Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Light Pollution- Luminous Restrictive Measures
D.T. Nikolaou, F.V. TopalisNational Technical University Of Athens
School Of Electrical And Computer Engineering, Lighting Laboratory
4th InternationalConferenceOnArtificialLightAtNightCluj-Napoca,September26-28,2016
ROADLIGHTING- NEEDFORBALANCE
Ontheonehand…. Onetheotherhand….
VisualComfort,Roadsafety WildlifeDisturbance,SkyGlow
Roadlighting
Skyglow– light
Pollution
TechnicalContradictionor
PoorLightingDesign
?
LUMINOUSINTENSITYDESIGNPARAMETERS• EN13201-2:2015– Gclassification
System
• AglarecontrolorientedsystemwhereTI%isnotcalculated
• Restrictsluminousintensityincertaingammaangles
GCLASSIFICATIONG1 G6
CLASS
Maximumluminousintensityindirectionsbelowthehorizontalincd/klm oftheoutputfluxoftheluminaire OtherRequirementsat70° and
above at80° andabove at90° andabove
G1 200 50 None
G2 150 30 None
G3 100 20 None
G4 500 100 10 Luminousintensitiesabove95° tobezero
G5 350 100 10 Luminousintensitiesabove95° tobezero
G6 350 100 0 Luminousintensitiesabove95° tobezero
Luminousintensitiesaregivenforanydirectionformingthespecifiedanglefromthedownwardverticalwiththeluminaireinstalledforuse.Anydirectionformingthespecifiedanglefromthedownwardvertical,withtheluminaireinstalledforuseLuminousintensitiesupto1cd/klm canberegardedaszero
Morecontrolovercriticaldesignangles
AMERICANINFLUENCE
• TheIESNA’sBUGRatingSystem
EN 13201-2IMPLICATION
Gclassification– askyglowpreventivemeasure(?!)HigherinstalledGclassdistributiontypes(G4,G5,G6)
WhatwouldtheirimpactbeonaffectingSkyGlowandEnergyEfficiency?
CIERECOMMENDATIONS
UpwardLightRatio– ULR• Only Directlightemissionintothesky
• Calculation– Installation’sTilttakenintoaccount
UpwardFluxRatio– UFR• Accumulativelightemissions
• Directemissions+Reflectedemissions
• Reflectionoccursby:
1. Areatobelit
2. Surroundings
• UPF=Maxtotalinstallationemissionsinlm
LIGHTDISTRIBUTION
ü MaximizeUtilizationFactorfortheAreatobeLit
ü ReducelightintheSurroundingArea
ü DifferentReflectionFactorsineachareaeg.Asphalt,Grass,Concrete,Stoneetc.
DIRECTEMISSIONS– ULR %
CaseStudy• ThreeEuropeanLEDluminairemanufacturers
• CommercializedStreetLightOptics
• AbsolutelyPhotometry
• HowTiltaffectsULR%?
• HowandifGisrelatedwithULR%?
Results• CompliancewithULOR=0%andFULLCUTOFF
• ULR%@(0,5,10,15tilt)notconnectedwithdrasticreductionwiththechoiceofGhigherinstalledclass
• ULR%similarinallGclasses
• MaximumnoticedULR1,4%@15ο Tilt
DIRECTEMISSIONS– ULR %
DIRECTEMISSIONS– ULR %
DIRECTEMISSIONS– ULR %
ü ArestrictioninGclasseswouldaffectcriticaldesignanglesü Shorterandlesswidedistributions
TOTALCONTRIBUTIONCASESTUDIESWITHCIE’S EVALUATIONMETHODS
ZEROTILTNOTALWAYSTHESOLUTION
Casestudy1
SpacingPowerDensity
(kW/km) TiltLave
(cd/m2) EIR Luminaireflux ULR DLOR UPFmax
ContributionL.Pollutionperkm
40 2,68 10 1,05 0,4 11500lm 0% 100% 1204lm 30,1 klm
39 2,74 5 1,12 0,3 11500lm 0% 100% 1189lm 30,3 klm
39 2,74 15 1 0,5 11500lm 0,2% 99,8% 1243lm 31,9klm
36 2,97 0 1,02 0,5 11500lm 0% 100,0% 1249lm 34,7klm
Ø M3lightingclassØ Height=8mØ Widthofcarriageway=8mØ Adjacentareastobelit=
asrequestedbyEN13201
Tiltrestriction:11%PowerDensityIncrease
LightPollutionincreasedby15%Competentdesignforthecorrect
choiceofLEDoptic.
