Overview
For a 130 MWp utility-scale plant, the design team needed to evaluate how inter-row spacing affected three competing objectives: shading losses, DC cable lengths, and power balance across strings. The standard approach — using a single GCR and simulating in PVSyst — couldn’t capture the terrain-driven variation across the site.
Analysis
PVX.AI ran spacing scenarios across the terrain-aware layout, comparing row pitch configurations from 4.5m to 7.5m. For each scenario, the platform calculated:
- Row-level shading loss based on actual terrain elevation and shadow geometry
- Total DC cable length and associated cost per scenario
- String-level power imbalance across the inverter blocks
Findings
- 46% difference in shading loss between the tightest and widest spacing scenarios
- Tighter spacing increased DC cable cost by 12% but reduced land footprint by 18%
- Terrain-driven shading variation explained 23% of the total shading delta — invisible to flat-field simulation tools
- Optimal pitch for this site was 5.8m, balancing shading, cable cost, and land utilization
Outcome
The terrain-aware spacing analysis enabled the development team to select a GCR that minimized lifetime energy loss while staying within land boundary constraints — a decision that flat-field simulation tools could not have supported.