Draft Report Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power Plant 396 KWP and 276 KWH Morowali, Central Sulawesi

DRAFT REPORT
Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power Plant

396 kWp and 276 kWh
Morowali, Central Sulawesi
PT Hengjaya Mineralindo
26 June 2023
Draft Report – Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power Plant Document Number
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: i REV: R00
PT Synkrona Enjiniring
Nusantara
DRAFT REPORT PT Hengjaya Mineralindo
Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power

Plant (396 kWp and 276 kWh)
Morowali, Central Sulawesi
Date Prepared by Checked by Approved by Revision Status
Bariz Irfan Maman S.

26 Jun 23 Yoga S. Perdana R00 Issued for Review
Andriazis D. Adhijaya S.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: ii REV: R00
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PT Hengjaya Mineralindo (HM) holds a 100% interest in the Hengjaya nickel project (Hengjaya Mine)
located in the Morowali Regency, on the east coast of the province of Central Sulawesi, Indonesia.
The Hengjaya Mine is located on an IUP permit concession area covering 5,983 hectares. In 2012 PT
Hengjaya was issued a 20-year mining operation/production licencelicense including a further 10-
year extension option. The HM Mine is one of the largest tonnage, high gradehigh-grade operations
in close proximity tonear the IMIP in central Sulawesi.
PT Hengjaya Mineralindo is a company engaged in the mining of nickel.As part of its sustainability
plan, PT Hengjaya MineralindoHM has already installed a hybrid PV power plant (PVPP) with a PV
and Battery capacity of 396 kWp and 276 kWh to supply electricity to that located in their camp site.
Tthe camp sitecampsite is located in Tangofa, Bungku Pesisir, Morowali, Central Sulawesi. This PV
power plantPP hasve been in operationed since 2022 in a power rental scheme withby SESNA, but in
realization the actual energy production is lower than proposed energy production by as the IPP that
is responsible for its construction and operation. However, PT HM considers the actual energy
production from the PVPP is lower than the proposed energy production by SESNA. Hence, PT
Hengjaya Mineralindo plans to assess the existing Solar PV Plantis PVPP. The assessment
performance with an aims aim to investigate the reason in the difference in energy output between
the current actual energy produced by the existing hybrid PVPP existing system and the initial
proposed capacity system proposed by IPPSESNA.
IPP submitted 3 proposals with different capacitycapacities, 396 kWp and 276 kWh; 396 kWp and
828 kWh; 512 kWp and 1,656 kWh. In the first proposal, IPP claimed a minimum of 525,728 kWh
for annual delivered energy. But in their annual report for the first year the system only produced
315,893 kWh, there is PV system trouble in March and April. Consultant The consultant do does the
simulation of the PV system with existing load to verify the energy production for the first year, the
result is energy production production of the PV system for the for first year is 3914,570800 kWh.
Proposed annual delivered energy has the biggest gap between those 3 values. There are some
reasons that causedSome reasons caused IPP’s proposed annual delivered energy is to be the
biggest, such as: IPP didn’t use actual simulation parameter parameters from existing condition (PV
orientation, shading, profile load, and battery), IPP assume all energy production will be absorbed
by the campsitecamp site. Consultant The consultant do does the simulation of the PV system with
load assumption from IPP the PV system produce produces 483,500 kWh. If using load assumption
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: iii REV: R00
from IPP the annual energy production will be higher than the existing condition. IPP load
assumption is higher than the existing condition.
There are some findings that the existing system is not in accordance with the PV system should be
such as the PV module is being connected in series with other moduleanother module in on the
other side of the roof (different azimuth), the monitoring system doesn’t connect to Sungrow
Cloud Data. Monitoring The monitoring system should be connected to Sungrow Cloud Data for
data record records as per the IPP proposal.
To solve this situation IPP proposed second capacity (396 kWp and 828 kWh) to achieve annual
energy production of 525,728 kWh to solve this situation. But when the consultant do does a
simulation with parameter from the existing condition the PV system (396 kWp and 828 kWh) only
produce 461,660 kWh so this capacity still won’t achieve the proposed annual energy production.
To achieve minimum annual energy production of 525,728 kWh, the system capacity must be
higher than IPP IPP's second capacity. IPP proposed third capacity of 512 kWp and 1,656 kWh to
reduce diesel generator operational hour hours and raise annual energy production. IPP claims that
the system will be produced 676,078 kWh. But when the consultant do does the simulation with
parameter from the existing condition the PV system (512 kWp and 1,656 kWh) only produce
597,000 kWh.
For recommendation, the third PV system capacity (512 kWp and 1,656 kWh) will achieve IPP IPP's
first proposed annual delivered energy of 525,728 kWh. In addition, to achieve more accurate PV
sizing in the future, it needs more accurate load profile data. So, it would be better if the
monitoring system for the 400 V MDP cubicle was connected to SCADA for data recordrecords.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: iv REV: R00
LIST OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................ii
LIST OF CONTENTS..............................................................................................................iv
LIST OF FIGURES..................................................................................................................vi
LIST OF TABLES...................................................................................................................vii
CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................1
1.1. Background.................................................................................................................................1
1.2. Objective....................................................................................................................................1
1.3. Hengjaya Solar PV Plant..............................................................................................................2
1.3.1. General Description........................................................................................................2
1.3.2. Assumption and Data Input............................................................................................3
1.3.3. Climate Condition...........................................................................................................5
CHAPTER 2 SOLAR ENERGY ASSESSMENT.............................................................................9
2.1. Site Condition.............................................................................................................................9
2.1.1. SESNA Proposal...............................................................................................................9
2.1.2. Actual Condition.............................................................................................................9
2.2. Energy Yield Result.....................................................................................................................9
2.2.1. Initial Proposal for Existing Condition...........................................................................10
2.2.2. Expansion Proposal (Option 1)......................................................................................10
2.2.3. Expansion Proposal (Option 2)......................................................................................10
2.3. Discrepancy Identifications of Energy Yield..............................................................................11
2.4. Recommendation.....................................................................................................................12
CHAPTER 3 PV SYSTEM ASSESSMENT.................................................................................13
3.1. Discrepancy Identifications of Electrical System.......................................................................13
3.2. Energy Management System (EMS) Assessment......................................................................15
3.2.1. Hengjaya EMS Architecture..........................................................................................15
3.2.2. Downtime Due to EMS Hardware Failure.....................................................................17
3.2.3. Analysis of EMS Control Philosophy..............................................................................17
3.3. Electrical System Assessment...................................................................................................18
3.3.1. HM Electrical System Modelling...................................................................................18
3.3.2. Effect of PV Intermittency.............................................................................................21
3.4. Electrical System Assessment...................................................................................................23
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: v REV: R00
CHAPTER 4 CONCLUSION...................................................................................................26
APPENDIX 1 Datasheets.....................................................................................................27
APPENDIX 2 PVSyst Report................................................................................................33
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.........................................................................................................ii
LIST OF CONTENTS..............................................................................................................iii
LIST OF FIGURES...................................................................................................................v
LIST OF TABLES....................................................................................................................vi
BAB 1 INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1
1.1. Background.................................................................................................................................1
1.2. Objective....................................................................................................................................1
1.3. Description of the Location........................................................................................................2
1.3.1. General Description........................................................................................................2
1.3.2. Climate Condition...........................................................................................................2
BAB 2 DISCREPANCY IDENTIFICATION..................................................................................7
2.1. Methodology..............................................................................................................................7
2.2. Historical Performance of Existing PV Plant................................................................................7
2.3. EMS Controller Assesment.........................................................................................................7
2.3.1. Hengjaya EMS Architecture............................................................................................7
2.3.2. Findings on EMS Hardware Problem..............................................................................8
2.3.3. Room for Operation Optimization on Hengjaya system.................................................9
2.4. Electrical System Assesment....................................................................................................10
BAB 3 SIMULATION AND MODELING..................................................................................11
3.1. Grid Impact Study.....................................................................................................................11
3.1.1. Existing Electricity System Study...................................................................................11
3.1.2. DigSILENT Modelling.....................................................................................................11
3.1.3. Simulation and Analysis................................................................................................12
3.2. PVSyst Simulation.....................................................................................................................25
3.2.1. Location Assessment....................................................................................................25
3.2.2. Solar Energy Resource Assessment...............................................................................25
3.2.3. Assumption and Data Input..........................................................................................26
3.2.4. Energy Yield..................................................................................................................29
BAB 4 EVALUATION OF EXPANSION PROPOSAL.................................................................30
4.1. Option 1....................................................................................................................................30
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: vi REV: R00
4.2. Option 2....................................................................................................................................30

