대한건축학회논문집 (Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea)

  • 제36권12호
  • /
  • Pages.107-118
  • /
  • 2020
  • /
  • 2733-6239(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2733-6247(eISSN)
대한건축학회 (Architectural Institute of Korea)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

건축계획에서 건강과 웰빙을 위한 주광설계 요소분석 - 생체 시스템과 시각적 쾌적함을 중심으로 -

Analysis of Daylight Design Elements for Health and Well-being in Architectural Planning - Focused on Circadian System and Visual Comfort -

  • 투고 : 2020.10.11
  • 심사 : 2020.11.17
  • 발행 : 2020.12.30
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

This study was to investigate the architectural planning elements of circadian systems and visual comfort in daylighting design. The main attributes in the human-based daylighting design were categorized, based on the reviews of the articles published last 10 years. View directions and distance from windows among characteristics of the comparative analysis were weighted more in the circadian system and the visual comfort. Material reflectance, sizes of windows, orientations of windows and shading devices affect greatly on the daylighting design. Higher material reflectance is the most economical and effective way for the healthier circadian system. Installing shading devices is the easiest method for better visual comfort. Big skylights are effective for good views and circadian system, but their high glare may bring low visual comfort. The daylighting design is executed in the early phase of a building design process, but daylighting factors related with the circadian system and the visual comfort are hardly considered in the process. The variables are not matched to keep the circadian system and the visual comfort properly. The results show various evidences for the importance that circadian system and visual comfort for efficient daylighting environments should be integrated in the building design process.

키워드

과제정보

이 논문은 2020학년도 홍익대학교 학술연구진흥비와 정부(교육부)의 재원으로 한국연구재단의 지원을 받아 수행된 기초연구사업입 (No. NRF-2015R1D1A1A01058577).

참고문헌

  1. Abravesh, M., Bueno, B., Heidari, S., & Kuhn, T. E. (2019). A method to evaluate glare risk from operable fenestration systems throughout a year. Building and Environment, 160, 106213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106213
  2. Acosta, I., Campano, M. A., Leslie, R., & Radetsky, L. (2019). Daylighting design for healthy environments: Analysis of educational spaces for optimal circadian stimulus. Solar Energy, 193, 584-596. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.10.004
  3. Acosta, I., Leslie, R. P., & Figueiro, M. G. (2017). Analysis of circadian stimulus allowed by daylighting in hospital rooms. Lighting Research & Technology, 49(1), 49-61. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153515592948
  4. Acosta, I., Molina, J. F., & Campano, M. A. (2017). Analysis of circadian stimulus and visual comfort provided by window design in architecture. International Journal of Engineering and Technology, 9(3), 198. https://doi.org/10.7763/IJET.2017.V9.970
  5. Amundadottir, M. L., Lockley, S. W., & Andersen, M. (2013). Simulation-based evaluation of non-visual responses to daylight: proof-of-concept study of healthcare re-design. In BS 2013: 13th International Conference of the International Building Performance Simulation Association (No. CONF).
  6. Amundadottir, M. L., Rockcastle, S., Khanie, M. S., & Andersen, M. (2017). A human-centric approach to assess daylight in buildings for non-visual health potential, visual interest and gaze behavior. Building and Environment, 113, 5-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.09.033
  7. Andersen, M., Gochenour, S. J., & Lockley, S. W. (2013). Modelling 'non-visual' effects of daylighting in a residential environment. Building and Environment, 70, 138-149. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.08.018
  8. Bellia, L., Pedace, A., & Barbato, G. (2013). Lighting in educational environments: An example of a complete analysis of the effects of daylight and electric light on occupants. Building and Environment, 68, 50-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.04.005
  9. Bellia, L., Pedace, A., & Barbato, G. (2014). Daylighting offices: A first step toward an analysis of photobiological effects for design practice purposes. Building and Environment, 74, 54-64. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.12.021
  10. Bellia, L., Fragliasso, F., & Stefanizzi, E. (2017). Daylit offices: A comparison between measured parameters assessing light quality and users' opinions. Building and Environment, 113, 92-106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.08.014
  11. Bian, Y., & Ma, Y. (2018). Subjective survey & simulation analysis of time-based visual comfort in daylit spaces. Building and Environment, 131, 63-73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.01.007
  12. Bian, Y., Leng, T., & Ma, Y. (2018). A proposed discomfort glare evaluation method based on the concept of 'adaptive zone'. Building and Environment, 143, 306-317. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.07.025
  13. Boyce, P. R. (2014). Human factors in lighting. Crc Press.
  14. Borisuit, A. (2013). The impact of light including non-image forming effects on visual comfort (No. THESIS). EPFL.
  15. Borisuit, A., Linhart, F., Scartezzini, J. L., & Munch, M. (2015). Effects of realistic office daylighting and electric lighting conditions on visual comfort, alertness and mood. Lighting Research & Technology, 47(2), 192-209. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153514531518
  16. Brennan, M. T., & Collins, A. R. (2018, September). Outcome-Based Design for Circadian Lighting: An Integrated Approach to Simulation & Metrics. In 2018 Building Performance Analysis Conference and SimBuild (pp. 141-148).
  17. BS EN 12665. (2011). Light and lighting. Basic Terms and Criteria for Specifying Lighting Requirements.
  18. Cai, W., Yue, J., Dai, Q., Hao, L., Lin, Y., Shi, W., ... & Wei, M. (2018). The impact of room surface reflectance on corneal illuminance and rule-of-thumb equations for circadian lighting design. Building and Environment, 141, 288-297. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.05.056
  19. Chen, X., Zhang, X., & Du, J. (2019). Glazing type (colour and transmittance), daylighting, and human performances at a workspace: A full-scale experiment in Beijing. Building and Environment, 153, 168-185. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.02.034
  20. Czeisler, C. A., Duffy, J. F., Shanahan, T. L., Brown, E. N., Mitchell, J. F., Rimmer, D. W., ... & Dijk, D. J. (1999). Stability, precision, and near-24-hour period of the human circadian pacemaker. Science, 284(5423), 2177-2181. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.284.5423.2177
  21. Davoodi, A., Johansson, P., & Aries, M. (2020, February). The use of lighting simulation in the evidence-based design process: A case study approach using visual comfort analysis in offices. In Building Simulation (Vol. 13, No. 1, pp. 141-153). Tsinghua University Press. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12273-019-0578-5
  22. Day, J. K., Futrell, B., Cox, R., Ruiz, S. N., Amirazar, A., Zarrabi, A. H., & Azarbayjani, M. (2019). Blinded by the light: Occupant perceptions and visual comfort assessments of three dynamic daylight control systems and shading strategies. Building and Environment, 154, 107-121. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.02.037
  23. Hamedani, Z., Solgi, E., Hine, T., Skates, H., Isoardi, G., & Fernando, R. (2020). Lighting for work: A study of the relationships among discomfort glare, physiological responses and visual performance. Building and Environment, 167, 106478. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106478
  24. Heerwagen, J. U. D. I. T. H., & Zagreus, L. (2005). The human factors of sustainable building design: post occupancy evaluation of the Philip Merrill Environmental Center.
  25. Hobday, R. (2016). Myopia and daylight in schools: a neglected aspect of public health?. Perspectives in public health, 136(1), 50-55. https://doi.org/10.1177/1757913915576679
  26. Jakubiec, J. A., & Reinhart, C. F. (2016). A concept for predicting occupants' long-term visual comfort within daylit spaces. Leukos, 12(4), 185-202. https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2015.1090880
  27. Kaya, S. M., & Afacan, Y. (2018). Effects of daylight design features on visitors' satisfaction of museums. Indoor and Built Environment, 27(10), 1341-1356. https://doi.org/10.1177/1420326x17704028
  28. Klepeis, N. E., Nelson, W. C., Ott, W. R., Robinson, J. P., Tsang, A. M., Switzer, P., ... & Engelmann, W. H. (2001). The National Human Activity Pattern Survey (NHAPS): a resource for assessing exposure to environmental pollutants. Journal of Exposure Science & Environmental Epidemiology, 11(3), 231-252. https://doi.org/10.1038/sj.jea.7500165
  29. Khademagha, P., Aries, M. B. C., Rosemann, A. L. P., & Van Loenen, E. J. (2016). Implementing non-image-forming effects of light in the built environment: A review on what we need. Building and Environment, 108, 263-272. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.08.035
  30. Knoop, M., Stefani, O., Bueno, B., Matusiak, B., Hobday, R., Wirz-Justice, A., ... & Appelt, S. (2020). Daylight: What makes the difference?. Lighting Research & Technology, 52(3), 423-442. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153519869758
  31. Konis, K. (2013). Evaluating daylighting effectiveness and occupant visual comfort in a side-lit open-plan office building in San Francisco, California. Building and Environment, 59, 662-677. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.09.017
  32. Konis, K. (2017). A novel circadian daylight metric for building design and evaluation. Building and Environment, 113, 22-38. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.11.025
  33. Konis, K. (2018). Field evaluation of the circadian stimulus potential of daylit and non-daylit spaces in dementia care facilities. Building and Environment, 135, 112-123. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.03.007
  34. Konis, K. (2019). A circadian design assist tool to evaluate daylight access in buildings for human biological lighting needs. Solar Energy, 191, 449-458. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2019.09.020
  35. Konstantzos, I., Tzempelikos, A., & Chan, Y. C. (2015). Experimental and simulation analysis of daylight glare probability in offices with dynamic window shades. Building and Environment, 87, 244-254. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2015.02.007
  36. Konstantzos, I., & Tzempelikos, A. (2017). Daylight glare evaluation with the sun in the field of view through window shades. Building and Environment, 113, 65-77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.09.009
  37. Korsavi, S. S., Zomorodian, Z. S., & Tahsildoost, M. (2016). Visual comfort assessment of daylit and sunlit areas: A longitudinal field survey in classrooms in Kashan, Iran. Energy and Buildings, 128, 305-318. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.06.091
  38. Lavie, P. (2001). Sleep-wake as a biological rhythm. Annual review of psychology, 52(1), 277-303. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.52.1.277
  39. Lee, D. (2012). Lighting design handbook 1, ECOFEEL, 8.
  40. Lee, K. (2016). Architectural environmental science. 3rd ed, Munundang, 245.
  41. Leslie, R. P., Radetsky, L. C., & Smith, A. M. (2012). Conceptual design metrics for daylighting. Lighting Research & Technology, 44(3), 277-290. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153511423076
  42. Lim, Y. W., Kandar, M. Z., Ahmad, M. H., Ossen, D. R., & Abdullah, A. M. (2012). Building facade design for daylighting quality in typical government office building. Building and Environment, 57, 194-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.04.015
  43. Lucas, R. J., Peirson, S. N., Berson, D. M., Brown, T. M., Cooper, H. M., Czeisler, C. A., ... & Price, L. L. (2014). Measuring and using light in the melanopsin age. Trends in neurosciences, 37(1), 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tins.2013.10.004
  44. Mardaljevic, J., Andersen, M., Roy, N., & Christoffersen, J. (2014). A framework for predicting the non-visual effects of daylight-Part II: The simulation model. Lighting Research & Technology, 46(4), 388-406. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153513491873
  45. Michael, A., & Heracleous, C. (2017). Assessment of natural lighting performance and visual comfort of educational architecture in Southern Europe: The case of typical educational school premises in Cyprus. Energy and Buildings, 140, 443-457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.12.087
  46. Moazzeni, M. H., & Ghiabaklou, Z. (2016). Investigating the influence of light shelf geometry parameters on daylight performance and visual comfort, a case study of educational space in Tehran, Iran. Buildings, 6(3), 26. https://doi.org/10.3390/buildings6030026
  47. Munch, M., Brondsted, A. E., Brown, S. A., Gjedde, A., Kantermann, T., Martiny, K., ... & Wirz-Justice, A. (2017). The effect of light on humans. Changing perspectives on daylight: Science, technology, and culture, 16-23.
  48. Othman, A. R., & Mazli, M. A. M. (2012). Influences of Daylighting towards Readers' Satisfaction at Raja Tun Uda Public Library, Shah Alam. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 68, 244-257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2012.12.224
  49. Park, H. (2019). Circadian Lighting, The Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Illumination and Electrical Installation Engineers, 33(6), 25-28
  50. Pechacek, C. S., Andersen, M., & Lockley, S. W. (2008). Preliminary method for prospective analysis of the circadian efficacy of (day) light with applications to healthcare architecture. Leukos, 5(1), 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/15502724.2008.10747625
  51. Potocnik, J., & Kosir, M. (2020). Influence of commercial glazing and wall colours on the resulting non-visual daylight conditions of an office. Building and Environment, 171, 106627. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106627
  52. Rea, M. S., Figueiro, M. G., Bierman, A., & Hamner, R. (2012). Modelling the spectral sensitivity of the human circadian system. Lighting Research & Technology, 44(4), 386-396. https://doi.org/10.1177/1477153511430474
  53. Reinhart, C., & Breton, P. F. (2009). Experimental validation of Autodesk® 3ds Max® Design 2009 and DAYSIM 3.0. Leukos, 6(1), 7-35. https://doi.org/10.1582/LEUKOS.2009.06.01001
  54. Solt, J., Aarts, M. P. J., Andersen, M., Appelt, S., Bodart, M., Kaempf, J., ... & Schuler, A. (2017). Daylight in the built environment. In Changing perspectives on daylight: science, technology, and culture (pp. 24-32). Science/AAAS.
  55. Stevens, R. G., Blask, D. E., Brainard, G. C., Hansen, J., Lockley, S. W., Provencio, I., ... & Reinlib, L. (2007). Meeting report: the role of environmental lighting and circadian disruption in cancer and other diseases. Environmental health perspectives, 115(9), 1357-1362. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.10200
  56. Suk, J. Y. (2019). Luminance and vertical eye illuminance thresholds for occupants' visual comfort in daylit office environments. Building and Environment, 148, 107-115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.10.058
  57. Tabadkani, A., Shoubi, M. V., Soflaei, F., & Banihashemi, S. (2019). Integrated parametric design of adaptive facades for user's visual comfort. Automation in Construction, 106, 102857. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.autcon.2019.102857
  58. Veitch, J. A., Van den Beld, G., Brainard, G., & Roberts, J. E. (2004). Ocular lighting effects on human physiology, mood and behaviour (No. 158). Tech. Report of CIE.
  59. Yao, J. (2020). IDENTIFYING OCCUPANTS'APPROPRIATE SEATING POSITION AND VIEW DIRECTION IN OFFICE BUILDINGS: A STOCHASTIC SHADE CONTROL BASED MULTIOBJECTIVE VISUAL COMFORT OPTIMIZATION. Journal of Green Building, 15(1), 15-36. https://doi.org/10.3992/1943-4618.15.1.15
  60. Yao, Q., Cai, W., Li, M., Hu, Z., Xue, P., & Dai, Q. (2020). Efficient circadian daylighting: A proposed equation, experimental validation, and the consequent importance of room surface reflectance. Energy and Buildings, 210, 109784. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2020.109784
  61. Yun, G., Sho, D. W., & Kim, K. S. (2011). A study on visual environment evaluation of residential space using the radiance program. Journal of the Architectural Institute of Korea Planning & Design, 27(2), 227-234.
  62. Zomorodian, Z. S., & Tahsildoost, M. (2019). Assessing the effectiveness of dynamic metrics in predicting daylight availability and visual comfort in classrooms. Renewable Energy, 134, 669-680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2018.11.072