Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Evolutionary Driven Search For Solar Building Models Using LiDAR Data
Evolutionary Driven Search For Solar Building Models Using LiDAR Data
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: The search for solar buildings is one of the primary challenges in urban planning, especially when devel-
Received 28 October 2014 oping self-sustainable cities. This work uses an evolutionary approach for finding the optimal building
Received in revised form 21 January 2015 model based on airborne Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR) laser-scanned data, regarding solar poten-
Accepted 24 January 2015
tial. The method considers self-adaptive differential evolution for solving the constrained optimisation
Available online 2 February 2015
problem. In the experiments, the effect of different buildings’ layouts and design parameters were ana-
lysed regarding solar irradiance. Rectangular, T and L-shaped buildings were considered with various
Keywords:
design parameters: position, building rotation, facades’ height, roof’s height and slope. The experiments
Solar energy
Solar building
confirmed that the method can efficiently find the solar building design with maximum solar potential
Differential evolution within constrained optimisation space.
LiDAR data © 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction building design and for finding the most suitable building’s sur-
faces for PV systems’ placements. Some studies [6–8] only consider
Solar energy is one of the most available renewable and clean self-shadowing and not the shadowing from surroundings. This is
types of energy [1]. Nonetheless, its great potential for electrical evident when considering the modelling of buildings within urban
energy generation remains widely unutilised. In order to develop areas, where solar radiation obstructions are more common [9].
low energy buildings for self-sustainable cities, reduce carbon With the advancement of remote sensing technologies, such as
emissions or maximise passive solar heating, it is vital to know Light Detection And Ranging (LiDAR), new methods have been
how to maximise solar energy utilisation. Solar energy is normally developed for buildings’ irradiance modelling and for estimating
actively converted into electricity using photovoltaic (PV) systems. the solar potential of buildings’ roofs [10]. LiDAR is an active remote
Since the recent development of cheaper and more efficient PV sensing technology that can be mounted on an aircraft in order to
modules [2,3], these systems have received significant positive scan the Earth’s surface using laser pulses. The resulting LiDAR data
attention. They are commonly installed on buildings’ roofs, where is presented as an unstructured set of 3D points (i.e. point cloud).
it is generally considered that a surface oriented towards the Equa- Various studies have been conducted in the search for the most
tor with a tilt angle equal to a location’s latitude is optimal for solar efficient solar building design. Most methods [11,6–8,12–14] con-
energy utilisation [4]. However, this is often not the case due to sider a selected range of parameters (e.g. predetermined roofs’
local climatic conditions [5] and the influence of shadowing from slopes). Others [15–18] have considered automatic approaches that
terrain and man-made objects that decrease the received irradi- are presented as optimisation problems. This is generally solved
ance. Therefore, the optimal slope and orientation of a PV system by evolutionary-driven algorithms. Hachem et al. [7] performed a
attached onto a building’s surface presents an optimisation issue for parametric investigation of building design regarding solar poten-
investors, as well as for architects, urban planners and civil engi- tial. In another study [6], the authors developed a methodology of
neers who want to assess the solar energy potential of rooftops, neighbourhood design that included streets’ and different build-
renewable energy integration into buildings and the carbon foot- ings’ shapes, and their positions in order to avoid mutual shading.
print of buildings. Furthermore, they used this methodology for evaluating the energy
Over recent years several methods have been developed in supply for neighbourhoods housing [8]. Energy demand was com-
order to address this issue by modelling solar irradiance on a pared with the solar potential of different neighbourhoods by
given surface. This is an increasing problem for energy-efficient considering heating and cooling requirements. Kämpf et al. [16]
presented a new evolutionary algorithm for optimising solar irra-
diation availability. Its performance was compared with several
∗ Corresponding author. Tel.: +386 2 220 7435; fax: +386 2 220 7272. related evolutionary algorithms, including DE. They searched for
E-mail address: m.bizjak@um.si (M. Bizjak). optimal positions for multiple buildings but did not consider their
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.01.051
0378-7788/© 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
196 M. Bizjak et al. / Energy and Buildings 92 (2015) 195–203
Fig. 1. (a) Classified LiDAR data; (b) Building model on the 2.5D grid of classified LiDAR data, where the following building design parameters are considered: r – rotation
axis, f – facades’ height, h – roof’s height and ˛ – roof’s slope; (c) Building’s cells within the 2.5D grid.