BAB 5 CONSLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................31
LAMPIRAN 1 Datasheets....................................................................................................32
LAMPIRAN 2 PVSyst..........................................................................................................35
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: vii REV: R00
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1-1 Location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo....................................................................................1
Figure 1-2 Basecamp Site of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo (source: Google Earth) ......................................2
Figure 1-3 PV String Configuration 2 x 7.................................................................................................4
Figure 1-4 PV String Configuration 2 x 11...............................................................................................4
Figure 1-6 Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi.........................................................................6
Figure 3-1 Average Load July 2022 – June 2023...................................................................................14
Figure 3-1 Hengjaya EMS Controller Architecture................................................................................16
Figure 3-2 EMS Controller Operation Scheme......................................................................................18
Figure 1-1 Location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo....................................................................................1
Figure 1-2 Basecamp Site of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo (source: Google Earth) ......................................2
Figure 1-3 Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi.........................................................................4
Figure 1-4 Historical Storm Data in Indonesia........................................................................................5
Figure 1 Hengjaya EMS Controller Architecture .....................................................................................8
Figure 2 EMS Controller Operation Scheme...........................................................................................9
Figure 3-2 PV String Configuration 2 x 11.............................................................................................28
Figure 3-3 PV String Configuration 2 x 12.............................................................................................28
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: viii REV: R00
LIST OF TABLES
Table 3-2 PV Capacity.............................................................................................................................3
Table 3-3 PV Array..................................................................................................................................4
Table 3-4 Losses Assumption..................................................................................................................5
Table 1-1 Monthly Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi............................................................6
Table 1-2 Monthly Average Ambient Temperature ................................................................................7
Table 1-3 Monthly Average Wind Velocity.............................................................................................8
Table 3-5 Simulation Result for PV System with Capacity of 396 kWp and 276 kWh (Existing PV
System).................................................................................................................................................10
Table 3-6 Simulation Result for PV System with Capacity of 396 kWp and 828 kWh (Option 1) ..........10
Table 3-7 Simulation Result for PV System with Capacity of 512 kWp and 1,656 kWh (Option 2) .......10
Table 3-1 Historical Performance of PV System...................................................................................13
Table 2-2 PV-BESS Operating Hours in Dry Season...............................................................................15
Table 2-3 PV-BESS Operating Hours in Wet Season..............................................................................15
Table 1-1 Monthly Average Ambient Temperature ................................................................................3

Table 1-2 Monthly Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi............................................................4
Table 1-3 Monthly Average Wind Velocity.............................................................................................5
Table 3-1 Weather Data.......................................................................................................................26
Table 3-2 PV Capacity...........................................................................................................................27
Table 3-3 PV Array................................................................................................................................28
Table 3-4 Losses Assumption................................................................................................................29
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 1 REV: R00
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
PT Hengjaya Mineralindo has a PV power plant that located in their camp sitecampsite. The
camp sitecampsite is located in Tangofa, Bungku Pesisir, Morowali, Central Sulawesi. The
coordinate of the camp sitecampsite is -2.953590° for latitude and 122.291277° for longitude.
The capacity of the power plant is 396 kWp for PV and 276 kWh for battery. Location The
location of the PV power plant can be seen in Figure 1 -1 1 -2.
This PV power plant have has been operated since 2022 for PT Hengjaya Mineralindo Camp
Site by IPP. There is a mismatch between energy production from IPP’s proposal and actual
energy production. The actual energy production is lower than IPP’s proposal.
Figure 1-11-2 Location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo
1.2. Objective
This report intends to provides provide a comprehensive insight into the technical and non-
technical condition of the existing PV System 396 kWp and 276 kWh. The assessment report
contains is the best result of a series of studies conducted, with the following scope of
discussion.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 2 REV: R00
a. Discrepancy IdentificationSolar Energy Assessment. CHAPTER 3 Error: Reference

source not found provide provides the energy assessment and the discrepancies
finding between the actual PV installation and the proposed design
b. Simulation and ModelingPV System Assessment. CHAPTER 5 Error: Reference source
not found provide provides the assessment of PV System existing modelling
conditionand evaluation
c. Evaluation of Expansion Proposal. Error: Reference source not found provide analysis
and evaluation of expansion proposal
d. Conclusion and Recommendations. Error: Reference source not found CHAPTER 7
provide provides an analysis and evaluation of the expansion proposal
1.3. Description of the LocationHengjaya Solar PV Plant
1.3.1. General Description
PT Hengjaya Mineralindo has basecamp site for their employees. PV Strings are
installed on rooftops, split into 7 (seven) buildings while the amount of PV inverters is 4
inverters. This basecamp is using diesel generator because there is no electricity supply
from PLN. There are someThe buildings consist of kitchen, workshop, office, and some
lodging. The basecamp image can be seen in Figure 1 -3 1 -4. The battery array
collected into one bidirectional inverter while the installed Diesel Generator is 2x500kVA
but only 1x500kVA unit can be operated normally since June 2023. There is already a
control system that can automatically switch between PV, Battery, or Diesel connections
to supply the load. There is weather station to monitor and record condition in the
campsite. This system records irradiation, wind velocity, wind direction, and ambient
temperature.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 3 REV: R00
Figure 1-31-4 Basecamp Site of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo (source: Google Earth)
1.3.2. Assumption and Data Input
Solar module assumptions and inputs include DC/AC ratio, PV string and array
configurations, PV module parameters, and losses assumptions. PV module parameters
include slope and azimuth, mounting considerations, and others. While the details
regarding the losses assumption used in the simulation are explained at the end of this
section.
1.3.2.1 DC/AC Ratio
Based on the inverter manufacturer, the installed capacity of the PV power can be
1.3 times higher than the output power of the inverter (DC/AC ratio 1.3). At high
solar irradiance, Vmpp can be higher than the inverter rating. Therefore, the
system will not work at the maximum power point and the power rating of the
inverter will limit the power conversion or it is called power curtailing. On the
other hand, power modification is required to prevent the voltage from rising to
unacceptable levels to avoid unwanted repeated trips.
1.3.2.2 PV String Configuration

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 4 REV: R00
PV string is a group of PV modules connected in series and installed in one place.

A PV array is a collection of strings connected to a single inverter. The strings and
arrays must be considered for inverter specification. The existing configuration
can be seen in Table 3 -20.
Table 3-1 PV Capacity

PV Capacity
PV Location Modules
(kWp)
Kitchen 93.22 158
Camp Celebes 42.84 72
Camp Andalas 47.20 80
Camp Java 47.20 80
Camp Borneo 47.20 80
Camp Papua 40.12 68
Workshop 79.06 134
Total 396.48 672
Below are the PV series configurations that are used in PT Hengjaya Mineralindo
campsite, but some series configurations use a series connection with the other
side of the building. Usually, the module series connection is only on one side of
the roof because the inverter will refer to lower the smallest voltage and current.
Figure 1-5 PV String Configuration 2 x 7
1.3.2.3 Modul PV Parameter Determination
PV module tilt will follow the slope of the existing roof. The characteristics of the
PV array for each PLTS system are listed in Table 3 -21.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 5 REV: R00
Table 3-2 PV Array
PV Location Tilt Azimuth

Kitchen 15 54 ; -126
Camp Celebes 20 59 ; -121
Camp Andalas 20 59 ; -121
Camp Java 20 59 ; -121
Camp Borneo 20 59 ; -121
Camp Papua 20 59 ; -121
Workshop 14 -52 ; 128
The inverter used in the campsite has a nominal power per unit of 15 kW (1 unit)
and 110 kW (3 units).
1.3.2.4 Losses Assumption
In the PVsyst simulation, several losses need to be considered. These losses

consist of thermal parameters, ohmic losses from cables, PV and inverter losses,
light-induced degradation (LID), mismatch, soiling, incidence angle modification
(IAM), auxiliaries, aging, and unavailability.
Table 3-3 Losses Assumption

Losses Value Remarks
The existing condition uses cable length
from the actual condition. Existing
Ohmic Losses -1.13%
conditions generate more losses and will
produce lower energy.
LID Loss 2% Based on the PV module datasheet.
Based on discussions with experts
Power Loss on MPP 2%
regarding practical industrial test results.
Based on the literature study, it is
Soiling Loss 2% assumed that the PV module will be
cleaned once a month.
Aging 0,55% Based on the PV module datasheet.
Based on the default PVsyst parameters
Thermal Parameter 20.0 w/m²K
for Rooftop PLTS.
1.3.3. Climate Condition
Basecamp The basecamp site has an average ambient temperature in the amount of
27.7°C, and an average wind speed in the amount of 1.7 m/s. Total irradiation within
one year is 1,624 kWh/m2. Further analysis for of climate will be explained in this
chapter. This climate data was obtained from IPP’s pyranometer and meteonorm
database. There are 2 months data that taken2 months of data was taken from
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 6 REV: R00
meteonorm data and 10 months of data was taken from IPP’s pyrano. For June and
July are using meteonorm data because there is no data from IPP’s pyranometer.
1.3.3.1 Irradiation
Irradiation data is obtained from IPP’s pyranometer and meteonorm database. 2

months of data was taken from meteonorm data and 10 months of data was
taken from IPP’s pyrano. June and July are using meteonorm data because there is
no data from IPP’s pyranometer. The highest irradiation is 174.6 kWh/m 2/month
In October. The lowest irradiation is 109.2 kWh/m 2/month in February.
Tabel 2-1 Irradiation Data

