Energy 35 (2010) 5043e5048

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Simple correlation for estimating the global solar radiation on horizontal surfaces
in India
A.K. Katiyar*, Chanchal Kumar Pandey
Department of Applied Sciences, Institute of Engineering & Technology, UP Technical University, Lucknow 226021, India

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: A long range five years (2001e2005) measured data of the global solar radiation on horizontal surface
Received 19 February 2010 along with the bright sunshine hours of four prominent cities viz. Jodhpur, Calcutta, Bombay, and Pune of
Received in revised form India have been analyzed. The under considered cities have varying weather conditions of the country.
7 August 2010
The regression constants have been calculated for the first, second and the third order Angstrom type
Accepted 11 August 2010
correlations for each location using regression analysis method. Comparisons of monthly mean global
Available online 19 September 2010
solar radiation ðHÞ between the measured and the calculated values have been made. The statistical
errors are also performed for testing the accuracy of regression constants. It is observed that in
Keywords:
Global solar radiation
comparison to first order, second and the third order Angstrom type correlations do not improve the
Bright sunshine hours accuracy of the estimated global radiation. Therefore, using the measured data of all four cities together,
Regression analysis we developed the first order Angstrom type correlations and presented new regression constants,
Clearness index applicable to all Indian locations. Furthermore, these regression constants of all India correlation are
validated by comparison with the experimental and the other theoretical results available in literature.
Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction daily bright sunshine hours and s0 is the maximum possible

Detailed information concerning the availability of the solar
radiation at the location of interest is required for the development
of any efficient solar energy system. The best way of knowing the
amount of global solar radiation at any site is to install measuring
instruments such as pyranometer, pyrheliometer at various places
in the given region and to monitor their day-to-day recording and
maintenance, which is really a very tedious and costly exercise. The
alternative approach is to correlate the global solar radiation with
the meteorological parameters at the place where the data are
being collected. The resultant correlation may then be used to
predict the data at any location using required meteorological
parameters of the location.
The first correlation for estimating the monthly average daily
global solar radiation on a horizontal surface ðHÞ (MJ/m2 day) using
sunshine duration was proposed by Angstrom [1]. Prescott [2] has
put the Angstrom correlation in more convenient form as
H=H0 ¼ a þ bðs=s0 Þ
where a and b are constants and H 0 is the monthly average daily
extraterrestrial radiation (MJ/m2 day). s is the monthly average
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ91 9415733200.
E-mail address: akkatiyariet@yahoo.com (A.K. Katiyar).
monthly average daily sunshine hours (day length). The physical
significance of the regression constant a represents the case of
overall atmospheric transmission for an overcast sky condition (i.e.
s=s0 ¼ 0); while b is the rate of increase of H=H 0 with s=s0 [3].
Angstrom [1] recommended values 0.25 and 0.75, respectively for
the constants a and b based on the data from Stockholm. It is
obvious that a þ b ¼ 1 because on clear days s=s0 is supposed to be
equal to 1. However, because of inherent in sunshine recorders,
measurements of s=s0 never equal to 1. So the constant a usually has
values in the interval 0.2e0.3 and the sum a þ b ranges from 0.65 to
0.8.
Since then various investigators developed the empirical
correlations using sunshine durations along with the different
types of meteorological parameters such as latitude, ambient
temperature, humidity, the elevation, water vapor pressure, etc.
Garg and Garg [4], Bahel et al. [5], Gopinathan [6], and Trabea et al.
[7] used the first order Angstrom type correlations with the varying
data of different meteorological parameters. However, Singh et al.
(1) [8], Fagbenle [9], Shaltout [10] and Ulgen and Hepbasly [11]
reported their different sets of constants for the second and the
third order Angstrom type correlations. El-Sebaii et al. [12] tested
the first, second and the third order type correlations for the Egypt
and found suitability of the first order correlation.
The objective of the present study is to analyze the measured
data of the global solar radiation and sunshine duration of different

0360-5442/$ e see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.08.014
5044 A.K. Katiyar, C.K. Pandey / Energy 35 (2010) 5043e5048

Table 1
Regression constants of Equations (1)e(3) for the selected locations and the corresponding values of the RC, MBE, RMSE, MPE and t-statistic.

Location Degree of correlation RC Regression constants MBE RMSE MPE t-statistic

a b c d
Jodhpur First 0.92 0.2276 0.5105 0.001 0.43 0.08 0.002
Second 0.94 0.1972 1.77 0.9121 1.60 1.70 8.22 2.78
Third 0.96 2.722 11.01 17.43 8.654 2.11 2.30 11.31 2.30

Calcutta First 0.91 0.2623 0.3952 0.03 0.73 0.27 0.04

Second 0.92 0.1291 0.933 0.5031 0.03 0.66 0.21 0.05
Third 0.93 1.378 6.33 12.75 7.664 0.04 0.50 0.31 0.08

Bombay First 0.94 0.2229 0.5123 0.08 0.8 0.16 0.10

Second 0.94 0.2341 0.4651 0.0425 0.07 0.8 0.17 0.09
Third 0.95 0.2944 0.0855 0.771 0.4363 0.07 0.79 0.16 0.09

Pune First 0.97 0.2286 0.5309 0.05 0.56 0.05 0.09

Second 0.97 0.2923 0.2844 0.2105 0.03 0.28 0.45 0.10
Third 0.98 0.5116 0.9934 2.53 1.33 0.05 0.5 0.04 0.10

parts of the country and propose a new set of regression constants
applicable to entire region of the country. For this, we considered
four Indian cities viz. Jodhpur (Latitude 26.30 N, Longitude
73.03 E), Calcutta (Latitude 22.65 N, Longitude 88.35 E), Bombay
(Latitude 19.12 N, Longitude 72.85 E) and Pune (Latitude 18.53 N,
Longitude 73.91 E). The data of these cities are used to obtain new
constants considering first, second and third order Angstrom type
correlations for the locations under consideration. The perfor-
mance of the new constants for each station is checked by
comparing it with the measured and other available theoretical
values. Since statistical comparisons did not show improvement in
the accuracy of second and third order Angstrom type correlations,
only first order linear correlations between the monthly average
daily clearness index ðH=H 0 Þ and the relative possible sunshine
duration ðs=s0 Þhave been proposed. This correlation predicts the
data of global solar radiation for all Indian locations; hence we call
it all India horizontal correlation (AIHC). Furthermore, the accuracy
of this AIHC has been tested not only for some important cities of
India but also for well known Egyptian locations.
2. Data and methodology
For the present study, we used the measured data comprising of
global solar radiation and bright sunshine hours of four Indian
stations, viz. Jodhpur, Calcutta, Bombay and Pune. These hourly
recorded data for the period of five years (2001e2005) are collected
from India Meteorology Department (IMD) Pune, a Government of
India organization. These data for each selected station are

Fig. 1. Graph between monthly average values of H=H 0 and s=s0 for Jodhpur, Calcutta, Bombay and Pune, India.
 A.K. Katiyar, C.K. Pandey / Energy 35 (2010) 5043e5048 5045

Table 2
Measured and estimated values of monthly average daily global radiation (MJ/m2 day) with percentage difference and MBE, RMSE, MPE and t-statistic values at Jodhpur, India.

Measured Bahal El-Sebaii Angstrom Equation (12) Percentage difference Angstrom Equation (12)

Bahal El-Sebaii
January 14.32 13.69 14.58 14.99 14.18 4.37 1.84 4.73 0.96
February 17.51 16.81 17.59 18.43 17.33 4.03 0.48 5.22 1.08
March 20.74 19.24 20.45 21.07 19.91 7.26 1.39 1.58 3.99
April 23.02 21.83 23.23 23.90 22.59 5.19 0.89 3.83 1.84
May 23.38 22.93 24.56 25.10 23.79 1.92 5.05 7.37 1.73
June 22.26 20.88 23.45 22.78 21.94 6.22 5.37 2.34 1.43
July 19.71 18.63 21.90 20.27 19.84 5.46 11.15 2.85 0.66
August 18.88 18.33 21.22 19.96 19.42 2.91 12.41 5.73 2.92
September 19.23 18.77 20.55 20.52 19.59 2.39 6.87 6.71 1.86
October 18.68 18.02 18.78 19.76 18.55 3.53 0.51 5.79 0.68
November 15.37 15.78 16.15 17.33 16.17 2.71 5.09 12.76 5.24
December 14.06 13.29 13.99 14.57 13.72 5.48 0.52 3.58 2.42
MBE 0.87 0.88 0.98 0.01
RMSE 0.89 1.15 1.07 0.45
MPE 3.84 3.98 5.21 0.002
t-statistic 4.64 1.19 2.28 0.02

