See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/237553426

Daylight simulation in buildings

Article · October 2008

CITATION READS

1 2,362

2 authors:

Silvia Tavares Heitor da Costa Silva

University of the Sunshine Coast Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul
50 PUBLICATIONS 222 CITATIONS 9 PUBLICATIONS 12 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Silvia Tavares on 19 May 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 th nd th
PLEA 2008 – 25 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Dublin, 22 to 24 October 2008

486: Daylight simulation in buildings

Silvia Garcia Tavares1*, Heitor da Costa Silva2

Universidade Federal do Tocantins, Palmas, Brazil1*

[email protected]
Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil2

Abstract
Emphasis on daylight is given to non-domestic buildings because in such buildings the
specificity of the activities or the high levels of illumination demand a more careful control on
daylighting examined for design purposes. Clearly energy saving in that situation is one of
the reasons for that emphasis. This paper deals with light coming into the rooms through the
window providing natural light once the window is considered the only system that provides
and controls light flux and distribution. Rooms can be classified according to their occupancy
and use, and then many different activities requiring different illumination levels can be
developed in the same space. Room's classification is the first step to establish the ratio
window to the floor area for daylight purposes. Therefore the aim of the present work is to
investigate window’s characteristics as a mean to assess daylighting. Windows’ parameters
were taken up to calculate daylighting for 12.00m² rooms. The simulated cases were
accessed varying windows position, shape, size and geometry, maintaining in all cases
3.60m² area. This methodology can be applied in architectural education aiming students’
comprehension about users’ comfort and energy savings. ECOTECT and Radiance
softwares were used to simulate the proposed windows’ parameters.

Keywords: daylighting, architectural education, computer simulation

1. Introduction due to the contrast with visible sky areas

There are two important topics related to daylight (HOPKINSON, 1966). Although lighting levels in
use: the first one reffers to pollution caused by these deep areas could be adjusted to reach
energy consumed by artificial lighting and the NBR 5413 values, better results are found when
second one is related to psycologic and artificial lighting is used as daylighting
physiologic damages caused by the lack in complementary resource.
natural lighting (BAKER, 1993). These questions, During the second half of 20th century,
associated with architectural and aesthetics daylighting became a minor architectural issue
issues, are the basic fundamentals of daylighting. because of the cheap and abundant electricity
The concerning about global warming and and efficient electric light sources (LECHNER,
sustainable design has increased the importance 2001). According to Knijinik (1994), in non-
of planning daylight use in non-residential residential buildings, fluorescent lamps represent
buildings. This is a strategy to improve energy 50% of lighting energy use. This type of efficient
efficiency by minimizing lighting, heating, and lamps with reflectors can reduce energy use up
cooling loads (IEA, 2000). Considering that to 65%, keeping the same lighting level.
windows are the only elements providing daylight Rooms can be classified according to their
inside environments, its characteristics are occupancy and use, and then many different
closely related to energy savings. activities requiring different lighting levels can be
In non-domestic buildings the specificity of developed inside the same space. Some authors
activities or the high lighting levels required to recommend minimum lighting levels values from
develop them, demand a more careful control on daylight according to users’ activity, while others
daylighting (SILVA, 1996) and energy saving in refer to space use.
this situation is one of the main reasons for that Windows must be considered as the system
emphasis. Nowadays glass building envelope is a providing daylight. Then is important to
synonym of status, and some corporations build comprehend design's relationship with thermal
these typology trying to show their position and performance. Main topics are that the larger is
capability. This architectural solution is common the void, more direct solar radiation enters in the
in many parts of the world, however these space and the closer the void is to the wall, more
buildings usually do not show any adaptation to light will be reflected inside the environment, if its
local climate. parameters contribute to this.
Artificial lighting demand increased with modern This paper deals with lighting coming into the
free plan tendencies, where large rooms were rooms through the window providing daylight
common. The large use of artificial lighting during where it is considered the only system providing
the day is also an important issue related to and controlling light flux and distribution. Some of
saving energy needs. In glass wall buildings, the simulations show how different window’s
deeper environment parts could become dark shapes, sizes, geometries and positions respond
 th nd th
PLEA 2008 – 25 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Dublin, 22 to 24 October 2008

