Solar Energy Vol. 22, pp. 155-164 O0384192XI7910"201-OI55FIg/$02.

0010
Pergamon Press Ltd., 1979. Printed in Great Britain

THE AVERAGE DISTRIBUTION OF SOLAR RADIATION--

CORRELATIONS BETWEEN DIFFUSE AND HEMISPHERICAL
AND BETWEEN DAILY AND HOURLY INSOLATION VALUESt

MANUEL COLLARES-PEREIRA~:and ARI RABL

Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, 5630 S. Ellis Ave., Chicago, IL 60637, U.S.A.

(Received 15 June 1978; revision accepted 14 August 1978)

Abstract--The correlations of Hottel, Whillier, Liu and Jordan between diffuse and hemispherical, and between
instantaneous (hourly) values and daily totals of solar radiation are recalibrated against pyrheliometer data for five
stations in the U.S. The validity of the Liu and Jordan approach is confirmed, and numerical inaccuracies of the
original correlations are found to arise from three factors: (i) reliance on uncorrected measurements of diffuse
insolation with pyranometer plus shade ring, (ii) use of a single value of extraterrestrial insolation for a whole
month, and (iii) neglect of seasonal variations in the diffuse/hemisphericalratio. The new correlation for the daily
total ratio of diffuse over hemispherical insolation agrees with results reported for India, Israel and Canada which
included the shade ring correction. This suggests that latitude independence is a good approximation. The new
correlations imply that the diffuse component is significantlylarger than that predicted by the original formulas of
Liu and Jordan. Analytical expressions are presented the parameters of which are obtained by a least squares fit to
the data. The resulting formulas provide a complete description of the long term average insolation incident on
surfaces of arbitrary orientation; the only meteorological input is the long term average daily total of hemispherical
insolation on the horizontal surface. Comparison between model and data shows an accuracy better than 3 per cent
for the long term average insolation available to solar correctors, both fixed and tracking. The model provides a
framework for optimal matching between solar radiation and ideal concentrators (based on the principle of phase
space conservation). In addition to computing radiation availability for solar collectors, the model can be used for
calculating heating and cooling loads of buildings.

I. INTRODUCTION relations between diffuse and global and between hourly

The only measurements of solar radiation for which long
term records are available from a large number of loca-
tions are measurements of hemispherical insolation (also
called total or global) on a horizontal surface. However,
in order to predict the energy delivery of any solar
collector (other than a horizontal flat plate) one needs to
know both the beam and the diffuse component of in-
solation. Correlations of the type first derived by Liu and
Jordan[l] supply that information, but questions[2-5]
have been raised about the general validity of these
correlations.
All previous studies of this type have been based on
measurements of diffuse radiation by means of a
pyranometer with shade ring. Since the shade ring blocks
not only the solar disk but also a sizeable portion of the
diffuse radiation, corrections must be applied which
depend on insolation and incidence angle[6]. This prob-
lem is avoided if the solar beam radiation is measured
with a pyrheliometer. Recently pyrheliometer data have
become available from the Aerospace Corporation [7] for
Albuquerque, New Mexico; Fort Hood, Texas; Liver-
more, California; Raleigh, North Carolina; and Maynard,
Massachusetts; with approximately 2 yr at each station.
We have analysed these data to reexamine the cor-
;Work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Division
of Advanced Energy Projects.
:~Supported by the Instituto Nacional de Investigacfio
Cientifica and the Centro de Fisica de Mat6ria Condensada,
Lisbon, Portugal.
Also at SERI (1536 Cole Blvd., Golden, CO 80401) and on
leave of absence from Argonne National Laboratory.
and daily values of insolation.
As for possible sources of error, there are several
differences between a pyranometer with shade ring and a
pyrheliometer. A shade ring is a simple nontracking
device, requiring only tilt adjustments every couple of
days, and the relative calibration of diffuse and of
hemispherical measurements can easily be established by
removing the shade ring. A pyrheliometer (or
equivalently a pyranometer with tracking occulting disk)
measures the beam (or the diffuse) radiation directly,
provided it tracks the sun accurately. The main problems
with a pyrheliometer are its susceptibility to errors if the
sun gets outside the 2.80 acceptance half angle, and the
difficulty of verifying the calibration relative to the
pyranometer. We have found slight variations in the
behavior of diffuse insolation from one station to another
(see Fig. 2d), but the data base is too short to determine
whether such effects are real or due to instrumentation.
We have, therefore, lumped all data together without
distinguishing between different stations. Thus, any cal-
ibration errors are likely to be washed out, and the
statistics are improved to the point where seasonal
trends can be established with confidence.
Since the present investigation concerns correlations
for daily totals of radiation, we had to discard any days
with incomplete records. We also screened the weather
tapes for data which were suspect for the following
reasons:
(i) zero pyranometer signal during central hours of the
day (more than 2 hr from sunrise and sunset).
(ii) beam and hemispherical data imply negative diffuse
component

155
 156 M. COLLARES-PEREIRAand A. RABL

(iii) pyrheliometer reading too low when pyranometer with T = length of day, 24hr; /o., = 1353 W/m 2 = solar
shows high insolation, a condition strongly suggestive of constant: n = day of year (starting 1 January): 3, =geog-
misalignment. We rejected data when the hourly beam raphic latitude; tos = arccos [ - tan ;t tan 3] = sunset hour
and hemispherical values lh,, and lh failed to satisfy the angle: and 8 = solar declination given by
condition [8]
sin 6 = 0.3979 sin 3,
(4)
0.5 (1)
L,., -L,., cosO (Note 0.3979 = sin 23.45).