"n P 2 o#1=2
averaged to obtain monthly mean daily global radiation H and the
monthly mean daily sunshine duration s. Then this averaged data is Hi;c  Hi;m
fitted in Equation (1) as well as in the following second and third RMSE ¼ ; (4)
p
order Angstrom type relations Equations (2) and (3) respectively.
 P 
Hi;c  Hi;m
H=H0 ¼ a þ bðs=s0 Þ þ cðs=s0 Þ2 ; (2) MBE ¼ ; (5)
p

" #1=2
H=H0 ¼ a þ bðs=s0 Þ þ cðs=s0 Þ2 þdðs=s0 Þ3 ; (3) ðp  1ÞMBE2
t ¼ ; (6)
where a, b, c and d are the regression constants. H 0 the monthly RMSE2  MBE2
average daily extraterrestrial radiation and s0 the maximum " ( ), #

possible monthly average daily sunshine duration, are obtained X Hi;m  Hi;c
using the standard method [13]. The latest computing MATLAB MPE ¼  100 p ; (7)
Hi;m
software has been used for the entire analysis.
From the above analysis we first obtained the regression where H i;c and H i;m are the ith calculated and measured values and
constants for each of the above-mentioned stations using Equa- p is the total number of observations. In general, a low RMSE is
tions (1)e(3). The accuracy of these constants is tested by desirable. The positive MBE shows over estimation while a negative
comparing it with the measured data and with well known indicates underestimation. The most appropriate and suitable
statistical tests, the root mean square (RMSE), mean bias (MBE), t- model with first order Angstrom type relation is then developed as
statistic and the mean percentage (MPE) errors. The RMSE (MJ/ AIHC by combining the data of all four locations together which is
m2 day), MBE (MJ/m2 day), t-statistic and MPE (%) are as follows: discussed in next part.

Table 3
Measured and estimated values of monthly average daily global radiation (MJ/m2 day) with percentage difference and MBE, RMSE, MPE and t-statistic values at Calcutta, India.

Measured Bahal El-Sebaii Angstrom Equation (12) Percentage difference Angstrom Equation (12)

Bahal El-Sebaii
January 11.59 11.53 13.72 12.54 12.32 0.48 18.41 8.21 6.34
February 15.66 15.24 17.09 16.63 16.01 2.69 9.12 6.20 2.22
March 18.32 16.93 19.29 18.46 17.06 7.61 5.26 0.73 6.89
April 19.46 19.47 21.84 21.25 20.45 0.06 12.20 9.21 5.11
May 20.20 20.36 22.86 22.22 21.39 0.77 13.18 9.97 5.90
June 15.82 14.78 19.44 15.95 16.28 6.58 22.86 0.77 2.89
July 15.43 14.11 18.92 15.19 15.63 8.56 22.63 1.51 1.33
August 14.71 13.84 18.39 14.91 15.29 5.90 25.09 1.42 3.99
September 14.37 12.96 17.08 13.98 13.32 9.79 18.83 2.71 7.29
October 12.54 12.58 16.34 14.75 13.35 0.34 30.34 17.66 6.48
November 14.15 15.21 16.92 17.78 15.20 7.48 19.56 25.67 7.41
December 12.22 12.23 13.85 13.34 12.88 0.10 13.41 9.18 5.46
MBE 0.44 1.62 1.02 0.39
RMSE 0.86 2.76 1.55 0.84
MPE 2.74 17.58 7.07 2.75
t-statistic 0.59 0.72 0.87 0.52
5046 A.K. Katiyar, C.K. Pandey / Energy 35 (2010) 5043e5048

Table 4
Measured and estimated values of monthly average daily global radiation (MJ/m2 day) with percentage difference and MBE, RMSE, MPE and t-statistic values at Bombay, India.

Measured Bahal El-Sebaii Angstrom Equation (12) Percentage difference Angstrom Equation (12)

Bahal El-Sebaii
January 16.66 16.08 17.09 17.61 16.65 3.45 2.60 5.74 0.07
February 20.14 19.86 20.41 21.79 20.37 1.42 1.33 8.19 1.13
March 22.57 21.13 22.20 23.16 21.81 6.39 1.65 2.59 3.41
April 24.40 22.34 23.72 24.47 23.12 8.45 2.82 0.28 5.27
May 25.03 22.99 24.44 25.19 23.80 8.14 2.38 0.61 4.92
June 17.50 16.96 20.65 18.39 18.24 3.13 17.95 5.12 4.21
July 13.81 12.48 17.74 13.38 14.09 9.59 28.52 3.10 2.09
August 14.73 13.07 17.90 14.06 14.58 11.26 21.52 4.58 0.99
September 15.36 14.03 17.92 15.17 15.31 8.69 16.68 1.28 0.33
October 18.48 17.97 19.47 19.66 18.69 2.77 5.36 6.36 1.17
November 16.41 17.08 17.931 18.73 17.62 4.14 9.27 14.15 7.42
December 14.52 15.24 16.27 16.69 15.79 5.01 12.08 14.99 8.82
MBE 0.93 1.16 0.84 0.04
RMSE 1.25 2.03 1.19 0.8
MPE 4.51 9.04 4.09 0.82
t-statistic 1.11 0.69 0.99 0.05

3. Results and discussion (MJ/m2 day) compared to the measured value of 15.4 (MJ/m2 day).
The similar analysis can also be seen for the monthly average daily
The analysis of the measured and the calculated H for Jodhpur, values for all the locations under study. The first order also requires
Calcutta, Bombay, and Pune locations shows that the maximum a less computational work in comparison to the second and third
values of global solar radiation are observed in May while the order correlations. Therefore, considering facts, we reported the
minimum values in December month. The values of the regression following first order Angstrom type correlations for all the four
constants as obtained with Equations (1)e(3) along with the corre- locations for the estimation of H.
lation regression coefficients (RC) and the values of the MBE, RMSE,
MPE and t-statistic for the all four locations are summarized in Table 1. 1. Jodhpur
The higher value of RC and very low values of RMSE and MPE conclude
remarkable agreement between the measured and the calculated H=H 0 ¼ 0:2276 þ 0:5105ðs=s0 Þ; (8)
values of global radiation for all four locations. It simply indicates the
excellent fitting between the clearness index H=H 0 and the relative 2. Calcutta
sunshine duration ðs=s0 Þ. The negative values of the MPE indicate that
the present correlations slightly underestimate. The highest value of
H=H 0 ¼ 0:2623 þ 0:3952ðs=s0 Þ; (9)
the MPE is 11.34 that comes with third order correlation for Jodhpur,
the desert place and far away from costal area.
3. Bombay
Furthermore, from the values of the RC, MBE, RMSE, MPE and t-
statistic tests for the considered locations, it has been observed that
the second and third order Angstrom type correlations do not H=H 0 ¼ 0:2229 þ 0:5123ðs=s0 Þ; (10)
significantly improve the accuracy of the estimated global solar
radiation over first order. For example, the estimated annual average 4. Pune
daily values of global solar radiation for Jodhpur are 18.9, 17.3 and
16.8 (MJ/m2 day) with first, second and third order calculations H=H 0 ¼ 0:2286 þ 0:5309ðs=s0 Þ; (11)
respectively; while, the measured value is 18.9 (MJ/m2 day). The
In above Equations (8)e(11), the values of regression constants
corresponding values for Calcutta are found to be 15.4, 15.3 and 15.4
a and b vary neither with latitude nor with altitude in any

Table 5
Measured and estimated values of monthly average daily global radiation (MJ/m2 day) with percentage difference and MBE, RMSE, MPE and t-statistic values at Pune, India.

Measured Bahal El-Sebaii Angstrom Equation (12) Percentage difference Angstrom Equation (12)

Bahal El-Sebaii
January 16.50 16.36 17.94 17.92 17.91 0.84 8.77 8.63 8.59
February 20.89 20.18 20.68 22.15 20.68 3.39 1.01 6.05 0.97
March 23.63 21.45 22.44 23.51 22.10 9.26 5.05 0.52 6.47
April 25.07 22.77 23.99 24.95 24.51 9.18 4.29 0.48 2.22
May 25.82 23.68 24.85 25.95 24.42 8.31 3.76 0.51 5.41
June 18.65 17.33 20.85 18.82 18.58 7.08 11.79 0.92 0.39
July 15.94 13.51 18.37 14.54 15.04 15.26 15.23 8.83 5.68
August 15.41 13.72 18.31 14.28 15.18 10.92 18.85 7.31 1.44
September 16.55 15.34 18.78 16.64 16.53 7.29 13.52 0.57 0.097
October 18.73 17.71 19.36 19.36 18.47 5.49 3.33 3.33 1.42
November 18.19 17.25 18.11 18.91 17.79 5.17 0.46 3.94 2.17
December 16.94 16.19 16.95 17.75 16.69 4.47 0.03 4.73 1.51
MBE 1.18 0.69 0.50 0.33
RMSE 1.57 1.59 0.80 0.81
MPE 7.22 4.75 0.96 1.59
t-statistic 1.14 0.48 0.80 0.45
 A.K. Katiyar, C.K. Pandey / Energy 35 (2010) 5043e5048 5047

