Gupta RP 8-00 PDF

Ramesh C.
Gupta, PE
Alfred Benesch & Co.
205 N Michigan Ave., Suite 2400
Chicago, IL 60601
312-565-0450
rgupta@benesch.com
www.benesch.com
benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Chicago, IL
Roadway Lighting
ANSI/IESNA RP-8-00
Ramesh Gupta
Alfred Benesch & Company
Chicago, IL

Chicago, IL
Contents
Definitions and terminology
Purpose of Roadway Lighting
RP-8-00 (Revisions)

Chicago, IL
Illuminance
Incident light that lands on a surface
Matches geometry of the roadway with light pattern
Quantified in footcandles (lumens/ft2)

Quantified in lux (lumens/m2)

Chicago, IL
Luminance
Light that reflects from a surface
-- Predicts roadway appearance -- how bright? -- how uniform?
Quantified in candela/meter2
Surface dependant
Direction dependant
Is what you see
Chicago, IL
Glare - What is it?
This glare forms a veil over

the eye and hinders the
eyes ability to see.
We refer to this glare as
Veiling Luminance.

Chicago, IL
What is it? - Visibility
Is a metric:
Influenced by
contrast,general
adaptation level,glare,
transient adaptation,
size,shape and color of
the object,background
complexity and
motion,and last but not
least, the visual capability
of the road user.
Chicago, IL
Small Target Visibility (STV)

Indicates how well user can see on the
lighted roadway
Metric Derived from Field of Contrast Values
Contrast: Luminance of Target Compared to
Luminances of Immediate Surroundings
Weighted for Numerous Factors: Average
Luminance, Pos or Neg Contrast, Driver Age
Combined into Single System Value
Chicago, IL
Contrast

Chicago, IL
Purpose of Roadway Lighting
Summary:
Reduction in accidents/fatalities
Reduction in pedestrian accidents/fatalities
Human Eye Limitations
Supplements head lighting at high speeds
Aid to older driver
Produces Highest Benefit/Cost ratio of all the
Highway improvement per FHWA Data
Chicago, IL
A Final Thought about the worth of Lighting

from the 1996 FHWA Annual Report

Chicago, IL
Roadway Lighting (RP-8-00)

Revisions

Chicago, IL
ANSI/IESNA
RP-8-00
American National
Standard Practice
For
Roadway Lighting

Chicago, IL
RP-8-00 History
Principles of Streetlighting
1928
Code of Streetlighting
1930, 35, 37
Recommended Practice of Streetlighting
1940
Recommended Practice of Street and
Highway Lighting
1945
American Standard Practice for Street
and Highway Lighting
1947, 53
American Standard Practice for
Roadway Lighting
1963, 72, 77, 83, 93

Chicago, IL
RP-8-00 History
1947 and 1983 were Landmark Documents
47 as the first American National Standards Institute
(ANSI) document
83 first inclusion of a method for lighting streets and
roadways other than Incident Light or Illuminance
method i.e. Footcandles.
(FYI, the CIE moved to the Reflected Light or
Luminance method in 1972. They used main frame
computers and developed prescriptions for lighting.
This approach was, and still is, unacceptable in the U.S.
where apparently we are all from Missouri!)
Chicago, IL
RP-8-00 History
The revolutionary document An Analytic Model
for Describing the Influence of Lighting
Parameters Upon Visual Performance CIE 19/2
1980 authored by the Blackwells was published.
Advent of the personal computer in the early 80s
made the calculations for the Reflected Light
metric easily possible and permitted its adoption
for Roadway Lighting.
The pc also made the more extensive contrast
calculations for a visibility metric possible, as long
as a two dimensional target was used.
Chicago, IL
RP-8-00 History
83 Standard clearly stated that the
Luminance method was the preferred
method.
83 standard contained an extensive
Appendix D Visibility
The belief at the time of the 83 standard was
that a Visibility based standard would soon
follow.
Chicago, IL
Visibility Basis of RP-8-00

Roots of new Recommended Practice trace back
to Waldrams Revealing Power work in 1938.
Utilizes principles by Blackwell in CIE 19/2
Current visibility model is by Werner Adrian
60 year old moving observer
18 cm, 50 % reflectance target viewed @ a height of
1.45 m and 83 m distance (1 degree downward angle)
0.2 second viewing time
Visibility Model accounts for eye adaptation, target/
background contrast and glare from the luminaires
Next revision to account for auto headlights and also
include discomfort glare requirements.
Chicago, IL

Chicago, IL
Visibility Model Sensitivity Analysis
Glare is from the fixed roadway lighting system benesch Ramesh C. Gupta
Chicago, IL
Contrast is the driving force behind visibility

Chicago, IL
Doubling the Light level does not double the visibility

Chicago, IL
Roadway Lighting Standard Practice

ANSI/IESNA RP-8-00
Practice allows for the following design
techniques:
Illuminance (LUX/ FC)
Luminance ( no change from 83 Practice )
STV ( Small Target Visibility)
Glare Consideration in All Methods

These design techniques apply to all new
roadways and are based on the RP-8 -1983 and
RP-8 -1990.
Chicago, IL
Glare Comes in Two Flavors

