Thought some of you might be interested in this

[Abed W Ayyad]

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2023/04/25/scientists-compare-pvsyst-comsol-software-in-assessments-of-bifacial-pv/#:~:text=PVsyst%20software%20simulates%20a%20bifacial,boundary%20conditions%2C%20and%20solver%20setup.

[Anton Driesse]

The blurb under the title of this PV Magazine article is misleading:

• They found that PVsyst outperformed Comsol in calculating solar production in nearly all cases.

What does "outperformed" mean?  PVsyst is more accurate?  No, it seems to be a misinterpretation of this line:

• With the same simulation method between softwares, PVSyst gives us a higher value for solar production in almost all cases.

In fact, the SEJ article (fortunately open access) does not compare to any measurements and therefore can only report on differences, but not on which simulation is more accurate.  Anyway, as the readers of this group all know, simulation accuracy is not just a question of the software but also of the inputs to the software. 

But what will stick in the minds of PV Magazine readers?

Anton

On 2023-04-27 5:56, 'Abed W Ayyad' via pvlib-python wrote:

https://www.pv-magazine.com/2023/04/25/scientists-compare-pvsyst-comsol-software-in-assessments-of-bifacial-pv/#:~:text=PVsyst%20software%20simulates%20a%20bifacial,boundary%20conditions%2C%20and%20solver%20setup.

--

-- 
PV Performance Labs
Emmy-Noether-Str. 2
79110 Freiburg
Germany

+49-761-8973-5603 (Office)
+49-174-532-7677 (Mobile)

www.pvperformancelabs.com

[Jonathan Leloux]

Amazing!

Thanks Anton for the clarification.