Discomfort and Disability Glare in the Visual Environment

  • Richard Kittler
  • Miroslav Kocifaj
  • Stanislav Darula
Chapter

Abstract

It is important to understand recent lighting and fenestration history and its development. Before the era of on-tap electrical energy supply for lighting, when artificial lighting sources were inefficient, fenestration was used as a means of providing working illuminance in addition to its many other well-documented functions. Daylighting technology developed firstly from a need to ease natural light into buildings in order to illuminate tasks and interior spaces. High ceiling heights with tall windows were favored and roof lighting, to provide working illuminance, became extensively used in industrial premises. With the advent of the fluorescent lamp, and its rapid rise to prominence during the 1950s, buildings were freed from many configuration constraints and the use of fenestration, as a means of providing working illuminance, diminished. Within a further decade, artificial lighting levels soared, especially in the USA. Levels of 2,000 lux were not uncommon as the philosophy that more light is better propagated rapidly. Controversy abounded concurrently with these developments. One area of controversy was associated with the trend toward seemingly unnecessary ever higher interior illuminances. The lighting industry was blamed for producing a body of opinion which favored higher illuminance and, hence, higher financial returns to the industry. Then the 1970s energy crisis materialized. It was already known that the then popular deep office building, illuminated almost totally by artificial lighting, was a prime offender in the excess energy consumption league. The high lighting levels used in these buildings came under immediate attack, resulting in large-scale delamping, which resulted in widespread but scarcely acknowledged complaints about difficulties due to observed fenestration brightness.

Keywords

Europe 

References

  1. Akashi, Y., Muramatsu, R., Kanays, S.: Unified Glare Rating (UGR) and subjective appraisal of discomfort glare. Lighting Res. Technol., 28, 4, 199–206 (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chauvel, P., Collins, J.B., Dogniaux, R., Longmore, J.: Glare from windows: current views of the problem. Proc. Symposium on Daylight: Physical, Psychological, and Architectural Aspects, Institut für Lichttechnik der TU Berlin, 294–302 (1980)Google Scholar
  3. CIE – Commission Internationale de l’É clairage: Discomfort Glare in Interior Lighting. CIE Publ. 117 CB CIE Vienna (1995).Google Scholar
  4. Cohen, J.: Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioural Sciences. Academic Press, New York (1977)Google Scholar
  5. Einhorn, H.D.: An analytical expression for the glare position index. Illuminating Engineering, 64, 228–229 (1969a)Google Scholar
  6. Einhorn, H.D.: A new method for the assessment of discomfort glare. Lighting Res. Technol., 1, 4, 235–247 (1969b)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Einhorn, H.D.: Discomfort glare: a formula to bridge differences. Lighting Res. Technol., 2, 2, 90–94 (1979)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Einhorn, H.D.: Unified glare rating (UGR): Merits and application to multiple sources. Lighting Res. Technol. 30 (2) 89–93 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ekman, G., and.Sjőberg L.: Scaling. Annual Review of Psychology 16 451–474 (1965)Google Scholar
  10. Emery, A.F., and MacGowan, D.: Windows in Internal Thermal Load Dominated Buildings. Proc. Windows in Building Design and Maintenance, CIB-84 Gothenburg, Sweden (1984)Google Scholar
  11. Guth, S.K.: Discomfort Glare and Angular Distance of Glare-source. Illuminating Engineering, 41, 6, 485 (1946)Google Scholar
  12. Hopkinson, R.G.: The multiple criterion technique of subjective appraisal. Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 2, 124 (1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hopkinson, R.G.: Subjective judgements – some experiments involving experienced and inexperienced observers. British Journal of Psychology, 46, 262 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Hopkinson, R.G. and Bradley, R.C.: Glare from very large sources. Illuminating Engineering, 55, 288–297 (1960)Google Scholar
  15. Hopkinson, R.G.: Architectural Physics: Lighting, London: HMSO, Part II, Section VII, 329–336 (1963)Google Scholar
  16. Hopkinson, R.G.: Glare from windows. Construction Research and Development Journal (CONRAD), 2, 3, 98–105; 2, 4, 169–175; 3, 1, 23–28 (1970–1971)Google Scholar
  17. Keep, P.V.: Stimulus deprivation in windowless rooms. Anaesthesia, 32, 598–602 (1977)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Keep, P.V., James, J., Inman, M.: Windows in the intensive therapy unit. Anaesthesia, 35, 257–262 (1980)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kittler, R.: New artificial ‘overcast and clear’ sky with an artificial sun for daylighting research. Lighting Research and Technology, 6, 4, 227–229 (1974)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kittler, R., Darula, S., MacGowan, D.: The Critical Window Luminance Causing Glare in Interiors. Selected papers of the Light and Lighting Conference with Special Emphasis on LEDs and Solid State Lighting, 2009, Budapest, CIE publ. x034: 63–73 (2010)Google Scholar
  21. Kozak, W., Macfarlane, W. V., Westerman, R.: Long-lasting reversible changes in the reflex responses of chronic spinal cats to touch, heat and cold. Nature, 193, 171 (1962)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Luckiesh, M. and Guth, S.K.: Illuminating Engineering, 43, 10 (1949a)Google Scholar
  23. Luckiesh, M. and Guth, S.K.: Brightness in visual field at Borderline between Comfort and Discomfort (BCD). Illum. Engineering, 44, 11, 650–670 (1949b)Google Scholar
  24. Macfarlane, W.V.: Habituation to heat and cold at the spinal cord level. Environmental Physiology and Psychology in Arid Conditions. UNESCO. Paris, 351 (1964)Google Scholar
  25. Macfarlane, W.V.: Personal communication to David MacGowan on Habituation. University of Adelaide (1972)Google Scholar
  26. MacGowan, D.: An Hypothesis - A new discomfort glare formula arising from a revision of the BRS/Cornell discomfort glare formulae in the light of past and present experience. Report Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley (1980)Google Scholar
  27. MacGowan, D.: Determination of modified external components of daylight factor and glare index using LIAM diagrams. Report Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory, University of California, Berkeley (1981)Google Scholar
  28. MacGowan, D., Thompson, H.E., Eaton, M., Harris, A.: Window Architectonics, Design Guide-lines. University of Manitoba report to Public Works Canada, Contract No.330-993, Ottawa, Canada, 4, 50–67 and 1–83 (1984)Google Scholar
  29. MacGowan, D., Kraft, C.L., Emery, A.F.: The Discomfort Glare Study at the University of Washington. Report to the USA National Science Foundation. Department of Mechanical Engineering University of Washington, 1–68 (1986)Google Scholar
  30. MacGowan, D., Pulpitlova, J., Subova, A.: Visual Work Environment and VDUs. Abstract Book, Work with Display Units, WWDU ’92. A47. Technische Universitat Berlin, (1992)Google Scholar
  31. MacGowan, D., Pulpitlova, J., Šubova, A.: Time and Circumstance, and the perception of discomfort glare. Lux Europa Proc., 1, 193–211 (1993)Google Scholar
  32. MacGowan, D.: Discomfort glare criteria. Lighting Res. Technol., 42, 1, 121–122 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Marcus, T., A.: The significance of sunshine and view for office workers. Sunlight in Buildings. 59–93. Bouwcentrum International Rotterdam, (1965)Google Scholar
  34. Nelson, P., MacGowan D., Pulpitlova J., Šubova A., Kittler R.: Unpublished data from the discomfort glare, joint Slovak Academy of Sciences and Royal Society countersigned 1990 research programme. Proc. CIE/Arup Visual Environment Symposium, London. CIE Central Bureau, Vienna. Publ. CIE x024 : 88–94 (2002)Google Scholar
  35. Pulpitlova, J., Subova, A., MacGowan, D.: Psychologische Blendung in Innenraumen. Proc., Licht 92, Saarbrucken, Germany (1992)Google Scholar
  36. Sörensen, K.: A modern glare index method. Proc. CIE Venice Vols. I, II, 108–111 (1987)Google Scholar
  37. Stevens S.S.: On the theory of scales of measurement. Science, 103, 677–680 (1946)ADSMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Stevens, S.S. (ed.): Handbook of Experimental Psychology. Wiley, New York (1951)Google Scholar
  39. Stevens, S.S.: On the psychophysical law. Psychol Rev., 64, 153–181 (1957)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Stevens, S. S: The psychophysics of sensory function. Sensory communication. MIT Press, Cambridge, pp, 1–34 (1961)Google Scholar
  41. Stevens, S.S.: To honor Fechner and repeal his law. Science, 133, 80–86 (1961)ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Stevens, J.C. and Stevens, S.S.: Brightness function: Effects of adaptation. Journ. Opt. Soc. Amer., 53, 3, 374–380 (1963)MathSciNetADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Šubova, A. and MacGowan, D.: Comfort driven controls for ‘Intelligent Buildings’. Proc. Vnútorná klíma budov, Tatranska Lomnica, 116–123 (1990)Google Scholar
  44. Šubova A., Kittler R., MacGowan D.: Results of on-going experiments on subjective response to discomfort glare. Proc. IES Japan Conf., Tokyo, 129–130 (1991)Google Scholar
  45. Taylor, L.: The natural history of windows: a cautionary tale. British Medical Journal, 1, 870–875 (1979)Google Scholar
  46. Wilson, L.M.: Intensive care delirium. The effect of outside deprivation in a windowless unit. Archives of Internal Medicine, 130, 225–226 (1972)Google Scholar

References to Appendix

  1. ISO – International Standardisation Organisation: Spatial distribution of daylight – CIE Standard General Sky. ISO Standard 15409:2004 (2004)Google Scholar
  2. Kittler, R., Darula, S., MacGowan, D.: The Critical Window Luminance Causing Glare in Interiors. Selected papers of the Light and Lighting Conference with Special Emphasis on LEDs and Solid State Lighting, 2009, Budapest, CIE publ. x034:2010, 63–73 (2010)Google Scholar
  3. Köster, H.: Dynamic daylighting archtiecture - basics, systems, pojects. Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel (2004)Google Scholar
  4. MacGowan, D., Thompson, H.E., Eaton, M., Harris, A.: Window Architectonics, Design Guide-lines. University of Manitoba report to Public Works Canada, Contract No. 330-993, Ottawa, Canada, 4, 50–67 and 1–83 (1984).Google Scholar
  5. Roy, G.G., Kittler, R., Darula, S.: An implementation of the Method of Aperture Meridians for the ISO/CIE Standard General Sky. Light. Res. Technol., 39, 3, 253–264 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard Kittler
    • 1
  • Miroslav Kocifaj
    • 1
  • Stanislav Darula
    • 1
  1. 1.Institute of Construction and Architecture Slovak Academy of SciencesBratislavaSlovakia

Personalised recommendations