How to Enter Mounting Parameters in PVSyst｜Explaining the 7 Basic Settings

Table of Contents

• What do PVSyst mounting conditions settings determine?

• Site information to organize before entering mounting conditions

• Basic setting 1: Choose fixed or tracking

• Basic setting 2: Input tilt angle to align generation assumptions

• Basic setting 3: Set azimuth to reflect orientation deviation

• Basic setting 4: Match module layout and number of tiers to site conditions

• Basic setting 5: Reflect row spacing and pitch in shading losses

• Basic setting 6: Verify rack height and terrain conditions

• Basic setting 7: Prepare the 3D scene and nearby shading conditions

• Result screens to check after entering mounting conditions

• Practical checkpoints to prevent input errors

• How to link PVSyst mounting condition settings with field surveying

• Summary

What does the "mounting conditions" setting in PVSyst determine?

When running a simulation of a solar power plant in PVSyst, racking conditions are important input items that greatly influence assumptions about energy production. Even if the photovoltaic module performance and the meteorological data are correct, if the racking orientation, tilt, row spacing, height, or layout conditions differ from the actual plan, the simulation results will diverge from reality.

Racking conditions, simply put, are the settings that define at what angle, in which direction, at what height, and at what spacing the solar PV modules are arranged. For fixed racking, the basic parameters are the tilt angle and azimuth. For tracking systems, the direction of the tracking axis, the tracking range, and considerations such as backtracking also come into play. In addition, for ground-mounted installations, the shading between front and back rows, terrain elevation differences, and the positional relationship to obstructions must also be considered.

What often causes practitioners using PVSyst to falter is treating racking conditions as merely part of an input screen. In reality, racking conditions are design parameters for simultaneously considering energy yield, shading losses, land-use efficiency, constructability, and maintainability. In particular, if you narrow row spacing too much to make the energy yield look slightly higher, or proceed with a uniform tilt condition without taking the site slope into account, you may need to revisit the design in later stages.

When learning how to use PVSyst, it is important first to understand which outcomes are affected by the mounting conditions. The tilt angle affects the annual amount of solar radiation captured. The azimuth affects the balance of power generation between morning and afternoon. Row spacing affects losses from nearby shading. The mounting height affects the relationship with the terrain and obstructions. These may seem like independent settings, but in reality they interact and together change the simulation results.

In this article, we explain the basic settings to keep in mind when entering mounting structure (racking) conditions in PVSyst, divided into seven items. This is intended to be useful not only for first-time PVSyst users but also for practitioners who are already running simulations yet are not confident about how to input racking conditions, and we clearly lay out the rationale and checkpoints.

On-site information to organize before inputting racking conditions

Before entering the racking conditions in PVSyst, you should first organize the site conditions. Instead of opening the screen and thinking about the numbers then, checking the design drawings, layout plans, survey results, site topography, orientation, slope, and surrounding obstructions in advance will greatly reduce input errors.

The first thing to confirm is the orientation of the installation site. Check whether "north" on the drawing is true north, north in the coordinate system, or simply the upward direction on a simplified drawing. In solar PV simulations, how the azimuth is handled affects the results. If you judge a site to be south-facing from the look of a drawing and enter it as such, it can actually be off by a few degrees to a dozen or so degrees. The larger the project, the more this small deviation can show up as a difference in annual energy production.

Next to check is the tilt angle of the mounting structure. It is important to consider separately the tilt angle assumed in the basic design, the site ground slope, and the range of adjustments possible during construction. For example, even if the mounting structure’s tilt angle is constant, if the ground is sloped the effective orientation and relative heights of the module surface will change. How detailed this is represented in PVSyst depends on the project stage, but at a minimum you should make clear whether the study is a preliminary assessment or a detailed analysis.

In addition, row spacing and pitch should be arranged in advance. Pitch often refers to the distance from the reference position of one racking row to the reference position of the next row, and it is very important for evaluating shading losses. The longer the period during which the shadow of the front row falls on the rear row, the more it affects power generation. In particular, at the low solar elevations in winter shadows tend to lengthen, and shading losses can be greater even with the same row spacing.

