Search the Community
Showing results for tags 'shading'.
Hi, When simulating a particular project and reading the EB, I can see that the module independent shading, which I normally assume to be due to the horizon (far) shading is just below 6%. Looking to the module dependent shading, I can see that this is at around 16%. Two aspects are interesting when it comes to this: The total shading loss over the year, presented in the summary, is 23.2%. Removing the horizon from the 3D model reduces the module dependent shading almost entirely. Knowing how the help file defines independent and dependent shading, I am a little confused by these two contradicting aspects. Regarding (1), what is the logic inferred here? Shouldn't the loss presented in module dependent shading be a share of the incoming radiation converted at STC into a certain available energy quantity? How can the relative loss before and after STC conversion be added together, when the loss on module level would be much smaller if corrected for the conversion efficiency? Regarding (2), what is the relation between horizon (module independent) shading and near (module dependent) shading? It is reasonable to expect that removing the horizon would remove the module independent shading loss. However, as it seems, it actually also removes the module specific shading. How can this be? I would expect these two losses to be distinguishable and non-interactive. Appreciate any explanation, as I haven't been able to find an elaborate explanation elsewhere.
In the simulation results, can someone please explain the physical meaning of the module specific partial shading and is there a way to present a graph that would show the shading losses during one day (best 21st of December) ?
Hello, I'm trying to run a basic simulation with one module tilted 30% facing south (azimuth 180 degrees), with a wall partially obstructing the view to the south. I've setup the scene, and when I run it there are outputs: Area South: Irradiance onto tilted surface [kWh/m2] Shading [kWh/m2] I'm finding that the shading losses compared to the irradiance (which I assume is the plane-of-array quantity) are much lower than I would expect. For a full year, I'm seeing: Shading - 25 kWh/m2 Area South: Irradiance onto tilted surface 1921 kWh/m2. Which is a 1.3% annual loss. However, when I compare the PV energy (DC) to a case without the shading obstruction I get: PV energy (DC) - with shading: 229.83 kWh PV energy (DC) - without shading: 348.31 kWh Which is a 34% annual loss. I realize converting from irradiance to DC power has other losses, but for the same system, same configuration with only a shading difference, I would ascribe most of this difference to shading. I would like to compute how much of the irradiance on the PV module is lost due to shading. Can you please explain what the shading outputs indicate and if there is a way to get more detailed outputs? I'd like to understand why I'm seeing so little shading loss reported compared to the hit in PV energy. Thanks, Nick
Hello, I am trying to run a simulation for a system where I've set up a 3D shading scene. When I click to generate results, two simulations occur. The first is the calculation of shading losses. This appears to run for the full 365 days. The next simulation says "Simulating", but only runs until day 239 before stopping. Then, the "Hourly Values" csv file only has data until August 28. Is there a setting somewhere that would govern this behavior? Thanks