Design Brief Understanding Daylight Metrics

energy design resources
design brief UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS
Summary Daylighting provides energy
The dynamic nature of sunlight poses many challenges when defining and productivity benefits. The
the quantity and quality of daylighting that effectively illuminates an benefits may be fully realized if
interior space. Static and dynamic daylighting metrics have been
the design is well balanced in
developed to inform and guide designers. Sustainable building rating
systems such as the United States Green Building Council Leadership in quantity and quality. Daylight
Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) and the Collaborative for metrics help to inform and
High Performance Schools (CHPS) also require some level of
guide daylighting design.
quantifying daylighting designs.
For lighting designers and energy consultants, it is important to

understand the various daylight terms, calculation methods, and metrics
that are used in the rating systems and by the daylighting community.
Each has its place for use when analyzing different aspects of a design.
Metrics such as Daylight Factor and Single Point in Time are widely
used to give a general sense of the daylight quantity in a given space. Less
familiar metrics, which include Daylight Saturation Percentage and
various Daylight Autonomy hybrids, tend to be more robust, though CONTENTS
more calculation intensive. All hold merit for lighting designers to
Introduction 2
understand and consider.
Successful Daylighting Design 3
This Design Brief describes commonly used terms, various Daylight Metrics 6
methodologies, and daylight metrics. It provides an opportunity for
Daylight Calculation Parameters 14
the advanced reader to understand the facets involved in balancing
Classroom Daylighting Example 19
the quantity and quality of daylight entering into a given space. In
particular, metrics are compared and a classroom daylighting example Calculation Tools 29
is examined. Also, calculation tools that enable designers to effectively Conclusion 29

evaluate the impact of their daylighting and electric lighting designs For More Information 30
are briefly described. Notes 31
Introduction
Various scientific studies1 and anecdotal evidence show a positive correlation
between the presence of daylight in an occupied space and human health,
comfort, and productivity. In addition, daylighting a space provides
significant energy savings when the electric lighting system is dimmed or
turned off. Because these benefits are in harmony with environmentally
conscious design, daylighting design is a key aspect of building rating
systems such as LEED and CHPS. Therefore, it is important for lighting
designers and energy consultants to understand the methodology used to
define the quantity and quality of daylighting entering into a space.
Rating Systems Defined Fundamentally, most rating systems use measurements, metrics, and
A calculation method is a defined criteria to benchmark designs (see Rating Systems Defined sidebar).
approach to collecting and/or combining Measurements are individual bits of information such as the illuminance
basic daylight and space measurements. at a point on the workplane, or wall, ceiling, and floor reflectance
A metric refers to the scale created by a

characteristics of a given space. Individual measurements are assembled
complete set of daylight measurements. using a calculation method to create a meaningful metric, which is used
Metrics can be defined by one basic to define criteria for specific applications. Designers who meet or exceed
calculation method or a combination of the criteria for a given space are more confident that the amount and
calculation methods. quality of daylight will be acceptable. Both the LEED and CHPS rating
Criteria are the thresholds adopted by a systems include criteria based on specific metrics that designers must
governing body or organization, typically meet to qualify for credits. The intent of the criteria is to help designers
derived by benchmarking test cases with avoid undesirable outcomes such as too much glare or solar gain in a
selected metrics. space. Such shortcomings can decrease comfort, interfere with
Rating systems such as LEED and CHPS productivity, and, potentially, increase energy use.
specify the criteria that must be met by
Typically, metrics address the quantity of daylight saturation sufficient to
designers. The criteria is based on
turn off electric lights. Metrics also address many facets of quality such as
specific metrics and requires the use of
glare and uniformity that shape the luminous environment. The list of
defined calculation methods for
individual sets of measurements. daylight metrics is growing. Some metrics are static, such as Daylight
Factor, while others are dynamic, such as Daylight Saturation Percentage.
Some provide direction for one design aspect such as average workplane
illuminance, though do not account for other aspects. While no one metric
that exists today perfectly encompasses the quantity, quality, energy, and
other aspects of a daylighting design, dynamic daylight metrics seem to
encompass more complete benchmarks than static metrics (see
Daylighting Basics sidebar). Metrics that use dynamic calculation methods,
such as Daylight Autonomy, are able to better incorporate project design
PAGE 2 UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

parameters (e.g., illuminance criterion and occupancy schedules), climate, Daylighting Basics
and the variability of daylight. Ambient Lighting: Illuminance required
for way finding or tasks with larger
Successful Daylighting Design
objects having high contrast.
Successful daylighting design starts with clearly defined goals. Design Dynamic Daylight Metrics: A metric
teams should first establish project goals that affect the quality of daylight defined by an annual calculation
in a space, setting parameters for direct solar control and uniformity of method, addressing the variability of
distribution. Secondly, quantitative goals such as illuminance and energy daylight over time.
targets, and cost considerations should be understood. Usability and Illuminance [fc and lux]: Incident
functionality goals and architectural integration are equally important to luminous flux per area. The area is
establish, through a more subjective lens. Metrics or rating programs defined as square feet for a unit result
should be used as a design guide only if the goals of the project are in line of footcandles [fc] and square meters
with the daylighting credit/point intent. for a unit result of lux.
Static Daylight Metrics: A metric

Quality
defined by a calculation method that
Direct Solar Control addresses daylight under a single
condition.
Although direct sunlight is necessary for passive solar strategies,
Task Lighting: Illuminance required
photovoltaic applications, and solar hot water systems, it is critical to
for tasks involving finer detail or low
control direct sun intended for interior daylighting purposes. Without
contrast. The actual illuminance required
proper control that meets the project design goals, glare from direct sun
is typically based on recommendations
is likely to disrupt occupants during certain times of the day and year. of the Illuminating Engineering Society
As a result, building residents will use shading devices to control of North America (IESNA), which are
unwanted glare or other extreme measures, which undermine the design based on criticalness of the task and age
teams original goals for daylight illuminance, uniformity, functionality, of the occupants.
energy use, and architectural integration. Direct sun tests (see sidebar on
page 6) are used by many designers as a means of avoiding direct sun
issues. The For More Information section lists publications that
address direct solar control strategies.
Uniformity
If direct sun control is properly implemented based on space

orientation, occupancy schedule, and other factors, the next measure of
success is the quality of daylight distribution. A uniform distribution is
desired for many space types because it distributes consistent daylight
throughout a room and avoids the discomfort that can result from high
brightness ratios. Uniformity also implies a less shadowed environment,
which is more suitable for task work.
UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS PAGE 3