Mounting-structure height is another item that is easy to overlook. Drawings include multiple reference heights, such as the height of the module lower edge, the height of the module upper edge, the support-post height, and the clearance from the ground surface. When entering data into PVSyst, clarify which height is used for which element and make sure it does not contradict the dimensions on the drawings. Especially when reproducing nearby shading in the 3D scene, mistakes in entering the mounting-structure height or obstruction heights directly affect how shadows appear.

Obstructions around the site are also important. When there are trees, slopes, buildings, utility poles, fences, equipment, or adjacent structures, decide how much to include in the simulation. Including everything in fine detail is not always best, but omitting items that have a large shading effect will make the results overly optimistic. Conversely, representing items that actually have little impact as if they were significant can lead to the estimated power generation being lower than necessary.

Thus, to enter the racking conditions correctly, organizing site information is essential, not just operating PVSyst. In practice, surveying, design, construction, and energy-yield assessment are often handled by different people, so the person entering the data may not be aware of all the assumptions. Before running the simulation, it is important to confirm which drawings will be used as the reference, which point-in-time design conditions to apply, and whether to reflect the on-site survey results.

Basic Setting 1: Choose Fixed or Tracking

When entering racking conditions in PVSyst, the first decision to make is whether to treat the system as fixed or as a tracking system. While fixed systems are used for many ground-mounted and roof-mounted PV installations, some projects may assume a tracking system that moves the module surface to follow the sun's movement.

For fixed-tilt systems, the racking is configured with a constant tilt angle and azimuth. The module plane does not move in response to the sun’s position during the day. Therefore, the primary settings are tilt angle, azimuth, module layout, and row spacing. Fixed-tilt systems have a relatively simple structure, and because the input fields in PVSyst are easy to understand, this configuration is straightforward for beginners to handle initially.

On the other hand, for tracking systems, because the module surface angle changes to follow the sun’s movement, different settings are required compared with fixed systems. The orientation of the tracking axis, the range of trackable angles, the approach to tracking control, and controls to avoid mutual shading between rows all affect the results. While tracking systems can be expected to increase power generation, the assumptions in simulations become more complex, and if real-world control conditions diverge from the input conditions, the evaluation can easily diverge as well.

Field personnel should note that even if the design drawings include terms such as "movable", "tracking", or "rotating", they need to verify whether this means the system will perform solar tracking during actual power generation operations or whether it merely allows angle adjustment during installation or maintenance. Even if the racking permits angle adjustment, if it does not perform daily tracking in normal operation, it is natural to treat it as fixed in PVSyst.

Even when choosing a fixed-tilt system, there can be cases where multiple racking orientations and tilts coexist to match the terrain. For example, some blocks may have different orientations to fit the shape of the land, or the layout may be divided in east-west directions. In such cases, you should consider whether to represent the whole site with a single racking condition or to split it into multiple sub-arrays or scenes. In the preliminary stage you may proceed with representative values, but when you want to compare shading losses and differences in power generation, it is necessary to divide conditions as closely as possible to the actual situation.

When using PVSyst, rather than trying to input every detail perfectly from the start, it is important to first determine whether the system is fixed or tracking, and then fill in the input fields required for that mode in sequence. If you choose the wrong mode, the meaning of subsequent tilt and azimuth settings can change, so carefully confirm the mounting-condition settings as your starting point.

Basic Setting 2: Enter the Tilt Angle to Standardize the Assumptions for Power Generation

The tilt angle is one of the most basic parameters in PVSyst's racking condition settings. The tilt angle indicates how much the surface of a photovoltaic (PV) module is tilted relative to the horizontal plane. In general, changes in the tilt angle affect the annual solar irradiation received, seasonal power generation, rainwater runoff, and the tendency for dirt to remain.

When entering the tilt angle into PVSyst, first verify the design tilt angle. Often you will use the angle shown on the design drawings or layout plans as-is, but be careful when multiple angles are shown on the drawings. For example, the ground surface slope, the mounting structure’s installation angle, and the module surface angle may be listed separately. The angle to use in the simulation is the module surface tilt angle as the power-generating surface.

