PV Optimisation

Hi everyone!

I’m working on grasshopper this summer for an internship. The aim is to do PV simulation in order to optimize the PV installation on the selected surface with the best tilt and azimuth.

My aim was to illustrate the energy gain between three simulations:

  • The first one (concerning the first big cluster on the file), considered the roof is 100% covered by PV modules. They should have the same azimuth and tilt as the surface we can choose.
  • The second one, extracted from the second big cluster below, analyzed the energy provided by the PV modules, which are dimensioned with the “PV System Size” tool. The tilt and azimuth are the same as the surface selected.
  • Finally the third one, from the same cluster, is almost the same as the second besides it considers the optimal tilt and the optimal azimuth.

But I found something strange and I’m not sure of my results. Indeed we have for the second and the third simulation a generated surface by the “PV System Size” tool upper than the selected surface, and it is the same for the both simulation. I found it strange because normally the surface percentage used is indicated, especially for the second simulation where the tilt and the azimuth don’t change. So I’m a little bit confusing, and my energy results are not consistent.

My second interrogation is about the volume we wished analyzed. My aim is to select one surface of the building. Sliders were used to select the surface but it takes time to find the right surface. Indeed Grasshopper explodes volume randomly. I found a tip to select fastest the surface on the roof, but I’m sure there is an alternative way, easiest, to select the correct surface. My first idea was to see the surface number applied on the different surface centroids on the 3D model, and after just enter the number on a text box to select the surface.

The last question is about the minimal distance between row anchors. I think it’s relevant to consider this parameter to design PV module because the geometry of the surface selected constraints a lot the PV installation. Is there any way to consider this parameter and the geometry surface in order to calculate the “real” energy provided by the PV installation?

Sorry for the German translation in the .gh file attached, the firm work only in German.

Best regards

French student who needs some help

Ben180618_Photovoltaics shaded analysis.gh (582.8 KB)

Since this is Ladybug-specific, I would suggest asking the questions at the LB|HB forum:

Also consider internalizing geometry so that other people looking into this don’t have to create stuff just to be able to get the definition running. The same goes for hard-coding a file path to external files.