A study of luminous environment with prism daylight redirecting fenestrations in classrooms

Tian, Zhen; Lin, Peng; He, Yansong; Jonsson, Jacob C.

doi:10.1177/1420326x19895566

Cited by 11 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…UDI is defined as the annual occurrence of daylight levels across the task area that is considered useful for occupants. Based on different sources (Li et al 2006;Tzempelikos and Shen 2013;Tian et al 2021) the daylight illuminance in the range of 100-3000 lx is considered to be effective within buildings of various use and various activities held on the working plane. For office buildings in particular this range is considered to be effective from 100 lx to 2000 lx: i.e.…”

Section: Metrics Used To Evaluate Dynamic Façade Daylight Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Example-based dynamic façade design using the facade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator

Akimov,

Bezborodov,

Badenko

2023

Build. Simul.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

It remains challenging to conduct an efficient dynamic façade design. In this article authors try to address this issue introducing the façade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator aimed to evaluate the performance of a dynamic (adaptive) façade from its daylighting performance point of view. To illustrate the FDPI application the authors introduced the preliminary dynamic façade concept for an office building located in Tel Aviv (Hot-summer Mediterranean Climate Csa) with further shape modification based on the daylighting performance analysis compared to the three alternatives representative of different typologies of dynamic facades. Al Bahr, One Ocean and The University of Southern Denmark façade systems were simulated under the same weather and building conditions of the preliminary dynamic façade concept and were considered as a benchmark for the study. The final dynamic façade concept elaborated by the authors in the preliminary comparative workflow showed noticeable daylight performance improvement with respect to the case studies comparative scenarios. The FDPI metric allowed to estimate a daylighting performance improvement of 43% of the final dynamic façade concept over the case study dynamic façade that showed the best performance in the daylighting simulations.

show abstract

Section: Metrics Used To Evaluate Dynamic Façade Daylight Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Example-based dynamic façade design using the facade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator

Akimov,

Bezborodov,

Badenko

2023

Build. Simul.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The impact of building accumulation in energy-efficient school buildings is significant [43]. One of the newest articles on classrooms is "Studying the Light Environment with the Phenomenon of Redirection of Daylight Prisms in Classrooms" published in Indoor and Build Environment [44].…”

Section: Figurementioning

confidence: 99%

Influence of Roof Windows Area Changes on the Classroom Indoor Climate in the Attic Space: A Case Study

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Windows are a complex part of building design and provide a considerable benefit, including to school buildings. For the evaluation of the daylighting conditions prevailing in classrooms, the daylight factor (DF) was considered as the most appropriate parameter for indicating the quantity of admitted daylight. The DF values and CIE overcast sky were calculated using Velux Daylight Visualizer 3 software. The task of the paper is to compare various roof window openings in relation to the level of daylight in the attic, looking to optimize the use of the attic for teaching. The indoor air temperature has a general influence on comfort in the interior, in addition to daylight. In winter, the situation is not critical. The thermal insulation properties of packaging structures are sufficient. The situation is worse in summer, due to the fact that the heat-storage properties are undersized and there is excessive overheating of the indoor air. Four variants of roof windows and their influence on the overall microclimate in the attic are compared. The variant without roof windows is a suitable solution with regard to minimum overheating, but the worst situation for daylight. In order to receive even more light from the window (by moving windows to the top of the roof), we can use variant 2. Based on a combination of daylight calculations and summer temperature, a graphical dependence on window size prediction in terms of top and combined lighting is derived. This was hypothesized without shading the windows. Of course, the shading elements of these windows or cooling are expected in the summer. Finally, the energy required for cooling is compared depending on the size of the windows and achievement of the permissible temperature.

show abstract

“…For example, the requested horizontal illuminance and DF for classrooms in Daylight Zone 4 are 450 lx and 3.3%, respectively. 13 One way of advancing the Chinese Standard for daylight is to examine and employ international vertical eye illuminance that has been explored, proposed and validated by global researchers for years [19][20][21] as well as CBDMs. However, one important factor that potentially influences the global generalization of daylighting design metrics is socioenvironmental contexts, defined as 'the climate and habitat (interior and exterior) to which a person has acclimatized and their behaviour and expectations towards these elements' by Pierson et al 22 Two types of studies have demonstrated the impact of socio-environmental context upon subjective daylighting evaluations: indirect ones and direct ones.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Using data matching to compare subjective assessments of daylighting environments between Singapore and Nanjing

Kong

Jakubiec

et al. 2023

Indoor and Built Environment

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study compares subjective evaluations of daylighting environments from two universities: the Singapore University of Technology and Design (SUTD) in Singapore and Southeast University (SEU) in Nanjing, China. Two hundred and twenty-nine students evaluated their instantaneous daylighting environments. Four representative daylighting predictors, horizontal illuminance, vertical illuminance, mean luminance of an entire scene and CIE Glare Index (CGI), were matched between two universities using a propensity score matching method. Eighty-eight participants, 44 from each university, were matched in terms of these four daylighting predictors. The results demonstrate that there are statistically significant differences in subjective assessments between these two locations. Under quantitatively similar daylighting environments, more participants at STUD reported adequate daylighting levels with a noticeable degree of daylight glare, as well as desires to decrease current daylighting levels. On the other hand, more participants at SEU reported inadequate daylighting levels with an imperceptible degree of daylight glare, as well as desires to increase current daylighting levels. One reason for subjective assessment differences might be dissimilar socio-environmental contexts, where the participants are acclimatized to different daylighting environments between Singapore and Nanjing.

show abstract

A study of luminous environment with prism daylight redirecting fenestrations in classrooms

Cited by 11 publications

References 25 publications

Example-based dynamic façade design using the facade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator

Example-based dynamic façade design using the facade daylighting performance improvement (FDPI) indicator

Influence of Roof Windows Area Changes on the Classroom Indoor Climate in the Attic Space: A Case Study

Using data matching to compare subjective assessments of daylighting environments between Singapore and Nanjing

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About