Occupancy Controls for Lighting

Ratings: (0)|Views: 17 |Likes: 0

Published by srukeer
sensors
See more

PG&E Energy Efficiency Information

O
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
f
o
r
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g

P
a
g
e
4
makes microwave sensors and very lit-tle data exist on field experience or in-stalled cost. They are used primarily inthe
security and alarm industries.
Mounting Configurations
There are two basic mounting configu-rations for occupancy sensors. Ceiling- mounted sensors employ an
independ-ent controller and/or power supply. Theymay be mounted high on a wall or in acorner, as well as on the
ceiling. Wall- box sensors are primarily designed asretrofit replacements for common wallswitches. Both ceilingmounted andwallbox occupancy sensors are avail-able with either PIR or ultrasonic sens-ing units. They can be
combined tocover an oddly shaped or large room. Aperformance comparison of a variety of sensor/mounting
combinations is pro-vided in Table 1.
Ceiling-Mounted Sensors
Ceiling-mounted occupancy sensors arevery popular. The typical system con-sists of a motion detector/controller
unitconnected to a "switchpack" housing,containing the power supply and relay.Low voltage wiring is all that is
requiredfor communication between the switch-pack and the sensor.Ceiling-mounted sensors are typicallyused in larger
rooms because they cancover greater areas, and usually have these characteristics:
MountingLocationSensor TechnologyAngle of Coverage Typical EffectiveRange
1
OptimumMountingHeight
C
e
i
l
i
n
g
U
l
t
r
a
s
o
n
i
c
3
6
0

500-2000 ft
2
8-12C
e
i
l
i
n
g
P
a
s
s
i
v
e
I
n
f
r
a
r
e
d
3
6
0

300-1000 ft
2
8-12W
a
l
l
S
w
i
t
c
h
U
l
t
r
a
s
o
n
i
c
1
8
0

275-300 ft
2
40-48W
a
l
l
S
w
i
t
c
h
P
a
s
s
i
v
e
I
n
f
r
a
r
e
d
1
7
0
1
8
0

300-1000 ft
2
48C
o
r
n
e
r
W
i
d
e
V
i
e
w
P
a
s
s
i
v
e
I
n
f
r
a
r
e
d
1
1
0
1
2
0

T
o
4
0
f
e
e
t
3
1
0

C
o
r
n
e
r
N
a
r
r
o
w
V
i
e
w
P
a
s
s
i
v
e
I
n
f
r
a
r
e
d
1
2

T
o
1
3
0
f
e
e
t
6
7

C
o
r
r
i
d
o
r
U
l
t
r
a
s
o
n
i
c
3
6
0

T
o
1
0
0
f
e
e
t
8
1
2

H
i
g
h
M
o
u
n
t
P
a
s
s
i
v
e
I
n
f
r
a
r
e
d
1
2

T
o
1
0
0
f
e
e
t
T
o
3
0

Sensitivity to minor motion may be substantially less than noted here, depending onenvironmental factors.
Table 1: Occupancy Sensor Performance Characteristics
(Source: CEC)
Figure 2: Example Ceiling Sensor (Source: Manufacturers Literature)

PG&E Energy Efficiency Information

O
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
f
o
r
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g

P
a
g
e
5

Most cost between $50 and $120,uninstalled, with relay and low-voltagepower supply.

Ceiling-mounted ultrasonic occu-panc y sensors are available in cover- age patterns ranging from about 250
to2,000 square feet.

Time delay
and sensitivit y controls are mounted on the sensor, makingthem inaccessible to occupants.

Installation of these units requiresopening the ceiling or wall, since they must be hardwired to the electrical distribution system. This results in a rela-tivel y high installation cost for retrofitapplications.

Wall-MountedSensors
Wallbox-mounted occupancy sensor units were introduced for smaller officesand similar applications where thehigher
cost ceiling-mounted units wereconsidered too expensive. These unitshave all components in a single housingand can
be easily wired into existingswitch boxes in the room.Most have the following characteristics:

They typically cost between $30 and$90, uninstalled.

