Kumar 1997

This article was downloaded by: [Illinois Institute Of Technology]
On: 02 May 2013, At: 09:17

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number:
1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street,
London W1T 3JH, UK
International Journal of
Geographical Information
Science
Publication details, including instructions for
authors and subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgis20
Modelling topographic
variation in solar radiation
in a GIS environment
LALIT KUMAR , ANDREW K. SKIDMORE &
EDMUND KNOWLES
Published online: 06 Aug 2010.
To cite this article: LALIT KUMAR , ANDREW K. SKIDMORE & EDMUND KNOWLES
(1997): Modelling topographic variation in solar radiation in a GIS environment,
International Journal of Geographical Information Science, 11:5, 475-497
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/136588197242266
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/

terms-and-conditions
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study
purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution,
reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in any
form to anyone is expressly forbidden.
The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make
any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or
up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae, and drug doses
should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher
shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand, or
costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or
indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.
Downloaded by [Illinois Institute Of Technology] at 09:17 02 May 2013
int. j. geographical information science, 1997 , vol. 11 , no. 5 , 475± 497
Research Article
M odelling topographic variation in solar radiation in a GIS

environment
LALIT KUMAR, ANDREW K. SKIDMORE and

EDMUND KNOWLES
School of Geography, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052,
Australia
email: p2114659@geog.unsw.edu.au
( Received 9 May 1996; accepted 5 December 1996 )
Abstract. Clear sky shortwave solar radiation varies in response to altitude and
elevation, surface gradient (slope) and orientation (aspect), as well as position
relative to neighbouring surfaces. While the measurement of radiation ¯ ux on a
relatively ¯ at surface is straightforward, it requires a dense network of stations
for mountainous terrain. The model presented here uses a digital elevation model
to compute potential direct solar radiation and di use radiation over a large
area, though the model may be modi® ed to include parameters such as cloud
cover and precipitable water content of the atmosphere. The purpose of this
algorithm is for applied work in forestry, ecology, biology and agriculture where
spatial variation of solar radiation is more important than calibrated values. The
ability of the model to integrate radiation over long time periods in a computa-
tionally inexpensive manner enables it to be used for modelling radiation per se ,
or input into other hydrological, climatological or biological models. The model
has been implemented for commercially available GIS ( viz. Arc Info and Genasys)
and is available over the Internet.
1. Introduction
Solar radiation powers micrometeorological processes (such as soil heat ¯ ux and
soil temperature), sensible heat ¯ ux, surface and air temperatures, wind and turbulent
transport, evapotranspiration and growth and activity of plants and animals. In fact,
99´8 per cent of energy at the Earth’s surface comes from the Sun ( Dickinson and
Cheremisino 1980 ).
The total global radiation at the Earth’s surface consists of both short and
longwave radiation. Shortwave radiation may be absorbed by terrestrial bodies and
cloud cover and re-emitted as longwave radiation. The shortwave radiation reaching
the surface of the Earth may be direct, di use or re¯ ected (® gure 1). Direct radiation
reaches the surface of the Earth from the solar beam without any interactions with
particles in the atmosphere. Di use radiation is scattered out of the solar beam by
gases ( Rayleigh scattering) and by aerosols (which include dust particles, as well as
sulphate particles, soot, sea salt particles, pollen, etc.). Re¯ ected radiation is mainly
re¯ ected from terrain and is therefore more important in mountainous areas. Direct
shortwave radiation is the most important component of global radiation because
it contributes the most to the energy balance and also the other components depend
on it, either directly or indirectly ( Kondratyev 1965 ).
1365 ± 8816/97 $12´00 Ñ 1997 Taylo r & Francis Ltd.
476 L . Kumar et al.
Figure 1. Downward irradiance received in a mountainous region: (1 ) direct irradiance,

( 2) di use irradiance from the sky, and (3 ) terrain re¯ ected irradiance.
Global radiation at a location is roughly proportional to direct solar radiation,

and varies with the geometry of the receiving surface. The other components, such
as di use radiation, vary only slightly from slope to slope within a small area and
the variations can be linked to slope gradient ( Kondratyev 1965, Williams et al .
1972 ). In fact, di use radiation comprises less than 16 per cent of total irradiance at
visible wavelengths in the green and red region ( Dubayah 1992), rising to 30 per
cent for blue. The ¯ ux of clear-sky di use radiation varies with slope orientation
much the same way as the ¯ ux of direct solar radiation, hence preserving the spatial
variability in total radiation ( Dubayah et al . 1989 ).
Parameters such as rainfall and temperature are frequently measured at one site
and generalized for the surrounding region but extrapolating vertical atmospheric
values, even using satellites, is di cult. Recording solar radiation at one site and
extrapolating is seldom feasible as it is highly variable from place to place due to
changing slope (surface gradient) and aspect (surface orientation). On ¯ at terrain
and under clear-sky conditions, the downwelling shortwave radiation is nearly the
same from point to point over relatively large areas and so one measurement can
be taken to be representative of the entire area. However for mountainous terrain
such point measurements do not adequately represent the shortwave radiation over
large areas because mountain terrain sets up localized weather conditions ( Barry
1981 ) and so point samples are representative of only the locality from which they
are collected. It is thus obvious that to get a reasonable accuracy in the measurement
of incoming ¯ uxes in mountainous terrain one has to use either a very dense network
of data collection stations or use approaches such as radiation modelling ( Duguay
1993 ).
Solar radiation over large areas has often been estimated by measuring the
number of hours of sunshine at a single site and then converting the hours into
radiation values by the use of empirical relationships, such as the AÊ ngstrom equation
Ê
(A ngstrom 1924, Glover and McCulloch 1958), and generalizing this for the whole
area. The conventional A Ê ngstrom equation is of the form
Q / Q A = a + b n /N ( 1)
Sola r radiation modelling 477
where Q =total solar radiation on a horizontal surface on the Earth

