Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Results in Optics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/rio

Illumination distribution and daylight glare evaluation within different

windows for comfortable lighting
Xin Liu, Yue Sun, Shuo Wei, Linlin Meng, Guanying Cao ⇑
Research Institute of Photonics, Dalian Polytechnic University, Dalian 116034, China

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: Although the application of natural light illumination has great benefits in energy saving and physical and men-
Illumination distribution tal health of occupants, it also potentially causes glare which affects people's visual comfort. The illumination
Daylight glare evaluation distribution and daylight glare with different windows were investigated in the paper. For illumination distri-
Different windows bution, the results show that as the height of the windowsill increases from 0.8 m to1.6 m, the maximum illu-
Comfortable lighting
mination decreasing by 2148 lx, the minimum illumination gradually increased and changed less, increasing by
93 lx. Circular window results in the smallest indoor illumination, the maximum and minimum of the indoor
illumination show little difference for the other four window shapes with the same windowsill heights and win-
dow area. And the indoor illumination increases gradually with the glass transmittance increasing. For daylight
glare evaluation, the results show that the glare gradually decreases as the height of the windowsill increases
from the ground. The rectangular window produces the strongest glare, the circular and square windows pro-
duce almost the same glare, less than the rectangle window. The ribbon and arched windows produce similar
glare with the minimal extent under the same windowsill height and window area. Moreover, the greater the
glass transmittance, the worse the glare is.

1. Introduction
Daylighting plays an important role in energy saving, health and
environmental protection. It has been already fully utilized in architec-
tural design. It brings people well‐being, but also glare which affects
people's visual comfort. In order to evaluate glare, many scholars have
proposed different glare evaluation indexes. Among them, the glare
indicators for artificial light sources include BRS glare equation
(BGI), CIE glare index (CGI), and Unified Glare Rating (UGR). Since
these evaluation indexes are for small light sources and static artificial
light sources, they should not be applied to evaluate large, dynamic
daylight glare (Petherbridge and Hopkinson, 1950; Einhorn, 1969,
1979; CIE, 1992). In 2006, Jan Wienold applied CCD imaging technol-
ogy and Evalglare software to analyze the Daylight Glare Index (DGI)
and Daylight Glare Probability (DGP) and found that DGP had a
squared correlation factor of 0.94 with the user’s response regarding
glare perception. Therefore, DGP is more suitable as daylight glare
evaluation index (Wienold and Christoffersen, 2006). And he intro-
duced three different DGP‐based methods for calculating dynamic
glare values to classify DGP values (Wienold, 2009). Then, Reinhart
compared DGI, CGI, Visual Comfort Probability (VCP), UGR and
DGP, and found that DGP is the most reliable daylight glare evaluation
index (Reinhart and Walkenhorst, 2001; Reinhart and Voss, 2003;
Reinhart, 2004; Jakubiec and Reinhart, 2012). In order to find out
the relationship between the factors and glare, Kim calculated the
brightness of glare source according to the vertical illumination of
the observer's position. Glare source can be found in windows with
uneven brightness distribution (Kim and Kim, 2012). In 2005, Line
Karlsen conducted a survey of 44 testers and found a correlation
between the vertical illumination of the eye level, the horizontal illu-
mination of the table, and the perception of uncomfortable glare from
the window (Karlsen et al., 2015). A successful window design must
consider the balance of visual comfort and illumination. In 2008,
Mohamad optimized window size based on discomfort glare and ver-
tical illumination (Araji and Boubekri, 2008). In 2017, Rupp evaluated
the size of windows based on energy saving, thermal comfort and
lighting performance, which can be applied to the evaluation of win-
dow area in any area (Rupp and Ghisi, 2017). In 2010, Jitka Mohel-
nikova compared the effects of three different types of window glass
under daylighting (Mohelnikova, 2010). SunYue et al. analyzed day-

⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: gycao@dlpu.edu.cn (G. Cao).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rio.2021.100080
Received 5 November 2020; Revised 23 February 2021; Accepted 13 March 2021

2666-9501/© 2021 The Author(s). Published by Elsevier B.V.

This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
X. Liu et al.
light glare and optimized lighting design for office lighting (Sun et al.,
2020). Some factors affect indoor illuminance and people's visual com-
fort. In 2016, Deng Qiguang and coworkers analyzed the influence of
different meteorological documents on daylight glare and provided
guidance for the selection of suitable meteorological documents for
glare analysis (Deng et al., 2016). In 2018, Jan Wienold et al. wrote
a review on factors affecting the uncomfortable glare from daylight,
and concluded that some factors, including the luminance of the glare
source, adaptation level, contrast effect, and size and position of the
glare source, must affect human visual comfort, and some, including
the gender and optical correction of the observer, certainly do not
affect human visual comfort. There are some uncertain factors
included the attractiveness of the view through the window or the cul-
ture of the observer still require further research (Pierson et al., 2017,
2018). Because the factors that may affect the lighting and glare of
windows include many factors, such as windowsill height, window
shape, transmittance of window glass and so on, no one has made a
detailed analysis on how these factors affect the lighting and glare,
so this paper makes a specific analysis on this issue.
This paper studied the illumination distribution and daylight glare
with different windows, which include different windowsill heights
under the same window area, different window shapes under the same
windowsill height and window area, including rectangle, square, cir-
cle, ribbon and arch, and different transmittance of the window. We
apply DIALux to calculate illuminance, Diva for Rhino for glare analy-
sis, and DGP as a glare evaluation index. A typical classroom in Dalian,
China is selected for investigation.
2. Methods
2.1. Daylight glare probability (DGP)
The evaluation indexes of glare include BGI, CGI, UGR, DGI and so
on, but they can't evaluate the daylight glare correctly. In 2006, Jan
Wienold and Jens Christoffersen tested >70 testers under different
daylight environments using Radiance to evaluate different models.
They found that the coefficient of square correlation between the
DGI and human perception of glare was only 0.56, so the formula of
DGP was proposed. DGP takes the vertical illumination of the human
eye level into account, which is a function of the vertical illumination
of the human eye level, the brightness of the light source, the solid
angle of the light source, and the position of the light source
(Wienold and Christoffersen, 2006; Pierson et al., 2018). There is a
strong correlation between DGP and people's perception of glare
(square correlation factor is 0.94). Jan Wienold divided the value of
DGP into four degrees, DGP < 0.35 is an imperceptible degree, 0.35
< DGP < 0.4 is a perceptible degree, 0.4 < DGP < 0.45 is a dis-
turbing degree, and DGP > 0.45 is considered to be intolerable
(Wienold, 2009). The formula for DGP is as follows:
DGP = 5.87*10
5 Ev + 9.18 * 10
2 log10 (1 + ) + 0.16 ð1Þ
where Ev is the vertical eye illumination (lx); Ls,i is the luminance of the
glare source(cd=m2 Þ; ωi is the solid angle of the glare source (sr); and Pi
is the position index relative to the glare source.
2.2. Chinese standard weather data (CSWD)
Meteorological documents include hourly weather parameters such
as temperature, relative humidity, wind direction, wind speed, wind
frequency, solar radiation, cloud cover, and rainfall. The weather files
in China include Chinese Typical Year Weather (CTYW) and Chinese
Standard Weather Data (CSWD). The CTYW meteorological data was
measured by the U.S. National Climatic Data Center for weather data
from 1982 to 2019, and 57 meteorological documents were obtained.
CSWD meteorological documents are typical hourly meteorological
2
Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080
documents collected by Jiang Yi from Tsinghua University's Depart-
ment of Architecture and China meteorological administration in
270 areas. The source data include annual data, typical annual data,
extremely high enthalpy data, extremely high temperature data, extre-
mely low temperature data, extremely high radiation data, and extre-
mely low radiation data (Bureau, 2005; Zhang and Huang, 2004). In
our previous work, we studied the optimization of meteorological doc-
uments in the annual total glare analysis, and concluded that CTYW is
suitable for studying the daylight glare time distribution under typical
climatic conditions, while CSWD is suitable for studying the daylight
glare time distribution under normal local climatic conditions. CSWD
meteorological documents are divided into CSWD(A) and CSWD(C). In
this paper, CSWD(C) meteorological document from Dalian of Liaon-
ing province was selected.
2.3. Simulation models
2.3.1. Windowsill heights
We used the Rhino software to build a classroom with a length of
8.70 m, a width of 6.35 m and a height of 4.50 m. The window is
5.50 m long, 0.022 m wide and the high from the window top to bot-
tom is 2.60 m. (The window is in the south). When we studied the win-
dowsill heights, only the height from the bottom of the windowsill to
the ground was changed under the same window area and shape. In
this experiment, the heights of the windowsill were set as 0.80 m,
1.00 m, 1.20 m, 1.40 m, 1.50 m, 1.60 m for glare calculation and anal-
ysis, respectively. The reflectivity of the floor is 20%, the reflectivity of
the wall is 50%, the reflectivity of the furniture is 50%, and the trans-
mittance of the glass is 65%. Fig. 1 is a model for windowsill height
study, (a) is the front view, (b) is the top view, (c) is the left view,
and (d) is the perspective view. Fig. 2 shows the simulation perspec-
tive. It contains a lot of simulated items, including window, glass, wall,
desk, computer, and even the outside ground. Therefore, we chose it as
our simulation perspective.
2.3.2. Window shapes
When studying the shape of the window, the height of the win-
dowsill from the ground is 0.80 m, and the area of the window is con-
trolled to be around 9.00 m2. Table 1 shows the size of windows of
different shapes. Fig. 3 is a schematic illustration of the windows with
different shapes.
2.3.3. The transmittance of the window glass
Glass is an important building material and plays an important role
in building lighting and decoration. Due to the increasing demand for
architectural decoration, the use of glass is also increasing year by
year. When selecting glass for windows, in addition to the appearance
characteristics, it is also necessary to consider the heat control of the
glass, the cost of cooling, and the comfort of daylight transmission.
Low‐E glass was employed in this study. Transmissivity is the amount
of unabsorbed light in one traversal of the material. Transmittance is
the total light transmitted through the pane including multiple reflec-
tions. To compute transmissivity (tn) from transmittance (Tn), the for-
mula (2) is applied (Rhino, 2016):
tn = (sqrt(0.8402528435 + 0.0072522239*Tn*Tn)

0:9166530661Þ=0:0036261119=Tn ð2Þ
When we studied the transmittance of window glass, the model in
Fig. 1was used for simulation. According to the calculation of formula
(2), when the glass transmittance is 10%, 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, 60%,
70%, 80% and 90%, the corresponding glass transmissivity is 0.11,
0.22, 0.33, 0.44, 0.55, 0.65, 0.76, 0.87and 0.98, respectively. By mod-
ifying the following procedures and then performing simulation calcu-
lations, the effect of glass transmittance on daylight glare in the room
can be obtained.
X. Liu et al. Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080

Fig. 1. Model for studying the height of the windowsill (a) front view (b) top view (c) left view (d) perspective view.

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Windowsill heights

3.1.1. Illumination distribution

The bottom height of the windowsill from the ground in Fig. 1 were
0.8 m, 1.0 m, 1.2 m, 1.4 m, 1.5 m and 1.6 m for simulation analysis,
respectively. Fig. 4 shows the distribution of isoillumination at differ-
ent windowsill heights simulated by DIALux. It is easy to see that the
illumination near the windowsill gradually decreases, while the illumi-
nation away from the windowsill gradually increases.
The amount of direct light from the sky obtained from the indoor
point is determined by the size of the sky area seen through the win-
dow at that point. The farther away from the window, the smaller
the area of the sky can be seen, and the smaller the illumination; the
larger the angle between the light projected from the window and
the light‐receiving surface, the larger the illumination, vice versa.
Fig. 2. Simulation perspective. Therefore, the illumination near the window is large, and the illumina-
tion away from the window is small. The illumination in the room
changes as the height of the windowsill from the ground increases.
The illumination near the window is relatively reduced and the illumi-
Table 1 nation away from the window is relatively increased. Table 2 shows
Dimensions of different shapes of windows. the illumination of different windowsill heights. We found that as
the height at the bottom of the windowsill increased from 0.8 m to
Window shapes Window size Window area (m2)
1.6 m, the maximum illumination decreased significantly, by
Rectangle 4.50 m × 2.00 m 9.00 2148 lx, while the minimum illumination gradually increased to a less
Square 3.00 m × 3.00 m 9.00
extent, by 93 lx. And the uniformity ratios also increase gradually
Circle r = 1.69 m 8.97
Ribbon 2.65 m × 3.40 m 9.01 when the windowsill heights increase.
Arch 2.65 × 2.36 m, r = 1.32 m 8.99

3.1.2. Daylight glare evaluation

Fig. 5 shows the annual glare distribution of different windowsill
The simulation calculation procedure for the glass transmittance of heights.
10% is as follows: When the window area is the same and the height of the windowsill
void glass Glazing_DoublePane_LowE_10 from the ground gradually increases from 0.8 m to 1.6 m, it can be
0 seen from Fig. 5 that the amount of imperceptible glare
0 (0 < DGP < 0.35) throughout the year is gradually increased, and
3 0.11 0.11 0.11 the amount of intolerable glare (0.45 < DGP < 1) is gradually