Their sensor pattern spreads primar-il y to the left and right (60 to 90 ineach direction) in the horizontal
plane,but only minimally in the vertical plane.

An off-auto switch is available to ei-ther manually shut off the lights when aspace is occupied, or allow the sensor to
control lighting. Some also have amanual override to keep lights on whena room is empty, ensuring that light
isavailable even if a sensor fails. A spe-cial key or tool is often required to acti- vate the manual
override.

Time-delay and sensitivity controlsare usually accessible without removingthe sensor from the switch box. Thetime
delay before turning the lights off isadjustable in most wallbox units, typi-cally from 30 seconds to 15 minutes.Shorter
and longer adjustment ranges of from 10 seconds to 30 minutes areavailable.
Integration With DaylightingControl
Several manufacturers have recentlybegun to combine occupancy sensorswith photocell sensors for daylightingcontrol.
Integrated devices are nowavailable for both ceiling-mounted andwallbox units. Integration of daylightingcontrols with
occupancy sensors in thesame control spaces is, at best, of limFigure 3: Example Wall Sensor
(Source: Manufacturer's Literature)

PG&E Energy Efficiency Information

O
c
c
u
p
a
n
c
y
C
o
n
t
r
o
l
s
f
o
r
L
i
g
h
t
i
n
g

P
a
g
e
6
ited utilit y. While there are some good potential applications, such as in ware-houses and malls, where simple
con-trols will be effective, the utility of theseunits is severely limited in spaces thatcontain more precise and/or
difficultvisual tasks. In addition, integrated day-lighting-occupant sensing schemes limitlighting control to on/off
switching (asopposed to dimming). This can be an-noying to occupants. Dimming is mostoften the superior
approach in da ylight-ing applications.
Case Study: Large scale LightingControl in Manufacturing/OfficePark
The retrofit of occupancy sensor con-trols in a large manufacturing/officecomplex in California provides an ex-ample

of how this lighting control tech-nology can be applied cost-effectively.More than 5000 occupancy sensorswere
installed throughout the 27 build-ing, 3 million square foot campus facilitythat included manufacturing, engineer-ing
and development offices and com-puter facilities. The building lighting was previously controlled manually
throughcentral panels. The majority of thebuildings contained no light switches in the individual offices. Energy
monitoringof the lighting panels indicated that thelighting was on an average of 22 hoursper day. A new, more energyefficientmethod was needed that would be flexi-ble, reliable and responsive to individualbehavior. After a
detailed study of three lightingcontrol alternatives, ultrasonic occu- pancy sensors were selected as themost
appropriate and cost-effectivelighting control strategy. The new con-trol system was implemented in threephases. In the
test phase, seven unitswere installed in a standard office bayand their performance was monitored.On average the units
saved 55 percentof pre-retrofit energy consumption. InPhase I of the project, 550 additionalunits were installed in a
pilot program inoffices and conference rooms to further evaluate product performance, occupantsatisfaction and energy
savings. PhaseI results showed high employee satis-faction and energy savings of about 50percent. In the final phase,
4600 unitswere installed at a cost of $850,000. Afollow-up analysis estimated a paybackfor the retrofit of 1.1 years.
Applicability
In the past, the biggest application pit-falls associated with occupancy sensorshave been problems caused either
byusing inappropriate sensor sensitivit y patterns for the application at hand, or by the improper mounting
location of sensor units. Studies suggest that whenoccupants find lighting controls of anytype to be obtrusive, they will
disablethem, thus negating any potential en-ergy savings. In most applications, sen-sor types, sensitivity patterns,
mountingheights, and locations should be basedon the recommendations of the manu-facturer. Typical
applications of occu-panc y sensors are shown in Table 2.
Applicability to Lamp-BallastSystems
Occupancy sensors are appropriate for controlling both incandescent and rapid- start fluorescent lamps. With
theselamps, reduced lamp life due to frequentswitching is not a significant problem.