Q A=radiation on a horizontal surface at the upper limit of the atmosphere
n =hours of bright sunshine
N =total possible hours of sunshine, and
a and b are constants found using regression.
Bu o et al . ( 1972), Frank and Lee ( 1966) and Kondratyev ( 1969 ) have developed
empirical relations between the e ects of slope exposure (e.g., gradient and aspect
(Skidmore 1990 )) and clear sky radiation, but most of the results are in graphical
or tabular form. This may be good for engineers, who require only point speci® c
data, but in forestry and ecological studies the variation in solar radiation over a
study area is required. Swift ( 1976) modelled total shortwave radiation over a large
area but it required measurements of solar radiation on a nearby site in addition to
slope and aspect information. The shading e ects by adjacent features had to be
visually estimated and manually calculated. Nunez ( 1980) developed a model which
used cloud temperature data to obtain radiation ¯ uxes. Recently, Dubayah and Rich
( 1995 ) review the issues in modelling solar radiation for GIS.
Di use sky irradiance under cloud free conditions may be estimated by assuming
an isotropic sky, and calculating the proportion of the sky seen from a point (that
is using the equivalent of the viewshed operation in GIS) ( Dubayah and Rich 1995).
Under cloudy or partly cloudy conditions, di use radiation is anisotropic which may
be explicitly modelled, but in practice this is computationally expensive to achieve
as the di use radiation from di erent portions of the sky must be calculated. More
importantly, in order to calculate actual solar ¯ ux, ® eld data such as pyranometer
data (which measures actual incoming solar ¯ ux at a station), atmospheric optical
data, or atmospheric pro® ling (sounding) must be used.
The aim of this research was to compute potential solar radiation (the amount
of shortwave radiation received under clear-sky conditions), over a large area using
only digital elevation and latitude data and to study the variation in radiation at
di erent aspects and slopes. The model must cope with ¯ at or mountainous terrain,
as well as shading by adjacent features. While the model calculates only the potential
beam solar radiation and a simpli® ed di use radiation, it can be modi® ed to include
other parameters such as e ects of cloud cover and precipitable water content of the
atmosphere, if such data are available. It should be noted that for many parts of the
earth, these data are not readily available, so we wished to develop a pragmatic
approach to radiation modelling which may be utilized by GIS analysts. Thus the
emphasis is on describing relative spatial variation in solar radiation, with modelled
values as close to actual values as possible, rather than in exact values for validation
and calibration purposes; relative solar radiation may be linked to the distribution
of ¯ ora and fauna in the landscape, as well as productivity.
Any model which is established in a given site using as input data records of
classical weather parameters produced either by individual site installation or by a
nearby meteorological station will only be applicable to that site. Therefore, while
generating the model, an attempt has been made to include widely accepted empirical
relations at the expense of probably more rigorous computational methods which
require a lot of site speci® c data. As has been mentioned previously, site speci® c
data for mountainous terrain is rarely available, hence inclusion of such parameters
in the model would probably render it unusable for a lot of areas where it is actually
meant to be used. However, where general empirical relations have been used other
parameterizations are given and the reader is directed to relevant literature so that,
where site speci® c data is available, these relations could be utilized.
2. M ethod
2.1. Computatio nal procedures
The intensity of solar radiation is a function of the solar direction relative to the
local plane of the Earth’s surface at that instance. Variables such as solar azimuth
angle and solar altitude angle change continuously throughout the day, and so have
to be calculated every time the intensity of solar radiation is computed. Solar
declination may be assumed to be constant and is calculated only once per day. To
simplify the explanations, the Ptolemaic view of the Sun’s motion around the Earth
will be used; in other words the site is ® xed and is the centre of origin. The
fundamental equations used below are available from standard textbooks on solar
engineering, such as Kreith and Kreider ( 1978), Du e and Beckman ( 1991) and
Sayigh ( 1977 ).
The Sun’s position in the sky is described by the solar altitude and solar azimuth
angles. The solar altitude angle (a ) is the angular elevation of the Sun above the
horizon (® gure 2). It is measured from the local horizontal plane upward to the
centre of the sun. The solar altitude angle changes continuously; that is daily and
seasonally. It is zero at sunrise each day, increases as the Sun rises and reaches a
maximum at solar noon and then decreases again until it reaches zero at sunset.
The noon solar altitude angle varies seasonally; the seasonal change being due to
the declination angle changing daily.
The solar azimuth angle (a s ) is measured in a horizontal plane between a due
south line and the direction from the site to the sun as projected onto a horizontal
plane (® gure 2). The solar altitude angle (a ) and solar azimuth angle (a s ) are related
to the fundamental angles of latitude, solar declination (d s ) and hour angle (hs ) by
equations (2 ) and ( 3 ) where L is the latitude of the site ( Kreith and Kreider 1978).
sin a =sin L sin d s+cos L cos d s cos hs ( 2)
sin a s=cos d s sin h s /cos a ( 3)
The hour angle describes how far east or west the Sun is from the local meridian.
It is zero when the Sun is on the meridian and decreases at a rate of 15ß per hour.
By convention morning values are positive and afternoon values are negative.
Solar declination is the angle between the direction to the Sun and the plane of
the Earth’s equator and is given in equation ( 4) ( Du e and Beckman 1991).
d s=23´45 sin ( 360ß ( 284+ N )/365) ( 4)
Figure 2. Illustration of solar altitude and solar azimuth angles.