Month Irradiation (kWh/m2)
January 115.9
February 109.2
March 145.9
April 139.8
May 124.1
June 133.2
July 135.0
August 130.8
September 147.5
October 174.6
November 139.5
December 114.0
Total 1,609.6
1.3.3.1 Precipitation
Rainfall at the location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo campsite based on

Meteonorm can be observed in Table 1 -7. The highest precipitation is 625 mm in
June and the total annual precipitation is 3,416 mm. May until September are
months with a high chance of precipitation.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 7 REV: R00
Figure 1-8 Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi
Table 1-4 Monthly Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi
Month Precipitation (mm) Days with Precipitation (days)

January 128 8
February 117 8
March 135 7
April 280 8
May 514 16
June 625 23
July 586 23
August 399 19
September 235 13
October 152 11
November 112 9
December 133 8
Yearly 153
1.3.3.1 Energy Yield for Wet and Dry Season
Morowali, Central Sulawesi has 2 kinds of weather, there are a dry season and
rainy season. Based on the simulation energy production the annual energy
production is 391.57 MWh/year. If using theory that wet season are including
April until September and the rest of the other month is dry season, the energy
production in dry season is 189.42 MWh and wet season is 202.15 MWh.
Therefore, the wet and dry season doesn’t have correlation with energy
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 8 REV: R00
production of the system. Accumulatively the irradiation on wet season also

higher than the dry season.
1.3.3.2 Ambient Temperature
Morowali, Central Sulawesi has 2 kind kinds of weather, there are a dry season
and rainy season. In this location, the average ambient temperature is 27.7oC,
the highest mothlmonthly average ambient temperature is 28.8oC in April, and
the lowest monthly average ambient temperature is 26.2 oC in July. Average The
average ambient temperature for each month can be seen seen ion Table 1 -5 1
-6.
Table 1-51-6 Monthly Average Ambient Temperature
Month Average Ambient Temperature (oC)

January 28.0
February 28.4
March 28.6
April 28.8
May 28.0
June 26.7
July 26.2
August 26.4
September 26.5
October 27.3
November 28.6
December 28.7
Yearly Average 27.7
1.3.3.3 Precipitation
Rainfall at the location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo campsite based on

Meteonorm can be observed in Table 1 -7. The highest precipitation is 625 mm in
June and the total annual precipitation is 3,416 mm. May until September are
months with high chance of precipitation.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 9 REV: R00
Figure 1-9 Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi
Table 1-7 Monthly Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi
Month Precipitation (mm) Days with Precipitation (days)

January 128 8
February 117 8
March 135 7
April 280 8
May 514 16
June 625 23
July 586 23
August 399 19
September 235 13
October 152 11
November 112 9
December 133 8
Yearly 153
1.3.3.4 Historical Storm Data
Based on UN-OCHA ROAP (United Nations Office for the Coordination of

Humanitarian Affairs Region of Asia Pacific), there is no storm around Morowali,
Central Sulawesi. The historical storm data from 1956 until 2018 can be seen in
Figure 1 -10.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 10 REV: R00
Figure 1-10 Historical Storm Data in Indonesia 1
1.3.3.5 Wind Velocity
In this location the average wind velocity is 1.1 m/s, the highest monthly
average wind velocity is 1.5 m/s in September, and the lowest monthly average
wind velocity is 0.51 m/s in November. Average The average ambient
temperature for each month can be seen seen ion Table 1 -8 1 -9.
Table 1-81-9 Monthly Average Wind Velocity
Month Wind Velocity (m/s)

January 0.86
February 0.88
March 1.07
April 0.91
May 0.94
June 1.00
July 1.39
August 1.49
September 1.51
October 1.30
November 0.51
December 0.76
Yearly Average 1.1
1
UN-OCHA ROAP (United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs - Region of Asia Pacific),
Asia Pacific: Storm Tracks 1956 to 2018 <https://data.humdata.org/dataset/asia-pacific-storm-tracks-1956-to-
2018>.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 11 REV: R00
1.3.3.6 Irradiation
Irradiation data is obtained from from IPP’s pyranometer and meteonorm

database. There are 2 months data that taken from meteonorm data and 10
months data taken from IPP’s pyrano. For June and July are using metenorm data
because there is no data from IPP’s pyranometer. The highest irradiation is 174.6
kWh/m2/month In October. The lowest irradiation is 109.2 kWh/m 2/month in
February.
Tabel 2-2 Irradiation Data

Month Irradiation (kWh/m2)
January 115.9
February 109.2
March 145.9
April 139.8
May 124.1
June 124.5
July 158.4
August 130.8
September 147.5
October 174.6
November 139.5
December 114.0
Total 1,624.2
CHAPTER 2
SOLAR ENERGY ASSESSMENT
2.1. Site Condition
2.1.1. SESNA Proposal
SESNA offers PV system with capacity of 396 kWp and 276 kWh. In their proposal there
are simulation report of the PV system. SESNA proposed annual minimum delivery
energy of 525,728 kWh, based on their calculation. SESNA simulation using assumption
of on grid system, typical orientation, without shading, irradiation data is from
stochastic, and average load of 170 kW with maximum load of 250 kW.
Shading is an important parameter in PV system operation. Near shading is caused by

nearby objects that can partially or completely shadow the PV at any given time. PT
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 12 REV: R00
Hengjaya Mineralindo campsite is located below the equator, so the optimal azimuth is
facing north. However, because the PLTS is placed on the existing rooftop, the azimuth
tilt angle for the PLTS Rooftop is adjusted to the position of the roof of the building. The
angle of inclination used for the PLTS Rooftop is also adjusted to the slope of the roof of
the building.
2.1.2. Actual Condition
The actual condition of the PV System there are 6 different orientations, some trees
that cause shading on PV module, irradiation data is from pyranometer, and average
load 103 kW. Based on simulation with actual condition, the annual energy production
is 391,570 kWh. This simulation is using parameter taken from actual condition. The
module is connected in series with the other module on the other side of the roof.
2.2. Energy Yield Result
The energy yield represents the normalized specific production of energy (in
kWh/kWp/year) and the energy yield (MWh/year) based on the Pvsyst simulation
results. The amount of energy each year is affected by the average PV module
degradation of 0.55%/year.
The energy production between SESNA proposal and actual condition is different
because the parameter that used in SESNA proposal is different with the actual
condition in Hengjaya campsite.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 13 REV: R00
CHAPTER 3
DISCREPANCY IDENTIFICATION
3.1.1. Initial Proposal for Existing Condition
Based
System)
Parameter Value
Unused Energy 88.66 MWh
Energy from Solar 394.80 MWh
Energy from Diesel 510.55 MWh
Energy from Solar per Day 1.081 kWh/day
Solar Fraction 43.61 %
3.1.2. Expansion Proposal (Option 1)
Table 3-11 Simulation Result for PV System with Capacity of 396 kWp and 828 kWh (Option 1)
Parameter Value
Energy from Solar per Day 1,264 kWh/day
3.1.3. Expansion Proposal (Option 2)
Energy yield tercapai atau tidak
Table 3-12 Simulation Result for PV System with Capacity of 512 kWp and 1,656 kWh (Option 2)
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 14 REV: R00
Parameter Value
From Table 3 -25 the third PV system capacity will achieve its first proposed annual
delivered energy (525,728 kWh).
3.2. Discrepancy Identifications of Energy Yield
The energy production between SESNA proposal and actual condition is different because the
parameter that used in SESNA proposal is different with the actual condition in Hengjaya
campsite. Therefore, the energy production between SESNA proposal and actual condition is
different.
No Components SESNA Proposal Actual Condition
1 PV Module 600 590
2 System Capacity 396 396.48
3 x 110
3 Inverter 3 x 110
1 x 15
20 / 59° ; 20 / -121°
4 Tilt / Azimuth 10 / 0° 15 / 54° ; 15 / -126°
14 / 128° ; 14 / -52°
Horizontal Global
5 1,794.60 1609.5
Irradiation (GHI)
6 Near Shadings 0 0.44
7 Module Degradation Loss 0 -0.27
8 Ohmic Wiring Loss -1.02 -1.13
9 Performance Ratio 82.71 63.12
10 Energy from PV System 584.14 391.57

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 15 REV: R00
No Components SESNA Proposal Actual Condition
Minimum Delivered
11 525.72 -
Energy Guaranteed
3.3. Recommendation
In addition, to achieve more accurate PV sizing in the future, it needs more accurate load
profile data. It would be better if the monitoring system for the 400 V MDP cubicle was
connected to SCADA for data records. Reduce object that cause near shading in the module, it
will increase 0.44% energy production annual. This PV system still has energy that does not
absorb by load or battery because the battery is in full capacity, to absorb this energy
production it will need to increase the capacity of the battery.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 16 REV: R00
CHAPTER 4
PV SYSTEM ASSESSMENT Methodology
4.1. Historical PerformanceDiscrepancy Identifications of Existing PV PlantElectrical System
In this chapter overview of PV-BESS and Diesel Generator performance will be elaborated and
compared to what is stated in the proposal to bet he performance of both PV-BESS and Diesel
Generator performance. The data analyses will be categorized to Dry Season performance and
Wet season performance. As the objective of the analysis is to observe the system
performance improvement possibility, the categorization of dry season and wet season will
only based on log data whether i t is sunny day or rainy day.
The following table illustrates comparison between proposed system performance and actual
system performance in HM camp area.
Table 3-13 Historical Performance of PV System

