Beaming Daylight Into Deep Rooms

Ruck, Nancy C.

doi:10.1080/09613218508551188

Cited by 5 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Solutions occupy different portions of a conceptual solution space whose axes are performance and complexity. The simplest devices are static reflective systems (slats/light shelves) (e.g., Littlefair 1995;Tregenza 1995;Beltran et al 1996;Konis and Lee 2015) or prismatic systems that rely on total internal reflection (TIR) (e.g., Ruck 1985;Sweitzer 1993;Andersen et al 2003;Thuot and Andersen 2011;Thanachareonkit et al 2014;McNeil et al 2017;Alva et al 2020). Although they work well under specific solar conditions, many generally sacrifice performance over a much wider range of incident solar angles and sky conditions.…”

Section: List Of Symbolsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential annual daylighting performance of a high-efficiency daylight redirecting slat system

et al. 2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

While the primary role of window attachments is often to moderate glare and solar heat gains, they are also able to provide additional daylight to interior spaces. For this purpose, a variety of daylight-redirecting window systems have been developed over the past 150 years. Fixed reflective systems (slats/light shelves) or prismatic systems that rely on total internal reflection work well under specific solar conditions, but generally sacrifice performance over a much wider range of incident solar angles and sky conditions. Dynamic systems -typically reflective slats -are more responsive to sun angles but have not been able to achieve optimal performance for glare and daylight redirection efficiency. A previous investigation into an adjustable, reflective blind concept first conceived of in the late 1970s showed promise but was not reduced to practice due to lack of adequate simulation and analysis tools. In this paper, this concept is further developed and its energy and visual comfort performance evaluated for four mid-latitude, temperate climates using ray-tracing simulation techniques. Results indicate significant potential lighting energy savings when compared with conventional automated reflective blinds (2.1-4.9 kWh/(m 2 •a), or 14%-42%, depending on climate and orientation) or, especially, manually-operated matte white venetian blinds (1.4-7.9 kWh/(m 2 •a), or 9%-54%, depending on climate and orientation), while maintaining acceptable or better visual comfort conditions throughout the interior space.

show abstract