where N is the day number, 1 January being day 1 and 31 December being day 365.
The declination varies from 23´45ß S to 23´45ß N. Again by convention values north
of the equator are taken to be positive and those to the south are negative.
2.2. T he algorithm
The ¯ owchart in ® gure 3 shows in detail the calculation of potential solar radi-
ation at a site and the program, written in AML (Arc-Info) and Genasys script, is
available at ftp site fatboy.geog. unsw.edu.a u (under solarradn directory). The program
prompts for the latitude, day numbers when calculations are to begin and end, as
well as the time interval to be used. Obviously if calculations are for one day only,
the day number for the start and end of calculation will be the same and the program
will integrate the values from sunrise to sunset. Therefore by just changing the day
number, solar radiation for any length of time can be calculated. The user must
specify latitude as a northern or southern value; northern values being positive and
southern values being negative.
The initial stage is to calculate the declination using equation ( 4 ). The solar hour
Figure 3. Flowchart to calculate potential solar radiation.

angles at sunrise (hsr ) and sunset (hss ) for the day are also calculated. Sunrise is when
solar altitude angle is zero degrees, (equations ( 5) and ( 6 )).
sin a =0=sin L sin d s+cos L cos d s cos h sr (a =0) ( 5)
[ hsr=cosÕ 1
(Õ tan L tan d s ) ( 6)
and h ss= Õ h sr
Sunrise and sunset are the time when the centre of the sun is at the horizon, i.e.,
solar altitude angle is taken from the centre of the Sun. Fleming et al . ( 1995) have
suggested the use of Õ 0´8333ß as the altitude angle for calculating the sunrise time
as this takes atmospheric refraction into account. At this angle the top of the solar
disc is just visible above the horizon and so starts illuminating the site, albeit with
very weak rays.
Once the sunrise and sunset times are calculated, solar radiation is integrated
from sunrise to sunset. At this point it is necessary to decide on the time interval
between solar irradiance calculations. This decision depends on both the accuracy
required as well as the terrain, and must be balanced against computational expense.
A rugged terrain will cause increased shading e ects as the Sun moves across the
sky and so a smaller time interval should be used. For the example below, average
solar radiation was calculated at the midpoint of a 30 minute interval; the midpoint
being taken to represent the average of the ¯ ux over the time interval.
The solar altitude and azimuth angles at the above hour angle are then calculated
using equations ( 2 ) and ( 3 ). However, in using equation ( 3) to ® nd the azimuth
angle, it is important to distinguish the case where the Sun is in the northern half
of the sky from the case where it is in the southern half. If cos h s is greater ( less)
than tan d s /tan L then the Sun is in the northern (southern) half of the sky and its
azimuth angle is in the range Õ 90ß to 90ß ( 90ß to 270ß ).
In the next stage, shaded and illuminated points are calculated. The HILLSHADE
command (in both Arc/Info and Genasys) creates a shaded relief grid by considering
the illumination angle and shadows from a grid of elevation, solar azimuth angle
and solar altitude angle. Shadows are de® ned by the local horizon at each cell. In
Arc/Info shadows are assigned a value of zero and illuminated cells are given a value
of one, while in Genasys the values obtained have to be reclassi® ed to get the shaded
and illuminated cells.
Solar radiation received at a site will depend upon the solar ¯ ux outside the
atmosphere, the optical air mass, water vapour and aerosol content of the atmos-
phere. The solar ¯ ux (Io ) outside the atmosphere is given by Kreith and Kreider
( 1978 ) and Du e and Beckman ( 1991 ) (equation ( 7)).
Io = S o ( 1+0´0344 cos( 360ß N /365)) ( W mÕ 2
) ( 7)
Equation ( 7 ) accounts for variation in the solar irradiance at the top of the
atmosphere throughout the year as a result of the elliptical nature of the Earth’s
path around the Sun. S o , the solar constant, is the irradiance of an area perpendicular
to the Sun’s rays just outside the atmosphere and at the mean Sun± Earth distance.
The exact value of the solar constant is subject to much ongoing debate. A value of
1353 W mÕ 2 has been accepted by NASA as a standard ( Jansen 1985) and the
Smithsonian Institute also uses this value; however recent publications have cited
values of 1367 W mÕ 2 ( Duncan et al . 1982, Wehrli 1985 ) and 1373 W mÕ 2 (Monteith
and Unsworth 1990 ). The World Radiation Centre ( WRC) has adopted a value of
1367 W mÕ 2 ( Du e and Beckman 1991 ) and so this is the value used for calculations
in this model.
2.2.1. Direct radiation

Solar radiation is attenuated as it passes through the atmosphere and, in a
simpli® ed case, may be estimated using Bouger’s Law ( Kreith and Kreider 1978;
equation ( 8 ))
Ib = Io eÕ
kM
( 8)
where it is assumed that the sky is clear, Ib and Io are the terrestrial and extraterrestrial
intensities of beam radiation, k is an absorption constant and M is the air mass
ratio. The air mass ratio is the relative mass of air through which solar radiation
must pass to reach the surface of the Earth. It is the ratio of actual path length mass
to the mass when the Sun is directly overhead. It varies from M=1 when the Sun
is overhead to about 30 when the Sun is at the horizon. The two main factors
a ecting the air mass ratio are the direction of the path and the local altitude. The
paths direction is described in terms of its zenith angle, y , which is the angle between
the path and the zenith position directly overhead. The ratio M is proportional to
sec y , which is equal to 1/cos y (Gates 1980 ).
The adjustment in air mass for local altitude is made in terms of the local
atmospheric pressure, p, and is de® ned in equation ( 9) where p is the local pressure
and Mo and po are the corresponding air mass and pressure at sea level.
M = ( p /p o ) Mo ( 9)
This above formula is valid only for zenith angles less than 70ß ( Kreith and
Kreider 1978 ). When the zenith angle is greater than 70ß , the secant approximation
underestimates solar energy because atmospheric refraction and the curvature of the
Earth have not been accounted for. Frouin et al . ( 1989 ) have suggested the use of
equation ( 10).
M = [cos y +0´15 ( 93´885 Õ y )Õ 1´253
]Õ 1
( 10)
Keith and Kreider ( 1978 ) and Cartwright ( 1993 ) have suggested using the rela-
tionship in equation ( 11 ). The model presented here used equation ( 11) to calculate
the value of air mass ratio.
M = [1229 + ( 614 sin a )2 ]1/2Õ 614 sin a ( 11)
As the solar radiation passes through the Earth’s atmosphere it is modi® ed due to:
Ð absorption by di erent gases in the atmosphere,
Ð molecular (or Rayleigh) scattering by the permanent gases,
Ð aerosol (Mie) scattering due to particulates.
Absorption by atmospheric molecules is a selective process that converts incoming
energy to heat, and is mainly due to water, oxygen, ozone and carbon dioxide.
Equations describing the absorption e ects of the above are given by Turner and
Spencer ( 1972 ). A number of other gases absorb radiation but their e ects are
relatively minor and for most practical purposes can be neglected ( Forster 1984 ).
Atmospheric scattering can be either due to molecules of atmospheric gases or
due to smoke, haze and fumes ( Richards 1993). Molecular scattering is considered
to have a dependence inversely proportional to the fourth power of the wavelength
of radiation, i.e., l Õ 4 . Thus the molecular scattering at 0´5 m m (visible blue) will be
16 times greater than at 1´0 m m (near-infrared ). As the primary constituents of the
atmosphere and the thickness of the atmosphere remain essentially constant under
clear sky conditions, molecular scattering can be considered constant for a particular
wavelength. Aerosol scattering, on the other hand, is not constant and depends on
the size and vertical distribution of particulates. It has been suggested (Monteith
and Unsworth 1990) that a l Õ 1´3 dependence can be used for continental regions.
In an ideal clear atmosphere Rayleigh scattering is the only mechanism present
( Richards 1993 ) and it accounts for the blueness of the sky.
The e ects of the atmosphere in absorbing and scattering solar radiation are
variable with time as atmospheric conditions and the air mass ratio change.
Atmospheric transmittance (t ) values vary with location and elevation and range
between 0 and 1. According to Gates ( 1980 ) at very high elevations with extremely
clear air t may be as high as 0´8, while for a clear sky with high turbidity it may be
as low as 0´4.
Hottel ( 1976 ) has presented a set of empirical equations for estimating beam
radiation transmitted through clear atmosphere. The equations take into account
the zenith angle as well as the altitude, and are stated in equation ( 12);
t b = a 0 + a 1 eÕ
k/cos
y ( 12)
where t b is the atmospheric transmittance for beam radiation. a 0 , a 1 and k are
constants and for the standard atmosphere with 23 km visibility and altitudes less
than 2´5 km are given in equation ( 13 ).
a0 =0´4237Õ 0´00821 ( 6 Õ A )2
a1 =0´5055+0´00595 (6´5 Õ A )2
k =0´2711+0´01858 ( 2´5Õ A )2 ( 13)
where A is the altitude of the site in kilometres. Equations for a standard atmosphere
with 5 km visibility are also given by Hottel.
Kreith and Kreider ( 1978 ) have described the atmospheric transmittance for
beam radiation by the empirical relationship given in equation ( 14 ).
t b=0´56 (eÕ 0´65 M
+ eÕ 0´095 M
) ( 14)
The constants account for attenuation of radiation by the di erent factors discussed
above. Because scattering is wavelength dependent, the coe cients represent an
average scattering over all wavelengths. This relationship gives the atmospheric
transmittance for clear skies to within 3 per cent accuracy ( Kreith and Kreider 1978)
and the relationship has also been used by Cartwright ( 1993 ). Equation ( 14 ) is used
in the model instead of the Bouger form (equation ( 8)) as the Bouger form applies
to a simpli® ed case and does not account for factors considered in developing
equations (14 ) and ( 15 ).
Therefore the shortwave solar radiation striking a surface normal to the Sun’s
rays (Is ) is given by equation ( 15). The atmospheric transmittance in the above
equation can be replaced by site speci® c values if they are available.
Is = Io t b ( 15)
The last stage is to calculate the solar radiation on a tilted surface (Ip ). This is
given in equation ( 16), where cos i =sin d s (sin L cos b Õ cos L sin b cos a w ) +
cos d s cos h s (cos L cos b +sin L sin b cos a w )+cos d s sin b sin a w sin h s . i is the angle
between the normal to the surface and the direction to the Sun and b is the tilt angle
of the surface (slope) and aw is the azimuth angle of the surface (aspect). Slope and
aspect of each grid cell are stored in separate grids, and accessed as required to
calculate the solar radiation.
Ip = Is cos i ( 16)
2.2.2. Di use and re¯ ected insolatio n

