developer_mh

Hi David, this is a serious bug, no question. Could you please provide a project file to us, so that we can look into it? You can send it to me as private message here in the forum or send it as an email to hotline@valentin-software.com, along with your customer number and a short reference to your forum post here. Thanks a lot, kind regards, Martin

Hi Nabil, the U0-charging (boost charge) will be done with grid power if PV power isn't sufficient. So in order to fully avoid charging from the grid you can set the upper limit of the I-charging mode (bulk charging) to 75%, or the end of U0-charging to 70%. Since you want to achieve an 80% charging limit, you can also set all those values to 80%. Setting the duration of the maintenance modes (equalisation and full charge) to 0 is also the right thing to do. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Jimmy, you can find the setup file for PV*SOL premium 2021 R4 here: http://downloads.valentin.de/pvsol/setup_pvsolpremium_2021_4.exe Kind regards, Martin

Hi Jimmy, if you use module mounting systems, you can select the edge that is used as a reference: The module coverage tool doesn't have this option. If you need the modules to be mounted horizontally, just set the mounting angle to 0°. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Paramesh, could you provide the log files please? You can find them here: C:\ProgramData\Valentin EnergieSoftware\log C:\ProgramData\Valentin EnergieSoftware\log Just send me a private message here in the forum, thanks. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Wouter, our 3D team checked your model and it seems to be fine. Apparently there is a bug in the automatic detection of the mounting surfaces. We will file a bug notice with your model attached to the responsible developer so that he can fix it perhaps. But since he is busy right now with other things, and since it is a feature in beta state, please understand that there won't be an immediate fix for that. In the meanwhile we recommend to use the draw tool in those cases in order to get clean mounting surfaces. Kind regards, Martin

Dear Wouter, thanks, I didn't realize that you already posted the model. I forwarded it to our 3D team and the hotline. Let's see what they say. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Andrii, this is interesting. Could you provide us a project file with the described map section and 3D model? You can send it here in the forum as private message. Thanks a lot, kind regards, Martin

Hi Bill, this is just an inaccuracy in the translation of the 3D environment. "Flush Mount" is the type you are looking for. Kind regards, Martin

Dear Wouter, dear Jimmy, we really appreciate how you discuss with each other and help you out! Could you try to reduce the model so that only the lower block remains and then convert it into an obj file? Which software are you using for modelling and converting dwg to obj? Kind regards, Martin

Dear Gorka, you can avoid a grid feed-in if you set the maximum feed-in power clipping to 0 % at the feed-in point in the dialog of the AC grid: Concerning your last question: Thanks for pointing that out, we will put that on our list. Kind regards, Martin

Hallo Finn, dazu gibt es leider noch kein Update. Auch im nächsten Release wird es nicht enthalten sein, tut mir leid. Wir mussten andere Dinge priorisieren. Viele Grüße, Martin

Hallo Marko, entschuldige die späte Antwort. In diesem Fall liegt es an der Regelung des Backup-Diesel-Generators, der auf Laststeuerung gesetzt ist: Diese Einstellung führt dazu, dass der Generator fast immer läuft, da die Last in diesem Projekt fast immer über 3 kW liegt. Der Generator sorgt dann dafür, dass die Last immer von ihm gedeckt wird und die Batterien immer voll sind. Sie sind damit so gut wie wirkungslos. Ohne diese Laststeuerung funktioniert die Auslegung wie gewünscht. Viele Grüße, Martin

Hallo Gero, entschuldige die späte Antwort. Geht es um die Planung mit PhotoPlan in PV*SOL? Oder könntest du vielleicht mit einem Beispielbild näher erläutern, wo es hakt? Besten Dank und viele Grüße, Martin

Hi aponsa, the decision which economic concept you must apply does not depend on the feed-in clipping. It does depend on your local tariff. In Germany for example with have surplus feed-in tariffs. In other countries like Brazil or Poland, net metering tariffs prevail. Kind regards, Martin

Dear David, regarding the shading calculation, please verify that the following option is checked: If you enter the 3D environment and return to the main application, the calculation of the shadings should occur. Then you should also see the yield reduction due to shading in the results. A specific annual yield of 913 kWh/kWp is nothing unusual for a PV system without shading (which is the case in your example where the shadows where not calculated). We don't know where you read that, but to clear up misunderstandings: The new 3D environment will not be released November of this year, I am afraid. It was never planned to be released this year, so I am sorry if we were communicating that unprecisely earlier. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Sondre207, first of all: The import of PVGIS horizons will be a built-in feature in the upcoming major release, PV*SOL premium 2022 R1, due this autumn/winter. In the meantime you can simply open the exported csv file in Excel or any other spreadsheet software, and add 180 to the azimut values in another column, like so: Then you can just copy the azimuth and the elevation column (B and C in this example here), and paste it into the horizon table in PV*SOL: Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