No Operational Aspects Proposal Actual Discrepancy Implication
HengjayaHM Average - Increase in
1 170.00 kW 119.71 kW Yes
LoadAverage Load curtailed energy
PV-BESS Daily
Operating Hours (PV-
<8 hours - Decreasing energy
2 BESS can supply 100% 8 hours Yes
(average) supplied to load
load during 08.00 –
16.00)
Additional PV-BESS
3 1 hour 1 hour No -
Daily Operating Hour
Diesel Generator (DG)
- Inefficiency in DG
4 Minimum Operation 100 kW <100kW Yes
fuel consumption
during (08.00-16.00)
BESS can stabilize the
5 system when PV Yes Yes No -
fluctuates
Smart Controller can
dispatch for both PV-
6 Yes Yes No -
BESS and Diesel
Generator
Diesel Generator to
operate during a
7 Yes Yes No -
worst-case scenario in
08.00-16.00
Additional hardware AGC + Auto
AGC + Auto
was installed on Synchronizer
8 Synchronizer No -
Genset to support to be
installed
EMS installed
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 17 REV: R00
Based on collected data, i t is known that the average load during one year (July 2022 – Junei
2023) is lower than what is stated in the proposal., as illustrated in the following resume table.
Average Load July 2022 – Juni 2023 (kW)

180
160
140
120
Load (kW)
100
80
60
40
20
0
8:00 9:00 10:00 11:00 12:00 13:00 14:00 15:00 16:00
Time
Table 14 Proposed and Actual Average Load Comparison Table
Time Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr
8:00 97,00 88,40 89,87 93,33 112,52 104,13 85,52 89,29 82,39
9:00 112,63 101,80 104,03 112,07 125,42 122,62 102,90 108,04 93,81
10:00 125,77 126,40 107,87 113,77 135,55 129,78 112,61 120,21 100,00
11:00 134,37 122,80 115,67 117,70 139,71 131,65 122,55 128,04 112,23
12:00 137,67 133,20 122,03 127,67 141,81 137,33 123,94 134,61 112,26
13:00 137,20 129,00 121,90 129,93 144,45 134,39 129,06 135,25 1
14:00 139,13 131,80 123,07 126,47 136,74 132,39 126,29 131,04 1
15:00 135,57 118,60 113,60 114,80 128,74 126,00 118,71 127,96 1
Avrg 11 11 11 13 12 11 12 10 12
(kW) 127,42 9,00 2,25 6,97 3,12 7,29 5,20 1,80 4,36 0,41
Figure 3-11 Average Load July 2022 – June 2023
From table above, theThe total one year average load from 8:00 until 16:00 is 119.71 kW
whereas average load in the proposal is 170.00 kW.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 18 REV: R00
Lower load can result in more dumped energi / curtailed PV power because the battery system
can be performed like a smoother because its capacity can only last up to 2 hour if its
discharged at system peak load. Therefore during daytime when PV produce maximum load,
the battery is already fully charged and the excess power from PV is dumped.
It is stated in the SESNA’s proposal that they will provide 8-hour daily operation of PV-BESS but
they did not state any specific pre-condition whether it is in the sunny day, cloudy or rainy day.
In the following tables, summary of PV-BESS operating hour during dry season and wet season
in one year (July 2022 to Juni 2023) are provided.
Table 2-1516 PV-BESS Operating Hours in Dry Season
Actual Ooperating
Month Proposed Hour
Hhour
September 2022 240 205
October 2022 248 219
November 2022 240 217
December 2022 240 216
Januaryi 2023 248 193
February 2023 224 184
March 2023 248 72
April 2023 240 180
As the obtained data is from July 2022 to Juni 2023, the categorization of Dry season would be
September 2022 to April 2023, and the rest would be wet season.
Table 2-1718 PV-BESS Operating Hours in Wet Season
Actual Ooperating
Month Proposed Hour
Hhour
July 2022* 40 31
August 2022 248 186
September 2022 240 205
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 19 REV: R00
Actual Ooperating
Month Proposed Hour
Hhour
May 2023 248 188
Juni 2023** 104 66
April 2023 240 180
Notes:
*) Incomplete Log Data report (only from Julnyi 1st -to Juni 5th and June 1st-13th)
**) Log Data report only up to Juni 13th
Other Discrepancy found from historical data is Diesel Generator operation. It is stated in the
proposal that Diesel Generator would be operated effectively and efficiently with minimum
load of 100 kW. But, in actual Diesel Generator was operated under 100 kW load in some
dates.
4.2. Energy Management System (EMS)MS Controller Assessment
This chapter elaborates HengjayaHM Energi Management System in from a High levelHigh-
level point of view. TSo therefore, discussion is limited to the EMS scheme and upgrade
possibility, EMS hardware and upgrade possibility, and System Operation Algortihm
Algorithm in general.
The objective of this study is to make sure that HengjayaHM EMS can achieve to main
objectives ; Ooptimum oOperation of the system. and Operation planning. The optimum
operation of one day is used as the basis for operation planning of the next day. He goal is
improve operation for day to day.
4.2.1. Hengjaya EMS Architecture
HengjayaHM EMS consists of three main components: i) Controlled Components, ii)

Measurement Components, iii) Communication component components, and iv)
Controller Components. Controlled Components consists consist of Battery Inverter
(PCS), PV Inverter, and Diesel Generator. Measurement components consists consist of
all current transformer transformers and voltage transforment transformers on main
components. Communication The communication component is the SCADA system
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 20 REV: R00
alongside with its related hardware and the cController components are ComAP
InteliSys NTC Hybrid installed on the Synchronization bus panel and ComAP InteliGen
NT(C) BB installed on the Diesel generator panel.
In normal operation, during the daytime, PCS acts as a grid former with its Virtual
Synchronous Generator (VSG) Mode (VSG) to provide Inertia to the system. In the grid,
Inertia is covered by Diesel Generator. Energi Energy Management System (EMS) has
to make sure smooth transition between DG to PCS in the morning when PV starts to
produces produce power and PCS to DG in the afternoon when the PV start starts to
disconnect from the system.
Each of them has EMS modules installed on their site and one master module in
synchro Bus. PCS EMS module and DG EMS module monitor electrical variables, and
store and send data to the master module to be processed. Master The master module
contains several programs intalled installed and canable to provide operational
solution solutions and converted it them to commands for each PCS EMS module and
DG EMS module by with the help of the SCADA system.
This EMS Control scheme is illustrated as follows.
Figure 3-1213 Hengjaya EMS Controller Architecture
SCADA system and EMS are continously continuously communicating and

controcontrollingl PV, battery, and Diesel Generator through their EMS modules to
achieve an optimized operation scheme as calculated by the main module program.
4.2.2. Downtime Due to Findings on EMS Hardware ProblemFailure

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 21 REV: R00
Based on collected SESNA report data, it was found that there were 2 (two) EMS
related hardware problem occured 2 (two) EMS-related hardware problems occurred in
the Hengajaya system and causing caused 1 month PV-BESS unavailability the whole
day:
a. PCS VSG Mode failure
b. PCS Monitoring system failure
These two problems were already solved by on siteon-site team the next month after
it they occuredoccurred. I t is important to prevent the same problems to be
occuredoccur in the future. ISo i t is highly recommended to utilize night time (when
PV-BESS system does not operate) to conduct daily basis checking and testing to make
sure the EMS hardware and software can operate normally the next day. provide spare
parts to improve repair time when the system failure occurs.
4.2.3. Analysis ofRoom for Operation Optimization EMS Control Philosophyon Hengjaya
system
HengjayaHM Power system only consists of PV, Battery, and Diesel Generator. While
the power purchase agreement for PV-BESS between SESNA and HengjayaHM is a falt
flat price, threfore therefore the optimum operation of the HengjayaHM system can be
achieved as long it obey obeys the following hierarchy:
a. PV supply the grid
b. Battery supply the grid
c. Diesel generator supply supplies the grid in its optimum operation range
d. Diesel generator supply the grid not in its optimum operation range
It is intended by HengjayaHM that during from 07.00 to 17.00, Hengaja electricity