Table 6
Measured and estimated values of monthly average daily global radiation (MJ/m2 day) with percentage difference and MBE, RMSE, MPE and t-statistic values at Ahmedabad,
Vishakhapatnam and Chennai, India.

Ahmedabad Vishakhapatnam Chennai Percentage difference

Measured Equation (12) Measured Equation (12) Measured Equation (12) Ahmedabad Vishakhapatnam Chennai
January 15.73 16.19 15.03 15.93 17.55 17.99 2.96 2.51 6.00
February 18.91 19.17 19.45 20.53 21.07 21.20 1.39 5.57 0.61
March 22.27 21.28 19.62 21.01 22.04 21.83 4.48 7.04 0.92
April 25.04 23.53 22.01 20.46 21.52 22.12 6.03 7.06 2.77
May 24.84 24.52 21.50 20.20 19.10 18.44 1.30 6.05 3.45
June 20.66 20.92 17.45 17.49 20.97 19.51 1.25 0.23 6.92
July 15.12 15.46 15.51 16.01 18.28 17.82 2.25 3.18 2.50
August 14.22 15.42 14.68 15.98 19.93 18.06 8.40 8.84 9.37
September 16.75 16.87 15.13 17.54 18.99 17.39 0.69 15.88 8.43
October 19.24 19.49 14.07 14.95 16.16 15.77 1.32 6.22 2.39
November 16.49 16.86 17.70 17.33 14.19 13.98 2.25 2.09 1.46
December 14.87 15.01 14.99 15.29 13.98 15.31 0.94 1.97 9.54
MBE 0.05 0.46 0.36
RMSE 0.68 1.39 0.98
MPE 0.80 3.31 0.39
t-statistic 0.07 0.35 1.66

systematic manner which is reflected through Fig. 1. However, the
sum of the constants (a þ b), which represent the maximum
clearness index fðs=s0 Þ ¼ 1g averaged over the period of recording
data, is found to be almost equal for all the four considered loca-
tions. The values of the sum a þ b are obtained as 0.7381, 0.6575,
0.7352 and 0.7595 for Jodhpur, Calcutta, Bombay and Pune,
respectively.
Furthermore, in order to develop the first order correlation AIHC
applicable to all Indian locations, as already mentioned above, we
combined the entire measured data of all the four selected loca-
tions together and analyze to obtain the following correlation:
H=H0 ¼ 0:2281 þ 0:5093ðs=s0 Þ;
The results of the proposed correlation {Equation (12)} are
compared with the theoretical estimates of Angstrom [1], Bahel
et al. [5] and El-Sebaii [12] models along with the measured data for
Jodhpur, Calcutta, Bombay, and Pune through Tables 2e5.
Comparison of all stations shows that new constants predict more
accurate results than Angstrom [1], Bahel et al. [5] and El-Sebaii
[12]. The maximum deviation of estimations with measured data is
found as 15.2% and 28.5% for Bahel et al. and El-Sebaii models
respectively however it is only 8% with our new constants. The
RMSE, MBE and t-statistic values for all models are also presented
in the same Tables 2e5. A fairly good agreement is observed
between the measured and our present calculated global radiation.
Furthermore, Equation (12) is also employed for other Indian
locations Ahmedabad (Latitude 23.07 N, Longitude 72.06 E),
Vishakhapatnam (Latitude 17.72 N, Longitude 83.4 E) and Chennai
(Latitude 13 N, Longitude 80.28 E) for which the experimental data
are available, just to test the applicability of regression constants for
other regions. The measured data for these locations are also taken
from India Meteorology Department (IMD) Pune, India. The
comparison between the measured and the calculated data for
these three locations is shown in Table 6. It is obvious that the
agreement between the measured and the calculated AIHC data for
all the locations is excellent. The values of the MPE for Ahmedabad,
Vishakhapatnam and Chennai are 0.8, 3.31 and 0.39 respectively
(12) while the values of MBE are found to be 0.05, 0.46 and 0.36
respectively.
Since, the maximum clearness index (a þ b) of AIHC is found to
be almost equal to that obtained for Egypt [7], therefore we also
used it to estimate H for Matrough, Arish and Cairo cities of Egypt
for the comparison purposes. The comparison of estimated values
of AIHC with measured data of Egyptian cities is shown through
Figs. 2e4. It is seen from the figures that in general the agreement
for all months is fairly good. The monthly relative percentage
difference between measured and calculated global radiations for
any cities rarely exceeds 8% and in most cases it is much less than
5% except for November/December months where solar insolation
is poor. The low values of the RMSE, MBE, MPE and the t-statistic for
Indian as well as for Egyptian cities, clearly prove that the proposed

