Expanding bifacial capabilities and bringing bifacial modeling into alignment with PVsyst #314
+289
−140
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
added 7 commits
October 15, 2019 11:18
It seems like the right way to do it is how SAM currently does it, but using the PVsyst approach means better agreement as well as more simplicity when you do the full analysis for the bifacial scenario
…d add rearside irradiance component outputs To bring model into alignment with PVsyst. Also added a commented out section for tweak the rearside irradiance if it's eventually needed
…radiances from perez to isotropic
…rradiances from MARION to ashrae
…n from MarionAOICorrection to ashrae with b0=0.04
|
Thanks for the contribution! We'll have to look closely at these changes and discuss which ones make sense to add in. |
|
As an update, we will probably be reviewing these changes after our next SAM release, unless there are any bug fixes in here that you think we should include @caseyzak24 . Thanks again for your contributions! |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
As I've discussed with collaborators in the past, for SAM/
sscto be useful to us at CCR it has to be able to generate results that are similar to the current dominant bankable energy model, which is, (for now) PVsyst.This PR is the result of my efforts to bring the 2 models into alignment. Using these changes, we are seeing good agreement between the 2 models in monthly DC production across a range of locations and designs (see figure below, error as a decimal is on the y-axis).
As noted in the commit messages, all of these changes may not be the right choice for
ssc(or even the right approach in general). I implemented PVsyst's approach to frontside ground diffuse contribution. Note this will result in differences between monofacial and bifacial sims that have nothing to do with backside phenomena. I changed the IAM model used for diffuse in the bifacial model to ASHRAE (again likely not as realistic but resulted in better agreement). I also changed the transpo model used from perez to isotropic.I submitted all these changes together because that was easiest and it is the version I have benchmarking results for; please feel free to pick and choose the parts that make the most sense for this project.