For roof-mounted installations, the roof pitch will sometimes directly become the module tilt angle, but when the mounting system adds an angle relative to the roof surface, do not confuse the roof pitch with the mounting-system angle. For ground-mounted systems, the site ground after grading is not necessarily perfectly level. Depending on how much of the terrain’s influence is reflected, the way the tilt angle is handled in PVSyst will vary.

Increasing the tilt angle can be advantageous for the low solar elevation in winter, but in summer the angle of incidence becomes larger, so it is not necessarily optimal over the entire year. Also, as the tilt angle increases, shadows from the front rows tend to extend to the rear rows, which may require widening the row spacing. In other words, the tilt angle affects not only the power-generating surface but also land-use efficiency.

In simulations, creating multiple cases with different tilt angles and checking not only annual generation but also monthly generation and shading losses makes practical decision-making easier. For example, even an option with slightly higher annual generation may have large winter shading losses and also require wider row spacing for construction. Conversely, an option that is slightly inferior in annual generation may be easier to adopt when layout efficiency and constructability are taken into account.

After entering the tilt angle in PVSyst, it is important not just to look at how the energy production changes on the results screen, but also to check the breakdown of losses and the monthly trends. The tilt angle should not be optimized in isolation; it must be evaluated together with the azimuth, row spacing, racking height, and site topography. In practice, you should not simply enter the tilt angle specified by the designer, but also understand what that condition means in the simulation.

Basic Setting 3: Set the azimuth to reflect orientation offset

Azimuth is a setting that indicates which direction a solar photovoltaic module is facing. Rather than using only descriptions such as south-facing, east-facing, or west-facing, the actual deviation in degrees is handled numerically, so care must be taken in how the reference is defined when entering the value.

In PVSyst, confirm the azimuth input rules and configure them so they match the orientation of the design drawings. Depending on the software, east–west deviations may be expressed relative to south, or angles may be handled relative to north. If you enter values based only on the conventions of your usual drawings or survey coordinates, mistakes can occur such as east and west being reversed, the sign of an angle being wrong, or what you intended as a south-facing condition actually being offset.

In practice, it is common for module rows to be rotated slightly from due south to match the shape of the site. When placing the racking to accommodate property boundaries, roads, site grading, drainage plans, and access plans, the orientation will not necessarily be ideally south-facing. A deviation of a few degrees may have only a limited impact on energy generation, but when the project is large or the deviation is significant in the east-west direction, it also affects the time-of-day distribution of energy generation.

When setting the azimuth angle, it is useful to consider not only the annual energy output but also the generation trend between morning and afternoon. Pointing more toward the east tends to increase morning generation, while pointing more toward the west tends to boost afternoon generation. For self-consumption projects or projects that consider power demand by time of day, the imbalance in generation timing—not just the simple annual output—should be taken into account.

Also, in projects with roofs facing multiple orientations or where racks are arranged in several directions to match the terrain, treating the whole as a single average orientation can make it hard to see the true situation. For example, when southeast- and southwest-facing surfaces are mixed, each has a different generation curve. If you enter an averaged orientation, monthly and annual totals may look similar, but the output by time of day may not be accurately reproduced.

When setting the azimuth in PVSyst, align the north on the drawing, the survey results, and the on-site verification as much as possible before making a judgment. In particular, be careful when the layout plan has been rotated for viewing or when there are multiple north arrows on the drawing. By confirming the reference azimuth, the sign of the angle, and the target block before input, you can avoid significant rework later.

Basic Setting 4: Align Module Placement and Number of Rows with Site Conditions

Racking configuration also requires consideration of arrangement conditions, such as how many rows and how many columns the modules are laid out in. When evaluating energy production in PVSyst, not only the total number of modules and capacity but also the way they are mounted on the racking affects shading and the accuracy of reproducing the layout.

When entering the module layout, first confirm the number of modules per mounting frame, whether they are mounted vertically or horizontally, the number of tiers (rows), and the number of columns. Drawings may show the module overall dimensions, mounting-frame pitch, aisle widths, maintenance spaces, and so on. Even if you simplify the input in PVSyst, you need to ensure it does not differ significantly from the actual on-site layout.

