Comparative Analysis of View Factor and Ray Tracing Methods for Energy Yield Prediction in Bifacial Photovoltaic Systems Under Various Installation Configurations

This study implemented and validated View Factor (VF) and Ray Tracing (RT) simulation models against four-season field-measured data to evaluate the accuracy of energy yield prediction in bifacial PV systems under three installation configurations: (1) Single-row tilted, (2) Multi-row tilted, and (3) Vertical East–West facing. Front-side and rear-side irradiance and electrical energy yield were evaluated using nRMSE and nMBE metrics, and the relationship between irradiance component ratios (direct, diffuse, reflected) derived from RT results and error trends was analyzed. For front-side irradiance prediction, VF and RT methods showed similar performance in Single-row tilted and Multi-row tilted systems (nRMSE difference within 1 percentage point), while the RT method generally showed lower error than the VF method for rear-side irradiance prediction across the evaluated systems. Notably, in the Multi-row tilted system with high structural complexity, RT achieved nRMSE of 13.3%, which was 14.4 percentage points lower than VF (27.7%). Critically, the performance difference between the two methods was maximized under diffuse-dominant conditions. During shaded periods of the Vertical East–West facing system (diffuse ratio 76–81%), VF method’s nRMSE increased to 14.1–33.5%, while RT method maintained a stable level of 8.8–14.3%. This difference is likely related to differences in diffuse-radiation treatment between the two approaches, including the anisotropic sky representation used in the RT workflow and simplified assumptions in the VF-based rear-side model. In the temporal resolution analysis, the 1 h interval showed the lowest nRMSE for cumulative energy prediction, while the 5 min interval more accurately reproduced peak timing and rapid power fluctuations. This study suggests that the RT method can improve rear-side irradiance prediction accuracy, particularly under conditions of increased structural complexity and higher diffuse radiation ratios. It also indicates that simulation temporal resolution should be selected according to research objectives, such as long-term energy yield estimation or short-term power fluctuation analysis.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Energies
Published
2026-04-14
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3390/en19081905
Primary Topic
Solar Radiation and Photovoltaics
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparative Analysis of View Factor and Ray Tracing Methods for Energy Yield Prediction in Bifacial Photovoltaic Systems Under Various Installation Configurations

Kyungsoo Lee, Seokhun Yoo
Energies
Solar Radiation and Photovoltaics
article

Comparative Analysis of View Factor and Ray Tracing Methods for Energy Yield Prediction in Bifacial Photovoltaic Systems Under Various Installation Configurations

Kyungsoo Lee, Seokhun Yoo
article en

Abstract

This study implemented and validated View Factor (VF) and Ray Tracing (RT) simulation models against four-season field-measured data to evaluate the accuracy of energy yield prediction in bifacial PV systems under three installation configurations: (1) Single-row tilted, (2) Multi-row tilted, and (3) Vertical East–West facing. Front-side and rear-side irradiance and electrical energy yield were evaluated using nRMSE and nMBE metrics, and the relationship between irradiance component ratios (direct, diffuse, reflected) derived from RT results and error trends was analyzed. For front-side irradiance prediction, VF and RT methods showed similar performance in Single-row tilted and Multi-row tilted systems (nRMSE difference within 1 percentage point), while the RT method generally showed lower error than the VF method for rear-side irradiance prediction across the evaluated systems. Notably, in the Multi-row tilted system with high structural complexity, RT achieved nRMSE of 13.3%, which was 14.4 percentage points lower than VF (27.7%). Critically, the performance difference between the two methods was maximized under diffuse-dominant conditions. During shaded periods of the Vertical East–West facing system (diffuse ratio 76–81%), VF method’s nRMSE increased to 14.1–33.5%, while RT method maintained a stable level of 8.8–14.3%. This difference is likely related to differences in diffuse-radiation treatment between the two approaches, including the anisotropic sky representation used in the RT workflow and simplified assumptions in the VF-based rear-side model. In the temporal resolution analysis, the 1 h interval showed the lowest nRMSE for cumulative energy prediction, while the 5 min interval more accurately reproduced peak timing and rapid power fluctuations. This study suggests that the RT method can improve rear-side irradiance prediction accuracy, particularly under conditions of increased structural complexity and higher diffuse radiation ratios. It also indicates that simulation temporal resolution should be selected according to research objectives, such as long-term energy yield estimation or short-term power fluctuation analysis.

EnergiesVol. 19(8)
Tech University of Korea (KR)
Ministry of Trade, Industry and Energy, Korea Institute of Energy Technology Evaluation and Planning
Affordable and clean energy
Openalex Percentile: Top 23%
Solar Radiation and Photovoltaics
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.