Discomfort Glare is not accounted for in the
current RP-8 -00, but may be included in the next
revision to RP-8.
Disability Glare is accounted for in two ways as
follows:
The luminance levels given Tables 3 & 4 are minimum
level to mitigate oncoming headlights
The calculation of Veiling Luminance Ratio evaluates
the disability glare of the proposed lighting system
Chicago, IL
Illuminance
ROAD AND AREA CLASSIFICATION
ROAD
ROAD
PEDESTRIAN
AREA
CLASSIFICATION
AVG.
LUMIN.
MAX
UNIFORM.
RATIO
MAX
UNIFORM.
RATIO
L avg 2
(cd/m )
Lavg /L min
Lmax/Lmin
MAX
VEILING
LUMIN.
RATIO
Lvmax/Lavg
(lux)
vg
Freeway Class A
0.6
3.5
6.0
0.3
Freeway Class A
6.0
9.0
8.0
3.0
0.3
Freeway Class B
0.4
3.5
6.0
0.3
Freeway Class B
4.0
6.0
5.0
3.0
0.3
High
1.0
3.0
5.0
0.3
High
10.0
14.0
13.0
3.0
0.3
Medium
0.8
3.0
5.0
0.3
Medium
8.0
12.0
10.0
3.0
0.3
Low
0.6
3.5
6.0
0.3
Low
6.0
9.0
8.0
3.0
0.3
High
1.2
3.0
5.0
0.3
High
12.0
17.0
15.0
3.0
0.3
Medium
0.9
3.0
5.0
0.3
Medium
9.0
13.0
11.0
3.0
0.3
Low
0.6
3.5
6.0
0.3
Low
6.0
9.0
8.0
3.0
0.3
High
0.8
3.0
5.0
0.4
High
8.0
12.0
10.0
4.0
0.4
Medium
0.6
3.5
6.0
0.4
0.4
4.0
8.0
0.4
Collector
Local
R4
(lux)
Major
R1
MAX
MAX
UNIFORM. VEILIN
RATIO
G
LUMIN.
Eavg/Emin
RATIO
Lvmax/La
R2 &
R3
(lux)
Expressway
PEDESTRIAN
AREA
CLASSIFICATION
PAVEMENT
CLASSIFICATION
Luminance
Expressway
Major
Collector
Medium
6.0
9.0
8.0
4.0
0.4
Low
Low
4.0
6.0
5.0
4.0
0.4
High
0.6
6.0
10.0
0.4
High
6.0
9.0
8.0
6.0
0.4
Medium
0.5
6.0
10.0
0.4
Medium
5.0
7.0
6.0
6.0
0.4
Low
0.3
6.0
10.0
0.4
Low
3.0
4.0
4.0
6.0
0.4
Local
STV
STV
CRITERIA
LUMINANCE CRITERIA
Wtg. Avg.
VL
L avg 2
Cd/m
Median
<7.3
m.
Lavg *2
Cd/m
Median
>7.3 m.
Max.
Uniformity
Ratio
L m a x/L min
Freeway "A"
3.2
0.5
0.4
6.0
Freeway "B"
2.6
0.4
0.3
6.0
Expressway
3.8
0.5
0.4
6.0
High
4.9
1.0
0.8
6.0
Medium
4.0
0.8
0.7
6.0
Low
3.2
0.6
0.6
6.0
High
3.8
0.6
0.5
6.0
Medium
3.2
0.5
0.4
6.0
ROAD
Illuminance
Luminance
STV
Major
Collector
Local
RP-8-00 Revisions
PEDESTRIAN
AREA
CLASSIFICATIO
N
Low
2.7
0.4
0.4
6.0
High
2.7
0.5
0.4
10.0
Medium
2.2
0.4
0.3
10.0
Low
1.6
0.3
0.3
10.0

Chicago, IL
RP-8-00 Revisions
Pedestrian Area Classifications

Pedestrian Conflict Area Classifications
High -
Areas with significant numbers of pedestrians expected to be on the

sidewalks or crossing the streets during darkness. Examples are
downtown retail areas, near stage theaters, concert halls, stadiums,
and transit terminals.
Medium -
Areas where lessor numbers of pedestrians utilize the streets at night.

Typical are downtown office areas, blocks with libraries, movie
theaters, apartments, neighborhood shopping, industrial, older city
areas, and streets with transit lines.
Low -
Areas with very low volumes of night pedestrian usage. This can
occur in any of the cited roadway classifications but may be typified
on suburban single family streets, very low density residential
developments, and rural or semi-rural areas.
Low - 10 or less per hour

Medium - 11 to 100 per hour
High - over 100 per hour
Reprinted from RP -8- 00

Chicago, IL
RP-8-00 Revisions
Recommendations for Pedestrian Areas and
Bikeways Lighting Design in the Urban
Environment that drawn from :
CIE92 Guide to the lighting of urban
areas
ITE Guideline to Urban Major Street
Design
Chicago, IL
Vertical Illumination
Urban Areas
Facial Recognition

Chicago, IL
RP-8-00 revisions (contd)