where 0 is the incidence angle of the sun and L., the
solar constant.
We discarded about 10 per cent of the data, mostly
days with Incomplete or nonexistant records. Ap-
plication of criteria (i), (ii) and (iii) does not have any
significant effect on our results. Table 1 lists the stations,
their latitude, longitude and elevation above sea level,
the years of observations, and, as indication of the
statistics, the number of days of data used for this study.
2. CORRELATION FOR DAILY VALUES OF DIFFUSE AND HEMIS-
PHERICAL INSOLATION
Because of the variability of the weather the dis-
tribution of diffuse solar radiation is very irregular, both
in time and in space. Nevertheless the average charac-
teristics of diffuse radiation are quite regular and can be
correlated with an effective transmission coefficient of
the atmosphere, as was first recognized by Liu and
Jordan. Several different correlations can be obtained,
depending on the averaging procedure and on the time
interval chosen for the insolation data (e.g. hourly or
daily). The present investigation is concerned with the
relation between Ha, the daily total of diffuse insolation
on a horizontal surface, and Ha, the daily total of global
insolation on a horizontal surface. As correlation
parameter one uses the ratio
Kh = H, IH,,
of terrestrial over extraterrestrial radiation, Ho being the
daily total radiation which would be incident on the same
horizontal surface in the absence of any atmosphere.
The extraterrestrial radiation Ho is given by[9]
H,, = ~T Io,[l+O.O33cos{
' 2~rn ~1 cos3. cos 6
\365.24/
In the approximation of a circular orbit of the earth 3,
is
21r(n + 284). (5a)
3'~3,o= 365.24 '
for greater accuracy the expression
y[rad] = yo + 0.007133 sin 3'o + 0.032680 cos 3`o
- 0.000318 sin 23,o + 0.000145 cos 23,0 (Sb)
is recommended by Ref. [10]. For the present analysis we
used 8 and Ho as provided for each day with the weather
data; they are based on the more accurate eqn (5b).
Kh has been called cloudiness index[l] but the name
"clearness index" is more descriptive. When Ha/Hh data
for individual days are plotted vs Kh, as for example
in Fig. 3 of Ref.[3], they show a characteristic pattern,
data points being clustered around the solid line in our
Fig. l(a) but with considerable scatter. This scatter
reflects the short term day-to-day fluctuations of the
weather. To isolate the long term characteristics one
averages over all values of Ha and Hh corresponding to a
particular value o[ Kh. If the number of data is finite one
must group data with slightly different Kh values
together. With large Kh intervals, one reduces the stan-
dard deviation of Ha/H, from the true average, but at the
(2) price of losing information about the correlation with K,.
For the data at hand we found an interval of AKh = 0.05
to be a good compromise. The resulting pattern is shown
in Fig. l(a). For each K, interval the error bars show the
standard deviation
S.D. o f - ~ = ~/(((Ha/Hh ):) - ((Ha/Hh))2)

x (sin w, -w~ cos o)~) (3) where (HdHh) indicates the average over all HdHh

Table 1. Data base for present study

Elevation
above
Station Lat. deg. Long.deg. sea level, m Years Number of Days
Albuquerque,
New Mexico 35.05N 106.62W 1618 1961--64 1284
Fort Hood.
Texas 31.08N 97.85W 329 1974-76 589
Livermore,
California 37.7N 121.7W - 160 1974-75 230
Maynard,
Massachusetts 42.42N 71.48W 63 1975-76 696
Raleigh,
North Carolina 35.87N 78.78W - 130 1975-76 283
 The average distribution of solar radiation correlations 157

1.0 - t , - ~ - 4 ~ | ' Fil ' ' ' curve was based, were not corrected[Ill, whereas the
data in Refs. [2-4] included the correction.
0.8 Until now the correlation between HdHa and Ka (as
H---~d0.6 well as the one between /td//~a and /~h, see following
Hh section) has been assumed to be independent of time of
0.4
LIu JordonJ''~.~
ond
year. However, since the amount of scattering of radia-
tion passing through the atmosphere depends on the path
0.2 length (or air mass AM = 1/cos 0, 0 being the incidence
angle), and since average path length varies with time of
o ' o'.2 ' o'.4 . . 0.6. . 0.8 year, one might expect a seasonal variation in the cor-
K h = Hh / H 0
relation for diffuse insolation. We have therefore
Fig. l(a). Plot of ratio HalHh between daily total diffuse and separated the data according to their value of sunset
daily total hemispherical irradiation vs clearness index Kh = hour angle to, [in rad] ~o, = (21rtJT) where t, = sunset
(HdHo), found in the present investigation and compared with hour and T = 24hr. The HdHh points of Fig. l(b) were
the results published by Ruth and Chant[4] and Liu and obtained by grouping all data into three tos bins
Jordan [l].

winter: tos<7-0.15
I0 [] Over All Averoge
W-Winter
S- Summer
F-Foil- Spring
spring and fall: ~ - - 0.15 -< to, -<~+0.15
-- PolynomioI fit

summer: oJs ->~-+ 0.15.

05
\ One can see the seasonal trend most clearly at large K,
where summer has a higher ratio Ha/Ha than winter. At
intermediate Ka the trend is reversed and less
pronounced.
For a possible explanation of this effect we calculate
the average air mass during the day

0 0.5 lO (AM) = (I/cos 0).

Kh
The precise averaging procedure does not matter for the
Fig. I(b). Same as in Fig. i(a), but with data points separated sake of the present argument. The weighting factor used
according to season--Summer, Spring-Fall, Winter. for this averaging should account for the variation of
irradiance with incidence angle 0 which is given by
values in the Ka intervalt. A least square fit with a
fourth degree polynominal yields the curve cos 0 = cos (5 cos A (cos co - cos to~) (7)

0.99 for Ka -<0.17 where co = (2rt/T) is the hour angle. It is most con-
venient to assume a weight proportional to cos 0; for
1.188 - 2.272 K, + 9.473 K, 2 - 21.856 Ka 3 (6)
H. correct normalization the weighting factor cos 0 must be
+ 14.648 Ka4 for 0.17 < K, < 0.8 divided by

which is shown by the solid line in Figs. l(a) and (b). It

fo=' dto cos 0 = cos A cos (5 (sin tos - to, cos tos). (8)
agrees quite well with the correlations for India[2],
Israel[3] and Canada[4], but lies significantly above the
original curve of Liu and Jordan[l]. The most plausible (See also Section 4). The resulting daily average air
explanation for the discrepancy between the Hd/Hh mass is
curve of Liu and Jordan and all subsequent in-
vestigations lies in the shade ring correction. The data of 0)s
Blue Hill, Massachusetts, on which the Liu and Jordan (AM) = (l/cos 0) cos ~ cos h (sin to~ - to~ cos ~o~)"

For the stations in Table 1 the lat. A is approx. 35 and

*There is a slight difference between averaging the ratio HdHh
and averaging Ha and Hh separately since the same Kh value
may be associated with several different values of Hh. We found,
however, the numerical difference between these two averaging
procedures to be insignificant. Similar conclusions apply to
FIa/fI~ and to HdHo.
(AM) varies from 1.64 at summer solstice to 1.92 at
equinox to 2.95 at winter solstice.
In a homogeneous atmosphere with either isotropic or
strongly forward (within a few deg.) scattering the ratio
of diffuse over hemispherical insolation increases with
158 M. COLLARES-PEREIRAand A. RABL
IO
air mass. Such an effect shows up in the data only at
intermediate K, and it is not very pronounced. Several
Winter
other factors seem to mask this effect. Firstly, scattering
08 El Fall and Spring
by aerosols is in the forward direction with relatively X Summer
large scattering angles, on the order of 20--60 deg. and
hence a significant portion of the diffuse radiation fails to O6
reach the surface of the earth when the incidence angle
is large. Secondly, the atmosphere is not homogeneous
but contains clouds of finite width and finite thickness. 04 ~ .x i ~

Therefore, an intermittant cloud cover transmits less

radiation at large than at small incidence angles, and high
values of Kh can be reached only on very clear days. 02
This agrees with the trend observed by Bugler for hourly
insolation data, see Fig. 8 of Ref.[12]. It also seems to be
consistent with the results of Ref.[13]. Thirdly, there
0 02 04 06 08 IO
may be seasonal variations in atmospheric turbidity.
Kh

3. CORRELATIONFOR MONTHLY AVERAGESOF DIFFUSE AND
HEMISPHERICAL INSOLATION
As shown by Liu and Jordan[l], the monthly averages
/~d and Hh of diffuse and hemispherical insolation can be
correlated with the monthly average clearness index
Fig. 2(a). Plot of the ratio fl,dlYth between "monthly" diffuse and
"monthly" hemispherical irradiation vs "monthly" average
clearness index /(h, for all stations. The data are grouped into
bins according to their sunset hour angle; the solid and the
dashed lines are plots of a least squares fit for each of the three
seasons.

g;h = fI,/ no. (9) A least squares fit yields the correlation

The difference between the correlation for HJH, and

the one for Hd/Hh arises from the underlying averaging
[
procedure. Whereas the Hd/Hh curve is obtained by /~'d//~" = l -- [0.505 + 0.261 (to, -- 2) ] COS[2(gh -- 0.9,]
averaging Hd and Hh data corresponding to one value of
K,, a point of the Hd/Hh plot is the result of averaging (10)
Hs, H, and K, over all days of a month. The Hd/H,
curve incorporates therefore the distributio,~ of clear and shown for co, = (z-/2) by the solid line in Fig. 2(a). The
cloudy days during the course of a month. dashed lines are eqn (10) evaluated at to, =(~r/2)-0.2
Of course, the choice of a month as an averaging and co, = (7r/2) + 0.2.
period is rather arbitrary. If one had data for a very large The seasonal trend in Fig. 2(a) is obscured by the
number of years, one could evaluate Hd/fth and/~, for a random scatter of month-to-month variations. For a
single day, say the N'th day of the year, by averaging lid, clearer demonstration of the seasonal pattern we have
HE and K, measured on the N'th day of the year over all averaged the monthly points of Fig. 2(a) o v e r / ( , inter-
years for which data are available. The smaller the vals of 0.05. The resulting seasonal averages in Fig. 2(b)
number of days used for averaging, the larger the resul-
ting scatter of the FId/fth points. This is illustrated by the 1.0
X Summer
large scatter in Fig. 2(a) where each point represents the
o Foll and Spring
average over a 26 day period for a particular station and
i Winter
a particular year. (We chose 26 days as length of the 08

"month", because it divides the year into equal

"months", with only a minimal leftover of 1 or 2 days to
be discarded). By averaging the monthly data over 0.6

several years one reduces the scatter and arrives at the r=" ~ x

universal relationship between ffld/fflh and /~h. . It

~
0.4
TO test for seasonal variations we grouped the data

into bins according to their sunset hour angle to,, as x

shown by the *, [] and X symbols in Fig. 2(a)
02

< E2 _ 0.15
tos -- (winter, *)

