How to Set Shading Objects in PVSyst | 6 Steps to Reduce Shading Losses

Table of Contents

• Purpose of setting obstructions in PVSyst

• On-site conditions to clarify before configuring obstructions

• Step 1: Identify obstructions that cause shadows

• Step 2: Organize the positions and heights of obstructions in site coordinates

• Step 3: Place obstructions on the 3D scene

• Step 4: Verify the sun path and shadow patterns

• Step 5: Review the layout plan while monitoring shading losses

• Step 6: Organize the conditions to include in the report

• Common mistakes and countermeasures when configuring obstructions

• Improving obstruction configuration accuracy using site survey data

• Summary: Obstruction configuration determines the reliability of power generation assessment

Purpose of configuring shading objects in PVSyst

When evaluating the energy yield of a photovoltaic installation, it is important to correctly account for the effects of shading from the surrounding environment, not just panel capacity and tilt angle. In PVSyst you can define obstructions such as buildings, trees, utility poles, fences, slopes, and adjacent equipment, and check at which times and to what extent shadows occur relative to the sun’s movement. By configuring obstructions, you can understand in the simulation how much they will affect annual energy production, rather than simply judging subjectively that "there might be shadows."

The impact of obstructions on shading can vary greatly depending on the scale of the power plant and its installation environment. When installed on the roofs of houses or factories, adjacent buildings, chimneys, rooftop equipment, and railings can be sources of shade. For ground-mounted power plants, surrounding trees, differences in ground elevation on developed land, adjacent rows of mounting racks, and nearby structures may have an effect. In particular, at the low solar altitude in the morning and evening, even relatively low obstacles located far away can cast long shadows, so a brief on-site inspection may overlook them.

The reason setting up shading objects in PVSyst feels difficult is that it doesn’t end with simply drawing the shape. You need to consider the object’s position, height, azimuth, distance to the panels, the site’s topography, and the seasonal solar altitude together. If inputs are too rough, shading losses will be underestimated; conversely, if inputs are overly conservative, the estimated energy yield may be lower than reality. In practice, rather than creating a perfectly polished 3D model, it is important to correctly extract the obstacles that affect energy yield and reflect them with the necessary level of accuracy.

The purpose of defining shading objects is not merely to visualize shadows. In the design stage, the aim is to enable concrete decisions such as revising panel layouts, adjusting racking spacing, reducing or expanding the installation area, considering tree removal or relocation of structures, and excluding areas with heavy shading. In other words, setting up shading objects in PVSyst is both an input task to generate power production figures and an important evaluation step for confirming the validity of a design proposal.

Site conditions to address before installing obstructions

Before entering obstructions into PVSyst, you should first organize the site conditions. If you start creating obstructions directly on the screen, it becomes unclear which objects should be placed where, leading to more corrections later. In practice, the design engineer, field surveyor, and power output evaluator are often different people, so it is important to compile the information so that anyone can interpret it the same way.

The first thing to check is the orientation of the site. In solar power generation, obstacles on the south side tend to draw attention, but the east side, which affects morning generation, and the west side, which affects evening generation, cannot be ignored. In winter the sun’s elevation is lower, so shadows from buildings and trees on the south tend to be longer. In summer the sun’s elevation is higher, and the same obstructions tend to cast shorter shadows. Because shadow patterns change with season and time of day, when evaluating based only on on-site photos, record the date and time the photos were taken to make later verification easier.

Next, organize the heights and distances of shading objects. The impact of shadows increases the taller the shading object and the closer it is to the panels. For buildings, eave heights and the heights of rooftop equipment are relevant; for trees, the top of the crown and the spread of branches; for fences, the heights of posts and the upper parts. For objects like trees whose shapes are not constant, it is realistic to simplify and input the outline that is likely to affect power generation rather than reproduce every fine twig and leaf.

Elevation differences in the terrain are also important. On flat sites it is straightforward to treat the height of obstructions, but on slopes or developed land the elevation at the base of an obstruction can differ from the elevation of the panel mounting surface. For example, a building located lower than the panels may have less impact even if it is the same height. Conversely, slopes, retaining walls, or trees situated higher than the panels can cast shadows larger than expected. It is important to check not only the height of obstructions but also the elevation at which they stand.

