|
| 1 | +""" |
| 2 | +Varying Model Components in ModelChain |
| 3 | +====================================== |
| 4 | +
|
| 5 | +This example demonstrates how changing modeling components |
| 6 | +within ``pvlib.modelchain.ModelChain`` affects simulation results. |
| 7 | +
|
| 8 | +Using the same PV system and weather data, we create two |
| 9 | +ModelChain instances that differ only in their temperature |
| 10 | +model. By comparing the resulting cell temperature and AC |
| 11 | +power output, we can see how changing a single modeling |
| 12 | +component affects overall system behavior. |
| 13 | +""" |
| 14 | + |
| 15 | +# %% |
| 16 | +# Varying ModelChain components |
| 17 | +# ------------------------------ |
| 18 | +# |
| 19 | +# Below, we create two ModelChain objects with identical system |
| 20 | +# definitions and weather inputs. The only difference between them |
| 21 | +# is the selected temperature model. This highlights how individual |
| 22 | +# modeling components in ``ModelChain`` can be swapped while keeping |
| 23 | +# the overall workflow unchanged. |
| 24 | + |
| 25 | +import pvlib |
| 26 | +import pandas as pd |
| 27 | +import matplotlib.pyplot as plt |
| 28 | + |
| 29 | +# %% |
| 30 | +# Define location |
| 31 | +# --------------- |
| 32 | +# |
| 33 | +# We select Tucson, Arizona, a location frequently used in pvlib |
| 34 | +# examples due to its strong solar resource and available TMY data. |
| 35 | +latitude = 32.2 |
| 36 | +longitude = -110.9 |
| 37 | +location = pvlib.location.Location(latitude, longitude) |
| 38 | + |
| 39 | +# %% |
| 40 | +# Create simple synthetic weather data |
| 41 | +# ------------------------------------- |
| 42 | +# |
| 43 | +# To keep this example lightweight and fully reproducible, |
| 44 | +# we generate a small synthetic weather dataset instead of |
| 45 | +# downloading data from an external source. |
| 46 | +# |
| 47 | +# The weather values are kept constant so that any differences |
| 48 | +# in results arise solely from the chosen temperature model. |
| 49 | + |
| 50 | +times = pd.date_range( |
| 51 | + "2019-06-01 00:00", |
| 52 | + "2019-06-07 23:00", |
| 53 | + freq="1h", |
| 54 | + tz="Etc/GMT+7", |
| 55 | +) |
| 56 | + |
| 57 | +weather_subset = pd.DataFrame({ |
| 58 | + "ghi": 800, |
| 59 | + "dni": 600, |
| 60 | + "dhi": 200, |
| 61 | + "temp_air": 25, |
| 62 | + "wind_speed": 1, |
| 63 | +}, index=times) |
| 64 | + |
| 65 | +# %% |
| 66 | +# Define a simple PV system |
| 67 | +# ------------------------- |
| 68 | +# |
| 69 | +# To keep the focus on the temperature model comparison, |
| 70 | +# we define a minimal PV system using the PVWatts DC and AC models. |
| 71 | +# These models require only a few high-level parameters. |
| 72 | +# |
| 73 | +# The module DC rating (pdc0) represents the array capacity at |
| 74 | +# reference conditions, and gamma_pdc describes the power |
| 75 | +# temperature coefficient. |
| 76 | +# |
| 77 | +# For the temperature model parameters, we use the sapm values |
| 78 | +# for an open-rack, glass-glass module configuration. These |
| 79 | +# parameters describe how heat is transferred from the module |
| 80 | +# to the surrounding environment. |
| 81 | +module_parameters = dict(pdc0=5000, gamma_pdc=-0.003) |
| 82 | +inverter_parameters = dict(pdc0=4000) |
| 83 | + |
| 84 | +temperature_model_parameters = ( |
| 85 | + pvlib.temperature.TEMPERATURE_MODEL_PARAMETERS["sapm"] |
| 86 | + ["open_rack_glass_glass"] |
| 87 | +) |
| 88 | + |
| 89 | +system = pvlib.pvsystem.PVSystem( |
| 90 | + surface_tilt=30, |
| 91 | + surface_azimuth=180, |
| 92 | + module_parameters=module_parameters, |
| 93 | + inverter_parameters=inverter_parameters, |
| 94 | + temperature_model_parameters=temperature_model_parameters, |
| 95 | +) |
| 96 | + |
| 97 | +# %% |
| 98 | +# ModelChain using the sapm temperature model |
| 99 | +# -------------------------------------------- |
| 100 | +# |
| 101 | +# First, we construct a ModelChain that uses the sapm |
| 102 | +# temperature model. All other modeling components remain |
| 103 | +# identical between simulations. |
| 104 | +# |
| 105 | +# This ensures that any differences in the results arise |
| 106 | +# solely from the temperature model choice. |
| 107 | +mc_sapm = pvlib.modelchain.ModelChain( |
| 108 | + system, |
| 109 | + location, |
| 110 | + dc_model="pvwatts", |
| 111 | + ac_model="pvwatts", |
| 112 | + temperature_model="sapm", |
| 113 | +) |
| 114 | + |
| 115 | +mc_sapm.run_model(weather_subset) |
| 116 | + |
| 117 | +# %% |
| 118 | +# ModelChain using the Faiman temperature model |
| 119 | +# ---------------------------------------------- |
| 120 | +# |
| 121 | +# Next, we repeat the same simulation but replace the |
| 122 | +# temperature model with the Faiman model. |
| 123 | +# |
| 124 | +# No other system or weather parameters are changed. |
| 125 | +# This illustrates how individual components within |
| 126 | +# ModelChain can be varied independently. |
| 127 | +mc_faiman = pvlib.modelchain.ModelChain( |
| 128 | + system, |
| 129 | + location, |
| 130 | + dc_model="pvwatts", |
| 131 | + ac_model="pvwatts", |
| 132 | + temperature_model="faiman", |
| 133 | +) |
| 134 | + |
| 135 | +mc_faiman.run_model(weather_subset) |
| 136 | + |
| 137 | +# %% |
| 138 | +# Compare modeled cell temperature |
| 139 | +# --------------------------------- |
| 140 | +# |
| 141 | +# Since module temperature directly affects DC power |
| 142 | +# through the temperature coefficient, differences |
| 143 | +# between temperature models can propagate into |
| 144 | +# performance results. |
| 145 | +fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(10, 4)) |
| 146 | +mc_sapm.results.cell_temperature.plot(ax=ax, label="SAPM") |
| 147 | +mc_faiman.results.cell_temperature.plot(ax=ax, label="Faiman") |
| 148 | + |
| 149 | +ax.set_ylabel("Cell Temperature (°C)") |
| 150 | +ax.set_title("Comparison of Temperature Models") |
| 151 | +ax.legend() |
| 152 | +plt.tight_layout() |
| 153 | + |
| 154 | +# %% |
| 155 | +# Compare AC power output |
| 156 | +# ------------------------ |
| 157 | +# |
| 158 | +# Finally, we compare the resulting AC power. Even small |
| 159 | +# differences in temperature modeling can lead to noticeable |
| 160 | +# differences in predicted energy production. |
| 161 | +fig, ax = plt.subplots(figsize=(10, 4)) |
| 162 | +mc_sapm.results.ac.plot(ax=ax, label="SAPM") |
| 163 | +mc_faiman.results.ac.plot(ax=ax, label="Faiman") |
| 164 | + |
| 165 | +ax.set_ylabel("AC Power (W)") |
| 166 | +ax.set_title("AC Output with Different Temperature Models") |
| 167 | +ax.legend() |
| 168 | +plt.tight_layout() |
0 commit comments