slope is measured from the upper surface of a block, where a given crossover, the parameter values are taken from the first parent as
roof can be inclined from all sides of each block. long as the random number is smaller than CR. Otherwise, all of
After the building has been modelled, it is rasterised into the the remaining parameters are obtained from the second parent
2.5D grid. During the rasterisation process, for each covered cell, [39].
the highest point of the roof is considered within the given cell. The
covered cells represent the building within the grid (see Fig. 1c).
In this work, self-adaptation of F and CR control technique, as
2.2. Proposed evolutionary approach proposed by Brest et al. [34], is used in order to achieve more flexible
Fig. 3. Example of (a) classified Lidar data in 2.5D grid and the per-cell (b) shadowing coefficient Sc , (c) direct irradiance Icb , (d) diffuse irradiance Icd and (e) solar potential Ic .
optimisation. F and CR parameters are adapted for each vector as During the mutation, for each target vector xi,G , i = 1, . . ., P, a
follows: mutated vector is generated by adding the weighted difference
between two vectors to the third vector of the population:
Ft + rand1 · Fu , if rand2 < 1
Fi,G+1 = , (1) vi,G+1 = xr1 ,G + F(xr2 ,G − xr3 ,G ), (3)
Fi,G , otherwise
where r1 , r2 , r3 ∈ {1, 2, . . ., P} are random integers; r1 = / r2 =
/ r3
rand3 , if rand4 < 2 ⇒ P ≥ 4 and F ∈ [0,2] represents an amplification of the difference
CRi,G+1 = , (2) vector (xr2 ,G − xr3 ,G ) [33]. The crossover operation is performed fol-
CRi,G , otherwise
lowing the mutation operation.
where randj ∈ [0,1], j ∈ {1, 2, 3, 4}. 1 and 2 represent the proba- The purpose of the crossover operation is to increase the vec-
bility adjustment factors for F and CR, respectively. In this work the tor (i.e. candidate) diversity. In order to obtain the trial vector, the
following values are used: 1 = 2 = 0.1, Ft = 0.1 and Fu = 0.9, as sug- target vector is crossed with the mutated vector:
gested in [34]. The most common strategy is DE/rand/1/bin [33]. ui,G+1 = (u1i,G+1 , u2i,G+1 , . . ., uni,G+1 ), (4)
Three operations are performed for each vector in every gener-
ation: mutation, crossover, and selection. The mutation and the vji,G+1 , if (randj ≤ CR) or j = rni
crossover are used for generating new candidates, whilst selection uji,G+1 = , (5)
xji,G , if (randj > CR) or j =
/ rni
determines which vector shall survive in the current generation.
Fig. 4. LiDAR dataset representing an urban area with designated locations U1 and U2.
M. Bizjak et al. / Energy and Buildings 92 (2015) 195–203 199
Fig. 5. LiDAR dataset representing a mountainous area with designated locations M1 and M2. A part of M2 location is concealed by the hill.
where randj is the output of a random generator, CR ∈ [0,1], rni is The considered fitness function runs the method for solar poten-
a randomly-selected index for ensuring that ui,G+1 obtains at least tial estimation [10], which considers 2.5D grid as the input, based
one parameter from the mutated vector vi,G+1 [33]. Otherwise, a on the underlying LiDAR point cloud. Additional input are the cells
new population vector would not be created and the population of a candidate building. In order to achieve greater performance, a
would cease to evolve [34]. If a solution parameter of a vector is parallel implementation of the method on graphics processing unit
outside the parameter limits then, as a compromise, the parameter (GPU) [40] was used. The solar potential calculation is performed
value is set at the mean value of the parameter limits. During the in the following steps:
selection operation, the trial vector ui,G+1 replaces the target vector
xi,G in case it yields a higher solar potential estimation [33]: 1. Normals for each building’s cell are calculated. These are
required in order to estimate the slope and aspect angles.
