developer_mh

Hi Vishnu, the first result that you show is the energy yield according to EnEV (German Standard "Energieeinspeiseverordnung") and is calculated with the (simple) formulas given in the standard. https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/pages/results/energy-yield-for-enev/ The second result is the energy balance that is an output from our simulation core. https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/pages/results/energy-balance/ So, if you want to have a "Nachweis" for the German EnEV, take the first results. If you want to have a detailed and validated simulation of your PV plant, take the second Kind regards, Martin

Hi Vishnu, we calculate the impact of the shading down to substring level. You can read more on that topic here: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/calculation/pv-modules/shading-due-to-nearby-objects/ We consider the diffuse shading to be equally distributed over one module. But we calculate it separately for each module, so the mismatching effects that you mention are taken care of in our simulation. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Peter, if you want to connect several module areas together to one inverter, please have a look here: There is also a link to a post where this question is answered. Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

Hi UserPV, here is a description of how the data has to be formatted: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/pages/system-type-climate-and-grid/meteosyn/#options Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

Hi Vishnu, the battery charge from the grid occurs when the battery management (charging strategy) requires a full or equalization charge in situations where the PV can't provide sufficient energy. Here you find more info on that topic: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/calculation/battery-systems/charging-plans/ You can set the duration of these charging modes to 0 to disable them (in the 2nd example the equalization mode is disabled): https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/pages/battery-system/charging-strategy/ Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

Hi Tim, what you describe is a common use case for PV systems. You have a feed-in tariff that remunerates the energy that your system injects into the grid. You have a consumption tariff that you have to pay for every kWh that you draw from the grid. And then you have the "own consumption" when you can supply your electrical applications with the PV energy from your roof. Normally, the own consumption is free (and it should be, like you don't have to pay for the tomatoes that you grow in your garden), except for Germany, where you have to pay for that, too. But these are political discussions. But for these reasons, you can also enter a fee (and also a remuneration) for own consumption in the tariffs: In the results you then have all three assets: You will also find these results in the project report. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Remu, a deletion of the climate data sets from the list is not possible, I am afraid. But what you see is only meta data of the available locations, so all these data sets don't take space on your hard drive. Only if you see a file name in the last column there is a real climate data file on your system. Kind regards, Martin

Hi UserPV, in the case of the example project "Solar Park Neuhardenberg incl P90", we have module degradation as well as P50/P90 analysis. See these topics for more information: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/pages/financial-analysis/bankability-p50p90/ https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/pages/pv-modules/module-degradation/ These two factors effect the amount of energy that is fed into the grid in the first year. If you set the P50/P90 bankability to 50 and the module degradation to 100% (no degradation), then hese two numbers are equal: You can play around with the factors to see how they influence the results. Kind regards and good luck, Martin

Hallo Villamizar, der Lastabwurf ist nur bei Offgrid-Projekten (Anlagenart netzautark mit oder ohne Diesel-Generator) verfügbar. Kannst du genauer beschreiben, wie das Energie-Konzept mit Net-Metering und Batterie-Speicher "im Sinne des Lastabwurfs" aussehen soll? Vielleicht finden wir eine Lösung. Beste Grüße, Martin

Freut mich, dass du die Lösung dann noch gefunden hast. Beste Grüße, Martin

Hi UserPV, could you provide an example project file so that we can take a look at it? Thanks a lot, kind regards, Martin

Hi Andrei, that would be here in the program options: Also refer to these pages for more information: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/options/ Kind regards, Martin

Hi José, do you mean you want to start a tariff zone e.g. on March 15 and end it on September 15? I am afraid that this is not possible right now. You can enter different values for each month, but the changes from one tariff zone to another can only take place at the beginning of the month. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Remu, please correct me if I got your question wrong, but you don't have to calculate anything by hand if you want to place module mountings on flat roof tops. There is a dialog that helps you to get the inclination and orientation of the PV modules that you want: Then the program will determine the orientation to the mounting surface and enter the values accordingly: Hope that helps, kind regards, Martin

@Vishnu: Thanks a lot for answering here! We really appreciate it a lot when you help out each other!