A new Full Cutoff luminaire light distribution
definition is added
High Mast Lighting no longer has a separate set of
recommendations
Intersection lighting levels have been clarified
A new methodology is recommended for the
lighting of Railroad Grade Crossings
Recommendations are included for Isolated
Traffic Conflict Areas . (Table D1,D2 & D3)
Chicago, IL

Added a Section on Glare and Sky-Glow (Light
Pollution) Issues
Cautions designer to be prepared to meet the needs
of client and also satisfy these issues
Light above the horizontal does not benefit
roadway lighting and adds to sky-glow which is
undesirable and offensive.
Discourages the use of Non -cutoff distributions
Encourages the use of Cutoff and Full Cutoff
distributions
References TM-10 and RP -33
Chicago, IL
Earth at Night
Other Aspects of Roadway Lighting

- Light Pollution
http://earthobservatory.nasa.govbenesch
/study/lights/
Ramesh C. Gupta
Chicago, IL
Sky Glow
Los Angeles, CA in 1988 from Mt. Wilson

Chicago, IL
Cut-off Installation

Chicago, IL
Fig-1

Chicago, IL

Intersection Lighting
The intersection illumination is equal to the sum of the values used for each separate street

Chicago, IL
Railroad Grade Crossings
Fig D-4
Min of 10 lux vertical illumination on railroad cars

Seven Years into Illumination at Railroad Highway Crossings by Dick Mather; Signal Crossing Specialist
with the Oregon Public Utility Commission

Chicago, IL
Illuminance or Luminance Method
70 cd/m2
140 cd/ m2
Same Lux level

Chicago, IL
High vs. Low Veiling Luminance
Refractor unit
0.4 cd/m2
Flat glass unit

0.6 cd/m2

Chicago, IL
No Roadway Lighting
No Fixed Lighting

Chicago, IL
Roadway Lighting
Addition of Fixed Lighting

Chicago, IL
200 W HPS Refractor Optics
Luminance = 1.34 cd/ m sq.

Max/Min Uniformity = 6.2
STV = 4.89
150 W HPS Cutoff Optics
Luminance = 0.83 cd/ m sq.

Max/Min Uniformity = 5.6
STV = 3.06
Chicago, IL
400 w HPS Offset Luminaires
Luminance = 1.61 cd/ m sq.; Max/Min Uniformity = 2.4; STV = 3.19

Chicago, IL
Uniform
Lighting
Non-Uniform
Lighting

Chicago, IL
RP-8-00
Conclusions:
The new Recommended Practice for Roadway
Lighting offers the designer the capability of
significantly reducing the energy.
The designer can design the lighting system with
knowledge of how the street will look when the
luminaires are turned on.
The designer can predict how well a motorist can
see under a particular lighting system.
Chicago, IL
Who Can Make the Difference?
DOTs
Municipalities
Utilities
Consultants
Citizens
Public Official
30%
15%
55%

Chicago, IL
HOW?
Use the Standards:
American National Standard Practice for Roadway
Lighting
ANSI/IESNA RP-8-00
An Information Guide for Roadway Lighting

AASHTO 1984 Under Revision
City/State Standards and Codes

Chicago, IL
ANSI/IESNA
RP-8-00
American National
Standard Practice
For
Roadway Lighting

Chicago, IL
AASHTO LIGHTING GUIDE
Lists Warrants and other

Conditions where
Lighting should be considered
Note: this publication is under

Revision.

Chicago, IL
Questions

Chicago, IL
Thank You

Chicago, IL

Gupta RP 8-00 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Gupta RP 8-00 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ramesh C.

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Quantified in footcandles (lumens/ft2)

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Glare - What is it?

This glare forms a veil over

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

What is it? - Visibility

Small Target Visibility (STV)

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Purpose of Roadway Lighting

A Final Thought about the worth of Lighting

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Roadway Lighting (RP-8-00)

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Visibility Basis of RP-8-00

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Visibility Model Sensitivity Analysis

Visibility Model Sensitivity Analysis

Contrast is the driving force behind visibility

Visibility Model Sensitivity Analysis

Doubling the Light level does not double the visibility

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Roadway Lighting Standard Practice

Glare Consideration in All Methods

Glare Comes in Two Flavors

ROAD AND AREA CLASSIFICATION

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Pedestrian Area Classifications

Areas with significant numbers of pedestrians expected to be on the

Areas where lessor numbers of pedestrians utilize the streets at night.

Low - 10 or less per hour

Reprinted from RP -8- 00

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

RP-8-00 revisions (contd)

RP-8-00 revisions (contd)

Other Aspects of Roadway Lighting

Los Angeles, CA in 1988 from Mt. Wilson

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

RP-8-00 revisions (contd)

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

RP-8-00 revisions (contd)

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Railroad Grade Crossings

Min of 10 lux vertical illumination on railroad cars

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Illuminance or Luminance Method

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

High vs. Low Veiling Luminance

Flat glass unit

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

Addition of Fixed Lighting

benesch Ramesh C. Gupta

200 W HPS Refractor Optics

Luminance = 1.34 cd/ m sq.

150 W HPS Cutoff Optics