ui,G+1 , if f (ui,G+1 ) > f (xi,G ) 2. The per-cell time and location dependent terrestrial irradiance
ui,G+1 = . (6)
xi,G , otherwise calculation is performed by considering the cell’s aspect and
slope angles [4], as well as the long-term on-site diffuse Id and
In this operation, the building is modelled based on the parameters global Ig solar irradiance measurements by the pyranometer. The
of a given candidate. For each candidate, the original grid remains direct irradiance is simply calculated as Ig − Id .
intact, whilst a different building design is considered on the 2.5D 3. The final estimation of the solar potential for a cell at a given
grid. The cells covered by the building are then used for solar poten- time is then defined as:
tial estimation. Furthermore, a problem of non-fixed number of kWh
covered cells is encountered due to rasterisation after the rotation. Ic = Icb (1 − Sc ) + Icd , (7)
m2
The minimisation of the number of covered cells is done by the
adjustment of the building’s position and additional elimination of where Icb and Icd are the terrestrial direct and diffuse irradi-
the excess cells. The original number of covered cells is set when ances of a given cell, whilst Sc is the shadowing coefficient that
the building is not rotated. The excess cells are detected after the decreases the direct irradiance. Fig. 3 shows each influence factor
rotation and iteratively removed from the building’s edges oriented considered for solar potential estimation.
towards the Equator starting from the right side, until the number The Sun’s position is required for accurate shadowing, and is
of cells is matched to the original amount. The presented selection obtained with the precise Solar Positional Algorithm (SPA) [41].
is performed in the same way for every tested strategy. The criteria 4. Time-dependant irradiance Ic is considered between sunrise Tsr
(i.e. fitness function) used in the selection is described in the next and sunset Tss with the fixed time-step, in order to estimate the
subsection. daily solar insolation:
Tss kWh
Jc = Ic (t)dt . (8)
2.2.1. Maximisation of the solar irradiance m2
Tsr
The initial population is randomly generated over the entire
parameter space [33] for all parameters apart from building rota- 5. The solar potential is defined as an average daily insolation
tion and roof slope. These two have proven to have significant throughout the year [10].
impact on solar potential estimation and can be approximated to 6. The final result of the fitness function is the sum of the solar
some extent, which in turn speeds-up the search. Generally, a sur- potential for each cell of the building. Hence, this presents the
face oriented towards the Equator with a tilt angle equal to the average amount of the daily solar energy a building receives in
location’s latitude is optimal for solar energy utilisation [4]. Hence, a kWh/m2 .
simple heuristic is proposed where the initial population parameter
space for roof slope is considered in Gaussian distribution, where 3. Results and discussion
the peak of the distribution equals the location’s latitude. A similar
heuristic is used for the building’s rotation parameter, where the The presented method was tested on two different LiDAR
distribution’s peak is oriented towards the Equator. The workflow datasets, one representing a generally flat urban environ-
of the presented method is shown in Fig. 2. ment (46◦ 6 21 N, 14◦ 31 53 E), whilst the other a mountainous
200 M. Bizjak et al. / Energy and Buildings 92 (2015) 195–203
0.524
0.520
0.654 0.664
0.518 0.652
0.662
0 3 6 9 12 15 18 21 0 10 20 30 0 10 20 30
Generation Generation Generation
0.529 0.674
0.658
Solar potential [M W/h]
0.668
0.655
0.526
0.654 0.666
0.525
0.653 0.664
0 4 8 12 0 11 22 33 44 55 0 7 14 21 28
Generation Generation Generation
0.513 0.628
0.61
Solar potential [M W/h]
Solar potential [M W/h]
0.508 0.618
0.602
0 3 6 9 0 11 22 33 44 55 66 77 0 6 12 18
Generation Generation Generation
0.516 0.632
0.615
Solar potential [M W/h]
0.515 0.631
0.614
0.514 0.63
0.613 0.629
0.513
M2
0.628
0.512 0.612
0.627
0.511 0.611 0.626
0.51 0.625
0.61
0 3 6 9 0 7 14 0 2 4 6 8
Generation Generation Generation
Fig. 6. Best solar potential estimation in each generation for all tested combinations of building shapes and areas of interest using different DE strategies. Solar potential is
estimated as the daily average irradiance of the entire building.
