Abstract
Daylight is vital to building occupants as it impacts health and productivity of humans in the indoor environment. No doubt that green building rating systems contribute to the awareness of the significance of daylight in buildings, they enhances the indoor environmental quality by awarding credits to daylight harvesting in buildings. LEED as one of the predominant green building rating systems sets specific daylight criterion, and offers more than one option for project teams to assess and comply with the set criterion; either using manual calculations, using computer simulation (during design), or by daylight measurement (by substantial construction). This article presents a case study of a LEED Gold building in Cairo, Egypt. Within this specific case, three daylight assessment approaches were implemented; Daylight simulation (on design drawings), daylight measurement (after substantial construction), and Post Occupancy Evaluation (POE) (after 9 months of building occupancy). This paper contrasted the results of the assessment methods, this contrast in daylight assessment methods revealed the significance as well as drawbacks of each assessment method compared to the other, and distilled valuable insights about the reliability of each of the available assessment methods.
Highlights
One of the LEED V3 requirements indicates that, at least 75% of all regularly occupied spaces should receive daylight luminance between 10 and 500 foot-candles (107 and 5380 Lux), in order to achieve 1 LEED credit; projects should opt for daylight simulation or measurement to verify the daylight credit requirements, in both cases criteria is the same, if project‟s team opts for daylight measurement; projects may achieve 2 points if they demonstrate more than 90% of regularly occupied space areas to be compliant [6]
The objective of this paper is to evaluate two dominant daylight evaluation methods; simulation and measurements, and to compare both with the actual building user‟s perception in a LEED awarded building
The research follows mixed method approach; simulation, field measurements, and survey of occupant‟s feedback on the quality of daylight in their office spaces
Summary
Humans spend more than 90% of their time indoors [1]; the quality of the indoor environment is crucial to be considered for their health, wellbeing, and productivity. One of the most significance indoor environmental quality aspects is daylight. Daylight is an important factor which impacts building occupants‟ health and well-being. Daylight has a clear leverage on our body clock and metabolism, and it can affect our circadian cycle [2]. The availability of daylight can keep the occupants healthy and effective in their works. As well as for buildings, daylight is a primary source of lighting and a special element in enhancing architecture [3]
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