The Good and Bad of Daylighting Design: The Bad
Left image is an (Kruse Elementary School, Colorado) example of glare rendering a room uncomfortable and unsuitable for the reading
tasks of the media center. The right image is an (Fort Collins High School, Colorado) example of a Band-aid, i.e. paper taped on
glazing, used to remedy a high daylight illuminance design in a computer room with a low task illuminance criterion.
Source: Architectural Energy Corporation
Quantity
Illuminance Targets
Proper control of direct sunlight and the uniform distribution of daylight

render a space usable and comfortable. The quantity of distributed daylight
determines the extent that electric lights can be dimmed. The goal is to
meet workplane illuminance requirements for the majority of the year.
Target illuminance are typically those recommended by the Illuminating
Engineering Society of North America (IESNA) for a given space type.
One method of designing appropriate illuminance levels is to divide the

lighting resource(s) for task requirements (specific work areas with small
objects) and ambient requirements (general areas for way finding or
with large objects). Designers may decide to provide the entire task plus
ambient goals, or just the ambient goal. In most applications, the
task/ambient approach is recommended because it allows for varied light
levels and provides more synergy with total building energy concerns
than using the ambient only approach.
Lighting power density is the maximum Energy Targets

allowable lighting density permitted by
local or national codes. It is expressed California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and
in watts per square foot for a given Nonresidential Buildings, also known as Title 24, provide lighting
space type. power densities (LPD) for various applications. For example, Title 24

The Good and Bad of Daylighting Design: The Good
Left image is an (Old National Bank, Indiana) example of daylighting design that allows for daylight illuminance to be projected
deep into the office space with the aid of a daylight redirection device (interior optical louvers) located at the upper portion of the
daylight glazing. Interior blinds are used to control glare for individual work areas next to the glazing. The right image is an (Fossil
Ridge High School, Colorado) example of balanced ambient daylight illuminance for a majority of the workplane. Task lighting is
available for supplementing light levels in the individual work areas.
2005 requires a LPD of 1.2 watts per square foot for schools. For Title
24 2008, the LPD is 1.0 watt per square foot. By utilizing daylighting
strategies integrated with energy-efficient electric lighting systems,
energy targets such as LPD can be successfully met. In California, LPDs
of 0.8 watts per square foot have been achieved in classrooms. CHPS
advocates the use of teacher, student, and audio/visual task-specific
lighting schemes to reduce an unnecessary wash of electric light across a
classroom. ASHRAE 90.12 also provides lighting energy targets for
various building applications.
Cost
Daylighting systems should be evaluated in terms of life-cycle cost,

which looks at both first cost and operation and maintenance (O&M)
expenses. The first cost of the daylighting solution should be in line with
the overall scope and construction budget of the project. O&M costs
should be reduced or at least balanced due to the hard cost savings from
reduced electric lighting use and associated reduction in cooling loads,
and from soft cost savings due to gains in productivity.

Direct Sun Tests Subjective Goals
One test to detect the presence of direct
Usability and Functionality
sunlight is to examine workplane
illuminance at critical times of the year Usability and functionality are more variable and dependent on the
such as morning, noon, and afternoon building owners requirements from project to project than the previous
on the summer solstice and equinox,
goals. The general intent for usability and functionality is to allow for
which are times required for the CHPS
user adjustment and override, and ensure adequate daylight to all
(California version) direct sun test.
occupants of the daylit space. Usability and functionality goals also may
If the illuminance exceeds a direct sun
threshold on the workplane, direct relate to credits within the green building rating systems such as the
sunlight is assumed present and control LEED Indoor Environmental Quality credit that requires providing a
measures need to be reevaluated. view to the outdoors and controls to reduce electric lighting use.
It is difficult to provide full cutoff for

Architectural Integration
winter conditions, and the winter sun
can be beneficial as a passive heat gain The most subjective goal, and the most difficult to account for in any
in cold climates. Winter may be a critical daylighting metric, is architectural integration. A broad definition of the
time to evaluate based on project goals goal without specific criteria is for the daylighting design to fully
and space task requirements.
integrate with the architectural expression of the building inside and
Direct sun tests can be completed outside. It means full integration with various systems including the
through a variety of methods including building envelope, mechanical, structural, heating, ventilation, and air
sun path diagrams and cutoff angles,
conditioning, electrical, lighting, and interiors.
physical modeling, or computer
simulation of the space. Daylight Metrics
Daylight metrics have been developed with the purpose of setting a scale
for designers to use when comparing aspects of daylighting design. Criteria
are paired with the metrics in rating programs to help distinguish well-lit,
comfortable environments throughout the day and year from those where
daylight is minimal or a hindrance. Each metric differs and has a variety of
strengths. Two sustainable building rating systems predominately use
daylight metricsthe LEED New Construction (NC) rating system has
widespread use in California and across the U.S., and the CHPS Best
Practices, both the California (CA) and New York (NY) versions, are
widely used by school districts. School districts in other states also are
adopting CHPS into their building programs. Definitions are given on
Page 2 in the Rating Systems Defined sidebar to define a hierarchy.
The calculation methods and encompassing metrics defined in this

Design Brief include those associated with the LEED and CHPS rating

systems, as well as several dynamic daylight metrics. All establish the
workplane as the datum for analysis, which is typically 2.5 feet above
the finished floor. Calculation methods such as Annual Light
Exposure and Luminance Ratios are omitted because they typically
analyze different planes. This is not to say these methods do not have
a place in future metrics.
Basic Calculation Methods
The following calculation method descriptions are the most commonly

used in the daylighting community. The methods may be used as stand-
alone metrics; most are often combined or manipulated for use in rating
programs to address certain design goals.
Maximum to minimum illuminance ratio
Maximum to Minimum Illuminance Ratios
is the highest horizontal illuminance
Similar to a direct sun test, maximum to minimum illuminance ratios point divided by the lowest horizontal
provide a method that can help detect glare and unbalanced illuminance point or area.
illuminance on the workplane by establishing an acceptable threshold,

which is variable by specific application. A workplane calculation must
be performed to find the point illuminance at the desired time of year
or the averages based on an annual calculation. The method then
requires a computer-aided or manual search for the workplane
extremes so the maximum to minimum illuminance ratio can be
calculated. While detecting imbalance in a space, the ratio does not
account for the gradient of the workplane distribution or extremes in
frequency or location. Therefore, it is often combined with other
metrics for design comparison.
Single Point in Time (SPT)
This method requires a workplane illuminance calculation for one time

of the year. The time can be selected to represent an average daylight
condition such as sunny equinox at noon or an extreme scenario such as
cloudy winter solstice. The SPT method accounts for variability in
designs such as orientation and shading mechanisms. However, care
should be taken to select a point in time that is representative of the
buildings occupancy schedule and energy loads, and relevancy to the
design goals for the space.