landscape (46◦ 32 30 N, 15◦ 34 6 E), as shown in Figs. 4 and 5, Average measurements from the nearest meteorological station
respectively. Both datasets have northern continental climate. For over the last decade were used in order to calculate the solar poten-
proof-of-concept, the testing was performed using three types of tial for each building candidate. As the self-adaptation technique
building shapes: rectangular, L and T shape. For the L-shape model was used, the population size remained the only parameter to con-
the roof was inclined by the same angle from all sides of each block. trol DE, besides the candidate parameter bounds. The population
During the experiments, every building was tested at four loca- size was set as a multiple of the number of building parameters
tions (i.e. regions U1, U2, M1, M2), two per dataset as shown in by factor 10 (60), as suggested in [33]. As it turned out, this size
Figs. 4 and 5. was insufficient for strategies with the approach best (DE/best/b/c).
M. Bizjak et al. / Energy and Buildings 92 (2015) 195–203 201
300 lines, each representing a single search run using the considered
strategy with the best calculated solar potential per generation.
250
The goal of each search was to quickly find the optimum, which
200 Rect means that searches ending in earlier generations were more suc-
cessful. DE strategies with the approach best (DE/best/b/c) provided
L
150 better performance than others, because the graphs representing
T
them are generally steeper and converge towards the optimum
100 Sum
faster. In most cases they had already gained a noticeable advantage
50
during the first generation. The amount of required generations
to find the optimum differed considerably for each location. It is
0 a consequence of topographical diversity. For example, buildings
rand/1/bin best/1/bin rand/1/exp best/1/exp best/2/bin
at location M2 were found faster than elsewhere. This occurred
Fig. 7. Sum of the required generations until convergence for each considered DE because they were located on the top of the hill, which means there
strategy and building type. was no shadowing from surroundings. In that case the parameter
facades’ height became irrelevant. Higher buildings are less likely
to be shadowed and consequently have a higher solar potential.
It is suspected that the main reason for this is in the high amount For an easier direct comparison, graphs from Fig. 6 are presented
of local maximums, where shadowing is lower and, consequently, in Fig. 7 with the sum of generations until convergence, based on
DE can converge too quickly towards a local maximum that is the considered strategy and building type.
not necessarily the least shadowed. In order to solve this prob- In Fig. 7 it can be seen that the overall best performer (i.e.
lem, the population size was increased to 80 candidates, which the lowest number of generations required for the search) was
proved to be enough. The search was completed when the differ- the DE/best/1/bin strategy, followed by DE/best/2/bin. It is evident
ence between the calculated solar potential and the global optimum that the optimal rectangular building was found faster than other
was at most 0.25%. In this case, DE satisfied the convergence con- shapes, which is due to smaller number of building cells. On the
ditions. The candidate maximum roof angle parameter was set at other hand, the T and L-shape buildings had the same amount of
70◦ where the roof was still ridged. The rotation was also limited covered cells. However, the L-shape was found quicker and its solar
to 90◦ . potential estimation was slightly higher. This occurred because the
Fig. 6 presents the results for each building type for all consid- internal shadowing between building’s cells was higher for the T-
ered strategies and areas of interest. Every graph consists of five shape building. Internal shadowing takes place when a building’s
cell is shadowed by another cell of the same building. Additionally, [7] C. Hachem, A. Athienitis, P. Fazio, Parametric investigation of geometric
form effects on solar potential of housing units, Solar Energy 85 (9) (2011)
the roof design was different, as the roof was sloped from all sides
1864–1877, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2011.04.027.
of each block for the L-shape building. It can also be observed that [8] C. Hachem, A. Athienitis, P. Fazio, Evaluation of energy supply and demand
strategies with the approach rand (DE/rand/b/c) benefited from the in solar neighborhood, Energy Build. 49 (2012) 335–347, http://dx.doi.org/
exponential recombination (DE/a/exp/c), whereas others did not. 10.1016/j.enbuild.2012.02.021.
[9] D. Robinson, A. Stone, Solar radiation modelling in the urban context,
Fig. 8 shows the optimal building models found during testing, Solar Energy 77 (3) (2004) 295–309, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.
presented in Figs. 6 and 7, for each building type and area of inter- 2004.05.010.
est. All buildings, tested at a particular area of interest, were located [10] N. Lukač, D. Žlaus, S. Seme, B. Žalik, G. Štumberger, Rating of roofs sur-
faces regarding their solar potential and suitability for PV systems based
at approximately the same part of the area. They were generally on LiDAR data, Appl. Energy 102 (2013) 803–812, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
oriented on an east-west axis, where the most exposed roof sur- j.apenergy.2012.08.042.
faces are oriented towards the Equator. The rectangular buildings [11] C. Ling, M.H. Ahmad, D. Ossen, The effect of geometric shape and building ori-
entation on minimising solar insolation on high-rise buildings in hot humid
were in all cases strictly on the east-west axis (i.e. not rotated), climate, J. Constr. Dev. Countries 12 (1) (2007) 27–38.
whereas the T and L-shaped buildings were often rotated by up to [12] M. van Esch, R. Looman, G. de Bruin-Hordijk, The effects of urban and build-
10◦ from the axis. This was mostly due to the internal shadowing of ing design parameters on solar access to the urban canyon and the potential
for direct passive solar heating strategies, Energy Build. 47 (2012) 189–200,
the building’s cells. All optimal buildings, except those located on
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.11.042.
the top of the hill (M2), had the maximum allowed height in order to [13] T. Hwang, S. Kang, J.T. Kim, Optimization of the building integrated photo-
decrease the shadowing from surroundings. On the urban dataset, voltaic system in office buildings’ focus on the orientation, inclined angle
the building’s roofs were sloped on average at 50◦ (±3◦ ), whereas and installed area, Energy Build. 46 (2012) 92–104, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.enbuild.2011.10.041.
at the mountainous location the average slope was 45◦ (±2◦ ). The [14] J. Kanters, M. Wall, The impact of urban design decisions on net zero energy
difference occurred because surface topography and geographic solar buildings in Sweden, Urban Plann. Trans. Res. 2 (1) (2014) 312–332,
location differed for each area of interest. Moreover, on the urban http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/21650020.2014.939297.
[15] R. Ouarghi, M. Krarti, Building shape optimization using neural network and
dataset, where slopes were higher, tested buildings were heavily genetic algorithm approach, ASHRAE Trans. 112 (1) (2006) 484–491.
shadowed by nearby buildings. [16] J.H. Kämpf, D. Robinson, A hybrid CMA-ES and HDE optimisation algorithm with
application to solar energy potential, Appl. Soft Comput. 9 (2) (2009) 738–745,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2008.09.009.
