plane maps to DHI. DNI is not exported with the default values, but you can get those values with a separate module area: The simulation period is always one year. Shorter periods can be extracted from the exported results. Best regards, Frederik

Hallo Wolfgam, vielen Dank für die Projektdatei. Ich bin dabei, dem Problem auf den Grund zu gehen. Viele Grüße, Frederik

Hi Frido, could you send a project file where this problem occurs? Thank you in advance and best regards, Frederik

Hi Taf, in our online help there is a description: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2021/en/pages/financial-analysis/bankability/ Also have a look into this thread: I hope this helps. Best regards, Frederik

Hi saad, this is correct. The layout of the tracking is not put into the project report. The tracking configuration per module area is part of the project report: Best regards, Frederik

Hello Fayez, thank you for your request. It is hard to tell what exactly went wrong, but most of the times the 3D models are broken in a way PV*SOL cannot handle. Check your models before the import and try to simplify your models as far as possible. The less vertices the faster the simulation. Best regards, Frederik

Hi Frido, normally, a window opens informing about running instances that have to be closed before an installation. It might be that a "dead" process is still running but the GUI crashed. This might explain why our usual warning does not show. A restart of your computer should end such processes, did you already try a reboot? If this is not working, delete the folder C:\Program Files (x86)\Valentin EnergieSoftware\PVSOL premium 2021\ manually before installing. Best regards, Frederik

Hi Matthew, the answer to your question is concurrency. Only if the higher amount of solar energy can be used just in time, you could raise your solar fraction. In your case you produce more solar energy which you cannot use, since your appliances simply are not able to consume this overproduction. This is why your grid-feed-in is getting so much higher and your own power consumption is getting so much lower respectively. To reach a high solar fraction (i.e. maximize your own power consumption) the only solution might be an energy shift which leads to batteries. The other way is to adapt your appliances as much into the period of solar energy production as possible. In some use cases, this is possible, in some other ones it is not. Reaching 100% is not impossible but in many cases uneconomical. Plus it depends on how adaptable your use case is. If you have further questions, feel free to ask. Best regards, Frederik P.S.: Have a look into some graphs showing the load of your appliances and the PV power production to get a better feeling for this problem.

Hi Yash Bhosale, I had another look into the coordinates and while they are correct using map providers like Openstreetmap, BingMaps or GoogleMaps, PV*SOL unfortunately needs a special format as described in https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2021/en/pages/system-type-climate-and-grid/meteosyn/#options I did not double check it since I assumed from your request that you did do this already. By using the converted coordinates 48.0636,-16.3600 everything works fine. Best regards, Frederik

Hi anees, PV*SOL does work on one screen but not on the second? This is hard to reproduce, since many of us use two screens as well and 3D does work on both screens. Did you try different setups, e.g. only one screen attached? I'm not sure if this is an issue caused by PV*SOL. Best regards, Frederik

Hallo DanielB, ich vermute es geht darum, das komplette Gebäude detailgetreu abzubilden. Das ist mit unserem derzeitigen 3D tatsächlich umständlich. Würde es für eine Simulation nicht ausreichen, nur die belegte Dachfläche zu extrudieren und mit Verschattungsobjekten zu belegen, um alle Abschattungssituationen abzubilden? Beste Grüße, Frederik