When the number of tiers changes, the depth and height of the mounting rack change, which also affects how shadows fall on the front and rear rows. For example, even with the same tilt angle, a rack with more module tiers will have larger vertical dimensions and may be more likely to cast shadows onto the rear row. Conversely, a rack with fewer tiers will have smaller height differences, changing the shadowing conditions.

Module orientation must not be overlooked. Whether mounted vertically or horizontally, the shape of the mounting structure changes even with the same number of modules. If the mounting structure’s width and depth change, the relationship with row spacing and walkway width also changes. When creating a detailed 3D scene in PVSyst, if the module arrangement differs from the actual layout, the way shadows fall will also change.

In practice, during the initial study phase it is common to input representative racking dimensions and then update them with detailed conditions as the design is finalized. What is important at this stage is to record which stage's layout conditions are being used. If the final report is prepared using the initial proposal's racking dimensions, it may fail to align with the detailed design.

Furthermore, module placement also affects electrical design. The number of modules connected in series and the circuit configuration itself are often treated as separate settings, but when the physical layout and the electrical grouping are significantly misaligned, care is required when evaluating the effects of shading. If some modules are shaded, the way losses occur can vary depending on which circuit is affected.

When inputting the racking conditions in PVSyst, you should not only match the generation capacity but also verify that the racking shape, module layout, number of tiers, and orientation are consistent with the site's design conditions. In particular, when conducting shading analysis, the accuracy of the module layout is a key factor that underpins the reliability of the results.

Basic Setting 5: Reflect Row Spacing and Pitch in Shading Loss

Row spacing and pitch are settings among the mounting conditions that directly affect shading losses. In ground-mounted solar power plants, the modules or mounting structures in a front row can cast shadows on rear rows. To evaluate how much this shading affects power generation, it is necessary to enter the row spacing correctly.

Row spacing and pitch are terms that are easily confused. Row spacing may refer to the clear distance from the trailing edge of the previous row to the leading edge of the next row. In contrast, pitch often refers to the distance from the reference line of one row to the reference line of the next row. Because drawings differ in how dimensions are measured, confirm which distance should be used before entering values into PVSyst.

Shadows between front and rear rows become larger when the sun’s elevation is low or during winter. In the morning, evening, and winter months shadows lengthen, so if row spacing is narrow the lower parts of the rear rows are more likely to be shaded. To reduce shading losses, row spacing needs to be widened, but widening row spacing can reduce the capacity that can be installed on the same site. Therefore, row spacing is an important design parameter for balancing power generation and land-use efficiency.

After setting the row spacing in PVSyst, check the results for nearby shading. Looking at the shading effects not only on an annual basis but also by month and by season makes it easier to assess the validity of the design. For example, even if the annual shading loss appears small, losses can be large in specific months during winter. If the generation during that period is important for contractual conditions or generation planning, it may be necessary to reconsider the row spacing.

Furthermore, on sloped terrain the consideration of row spacing becomes even more complicated. On flat ground, arranging rows at the same pitch produces relatively uniform shading conditions, but when the terrain has elevation differences the relative heights of the front and rear rows change. If the rear rows are positioned higher than the front rows, the impact of shading may be reduced; conversely, if the rear rows are lower they are more prone to being shaded.

Even if you do not reproduce the terrain in detail in PVSyst, for projects where local elevation differences have a major effect on shading it is important to check representative cross-sections and assess the appropriateness of row spacing. Just because shading losses are small in a simple flat-ground model does not mean the same will apply to an actual sloped site.

Input errors in row spacing affect not only power generation estimates but also decisions about layout planning. If you enter spacing wider than the actual value, shading losses will appear smaller and estimated power generation may be higher. If you enter spacing narrower than the actual value, shading losses may be overestimated. Before transcribing the dimensions from the drawings as is, always verify that the dimension reference and the input fields match.

Basic Setting 6: Confirm mounting structure height and terrain conditions

Mounting structure height is an important parameter when handling near shading and the 3D scene in PVSyst simulations. When the mounting structure height changes, row-to-row shading, the relationship with surrounding obstructions, and interaction with the terrain change. Especially for ground-mounted projects, it is important to define the height of the module bottom edge, the height of the top edge, the position of the support posts, and their relationship to the ground surface.