4. Conclusion [17] J.H. Kämpf, D. Robinson, Optimisation of building form for solar energy utili-
sation using constrained evolutionary algorithms, Energy Build. 42 (6) (2010)
This paper proposed a novel method for searching optimal solar 807–814, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2009.11.019.
building models within urban areas. For this the differential evo- [18] J.H. Kämpf, M. Montavon, J. Bunyesc, R. Bolliger, D. Robinson, Optimisation of
buildings’ solar irradiation availability, Solar Energy 84 (4) (2010) 596–603,
lution (DE) was used and tested using various strategies. For every http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2009.07.013.
candidate, a building was modelled and evaluated regarding solar [19] E. Roohollahi, M. Mehrabian, M. Abdolzadeh, Prediction of solar energy gain on
potential by considering shadowing from real topographic data and 3-D geometries, Energy Build. 62 (2013) 315–322, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
j.enbuild.2013.03.008.
local climate conditions that were captured using pyranometer. To [20] C. Demain, M. Journée, C. Bertrand, Evaluation of different models to esti-
our knowledge, this is the first attempt to use LiDAR data in order to mate the global solar radiation on inclined surfaces, Renew. Energy 50 (2013)
find the most efficient building design regarding solar potential. The 710–721, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2012.07.031.
[21] B. Yu, H. Liu, J. Wu, W. Lin, Investigating impacts of urban morphology on spatio-
results suggest that strategies with the approach best (DE/best/b/c) temporal variations of solar radiation with airborne LiDAR data and a solar flux
are more suitable for this kind of optimisation problem, provided model: a case study of downtown Houston, Int. J. Remote Sens. 30 (17) (2009)
that the population size is large enough. The best performer turned 4359–4385, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/01431160802555846.
[22] A. Jochem, B. Höfle, M. Rutzinger, N. Pfeifer, Automatic roof plane detec-
out to be the DE/best/1/bin strategy. The presented method could tion and analysis in airborne LiDAR, Sensors 9 (7) (2009) 5241–5262,
also be easily extended to handle more building design parameters. http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/s90705241.
[23] J. Hofierka, J. Kanuk, Assessment of photovoltaic potential in urban areas using
open-source solar radiation tools, Renew. Energy 34 (10) (2009) 2206–2214,
Acknowledgements http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.02.021.
[24] R. Levinson, H. Akbari, M. Pomerantz, S. Gupta, Solar access of residential
This work was supported by Slovenian Research Agency rooftops in four California cities, Solar Energy 83 (12) (2009) 2120–2135,
under grants P2-0041, 1000-13-0552, and J2-6764. Thanks to the http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2009.07.016.
[25] L. Wiginton, H. Nguyen, J. Pearce, Quantifying rooftop solar photovoltaic
Slovenian Environment Agency for providing the pyranometer potential for regional renewable energy policy, Computers, Environ. Urban
measurements. Syst. 34 (4) (2010) 345–357, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.
2010.01.001.
[26] T.R. Tooke, N.C. Coops, J.A. Voogt, M.J. Meitner, Tree structure influences on
Appendix A. Supplementary data rooftop-received solar radiation, Landscape Urban Plan. 102 (2) (2011) 73–81,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2011.03.011.
Supplementary data associated with this article can be [27] H.T. Nguyen, J.M. Pearce, Incorporating shading losses in solar photovoltaic
found, in the online version, at http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild. potential assessment at the municipal scale, Solar Energy 86 (5) (2012)
1245–1260, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2012.01.017.
2015.01.051. [28] M. Brito, N. Gomes, T. Santos, J.A. Tenedório, Photovoltaic potential in a Lisbon
suburb using LiDAR data, Solar Energy 86 (1) (2012) 283–288, http://dx.doi.org/
References 10.1016/j.solener.2011.09.031.
[29] J. Hofierka, M. Zlocha, A new 3-D solar radiation model for 3-D city
[1] M. Dresselhaus, I. Thomas, Alternative energy technologies, Nature 414 (6861) models, Trans. GIS 16 (5) (2012) 681–690, http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/
(2001) 332–337. j. 1467-9671.2012.01337.x.