to lighting distribution. Both building’s orientation (when designing with

As a simplified assessing manner, comfort can be direct solar radiation) and shape are critical to a
qualitatitive verified when related to uniformity successful daylighting scheme. It must be
quotient and quantitative verified when related to considered not only the external form, but also
lighting level. These variables depend on internal spaces shape (LECHNER, 2001). This
fenestration’s size, position (on the wall) and way it is important to observe the relation
shape, and on space geometry (on which wall will between shape (of room and window) and
window is positioned). Besides that, daylighting daylighting quality.
systems and environment determine materials,
colors, specularity, reflectance and transparency.
Figure 1 shows relation between comfort and 2. Objective
lighting. The objective of the present work is to investigate
window’s parameters as a mean to assess
daylighting using the concept of Daylight Factor
(DF).
Windows’ light performance was investigated with
the intention of assessing lighting distribution
inside spaces. This way it is possible to provide
students means to comprehend architectural
design concerned with comfort and energy
saving.

3. Methodology
Figure 1 – Relation between comfort and lighting Lamps are the main artificial lighting resource,
and sun is the only daylighting resource. Light
Buildings’ heating, cooling and lighting are from the sun enters inside the environment, direct
accomplished not just by mechanical equipment, or indirectly, being diffused by the atmosphere
but mostly by the building design itself. Then, and reflected by natural or artificial enrironment
architects can satisfy the need for aesthetic surfaces (Majoros, 1998). This way a luminary
expression and efficiently heat, cool and light filters and distributes light from an electric device,
buildings through an environmentally responsible and the sky is the daylighting device that allows
design (LECHNER, 2001). Architectural design is sunlight coming into environment, being
the main resource to assure that buildings will be transmitted, reflected or diffused.
heated, cooled and lit correctly. Windows are also daylighting devices, as daylight
Electric lighting and general daylighting have the passes through it to lit the interior environments,
same goal: to supply high quality and efficient but it could not be efficient in the general building
light while minimizing direct glare, veiling structure. Being a transparent part of building
reflections and excessive-brightness ratios. envelope, it also causes glare and thermal loads
Lechner (2001) established some specific goals (BAKER, 1993). This work considers diffuse light,
related to daylighting due to window’s location so direct light is not being simulated, this way
limitations and daylight variability: direct glare and thermal loads from sunlight are
• to get more light deeper into the building to not the object of this study.
raise the lighting level inside it and to reduce Reffering to interior lighting, PROCEL (2002)
lighting gradient across the room; defines that efficient design must provide:
• reduce or prevent severe direct glare of • good visibility conditions;
unprotected windows and skylights; • good colors reproduction;
• to prevent excessive-brightness ratios, • electric energy saving;
specially those caused by direct sunlight; • facility and low costs maintenance;
• to prevent or minimize veiling reflections, • initial compatible price;
specially from skylights and clerestory • use of local task lighting;
windows; • use of both natural and artificial lighting.
• to diffuse the light providing multiple In this work, windows’ size, shape and position
reflections; are assessed to comprehend lighting distribution
• it is limited to those spaces which have inside a room provided by a fenestration.
critical visual tasks, and it is related to the Environment geometry is assessed to analyze
use of full daylighting and sunlight aesthetic lighting distribution according to geometry
potential. variation. In this case, the main parameter is the
To develop an efficient lighting design, it is comparison between a different geometry and the
necessary to know space’s specific use and first one (base environment). In this work,
characteristics. In this work, to achieve these window's light performance is seen, as the only
goals, basic daylighting strategies are related to: standpoint for window design. This way is
• space planning possible to contribute to energy saving in
• environment geometry buildings and improve light quality inside the
• windows shape environment.
• windows size All simulations were developed to Porto Alegre
• windows position (Brazil), where the latitude is 30,02ºS and the
 th nd th
PLEA 2008 – 25 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Dublin, 22 to 24 October 2008