0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8

E - 0.15 <tos < ~ + 0 . 1 5 (spring and fall, f7])
2
Fig. 2(b). The same as in Fig. 2(a), but averaging the data points
~os -> E2 + 0.15 (summer, X).
within /~h intervals of 0.05 but separated according to season.
 The average distribution of solar radiation correlations
IO
Page
~ i
:E~ 0,5 ptes~rtt
0.5 I0
Fig. 2(c). The same as in Fig. 2(a) but comparing the least squares
fit of the present investigation with the fits of Liu and Jordan[l]
and Page [16].
show a definite separation of summer (higher Ha/Hh) and
winter (lower Hd/H,) from spring-fall, at least for all
intermediate/~h in the range from 0.4 to 0.65. A possible
reversal of fall-spring and winter for /~h <0.4 is not
significant because of poor statistics. The pattern is less
definite for very clear months/~h >0.65; most of these
data come from a single station, Albuquerque, with
high altitude 1600 m, and we do not know how typical
they are of other locations; also the scatter for/~h > 0.65
in Fig. 2(a) is very large.
We have computed X_2, the sum of squares of the
difference between the Ha/Hh points of Fig. 2(b) and the
analytical fit (10). Without including seasonal dependence,
i.e. using (I0) with to, = (d2) for all data, the value of X2 is
3.11, whereas X2 for the correlation with the to, depen-
dence is only 1.55.
A comparison between the Ha/Hh fits of Liu and
Jordan[I], of Page[16], and of the present investigation
is shown in Fig. 2(c).
4. R E L A T I O N B E T W E E N INSTANTANEOUS AND DAILY T O T A L IN-
SOLA]']ON
For many applications one needs to know the in-
stantaneous insolation, also called irradiance, Ib (beam),
la (diffuse) and Ih (hemispherical), rather than the dally
totals Ha, H, and lib = H , - Ha. Given the long term
average daily total irradiation on a horizontal surface Hh,
one can find the long term average irradiances [a and [,
and [b = [h - [a by first calculating/~a from eqn (10) and
then multiplying Ha and Hh by the conversion factors
r a = _--.-- (11)
Ha
and
h
/'h ~ 7 . (12)
159
In principle one could work with rb = [b/fib or rb., =
[b.dflb., instead of either ra or rh, but in practice use
of r~ and r, seems to be simpler (We did prepare plots of
rb.. from our data, but found the pattern less clear than
for rd and rh). As shown by Hottel and Whillier[14] and
by Liu and Jordan[l] the factors ra and rh depend to a
good approximation on only two variables: the time of
day t, expressed as hour angle to = 2rrt/T, and sunset
time t,, expressed as sunset hour angle to, = 2~rtJT.
The functions ra(to, tos) and rh(to, to,) are found
empirically by plotting for each hour the average ratio of
hourly f and daily/~ insolation on a plot of r = I-//4 vs
to,. To reduce the scatter one averages over all days
within an tos interval, for example, a month. We com-
bined, as was done in Ref. [1] a.m. and p.m. data, because
for most of the applications of this model slight morning-
afternoon asymmetries do not matter. We did find slight
evidence for possible systematic variations of ra with/~,
and with location, but these variations are small com-
pared to the scatter in the data, and the statistics of our
data base is too limited for any definite statement about
deviations from the simple relations established in
Refs.[1] and [14]. Liu and Jordan have shown that rs is
represented very well by the expression
7r cos t o - cos to, (13)
ra(to, to,) = ~ sin to, - to, cos to,
with T = length of day = 24 hr. This is actually the ratio
of extra-terrestrial irradiance on a horizontal surface, L
cos 0, over extra-terrestrial daily irradiation Ho on the
same horizontal surface. The reason for the remarkably
close agreement between L cos O/Ho and [a/ffIa lies in
the fact that the average transmission coefficient for
diffuse irradiance ~d = [,dip cos O is quite insensitive to
cloud conditions and incidence angle. This feature is also
reflected by the near constancy of /~a in Fig. 2(d).
+ FT Hood
[3 Livermore
X Rayleigh
04
Maynard
Albuquerque
Total average
0 3
z
,2 o2
o,
O0
02 04 06 08
K.
Fig. 2(d). Plot of the ratio /-)J//o between the "monthly"
average total diffuse and the extraterrestrial irradiation vs the
"monthly" average clearness index /~h, for the five locations
considered in this study averaging data points within/<h intervals
of 0.09; the dashed line is a linear least squares fit to the total
average.
160 M. COLLARES-PEREIRA and A. RABL

(Future investigations concerned with refinements of this Sunset Hour Angle, Ws, in Rodions from Solor Noon
model for ra might start with an investigation of the 1.04... 1.57... 2.09...
Hours from Sunrise to Suns'et
dependence of rd on Kh and 0). The solid lines in Fig.
8 9 ~0 12 13 14 15 16
3(a) show ra of eqn (13) for t = 0.5; 1.5; 2.5; 3.5; 4.5; 5.5; 0.2 1
6.5 hr from solar noon. The crosses are the correspond-
ing averages for all data of the stations and years in ~ H o T~meof Doy
Table 1. The close agreement for ra between Liu and urs fromSolorNoon)
Jordan and the present investigation comes from the fact
that the ratio of hourly diffuse to daily diffuse radiation is
insensitive to the shade ring correction.
For the hemispherical insolation rh differs markedly
from eqn (13) because atmospheric attenuation of beam
radiation increases with incidence angle. In Refs.[1] and
[14] curves for rh were presented, without analytical
expressions. As our new data agree so closely with the r,
curves of Ref.[I] and as there is no reason to expect any
discrepancy, we decided to combine the new data with o.oi / . , I
corresponding points from the r, curves of Ref.[I], each
data base weighted according to the number of years of 6'0 7'5 9'o ,65
observation. The resulting averages are shown by the Sunsel Hour Angle ~s, in Degrees from Solor Noon
crosses in Fig. 3(b). A least squares fit to these data in
the form Fig. 3(a). Plot of rd (conversion from daily total to instantaneous
for diffuse component) vs sunset hour angle for different times of
71" COS to COS tos
the day: eqn (13) is shown to the solid lines.
rh(to, w,) = ~ (a + b cos to)
--
(]4)
1 sin tos O)s COS
Sunset Hour Angle, ws in Rodions from Solor NOO~
1.04 L57 2.09
yields the coefficients I I
I Hours from Sunrise to Sunset
8 9 I0 II 12 13 (4 t5 16
a = 0.409 + 0.5016 sin (to, - 1.047) 0.2

' Time o'f Doy' '

b = 0.6609 - 0.4767 sin (to, - 1.047). s from %lor Noon)

The angles are specified in rad, and 1.047rad = 60.