Di use solar radiation (Id ) was calculated using the method suggested by Gates
( 1980 ), and is given by the equation ( 17).
Id = Io t d cos2 b /2 sin a ( 17)
where t d is the radiation di usion coe cient. t d can be related to t b by equation
( 18) ( Liu and Jordan 1960) which applies to clear sky conditions, and shows that
the greater the direct solar beam transmittance, the smaller the transmittance to
scattered skylight. Typical values of direct beam transmittance for a dust free, clear
sky range from 0´400 to 0´800, and the corresponding di use skylight transmission
varies from 0´153 to 0´037 (Gates 1980).
t d =0´271Õ 0´294 t b ( 18)
The magnitude of re¯ ected radiation depends on the slope of the surface and the
ground re¯ ectance coe cient. The re¯ ected radiation here is the ground-re¯ ected
radiation, both direct sunlight and di use skylight, impinging on the slope after
being re¯ ected from other surfaces visible above the slope’s local horizon. The
re¯ ecting surfaces are considered to be Lambertian. Here re¯ ected radiation (Ir ) was
calculated based on equation ( 19) (Gates 1980)
I r = rI0 t r sin 2 b /2 sin a ( 19)
where r is the ground re¯ ectance coe cient and t r is the re¯ ectance transmittivity.
The ground re¯ ectance coe cient is the mean re¯ ectivity of the surface over a speci® c
spectral band normalized by the full solar spectrum (Monteith and Unsworth 1990 ).
t r can be related to t b by the relationship in equation ( 20) (Gates 1980).
t r=0´271+0´706 t b ( 20)
A value of 0´20 was used for the re¯ ectance coe cient of vegetation (Gates 1980 ).
2.3. Study site

The algorithm described was used to compute the potential shortwave radiation
at Nullica State Forest near Eden, New South Wales, at a latitude of 36´5ß S. The
terrain at the site is fairly rugged with elevation ranging from 9 to 880 metres.
Figure 4 shows the location of the site while ® gure 5 gives a summary of the slope,
aspect and elevation distributions. The total area of the study site was 16406 ha,
made up of 182288 30 m by 30 m grid cells.
3. Results and discussion

3.1. Computatio n time
The program was run on a Sun Sparc5 workstation. For each time interval it
took about 2´35 seconds of CPU time to compute the solar radiation for the 182288
grid cells. Using a time interval of 30 minutes it takes 5´7 hours of CPU time to
Figure 4. Location of study site.
calculate the solar radiation over the whole area for one year. However, because of
the time taken for ancillary processes such as ® le transfers, the real time taken is
about 10 times the CPU time.
3.2. Choice of time interval

While it would be ideal to have a very short time interval to obtain accurate
results, this is not always possible because of constraints such as time and the
availability of a fast computer. The time interval chosen can be larger for terrain
which is reasonably ¯ at but has to be small for rugged terrain where shadowing
e ects by adjacent features will lead to signi® cantly di erent results. The calculation
of the radiation ¯ ux at the midpoint of the time interval somewhat reduces this e ect.
For the study site, solar radiation was calculated using seven di erent time
intervals for 23 September (equinox). The values for all the cells were then added
and the mean and standard deviation calculated. The results are shown in table 1.
While the mean values are similar, the standard deviation, minimum and maximum
values show the wider range of values obtained at larger time intervals.
To illustrate the impact of large time intervals, the mean deviation in solar
Figure 5. Cumulative frequency distributions for slope, aspect and elevation for study site.
Table 1. E ect of decreasing time interval on insolation.
Standard
Time interval Minimum Maximum Mean deviation
60 9478 33689 25582 2935

45 9806 33573 25554 2868
30 10087 33460 25530 2857
15 9801 33421 25534 2828
10 10334 33398 25534 2831
5 10265 33415 25532 2825
1 10262 33410 25533 2825
radiation was calculated for individual grid cells. For each interval and for each grid
cell the actual solar radiation obtained was subtracted from that obtained using a
time interval of one minute. All positive and negative deviations were separated and
the mean deviation was calculated. The results (® gure 6) show that smaller time
intervals give much more accurate results than larger time intervals. It also shows
that overall there is no particular bias in the algorithm in overestimating or underes-
timating the radiation received, as both the positive and negative deviations are
almost equal (assuming that the 1 minute interval readings are not biased). It should
also be noted that results obtained using a 30 minute interval di er by only about
one per cent when compared to those obtained using a one minute interval.
3.3. Radiatio n modelling

Solar radiation was calculated every 30 minutes and integrated to give monthly
values. Distribution of shortwave radiation over the study site for the whole year is
shown in ® gure 7 and seasonal variations are shown in ® gure 8. Figure 7 shows a
considerable range in shortwave radiation received over the area, the range being
Figure 6. Mean deviations in insolation at each time interval from values obtained using
one minute intervals.
Figure 7. Annual solar radiation distribution.