It is also necessary to establish criteria for deciding which obstructions to include. Trying to input every object on site in detail not only increases the time required, but also makes it harder to manage simulation conditions. In practice, priority is given to items that could cast shadows on the panel surfaces, those likely to affect annual energy production, and those that should be recorded in reports for accountability. Low structures that are distant, or objects that have little effect relative to the sun’s path, may be omitted where appropriate.

Step 1: Identify obstructions that cause shadows

The first step in defining obstructions in PVSyst is to identify all potential sources of shading. It is important not to focus only on the prominent features at the site, but to broadly check for anything that could cast a shadow on the solar panels. Large buildings and trees are easy for anyone to notice, but small rooftop equipment, lightning protection devices, handrails, piping, signs, and fences on slopes are examples of obstructions that are often overlooked.

For rooftop installations, carefully check the protrusions around the roof surface. HVAC equipment, exhaust outlets, rooftop penthouses, parapets, and the walls of adjacent buildings can cast shadows on parts of the panel rows depending on the time of day. Especially when panels are laid out to cover the entire roof, shading from equipment near the edges can have a greater impact than expected. On the roof, in addition to taking site photos, sketching a simple plan that shows the planned installation area and the relative positions of obstructions will make it easier to enter the data into PVSyst later.

For ground-mounted installations, check the site including its outer perimeter. Even if there are no obstacles within the property, neighboring buildings and trees, utility poles along roads, surrounding woodlands, and level differences on developed land can have an impact. Shadows in particular are much longer on winter mornings and evenings, so even obstructions located away from the panels require attention. During the on-site inspection, check the visibility to the east, south, and west as seen from the planned panel installation location, and be aware of which areas will be shaded by the sun’s movement.

The identified shading objects are easier to manage when organized by type. Objects with clear shapes, like buildings; objects with irregular shapes, like trees; continuous features, like fences and walls; and features that act as surfaces, like terrain, are represented differently in PVSyst. Buildings are easily represented by simplified shapes such as rectangular prisms or polygons, fences and walls can be treated as narrow surfaces, trees are often replaced with simplified forms such as cylinders or simplified canopy shapes, and terrain is represented, when necessary, as elevated surfaces or boundaries.

At this stage, you don't need to be overly concerned with creating perfect shapes. First, the goal is to comprehensively list obstructions that are likely to affect power generation. Whether an obstruction has a large impact can be judged later by checking sun paths and the results of shading loss analysis. If you omit too much from the start, it will be difficult to identify the cause later when shading losses appear unnaturally small. Conversely, entering everything in excessive detail makes the model complicated and increases the chance of input errors and the difficulty of explanation. In the identification stage, it's practical to cast a wide net and then simplify based on importance during the input stage.

Step 2: Organize the positions and heights of obstructions in the local coordinate system

Once you have identified the obstructions, next organize their positions and heights. In PVSyst's 3D scene, the relative positions of panels and obstructions have a major impact on shading calculations. Even if they look plausible, if distances or azimuths are off, the timing and extent of shading will differ from reality. Therefore, before entering obstructions, it is important to make the reference point, azimuth, dimensions, and heights as clear as possible.

First, establish reference points on the site. For example, the corners of the installation area, corners of the building, surveyed reference points, or reference lines on the roof plan. If you position obstructions by feel without establishing reference points, consistency is likely to be lost when you later change the panel layout. If you organize the distance from the reference points to the obstructions, the width and depth of the obstructions, and the clearance from the panel installation area, it will be easier to verify input values in PVSyst.

Regarding height, it is necessary to distinguish whether it is the height from the ground or the installation surface, or whether it refers to elevation. Even if a building's height is 10 m (32.8 ft), if the base of that building is 2 m (6.6 ft) higher than the panel installation surface, the effective height as seen from the panel will be greater. Conversely, if the base is lower, the impact may be smaller. For rooftop equipment, roof surface height and the overall building height can be confused, so record which surface was used as the reference when measuring the height.

Orientation is also important. When placing panels and shading objects in PVSyst’s 3D scene, if the north/south orientation is offset from reality, the timing of shadows will be shifted. When using site drawings, confirm whether the top of the drawing indicates true north or an arbitrary direction aligned with the building axis. Even when referencing aerial photographs or design drawings, if you do not correctly align the orientation before inputting, the evaluation of shadows in the east–west direction is likely to contain errors.

