Add pvsamv1 properties and setters for interdependent parameters

[Matthew-Boyd]

This includes properties and setters for all interdependent parameters, including:

• system capacity
• modules per string
• number of strings (restricting to subarray1 only)
• PV module model
• inverter model

[dguittet]

Another thought I had was that it would be good to move a lot of the functionality in pv_design_utils.py and pv_inverter.py` into PySAM where it'll probably get a broader user base. Not something we can do with the current project, but I'll ask if it's appropriate for SAM core

[dguittet]

@Matthew-Boyd I added an assert for the PV system capacity in here: a6275cc

This now causes the test_hybrid_detailed_pv_only to fail.

[dguittet]

@Matthew-Boyd Looking at the latest change, I think it went in the wrong direction. The DetailedPVPlant needs to be able to use a system capacity.

Can you tell me what the input dictionary format for DetailedPVPlant should be? Where does the system_capacity input go?

IIRC, the input dictionary format for the simple PVPlant is different since there's no "tech_config" required.

[Matthew-Boyd]

@Matthew-Boyd Looking at the latest change, I think it went in the wrong direction. The DetailedPVPlant needs to be able to use a system capacity.

Can you tell me what the input dictionary format for DetailedPVPlant should be? Where does the system_capacity input go?

IIRC, the input dictionary format for the simple PVPlant is different since there's no "tech_config" required.

@dguittet
The dictionary key system_capacity_kw in the top level of the pv_config parameter for DetailedPVPlant was not being used before this last commit. The value for system capacity was only being taken from the tech_config sub-dict in pv_config.

The input dictionary format for the DetailedPVPlant, as provided in tech_config, is demonstrated in pvsamv1_basic_params.json, which is the same as the SAM UI code generation for "PySAM JSON". The system capacity is adjusted for coherence with other model parameters and set in the model in DetailedPVPlant::processed_assign()

I will add another test to ensure the system_capacity_kw top-level key value is used properly and in place of any value for system_capacity in tech_config.