English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Four PV power plant variability simulation methods – no-smoothing, time average, Marcos, and the wavelet variability model (WVM) – were compared to measured data from a 19MW PV power plant to test the relative accuracy of each method. Errors (simulated vs. measured) were quantified using five application-specific metrics: the largest down ramps, the largest up ramps, the mean absolute error in matching the cumulative distribution of large ramps, the total energy contained in down ramps over the entire period considered, total energy in down ramps on the worst day. These errors we evaluated over timescales ranging from 1-second to 1-hour and over plant sizes of 1 to 14MW and the total plant size of 19MWs to determine trends in model errors as a function of timescale and plant size. Overall, the WVM was found to most often have the smallest errors. The Marcos method also often had small errors, including having the smallest errors of all methods at small PV plant sizes (1 to 7MWs). The no-smoothing method had large errors and should not be used. The time average method was an improvement over the no-smoothing method, but generally has larger errors than the WVM and Marcos methods.

Comparison of Errors in Solar Power Plant Variability Simulation Methods