3
X. Liu et al.
Fig. 3. Windows of different shapes with the same area.
reduced. Through the analysis of illumination distribution, we know
that the illumination near the window is relatively reduced and the
illumination away from the window is relatively increased. Thus, the
uniformity of illumination throughout the room is increased, and the
visual comfort of the user is also improved. The visual comfort of
the user was improved as the height of the windowsill increases which
decreases the perceived glare. It can be concluded that the glare grad-
ually decreases as the height of the windowsill from the ground
increases for windows of the same area.
In practice, if the windowsill is too high, it will affect lighting, peo-
ple's vision, ventilation and so on. The indoor light intensity is weak-
ened, which affects people's demand for daylight. Of course, some
people who prefer floor‐to‐ceiling windows to get a lot of light. People
work indoors for a long time, and hope to relax the visual fatigue
through the window, but the windowsill is too high, the human vision
can't be relaxed which induces the decrease of the work efficiency.
And the convection area of the window and the door is reduced, which
reduces the ventilation level of the building. In addition, according to
the Uniform Standard for Civil Building Design GB 50352‐2019, corre-
sponding safety measures should be taken when the windowsill is
<0.8 m. Therefore, the windowsill should not be too high or too
low. The height of the windowsill of a multi‐story building is 0.9 m,
and the height of the windowsill is generally between 0.8 and 1.2 m.
3.2. Window shapes
3.2.1. Illumination distribution
The different shapes of the windows in Fig. 3 were simulated and
analyzed by DIALux when the window area is the same and the height
of the windowsill of different shape windows is 0.8 m from the ground.
Fig. 6 shows the distribution of isoillumination with different window
shapes. For windows of the same shape, the illumination value near
the window is high, and the illumination far away from the window
4
Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080
is low. For windows of different shapes, through comparison, it is
found that using circular window has the smallest indoor illumination.
In the process of changing the shape of the window from rectangle,
square, ribbon to arch, the illumination near the window gradually
decreases, and the illumination far away from the window gradually
increases.
When the shape of the window is rectangle, square, ribbon, or
arched, the height of the window gradually increases, and the illumi-
nation away from the window increases relatively. In the process of
changing the shape of the window, the width of the window is gradu-
ally narrowed. The illumination of the rectangular window is the lar-
gest, the square window is the second, the ribbon window and arched
window are almost the same and the illumination is the smallest near
the window. Table 3 shows the illumination of different window
shapes. Similarly, the indoor illumination with circular windows is
the smallest. For the other four window shapes, the maximum and
minimum of indoor illumination hardly vary. The value of uniformity
ratios for rectangle window and circular window is smaller and the
square window, ribbon window and arched window have same unifor-
mity ratios.
3.2.2. Daylight glare evaluation
Fig. 7 shows the annual glare simulation report of windows of dif-
ferent shapes. Fig. 8 shows the effect of window shapes on glare.
Rectangle, square, circle, ribbon, and arch are common shapes of
windows. As can be seen from Fig. 7 and Fig. 8, rectangular windows
of the same area illustrate the strongest glare, circular and square win-
dows produce similar intensity of glare which is weaker than the rect-
angular, ribbon and arched windows with the least strong glare of the
similar intensity. According to the previous research on illumination
distribution, the reduction in width and the increase in height result
in the increase of both the uniformity of illumination in the room
and the visual comfort standard of the users. It can be concluded that
X. Liu et al.
Fig. 4. The distribution of isoillumination at different windowsill heights.
the rectangular window produces the most glare, the circular and
square windows produce almost the same glare, weaker than the rect-
angle. Ribbon and arched windows produce almost the same glare
with the minimal intensity under the same windowsill height and win-
dow area.
In practical application, the choice of window shape should con-
sider both lighting and aesthetics aspects. Because the glare caused
by a single rectangular window is relatively serious, it is not recom-
mended to apply when the window area is large. The ribbon shape
window can be employed instead to reduce glare. Circular and arched
windows induce less glare than rectangular windows so they are sug-
gested to be used to adapt to the theme or aesthetics of the house.
Because different countries have different architectural style and cul-
tural customs, for example, the housing construction in China is mostly
standard square building. In order to make the overall outlook of the
house looks neat, square windows are usually applies. The types of for-
5
Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080
eign houses are various. And in order to pursue art and beauty, arched
windows are often widely used.
3.3. The transmittance of the window glass
3.3.1. Illumination distribution
Fig. 9 shows the line chart of the indoor illumination variations
using glass with different transmittance indexes. A linear relationship
between indoor illumination and glass transmittance has been deter-
mined. As the glass transmittance increases, the indoor illumination
also increases gradually. When the glass transmittance is 0%, there
is no illumination indoors. When the transmittance of the glass
increases, the illumination on the work plane also increases. The illu-
mination near the window increases greatly, and the illumination
away from the window increases within a relatively mild level.
X. Liu et al. Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080

Fig. 4 (continued)

Table 2
Illumination analysis of different windowsill heights.

Values windowsill heights (m) Average Illumination (lx) Minimum Illumination (lx) Maximum Illuminatioation (lx) uniformity ratios

0.8 1359 238 5033 0.175

1.0 1312 268 4133 0.204
1.2 1270 285 3672 0.224
1.4 1230 320 3177 0.260
1.5 1202 326 2993 0.271
1.6 1179 331 2849 0.280

But if the window glass becomes dirty, the results will depend upon
the dirt uniformity and its impact on transmittance. So when there is
dust on the window glass, additional analysis will need to be done.
When the transmittance is too high, the indoor illumination is
large, and the user will pull on the curtains to reduce the glare. In most
classrooms, the phenomenon of “drawing the curtains and turning on
the lights” appears; when the transmittance is low, the indoor lighting
is reduced, and some classrooms use artificial light to illuminate.
Therefore, if the transmittance is too low or too high, the natural light
illumination will not be fully utilized. On the contrary, the artificial
light source illumination will be used in a large amount, which will
increase the energy cost. It runs counter to the “green lighting” con-
cept proposed by the US Environmental Protection Agency in the early
1990s. Thus, it is particularly important to select a glass with a reason-
able transmittance. If we want to prevent glare, we can use curtains
with different transmission levels, such as gauze or thick curtains to
create a comfortable light environment.
Fig. 5. The annual glare distribution of different windowsill heights.

