Dear eQuesters,
Recently I have been working on a project where the clients are planning to use the PV modules for electricity generation. I have a Helioscope simulation report provided by the PV contractor which shows the power generation as 105,300 kWh per year. However, when I use the same details mentioned in the report for my eQuest simulation, I am getting 26,576 kWh. Can anyone please explain the discrepancies on these reports or am I missing something?
The PV system used in this project has 4 inverters of capacity 20kW each. Four segments PV models with 33.6kW, 18.6kW 16.8kW and 16.1kW power generation capacity. Tracking volts of inverters : 244-529 Vac.
I really appreciate your time.
Thanks,
Pramod D. | Mechanical Engineer
d.pramod at setty.com
May I ask how are are u getting Solar kWh from eQuest to compare. I dont
think there is provision of solar in equest.
On Mon, Sep 3, 2018 at 10:33 AM Pramod .D via Equest-users <
The generated kWh is shown in PS-H report. We can simulate the PV in eQuest see below,
[cid:image001.png at 01D44378.036898B0]
Thanks,
Pramod
Ok then. I think it might have to do with the weather file you have
imported in euqest.
I have modeled PV in eQuest and had the same problem.? The simulation showed much less than the PV vendor estimated.? The actual generation history confirmed that the vendor's calculations were very close.
I have tried the TMY2 and TMY3 files for the area and it made no appreciable difference.? I requested all the information eQuest requested from the vendor and plugged that in, so it is not an input error. I even tried changing the orientation and angle of the PV panels, but could not approach the actual generation.
Maybe someone else can enlighten us??Paul Diglio
Paul,
I have used all the inputs which eQuest requires using the cutsheets of inverters and PV module. I am not sure about the tracking volts though.
The variation of tracking volts significantly changes the electricity generated by the PV system. But still I am far away from the vendors? calculations.
Thanks,
Pramod