CONCLUSIONS
- The open-plan studios located at the top of the building were well
daylit having average daylight factors of over 5 per cent, with good
uniformity across the spaces. - The average daylight factors predicted for the studios located on the
ground and first floor were significantly lower, with average daylight
factors lower than relevant guidelines. - The disparity between average daylight factors achieved for rooms
located on different floors was larger than desirable. - The removal of the solid wall adjacent to the atrium increased the
average daylight factors within each of the applicable studios and
improved uniformity of daylight across the spaces. The increase in
average daylight factors resulting from this improvement was not
sufficient to ameliorate the deficiencies indicated above.
The results led the architect to reconsider the size and layout of the
external glazing to specific areas of the building in order to increase the
daylight levels within the ground and first floor studios. The addition of
glazing to the partition wall was considered in order to increase the
daylight penetration to the rear of the studios; increasing the amount of
glazing within these walls would also improve the visual connection
between the working areas of the building and adjacent circulation
spaces. This was an important consideration in the lighting for working
areas.
In conclusion, it is not suggested that methods of calculation or
computer simulation are not relevant, but the more complicated the
building, the more difficult, time consuming and expensive will they
become, to a point where the study of simple models either in the exterior
atmosphere or below an artificial sky, taken with their other advantages
of simple modification to take into account necessary change and visual
inspection, make them a worthwhile consideration.
Calculations 59The artificial sun uses a lamp in a parabolic
reflector to simulate the sun’s parallel rays of
lightDP Archive