When dealing with trees and plantings, it's important to account for variability in measurements. Trees grow, and the density of foliage also changes with the seasons. Even if there seems to be little problem at the time of a site survey, tree height may increase over a few years and shade can become more extensive. In evaluating power generation projects, it's common to consider not only current conditions but also future management policies. Whether removal or pruning is assumed, whether the status quo is maintained, or whether growth is anticipated will change the height entered as an obstruction.

When organizing positions and heights, it is useful to create a simple input checklist. Although tables are not used in the main text, in practical work it helps to compile the obstruction name, type, distance from the reference point, width, depth, height, elevation difference, and notes to prevent missing settings or mixing up conditions. The more thorough the information整理 before working in PVSyst, the smoother the verification and report explanations will be after creating the 3D scene.

Step 3: Place occluders in the 3D scene

Once you have organized the site conditions, place the shading objects in the PVSyst 3D scene. Here, reproduce the spatial relationship between the panel layout and the shading objects so the model can be used for shadow analysis. The practical point is not to make a visually detailed model, but to correctly represent the shapes and positions that affect shadow calculations. Rather than perfectly reproducing fine indentations on building exterior walls or the branches and leaves of trees, it is more advantageous for both work efficiency and explainability to appropriately simplify the exterior shapes that block sunlight.

When placing buildings, it is standard to represent them as rectangular or polygonal blocks. Enter the building's width, depth, and height, and position it correctly relative to the panel installation area. If rooftop protrusions or roof penthouses affect shadows, add them as separate obstructions from the main building. If you evaluate using only the overall building height, shadows from rooftop equipment can actually be overlooked. Conversely, if you input even small protrusions that have little effect on power generation, the model can become overly complex, so assess whether they are necessary while observing the area the shadow reaches.

Linear obstructions such as fences, walls, and retaining walls are arranged as elongated surfaces or box-shaped objects. Even if their height is low, when they are close to the panels they can cast shadows in the morning and evening. In particular, for ground-mounted installations where perimeter fences are close to the panel rows, the low solar altitude in winter can cast shadows on the edge panels. Whether it is necessary to reproduce fence posts and upper structures in detail should be determined by the degree of shadow impact and the required assessment accuracy.

Trees are input in a simplified form as trunks and canopies. When the canopy is treated as a single large mass, light transmission through the actual gaps between leaves may not be represented. For that reason, the evaluation of tree shadows should be regarded as having greater uncertainty than building shadows. When taking a conservative approach, the canopy outline may be set somewhat larger, but if it is overestimated too much, the estimated power generation may appear unnecessarily low. It is important to enter data based on local management policies, planned pruning, and the status of coordination with surrounding owners.

Don't forget the shadows between panel rows. When you think of obstructions you tend to imagine nearby buildings and trees, but for ground-mounted systems self-shading—where front-row racking casts shadows on rear rows—is also important. The occurrence of inter-row shading changes with racking spacing, tilt angle, orientation, and terrain slope. When creating the panel layout in PVSyst, configure it so that not only external obstructions but also the shading between arrays is correctly reflected.

After creating the 3D scene, change viewpoints to review it. By checking the plan-view positional relationships from above, the height relationships from the side, and the shading relationships from the sun direction, it becomes easier to spot input errors. In particular, mistakes such as shading objects being placed on the opposite side of the panels, the orientation being reversed, using the wrong units for height, or the reference plane being offset are difficult to notice by looking at numbers alone. Verifying that there is no visual inconsistency in the 3D display is fundamental to improving the quality of shading object settings.

Step 4: Check the sun path and how shadows fall

After placing shading objects, check how shadows will fall relative to the sun path. In PVSyst you can examine how shadows fall on the panel surface based on the sun’s position by season and time of day. What you should look at here is not simply whether a shadow is shown, but during which seasons and times of day, and over what extent the shadows occur.

In solar power generation, shadows that occur during periods of high solar irradiance have a greater impact on power output. Shadows in the early morning and late afternoon are long because the sun’s altitude is low, but solar irradiance at those times can be lower than around noon. Conversely, when shadows fall on the panel surface from morning through early afternoon, they are more likely to have a large effect on power generation. Therefore, check not only the area of the shadow but also the time when the shadow occurs and the solar irradiance conditions.

Shadows in winter require particular attention. In winter the solar altitude is low, and shadows from obstructions on the south side become longer. Although summer generation tends to appear larger when looking at annual generation, installations with significant winter shading will see an impact on the seasonal balance of generation. When reviewing reports, check not only annual figures but also monthly shading losses and changes in generation to determine which seasons have concentrated problems.

When checking the sun path, it is important not to look only at extreme days but to observe trends throughout the year. Checking around the winter solstice, the spring and autumn equinoxes, and the summer solstice makes it easier to understand changes in shadows due to differences in solar altitude. Even if site photos confirm that "there was no shadow at this time," shadows can appear when the seasons change. It is especially risky to judge based solely on impressions from on-site checks when the season at the time of design differs from the season after the start of operation.

When checking how shadows fall, pay attention to cases where only part of a panel is shaded. Solar panels can have their power generation affected even if only a portion is shaded. Whether the shadow crosses the lower edge of a panel row, runs as a narrow vertical strip, or is concentrated on specific rows changes how the actual electrical impact is assessed. In PVSyst this is quantified as shading loss, but to enable design improvements it is also important to visually confirm where the shadows occur.

If, at this stage, the results look unnatural, recheck the positions, heights, orientations of obstructions, and the panel layout. For example, if there is a tall building to the south on site but shading losses are almost zero, possible causes include an incorrect orientation, the building height being entered too low, or the obstruction being positioned too far away. Conversely, if shading losses are larger than the impression on site, possible causes include entering obstructions too large, double-counting elevation differences, or allowing unnecessary obstructions to affect the results.

Step 5: Review the layout plan while monitoring shading losses

The value of obstruction settings lies not in simply checking the numerical shading-loss figures, but in applying those results to improve the design. After checking shading losses in PVSyst, determine which obstructions affect performance and to what extent, and review the panel layout and racking conditions. Consider whether to leave areas with large shading losses as they are, change the layout to avoid them, or mitigate them through management measures.

First, what you should check is whether shading losses are occurring broadly across the entire site or concentrated in specific areas. If the impact is widespread, it may be caused by surrounding terrain, large buildings, or the spacing between rows. If it is concentrated in only some areas, specific trees, rooftop equipment, perimeter fences, or adjacent structures might be the cause. If only a subset of panels is heavily affected, simply reviewing and adjusting the layout in that area can sometimes lead to improvements in overall power generation.

When revising the layout plan, one approach is to move panels away from areas with heavy shading. For example, slightly relocate panels that are on the north side of a building or near trees, increase setbacks from the perimeter, or exclude installation zones around rooftop equipment. The number of panels may decrease, but compared with forcing the installation of heavily shaded panels, this can be advantageous in terms of power generation efficiency and maintainability. Rather than simply maximizing capacity, it is important to make decisions based on the effective energy generation including shading losses.

Reviewing racking conditions can also be effective. Changing the tilt angle, adjusting rack spacing, or reviewing the row orientation can alter inter-row shading and the effects of external obstructions. However, because changing the tilt angle also changes how much solar radiation is received annually, you need to compare not only shading losses but overall energy production. Even if shading is reduced, if the azimuth or tilt conditions become worse, the total generation may not improve as much as expected.

We may also consider measures that address the obstruction itself. For trees, this could mean pruning or felling; for structures, relocation or changing their height; and for fences, adjusting their installation position. However, these options are related to landowners, surrounding stakeholders, safety, laws and regulations, and maintenance conditions. Even if PVSyst shows large shading losses, that does not mean removal can be carried out immediately. Simulation results are used as material to explain impacts to stakeholders and to determine the priority of countermeasures.

When comparing multiple proposals, it is important to vary only the shading losses while keeping the same baseline assumptions. If you compare scenarios that differ in weather data, panel capacity, orientation, tilt, or equipment conditions, the effect of shading mitigation measures becomes difficult to discern. Create cases for before and after shading mitigation and clearly state what was changed for comparison. This makes it easier to explain how much energy production improved due to layout changes and how profitability and the rationality of the design would change if the number of panels were reduced.

Step 6: Organize the conditions that should be recorded in the report

When you configure shading objects, it is important to record those conditions in reports and internal documents. If you only look at PVSyst results, it is easy to focus on figures such as annual energy production and shading losses, but if you do not know what shading conditions those figures are based on, you cannot verify them later. In practice, you may be asked to provide the justification for the input conditions during design changes, changes in site conditions, questions from stakeholders, or in review and presentation situations.