Hallo Pommesfän, das ist im Prinzip richtig, die Leistungsoptimierer bestimmen letztendlich die Spannung, die dann am Wechselrichter anliegt. Die Ausgabe der durch die Module entstenden Leerlauspannung ist hier auch nur ein warnender Hinweis, dass es sich lohnt, genauer hinzusehen. Im Fall von Huawei sollten alle Leistungsoptimierer-Verschaltungen in deren Tool verifiziert werden: https://eu.smartdesign.huawei.com:31943/login/login.action Viele Grüße, Martin

Hallo K. Kurth, die gewünschte Verschaltung mit 2x14 Modulen an einem MPP-Tracker bedingt, dass die 10 Module des Balkondachs mit 4 Modulen des Hauptdachs in Reihe geschaltet werden müssen. Wenn innerhalb eines Strangs Module unterschiedlicher Modulflächen verschaltet werden, ist das eine Polystring-Verschaltung. Die Lösung wäre also: Polystring-Option aktivieren Betriebsart auf MPP1, MPP2 Option "Stränge in Reihe schalten" Dann folgende Verschaltung herstellen: Ich hoffe, das hilft weiter. Viele Grüße, Martin

Guten Morgen Tamara, ohne weiteres ist es leider nicht möglich, ein einzelnes Modul aus einer Ost-West-Aufständerung herauszulöschen. Was man aber machen kann, ist, ein Modulpaar aus der Formation zu löschen (dazu trennt man zuerst die Modulreihe unter- und oberhalb des zu löschenden Moduls mit Hilfe der Schere auf). Dann erstellt man ein zweites Montagesystem, diesmal aber kein Ost-West-System, sondern ein einfaches, das den gleichen Neigungswinkel hat wie das vorherige, und als Ausrichtung dann 90° für Westen. Von diesem System zieht man sich ein Modul in die Szene und platziert es zwischen die aufgetrennten Modulreihen: Aufgrund der Sicherheitsabstände musste ich in meinem Beispiel eben auch die obere Hälfte der Modulreihe ausgliedern, um sie einen Tick nach oben zu schieben, da ich sonst das einzelne Modul nicht zwischen die Reihen bekommen hätte. Ich hoffe, das hilft weiter. Viele Grüße, Martin

Hi Aljaz, thank you for your question. It is indeed not possible to define separate cables for inverter groups that come from 3D. Even if you split the group in 3D into 16 separate inverters, PV*SOL will combine them into one group again when adopting the data from 3D. I guess this is what you already tried out. In the 2D mode however, you can enter separate equal inverter configurations. They will not be combined by the software. Then you could enter the cabling distances indivually: then in the cable section: So, in 3D mode automatic grouping occurs (for performance reasons). There you would enter the average cable length over your 16 inverters. If you want to plan the cable section for every inverter separately in order to see what it brings, switch to the 2D mode and separate your inverters. I'd recommend saving the 2D apporach into a second project file so that you don't override your 3D planning. Transformer losses can't be entered right now. You'd have to add the transformer losses to the total loss. Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

Hi Jordn, yes, I guess you are right, the naming (more precisely: the english translation) there is incorrect. While ROA (or ROI) is approximately equal to the IRR over one year, they mean something different over the course of several years. Thanks for pointing that out, we will fix it in one of the upcoming releases. Kind regards, Martin

Hallo J. Berends, dieses Thema steht schon seit längerem bei uns auf der Liste, ist aber offengestanden noch nicht eingeplant. Es rückt aber immer stärker in den Fokus. Vielen Dank jedenfalls für die Anfrage. Viele Grüße, Martin

Hi David, thank you for your questions and welcome to the forum! 1) The extreme shading values that you encouter there are due to an error in our 3D environment that - unfortunately - exists quite some time already. The reason is the attica around the roof, which causes our shading algorithm to think - in some circumstances - that the roof level is actually on the same height as the top level of the attica. So for the algorithm, parts of the modules are below the roof surface, and hence the extreme shading values. They are obviously incorrect, but the algorithm is so complex that we were not able to fix this issue without breaking something else. A workaround is to break up the attica at some point in the circumference of the roof. A small gap in the attica will prevent this from happening. 2) Find more about the limitation in this post here, point 3: So, you can try yourself what your computer is able to manage. Also, we plan to increase these limits in the future, but the exact date is yet unknown. But for us, performance of our software is crucial. Already in the next major release we will be publishing a major amelioration for the RAM usage, so this will already boost the planning of large systems significantly. 3) In order to be able to answer that we would need a project file with the imported simplified landscape, I guess. You can send it to me here in the forum as private message, or better directly to our technical support team at hotline@valentin-software.com Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

Hallo Lukas, das von dir beschriebene Problem ist mutmaßlich mit dem neuen Release, PV*SOL premium 2021 R8 behoben. Könntest du mal testen, ob das Speichern in der neuen Version funktioniert? Viele Grüße, Martin