Download as PDF, PPTX
54 paul gibbs_helioscope
This document discusses design optimization in HelioScope, a cloud-based solar design and modeling tool. It begins with an overview of HelioScope and its capabilities for layout, energy yield calculation, and financial analysis. Various design optimization techniques in HelioScope are then described, including shading analysis, row spacing optimization, azimuth optimization, and wiring optimization. Research results are also presented on topics like shade tolerance, effects of tilt angle, and east-west racking. The document concludes with an update on new and upcoming functionality in HelioScope.
More Related Content
Similar to 54 paul gibbs_helioscope
More from Sandia National Laboratories: Energy & Climate: Renewables
54 paul gibbs_helioscope
- 1. Design Optimization inHelioScope October, 2015 1
- 2. Agenda • Design Optimization:Integrating modeling and design • HelioScope Design Decisions in Practice • HelioScope Development Roadmap 2
- 3. About Folsom Labs& HelioScope 3 • Cloud-based application integrating system design and performance modeling • Similar math to PVsyst (PAN file support, irradiance calculations, etc.) • Used for preliminary layouts, value- engineering, and energy yield calculations • Used on projects of all sizes (residential, commercial, utility) and all geographies
- 4. Design Optimization: Integrating performancemodeling and system design 4
- 5. Why Design Optimization? 5 AutomaticBill of Materials Bankable Energy Yield CAD Layout Design Render Image Automatic Engineering Calculations
- 6. Technical hurdles tooptimization tools • Performance: – Single Diode Model – Advanced layout engine • Modeling – Incorporate Project Financials • Product – Stepwise vs. Black Box Modeling 6
- 7. Obstruction Shade Optimization 7 Heatmapof annual shading losses for each module Winter solstice 10am-2pm shading removed Shade losses calculated based on hourly weather file and shade patterns
- 8. Financial Results (RowSpacing) 8 Range of Row Spacing Financial metrics, including LCOE, NPV, ROI, IRR
- 9. Full Financial Outputwith Sensitivities 9 Best configuration with energy output Sensitivity values Sensitivity values
- 10. Row Spacing Optimization 10 Objectivesof margin vs dollars will lead to different results
- 11. Azimuth Optimization 11 Revenue curve diverges from energy curve becauseof utility tariff structure and TOD production
- 12. Inverter Load Ratio(DC-to-AC) Optimization 12 User-defined objective (including LCOE, as well as NPV, IRR, ROI) Maximum inverter size (AC)
- 13. Dynamic Voltage DropCalculations 13 Voltage Drop by Wire Type Voltage Window Analysis
- 14.
- 15. Shade Tolerance 15 10am to2pm 15% Shade Threshold 10% Shade Threshold 5% Shade Threshold Power (kW)! 96.3! 98.3! 108.8! 122.4! Shade %! 2.7%! 2.7%! 3.2%! 4.4%! kWh/kWp! 1,684! 1,674! 1,668! 1,647! Energy (MWh)! 162! 165! 181! 201!
- 16. Low Tilt ImprovesPacking Density 16 25º Tilt 10º Tilt System Size (kW)! 342! 450! +30%! Productivity (kWh/kWp)! 1,536! 1,479! -5%! Energy (MWh)! 525! 665! +23%! Note: Analysis for 4,000 m2 rooftop located in Charlotte, North Carolina. Assumes 10am-2pm row spacing for 25° and 10° tilt designs. Assumes standard 72-cell modules with string inverters.
- 17. East-west Racking GoesOne Step Further • Lower tilt (generally no tilt toward equator) • Greater rooftop fill, lower ballasting requirements 17
- 18. Drive toward LowTilt (and Greater Density) Leads to East-West 18 25º Tilt 10º Tilt Dual Tilt Coming soon in Note: Analysis for 43,000 ft2 rooftop located in Charlotte, North Carolina. Assumes 10am-2pm row spacing for 25° and 10° tilt designs, and assumes 10° tilt for east-west design. Assumes standard 72-cell modules with string inverters. System Size (kW)! 342! 450! 540! Productivity! (kWh/kWp)! 1,536! 1,479! 1,363! Energy (MWh)! 525! 665! 736!
- 19. Azimuth Optimization 19 180º Azimuth!198º Azimuth! Diff! System Size! 115 kW! 123 kW! +6.5%! Productivity! 1,251 kWh/kWp! 1,236 kWh/kWp! -1.2%! Energy! 144 MWh! 152 MWh! +5.2%! Note: Analysis for 21,000 ft2 rooftop located in Rochester, NY. Assumes 15° module tilt and 3’ row spacing. Assumes standard 72-cell modules with string inverters.
- 20. Wiring Optimization 20 Modules perstring Combiner box size Source circuit conductor Combiner box layout Wiring direction Home run 1.7 2.4 0.4 1.0 0.5 0.8 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 Modules per string Source circuit conductor Wire direction Combiner size Home run conductor Combiner layout Impactonsystemcost(¢/Wp)
- 21. Additional Resources 21 http://www.folsomlabs.com/resources Voltage DropArticle Shading Optimization Article Module Binning Cost/ Benefit String Inverter Energy Yield Analysis Wiring Optimization Case Study
- 22.
- 23. HelioScope Functionality Update PerformanceModeling: • Meteonorm/SWERA integration • Sub-module (cell-string) calculations • AC system modeling (including conductors and transformers) • Optimization tools 23 Design Integration: • CAD Export/KMZ Import • Imagery Integrations
- 24. HelioScope Functionality Upcoming Performancemodeling: • Real-time design feedback • Sub-hourly calculations • Longitudinal Modeling • Storage calculations Engineering Process: • Team Management • System Profiles/Reference Designs • Version Control 24 Design Integration: • Permit generation (SunShot 2016) • Financial calculations • Proposals
- 25. Questions and Comments? ContactUs: Paul Gibbs paul.gibbs@folsomlabs.com Folsom Labs San Francisco, CA 25
- 26. Hundreds of Customers,Large and Small, use HelioScope 26