Daylight Factor (DF)
Daylight Factor is defined as the ratio of the internal illuminance at a

workplane point in a building to the unshaded, external horizontal
illuminance under a CIE3 overcast sky. DF is well defined and simple to
calculate. However, it does not account for orientation, shading and
glare control, or changes in sky conditions. DF can give a general report
of the average daylight conditions in a space, but cases of exceedingly
high illuminance cannot be addressed. In other words, DF is most useful
for locations with overcast skies; direct sunlight or sunny skies are not
well represented.
Daylight Autonomy
Daylight Autonomy (DA) at a specified workplane location is defined as

the percentage of year when a minimum illuminance requirement is met
by daylight alone. The exact method for sky and time simulation over a
typical year is not defined, but the fact that it requires an annual
simulation classifies this calculation method as dynamic. The minimum
illuminance is typically the IESNA recommendation for a given task
type. The use of the DA metric dates back to a Swiss standard, circa
1989.4 Variations of the original DA have been developed and
Continuous DA methods such as incremental summing and continuous
summing may more closely predict daylight performance.
Incremental Summing
Defined in 2002 by Reinhart,5 incremental summing refers most

closely to the original DA method. The difference is that times of year
are only included in the sum when the space is occupied. In other
words, the denominator of fractional count is the total number of
occupied hours addressed. The numerator of each fractional count is a
one or zero depending on whether the minimum daylight illuminance
is met. The 2002 application of incremental summing by Reinhart
marks a trend toward a more robust set of calculation methods, which
are referenced in this Design Brief as dynamic daylight metrics. The
concept refers to allowing flexibility in addressing the multitude of
design variables in any given space.

Continuous Summing
Proposed by Rogers in 2006,6 continuous summing is the term used for

a method that gives partial count to times when the daylight
illuminance at a given point lies below the task/ambient lighting
criterion. Continuous summing also addresses only occupied times of
the year. This summing method shows no difference from the
incremental summing method for a well-lit or over-daylit design.
However, this method becomes useful for showing the potential energy
savings if the electric lights have dimming or multi-level switching
capabilities. Accounting for partial daylight saturation is important
because of the human health, comfort, and productivity benefits.
Maximum Daylight Autonomy
To be used in conjunction with the continuous summing method,

Rogers also defined Maximum Daylight Autonomy (MaxDA).6 MaxDA
is an incremental summing method that uses a maximum illuminance
bound instead of a minimum. Times of the occupied schedule are
counted if the given point has an exceedingly high illuminance, which
is used as an indicator of glare or unwanted heat gains. The threshold
typically is ten times the illuminance criterion,7 though this value is not
grounded in a specific glare or heat gain study.
A specific example is given later in this Design Brief illustrating the

various static and dynamic metrics. Comparisons of the metrics are
presented using a simulation software tool that modeled a north-facing
classroom space.
Program Applications
The use and transformation of the calculation methods as LEED and

CHPS metrics are described for each compliance path along with
criteria for achieving each credit/point.
LEED NC Metrics
The U.S. Green Building Council developed a green building rating

system for newly constructed commercial buildings, known as LEED
NC. The rating system offers three compliance paths Glazing Factor,

SPT, or Measurement for documentation of Indoor Environmental
Quality Category, Credit 8.1 Daylight & Views. The three paths are
shown in the Metric Path and Criteria Definitions LEED NC Version
2.2 reference box.
Glazing Factor
The LEED NC version of Daylight Factor uses a simple spreadsheet

tool to relate glazing transmittance, areas, height, geometry, and space
area to the daylight saturation. The metrics calculation method is
similar to Daylight Factor because it is a ratio bounding the daylight
saturation at a worst-case condition (only diffuse sky contribution).
Differing from Daylight Factor, Glazing Factor is not calculated using a
workplane illuminance point grid or exterior horizontal illuminance. As
a result, it does not account for specific space properties or changes in
sky luminance. The Glazing Factor criterion requires a two-percent
threshold for 75 percent of the spaces to be met for the daylighting
design to receive credit.
Based on a simulated model, this path requires the design to meet a

minimum threshold of 25 foot-candles (fc) for 75 percent of the
space(s) on a sunny, equinox day at noon. A workplane point
calculation is required using an approximate two-foot spacing. The
credit states the need for direct solar control and gives a table of
options such as blinds and overhangs. This aspect of the metric does
not require a calculation method for proof, but it is assumed for equal
design comparison.
Measurement
The final compliance path for the LEED NC daylighting credit is to

take physical measurements on a ten-foot grid at workplane height,
which is a SPT (without a defined point in time) or DF method. The
threshold for receiving credit is 25fc or 2 percent, respectively, per
measured point.

Metric Path and Criteria Definitions LEED NC Version 2.2
OPTION 1 CALCULATION
Achieve a minimum glazing factor of 2% in a minimum of 75% of all regularly occupied areas. The glazing
factor is calculated as follows:
Glazing = Window Area [SF]/Floor Area [SF] x
Window Geometry Factor x
Actual Tvis/Minimum Tvis Factor x
Window Height Factor
OR
OPTION 2 SIMULATION
Demonstrate, through computer simulation, that a minimum daylight illumination level of 25 footcandles has
been achieved in a minimum of 75% of all regularly occupied areas. Modeling must demonstrate 25 horizontal
footcandles under clear sky conditions, at noon, on the equinox, at 30 inches above the floor.
OR
OPTION 3 MEASUREMENT
Demonstrate, through records of indoor light measurements, that a minimum daylight illumination level of 25 footcandles has
been achieved in at least 75% of all regularly occupied areas. Measurements must be taken on a 10-foot grid for all occupied
spaces and must be recorded on building floor plans. In all cases, only the square footage associated with the portions of
rooms or spaces meeting the minimum illumination requirements can be applied towards the 75% of total area calculation
required to qualify for this credit. In all cases, provide daylight redirection and/or glare control devices to avoid high-contrast
situations that could impede visual tasks. Exceptions for areas where tasks would be hindered by the use of daylight will be
considered on their merits.
Source: USGBC, www.usgbc.org/
CHPS CA
CHPS is a nation-wide rating system of comprehensive benchmarks that

focus on environmentally efficient and healthy K-12 schools. The CHPS
organization publishes a Best Practices Manual that has been adopted by
numerous California school districts. Other states such as New York have
adopted the CHPS building rating system with slight modifications.
The CHPS Environmental Quality credit 1.1 for daylighting offers up to

four points that are incrementally achieved based on the calculation results.
As with LEED, a choice of three compliance paths is offered for daylight
credit documentationSPT, DF, or DSP. Each of the metrics includes a
direct sun calculation at specific times and a translucent glazing check for
glare prevention, as well as a photocontrol requirement as a prerequisite.
A variety of simulation tools can be used to document the credit.
Similar to the LEED SPT, the CHPS version requires a minimum of

25fc on the workplane on a sunny, equinox day at noon. The same
workplane spacing requirements apply for the grid point calculation.
In addition to the actual SPT calculation, the CHPS SPT metric requires

daylight uniformity that does not exceed an 8:1 maximum to minimum
illumination ratio at the same point in time. This metric uses a
combination of calculation methods to account for both lower and
upper illuminance bounds at the select time.
Daylight Factor (DF)
The DF metric is named for the calculation method and has no

variation in its approach. The goal is to achieve an average of two-
percent Daylight Factor across the workplane using a four-foot grid.
CHPS requires that the space be located no more than 20 miles from
the coast (i.e., in an overcast climate) for this compliance path to apply.
This requirement minimizes the metrics failure to account for
exceedingly high illuminance as it would be in a typically sunny climate.
Daylight Saturation Percentage (DSP)
DSP uses a combination of Daylight Autonomy calculation methods.

CHPS is the first sustainable building rating system to use Daylight
Autonomy as a method in one of the compliance paths. The DSP
metric is defined as:
DSP = DSP40 - 2 DSP400
The first term on the right represents continuous DA at 40fc and the
second represents incremental DA at 400fc, which is equivalent to 10
times the illuminance criterion, also represented as MaxDA. The
calculation is to take place over a typical school occupancy schedule
between 8:00 AM and 3:00 PM, Monday through Friday, from August
15 through June 15 for each point on a 4-foot by 4-foot workplane
grid. The DSP for each point is averaged over the space and area
weighted for an entire school for criteria comparison. Criteria for each
CHPS compliance path is shown in the Metric Path and Criteria
Definitions CHPS CA reference box.
CHPS NY
CHPS for New York school districts offers one compliance path for its
five-point daylight credit. The metric is called Daylight Autonomy
Ratio (DAR) and is the basic continuous DA calculation. To achieve the

Metric Path and Criteria Definitions CHPS CA
EQ1.1.1 Single Point in Time Approach Option To qualify as a daylit classroom:

EQ1.1.R1 Given the geometry of the classroom and
1 Point 25% of classrooms are daylit with consideration of site obstructions, fixed exterior
2 Points 50% of classrooms are daylit shading, interior light shelves, and/or fixed blinds or
louvers located between glazing, no direct
3 Points 75% of classrooms are daylit
sun can strike the teaching surfaces or a work plane
4 Points 100% of classrooms are daylit located 4 ft inside the exterior walls at 9:00
AM, noon and 3:00 PM on the summer solstice and
EQ1.1.2 Daylight Saturation Percentage (DSP) Approach Option the equinox.
1 Point 30% average DSP for all classroom space EQ1.1.R2 Skylights shall meet the requirements of
no sun penetration, as described above, unless they
2 Points 45% average DSP for all classroom space
have diffusing glazing.
3 Points 60% average DSP for all classroom space EQ1.1.R3 Photocontrols shall automatically turn off or
dim the electric lights when daylighting is available.
4 Points 75% average DSP for all classroom space
EQ1.1.R4 Any diffusing glazing shall be located above
Daylight Factor Approach Option the line of sight for the teacher and the students.
EQ1.1.3 This approach is applicable only to California climate
zone 3 and to any location in California climate zone 1.
1 Point 25% of classrooms are daylit
Source: CHPS Best Practices Manual Volume III Criteria, www.chps.net/
credits, the school must have 75 percent of the spaces with 40 percent
continuous DA. There are currently no other solar control or uniformity
requirements. Some simulation tools afford users the opportunity to
easily verify compliance and document the CHPS NY daylight credit.
Other Applications
Although not currently implemented as a metric in a building rating

system, additional examples of dynamic daylight metrics exist and have
been used by researchers in the daylighting community (see Notes
section). Two are included for comparison purposes.
Useful Daylight Illuminances (UDI)
As the name indicates, UDI calculates the total number of occupied

hours that useful daylight enters a space at a select point. Useful
daylight is defined as providing ambient light at the workplane at
illuminance levels between 100 lux to 2,000 lux (9fc to 185fc).
Above 2,000 lux, heat gains and glare become potential problems.

Sensor Placement + Potential UDI metrics give thresholds using bins (too low, useful, and
Optimization Tool (SPOT) too high) for certain percentages of the workplane. It is dynamic in the
SPOT software is a user friendly, sense that it requires an annual calculation capturing design variables
RADIANCE-based tool for lighting such as occupancy and climate. UDI differs from the DA calculation
designers to simulate daylighting and
method because it bins hours based on saturation instead of summing
electric lighting in a given space and the
the saturation ratios.
associated energy use. The software
documents the LEED and CHPS daylight SPOT DA
credits, and supports the application of
dynamic daylight metric concepts. In addition to documenting the LEED SPT and CHPS daylight credit
compliance paths, the Sensor Placement + Optimization Tool or
SPOT simulated the Classroom
Daylighting Example in this Design Brief SPOT simulation software (see sidebar) gives a unique daylight
and provided the illustrations of the report. The metrics used for the report are a combination of
calculation variables associated with Continuous and Maximum DA. The Continuous DA thresholds
static and dynamic daylight metrics. require that 60 percent of the workplane meet 40 percent saturation for
www.archenergy.com/SPOT Adequate, 60 percent saturation for Good, and 80 percent
saturation for Excellent remarks. In addition, a prerequisite using an
upper saturation limit of one percent Maximum DA for five percent of
the workplane is used to penalize glare potential.
Daylighting Metrics Summary
The table on the next page summarizes the metrics and calculation
methods discussed in the previous section.
Daylight Calculation Parameters

Dynamic calculation methods provide a palette of metrics that are
adaptable to any type of space. Specific variables are important to
understand as they relate to the dynamic calculation methods. These
parameters include location and climate, time frame, shading element
automation, design illuminance, and spatial considerations.
Parameter Definitions
Location and Climate
Location - including global position and space orientation - and climate

affect daylighting due to sun angle, typical weather conditions, and
other sky factors such as turbidity or cloudiness. Dynamic daylight
metrics account for this variation in the annual daylight simulation by

Daylighting Metric Definitions
Calculation Method
Metric Parameters* Scale Description Criteria Path Program
Single Point in Max to Min Emax: Emin Prerequisite 8:1 1 CHPS-CA
Time Illuminance
Ratio and SPT, sunny Area% Area % point thresholds
equinox at noon here Eavg [fc] 25fc
Daylight Saturation Continuous DA with [(DSP40 - 2 x DSP400) Area weighted average DSP 2 CHPS-CA
Percentage 40fc and Incremental [%]]avg point thresholds
DA with 400fc
Daylight Factor DF, cloudy climate Area % Area % point thresholds 3 CHPS-CA
where DFavg[%] 2%
Daylight Autonomy Continuous DA using Area % 75% area must have 40% 1 CHPS-NY
Ratio design illuminance DAR, pass/fail
Glazing Factor DF variation Area % 75% area must have 2% 1 LEED-NC

Glazing Factor, pass/fail
Single Point in SPT, sunny equinox at Area % 75% area must have 25fc, 2 LEED-NC
Time noon, modeling or pass/fail
measurement
SPOT Daylight Continuous DA and MaxDA %, binned 5% area > 1% MaxDa - None
Autonomy MaxDA using design prerequisite
illuminance
DA %, binned 60% area compared to
stacked %DA bins
Useful Daylight Annual hour binning UDI hours %, binned Undetermined - None
Illuminances for various saturation
levels
*Other prerequisites exist but those listed are critical to the calculation method.
using local weather files, such as TMY28 data, to determine cloudiness

and sky luminance over the course of a typical year. This variable has
synergy with occupied times because if spaces are occupied only in the
afternoons and typically cloudy in the design location, then daylight-
dependent design solutions may not prove to be optimal.
Time Frame
The time frame variable applies to the annual simulation, though it can
be an important consideration in the design extreme metrics as well. The
question is whether or not an occupancy schedule should be used as a
mask to all of the daylight hours in the year. One paradigm says that a
space should be designed for future flexibility meaning that a full annual

schedule (or the annual peak for static metrics) should be used in the
simulations to account for worst-case scenarios. Another viewpoint is
that this often results in over-design or a mismatched design between
daylight and architecture as viewed by the occupant. Also, the
descritization, the technique of grouping by selected values, of the
schedule is a variable. The more fine-grained, the longer the annual
simulation time will take and the more accurate the results.
Shading Element Automation
As part of the dynamic daylight metric category, DA calculation methods

can incorporate different shading element scenarios based on design or
assumed user patterns. For example, if interior window shades are
implemented in the design of a south-facing open-office space, then the
shades can be automatically controlled by a timer or photosensor,
manually controlled by occupants, or fixed in place. If the shades are
manually controlled, users can be defined as passive or active. The passive
user will close the shades once glare is a problem, and leave the shades
closed the majority of the year. The active user will open and close the
shades as daylight changes. From a modeling perspective, designers can
simulate active users as similar to a photosensor. However, modeling
users as active is an ideal assumption that many designers advise against
to prevent an under-daylit space. Also, it is advisable to avoid manual
controls as part of the primary design, occupant behavior is too erratic to
depend on users to properly and consistently control shades.
Design Illuminance
Daylight design illuminance can vary based on task type or intended

electric lighting integration. For example, 50fc of daylight might be
required for the task and ambient illuminance in a library lobby whereas
only 20fc of daylight might be needed as an ambient supplement in an
art gallery lobby. The two scenarios will yield different DA results, even
if the interiors and location and orientation are the same.
Spatial Considerations
The spatial variable in this context refers to the location of the

measurement points. Measurements are typically taken at points in an

evenly spaced grid such as two feet or four feet, assuming a workplane
height of 2.5 feet above the finished floor. Specific requirements may be
defined by a building rating systems metrics. Separate grids can be used
in the same space if varying design illuminance criteria exist. The
definition of a calculation grid is common to almost all of the daylight
metrics. However, the ability to assign separate grids in a common space
to different design criteria is unique to dynamic daylight metrics.
Daylight Autonomy Example
The following example uses the DA calculation methods to show how

the inclusion of the discussed calculation variables allow a metric to
address the different design goals for successful daylighting design. The
goals addressed are Daylight Quantity for Illuminance, Daylight
Quality for Uniformity, and Daylight Quality for Direct Sun.
I Daylight Quantity Perform a base DA calculation for occupied

hours using a continuous summing method, the spaces design
illuminance, and representative climate data, along a grid of points
representing the critical task surfaces. The continuous summing
method is selected because it is useful when addressing the usability
and functionality goal, if lighting controls are used. Partial daylight
saturation allows for the benefits described in the introduction,
especially electric lighting energy savings through multi-level
switching or dimming.
I Daylight Quality (Uniformity) Require that a minimum

percentage of the daylit spaces workplane points meet the given
level of daylight quantity as measured by the base DA. The
threshold might vary depending on the activities occurring in the
space. Threshold recommendations for a classroom application are
given later in this brief.
I Daylight Quality (Direct Sunlight) Perform a MaxDA calculation

for occupied hours using the incremental summing method and
representative climate data, along a grid of points representing the
critical task surfaces.