This fit is shown by the solid lines in Fig. 3(b). This fit
satisfies the normalization condition

~ ili 3 112
x x ~ x ~ l'
' dt[h=Fl.
t~
g

to within I per cent for all to, under consideration.

5. APPLICABILITYOF INSOLATIONCORRELATIONS 0.0 , S.

The correlations discussed in the present paper pro-
vide a complete model of average instantaneous
insolation [15], both beam and diffuse, on a horizontal
surface. Together with the additional assumption that the
diffuse sky radiation is isotropic[16], this model uniquely
determines the average insolation at any instant and on
any surface. The only meteorological input needed is H,,
the long term average daily total hemispherical insolation
on a horizontal surface. The seasonal variation of /-1,
will usually necessitate separate calculations for different
times of the year, typically one calculation per month.
Monthly averages of H, can be found in many pub-
lications, for example, Ref.[l] lists 80 and Ref.[17] lists
200 stations in the U.S. and Canada. The present model
is quite different from traditional insolation models
which are based on data of atmospheric transmission
coefficient, cloud cover and sunshine hours (10, 21, 23).
Those models are appropriate for locations where only
the latter type of data are available but the radiation has
6b 7'5 9'0
Sunset Hour Angle, =s, in Degrees from Solor Noo~
Fig. 3(b). Plot of rh (conversion from daily total to instantaneous
for hemispherical component) vs the sunset hour angle for
different times of the day; the solid lines are the least squares fit
to these data, eqn (14).
not been measured. In those models the insolation H, is
calculated. The model presented in this paper assumes
the measured Hh as a starting point, which is more
directly relevant and therefore provides a more reliable
and accurate basis for predicting radiation intensities.
Furthermore, even for locations where Hh has not been
measured or where the data are questionable (among the
dubious stations quoted in Ref.[17] the most infamous is
Inyokern with unrealistically high values o f / , greater
than 0.8) the model can still serve as unifying reference
frame for comparison studies of solar collectors [18].
 The average distribution of solar radiation correlations 161

The model can be used to calculate the solar con- summing hourly insolation data (with the usual isotropy
tribution to heating and cooling loads of buildings as well assumption for the diffuse component). This procedure
as the energy incident on solar collectors of various may appear to be circular in the sense that this very data
kinds. The method is applicable not only to f/ate plate base was used for deriving the correlations. This is
collectors and collectors that employ optical focussing unavoidable, however, because one must use all avail-
but also to non-imaging collectors that concentrate the able reliable data in order to develop such a model to its
solar radiation as much as permitted by the second law greatest accuracy, and then one has no choice but to
of thermodynamics[24, 25] (phase space conservation). reuse the data to test the model predictions. This test is
For photovoltaic collectors the delivered energy is pro- genuine insofar as it yields a measure of the average and
portional to incident energy. For thermal collectors, on of the maximum error of the predictions.
the other hand, the relationship between incident and We have computed the deviation
delivered energy is nonlinear because the collector is
6= ]'I coll. model -- / ~ coil,data
turned on only when heat gain exceeds heat loss. This
n coil, data
effect can be accounted for by means of a utilizability
function which is based on the fractional time dis- between data and model, both for a point focus concen-
tribution of clear and cloudy days. We have treated this trator (2 axis tracker) and for a flat plate collector. (For
problem in another publication where explicit formulas the point focus concentrator/4co, is the daily total beam
for the energy delivery of solar collectors are radiation at normal incidence). We found that the
derived [ 18]. average error (over all stations and months) is less than 3
For an example, we calculate the long term average per cent for the insolation Hco, available to the collector,
insolation on an east facing vertical wall in Rome on 15 both for flat plate and for concentrating collectors. The
March at 8:00 in the morning. The latitude is ~. = 41.8, model appears to be free from any significant bias with
the sunset hour angle is to, = 1.57 rad and the hour angle respect to location or time of year at least as far as could
is to = -7r/3. The irradiance on the wall is be discerned from this rather limited data base. For a
particular month of a particular year the discrepancy
COSOwall. . . . 1 = + ~ [h between model and data can be much larger, on the order
of 3 per cent (standard deviation) for a flat plate and on the
order of 10 per cent (standard deviation) for concentrators.
with incidence angles given by eqn (7) for 0 and Results for other collector types fall between those for flat
plate and for point focus concentrating collector.
cos 0wa, = -- COS8 sin to The error ~ for the point focus concentrating collector
is plotted vs tos in Fig. 4(a) for each month at Ft. Hood,
for 0wa,. Livermore, Maynard and Raleigh, as indicated by the
From Ref.[22] the long term average hemispherical letters F, L, M and R. In view of the year to year
insolation H, is Hh = l l.96J/m 2. Intermediate steps of fluctuations the available statistics is too limited to
the calculation yield 14o = 27.94 MJim 2, /(h = 0.43, Ha = decide whether a particular station deviates from the
5.72 MJ/mL rd = 0.064, rh = 0.056, [h = 186 W/m s, /'~ = general pattern. (Livermore with the largest apparent
102 W/m2. Assuming the ground reflectance to be p = 0.2 deviation also has the poorest statistics). Even a station
the result is with almost constant sunshine such as Albuquerque
shows strong differences between different years. This is
L~. = 284 W/m2. demonstrated in Fig. 4(b) where the individual years
1961--64 for Albuquerque are labeled separately; there
The remarkable simplicity of this insolation model noticeable underprediction (-0.017) for 1962 and over-
derives from the observation of Liu and Jordan that the prediction for 1964 (+ 0.027).
average effects of clouds on transmission of solar radia- In order to isolate the origin of these large fluctuations
tion can be characterized by a single parameter K, in the prediction of the daily total beam irradiation, we
("clouds are clouds", so to speak). This appears to be have rerun this test, replacing Ha//4h from eqn (10) by
quite a good model of nature. the value actually measured for each month. The resul-
ting average error remains nearly unchanged (from 0.005
6. ACCURACY OF INSOLATION MODEL for all data to 0.014), but the standard deviation is
In order to evaluate the accuracy of the present reduced significantly (from 0.09 to 0.03). Therefore the
model, one should compare the model predictions with fluctuations are mostly due to the ratio Hd/H, and not
insolation data for tilted and for tracking surfaces. There due to rd of r,. The point focus concentrator represents,
are almost no long term insolation data for tilted or of course, the extreme in its sensitivity to the
tracking surfaces[19], and even hose that are available diffuse/hemispherical ratio ISIa/ffI,, whereas the flat plate
are problematic unless the reflectivity of the ground is is much less affected by it.
known and the pyranometer has been carefully cali- In any case, even though large, the fluctuations do not
brated for tilt dependence of sensitivity[26, 27]. Instead matter, provided the long term average is correct. After
we have used the data base in Table 1, calculating/~, for all, the model is designed to predict only the long term
each month and comparing the model predictions/4=o~e~ average insolation not the insolation for a particular
based on this value of/4h with values/qdata obtained by month.
 162 M, COLLARES-PEREIRAand A. RABL