system should be supplied by PV and battery only (a + b). Outside that periode,
electricity system would be supplied by DG which may be in efficient or inefficient in its
operation range. Should the DG falls below its optimum oerpation range, it would cause
higher generated electricity cost. in operation scheme (a) or (b) and beyond that hour, it
can be in operation scheme (c) or (d). But, it is very recommended to operates operate
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 22 REV: R00
in scheme (c) as i t is the optimum operation scheme. The operation scheme priority of
Existing HeEngjayaHM electricity system is EMS illustrated in the following flowchart:
Figure 3-1415 EMS Controller Operation Scheme
Based on SESNA monthly report data, it is found that in averagelyaverage, 2 days in a

month DG was operated during the daytime which is not desired either by
HengjayaHM or SESNA. As it is intended to increase Renewable Energyi penetration
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 23 REV: R00
and minimizse the operating hour of Diesel generator, it is important to make sure the
desired operation scheme can be fulfilled.
It is found that the existing battery size is more suitable for smoothing only as it can
only last for 2 hours when dischraged discharged in its full load. To implement the
desired operation scheme which is to achieve more RE penetration, additional battery
is required so possible battery discharge hour can last longer. The elaboration
regarding the sizing of additional battery capacity is expalined explained in the a
separated separate chapter.
Sebenarnya EMS system sudah oke asal kapasitas baterai dan PV sudah dapat
mencukupi seperti pada bab 2
4.3. Electrical System Assesment
Based on collected data and simulation result, there is No. voltage profile problem or
equipment overload in existing Hengjaya system. The voltage can be maintained in the
allowable range (0.9 – 1.05 p.u.) and there is no thermal loading problem in cables.
Regarding load stacking, i tis found that in some cases Diesel generator should connect to the
grid and supply the load because PV generation is lower than the load. If the battery SOC is
above its minimum value, battery will be prioritized before Diesel Generator.
This section elaborates more on DigSILENT transient simulation result for 2 hypothetical cases
and 2 actual cases based on SESNA monthly report data. The objective of hypothetical cases is
to ensure the PCS and DG can maintain system stability when the worst possible cases occured
in the system. While the objective of the actual cases are to show the responses of DG and
PCS.
Based on hypothetical and actual cases of simulation results, it can be seen that Dg and PCS
can maintain system voltage and frequency, therefore there should not been any stability
problem during worst PV drop and transition from PCS to DG and vice versa.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 24 REV: R00
4.4. Electrical System Assessment
4.4.1. HM Electrical System Modelling
At present, the HM Basecamp PV system technically is a Hybrid PV system that consists

of PV Array, Battery Array, and Diesel Power Plant collected into 400 V Power cubicle to
supply HM Basecamp electricity demand which is cumulated into one Distribution Panel.
PV System Power cubicle supplies distribution panel through 18 m Underground Cable.
In case of less power from PV, the controller will prioritize Battery to connect and
compensate the power when its State of Charge (SOC) is above its minimum allowable
value, otherwise, Diesel will come in and supply the load. There is no problem with the
Required ramp-up from Battery or Diesel as the switch between these power sources
can be automatically done smoothly.
DigSILENT modeling and transient simulation were conducted to observe whether the
Battery Inverter size is capable to handle worst-case scenario PV output drop and actual
case PV drop based on collected data.
Figure 3 -6 shows the single line diagram for the HM Basecamp low voltage system. HM
Basecamp PV system consists of PV Array and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS)
which is connected to one AC Combiner Panel. This AC Combiner Panel is
interconnected to the 400 V MDP cubicle with 18 m distance from the location of the PV
Powerhouse to the point of connection. 2x500 kVA Diesel Generator are connected to
MDP Cubicle to supply the HM Basecamp load at 10 m distance from the location of the
Diesel Generator.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 25 REV: R00
Figure 3-1 HM Basecamp Single Line Diagram
The results of the power flow simulation showing the amount of power generated
by the PV and the amount of power flowing on the cable and the direction of its
power flow can be seen in Figure 3 -7 and Figure 3 -8. Figure 3 -7 shows load
flow in the HM Basecamp system during the PV peak generation (13 rd January
2023; 12:00 PM) operation.
Figure 3 -8 shows load flow in the HM Basecamp system during the Peak Load
(10th June 2022; 12:00 PM) operation. During the Peak Load, Active power
generated by the PV system is used to supply the load in HM Basecamp which
supplies in total of 172 kW, while the diesel generator did not supply any active
power to the load. Since the HM Basecamp load during PV peak generation only
reach 171 kW, the rest of the active power generated by the PV system is used to
charge the battery.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 26 REV: R00

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 27 REV: R00
Figure 3-2 Load Flow During PV Peak Generation with HM Peak Load operationLoad Flow During Peak
Load
4.4.2. Effect of PV Intermittency
One of PV Power Plant risks is its intermittent nature which has probability of
sudden PV output power decrease (PV Drop). A short time interval capture of PV
and BESS power output (transient) commonly used to observe capability of
Battery and Battery Inverter to compensate power drop from PV.
A transient stability study on the HM Basecamp system is done with the maximum
PV generation, peak load, BESS in discharging state, and BESS in the charging
state. In this study, the impact of the active power drop of the HM Basecamp PV
system is observed.
The PV in this study consists of a solar power plant and batteries. The power
supply from the solar power plant is obtained from solar energy that is converted
into electrical energy through PV modules. The solar energy that can be received
by PV modules is very dependent on weather and environmental conditions.
Shadows on the surface of the PV module that appear due to dust, clouds, or
other obstructions will make the power supply reduced. In this study case, it is
assumed that there is a large cloud that blocks the sunlight from the PV module in
a short time. This condition is considered very extreme because the total surface
area of the PV module is very large and is unlikely to be covered by clouds in a
short time. Based on the operation scheme data, the diesel generator supplies the
HM Basecamp load during the daytime only when the PV system is not operated.
In this transient stability scenario, the HM Basecamp load only receives supplies
from the PV system.
The first simulated scenario is started with the maximum PV generation at 12:00,
then there is a decrease in its generation until 10% of the PV capacity within 10
seconds. The simulation time is 60 seconds with the generation of PV starting to
decrease from 10th to 20th second. The simulation results of PV drop transient
stability show the impact on the shift in active power supply which can be seen in
Figure 3 -9. The daytime active power supply for HM Basecamp system is
supplied by HM Basecamp PV Power Plant only.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 28 REV: R00
Figure 3 -9 represents transient simulations when HM Basecamp PV experiences

a sudden active power drop from 100% to 10% at PV peak generation. At the 10 th
second HM Basecamp PV generation is 259 kW. Then there is a 90% reduction in
power generation of the PV to 10% until the 20 th second. The reduction in PV
generation is compensated by the PV battery to meet the load requirements of
the system. The initial condition of the PV battery start from -84.79 kW -99 kW
means that the battery is in a charging state before the PV experiences a sudden
active power drop. After the power generation of the HM Basecamp PV drop, the
battery compensates for the loss of power for 136.42 kW and Hengjaya Basecamp
diesel generator (DG6) increases its power generation up to 9.04 kW. Based on
diesel generator starting data, the ramp rate of HML Basecamp diesel generator is
11.7 kW/s. Thus, the ramping up of DG6 during intermittency is still within its
diesel generator capability.130 kW.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 29 REV: R00
Figure 3-3 Transient During PV Peak Generation with HM Peak Load operation
4.5. Electrical System Assessment
Based on collected data and simulation results, there is No.no voltage profile problem or
equipment overload in the existing HengjayaHM system. The voltage can be maintained in the
allowable range (0.9 – 1.05 p.u.) and there is no thermal loading problem in cables.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 30 REV: R00
Regarding load stacking, it is found that in some cases Diesel generator should connect to the
grid and supply the load because PV generation is lower than the load. If the battery SOC is
above its minimum value, the battery will be prioritized before Diesel Generator.
This section elaborates more on DigSILENT transient simulation result for 2 hypothetical cases
and 2 actual cases based on SESNA monthly report data. The objective of hypothetical cases is
to ensure the PCS and DG can maintain system stability when the worst possible cases occur in
the system. While the objective of the actual cases are to show the responses of DG and PCS.
Based on hypothetical and actual cases of simulation results, it can be seen that D Gg and PCS
can maintain system voltage and frequency, therefore there should not be any stability
problem during the worst PV drop and transition from PCS to DG and vice versa.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 31 REV: R00
In addition to carryingcarry out the transient simulation in the previous section, HM Basecamp
electrical system operation is analyzed to show the capability of HM BESS and Diesel Generator
to compensate for the active power drop from PV due to intermittency. This analysis is done
with four same scenarios that are used in transient analysis.
HM Basecamp system operation before and after PV drop during PV peak generation are
shown in Figure 3 -13 and Figure 3 -14 respectively. In this scenario, the active power supply
for the HM Basecamp system is supplied by HM Basecamp PV Power Plant only, and the BESS
is in the charging state. The PV Power Plant is generating 259 kW and supplies 172 kW 160 kW
to the HM Basecamp load, the rest 84.79 kW 99.37 kW of active power from the PV Power
Plant is used to supply BESS. After the PV Power drop, the active power decreased to 9.04 kW
28.04 kW as shown in Figure 3 -14. To meet the load requirements of the system, the
reduction in PV generation is compensated by the BESS. The BESS which started by charging
84.79 kW to battery is now supply 136.44 kW 99.37 kW to the battery is now supplying 130.48
kW to the HM Basecamp load. This indicates that the battery has a power shifting of 221.23
kW 229.85 kW during a 90% PV drop within 10 seconds. Since the PV battery capacity is 250
kWh, the HM BESS can still compensate for the active power drop from the PV.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 32 REV: R00
Generation Mix Before PV Drop

