Daylight fluctuations effect on the functioning of different daylight-linked control systems

Abstract One of the problems preventing daylight-linked controls spread is users' reluctance in accepting them. Continuous electric light oscillations, determined by control systems, can annoy users. This problem is particularly relevant for switching systems and it is strictly dependent on sky conditions: the more variable the weather is, the more frequent the oscillations are. To deepen these issues, irradiance and daylight illuminance measurements were performed in a mock-up office. Percentage daylight fluctuations (PDFs) were calculated. Then, starting from measured data, the functioning of different switching systems (differential switching, switching with switching linked time delay, switching with daylight linked time delay and solar reset switching) was simulated, in order to investigate daylight fluctuations effect on controls performances. Simulations were repeated on varying dead band and time delay, to verify the effectiveness of techniques in reducing daily switching actions. Results demonstrates that when sky is clear, PDFs are generally comprised in the ranges [-5%; 0% [ and [0%; 5% [ both outdoor and indoor; whereas, when weather changes from a sky condition to another, fluctuations can be higher than 50%. Despite the choice of the switching technique is not univocal and its effectiveness strictly depend on specific indoor daylight availability, differential switching associated with a switching linked time delay turns out to be the strategy more adaptable to different cases. Moreover, not always the increment of the dead band extent or time delay corresponds to a reduction of the daily amount of switching actions.

[1]  Peter Boyce.  Editorial: Advancing lighting controls , 2015 .

[2]  Laura Bellia,et al.  Lighting Control Systems: Factors Affecting Energy Savings’ Evaluation☆ , 2015 .

[3]  Mohammad Yusri Hassan,et al.  A review on lighting control technologies in commercial buildings, their performance and affecting factors , 2014 .

[4]  Magali Bodart,et al.  Lighting energy savings in offices using different control systems and their real consumption , 2008 .

[5]  Åke Blomsterberg,et al.  Energy saving potential and strategies for electric lighting in future North European, low energy office buildings: A literature review , 2011 .

[6]  Sooyoung Kim,et al.  The impact of daylight fluctuation on a daylight dimming control system in a small office , 2007 .

[7]  Magali Bodart,et al.  Global energy savings in offices buildings by the use of daylighting , 2002 .

[8]  Laura Bellia,et al.  New parameters to evaluate the capability of a daylight-linked control system in complementing daylight , 2017 .

[9]  Anca D. Galasiu,et al.  Occupant preferences and satisfaction with the luminous environment and control systems in daylit offices: a literature review , 2006 .

[10]  Paul J. Littlefair,et al.  Photoelectric control: the effectiveness of techniques to reduce switching frequency , 2001 .

[11]  Dj Carter,et al.  User attitudes toward occupant controlled office lighting , 2002 .

[12]  Sooyoung Kim,et al.  Influence of light fluctuation on occupant visual perception , 2007 .

[13]  Moncef Krarti,et al.  Estimation of lighting energy savings from daylighting , 2009 .

[14]  John Cullen,et al.  The lighting handbook , 1986 .

[15]  Yuehong Su,et al.  Daylight availability assessment and its potential energy saving estimation –A literature review , 2015 .

[16]  Francesca Fragliasso,et al.  Why are daylight-linked controls (DLCs) not so spread? A literature review , 2016 .

[17]  Danny H.W. Li,et al.  Switching frequency and energy analysis for photoelectric controls , 2015 .

[18]  S Escuyer,et al.  Lighting controls: a field study of office workers’ reactions , 2001 .

[19]  Anca D. Galasiu,et al.  Energy Saving Lighting Control Systems for Open-Plan Offices: A Field Study , 2007 .