0.3
o

0.2

%
F F

~ o,
1'2- " ~ " ' ~" h I 6 ~ I 7 18 19' 2 0

i..r " ~ 2 " (in r o d i a n s )

~u

-05

Fig. 4(a). Plot of the error e = (l"~'coll.model- Ucoll.dalJ/'lcoll.data)VS W, = the sunset hour angle, for each month at
Fort Hood (F), Livermore (L), Maynard (M), Raleigh (R).

oB[
!
021
i

l
=" OI
t

o 0
II 1'2 ~ , ~ I 9 210
E

I~ -O I
z ~ oj s
(in rodiens)
~E

-oz

.O3[

Fig. 4(b). The same as in Fig. 4(a) but for Albuquerque with the years 1961--64 labelled separately by the Indexes
I--4.

It is instructive to show why the Liu and Jordan The analogous statement for fd is
method should predict the long term average correctly by
its very construction. 1
fd(oJ) = ~Y~ Id(~o)
As stated above, with the isotropy assumption for the
diffuse component, the long term average insolation on
any aperture is uniquely determined by [h and [d. These _ ~Id(co) ~.Hd I ~ H h
Y.Hd ~Hh
in turn can be written in a form which shows explicitly
the long term average as a summation over a period of N
days
= r.(~o)FI.. (18)
h(o,) = 1 ~ I,,(to). (15)
Therefore the long term average insolation must be cor-
Mter multiplying and dividing by rect if rh, rd and /'~d//4h are correct. The validity of the
present model is guaranteed to the extent to which these
1 correlations can be described by location independent
/~ =~Hh (16)
analytic fits.