Fig. 2. Comparisons between measured and calculated monthly average daily global Fig. 3. Comparisons between measured and calculated monthly average daily global
solar radiation on a horizontal surface H at Matrough, Egypt. solar radiation on a horizontal surface H at Arish, Egypt.
5048 A.K. Katiyar, C.K. Pandey / Energy 35 (2010) 5043e5048
Fig. 4. Comparisons between measured and calculated monthly average daily global
solar radiation on a horizontal surface H at Cairo, Egypt.
AIHC correlation can be used for estimation of global solar radiation
on horizontal surface at any location of India, Egypt or any place
having similar maximum clearness index.
4. Conclusions
On the basis of the analysis made from the obtained results of
four Indian locations, it is concluded that first order Angstrom type
correlation not only supercedes over second and third order
correlations for the accuracy of estimated monthly average daily
global radiation on horizontal surface but also requires less
computational work. Therefore, the first order correlations are
obtained for each location under consideration. The percentage
error of the data predicted by these first order correlations never
exceeds 10% for any of the locations. The first order AIHC corre-
lation predicts very good results not only for the locations of India
but also for Matrough, Arish and Cairo cities of Egypt. It provides
estimation of H for any location of India with absolute values of the
MPE less than 5%. Therefore we recommend the AIHC for the
estimation of monthly average daily global radiation on horizontal
surface. All India correlation may also be extended for other loca-
tions which have the same values of the maximum clearness index.
Acknowledgements
We are thankful to India Meteorology Department (IMD) Pune,
India for providing the measured data. One of us (CKP) is also
thankful to Uttar Pradesh Council of Science & Technology, Luck-
now, India for providing financial assistance for this work.
References
[1] Angstrom A. Solar and terrestrial radiation. Q J R Meteorol Soc 1924;50:121e5.
[2] Prescott JA. Evaporation from water surface in relation to solar radiation.
Trans R Soc Aust 1940;64:114e8.
[3] Ogolo EO. Evaluating the performance of some predictive models for esti-
mating global solar radiation across varying climatic conditions in Nigeria.
Indian J Radio Space Phys 2010;39:121e31.
[4] Garg HP, Garg SN. Prediction of global solar radiation from bright sunshine
hours and other meteorological data. Energy Convers Manage
1983;23:113e8.
[5] Bahel V, Bakhsh H, Srinivasan R. Correlation for estimation of global solar
radiation. Energy 1987;12:131e5.
[6] Gopinathan KK. Estimation of global solar radiation on horizontal surfaces
over Egypt. Solar Energy 1988;41:499e502.
[7] Trabea AA, Mosalam Shaltout MA. Correlation of global solar radiation with
meteorological parameters over Egypt. Renewable Energy 2000;21:297e308.
[8] Singh OP, Srivastava SK, Gaur A. Empirical relationship to estimate global
radiation from hours of sunshine. Energy Convers Manage 1996;37:501e4.
[9] Layi Fagbenle R. A comparative study of some simple models for global solar
irradiation in Ibadan, Nigeria. Int J Energy Res 1992;16:583e95.
[10] Mosalam Shaltout MA. Estimation of the different components of the solar
radiation over Egypt from the meteorological data. Solar Wind Technol
1985;1:176.
[11] Ulgen K, Hepbasly A. Estimation of solar radiation parameters for Izmir,
Turkey. Int J Energy Res 2002;26:807e23.
[12] El-Sebalii AA, Trabea AA. Estimation of global solar radiation on horizontal
surfaces over Egypt. Egypt J Solids 2005;28:163e75.
[13] Duffie JA, Beckman WA. Solar engineering of thermal processes. 2nd ed. New
York: John Wiley and Sons Inc; 1991.