longitude is 52ºW. Figure 4 shows window’s position variation. The

As mentioned before, room's classification is the aim is to assess the difference on daylighting
first step to establish the ratio window to floor distribution and uniformity inside a room due to
area for daylight purposes. Porto Alegre’s lighting reflections and distribution. Figure 4a
Building Regulation considers three types of shows the 3.60m² window divided in two 1.80m²
room: rooms to stay at night (e.g. bedrooms), window (2x20% wall area) and Figure 4b shows
rooms to stay during the day (e.g. living rooms, the original 3.60m² window close to a white wall
dining rooms, kitchens, offices) and rooms to stay which easily spreads light to all interior
for a short period (e.g. halls, corridors, toilets, environment.
storage rooms). This paper deals with simulations
dbased on rooms to stay during the day as non-
residential buildings’ are considered the stand
point of this work.
Simulated cases were generated varying
windows position, shape, size and room
geometry. In presented simulations where
variations were related to window’s position,
shape and room’s geometry, in all cases 3.60m²
window area was maintained. Window size
simulation was based on wall area, then in the
first case a 25% wall area window was simulated (a) (b)
and in the second case a 60% wall area window
Fig 5. Position: 2 x 20% (a) and left (b)
was simulated. It is important to detach that, in all
cases, room floor area corresponds to 12.00m².
Figure 5 shows a variation on window’s size
Wall area where windows are located in all
related to wall area. Then Figure 5a shows a 25%
window’s parametric simulations have 9.00m²
wall area window and Figure 5b shows a 60%
(3.0 x 3.0m²), then 40% of wall area, which
wall area window. These simulations investigate
corresponds to windows’ area, is 3.6m².
the distribution uniformity due to a smaller
The following figures shows simulated cases.
window inside a white environment and a big
Figure 2 is the base simulated environment, then
window that provides more daylight availability
varying this interior space (windows’ shape,
but also can easily cause glare.
position and size, and room’s geometry),
daylighting distribution was assessed.

(a) (b)
Fig 5. Size: 25% of the wall area (a) and 60% of the
wall area (b)
Fig 2. Base environment
Figure 6 shows the assessed environment
Figure 3 shows window’s shape variation, Figure geometry. In Figure 6a 3.60m² window was
3a is a 3.60m² horizontal window and Figure 3b is located on the larger wall (4m) and Figure 6b
a 3.60m² door shaped window, this way it could shows a square environment where the window
also simulate daylighting from a glass door. is located on the wall in front of the door which
corresponds to 3m wall in Figures 2, 3, 4 and 5.

(a) (b)
Fig 6. Geometry: 4m wall (a) and square
environmental (b)

(a) (b) This work took the classification of the spaces

Fig 3. Shape: horizontal (a) and door (b) and the minimum lighting levels required to
assess window's performance. These values are
 th nd th
PLEA 2008 – 25 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Dublin, 22 to 24 October 2008

recommended in the NBR 5413). ECOTECT and 5413 which also determines minimum
Radiance softwares were used to simulate the levels to internal lighting);
proposed windows’ parameters. Simulations are • to internal walls, floor and ceiling were
shown in item 3.2. admitted 0.95 reflectance value;
This methodology can be applied in architectural • lighting void composed by a single glass
education aiming students’ comprehension about (transparency 0.92);
daylighting distribution, users’ comfort and energy • calculations were based on the CIE data,
savings as it shows lighting efficient and deficient with external 8500lux and uniform sky.
rooms. These windows’ parameters were
investigated to determine a methodology to The same 0.95 reflectance value was admitted to
assess daylighting inside spaces, besides every wall, floor and ceiling as this work shows a
allowing correct daylighting fenestration design. It parametric study which has the aim of comparing
is important to highlight that these are the first variations on windows parameters and uniformity
architectural design decisions related to quotient. Then the values are not important, but
daylighting, as this work aims to set an the possibility of assessing differences on
educational approach to systemize graduate daylighting system behavior.
students investigations. Then the main point is to Except geometry variation, where the window
comprehend the parameters and variables was positioned on the larger wall (4m) wich was
involved and be able to analyze them, not just faced to west, all the other simulations were
know that they exist but be able to understand. performed to a north facing environment.
This is the reason why just a little number of The NBR 5382, suggests that the illuminance in
parameters were assessed, but also depleted all any point of the task plan should not be less than
daylighting characteristics of each of them. 70% of the average illuminance, stablished by
NBR 5413. This way, it should be taken care in
cases where the void size increases (as Figure
3.1. Parameters 5b), because depending on the environment
Mentioned 8500lux is due to an uniform sky characteristics light can cause glare.
which according to CIE Daylighting Availabity
Graph (Figure 7) corresponds to the lighting
levels available in more than 90% of the hours 3.2. Simulations
when daylighting is available, to a 30ºS latitude, The tables bellow show maximum, minimum and
as Porto Alegre. The correspondent point is average DF values calculated in all simulated
marked with a bullet in the Figure bellow. cases. Considering these three values, the
uniformity quotient (UQ) was also calculated, it
must be calculated as showed bellow:
m
u=
m
u – uniformity quotient
m – minimum lighting level (DF or lux)
m – lighting levels average (DF or lux)