488
Figure 8.
L . Kumar et al.
Seasonal solar radiation distribution.

from 3647 MJ mÕ 2 to 11253 MJ mÕ 2 per year. There are also substantial areas which
receive no direct radiation at all during the winter season, as shown in ® gure 8. The
months of November, December and January receive the most radiation and the
radiation is fairly evenly spread over all aspects, especially for ¯ atter grid cells. The
variation in solar radiation for di erent aspect and slope gradients are shown as
® gures 9 and 10. On an annual basis, northern facing slopes generally receive far
more radiation than the south facing slopes. In many places the south facing slopes
are fairly poorly irradiated, receiving only about half the shortwave radiation of the
northern slopes. Such variations would surely have a signi® cant e ect on the heat
budget of di erent sites, thus in¯ uencing latent and sensible heat ¯ uxes. At slopes
greater than about 20ß , radiation data have a higher variance with the northern
slope receiving the highest radiation. It is also interesting to note that southern
aspects receive a lot of radiation during the summer months. The reason for this is
that during these months the hours of sunshine are almost equal between the
northern and southern halves of the sky. The Sun rises in the southern half, and
during the course of the day, traverses through the southern half, crossing over to
the northern side around 8´20 am and then back to the southern side around 3´40
pm, before setting. In summer the Sun is also much higher in the sky, thus reducing
the shadow e ects on southern aspects. Figure 11 shows the sunrise, sunset, daylength
and the division of hours between the northern and southern halves of the sky.
During the months of April to August the di erences in the amount of radiation
received are pronounced (® gure 9). The radiation received on the south, south-east
and south-west aspects decrease rapidly with increasing slope, with the di eren-
ces being larger on steep slopes. On slope gradients greater than 30ß , southerly
aspect sites receive only about 25 per cent of the radiation received on the north,
north-east and north-west aspects.
Figure 10 shows the radiation for each aspect by month. The northerly aspects
(viz. north, north-west and north-east) receive relatively constant radiation regardless
of slope gradient, while for south, south-east and south-west aspects less radiation
is received on steep slopes except that in summer those aspects very near south
receive slightly more radiation on steeper slopes. This e ect is more pronounced
during the winter months when the sun is always in the northern half of the sky and
is closer to the horizon. In other words, steep southerly slopes can expect to be in
shadow more of the time.
Figure 12 shows the annual radiation for the di erent aspects. As previously
noted, north facing slopes receive the highest radiation throughout the year, though
the radiation during the winter months of June and July is only about half of that
received during the summer months of December and January. The variance in
radiation for the southern aspect is the most. During December and January, the
radiation for the southern aspect is very close to that of north aspect, at about
33 MJ mÕ 2 dayÕ 1, but during winter falls to as low as 11 MJ mÕ 2 dayÕ 1 , which is
only a third of the summer value. Radiation received by the other aspects lies between
the north and south aspects for most of the year, except in summer when they are
generally less than the amount received by the southerly aspect. North east and
north west aspects receive almost the same amount of radiation, as do east and west
aspects, and south-east and south-west aspects.
3.3.1. Di use and re¯ ected radiation

Under clear skies, direct shortwave radiation (as discussed above) is the most
important component of the total global radiation as it contributes the most to the
Figure 9. Distribution on incoming solar radiation by month.

Figure 10. Variation of incident solar radiation by aspect.
energy balance. Apart from direct shortwave radiation, other components which
contribute to the total radiation are the di use and re¯ ected radiation.
As the re¯ ected insolation was fairly small it was added to the di use component
and henceforth the term total di use radiation will be used to denote the sum of the
two. Table 2 shows the magnitudes of the direct and di use radiation for the solstices
and equinox and ® gure 13 shows the variation of both direct and di use radiation
over the year.
The total di use radiation is between 8 and 11 per cent of the direct insolation
and lies within the range given in the literature ( Kondratyev 1969). Di use radiation
Figure 11. Sunrise, sunset and daylength at study site.
Figure 12. Annual insolation on various aspects for study site.
Table 2. Direct and di use radiation for the solstices and equinox.
Direct Di use
Mean S.D. Mean S.D.
Summer solstice 31776 1642 2860 92

Equinox 25545 2925 2340 48
Winter solstice 15618 4257 1624 5
* Values for insolation are in kJ m Õ 2 day Õ 1.
S.D. = Standard Deviation.

Figure 13. Monthly variation of direct and di use radiation.
forms a higher percent of the total radiation during the winter months (approximately
11 per cent) while during the summer months it is about 7 per cent.
The other point of interest is the variance, or the lack of it, in di use radiation,
as seen from table 2 and ® gure 13. The small values of the standard deviation indicate
that di use radiation is fairly uniform across the terrain, and that slope and aspect
have very little e ect on it, contrary to the suggestion of Dubayah et al . ( 1989 ). This
being the case, one wonders whether there is any justi® cation in implementing highly
complex models to model di use radiation, particularly when only the approximate
solar radiation values are considered; unless the model is to be used for alpine
environments, where snow covers (with a re¯ ectance coe cient of around 0´8) will
result in considerably higher amounts of re¯ ected radiation impinging on surfaces.
3.4. Performance of model at other latitudes