Hi Alberto, Vishnu is right, the reason is the different relfection behaviour of the PV modules. There is a factor called IAM (incidence angle modifier) and is part of the data that is entered by the manufacturers: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/databases/components/pv-modules/#further https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/calculation/pv-modules/reflection-in-module-plane/ And then, as Vishnu also mentioned, the module orientation and inclination of the PV modules has to be identical in order to be able to compare the results. From what I see in the energy balance that you attached, there is a difference between the two systems (one with -3.61 kWh/m² and the other with +2.48 kWh/m²) Kind regards, Martin

Hi again, maybe I am getting something wrong, but I think you just have to enter the resulting subsidy values for feed-in and own consumption in the according fields of your tariff, linke so: Prices are in €/kWh, so you get 0,083 €/kWh of fed-in (delivered) energy and 0,058 €/kWh for own consumption. I will attach an example project file with that tariff that you see here so that you can try it out. Keep in mind that the percentage of own consumption will be a result of the simulation, you don't have to enter it manually. Kind regards, Martin PVSOL 2019 R10 project with SDE tariff model from Netherlands.pvprj

Dear forum users, together with Marta we were able to track down the error and we wanted to let you know the problem and the solution. In the PV system there was a wall mounted PV array with an inclination angle of more than 90°, that is, the modules are in fact more than vertical and already facing the ground. In these cases, our 3D shading simulation has a bug. It doesn’t calculate proper shading values, and as a consequence the yield simulation crashes. Unfortunately we can’t fix the bug in the 3D environment now. So as a workaround we would suggest to remove this PV mounting system from the wall and place a normal PV array there, so that the inclination angle is not exceeding the 90°. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Vishnu, in this case it would be best to contact our technical support team at hotline@valentin-software.com, they can help you out properly. It would be helpful if you could also attach the corresping project file. Kind regards, Martin

Hi stubzy, please have a look at these resources that will help you to understand the shading calculation in PV*SOL more in detail: https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/calculation/irradiation/horizontal-shading/ https://help.valentin-software.com/pvsol/2019/calculation/pv-modules/shading-due-to-nearby-objects/ And then some threads from the forum where we discuss the various shading results: Hope that helps. If you have any further question, please don't hesitate to ask. Kind regards, Martin

Hi stelpanel, from what I understand from that brochure here https://english.rvo.nl/sites/default/files/2019/04/Brochure SDE Spring 2019.pdf is that you receive a feed-in tariff for your produced energy that is dependent on the "correction amount", i.e. the current market price of energy. In total, if I understand it right, you will always get 9, 11 or 13 ct/kWh as a result, partially from the subsidy, partially from the market price. In this case, calculating SDE in PV*SOL is easy. Just create a new feed-in tariff with the according remuneration (9, 11 or 13 ct/kWh) and select it on the page "Financial Analysis". Please correct me if I understand the SDE+ system wrong. Kind regards, Martin

Dear stelpanel, I will translate your post using deepl.com: We will have a look into this, but please be aware that it might take a moment until we find the time to respond. Kind regards, Martin

Hi Marta, we are sorry that you are experiencing this error. We are looking into the issue. There is no need to open more than one thread here in the forum. And you don't need use the report function, this is intended to report inappropriate content to the moderators. Thank you for filing the bug report. As it is a larger project, it might take a while to debug. Thank you for your understanding, kind regards, Martin

Hi Kamal, these kind of bends occur when you have unequal number of modules in your strings. The curve section from 0V to the point where the bend occurs is where the two strings both deliver a current for the given voltage. After the bend, up to the open circuit voltage of the longer string, only the longer string (with 21 modules) can deliver current, the other string is not contributing anymore. Kind regards, Martin

Hallo ojsolar, die Gebäudedarstellungen werden automatisch generiert. Wenn man mit der Ansicht nicht zufrieden ist (bei großen Gebäuden ist das manchmal der Fall), kann man auch eigene Screenshots mit dem Screenshot-Manager der 3D-Umgebung machen und diese als Übersichtsbild festlegen: Dann wird das gewählte Bild auch im Projektbericht verwendet. Beste Grüße, Martin