The information that should be included in the report is, first, the types of obstructions and an overview. Ensure you can explain which buildings, which trees, which fences, and which terrain features were entered. You do not need to record every small dimension in the main text, but it is reassuring to document the heights of major obstructions, their relative positions, and the rationale behind how they were entered. For obstructions that significantly affect power generation in particular, explaining them in association with on-site photos and the positions on drawings will make it easier to gain stakeholders' understanding.

Next, document the rationale for simplifications. In practical 3D scenes, the site's geometry is rarely reproduced exactly. Record how elements were modeled — for example, representing buildings as simple boxes, approximating trees by their canopy outlines, or treating distant terrain as obstructions of a uniform height. If this is not recorded, later viewers of the model will not be able to judge “why the shape is like this.” Simplification is not inherently bad, but it should be done within the accuracy required for power generation assessment, and it is important to be able to explain those assumptions.

Shadow loss results should be checked not only as annual values but, when necessary, for seasonal and monthly trends. Even if the annual shadow loss is small, it may be concentrated in particular seasons. Conversely, shadows that occur in the morning and evening may have only a limited effect on annual energy production. In the report, being able to describe the times of day and seasons when shadows are problematic and the changes that would result from mitigation measures makes it more useful as a basis for design decisions rather than just a numerical report.

Also, record the possibility that obstruction conditions may change in the future. Tree growth, the construction of nearby buildings, fence alterations, and post-development changes to terrain can all affect power generation. Clarify whether the assessment is based on the current conditions at the time of design or whether it includes future management. In particular, because trees and vegetation can change shading losses depending on maintenance after operation begins, it is practical not to stop with only current-condition inputs but to consider them together with the management conditions.

When submitting a PVSyst report, take care to ensure that shading loss figures are not interpreted in isolation. By explaining the on-site conditions that underpin the figures, the input methods, the simplification policy, and whether any countermeasures were implemented, readers can correctly interpret the results. This helps with internal approvals, customer explanations, design reviews, and pre-construction checks.

Common Mistakes and Countermeasures in Obstruction Settings

One common mistake when setting obstructions in PVSyst is misinterpreting the orientation. If you assume the top of a drawing is north or fail to account for the deviation between the building axis and true north, the times when shadows occur will differ from reality. In shadow assessment, errors in orientation have a significant impact on the results. After entering the data, it is important to check the cardinal directions and the sun’s path and to review whether there are any inconsistencies with on-site photos or drawings.

Errors in handling heights are common. Examples include entering an elevation value where the height above ground should be entered for an obstruction, confusing height above the roof surface with height above ground, or double-counting terrain elevation differences. Errors in height directly affect shadow length. Especially on sloped sites and rooftop installations, it is necessary to clearly define the reference plane and confirm the relative height between the panel surface and obstructions.

There are also mistakes caused by excessively omitting obstructions. If, to finish the work quickly, you only enter large buildings and omit rooftop equipment, nearby fences, and surrounding trees, the shading losses may appear smaller than they actually are. If the power generation estimate becomes too optimistic, the gap between projected and actual performance after operation will widen, making it difficult to explain. For obstructions whose impact is unclear, it is safer to enter them once to check whether they cast shadows, and only omit them after confirming their impact is small.

Conversely, there are also failures caused by entering obstructions as larger than they actually are. If you overestimate the extent of trees, set building heights overly conservatively, or treat distant obstacles as larger than necessary, estimated power generation can be excessively low. Conservative evaluations are important, but unsupported overestimation can lead to incorrect design decisions. Even when taking a conservative approach, it's important to be able to explain why you chose those values.

Another mistake is to consider shading settings and electrical design separately. Depending on which panels are shaded, the circuit configuration and the apparent reduction in generation can change. Even if PVSyst indicates shading losses, in the actual design you need to decide how to group panels that are prone to shading, or whether to exclude heavily shaded areas from the installation. Shading settings should be treated not only as inputs to energy yield calculations but also as considerations that connect layout planning and electrical design.

It should also be noted that conditions can change between the time of the site survey and the time of design. Obstruction conditions are not fixed: ground elevations can change due to land development work, nearby trees may be felled, conversely new structures may be built, or the positions of rooftop equipment may be altered. Relying solely on old drawings or past photographs can result in simulating under conditions that differ from the current situation. At key milestones in the design, it is advisable to reconfirm the obstruction conditions.