The model was tested at latitudes ranging from 1ß to 60ß south of the equator,
by assuming the study site was located at these di erent latitudes. Figure 14 shows
the annual variation of solar radiation at di erent latitudes, while ® gure 15 shows
the solar radiation received at di erent aspects. The general trend is as expected,
with high radiation in summer and low radiation in winter. Latitudes of 50ß and 60ß
have reduced radiation during winter compared with equatorial latitudes. During
the summer months, the possible radiation at higher latitudes outstrips that at
equatorial latitudes because of longer daylengths at higher latitudes. While the ¯ ux
of radiation at the equator is higher than that at other latitudes, the receipt of
sunshine for much longer hours during summer months leads to the very high
possible total radiation values. This result is similar to that reported elsewhere, for
example Morse and Czarnecki ( 1958 ), Kondratyev ( 1969 ), Robinson ( 1966) and
Du e and Beckman ( 1974). However it should be noted that these graphs are
for clear sky conditions; the incoming radiation will decrease with decreasing
Figure 14. Clear day mean solar radiation at various southern latitudes for the 21st of each
month.
atmospheric transparency, and the higher the latitude the more pronounced is the
decrease in incoming solar radiation ( Kondratyev 1969).
The results obtained from this simulation exercise are consistent with published
work (e.g. Morse and Czarnecki 1958, Kondratyev 1965). However, because the
model integrates solar radiation from sunrise to sunset, care has to be taken in its
use to calculate radiation for polar latitudes where daylengths run into days. The
results obtained here will not be for single days but for the period from sunrise to
sunset, for example at the south pole this would be around 186 days during summer.
4. Conclusion
A method to compute the potential solar radiation on any slope and aspect and
at any latitude is described. Parameters such as the optical air mass, which has been
taken to be constant, can be changed to account for the changing elevation as
suggested by Garnier and Ohmura ( 1968 ) and Hottel ( 1976). The model could be
enhanced to include information such as cloud type, percentage cover, thickness and
altitude (Satterlund and Means 1978). However, as detailed data of this type are
generally not available for forest areas, they have not been used here.
The purpose of this algorithm is for applied work in forestry, ecology, biology
and agriculture where the spatial variation of solar radiation is more important than
calibrated values. The accuracy and the reliability with which a meteorological
variable should be measured and operated vary with the purpose for which the
measurement is required. In general, for most research purposes, the statement of
accuracy is intended to ensure data compatibility in both space and time ( Dogniaux
1994 ); requirements which are met by this model.
The potential to integrate solar radiation over long periods of time for large
areas means that this model can be used in a variety of areas such as plant growth,
Figure 15. Solar radiation received by di erent aspects at various latitudes (south of the
equator).
species location, water balance studies, biodiversity and identi® cation of possible
¯ ora and fauna sites, although it is used here to map topographic variations in direct
shortwave radiation.
It must be added that, while the model successfully computes the solar radiation,
the output will only be as good as the raw data supplied. In this case the model’s
accuracy will greatly depend on the accuracy of the DEM used. Errors in the DEM
will lead to errors in the computed values of aspect and slope and these have a
direct e ect on the calculation of solar radiation. The other assumption of the
atmosphere being uniform will have an insigni® cant e ect on calculated radiation
values as only clear sky radiation is being modelled.
Acknowledgement
This work was partly supported by an Australian Research Council Collaborative

