Galasiu, A D and Reinhart, C F (2008) Current daylighting design practice: A survey. Building Research & Information, 36(2), pp. 159-174. ISSN 0961-3218
Abstract
What are the current daylighting design practices among design teams with an explicit interest in sustainable design? A survey was undertaken: (1) to understand which daylight performance indicators and design tools are currently used by design practitioners to integrate daylighting in their projects; (2) to identify the additional information needed beyond that available in current design guides; and (3) to advise on the content and format of a new daylighting design guide that addresses these needs. The responses obtained from 177 participants showed that over 90% of the practitioners surveyed support the development of a new daylighting design guide that would provide online access to both simple calculation methods as well as more advanced daylighting design tools. Survey results also showed that a variety of non-standardized daylight prediction methods - primarily rules of thumb - are currently being used, and that there is no commonly acknowledged method of how to assess the performance and quality of a daylighting system in terms of energy savings, glare prevention, daylight factors, and the view to the outside. Quelles sont actuellement les pratiques conceptuelles en matire d'clairage naturel dans les bureaux d'tude s'intressant de manire explicite la conception durable? Une tude a t entreprise pour (1) comprendre quels indicateurs de performances d'clairage naturel et outils de conception sont actuellement utiliss par les bureaux d'tude pour intgrer l'clairage naturel dans leurs projets; (2) identifier les informations complmentaires ncessaires en plus de celles qui sont disponibles dans les guides de conception; (3) conseiller sur le contenu et le format d'un nouveau guide de conception sur l'clairage naturel pour rpondre ces besoins. Les rponses fournies par 177 participants montrent que plus de 99% des praticiens interrogs sont en faveur de la prparation d'un nouveau guide de conception sur l'clairage naturel qui donnerait accs en ligne la fois des mthodes de calcul simples et des outils de conception d'clairage naturel plus complexes. Les rsultats de cette enqute montrent galement que plusieurs mthodes de prdiction de l'clairage naturel non normalises, principalement empiriques, sont actuellement utilises et qu'il n'existe aucune mthode reconnue d'valuation des performances et de la qualit d'un systme d'clairage naturel en termes d'conomies d'nergie, de prvention de l'blouissement, de coefficient d'clairage diurne et de vue sur l'extrieur. clairage naturel, paramtres de l'clairage naturel, guide de conception, pratiques conceptuelles, outils de conception, indicateurs de performances, conception durable.
| Item Type: | Article |
|---|---|
| Uncontrolled Keywords: | daylighting; daylighting metrics; design guide; design practices; design tools; performance indicators; sustainable design |
| Index terms: | prevention, practitioner, glare, energy-saving, daylight factor, daylighting, survey, design team, sustainable design, prediction method, design practice, performance indicator |
| Subjects: | professional practice, energy systems, data analysis and analytics, practitioner, data collection methods, building performance, financial risk, design process, performance management |
| Topics: | Research Practice, Cost Management, Sustainability, Roles and Professions, Quality Management, Design Practice |
| Descriptive scope: | 4 PCEA |
N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here