Metric Comparison
The following table summarizes the capability of the defined metrics to

account for select design goals and variables in the design of a classroom.
The table shows that dynamic daylight metrics are the most robust
because the majority of the design goals and variables are addressed. The
notes in the table indicate some parameters are not clearly defined for
some metrics. Whether or not and how a parameter is included is often
open to interpretation.
Table 1: Daylighting Metrics versus Design Parameters in Classrooms
LEED CHPS CA CHPS NY OTHER
GF SPT SPT DF DSP DAR UDI Spot DA
Metric Type Static Dynamic
Design Goals
Quality, Direct Sun X X X X
Quality, Uniformity X1 X1 X X
Quantity, Illuminance X1 X1 X1 X1 X1 X X2 X
Quantity, Cost
Usability and Functionality X X X X
Architectural Integration
Design Variables
Surface Properties X X X X X X X
Space Orientation X X X X X X
Location and Climate X X X X X X
Time Frame X X X X
Shading Element Automation X3 X3 X X X
Design Illuminance X X
Spatial Considerations X1 X1 X1 X1 X X X
1 Does not allow for variable criteria based on project conditions or design goals
2 Dictates a broad range of acceptable illuminance, not allowing for metering of a specific daylight illuminance target
required for space programmed tasks.
3 Louvers or blinds must be located between glazing to be considered as a parameter in the calculation.

Classroom Daylighting Example
Analysis of daylight conditions in a classroom is presented below to
illustrate the use of metrics and criteria by various building rating
systems. The example represents a north-facing classroom and was
selected for its simplicity. The calculation parameters that are held
constant throughout the example include simulation settings, space
geometry, and surface properties. The dimensions of the classrooms are
30 feet by 32 feet, the wall thickness is eight inches, and the window-to-
wall ratio is 37 percent. The surface properties are given in Table 2.
Table 2: Model Surface Properties
Model Element Characteristic

Floor Reflectance 20%
Wall Reflectance 60%
Ceiling Reflectance 75%
Ground Reflectance 25%
Mullion Reflectance 50%
Lightshelf Reflectance 50%
Overhang Reflectance 50%
View Window Transmittance 36%
Daylight Window Transmittance 50%

The simulation tool used to generate the example is the SPOT software.
It was selected because the interface allows for a visualization of the
calculation variables, and the metric reports are a built-in function,
which allows for comparison of the results. The software uses
RADIANCE as the underlying engine with a Microsoft Excel interface.
Other simulation tools may produce similar results. A list of simulation
tools is referenced in the next section.
Six simulations were run, each with a cumulative change in the

calculation variables, described previously in the Dynamic Daylight
Metrics Section. Table 3 outlines the simulation variations. The
calculation grid remained constant for all six variations, as this
parameter affects both dynamic and static calculations.

Table 3: Simulation Descriptions for Classroom
Daylighting Example
Variation # Variable* Description

1 Base Case North-facing classroom
San Francisco, CA
Traditional school schedule
No shades or blinds
40fc design illuminance
4-foot calculation grid spacing
2 Orientation 45 degrees east of north
3 Location Boulder, CO
4 Time Frame Year-round school schedule
5 Shading Element Automatic shades based on
Automation exterior photocell
6 Design Illuminance 20fc design illuminance
*All changes in calculation variables are cumulative for the variations.

Test Case Variations, Calculation Process
Geometry and Surface Property Modeling
While geometry and surface property can be accurately represented

in a physical model, a computer model is more convenient for
running parameter variations. Figure 1 shows the room geometry for
the Base Case example.
Figure 1: Basic Model

Fenestration Modeling
In addition to basic geometry and room surfaces, glazing geometry and visual
properties must be modeled as shown in Figure 2. Window treatments and
transmittance values may be inputted. Advanced Options provide additional
inputs, if desired, for use-defined shade controls.
Figure 2: Glazing Properties
Calculation Options, Including Temporal and Spatial
The default RADIANCE parameters in the software are used for the
comparison calculations. Calculations were developed for each month of
the year (the year is assumed to be symmetric). Only March, which
includes the equinox, is necessary for the SPT calculations, and only one
cloudy condition calculation is necessary for the DF calculation.
However, all months are included for a fine-grained temporal
calculation of the dynamic daylight metrics.
Location and Schedule
As mentioned in the Location and Climate section, TMY2 data is a common

resource used to determine typical daily weather variations. The SPOT
software allows for the use of TMY2 or Energy Plus Weather (EPW) files to
scale the hourly daylight conditions calculated using the CIE sunny and
overcast sky models. This portion of the input (Figure 3) also allows for the
definition of both a daily and annual occupancy schedule. Only the occupied
times of the day and year are included in the dynamic metric calculations.

Figure 3: Site and Schedule
Shading Options
Although shading element automation is not included in the calculation

for the Base Case, it is a user-interface input included in Variation #5.
Modeling of shading elements is important, because the selection of the
inputs may result in significant variations in the results. Shade control can
be fixed, manual, or automatic. Automatic control can rely on time
schedules or photosensor control. This software only allows for fixed or
automatic control types, though other programs such as Daysim allow for
active and passive manual control. Each temporal increment of the annual
calculation will be performed with shades up or down depending on the
algorithm result, whether it is based on time or exterior illuminance. A
wall-mounted, northeast-facing photocell along with 850fc signal is used
in the automatic up/down shade control algorithm for Variation #5.

Design Illuminance
Electric lighting results are not directly relevant to the daylight metric
calculations with the exception of the design illuminance that is used to
determine the desired proportion of electric light to daylight in the
space. Most daylight metrics criteria aim for full daylight saturation of
the space. An alternative is to split the electric lighting and daylighting
contributions into a task and ambient approach.
Preliminary Daylight Results
Using an annual simulation engine, daylight illuminance on the

workplane can be determined for each time of the day, year, and for each
sky condition requested with the input. The results (Figure 4) allow for
inspection of the daylight contribution per electric lighting zone.
Figure 4: Daylight Illuminance Results
Daylight Metric Reports
Daylight Metric Reports were generated by the software for all metrics
discussed in this Design Brief with the exception of the LEED Glazing
Factor and Useful Daylight Illuminances. The reports are shown on the
following pages. The first metric, Single Point in Time for CHPS (CA),
is presented in Figure 5 and provides a space summary. It shows the
crude workplane illuminance distribution for a sunny equinox sky at
noon with the resulting average illuminance and maximum-to-
minimum ratio. The results show a smooth distribution from the
perimeter to the core of the space resulting from the north sky.