Grant with Genasys II Pty Ltd and the New South Wales Land Information Centre.
References
· ngstrom, A . K ., 1924, Solar and terrestrial radiation. Quarterly Journal of Royal
A
Meteorological Society , 50, 121± 125.
B arry, R . G ., 1981, Mountai n Weather and Climate ( New York: Methuen).
B uffo, J ., F ritschen, L . J ., and M urphy, J . L . , 1972, Direct solar radiation on various slopes
from 0ß to 60ß North Latitude. U.S. Forest Service Paci® c Northwest Forest Range
Experimental Station Research Paper PN W-142 .
C artwright, T . J ., 1993, Modelling the World in a Spreadsheet: Environmental Simulation on
a Microcomputer (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press).
D ickinson, W . C . , and C heremisinoff, P . N ., 1980, Solar Energy T echnology Handbook
( London: Butterworths) .
D ogniaux, R ., 1994, Prediction of Solar Radiation in Areas with a Speci® c Microclimate ,
( Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers) .
D ubayah, R ., 1992, Estimating net solar radiation using Landsat Thematic Mapper and
digital elevation data. Water Resources Research, 28, 2469± 2484.
D ubayah, R ., D ozier, J ., and D avis, F . , 1989, The distribution of clear-sky radiation over
varying terrain, in Proceedings of International Geographic and Remote Sensing
Symposium (Neuilly, France: European Space Agency) 2, pp. 885± 888.
D ubayah, R ., and R ich, P . M . , 1995, Topographic solar radiation models for GIS. International
Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 9, 405± 419.
D uffie, J . A ., and B eckman, W . A ., 1974, Solar Energy T hermal Processes (New York: John
Wiley & Sons).
D uffie, J . A ., and B eckman, W . A ., 1991, Solar Engineering of T hermal Processes (New York:
John Wiley & Sons).
D uguay, C . R ., 1993, Radiation modelling in mountainous terrain: review and status. Mountain
Research and Development , 13, 339± 357.
D uncan, C . H ., W illson, R . C ., K endall, J . M ., H arrison, R . G ., and H ickey, J . R ., 1982,
Latest rocket measurements of the solar constant. Solar Energy , 28, 385± 390.
F leming, P . M ., A ustin, M . P ., and N icholls, A . O ., 1995, Notes on a Radiation Index for
use in studies of aspect e ects on radiation climate. CSIRO T echnical Bulletin (In
Press) Division of Water Resources, Canberra.
F orster, B . C . , 1984, Derivation of atmospheric correction procedures for LANDSAT MSS
with particular reference to urban data. International Journal of Remote Sensing ,
5, 799± 817.
F rank, E . C . , and L ee, R ., 1966, Potential solar beam irradiation on slopes: Tables for 30ß
to 50ß latitude. U.S. Forest Services Rocky Mountai n Forest Range Experimental Station
Paper R M-18 .
F rouin, R ., L ingner, D . W ., G autier, C ., B aker, K . S ., and S mith, R . C . , 1989, A simple
analytical formula to compute clear sky total and photosynthetically available solar
irradiance at the ocean surface. Journal of Geophysical Research, 94, 9731± 9742.
G arnier, B . J ., and O hmura, A ., 1968, A method of calculating the direct shortwave radiation
income of slopes. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 7, 796± 800.
G ates, D . M . , 1980, Biophysical Ecology ( New York: Springer-Verlag) .
G lover, J . G ., and M c C ulloch, J . S . G ., 1958, The empirical relation between solar radiation
and hours of bright sunshine in the high altitude tropics. Quarterly Journal of Royal
Meteorological Society , 84, 56± 60.
H ottel, H . C . , 1976, A simple model for estimating the transmittance of direct solar radiation
through clear atmospheres. Solar Energy , 18, 129± 134.
J ansen, T . J ., 1985, Solar Engineering T echnology (New Jersey: Prentice Hall).
K ondratyev, K . Y a., 1965, Radiative Heat Exchange in the Atmosphere ( New York:
Pergamon Press).
K ondratyev, K . Y a., 1969, Radiation in the Atmosphere (New York: Academic Press).
K reith, F . , and K reider, J . F . , 1978, Principles of Solar Engineering (New York: McGraw-
Hill ).
L iu, B . Y ., and J ordan, R . C . , 1960, The interrelationship and characteristic distribution of
direct, di use and total solar radiation. Solar Energy , 4, 1± 19.
M onteith, J . L . , and U nsworth, M . H ., 1990, Principles of Environmental Physics ( London:
Edward Arnold ).
M orse, R . N ., and C zarnecki, J . T . , 1958, Flat plate solar absorbers: T he e ect on incident
radiation of inclination and orientation. CSIRO Report E.D. 6, Melbourne, Australia.
N unez, M . , 1980, The calculation of solar and net radiation in mountainous terrain. Journal
of Biogeography , 7, 173± 186.
R ichards, J . A ., 1993, Remote Sensing Digital Image Analysis: An Introduction ( Berlin:
Springer Verlag).
R obinson, N ., 1966, Solar Radiation (Amsterdam: Elsevier Publishing Company).
S atterlund, D . R ., and M eans, J . E . , 1978, Estimating solar radiation under variable cloud
conditions. Forest Science , 24, 363± 373.
S ayigh, A . A . M . , 1977, Solar Energy Engineering (New York: Academic Press).
S kidmore, A . K ., 1990, Terrain position as mapped from a gridded digital elevation model.
International Journal of Geographical Information Systems, 4, 33± 49.
S wift, L . W . , 1976, Algorithm for solar radiation on mountain slopes. Water Resources
Research, 12, 108± 112.
T urner, R . E . , and S pencer, M . M . , 1972, Atmospheric model for correction of spacecraft
data. In Proceedings of 8th International Symposium on Remote Sensing of the
Environment , (Ann Arbor: E.R.I.M.), pp. 895± 934.
W ehrli, C . , 1985, Extra-terrestrial Solar Spectrum . Publication No. 615 ( Davos Dorf: World
Radiation Centre).
W illiams, L . D ., B arry, R . G ., and A ndrews, J . T . , 1972, Application of computed global
radiation for areas of high relief. Journal of Applied Meteorology, 11, 526± 533.

Kumar 1997

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

You might also like

Kumar 1997

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

Kumar 1997

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Illinois Institute Of Technology]

On: 02 May 2013, At: 09:17

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/136588197242266

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Full terms and conditions of use: http://www.tandfonline.com/page/

M odelling topographic variation in solar radiation in a GIS

LALIT KUMAR, ANDREW K. SKIDMORE and

( Received 9 May 1996; accepted 5 December 1996 )

Figure 1. Downward irradiance received in a mountainous region: (1 ) direct irradiance,

Global radiation at a location is roughly proportional to direct solar radiation,

where Q =total solar radiation on a horizontal surface on the Earth

Figure 2. Illustration of solar altitude and solar azimuth angles.

Figure 3. Flowchart to calculate potential solar radiation.

2.2.1. Direct radiation

2.2.2. Di use and re¯ ected insolatio n

2.3. Study site

3. Results and discussion

Figure 4. Location of study site.

3.2. Choice of time interval

Table 1. E ect of decreasing time interval on insolation.

60 9478 33689 25582 2935

3.3. Radiatio n modelling

Figure 7. Annual solar radiation distribution.

Seasonal solar radiation distribution.

3.3.1. Di use and re¯ ected radiation

Figure 9. Distribution on incoming solar radiation by month.

Figure 10. Variation of incident solar radiation by aspect.

Figure 11. Sunrise, sunset and daylength at study site.

Figure 12. Annual insolation on various aspects for study site.

Direct Di use

Mean S.D. Mean S.D.

Summer solstice 31776 1642 2860 92

* Values for insolation are in kJ m Õ 2 day Õ 1.

S.D. = Standard Deviation.

Figure 13. Monthly variation of direct and di use radiation.

3.4. Performance of model at other latitudes

This work was partly supported by an Australian Research Council Collaborative

You might also like

2.2.2. Di use and re¯ ected insolatio n

Table 1. E ect of decreasing time interval on insolation.

3.3.1. Di use and re¯ ected radiation

Direct Di use

Figure 13. Monthly variation of direct and di use radiation.