this can be rearranged as Acknowledgements--We are grateful to Dr. S. A. Klein and Dr.
M. L. Weseley for valuable comments, and to Prof. R. Winston
for support and encouragement during the course of this work.
Z Is(t) l Z = rh(to)flh
(17)
i.(,,,) = Y~ 1-I. NOME2qCLATURE
In an attempt to be systematic and precise we were forced to
depart slightly from the notation established by Liu and Jordan,
using the definition of rh, eqn (12) tin particular with regard to subscripts. We use the symbols I for
 The average distribution of solar radiation correlations
irradiance (or instantaneous insolation, in Wire2) and H for
irradiation (or daily total insolation, in j/m2), together with
subscripts b for beam (also called direct), d for diffuse and h for
hemispherical (also called global or total). All radiation values
refer to a horizontal surface, unless otherwise specified. Beam
radiation on a surface normal to the sun is indicated by an
additional subscript n as in Ib.n and Hb.n.Bars indicate long term
average. Note that beam is defined with respect to the 2.8
acceptance half angle of the pyrheliometer, and not with respect
to the solar disc; thus it includes the circumsolar component[20].
Ho extraterrestrial irradiation (daily total)
Hb beam irradiation on horizontal surface (daily total)
Hb.~ beam irradiation at normal incidence (daily total)
/-/con irradiation incident on collector aperture (daily total)
Hd diffuse irradiation (daily total)
/'l"d long term average diffuse irradiation
Ha hemispherical irradiation (daily total)
/~h long term average hemispherical irradiation
Io.,, solar constant = 1353 W/m 2
Ib beam irradiance on horizontal surface
lb.n beam irradiance at normal incidence
Ia diffuse irradiance
I~ hemispherical irradiance
Kd H.,/Ho
Kh HdHo = clearness index
Kh HdHo = long term average clearness index
rd l,dH,~= conversion from daily total to instantaneous for
diffuse component
rh lh/Hh = conversion from daily total to instantaneous for
hemispherical component
T length of day = 24 hr = 86,400 sec
t time of day from solar noon (p.m. is positive)
ts sunset time
8 solar declination
a geographic latitude
0 incidence angle
to 2~/T = hour angle
oJ~ 2~dT = sunset hour angle
REFERENCES
1. B. H. Y. Liu and R. C. Jordan, The interrelationship and
characteristic distribution of direct, diffuse and total solar
radiation. Solar Energy 4, 1 (1960).
2. N. K. O. Choudhury, Solar radiation at New Delhi. Solar
Energy 7, 44 (1963).
3. G. StanhiU, Diffuse sky and cloud radiation in Israel. Solar
Energy 10, 96 (1966).
4. D. W. Ruth and R. E. Chant, The relationship of diffuse
radiation to total radiation in Canada. Solar Energy lg, 153
(1976).
5. J. F. Orgill and K. G. T. Hollands, Correlation equation for
hourly diffuseradiationon a horizontalsurface.Solar Energy
19, 357 0977). The correlationsfor hourly irradiation[5,13]
are differentfrom the correlationsfor daily irradiation(Refs.
[I--4]and present investigation).The daily correlationis the
result of averaging hourly irradiationvalues over all hours,
clear and cloudy, occuring during the course of the day. The
difference is analogous to the differencebetween Hd/Hh and
/~d/~h. It may therefore,be misleading to present hourly and
daily correlations on the same plot as was done in
Refs. [5, 13].
6. A. J. Drummond, On the measurement of sky radiation.
Arch. Met. Geoph., SeriesB, L 413 (1956). A brief summary
of Drummond's shade ring corrections is given in Ref.[3].
The correction factor for diffuse radiation is significant,for
example, at Gilat,Israel,it ranges from 1.12 to 1.34.
Notes added in proof
(i) Since completion of this work we received two interesting papers by Dr. John E. Hay, which we would like to
acknowledge: The first: A revised method for determining the direct and diffuse components of the total short-wave
radiation. Atmosphere 14, 278 (1976), investigates the effect of multiple reflections between earth and sky on the
correlations between diffuse and hemispherical insolation. When the contribution from multiple reflections is
163
7. Aerospace Report No. ATR-76 (7523-I 1)-9, The Aerospace
Corporation, P.O. Box 92957, Los Angeles, CA 90009. We
should like to thank Dr. C. Randall of the Aerospace
Corporation for helpful comments about the data.
8. M. L. Weseley, Meteorology Division, Argonne National
Laboratory, Argonne, IL 60439, private communication.
9. J. A. Duffle and W. A. Beckman, Solar Energy Thermal
Processes, Wiley, New York (1974).
10. R. L. Hulstrom and M. Imamura, Definition study for pho-
tovoltalc residential prototype systems. Final Report, Ap-
pendix. Martin Marietta MCR-76-394 0976).
11. B. Y. H. Liu, Dept. of Mechanical Engineering, Univ. of
Minnesota, private communication.
12. J. W. Bugler, The determination of hourly insolation on an
inclined plane using a diffuse irradiation model based on
hourly measured global horizontal insolation. Solar Energy
19, 477 (1977).
13. R. Bruno, A correction procedure for separating direct and
diffuse insolation on a horizontal surface. Solar Energy 20,
97 (1978).
14. H. C. Hottel and A. Whillier, Evaluation of flat plate solar
collector performance. Trans. Con/. on the Use of Solar
Energy: The Scientific Basis, Vol. II, Part l, Section A, pp.
74-104 (1955).
15. If hourly radiation values are needed for a detailed system
simulation, correlations between Ib and l~ must be used.
These have been developed by the Aerospace Corporation
and by Sandia Laboratories, see e.g.E. Boes, Estimating the
direct component of solar radiation. SANDIA Rep. SAND
75-0565. C. M. Randall, M. E. Whitson, Jr., Final report
hourly insolation and meteorological data bases including
improved direct insolation estimates. Aerospace Rep. No.
ATR-78 (7592)-1.
16. J. K. Page, The estimation of monthly mean values of daily
total short wave radiation on vertical and inclined surfaces
from sunshine records for latitudes 40"N--40S. Proc. UN
Conf. on New Sources of Energy, Paper No. 35/5/98 (1961).
Under clear conditions there appears to be a brightening of
the sky close to the sun. See Ref.[21].
17. W. A. Beckman, S. A. Klein and J. A. Duflie, Solar/-/eating
Design by the f-Chaff Method. Wiley, New York (1977).
18. M. Collares-Pereira and A. Rabl, Simple Procedure for pre-
dicting long term average energy delivery of nonconcentrat-
ing and of concentrating solar collectors. Presented at
Systems Simulation and Economic Analysis for Solar Heat-
ing and Cooling, San Diego, 27-29 June 1978, and submitted
to Solar Energy.
19. S. A. Klein, Calculation of monthly average insolation on
tilted surfaces. Solar Energy 19, 325 (1977).
20. D. Grether, J. E. Nelson and M. Wahling, Measurements of
Circumsolar Radiation. Lawrence Berkeley Lab. Report
NSFlRANN/SEIAB-5361PRI7414 (1975).
21. On the Nature and Distribution of Solar Radiation. Prepared
for U.S. Department of Energy by Watt Engineering Ltd.,
HCP/T2552-01 UC-59, 62, 63A (1978).
22. S. Barbara, S. Coppolina, C. Leone and E. Sinagra, Global
solar radiation in Italy. Solar Energy 20, 431-435 (1978).
23. K. Ya. Kondratyev, Radiation regime of inclined surfaces.
WMO--No. 467 (1977).
24. R. Winston, Light collection within the framework of
geometrical optics. J. Opt. SOc. Am. 60, 245 (1970).
25. A. Rabl, comparison of Solar Concentrators. Solar Energy
18, 93 (1976).
26. D. J. Norris, Calibration of pyranometers in inclined and
inverted positions. Solar Energy 16, 53 (1974).
27. K. A. Reed, Inclination dependence of pyranometer sensi-
tivity. Proc.Syrup. Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engrs. Vol.
161 (1978).
164 M. COLLARES-PEREIRAand A. RABL