COMPETENTDESIGN– KEYFORBALANCE
Casestudy2
Ø M3lightingclassØ Height=10mØ Widthofcarriageway=7,5mØ Adjacentareastobelit=as
requestedbyEN13201
AgainCompetentdesignforthecorrectchoiceofLEDoptic
ProperuseofEN13201withopticallyefficientluminaires– Lightpollution
control
Spacing Power Density (kW/km) Tilt Lave
(cd/m2) EIR Luminaire flux ULOR a DLOR UPF max UFR
30 2,1 10 1,08 0,3 7328 lm 0% 100% 751 lm 2,28
30 2,1 15 1,02 0,5 7328 lm 0,2% 99,8% 768 lm 2,36
30 2,5 0 1,06 0,4 8889 lm 0% 100% 956 lm 2,76
30 2,5 0 1,04 0,5 8801 lm 0% 100,0% 946 lm 2,76
30 2,5 0 1,07 0,5 8856 lm 0% 100% 952 lm 2,76
REFLECTION ANDOTHERPROPERTIES
Casestudy2• Mostphotometrically efficient
i.e maximumUtilizationFactor(μ)
𝑈𝐹𝑅 = 1 +𝑈𝐿𝑂𝑅
𝑷𝒂𝒓𝒆𝒂 ∗ 𝜇+𝑃012231450𝑃6276
𝐷𝐿𝑂𝑅 − 𝜇𝜇
𝐿6:,<4<=<6>𝐿6:,?6<4=
Parea% Spacing Power Density (kW/km) Tilt Luminaire flux ULOR a DLOR Upward
flux/luminaire UFR
R3, 7 30 2,1 10 7328 lm 0% 100% 751 lm 2,28
R3, 8 30 1,8 10 6419 lm 0% 100% 692 lm 2,19
R3, 10 30 1,5 10 5349 lm 0% 100% 634 lm 2,04
Luminancedesignschemes:• HigherParea%leadstolowerpollution
• Psurrounds%:Aslowaspossible• ReasonableuseofMaintenanceFactor leadstoloweroverlighting
andlightpollution
MF
HIGHERGCLASS– NOTNECESSARILYASOLUTION
Casestudy2
Ø C3lightingclassØ Height=6mØ Widthofcarriageway=6m
PowerDensitywasincreasedby14%andUFRby3%
G4,G5,G6lessefficientduetorestrictionsincriticalangles
IntensityClass
Power Density (kW/km) Tilt Eave
(cd/m2) EUo Luminaire flux ULOR a DLOR UPF max UFR
G3 1,4 15 15,6 41 4279 lm 0,2% 99,8% 406 lm 2,53
G4 1,6 0 16,1 46 4570 lm 0% 100% 432 lm 2,60
• TherestrictionsinGorBUGclasses: Cannothelpdrasticskyglowreduction.EN13201-2implicationmustnotbemisinterpreted.
• ExcludingG1toG3: CausesincreaseinPowerDensityby14%inCclass,25%inPclassesandeven38%inMclasses.
• LightPollutionimpact:Notexclusivelyamatterofadistributiontype,Gtypebutratheranissueofphotometricalefficiency.Assessmentispercase,nogeneralrule
• Optimizedopticalsystem– layout:Generatestheleastamountofupwardflux.Aninstallationthatusestheleastfluxtocreateanamountofluminancewithmaximumutilizationfactor.Thehigherthephotometricefficiencythelessthespilledlight
CONCLUSIONS(1/2)
• EdgeIlluminanceRatio:Needtobemaintainedwithinreasonablevaluesdependingonthelowerlimiteg.Upto+10%oftheminimumENrequiredvalue
• MaintenanceFactor:Reasonableuse,relatedtonewtechnologicaladvancesreducesexcessiveluminousflux
• ZeroULRinstallations:canbemorepollutersthanlesstightlycontrolledones.
• Lightabsorbingmaterials:forthesurroundingse.g.Grassreducelightpollution
• AdoptionofULRandUFRlimits:foreachlightingclass andgeometricscheme
CONCLUSIONS(2/2)
4th InternationalConferenceOnArtificialLightAtNightCluj-Napoca,October26-28,2016
D.T.Nikolaou, F.V.TopalisNationalTechnicalUniversityOfAthens
SchoolOfElectricalAndComputerEngineering,LightingLaboratory
http://lighting.ece.ntua.gr/index.php?lang=en
Thank you for your attention!!