Figure 5: SPT CHPS CA
Figure 6 gives a bar plot representation of the DSP equation

components. The saturation for 40fc is adequate and direct sunlight is
negligible. The resulting DSP can count towards a full building-area
weighted average to be compared against point total thresholds.
Figure 7 shows the DF for CHPS CA at 1.8 percent. The DF result is

the same for the Base Case and for all variations. The room geometry
and properties do not allow for quite enough daylight to meet the two
percent criterion.

Figure 6: DSP CHPS CA
Figure 7: DF CHPS CA
The SPOT DA results, shown in Figure 8, are presented in the form of

a stacked bar chart. The left bar gives the binned Continuous DA results
and the right bar gives the binned MaxDA results. The lines across the
bars show the criteria for sufficient daylight saturation and avoidance of
direct sunlight as related to the percent of workplane area respectively
for DA and MaxDA.

Figure 8: SPOT DA Results
The final report image shown in Figure 9 is for the LEED Single Point
in Time metric. The illuminance distribution plot is the same as for the
SPT CHPS, though the transformation of point data for the metric is
different. Again, the LEED option only counts the percent of the
workplane with illuminance above 25fc. A minimum of 75 percent of the
total building area must meet this threshold to attain the daylight credit.
Partial area can be counted for each space (criteria differ for small offices).
Figure 9: SPT LEED Results

Test Case Variations, Summarized Results
For the parameter comparisons in Table 4, point results are given as

though one classroom represents the typical school design. In a true
whole building calculation, all required areas would be included in the
calculation and summed appropriately for a program credit/point total.
The DF-CHPS CA column is highlighted to reiterate that the daylight

factor is the quintessential example of a static metric, as its results do not
change with any of the calculation parameter variations. The orientation
results also are emphasized to show the variability of results among the
metrics. The variation is due mostly to the thresholds instead of the
calculation results for this example. The SPOT DA thresholds are meant
to be dynamic with the project design goals. The DSP credit method is
currently under review, therefore a metric cannot be accepted or
disregarded based on the current thresholds.
The classroom example and the resulting metric comparisons are not
intended to make a statement about any one metric or threshold.
Rather, this exercise is intended to give a general sense of the capabilities
of the various metrics and an understanding of the differences for
lighting designers and energy consultants. Also, the example illustrates
how the dynamic metrics represent more complete benchmarks.

Table 4: Calculation Parameter Variations, Metric Results
Cumulative SPT-CHPS CA DSP-CHPS CA DF-CHPS CA SPOT DA SPT LEED

Parameter
Variations
Base Case 36fc average 57% average DSP 1.8% average DF 60% of area at 64% of area
40%-60% DA 25fc
4: 1 min to < 5% area above

max ratio 1% MaxDA
4 Points2 2 Points 0 Points Adequate 0 Credits
Orientation 40fc average 61% average DSP 1.8% average DF 60% of area at 67% of area
40%-60% DA 25fc
5: 1 min to > 5% area above

max ratio 1% MaxDA
4 Points 3 Points 0 Points Reevaluate 0 Credits
Location 38fc average 72% average DSP 1.8% average DF 60% of area at 67% of area
60%-80% DA 25fc

max ratio 1% MaxDA
Time Frame 38fc average 74% average DSP 1.8% average DF 60% of area at 67% of area
60%-80% DA 25fc

max ratio 1% MaxDA
Internal Shading 38fc average1 74% average 1.8% average DF 60% of area at 67% of area
DSP1 40%-60% DA 25fc

max ratio 1% MaxDA
4 Points 3 Points 0 Points Adequate 0 Credits
Design Illuminance 38fc average1 74% average 1.8% average DF 60% of area at 67% of area
DSP1 60%-80% DA 25fc

max ratio 1% MaxDA
4 Points 3 Points 0 Points Good 0 Credits
1 Does not change from previous variation because only louvers or blinds fixed between glazing are to be considered in the
calculation.
2 Note that all point totals assume modeled design is the same for all classrooms in the school, which is not a likely reality.
This is only for comparative purposes.

Calculation Tools
Many tools exist to aid in the process of weather file creation, initial
design checks, and full annual daylight simulations. Some of the most
widely used include ADELINE, AG132, Daysim, Daylight 1-2-3, EPS-
r, Lumen Micro, RADIANCE, and SPOT.
The most useful tools for dynamic calculations such as Daylight Autonomy
are those that have an annual simulation engine. The software tools that
exist in this capacity are RADIANCE interfaces. This is due to the accuracy
of RADIANCE daylight simulation and the flexibility in manipulating the
output. Daysim, Daylight 1-2-3, and SPOT are RADIANCE interfaces
that allow for the calculation and documentation of Daylight Autonomy
because of their inherent annual simulation processes. SPOT software has
options for calculating all of the different Daylight Autonomy methods used
in current sustainable building rating systems. Daysim and Daylight 1-2-3
DA results are typically presented in a graphical format as a workplane
distribution, which is equivalent to the SPOT DA method of presentation.
Other lighting software packages exist that allow for workplane illuminance
calculations under daylight. The output from programs such as AGI32 and
Lumen Micro can be used to calculate DA, though the process is somewhat
tedious for gathering annual data unless an automation method is developed.
Conclusion
For design teams, it is important to understand the many facets involved in
balancing the quantity and quality of daylight into a given space. Calculation
tools that simulate daylighting design and calculate the various metrics
provide designers with methods of prediction and benchmarking against
varying design concepts. While no one metric will be able to speak to all of
the design goals for successful daylighting, each metric has its place to assess
specific design issues at different places in the design process. The more robust
dynamic daylight metrics are more telling of the successes and failures of a
design as design goals and parameters change. Dynamic metrics are still in
their infancy, and further development and testing is needed to establish
concrete methods and benchmarks. The metrics will continue to evolve as the
daylighting community and, in particular, the IESNA daylight committee
grapples with determinants of daylight visual quality and quantity. More
innovative daylighting design, specific to space use, is on the horizon.