3.3.2. Daylight glare evaluation
Fig. 10 shows the glare intensity of the glass with a transmittance
from 10% to 90%. It can be seen from Fig. 10 that as the transmittance
of the glass increases, the intolerable glare (DGP > 0.45) gradually
increases, and the imperceptible glare (0 < DGP < 0.35) gradually
decreases. As the transmittance of window glass increases, the glare
is becoming more and more serious throughout the year. From the
above research, we know that as the transmittance of the glass
increases, the illumination in the room increases. Therefore, as the
transmittance of the glass increases, the glare gradually increases.
4. Conclusion
This paper firstly studied illumination distribution with different
windows. When the height of windowsill increased from 0.8 m
to1.6 m, the illumination near the window is relatively reduced and
the illumination away from the window is relatively increased. The
maximum illumination decreased significantly, by 2148 lx, while the
minimum illumination gradually increased to a less extent, by 93 lx.
For different window shapes, using circular window has the smallest
indoor illumination. In the process of changing the shape of the win-
dow from rectangle, square, ribbon, and arch, the illumination near

6
X. Liu et al. Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080

Fig. 6. The distribution of isoillumination with different window shapes.

Table 3
Illumination analysis of different window shapes.

Values window shapes Average Illumination (lx) Minimum Illumination (lx) Maximum Illumination (lx) uniformity ratios

Rectangle 2778 262 11,675 0.094

Square 2575 342 11,788 0.13
Circle 1398 52.6 5538 0.038
Ribbon 2786 367 11,693 0.13
Arch 2795 375 11,683 0.13

the window gradually decreases, and the illumination far away from
the window gradually increases. The other four window shapes except
for circular windows, indoor maximum and minimum illumination
have little change. For different transmittance of the window glass,
the indoor illumination also increases gradually with the glass trans-
mittance increasing.
Then we evaluated the daylight glare of different windows. For
windows with the same area and different windowsill heights, the
results show that the glare gradually decreases as the height of the
windowsill increases from the ground. Although the height of the win-
dowsill is higher, the glare is less, the level of lighting, people's field of
vision, ventilation, etc. will be reduced. And corresponding safety
measures should be taken when the height of the windowsill is
<0.8 m. Of course, for some people who like a lot of light, usually
use floor‐to‐ceiling windows to get enough light and vision. For differ-
ent window shapes with the same windowsill height and window area,
the results show that the rectangular windows produce the strongest
glare, the circular and square windows produce almost the same glare,

7
X. Liu et al. Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080

Fig. 7. The annual glare simulation report of windows of different shapes.

6000

5000
Illumination(lx)

4000 Average Illuminance

Minimum Illuminance
3000
Maximum Illuminance
2000

1000

0
100

9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10

Fig. 8. The effect of different windows shapes with the same area on daylight
glare.
but less than the rectangular windows. The ribbon and arched win-
dows produce almost the same glare with the minimal extent. For lar-
ger windows, rectangular windows produce the strongest glare, so it is
not recommended to use, but single or multiple ribbon windows can
be used to reduce glare. Circular and arched windows produce less
glare than rectangular windows and take art and aesthetics into
account. For different transmittance of the window glass, the results
show that the greater the glass transmittance, the more severe the
glare is. Therefore, it is especially important to select the glass with
suitable transmittance when building a house.
the transmittance of the window glass(%)
Fig. 9. Line chart of indoor illumination changes using glass with different
transmittance.
These will provide reference value for future architectural design
and lay the foundation for comfortable lighting. However, there are
still many factors that can affect indoor lighting and glare, such as
location, dust on windows, age, different students' gaze directions
and so on. The next step will be to analyze the effects of these factors
on daylighting, glare and energy savings through simulations and
human participant testing.

