This is an issue. How we approach this is to do a normal shading analysis to meet MCS, and then provide an alternative, better and more accurate estimate. The PV guide quotes the following:
"For systems connected to multiple inverters, or a single inverter connected to more than one MPP, it is acceptable to do a separate calculation for each sub array (each array connected to a dedicated MPP tracker)."
and later,
3.7.9 Additional Estimates
Additional estimates may be provided using alternative methodology,including the use of proprietary software packages, but any such estimates must clearly describe and justify the approach taken and the factors used and must not be given greater prominence than the standard MCS estimate. In addition it must be accompanied by a warning stating that it should be treated with caution if it is significantly greater than the result given by the standard method."
It doesn't say each method has to be done on the same basis or have the same equipment configuration. I don't feel due consideration was given to the use of optimisers or microinverters whose use will increase. AC panels will be launched in 2015 which will further muddy the water. Solar edge has been used in 50kW systems. It would be totally unrealistic and laughable to suggest providing 100 or 200 sunpath diagrams.
In our report and quotation to the customer, the following statement is made.
"We are obliged under the terms of the Microgeneration Certification Scheme to provide the following estimate of performance based on a specified manual method. This estimate will be that shown on the registration document for your system. This method may produce inaccurate results with a wider margin of error than that stated for the following reasons:
- It takes insufficient account of geographic location.
- There may be significant variance in irradiance at your location in comparison to that given in the data provided.
- The estimate takes no account of the performance of equipment specified or its ability to mitigate the effects of shading.
- It is prone to further inaccuracy in estimating the effects of shading due to human error.
Professional Performance Estimation by Solar Kingdom
Following the mandatory performance estimate is one prepared using expert system software specific to your location, based on the survey undertaken, and taking full account of the equipment specified. The financial analysis provided is based on this figure. In our opinion this better reflects expected performance and is subject to the standard disclaimer given."
We use PVSol, but you could equally use some other method, such as that from the solaredge software. The important thing is to ensure you have confidence in whatever method you use and can fully justify it to your MCS assessor. (Mine thinks the MCS method is pants as well, but can't say so).
The MCS system is better than that it replaced, is cumbersome and often inaccurate. In parts of NE Scotland it is over 20% out. Gavin A and myself even challenged it at the MCS PV Working Group (without success).
I see numerous quotes from competitors, with no output estimation whatsoever. As long as you can justify what you do, I wouldn't worry too much.