FOR MORE INFORMATION
Publications and Web Sites
CHPS Best Practices Manual: Volume II: Daylighting and Fenestration Design
Chapter, www.chps.net
Energy Design Resources, Daylighting Design Brief and other daylighting tools,
www.energydesignresources.com/category/daylighting/
Illuminating Engineering Society of North America (IESNA): IESNA Lighting

Handbook, 8th edition, www.iesna.org
LEED-NC 2.2 Reference Guide: Indoor Environmental Quality Credit 8:

Daylighting, www.usgbc.org
Southern California Edison Classroom Lighting Guide,

www.sce.com/RebatesandSavings/DesignandEngineering/SCEClassroom
LightingGuide/
The Daylite Site, various resources, www.thedaylightsite.com/
Calculation Tools
AGI32 Lighting Design Software: www.agi32.com/
Daylight 1-2-3: www.daylight1-2-3.com/
DAYSIM Daylighting Analysis Software: irc.nrc-

cnrc.gc.ca/ie/lighting/daylight/daysim_e.html
Ecotect: www.ecotect.com/
Lumen Micro: www.lighting-technologies.com/Products/LumenMicro/LM.htm
RADIANCE: radsite.lbl.gov/radiance/
SPOT: www.archenergy.com/SPOT

Notes
1. www.lrc.rpi.edu/programs/daylighting provides link to a variety of
studies although it is not an exhaustive reference.
2. [ASHRAE/IESNA] American Society of Heating, Refrigerating

and Air-Conditioning Engineers/Illuminating Engineering
Society of North America]. ASHRAE/IESNA 90.1 2004.
Standard - 2004 - Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise
Residential Buildings.
3. Commission Internationale de lEclairage (CIE) developed a series

of mathematical models of ideal luminous distributions under
different sky conditions.
4. Association Suisse des Electriciens. 1989. E clairage interieur par

la lumicre du jour. Association Suisse Des Electriciens, Swiss Norm
SN 418911, Zurich.
5. Reinhart C.F. 2002. Effects of interior design on the daylight

availability in open plan offices. In: Proceedings of the ACEEE
2002 Summer Study on Energy Efficiency in Buildings. Pacific
Grove, CA. USA.
6. Rogers 2006 Rogers Z. 2006. Daylighting Metric Development

Using Daylight Autonomy Calculations in the Sensor Placement
Optimization Tool. Boulder, Colorado, USA. Architectural
Energy Corporation.
7. Rogers 2006. Best estimate of acceptable threshold determined

through a series of examples. Refining of threshold is an
ongoing process.
8. Weather data provided by the federal government for 237 U.S.

locations, derived from a 1961-1990 period of record. Data sets are
hourly values of solar radiation and meteorological elements for a one.

Energy Design Resources provides information and design tools to
architects, engineers, lighting designers, and building owners and
developers. Our goal is to make it easier for designers to create
energy efficient new nonresidential buildings in California. Energy
Design Resources is funded by California utility customers and
administered by Pacific Gas and Electric Company, Sacramento
Municipal Utility District, San Diego Gas and Electric, Southern
California Edison, and Southern California Gas Company, under the
auspices of the California Public Utilities Commission. To learn more
about Energy Design Resources, please visit our Web site at
www.energydesignresources.com.
This design brief was prepared for Energy Design Resources by

Architectural Energy Corporation.
07/2008

Design Brief Understanding Daylight Metrics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design Brief Understanding Daylight Metrics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Design Brief Understanding Daylight Metrics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

energy design resources

design brief UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

Summary Daylighting provides energy

For lighting designers and energy consultants, it is important to

is examined. Also, calculation tools that enable designers to effectively Conclusion 29

A metric refers to the scale created by a

PAGE 2 UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

Static Daylight Metrics: A metric

If direct sun control is properly implemented based on space

UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS PAGE 3

Source: Architectural Energy Corporation

Proper control of direct sunlight and the uniform distribution of daylight

One method of designing appropriate illuminance levels is to divide the

Lighting power density is the maximum Energy Targets

PAGE 4 UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

Source: Architectural Energy Corporation

Daylighting systems should be evaluated in terms of life-cycle cost,

UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS PAGE 5

It is difficult to provide full cutoff for

The calculation methods and encompassing metrics defined in this

PAGE 6 UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

Basic Calculation Methods

The following calculation method descriptions are the most commonly

illuminance on the workplane by establishing an acceptable threshold,

Single Point in Time (SPT)

This method requires a workplane illuminance calculation for one time

UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS PAGE 7

Daylight Factor is defined as the ratio of the internal illuminance at a

Daylight Autonomy (DA) at a specified workplane location is defined as

Defined in 2002 by Reinhart,5 incremental summing refers most

PAGE 8 UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

Proposed by Rogers in 2006,6 continuous summing is the term used for

Maximum Daylight Autonomy

To be used in conjunction with the continuous summing method,

A specific example is given later in this Design Brief illustrating the

The use and transformation of the calculation methods as LEED and

The U.S. Green Building Council developed a green building rating

UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS PAGE 9

The LEED NC version of Daylight Factor uses a simple spreadsheet

Single Point in Time (SPT)

Based on a simulated model, this path requires the design to meet a

The final compliance path for the LEED NC daylighting credit is to

PAGE 10 UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

CHPS is a nation-wide rating system of comprehensive benchmarks that

The CHPS Environmental Quality credit 1.1 for daylighting offers up to

Single Point in Time (SPT)

Similar to the LEED SPT, the CHPS version requires a minimum of

UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS PAGE 11

Daylight Factor (DF)

The DF metric is named for the calculation method and has no

Daylight Saturation Percentage (DSP)

DSP uses a combination of Daylight Autonomy calculation methods.

DSP = DSP40 - 2 DSP400

PAGE 12 UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS

EQ1.1.1 Single Point in Time Approach Option To qualify as a daylit classroom:

Source: CHPS Best Practices Manual Volume III Criteria, www.chps.net/

Although not currently implemented as a metric in a building rating

Useful Daylight Illuminances (UDI)

As the name indicates, UDI calculates the total number of occupied

UNDERSTANDING DAYLIGHT METRICS PAGE 13