8
X. Liu et al.
Fig. 10. The effect of glass transmittance of 10%~90% on daylight glare.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influ-
ence the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgement
This work was funded by the Natural Science Foundation of Liaon-
ing Province, China (20180550017). We would like to thank Jan Wie-
nold for his contribution to the evaluation of daylight glare and thank
Solemma for providing us with the DIVA‐for‐Rhino license.
References
Araji, M.T., Boubekri, M., 2008. Window sizing procedures based on vertical
illuminance and degree of discomfort glare in buildings interiors. Architectural
Sci. Rev. 51 (3), 252–262.
Results in Optics 3 (2021) 100080
Bureau, China Meteorological, 2005. China Standard Weather Data for Analyzing
Building Thermal Conditions.
CIE, 1992. Discomfort Glare in the Interior Lighting, Commission Internatio-nale de l’E´
clairage (CIE), Technical committee TC-3.13, Division 4, Interior Environment and
Lighting Design, Vienna Austria.
Deng, Q.G., Cao, G.Y., Liu, Z.C., Wang, Z.S., Yang, Y., He, X.Y., Yu, J.J., 2016. Annual
daylight glare evaluation: impact of weather file selection. Light. Res. Technol. 50
(3), 446–455.
Einhorn, H.D., 1969. A new method for the assessment of discomfort glare. Light. Res.
Technol. 1 (4), 235–247.
Einhorn, H.D., 1979. Discomfort glare: a formula to bridge differences. Light. Res.
Technol. 11 (2), 90–94.
Jakubiec, J.A., Reinhart, C.F., 2012. The ‘adaptive zone’ – a concept for assessing
discomfort glare throughout daylit spaces. Light. Res. Technol. 44 (2), 149–170.
Karlsen, L., Heiselberg, P., Bryn, I., Johra, H., 2015. Hicham2.Verification of simple
illuminance based measures for indication of discomfort glare from windows. Build.
Environ. 92, 615–626.
Kim, W., Kim, J.T., 2012. A prediction method to identify the glare source in a window
with non-uniform luminance distribution. Energy Build. 46, 132–138.
Mohelnikova, Jitka, 2010. Comparative study of window glass influence on daylighting
in an open-plan Office. Leukos 7 (1), 37–47.
Petherbridge, P., Hopkinson, R.G., 1950. Discomfort Glare and the Lighting of Buildings.
Trans. Illumin. Eng. Soc. 15 (39). London, UK.
Pierson, C., Wienold, J., Bodart, M., 2017. Discomfort glare perception in daylighting:
influencing factors. Energy Procedia 122, 331–336.
Pierson, C., Wienold, J., Bodart, M., 2018. Review of factors influencing discomfort
glare perception from daylight. Leukos 14 (3), 111–148.
Reinhart, C.F., 2004. Lightswitch-2002: a model for manual and automated control of
electric lighting and blinds. Sol. Energy 77 (1), 15–28.
Reinhart, C.F., Voss, K., 2003. Monitoring manual control of electric lighting and blinds.
Light. Res. Technol. 35 (3), 243–258.
Reinhart, C.F., Walkenhorst, O., 2001. Validation of dynamic RADIANCE-based daylight
simulations for a test office with external blinds. Energy Build. 33 (7), 683–697.
Rhino/Diva, 2016. Retrieved 20 April 2016, from http://www.solemma.net/-DIVA-for-
Rhino/DIVA-for-Rhino.html.
Rupp, R.F., Ghisi, E., 2017. Enedir1.Assessing window area and potential for electricity
savings by using daylighting and hybrid ventilation in office buildings in southern
Brazil. Simulation 93 (11), 935–949.
Sun, Y., Liu, X., Qu, W., Cao, G., Zou, N., 2020. Analysis of daylight glare and optimal
lighting design for comfortable office lighting. Optik.
Wienold, Jan, 2009. Dynamic daylight glare evaluation. Proc. Build. Simul..
Wienold, J., Christoffersen, J., 2006. Evaluation methods and development of a new
glare prediction model for daylight environments with the use of CCD cameras.
Energy Build. 38 (7), 743–757.
Zhang, Q.Y., Huang, J., 2004. Chinese typical year weather data for architectural use.