300
250
200
Active Power (kW)
150
259
100
50
0
.
-50 -99.37
-100
-150
Load Stacking
PV Battery
Generation Mix Before PV Drop

300
250 0
200
Active Power (kW)
150
259
100
50
0
.
-50 -84.79
-100
-150
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-4 Load Stacking CurveBar Before PV Drop During PV Peak Generation
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 33 REV: R00
Generation Mix After PV Drop

180
160
140
Active Power (kW)
120
100 130.48
80
60
40
20 28.04
0
.
Load Stacking
PV Battery
Generation Mix After PV Drop

180
160 9.04
140
Active Power (kW)
120
100 136.44
80
60
40
20 24.95
0
.
PV Peak Generation with Hengjaya Peak Load Scenario
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-5 Load Stacking CurveBar After PV Drop During PV Peak Generation
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 34 REV: R00
CHAPTER 5
SIMULATION AND MODELING
5.1. Grid Impact Study
5.1.1. Existing Electricity System Study
At present, HML Basecamp PV system technically is a Hybrid PV system which consists of

PV Array, Battery Array and Diesel Power Plant collected into 400 V Power cubicle to
supply HML Basecamp electricity demand which cumulated into one Distribution Panel.
PV System Power cubicle supplies distribution panel through 18 m Underground Cable.
PV Strings are installed rooftop, split into 7 (seven) buildings while the amount of PV
inverters are 4 inverters. The battery array collected into one bidirectional inverter while
the installed Diesel Generator is 2x500kVA but only 1x500kVA unit can be operated
normally since June 2023. There is already control system which can automatically
switch between PV, Battery or Diesel connection to supply the load.
In case of less power from PV, controller will prioritize Battery to connect and
compensate the power when its State of Charge (SOC) is above its minimum allowable
value, otherwise Diesel will come in and supply the load. There is no problem with
Required ramp up from Battery or Diesel as the switch between these power sources
can be automatically done smoothly.
DigSILENT modelling and transient simulation was conducted to observe whether

Battery Inverter size is capable to handle worst-case scenario PV output drop and actual
case PV drop based on collected data.
5.1.2. DigSILENT Modelling
Figure 3 -6 shows the single line diagram for the HML Basecamp low voltage system.
HML Basecamp PV system consist of PV Array and Battery Energy Storage System (BESS)
which connected to one AC Combiner Panel. This AC Combiner Panel is interconnected
to the 400 V MDP cubicle with 18 m distance from the location of the PV Powerhouse to
the point of connection. 2x500 kVA Diesel Generator are connected to MDP Cubicle to
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 35 REV: R00
supply HML Basecamp load with 10 m distance from the location of the Diesel
Generator.
Figure 3-6 HML Basecamp Single Line Diagram
5.1.3. Simulation and Analysis
5.1.3.1 Load Flow Analysis
The results of power flow simulation showing the amount of power generated by
the PV and the amount of power flowing on the cable and the direction of its
power flow can be seen in Figure 3 -7 and Figure 3 -8. Figure 3 -7 shows load
flow in the HML Basecamp system during the PV peak generation (13 rd January
2023; 12:00 PM) operation. During the PV peak generation, Active power
generated by the PV system is used to supply load in HML Basecamp which supply
in total of 259 kW, while the diesel generator did not supply any active power to
the load. Since the HML Basecamp load during PV peak generation only reach 158
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 36 REV: R00
kW, the rest of active power generated by the PV system is used to charge the
battery.
Figure 3 -8 shows load flow in the HML Basecamp system during the Peak Load
(10th June 2022; 12:00 PM) operation. During the Peak Load, Active power
generated by the PV system is used to supply load in HML Basecamp which supply
in total of 172 kW, while the diesel generator did not supply any active power to
the load. Since the HML Basecamp load during PV peak generation only reach 171
kW, the rest of active power generated by the PV system is used to charge the
battery.
Figure 3-7 Load Flow During PV Peak Generation

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 37 REV: R00
Figure 3-8 Load Flow During Peak Load
5.1.3.2 Transient Stability Analysis
A transient stability study on the HML Basecamp system is done with the
maximum PV generation, peak load, BESS on discharging state, and BESS on
charging state. In this study, the impact from the active power drop of HML
Basecamp PV system is observed.
The PV in this study consists of a solar power plant and batteries. The power
supply from the solar power plant is obtained from solar energy that is converted
into electrical energy through PV modules. The solar energy that can be received
by PV modules is very dependent on weather and environmental conditions.
Shadows on the surface of the PV module that appear due to dust, clouds, or
other obstructions will make the power supply reduced. In this study case, it is
assumed that there is a large cloud that blocks the sunlight from the PV module in
a short time. This condition is considered very extreme because the total surface
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 38 REV: R00
area of the PV module is very large and is unlikely to be covered by clouds in a

short time. Based on the operation scheme data, the diesel generator supplies
HML Basecamp load at daytime only when the PV system is not operated. In this
transient stability scenario, HML Basecamp load only receive supplies from the PV
system.
5.1.3.2.1 PV Peak Generation Transient
The first simulated scenario is started with the maximum PV generation at

12:00, then there is a decrease in its generation until 10% of the PV
capacity within 10 seconds. The simulation time is 60 seconds with the
generation of PV starting to decrease from 10 th to 20th second. The
simulation results of PV drop transient stability show the impact on the
shift in active power supply which can be seen in Figure 3 -9. The
daytime active power supply for HML Basecamp system is supplied by
HML Basecamp PV Power Plant only.
Figure 3 -9 represents transient simulations when HML Basecamp PV

experiences a sudden active power drop from 100% to 10% at PV peak
generation. At the 10th second HML Basecamp PV generation is 259 kW.
Then there is a 90% reduction in power generation of the PV to 10% until
the 20th second. The reduction in PV generation is compensated by the PV
battery in order to meet the load requirements of the system. The initial
condition of the PV battery start from -99 kW means that the battery at
charging state before the PV experiences a sudden active power drop.
After the power generation of the HML Basecamp PV drop, the battery
compensates the loss of power for 130 kW.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 39 REV: R00
Figure 3-9 Transient During PV Peak Generation
5.1.3.2.2 Peak Load Transient
The second simulated scenario is conducted with the maximum HML

Basecamp at peak load (12:00), then there is a decrease in its generation
until 10% of the PV capacity within 10 seconds. The simulation time is 60
seconds with the generation of PV starting to decrease from 10 th to 20th
second. The simulation results of PV drop transient stability show the
impact on the shift in active power supply which can be seen in Figure 3 -
10. The daytime active power supply for HML Basecamp system is
supplied by HML Basecamp PV Power Plant only.

experiences a sudden active power drop from 100% to 10% at peak load.
At the 10th second HML Basecamp PV generation is 172 kW. Then there is
a 90% reduction in power generation of the PV to 10% until the 20 th
second. The reduction in PV generation is compensated by the PV battery
in order to meet the load requirements of the system. After the power
generation of the HML Basecamp PV drop, the battery compensates the
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 40 REV: R00
loss of power for 144.7 kW and HML Basecamp diesel generator (DG5)
increases its power generation up to 5.751 kW. Based on diesel generator
starting data, the ramp rate of HML Basecamp diesel generator is 11.7
kW/s. Diesel Generator did not response to compensate any active power
drop from PV.
Figure 3-10 Transient During Peak Load
5.1.3.2.3 Battery on Discharging State Transient
The third simulated scenario is started with the HML Basecamp BESS start
from discharging state, then there is a decrease in PV generation until
10% of the PV capacity within 10 seconds. The simulation time is 60
seconds with the generation of PV starting to decrease from 10 th to 20th
second. The simulation results of PV drop transient stability show the
impact on the shift in active power supply which can be seen in Figure 3 -
11. In this scenario, the active power supply for HML Basecamp system is
supplied by HML Basecamp PV Power Plant and BESS.