When entering the mounting-structure height, pay attention to the height reference shown on the drawings. Confirm whether it is the height from the ground surface to the bottom edge of the module, the height of the mounting support posts, the module center height, or an elevation reference. If you mistake the height reference, the way shadows appear in the 3D scene will change and the reliability of the results will decrease.

We also check the terrain conditions at the same time. On flat land, handling the mounting structure height is relatively simple. However, on sloped or graded land, the ground elevation of each row may differ. If there is an elevation difference between front and back rows, the way shadows fall can change even with the same mounting structure height. In particular, on sites in mountainous areas or near slopes or embankments, the terrain itself can act as an obstruction.

How much of the terrain to reproduce in PVSyst depends on the project's objectives. For initial rough assessments, you may simplify by treating the site as flat. On the other hand, when checking shadow losses and the validity of the layout in detail, ignoring elevation differences in the terrain can lead to incorrect conclusions. In practice, it's advisable to separate an approximate model from a detailed model and be clear about which results are used for which purposes.

The height of the mounting structure also affects its relationship with nearby obstructions. For example, whether a fence or equipment will cast a shadow on the module plane depends not only on the height of the obstruction but also on the height of the module plane. If the modules are positioned higher, they may be less likely to be shaded; if they are positioned lower, the same obstruction can have a greater shading effect.

Also, in snowy regions or in locations where vegetation height must be managed, the mounting structure height also affects maintainability. It is necessary to consider not only the simulated energy yield but also site maintenance and construction conditions. However, because PVSyst does not directly evaluate maintenance work itself, it is important to separate and organize the assessment of energy yield and decisions about on-site operations.

To correctly handle racking height and terrain conditions, reconciliation with on-site survey data and design drawings is essential. If height information is entered while still unclear, the evaluation of shading losses will also be uncertain. Before submitting the power generation report, confirm the reference for racking height, the extent to which terrain is accounted for, and consistency with obstruction heights.

Basic Setting 7: Configure the 3D Scene and Nearby Shadow Conditions

In PVSyst, configuring the 3D scene and near-shading settings is extremely important for practically evaluating mounting structure conditions. While tilt angle and azimuth can be entered relatively easily, at actual power plants shading between mounting rows, shading from surrounding structures, and shading from terrain affect energy production. To check these, near shading is evaluated using the 3D scene.

In a 3D scene, the arrangement of solar photovoltaic modules, rows of mounting structures, obstructions, and terrain features are represented spatially. The important point here is not to model everything in fine detail, but to appropriately reproduce the elements that affect power generation. Including too many small structures that have little effect on shading increases modeling time and complicates management. Conversely, omitting buildings, slopes, or trees that have a large impact on shading will make the simulation results overly optimistic.

When evaluating nearby shading, you check when, where, and to what extent shadows occur. Not only the annual loss rate, but also examining the seasons and times of day when shading happens makes it easier to uncover design issues. In particular, during winter mornings and evenings the sun's altitude is low and shadows become long. For sites with surrounding obstructions, shadows during these times can be larger than expected.

What you need to watch for in PVSyst's 3D scene is whether the model's coordinates and orientation match reality. Even if you think you created it based on the layout plan, if the azimuth is reversed, the scale is off, or the height reference is incorrect, the shadow assessment will not be accurate. After creating the 3D scene, it is important to intuitively check for anything that seems wrong by looking at the sun position and the direction of shadows.

Also, when entering obstructions, distinguish between those that currently exist on site, those that will be removed in the future, and those that will be newly installed. The elements to include will vary depending on whether you are assessing current shadows or shadows after completion. For items that undergo growth or seasonal changes, such as trees, you need to decide which condition to assume.

When configuring near-shadow settings, it is also important to determine the precision at which shadow calculations are performed. The more detailed the calculations, the more likely they are to approximate reality, but if the input data are inaccurate, precise calculations are meaningless. Practically, first align the accuracy of drawings, surveys, and on-site inspections, and then create a 3D scene at the required level.

The purpose of entering racking conditions in PVSyst is not simply to produce a report, but to obtain results that can be used for design decisions. The 3D scene and nearby shading settings are an important part of supporting those decisions. After entering the racking conditions, always check how the shading appears and verify that there are no inconsistencies with the drawings or on-site conditions.

Result screens to check after entering mounting conditions

After entering the racking conditions, instead of immediately outputting only the report, review several points on the results screen. PVSyst's results include many indicators, but when confirming the validity of the racking conditions, it is important to focus on energy production, losses, nearby shading, and monthly trends.

First, check the annual energy production. Compare how much the annual energy production changes before and after altering the mounting conditions. However, it is risky to judge based only on the annual energy production. Changing the tilt angle or azimuth may not greatly affect the annual total but can change monthly generation and time-of-day output patterns.

Next, review the loss diagram. By examining the loss diagram, you can identify at which stages generation is being reduced—such as from solar irradiance, temperature, electrical losses, and shading losses. The aspects of the racking conditions that matter most are how solar irradiance is received and shading losses. Changing the tilt angle or azimuth alters the amount of usable solar irradiance. Changing the row spacing or obstruction conditions alters the losses from nearby shading.

Monthly power generation is also important. The impact of racking conditions varies by season. Increasing the tilt angle can be advantageous in winter, but it can also change summer power generation. If the row spacing is narrow, shading losses in winter can become noticeable. Check the monthly results to identify changes that are easy to overlook when looking only at annual power generation.

In the near-shadow results, check whether shadow losses are overestimated or underestimated. If shadow losses are extremely small for the input column spacing and obstruction conditions, the 3D scene may not be set up correctly. Conversely, if shadow losses are larger than expected, recheck the column spacing, azimuth, obstruction heights, and terrain conditions.

We also check the configuration settings listed in the report. When used as submission materials, not only the numerical results but also the conditions under which they were calculated are important. We verify that items such as tilt angle, azimuth, capacity, meteorological conditions, and shading conditions match the design drawings and explanatory documents. In practice, discrepancies in the underlying assumptions are more likely to cause problems than the numerical results.

PVSyst's results screen is not simply a place to check whether a run was successful. It is where you verify how the mounting conditions you entered are reflected in energy production and losses. After running the simulation, review the results and, if necessary, modify the mounting conditions. By going through this back-and-forth, you move closer to a highly reliable assessment that can be used in practice.

Practical checkpoints to prevent input errors

When entering racking parameters in PVSyst, common mistakes are not limited to errors in the numerical values themselves. Practical errors can take many forms, such as mistakes with units, reference points, signs, misreading drawings, or using outdated design conditions. To prevent these errors, it is effective to establish check procedures to use before and after data entry.

First, always verify the tilt angle and the azimuth as a pair. Even if the tilt angle is correct, if the azimuth is reversed the simulation results will change drastically. In particular, pay attention to the signs for east and west and to differences in angle reference conventions. Simply checking the sun’s direction and the direction of shadows on the screen to see if they intuitively look right can reveal many mistakes.

Next, verify the units of the dimensions. Dimensions shown in millimeters (in) on the drawings may sometimes be entered as meters (ft) in PVSyst. If you misplace a digit, the racking dimensions and row spacing can end up with extreme values. After entering the data, display the 3D scene and check that the racking is not abnormally large and that the row spacing does not look unnatural.

Confusing row spacing with pitch is also a common mistake. Verify whether the dimension on the drawing refers to the distance from the racking end to end or the distance from centerline to centerline. If the distance that PVSyst's input fields require does not match the distance shown on the drawing, the calculated shading conditions will be affected.

Clarify the height reference for the mounting-structure height. Specify whether the height is measured from the ground surface, as elevation, at the module’s lower edge, or at the module’s upper edge. Heights of obstructions must be expressed using the same reference. If module heights use a ground-surface reference while obstructions use an elevation reference, mixing them will misalign the shading assessment.

Also, version control of simulation conditions is important. As the design progresses, racking dimensions, layout, capacity, and row spacing may change. If you continue to use a PVSyst file created from an old layout drawing, the results will not match the final design. Leaving the drawing date and the design conditions used in the file name or memo field makes it easier to verify later.

Finally, empirically verify the validity of the results. Even if the input values appear correct, if the results are extremely high or low, there may be a discrepancy in the assumptions somewhere. While looking at energy production, shading losses, monthly trends, and the loss diagram, confirm whether they are consistent with site conditions and the design. PVSyst calculates accurately based on the input conditions, but if the input conditions differ from reality, the results will also differ from reality.