Table 1: Minimum, maximum, average DF and

uniformity quotient to the base environment
Base
Minimum 13.51
Maximum 34.69
Average 18.35
UQ 0.736

Table 2: Minimum, maximum, average DF and

uniformity quotient to the environments in which varied
windows’ shape and position
Shape Position
Horiz. Door 2x20% Left
Min 13.19 12.17 11.94 13.00
Max 22.26 35.87 31.83 36.33
Average 17.04 15.99 15.33 18.51
UQ 0.772 0.761 0.778 0.702

Table 3: Minimum, maximum, average DF and

uniformity quotient to the environments in which varied
windows’ size and environment geometry
Fig 7. CIE Daylighting Availabity Graph Size Geometry
25% 60% 4m wall Square
The following parameters were used to develop Minimum 8.69 18.94 12.16 13.31
Maximum 19.84 38.01 34.48 34.12
the simulations:
Average 12.11 23.85 18.43 18.59
• 0.75m high task plan (according to NBR UQ 0.715 0.794 0.848 0.715
 th nd th
PLEA 2008 – 25 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Dublin, 22 to 24 October 2008

According to the tables above, the maximum UQ

found was 0.848 to the window positioned on the
4m wall (variation on environment geometry) and
the minimum UQ value found was 0.702 to the
window positioned on the left (variation on
windows’ position). Figures bellow show the
simulation made to the base environment (Figure
8) and the referred extreme cases – “left position”
and “geometry 4m wall” (Figures 9 and 10).

Fig 11. Relation between uniformity quotient and

simulated parameters

Considering that UQ values vary from 0 to 1 and

extreme calculated values are 0.848 and 0.702,
UQ variation is almost 0.15. These values show
that analyzed parameters do not cause a very
Fig 8. Simulation made to the base environment large variation on lighting distribution.
In case of varying windows’ size (25%), although
minimum and maximum lighting levels are
smaller than the other minimums and maximums
found, UQ is 0.715 due to space characteristics
and to window position.
On windows’ shape variation, horizontal window
configuration showed a good performance, but to
achieve room’s deeper parts and a mayor UQ
value on work plan, the window providing daylight
should have a minor sill, as in this model it is
1.50m and the work plan heigh is 0.75. This
relation creates a dark spot close to the wall.
2x20% position simulation is a good design
solution, but as the window area was also
Fig 9. Simulation made to the window positioned on the 3.60m², lighting level is minor between both
left (variation on windows’ position), situation that windows, and mayor in the middle of
corresponds to the minimum UQ found environment. Considering that non-residential
buildings are being analyzed and in these spaces
is common to have central space area used, it
can be a problematic window design.
Geometry variation shows that positioning
fenestration in larger wall, inside a clear
environment, uniformity quotient is considerably
increased.
These referred cases are the most important of
each simulated parameter, other results were
presented on tables (see item 3.2) as they
showed less significant results referring to UQ.
DF results express relation between external and
internal illuminance, and then the internal
illumination corresponds to the variation on
Fig 10. Simulation made to the to the window positioned external light availability.It is important to notice
on the 4m wall (variation on environment geometry),
that NBR 5413 stablishes a minimum illuminance
situation that corresponds to the maximum UQ found
level for internal spaces. As these values are
500lux to library reading spaces and 1000lux to
drawing offices, most of values shown on
4. Results Discussion simulations can be considered sufficient. Some
The UQ varies from 0 (less uniform situation) to 1 minimum DF shows that the solution was not
(more uniform situation). Tables 1, 2 and 3 shows successful, but the average shows:
that a little variation on UQ results were caused • highest average: 23.85%
by windows’ shape, position and size and by
• lowest average: 12.11%
environment geometry variations.
Condidering external 8500lux, 12,11% is
Assessed cases relation between uniformity
equivalent to 1020lux, which is sufficient for
quotient and parameters are shown on Figure 11.
 th nd th
PLEA 2008 – 25 Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Dublin, 22 to 24 October 2008