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 41 REV: R00
drop from PV.
Figure 3-11 Transient During Battery on Discharging State (18 October 2022)
5.1.3.2.4 Battery on Charging State Transient
The fourth simulated scenario is conducted with the maximum HML

Basecamp BESS start from charging state, then there is a decrease in PV
generation until 10% of the PV capacity within 10 seconds. The simulation
time is 60 seconds with the generation of PV starting to decrease from
10th to 20th second. The simulation results of PV drop transient stability
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 42 REV: R00
show the impact on the shift in active power supply which can be seen in
Figure 3 -12. In this scenario, the active power supply for HML Basecamp
system is supplied by HML Basecamp PV Power Plant only.

drop from PV.
Figure 3-12 Transient During Battery on Charging State (2 August 2022)
5.1.3.3 HML Basecamp Electrical System Operation

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 43 REV: R00
In addition to carrying out the transient simulation at the previous section, HML
Basecamp electrical system operation is analyzed to show the capability of HML
BESS and Diesel Generator to compensate the active power drop from PV due to
intermittency. This analysis is done with four same scenario that used in transient
analysis.
5.1.3.3.1 System Operation During PV Peak Generation
HML Basecamp system operation before and after PV drop during PV

peak generation are shown in Figure 3 -13 and Figure 3 -14 respectively.
In this scenario, the active power supply for HML Basecamp system is
supplied by HML Basecamp PV Power Plant only and the BESS is on the
charging state. The PV Power Plant is generating 259 kW and supply 160
kW to HML Basecamp load, the rest 99.37 kW active power from PV
Power Plant is used to supply BESS. After the PV Power drop, the active
power decrease until 28.04 kW as shown in Figure 3 -14. In order to
meet the load requirements of the system, the reduction in PV generation
is compensated by the BESS. The BESS which started from charging 99.37
kW to battery is now supply 130.48 kW to the HML Basecamp load. This
indicates that the battery has a power shifting of 229.85 kW during 90%
PV drop within 10 seconds. Since the PV battery capacity is 250 kWh, the
HML BESS can still compensate the active power drop from the PV.
Before PV Drop During PV Peak Generation (13 January

2023)
300
250 0
200
Active Power (kW)
150
259
100
50
0
.
-50 -99.37
-100
-150
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 44 REV: R00
Figure 3-13 Load Stacking Curve Before PV Drop During PV Peak Generation
After PV Drop During PV Peak Generation (13 January

2023)
180
160 0
140
Active Power (kW) 120
100 130.48
80
60
40
20 28.04
0
.
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-14 Load Stacking Curve After PV Drop During PV Peak Generation
5.1.3.3.2 System Operation During Peak Load
HML Basecamp system operation before and after PV drop during peak
load are shown in Figure 3 -15 and Figure 3 -16 respectively. In this
scenario, the active power supply for HML Basecamp system is supplied
by HML Basecamp PV Power Plant only. The PV Power Plant is generating
172 kW and all its active power is absorbed by HML Basecamp load. After
the PV Power drop, the active power decrease until 20.53 kW as shown in
Figure 3 -16. In order to meet the load requirements of the system, the
reduction in PV generation is compensated by the BESS and the Diesel
Generator. After the PV drop, the BESS active power increased from 0 kW
to 144.74 kW to supply HML Basecamp load, while the diesel generator
active power increased from 0 kW to 5.75 kW. This indicates that the
battery has a power shifting of 144.74 kW during 90% PV drop within 10
seconds. Since the PV battery capacity is 250 kWh, the HML BESS can still
compensate the active power drop from the PV.
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 45 REV: R00
Before PV Drop During Peak Load (10 June 2022)

200
180
0
160
Active Power (kW)

140
120
100
80 172
60
40
20
0
.
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-15 Load Stacking Curve Before PV Drop During Peak Load
After PV Drop During Peak Load (10 June 2022)

180
5.75
160
140
Active Power (kW)
120
100 144.74
80
60
40
20
20.53
0
.
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-16 Load Stacking Curve After PV Drop During Peak Load
5.1.3.3.3 System Operation with Battery on Charging State
HML Basecamp system operation before and after PV drop during battery
on charging state are shown in Figure 3 -17 and Figure 3 -18. In this
scenario, the active power supply for HML Basecamp system is supplied
by HML Basecamp PV Power Plant only and the BESS is on the charging
state. The PV Power Plant is generating 223 kW and supply 160 kW to
HML Basecamp load, the rest 85.26 kW active power from PV Power Plant
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 46 REV: R00
is used to charging the battery. After the PV Power drop, the active power
decrease until 15.48 kW as shown in Figure 3 -18. In order to meet the
load requirements of the system, the reduction in PV generation is
compensated by the BESS. The BESS which started from charging 85.26
kW to battery is now supply 97.39 kW to the HML Basecamp load. This
indicates that the battery has a power shifting of 182.65 kW during 90%
PV drop within 10 seconds. Since the PV battery capacity is 250 kWh, the
HML BESS can still compensate the active power drop from the PV.
Before PV Drop During Battery on Charging State (2 August 2022)

250
0
200
Active Power (kW)
150
100 223
50
0
.
-85.26
-50
-100
-150
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-17 Load Stacking Curve Before PV Drop at Battery on Charging State (2
August 2022)
After PV Drop During Battery on Charging State (2 August 2022)

140
120 15.48
Active Power (kW)
100
80
60 97.39
40
20
15.48
0
.
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-18 Load Stacking Curve After PV Drop at Battery on Charging State (2
August 2022)
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 47 REV: R00
5.1.3.3.4 System Operation with Battery on Discharging State
HML Basecamp system operation before and after PV drop during battery
on discharging state are shown in Figure 3 -19 and Figure 3 -20
respectively. In this scenario, the active power supply for HML Basecamp
system is supplied by HML Basecamp PV Power Plant and the BESS is in
the discharging state to supply the HML Basecamp load. The PV Power
Plant is generating 100 kW to supply HML Basecamp load, and the BESS is
supplying 41.58 kW to HML Basecamp load. After the PV Power drop, the
active power decrease until 9.13 kW as shown in Figure 3 -20. In order to
meet the load requirements of the system, the reduction in PV generation
is compensated by the BESS and Diesel Generator. The BESS which started
from discharging 99.37 kW to HML Basecamp load is now increased to
111.84 kW, while the diesel generator active power increased from 0 kW
to 20.73 kW. This indicates that the battery has a power shifting of 70.26
kW during 90% PV drop within 10 seconds. Since the PV battery capacity
is 250 kWh, the HML BESS can still compensate the active power drop
from the PV.
Before PV Drop During Battery on Discharging State (18 October

2022)
160
140 0
120 41.58
Active Power (kW)
100
80
60
100
40
20
0
.
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-19 Load Stacking Curve Before PV Drop at Battery on Discharging State
(18 October 2022)
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 48 REV: R00
After PV Drop During Battery on Discharging State (18 October

2022)
160
140
20.73
120
Active Power (kW)

100
80
60 111.84
40
20
0 9.13
.
Load Stacking
PV Battery DG
Figure 3-20 Load Stacking Curve After PV Drop at Battery on Discharging State (18
October 2022)
5.2. PVSyst Simulation
5.2.1. Location Assessment
In the PV system, selecting components and system configurations, it is necessary to

carry out a location assessment to take into calculate the energy loss due to shading,
optimal azimuth, and optimal tilt angle.
Shading is an important parameter in PV system operation. Near shading is caused by

nearby objects that can partially or completely shadow the PV at any given time. PT
Hengjaya Mineralindo campsite is located below the equator, so the optimal azimuth is
facing north. However, because the PLTS is placed on the existing rooftop, the azimuth
tilt angle for the PLTS Rooftop is adjusted to the position of the roof of the building. The
angle of inclination used for PLTS Rooftop is also adjusted to the slope of the roof of the
building.
5.2.2. Solar Energy Resource Assessment
The solar energy received by the earth's surface in an area will vary depending on the
coordinate lines, the angle of incidence of the sun, the duration of the sun's rays, and
the altitude. To obtain solar radiation data, measurements are made either directly with
measuring devices or by extrapolating data. There are many types of measuring
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 49 REV: R00
instruments that can be used, with different levels of accuracy. Therefore, solar
radiation data obtained from different sources for one location will have different data
quality depending on the measurement method and instrument. In this report, weather
data is obtained from from IPP’s pyranometer and meteonorm database. There are 2
months data that taken from meteonorm data and 10 months data taken from IPP’s
pyrano. For June and July are using meteonorm data because there is no data from IPP’s
pyranometer.
Table 3-19 Weather Data

Data
Month
Irradiation (kWh/m2) Ambient Temperature (oC)
January 115.9 28.0
February 109.2 28.4
March 145.9 28.6
April 139.8 28.8
May 124.1 28.0
June 124.5 26.7
July 158.4 26.2
August 130.8 26.4
September 147.5 26.5
October 174.6 27.3
November 139.5 28.6
December 114.0 28.7
Total / Average 1,624.2 27.7
Solar radiation in PT Hengjaya Mineralindo area has a fluctuating trend. From data
shows the lowest radiation intensity of 109.9 kWh/m 2/month in February, while the
highest radiation intensity is 174.6 kWh/m2/month in October.
The data released by Meteonorm is the result of stochastic model calculations from
several years which describe the potential for solar energy at a specified location based
on available climate and topographical data. The potential for solar energy needs to be
simulated because radiation values and weather conditions are dynamic so that they
can change over 25 years of PLTS system operation.
5.2.3. Assumption and Data Input
Solar module assumptions and inputs include DC/AC ratio, PV string and array
configurations, PV module parameters, and losses assumptions. PV module parameters
include slope and azimuth, mounting considerations, and others. While the details
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 50 REV: R00
regarding the losses assumption used in the simulation are explained at the end of this
section.
5.2.3.1 DC/AC Ratio
Based on the inverter manufacturer, installed capacity of the PV power can be 1.3
times higher than the output power of the inverter (DC/AC ratio 1.3). At high solar
irradiance, Vmpp can be higher than the inverter rating. Therefore, the system
will not work at the maximum power point and the power rating of the inverter
will limit the power conversion or it is called power curtailing. On the other hand,
power modification is required to prevent the voltage from rising to unacceptable
levels to avoid unwanted repeated trips.
5.2.3.2 PV String Configuration
PV string is a group of PV modules connected in series and installed in one place.

A PV array is a collection of strings connected to a single inverter. The strings and
arrays must be considered to inverter specification. The existing configuration can
be seen on Table 3 -20.
Table 3-20 PV Capacity

PV Capacity
PV Location Modules
(kWp)
Kitchen 93.22 158
Camp Celebes 42.84 72
Camp Andalas 47.20 80
Camp Java 47.20 80
Camp Borneo 47.20 80
Camp Papua 40.12 68
Workshop 79.06 134
Total 396.48 672
Below are the PV series configurations that used in PT Hengjaya Mineralindo

campsite, but there are some series configuration that using series connection
with the other side of the building. Usually, module series connection only on one
side of the roof because inverter will
‍
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 51 REV: R00
5.2.3.3 Modul PV Parameter Determination
PV module tilt will follow the slope of the existing roof. The characteristics of the
PV array for each PLTS system are listed in Table 3 -21.
Table 3-21 PV Array
PV Location Tilt Azimuth

Kitchen 15 54 ; -126
Camp Celebes 20 59 ; -121
Camp Andalas 20 59 ; -121
Camp Java 20 59 ; -121
Camp Borneo 20 59 ; -121
Camp Papua 20 59 ; -121
Workshop 14 -52 ; 128
The inverter used in the camp site has a nominal power per unit of 15 kW (1 unit)
and 110 kW (3 units).
5.2.3.4 Losses Assumption
In the PVsyst simulation, there are several losses that need to be considered.
These losses consist of thermal parameters, ohmic losses from cables, PV and
inverter losses, light-induced degradation (LID), mismatch, soiling, incidence angle
modification (IAM), auxiliaries, aging, and unavailability.
Table 3-22 Losses Assumption

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 52 REV: R00
Losses Value Remarks

Existing condition use cable length from
actual condition. Existing condition
Ohmic Losses -1.13%
generate more losses and will produce
lower energy.
LID Loss 2% Based on PV module datasheet.
Based on discussions with experts
Power Loss on MPP 2%
regarding practical industrial test results.
Based on the literature study, it is
Soiling Loss 2% assumed that the PV module will be
cleaned once a month.
Aging 0,55% Based on PV module datasheet.
Based on the default PVsyst parameters
Thermal Parameter 20.0 w/m²K
for Rooftop PLTS.
5.2.4. Energy Yield
The energy yield represents the normalized specific production of energy (in
kWh/kWp/year) and the energy yield (MWh/year) based on the Pvsyst simulation
results. The amount of energy each year is affected by the average PV module
degradation of 0.55%/year and there are uncertainties during the PLTS operating life
which can be estimated with probability values in the PVSyst simulation.
From the energy simulation results, it can be determined the capacity factor value of
the PLTS system for the first year. Capacity factor or CF is the ratio between the
production of electrical energy produced by PLTS in one year divided by the maximum
production of electrical energy produced by the PLTS, with the following formula:
() ❑
()
The losses that occur in the PLTS system will reduce the amount of energy that can be
converted from the sun, so that the remaining energy is the energy that is injected into
the network. Therefore, the performance ratio (PR) must also be monitored during the
operation of the PLTS system.
System)
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 53 REV: R00
Parameter Value
Energy from Solar per Day 1.081 kWh/day
Table 3-24 Simulation Result for PV System with Capacity of 396 kWp and 828 kWh (Option 1)
Parameter Value
Table 3-25 Simulation Result for PV System with Capacity of 512 kWp and 1,656 kWh (Option 2)
Parameter Value
Form Table 3 -25 the third PV system capacity will achieve their first proposed annual
delivered energy (525,728 kWh).
CHAPTER 6
EVALUATION OF EXPANSION PROPOSAL
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 54 REV: R00
6.1. Option 1
6.2. Option 2
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 55 REV: R00
CHAPTER 7
CONCSLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
In the first proposal, IPP claimed a minimum of 525,728 kWh for annual delivered energy. But in their
annual report for the first year the system only produced 315,893 kWh. For recommendation, the PV
system capacity needs to be upgraded into IPP's second option proposal (512 kWp and 1,656 kWh)
so the energy production will achieve IPP's first proposed annual delivered energy. The energy
production of IPP's second option proposal is 597,000 kWh.
 Wording di report yang membingungkan ada yang direvisi

 Hengjaya diganti HM semua - done
 Active power drop dijelaskan - done
 Di awal paragraf kasih penjalasan ttg adanya risiko intermitten (PV Drop) == Jelaskan PV Drop
- done
 Di Bar stack, DG dihapus saja karena gak ada - done
 Judul diganti biar gak membingungkan - done
Refer objective
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 56 REV: R00
APPENDIX 1
Datasheets
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 57 REV: R00
APPENDIX 1A
Modul PV
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 58 REV: R00
APPENDIX 1B
Inverter PV
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 59 REV: R00
APPENDIX 1C
PCS
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 60 REV: R00

HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 61 REV: R00
APPENDIX 1D
Battery
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 62 REV: R00
APPENDIX 2
PVSyst Report
APPENDIX 2A
HML001-236-Q01001
Hal: 63 REV: R00
APPENDIX 2B
Laporan PVsyst Report

Draft Report Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power Plant 396 KWP and 276 KWH Morowali, Central Sulawesi

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Draft Report Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power Plant 396 KWP and 276 KWH Morowali, Central Sulawesi

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

DRAFT REPORT

Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power Plant

Hal: i REV: R00

Assessment of Existing Solar PV Power

Date Prepared by Checked by Approved by Revision Status

Bariz Irfan Maman S.

Hal: ii REV: R00

Hal: iii REV: R00

Hal: iv REV: R00

Hal: v REV: R00

Hal: vi REV: R00

4.2. Option 2....................................................................................................................................30

Hal: vii REV: R00

Hal: viii REV: R00

Table 1-1 Monthly Average Ambient Temperature ................................................................................3

Hal: 1 REV: R00

Figure 1-11-2 Location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo

Hal: 2 REV: R00

a. Discrepancy IdentificationSolar Energy Assessment. CHAPTER 3 Error: Reference

1.3. Description of the LocationHengjaya Solar PV Plant

1.3.1. General Description

Hal: 3 REV: R00

Figure 1-31-4 Basecamp Site of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo (source: Google Earth)

1.3.2. Assumption and Data Input

1.3.2.1 DC/AC Ratio

1.3.2.2 PV String Configuration

Hal: 4 REV: R00

PV string is a group of PV modules connected in series and installed in one place.

Table 3-1 PV Capacity

Figure 1-5 PV String Configuration 2 x 7

Figure 1-6 PV String Configuration 2 x 11

Figure 1-7 PV String Configuration 2 x 12

1.3.2.3 Modul PV Parameter Determination

Hal: 5 REV: R00

Table 3-2 PV Array

PV Location Tilt Azimuth

1.3.2.4 Losses Assumption

In the PVsyst simulation, several losses need to be considered. These losses

Table 3-3 Losses Assumption

1.3.3. Climate Condition

Hal: 6 REV: R00

Irradiation data is obtained from IPP’s pyranometer and meteonorm database. 2

Tabel 2-1 Irradiation Data

Rainfall at the location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo campsite based on

Hal: 7 REV: R00

Figure 1-8 Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi

Table 1-4 Monthly Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi

Month Precipitation (mm) Days with Precipitation (days)

1.3.3.1 Energy Yield for Wet and Dry Season

Hal: 8 REV: R00

production of the system. Accumulatively the irradiation on wet season also

1.3.3.2 Ambient Temperature

Table 1-51-6 Monthly Average Ambient Temperature

Month Average Ambient Temperature (oC)

Rainfall at the location of PT Hengjaya Mineralindo campsite based on

Hal: 9 REV: R00

Figure 1-9 Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi

Table 1-7 Monthly Precipitation of Morowali, Central Sulawesi

Month Precipitation (mm) Days with Precipitation (days)

1.3.3.4 Historical Storm Data

Based on UN-OCHA ROAP (United Nations Office for the Coordination of

Hal: 10 REV: R00

Figure 1-10 Historical Storm Data in Indonesia 1