subtracted from the diffuse and hemispherical radiation data, the seasonal variation of the correlation is significantly
reduced, for the locations considered (Toronto, Montreal, Goose Bay and Resolute in Canada).
The second paper, Measurement and modeling of shortwave radiation on inclined surfaces. 3rd Conf. Atmos. Rad.,
pp 28-30 June 1978, Davis, California, published by American Meteorological Society, Boston, Massachusetts,
presents an analysis of radiation data on inclined surfaces, with due regard for such effects as the tilt dependence of
pyranometer sensitivity and the radiation reflected by the ground. Under clear sky conditions the isotropic model for
diffuse sky radiation seems to result in underprediction, on the order of 3 per cent, of the hemispherical radiation
available to tilted south facing surfaces, if the data in this paper (August, 1977, in Vancouver, Canada) axe typical.
(ii) After a closer look at the data in Ref. [22] we are puzzled by the low insolation values reported for Italy. The
associated Kh values are markedly smaller than those for seemingly similar climates in the U.S. (see Ref. [17]) and
Portugal (Servico Metereoltgico Nacional) thus raising the question of possible calibration errors.

R~sum~---Les corrtlations 6tablies par Hottel, Whillier, Liu et Jordan entre les radiations diffuse et htmisphtrique
(globale) et entre leurs valeurs instantantes (horaires) et journalitres sont reajusttes en les comparant avec les
donntes exp~rimentales pour la radiation directe provenant de cinq Iocalitts diftrentes aux Etats Unis. La validit6
de la m~thode utiliste par Liu et Jordan est confirmte et les imprecisions numtriques des corrtlations ~tablies
aupaxavant sont corrigtes. Trois facteurs sont ~ la source des probltmes associts avec ces corrtlations: (i) des
mesures non corrigtes de la radiation diffuse obtenues avec un pyranomttre muni d'un anneau ombrageant; (ii) une
seule valeur de la radiation extraterrestre pour tout un mois; (iii) variations saisonnitres du rapport entre les
radiations diffuse et htmisphtrique ignortes. Les nouvelles corrtlations sont compatibles avec les rtsultats obtenus
pour le Canada, I'Inde et Israel en utilizant la correction de I'anneau ombrageant. Donc l'approximation de
rindtpendence par rapport ~ la latitude est excellente. Les nouvelles corrtlations impliquent une valeur pour la
composante diffuse significativement plus grande que celle predite par les formules de Liu et Jordan. Les
paramttres des expressions anlytiques postultes sont obtenues par la mtthode des moindres carrts. Les formules
qui en rtsultent fournissent une description compitte de la moyenne ~ tong terme de la radiation incidente ~ des
surfaces d'orientation quelconque; le seul input mtttrtolngique est la moyenne ~ long terme du total journalier de
la radiation htmisphtrique sur une surface horizontale. Les comparaisons entre le modtle et les donntes
exptrimentales montrent une prtcision sup~rieure ~ 3% pour la moyenne h long terme de la radiation disponible aux
capteurs d'tnergie solaire, soit fixes soit mobiles. Le modtle permet de calculer la radiation disponible h tousles types
de capteurs.

Zusammeaf~aag--Die Korrelationen yon Hottel, Whillier, Liu und Jordan zwischen diffuser und hemisphaerischer
Sonnenstrahlung und zwischen stuendlichen und taeglichen Strahlungswerten werden geprueft und verbessert. Als
Gundlage kienen fuenf Stationen in den U.S.A. fuer welche stuendliche Messwerte sowohJ fuer hemisphaerische als
auch fuer direkte (Pyrheliometer) Sonnenstrahlung vorliegen. Die prinzipielle Gueltigkeit der Liu und Jordan Methode
wird bestaetigt, und numerische Ungenauigkeiten der urspruenglichen Korrelationen werden korrigiert. Wesentliche
Maengel der urspruenglichen Korrelationen lassen sich auf die folgenden drei Aspekte der Arbeit yon Liu und Jordan
zurueckfuehren: (i) sie verliessen sich auf Messungen der diffusen Strahlung mittels Pyranometer mit Schattenring,
welche nicht fuer den Schattenringeffekt korrigiert waxen; (ii) fuer die taegiiche ausserirdische Strahlung benutzten sie
einen einzigen Wert ueber den ganzen Monat; (iii) sie bcruecksichtigten nicht die Moegiichkeit jahreszeitlicher
Schwankungen im Verhaeltnis yon diffuser zu hemisphaerischer Strahlung. Die neuen Korrelationen fuer diffuse
Strahlung stimmen ueberein mit Ergebnissen aus Indien, Israel und Canada; der Schluss liegt daher nahe, dass sic zu
guter Naeherung unabhaengig yore Breitengrad sind. Der Anteil der diffusen Strahlung ist wesentlich hoeher als im
urspruenglichen Modell yon Liu und Jordan. Alle Korrelationen in dieser Arbeit werden als analytische Ausdruecke
gegeben, deren Parameter auf der Methode der kleinsten Fehlerquadrate bernhen. Die Formein bieten eine
vollstaendige Beschriebung des langzeitlichen Mittelwertes der Sonnenstrahlung auf Flaechen beliebiger Orientierung.
AIs einziger meteorologischer input wkd der langzeitliche Durchschnitt der horizontalen hemisphaerischen Sonnen-
strahlung benc~tigt. Vergieich zwischen Modell und Daten zeigt Genauigkeit zu 3% fuer die Straldung, die festen oder
nachgefuehrten Solaxkollektoren zur Verfuegung steht. Das Modell kann auch zur Berechnung des solaxen Anteils der
Heiz- oder kuehlbelastung yon Gebaeuden dienen.