Approach to Connecting PVSyst Racking Configuration with On-site Surveys

To correctly input the mounting conditions into PVSyst, it is important to be mindful of the connection to on-site surveying, not just desk-based design information. Planned sites for solar power plants are often not perfectly flat; in reality they have subtle elevation differences, slopes, drainage gradients, existing structures, and boundary offsets. The reliability of the mounting conditions depends on how fully these factors are understood.

In particular, for ground-mounted projects, on-site elevation differences affect inter-row shading and layout planning. Even if rows appear evenly spaced on drawings, there can be height differences between the front and rear rows in the field that change how shadows fall. It is important not to confuse the pre-development topography, the planned ground level after development, and the as-built measured ground level after construction.

Also, the positions and heights of obstructions are items we want to confirm by on-site surveying. Trees, existing equipment, and surrounding structures not shown on drawings may cast shadows. Simply taking photos during the site check may not reveal the precise positional relationships or heights. To reflect these in PVSyst's 3D scene, it is necessary to ascertain as quantitatively as possible the obstructions' positions, heights, and distances to the module plane.

What is useful here is a positioning and surveying system for efficiently acquiring on-site location information. The information required to input mounting-structure conditions is not just simple dimensions. It is spatial information about where the mounting structure is located, which direction it faces, what is around it, and the degree of elevation difference. If these can be recorded quickly on site, it becomes easier to make PVSyst's input conditions closer to the actual situation.

For example, if you can survey on-site the boundaries of the planned site, existing structures, obstructions, and ground elevation differences and cross-check them against the design drawings and layout plan, the accuracy of confirming mounting-structure conditions will improve. After construction, you can verify whether the actual mounting locations and heights match the plan and, if necessary, update the simulation conditions.

PVSyst is a powerful tool for evaluating energy production, but if the site conditions you input are ambiguous, you cannot make full use of its capabilities. To input the racking conditions correctly, it is important to consider verifying the design drawings, conducting on-site surveys, keeping photographic records, and understanding the three-dimensional positional relationships as a single workflow. The more accurately you can obtain the site's spatial information, the easier it will be to explain the simulation results.

Summary

Entering the mounting-structure conditions in PVSyst is not simply a matter of typing numbers into fields on the screen. By choosing fixed or tracking, and then setting the tilt angle, azimuth, module layout, row spacing, rack height, terrain conditions, and the 3D scene and nearby shading in sequence, you establish the basis for the energy yield assessment.

Especially in practice, small input errors in racking/mounting conditions can affect energy production, shading losses, month-by-month results, and report contents. Mistakes such as using the wrong reference for tilt or azimuth, confusing row spacing with pitch, failing to align height references, or using outdated drawing conditions can occur on any project. When using PVSyst, it is important to verify not only the input values themselves but also which drawings or on-site information those values are based on.

Racking conditions are not settings made solely to maximize power generation. They provide the foundation for decision-making that takes into account land-use efficiency, constructability, maintainability, shading losses, and the consistency of explanatory documentation. It is important to check not only annual energy production but also monthly generation, loss diagrams, nearby shading, and the appearance of the 3D scene to verify that the design intent matches the results.

Furthermore, accurate on-site information is indispensable for making PVSyst's mounting-structure conditions more precise. By identifying elevation differences, obstructions, boundaries, and post-construction positional shifts that cannot be determined from design drawings alone, you can bring simulation conditions closer to actual conditions. In particular, for ground-mounted solar power plants, the mounting position, ground elevation, and surrounding environment greatly affect shading losses and power generation estimates.

To efficiently obtain on-site location information and reflect it in PVSyst's input conditions, a system that can handle high-precision location data in the field—such as LRTK (an iPhone-mounted GNSS high-precision positioning device)—is useful. Being able to smoothly confirm the project site boundaries, record the positions of obstructions, verify racking locations, and grasp the as-built conditions after construction makes it easier to connect desktop simulations with actual site conditions. For reliable energy yield assessment in PVSyst, it is important to combine and utilize accurate spatial information obtained on site, not just software settings.