Radiance-general Digest, Vol 119, Issue 7

Thank you Lars and Googs for your useful responses. Now I have a start point to tackle this :slight_smile:

路路路

From: [email protected]
Subject: Radiance-general Digest, Vol 119, Issue 7
To: [email protected]
Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 12:00:00 -0800

Send Radiance-general mailing list submissions to
聽聽[email protected]

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
聽聽http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
聽聽[email protected]

You can reach the person managing the list at
聽聽[email protected]

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of Radiance-general digest..."

Today's Topics:

聽聽聽1. Re: Using radiance for simulating light pipes (Lars O. Grobe)
聽聽聽2. Re: Using radiance for simulating light pipes (Rob Guglielmetti)

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 07 Jan 2014 21:20:48 +0100
From: "Lars O. Grobe" <[email protected]>
To: Radiance general discussion <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Using radiance for simulating light
聽聽pipes
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Hi Alejandro,

the topic of light pipes appears from time to time, and unfortunately
the simple answer is that Radiance (and any backwards-tracer) is not
really suiteable for the task, if

1) you consider sunny days (you probably want to do so)

2) you do not have a diffusor placed on the top aperture of the pipe.

There are still some promising approaches to solve the problem. One is
using descrete patch models of the sky, such as the Tregenza scheme,
with the direct sun contribution being distributed over larger patches.
This implies distributing the sun radiance over a larger part of the
sky, which smoothes out sharp peaks in the transmission - which may not
be crucial in many cases.

The other option is using a forward extension to Radiance, such as the
photon map. This requires a modified version of Radiance, but gives you
a tool which has been developed with exactly applications such as light
pipes in mind.

Finally, you may even try to generate the BSDF of a light pipe using
genBSDF and apply this to a surface representing the bottom aperture.

The latter two options keep the resolution of the incident radiance,
especially the "sharpness" from the sun, intact.

Cheers, Lars.

> Hi everyone,
> I am a newcomer in the radiance community. I am involved in a project to
> assess the light output from light pipes. We are gonna simulate the
> light output of 2 types of light pipes and then compared them to the on
> site measurements. I would appreciate any guiding or advise on where to
> start the simulations. I am considering backward retracing as a more
> suitable option than forward retracing for this particular case, what do
> you think?
> Thank you
> Ale

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 7 Jan 2014 13:45:35 -0700
From: Rob Guglielmetti <[email protected]>
To: Radiance general discussion <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Using radiance for simulating light
聽聽pipes
Message-ID: <[email protected]>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252

What Lars said, and:

Most TDD manufacturers provide performance tables based on some incident illumination on the exterior aperture, relating that flux to an expected avg illuminance inside a model space, assuming some room cavity ratio and TDD spacing. People have been known to use those tables, and an annual exterior (e.g. roof) illuminance schedule (ideally based on a weather file and Perez sky) to scale the predicted interior illuminance for an annual (or whatever) result. In this way you could use a light backwards ray tracer because you?re just solving the problem from the roof to the sky/sun. This whole process would be super fast with Lars? recommended approach to deriving the annual illuminance schedule (i.e. using gendaymtx and a single point on the roof). This approach also takes into account local obstructions (rooftop units, trees, whatever).

Several TDD manufacturers also provide photometry files that you could use in Radiance to compute a grid of interior point illuminances, and again scale those up or down based on the roof illuminance schedule. In this way you could do a fairly reasonable accounting of an actual interior.

The performance tables and photometry files are all a bit nebulous, based on assumptions and best/worst case scenarios, and voodoo. Your mileage may vary. Proceed with caution. Look both ways before crossing the street. But hey, it?s something. =8-)

- Googs

On Jan 7, 2014, at 1:20 PM, Lars O. Grobe <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi Alejandro,
>
> the topic of light pipes appears from time to time, and unfortunately
> the simple answer is that Radiance (and any backwards-tracer) is not
> really suiteable for the task, if
>
> 1) you consider sunny days (you probably want to do so)
>
> 2) you do not have a diffusor placed on the top aperture of the pipe.
>
> There are still some promising approaches to solve the problem. One is
> using descrete patch models of the sky, such as the Tregenza scheme,
> with the direct sun contribution being distributed over larger patches.
> This implies distributing the sun radiance over a larger part of the
> sky, which smoothes out sharp peaks in the transmission - which may not
> be crucial in many cases.
>
> The other option is using a forward extension to Radiance, such as the
> photon map. This requires a modified version of Radiance, but gives you
> a tool which has been developed with exactly applications such as light
> pipes in mind.
>
> Finally, you may even try to generate the BSDF of a light pipe using
> genBSDF and apply this to a surface representing the bottom aperture.
>
> The latter two options keep the resolution of the incident radiance,
> especially the "sharpness" from the sun, intact.
>
> Cheers, Lars.
>
>> Hi everyone,
>> I am a newcomer in the radiance community. I am involved in a project to
>> assess the light output from light pipes. We are gonna simulate the
>> light output of 2 types of light pipes and then compared them to the on
>> site measurements. I would appreciate any guiding or advise on where to
>> start the simulations. I am considering backward retracing as a more
>> suitable option than forward retracing for this particular case, what do
>> you think?
>> Thank you
>> Ale
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiance-general mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
Radiance-general mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general

End of Radiance-general Digest, Vol 119, Issue 7
************************************************