suggested activities. Highest average, 23.85%, distribution, the following rules can be detached
corresponds to 2030lux. as a final conclusion of this work:
From this study, is possible to conclude that, in • windows should be high on the wall, widely
most of simulated cases, lighting level is sufficient distributed, and optimum area;
as all other options showed higher levels and that • if possible, windows must be placed in more
daylighting availability to Porto Alegre (RS, Brazil) than one wall, or have the area distributed on
exceeds 8500lux most of time that we have the same wall;
daylight availability. • windows must be positioned on the larger
This parametric study can be useful to provide wall;
energy savings in buildings, as they show most • use clear walls to reduce the contrast
adapted situation to provide more or less lighting between windows and walls;
levels inside spaces. These simulations are not • it became clear that amongst the studied
considering direct solar radiation, so efficiency parameters, the environment geometry is the
issues are related to a better use of daylighting to one that mostly affects values for average
save energy used to artificial lighting. Lighting daylight factors and light distribution;
levels must be carefully verified on NBR 5413 to • for lighting and visual comfort purposes, all
assure that daylight system will provide needed simulated cases provided UQ between 0.7
lighting levels. and 0.9, which is a high value. Considering
It is also useful to help students to make a that the more uniform the lighting is, more
decision about the consequences of their design comfortable people feel and that glare is
decisions, as solutions adopted to daylighting caused by contrast, we can say that these
systems intervene on aesthetics solution, comfort environmets are functional. It is important to
conditions and energy savings. notice at this point that all surfaces have the
same reflectance, which helps on providing a
satisfying light distribution.
5. Conclusion
This study shows variations between daylighting
distribution inside a space due to decisions 6. References
related to daylighting system. This assessment is 1. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas
based on some parameters variations: windows’ Técnicas, (1992). NBR 5413 – Iluminância de
shape, size and position and variation on interiores: Procedimento. Rio de Janeiro: p. 1-13
environment geometry. 2. ABNT – Associação Brasileira de Normas
Assessing this work, students can easily Técnicas, (1985). NBR 5382 – Verificação de
comprehend the importance of a conscious iluminância de interiores. Rio de Janeiro: p. 1-4.
daylighting design on energy efficiency and 3. BAKER, N.; FRANCHIOTTI, A. & STEEMERS,
become more environmentally conscient besides K. (Editors)., (1993). Daylight in architecture: A
comprehending aesthetics solutions and comfort European Reference Book. Londres: James &
conditions. This way, this study also shows the James Editors: p. 12-52
importance of developing comfort strategies at 4. CORBELLA, Oscar; YANNAS, Simos, (2003).
the same time of architectural conception. Em busca de uma arquitetura sustentável para
It is also important to understand architectural os trópicos. Rio de Janeiro: Revan.
spaces as a luminary that spreads, controls and 5. ELETROBRÁS/PROCEL, (2002). Manual de
reflects daylighting in interior environments, as prédios eficientes em energia elétrica. Rio de
the sky does in external spaces. This work shows Janeiro: IBAM-ELETROBRÁS/PROCEL: p. 84-93
a high reflective environment which was taken as 6. HOPKINSON, R. G.; PETHERBRIDGE, P.;
a parametric base, but is necessary to LONGMORE, L., (1966). Iluminação natural.
comprehend that varying these paramets, Lisboa,Portugal: Fundação Calouste Gulbenkian.
general lighting availability will also vary. 7. IEA - International Energy Agency (IEA) Solar
It is also necessary to keep in mind that the main Heating and Cooling Programme, Energy
lighting design goal must be creating an adjusted Conservation in Buildings & Community Systems,
visual environment. An environment can be (2000). Daylighting in buildings: A source book on
considered good in terms of users comfort when daylighting systems and componentes. Califórnia,
it provides visual comfort and allows the EUA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory.
development of visual tasks needed by 8. KNIJINIK, Roberto, (1994). Energia e meio
environment function (MAJOROS, 1998). To ambiente em Porto Alegre. Porto Alegre, Brasil:
provide visual comfort, an interior room must p. 25-42.
have all parts viewed with no difficulty and visual 9. LECHNER, Norbert, (2001). Heating, cooling
tasks should be developed without tension. and lighting: Design methods for architects. USA:
Visual comfort with thermal and acoustic issues, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: p. 280-282; 360-377.
are the three parts that complete comfort feeling. 10. MAJOROS, András, (1998). Daylighting.
Dynamic nature of daylighting satisfies biological PLEA Notes. Queensland, Austrália: University of
needs to respond to day natural rhythms Queensland Printery: p. 5-14
(LECHNER, 2001). Daylighting design, however, 11. SILVA, Heitor C., (1996). Window Design for
require a careful fenestration design to provide thermal comfort in domestic buildings in southern
daylighting distribution and quality. Brazil. PhD thesis, Architectural Association
Considering the parameters adopted and results School of Architecture, Environment and Energy
assessed, and aiming a good daylighting Programme. London, UK: p. 75-91.

View publication stats