[2] A. Luque, S. Hegedus, Handbook of Photovoltaic Science and Engineering, Wiley, [30] J.A. Jakubiec, C.F. Reinhart, A method for predicting city-wide electricity
Chichester, West Sussex, England, 2003. gains from photovoltaic panels based on LiDAR and GIS data combined
[3] G. Singh, Solar power generation by PV (photovoltaic) technology: a review, with ho simulations, Solar Energy 93 (2013) 127–143, http://dx.doi.org/
Energy 53C (2013) 1–13, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2013.02.057. 10.1016/j.solener.2013.03.022.
[4] J.A. Duffie, W.A. Beckman, Solar Engineering of Thermal Processes, Wiley- [31] D.A. Jacques, J. Gooding, J.J. Giesekam, A.S. Tomlin, R. Crook, Methodology for
Interscience, New York, 2006. the assessment of PV capacity over a city region using low-resolution LiDAR
[5] J.D. Mondol, Y.G. Yohanis, B. Norton, The impact of array inclination and ori- data and application to the City of Leeds (UK), Appl. Energy 124 (2014) 28–34,
entation on the performance of a grid-connected photovoltaic system, Renew. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2014.02.076.
Energy 32 (2007) 118–140, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2006.05.006. [32] J. Liang, J. Gong, W. Li, A visualization-oriented 3D method for efficient
[6] C. Hachem, A. Athienitis, P. Fazio, Investigation of solar potential of housing computation of urban solar radiation based on 3D-2D surface mapping,
units in different neighborhood designs, Energy Build. 43 (2011) 2262–2273, Int. J. Geogr. Inf. Sci. 28 (4) (2014) 780–798, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2011.05.008. 13658816.2014.880168.
M. Bizjak et al. / Energy and Buildings 92 (2015) 195–203 203
[33] R. Storn, K. Price, Differential evolution – a simple and efficient heuristic for [38] D. Shepard, A two-dimensional interpolation function for irregularly-spaced
global optimization over continuous spaces, J. Global Optimiz. 11 (4) (1997) data, in: Proceedings of the 1968 23rd ACM National Conference, ACM
341–359, http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1008202821328. ‘68, New York, USA, 1968, pp. 517–524, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/800186.
[34] J. Brest, S. Greiner, B. Boskovič, M. Mernik, V. Žumer, Self-adapting con- 810616.
trol parameters in differential evolution: a comparative study on numerical [39] E. Mezura-Montes, J. Velázquez-Reyes, C.A.C. Coello, A comparative study of
benchmark problems, IEEE Trans. Evolut. Comput. 10 (6) (2006) 646–657, differential evolution variants for global optimization, in: Proceedings of the
http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TEVC.2006.872133. 8th Annual Conference on Genetic and Evolutionary Computation, GECCO
[35] D. Mongus, N. Lukač, B. Žalik, Ground and building extraction from LiDAR data ‘06, New York, USA, 2006, pp. 485–492, http://dx.doi.org/10.1145/1143997.
based on differential morphological profiles and locally fitted surfaces, ISPRS 1144086.
J. Photogramm. Remote Sens. 93 (2014) 145–156, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ [40] N. Lukač, B. Žalik, GPU-based roofs’ solar potential estimation using
j.isprsjprs.2013.12.002. LiDAR data, Comput. Geosci. 52 (0) (2013) 34–41, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
[36] J. Heinzel, B. Koch, Exploring full-waveform LiDAR parameters for tree species j.cageo.2012.10.010.
classification, Int. J. Appl. Earth Observ. Geoinf. 13 (1) (2011) 152–160, [41] I. Reda, A. Andreas, Solar position algorithm for solar radiation appli-
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jag.2010.09.010. cations, Solar Energy 76 (5) (2004) 577–589, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/
[37] W.Y. Yan, A. Shaker, N. El-Ashmawy, Urban land cover classification using air- j.solener.2003.12.003.
borne LiDAR data: a review, Remote Sens. Environ. 158 (0) (2015) 295–310,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rse.2014.11.001.