Skip to main content

Atrium Design and the Science of Daylighting: A Comparative Field Study

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Gulf Conference on Sustainable Built Environment
  • 466 Accesses

Abstract

Scientific and analytical advances in lighting design metrics have created a perspective that empirically defines measurable parameters of daylight. These have narrowly focused on illuminance-based metrics of light and energy efficiency of high-performance buildings and disregarded the qualitative and health-effective dimensions of daylight. Design strategies implemented should not only meet green building standards and certification guidelines, but also consider human physiological and psychological responses. The intent of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of the design approach of atriums in two LEED educational buildings with regards to building performance, chronobiological benchmarks, and occupant’s behavior. To assess visual comfort and discomfort, light illuminance and spectral power distribution measurements were taken inside both atriums to analyze the spaces throughout a typical equinox day, and at different days for varying sky conditions. The results from this visual environment analysis were then translated to assess health effective light received with the use of the circadian stimulus (CS) and equivalent melanopic lux (EML) metrics. Behavioral logs and surveys were also documented to help establish any patterns that could draw attention to human responses which could identify mediating factors in the indoor environment. Results indicate that illuminance level measurements taken on horizontal planes tend to be greater than those in vertical planes facing different directions. This addresses designers’ misconception that meeting a spatial Daylighting Autonomy at the 300 lux benchmark (sDA300) on the horizontal working plane is sufficient. It is also noted that meeting the sDA300 benchmark is not a strong indicator of maintaining 0.3 circadian stimulus or 250 EML benchmark. Both circadian stimulus and equivalent melanopic lux biological benchmarks appear to be more difficult to meet than the visual task illuminance level benchmark requirements. This chapter highlights how human responses to the design of the luminous environment fit in the overarching scheme of daylighting design parameters and metrics. It emphasizes lesser known potential health effective light metrics adopted in the field for increased applications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Raw G (1992) Sick building syndrome: a review of the evidence on causes and solutions. HM Stationery Office, Richmond

    Google Scholar 

  2. Frontczak, M. W., Pawel 2011. Literature survey on how different factors influence human comfort in indoor environments. Build Environ, 46, 922-937

    Google Scholar 

  3. Mardaljevic J, Heschong L, Lee E (2009) Daylight metrics and energy savings. Light Res Technol 41:261–283

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Reinhart CF, Mardaljevic J, Rogers Z (2006) Dynamic daylight performance metrics for sustainable building design. Leukos 3:7–31

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Van Bommel WJM (2006) Non-visual biological effect of lighting and the practical meaning for lighting for work. Appl Ergon 37:461–466

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Khademagha P, Aries M, Rosemann A, Van Loenen E (2016) Implementing non-image-forming effects of light in the built environment: a review on what we need. Build Environ 108:263–272

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Serra R (1998) Daylighting. Renew Sust Energ Rev 2:115–155

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Moon P (1942) Illumination from a non-uniform sky. Illum Energies (NY) 37:707–726

    Google Scholar 

  9. Reinhart CF (2004) Lightswitch-2002: a model for manual and automated control of electric lighting and blinds. Sol Energy 77:15–28

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Heschong L, Wymelenberg VD, Andersen M, Digert N, Fernandes L, Keller A, Loveland J, Mckay H, Mistrick R, Mosher B (2012) Approved method: IES Spatial daylight autonomy (SDA) and annual sunlight exposure (ASE). IES-Illuminating Engineering Society, New York, NY

    Google Scholar 

  11. Nabil A, Mardaljevic J (2005) useful daylight illuminance: a new paradigm for assessing daylight in buildings. Lighting Res Technol 37:41–57

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Vos JJ (1984) Disability glare-a state of the art report. CIE J 3:39–53

    Google Scholar 

  13. de l’Eclairage CI (2004) Ocular lighting effects on human physiology and behaviour. CIE Technical Report, 158

    Google Scholar 

  14. Kent M, Fotios S, Altomonte S (2018) Experimental biases in discomfort glare evaluations. 34th International Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture (PLEA), PLEA, 2018

    Google Scholar 

  15. Konis K, Selkowitz S (2017) The role of metrics in performance-based design. effective daylighting with high-performance facades. Springer, New York, NY

    Book  Google Scholar 

  16. Wallace LA, Nelson CJ, Dunteman G (1991) Workplace characteristics associated with health and comfort concerns in three office buildings in Washington, DC (No. PB-91-211342/XAB). Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC (United States). Atmospheric Research and Exposure Assessment Lab

    Google Scholar 

  17. Salinas JL (1982) Artificial light and occupational health. Occup Health Nurs 30:13–15

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Kim A, Schiavon S, Graham L, Ko WH (2016) Lighting for circadian health: survey module and non-invasive open-source wearable sensor system. Center for the Built Environment (CBE)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Lucas RJ, Peirson SN, Berson DM, Brown TM, Cooper HM, Czeisler CA, Figueiro MG, Gamlin PD, Lockley SW, O'hagan JB, Price LLA, Provencio I, Skene DJ, Brainard GC (2014) Measuring and using light in the melanopsin age. Trends Neurosci 37:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Enezi JA, Revell V, Brown T, Wynne J, Schlangen L, Lucas R (2011) A “Melanopic” spectral efficiency function predicts the sensitivity of melanopsin photoreceptors to polychromatic lights. J Biol Rhythm 26:314–323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Institute IWB (2019) Well Building Standard V2

    Google Scholar 

  22. Mariana Figueiro MR (2017) Quantifying circadian light and its impact [Online]. Architectural Lighting. Available: https://www.archlighting.com/technology/quantifying-circadian-light-and-its-impact_o

  23. Floor Plan Database (2019) University of Oregon: The High Performance Environments Lab (HiPE)

    Google Scholar 

  24. Hraska J (2015) Chronobiological aspects of green buildings daylighting. Renew Energy 73:109–114

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Al Awadh, S., Elzeyadi, I. (2020). Atrium Design and the Science of Daylighting: A Comparative Field Study. In: Bumajdad, A., Bouhamra, W., Alsayegh, O., Kamal, H., Alhajraf, S. (eds) Gulf Conference on Sustainable Built Environment. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39734-0_22

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-39734-0_22

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-39733-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-39734-0

  • eBook Packages: EnergyEnergy (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics