Analysis of Various Opening Configurations of a Second-Generation Virtual Natural Lighting Solutions Prototype

REFERENCES

• Aries MBC, Veitch JA, Newsham G. 2010. Windows, view, and office characteristics predict physical and psychological discomfort. J Environ Psychol. 30(4):533 ‐541.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Assem EO, Al-Mumin AA. 2010. Code compliance of fully glazed tall office buildings in hot climate. Energ Buildings. 42(7):1100 ‐1105.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Berman MG, Jonides J, Kaplan S. 2008. The cognitive benefits of interacting with nature. Psychol Sci. 19(12):1207 ‐1212.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Blask DE. 2009. Melatonin, sleep disturbance and cancer risk. Sleep Med Rev. 13(4):257 ‐264.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chang C-Y, Chen P-K. 2005. Human response to window views and indoor plants in the workplace. HortScience. 40(5):1354 ‐1359.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• [CIE] Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage. 2005. Test cases to assess the accuracy of lighting computer programs. Vienna (Austria): Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage. TC-3-33, 97 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Comité Européen de Normalisation. 2002. Light and lighting—lighting of work places, Part 1: indoor work places. Comité Européen de Normalisation. Brussels, Belgium. EN 12464 ‐1, 43 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Continental Automated Buildings Association. 2008. Bright green buildings: convergence of green and intelligent buildings. <http://www.caba.org/brightgreen> Accessed 2014 Jan 27.
   Google Scholar
• de Vries HJA, Aarts MPJ, Knoop M, Cornelissen H. 2009. Beneficial non-visual effects of daylight, Research into the influential parameters. In: Proceedings of Lux Europa 2009—the 11th European Lighting Conference. Istanbul (Turkey): Turkish National Committee on Illumination. 2009 Sep 9-11.
   Google Scholar
• Enrech Xena C. 1999. Simulation of natural light by artificial sources: architectural issues [dissertation]. Nantes (France): Université de Nantes. 281 pp.
   Google Scholar
• European Commission. 2013. Energy-efficient buildings: multi-annual roadmap for the contractual PPP under Horizon 2020. (Luxembourg): European Commission. 141 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Farley KMJ, Veitch JA. 2001. A room with a view: a review of the effects of window on work and well-being. IRC Research. Ottawa, Canada: Report No. RR-136. 33 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Fisher A. 1992. Tolerances in lighting design. In: Proceedings of CIE Seminar on Computer Programs for Light and Lighting; 1992 Oct 5-9. Vienna (Austria): Commission Internationale de l’Eclairage.
   Google Scholar
• Fontoynont M. 2011a. Benefits of quality lighting in hospitals. In: Proceedings of Conference and Workshop – Light that Improves Health and Well-being in Hospital Sectors, Copenhagen, Denmark; 2011, Nov 22.
   Google Scholar
• Fontoynont M. 2011b. Solid state lighting and changed situation for lighting conditions. In: Proceedings of The Future of Energy Efficient Lighting, Katrineholm, Sweden; 2011 Nov 28-30.
   Google Scholar
• Galasiu AD, Veitch JA. 2006. Occupant preferences and satisfaction with the luminous environment and control systems in daylit offices: a literature review. Energ Buildings. 38(7):728 ‐736.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hammad F, Abu-Hijleh B. 2010. The energy savings potential of using dynamic external louvers in an office building. Energ Buildings. 42(10):1888 ‐1895.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hartig T, Evans GW, Jamner LD, Davis, DS, Gärling T. 2003. Tracking restoration in natural and urban field settings. J Environ Psychol. 23(2):109 ‐123.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jenkins D, Newborough M. 2007. An approach for estimating the carbon emissions associated with office lighting with a daylight contribution. Appl Energ. 84(6):608 ‐622.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan R. 1993. The role of nature in the context of the workplace. Landscape Urban Plan. 26(1–4):193 ‐201.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kaplan S. 1995. The restorative benefits of nature: toward an integrative framework. J Environ Psychol. 15(3):169 ‐182.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kim J, Wineman K. 2005. Are windows and view really better? A quantitative analysis of the economic and psychological value of views. New York (NY): Lighting Research Center, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Kosonen R, Tan F. 2004. Assessment of productivity loss in air-conditioned buildings using PMV index. Energ Buildings. 36(10):987 ‐993.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lockley SW, Gooley JJ. 2006. Circadian photoreception: spotlight on the brain. Curr Biol. 16(18):R795 ‐R797.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Maamari F, Fontoynont M, Adra N. 2006. Application of the CIE test cases to assess the accuracy of lighting computer programs. Energ Buildings. 38(7):869 ‐877.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mangkuto RA, Aries MBC, van Loenen EJ, Hensen JLM. 2014. Simulation of virtual natural lighting solutions with a simplified view. Lighting Res Technol. 46(2):198 ‐218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Markus TA. 1967. The function of windows—a reappraisal. Build Sci. 2:97 ‐121.
   Google Scholar
• Ochoa CE, Aries MBC, Hensen JLM. 2012. State of the art in lighting simulation for building science: a literature review. J Building Performance Sim. 5(4):209 ‐233.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pandharipande A, Caicedo D. 2011. Daylight integrated illumination control of LED systems based on enhanced presence sensing. Energ Buildings. 43(4):944 ‐950.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhart CF. 2005. A simulation-based review of the ubiquitous window-head-height to daylit zone depth rule of thumb. In Proceedings of the 9th IBPSA Conference—Building Simulation 2005. Montreal (Canada): International Building Performance Simulation Association. p. 1011 ‐1018.
   Google Scholar
• Reinhart CF, Weismann DA. 2012. The daylit area—correlating architectural student assessments with current and emerging daylight availability metrics. Build Environ. 50:155 ‐164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Reinhart CF, Wienold J. 2011. The daylighting dashboard—a simulation-based design analysis for daylit spaces. Build Environ. 46(2):386 ‐396.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rodriguez RG, Pattini A. 2014. Tolerance of discomfort glare from a large area source for work on a visual display. Lighting Res Technol. 46(2):157 ‐170.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Skåret JE. 1992. Indoor environment and economics. Oslo (Norway): NBI-Byggforsk. Report No. N 6405.
   Google Scholar
• Slater AI, Graves H. 2002. Benchmarking lighting design software. London (England): Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers. Report No. TM 28/00. 33 pp.
   Google Scholar
• Slater AI, Perry MJ, Carter DJ. 1993. Illuminance differences between desks: limits of acceptability. Lighting Res Technol. 25(2):91 ‐103.
   Google Scholar
• Smolders KCHJ, de Kort YAW, Cluitmans PJM. 2012. A higher illuminance induces alertness even during office hours: findings on subjective measures, task performance and heart rate measures. Physiol Behav. 107(1):7 ‐16.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Stefani O, Bues M, Pross A, Mebben S, Westner P, Dudel H, Rudolph H. 2012. Moving clouds on a virtual sky affect well-being and subjective tiredness positively. In: Proceedings of CIE Lighting Quality and Energy Efficiency, Hangzhou, China; 2012 Sep 19-21.
   Google Scholar
• Stevens RG. 2009. Working against our endogenous circadian clock: Breast cancer and electric lighting in the modern world. J Mutation Res/Genetic Toxicol Environ Mutagenesis. 680(1–2):106 ‐108.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ulrich RS. 1984. View through a window may influence recovery from surgery. Science 224(46–47):420 ‐421.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Den Wymelenberg K, Inanici M. 2014. A critical investigation of common lighting design metrics for predicting human visual comfort in offices with daylight. Leukos. 10(3):145 ‐164.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• van Loenen EJ, Oosting W, Vogels I, Lashina T, van Haasen R, Staats C, van Tertholen O, Sempel A. 2007. Virtual windows. In: Aarts E, Diederiks E, editors. Ambient lifestyle: from concept to experience. Amsterdam (The Netherlands): BIS Publishers. p. 148 ‐161.
   Google Scholar
• Ward G, Shakespeare RA. 1998. Rendering with Radiance: the art and science of lighting visualization. San Francisco (CA): Morgan Kaufman Publishers.
   Google Scholar
• Wienold J. 2009. Dynamic daylight glare evaluation. In: Proceedings of Building Simulation 2009—the 11th International IBPSA Conference, Glasgow, Scotland; 2009 July 27-30.
   Google Scholar
• Wienold J, Christoffersen J. 2006. Evaluation methods and development of a new glare prediction model for daylight environments with the use of CCD cameras. Energ Buildings. 38(7):743 ‐757.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Woods JE. 1989. Cost avoidance and productivity in owning and operating buildings. Occup Med-C. 4(4):753 ‐770.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Yun GY, Hwang T, Kim JT. 2010. Performance prediction by modelling of a light-pipe system used under the climate conditions of Korea. Indoor Built Environ. 19(1):137 ‐144.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar