Tutorials

[wholmgren]

Not yet ready to merge

Closes #30. This PR is just about making the notebooks work from beginning to end. I'm not going to spend much time making them read better.

I wrote a new tmy_to_power notebook that replaces Test_Scripts.

Here's a nbviewer link to my fork.

To do:

• ET_Irradiance (move into irradiance)
• TS_2_Irradiance_functions reworked and renamed tmy_and_diffuse_irrad_models
• atmosphere
• irradiance
• pvsystem
• solarposition
• tmy
• tracking
• add 0.2.1 whatsnew

Note that I've already rebased this on #77.

~~@NelisW sorry if this steps on your toes. Would be great to divide and conquer if you have the time to work on one or more of these before ~Monday.~~

[wholmgren]

@bmu @Calama-Consulting ready for your review. I will merge this if I don't hear from you by Monday.

[wholmgren]

@NelisW we'd still be thrilled to have your help improving the now-working tutorials or writing new ones.

[NelisW]

You know the feeling when you haven't visited friends for some time: your
embarrassment keeps you from calling :-(

I have been busy preparing for a PV system purchase for my home - about to
sign the contract. Quite an investment (1 kW PV water heating, 3kW PV for
the rest, 50V@200 Ah, 3kW IMEON inverter ) - lots of reading to do. Still
not fully decided on battery selection (gell or crystal)

Then also lure of Arduino / Raspberry Pi seduced me, with its detracting
promise of home automation. Spent too much time there.

I will try an put in some time over the weekend.

not to worry about toe-stepping here, these toes have been out of
circulation too long ...

On 10 July 2015 at 20:50, Will Holmgren [email protected] wrote:

@NelisW https://github.com/NelisW we'd still be thrilled to have your
help improving the now-working tutorials or writing new ones.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#74 (comment).

[bmu]

Should I merge it or are there problems with #78 and #79?

[bmu]

And I am not sure about #77. Seems that there are some conflicts with this pull request, at least in the diff. but maybe it is ok, as you say you rebased it.

[wholmgren]

@bmu I'm not sure what conflicts with #77 you're referring to. GitHub says that it can merge it automatically, so I think that means that everything is resolved.

What do you think we should do regarding this vs. #78? I would prefer to give @NelisW the credit for fixing the tutorials, but it will take some time get #78 into mergeable shape and this is ready to go now.

[bmu]

When I look at the diff in #77 for whatsnew.rst and 0.2.1.txt seems like it is the same as the diff for this PR here (with some minor differences). Not sure, if this is resolved by your rebase.

[bmu]

I would prefer to merge this one in favour of #78. it's a pity with the doubled work.

[wholmgren]

Ok. I rebased on the new upstream master and fixed a typo in the 0.2.1 whats new.