Using on-site survey data to improve the accuracy of obstruction settings

To increase the accuracy of obstruction settings, it is effective to acquire the site's location and height information as accurately as possible. No matter how carefully you create a 3D scene in PVSyst, if the underlying on-site dimensions are ambiguous, the assessment of shading losses will also be unstable. In particular, for large ground-mounted projects, projects with many surrounding trees or buildings, and sites on slopes or on developed/graded land, the presence or absence of on-site survey data has a major impact on the reliability of obstruction settings.

In conventional on-site inspections, obstructions are sometimes estimated based on photos, simple notes, and measurements on drawings. This method can be used for preliminary assessments, but judgments about distance and height tend to depend on the assessor’s experience. For example, a tree that appeared close on site may actually be far away, or a building that seemed low may have a significant effect due to the elevation difference relative to the panel surface. If shadows are judged solely on visual impressions, the input conditions tend to vary.

If you have on-site data with high-accuracy location information, the placement of shading objects becomes much clearer. By surveying and geolocating building corners, tree positions, fence lines, the crest and toe of slopes, and the boundaries of the panel installation area, you can more easily incorporate them into PVSyst’s 3D scene. Also, if you can obtain elevation data as well, you can confirm the relative height between shading objects and the panel plane. This allows you to evaluate shadow impacts in a way that is closer to reality than with simple horizontal distances alone.

There is also a way to utilize point cloud data. If you can acquire on-site buildings, terrain, trees, and structures as point clouds, it becomes easier to grasp the outlines and heights of obstructions. It is not necessary to reproduce the point cloud exactly in PVSyst, but it is useful as a basis when simplifying obstructions. For example, it is effective as reference information for decisions before input: confirming the top height of trees, grasping the elevation differences of slopes, and checking the distance between buildings and the installation area.

The advantage of using on-site survey data is that it also aids explanations to internal teams and clients. Because obstruction conditions can be described not as an “impression seen on-site” but as data with coordinates and heights, it becomes easier to demonstrate the validity of input conditions. If there are design changes, it also becomes easier to trace which position was used as the reference and what was changed. Transparency of input conditions is important for power generation simulations, and organizing on-site data provides the foundation for that.

On the other hand, collecting on-site data too finely can make the task of entering it into PVSyst burdensome. What matters is not reproducing everything in detail, but reflecting the factors that affect shading losses with the necessary and sufficient accuracy. In practice, it is advisable to collect data broadly in the field and then organize and enter it into PVSyst in the form required for power generation assessment. Combining surveying, point clouds, drawings, and photographs makes it easier to balance the accuracy of obstruction settings with work efficiency.

Summary: Obstruction settings determine the reliability of power generation evaluation

Setting obstructions in PVSyst is a crucial task in the energy-yield assessment of photovoltaic systems. If obstructions are entered correctly, you can understand the shading effects caused by buildings, trees, fences, terrain, and rows of racking, and make design decisions that take shading losses into account. Conversely, if the position, height, or orientation of obstructions is entered incorrectly, the estimated energy production may appear larger than it actually is or smaller than necessary.

In practice, we first identify the obstructions that cause shadows, organize their positions and heights, and place simplified versions of them in the 3D scene. After that, we check the sun path and how shadows fall, and while reviewing the shadow-loss results we revise panel layouts and mounting conditions. Finally, by documenting the input conditions, the rationale for simplifications, the shadow-loss results, and the possibility of future changes in a report, it becomes easier to explain the simulation results.

What matters in shading-object settings is not creating a beautifully detailed 3D model. It is about not overlooking shading objects that affect energy production, entering them in a way that is reasonable for the site conditions, and using the results to drive design improvements. When learning how to use PVSyst, shading settings should be understood not as mere on-screen operations but as a process that links site surveys, surveying, design, and energy yield assessment.

Especially for ground-mounted installations, complex roof shapes, or projects with many surrounding trees and buildings, how accurately you can grasp on-site positional and elevation information becomes crucial. What helps is a system like LRTK (an iPhone-mounted GNSS high-precision positioning device) that allows you to easily obtain high-precision location data on site. If you record obstruction locations, the boundaries of the installation area, terrain elevation differences, and the positions where site photos were taken, it becomes easier to organize the rationale for the conditions you input into PVSyst. To design for reduced shading losses, it is essential not only to operate within the simulation screen but also to measure the site correctly and model it accurately. By using LRTK to improve the accuracy of on-site data, you can increase the reliability of obstruction settings and lead to a more convincing power generation assessment.