See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/363372172

Comparative Analysis Between Lumen Method Calculation and Dialux

Simulation for Electrical Lighting Design. Article information Abstract

Article · September 2022

DOI: 10.37933/nipes.e/4.3.2022.7

CITATIONS READS

0 978

2 authors, including:

Prophet Tepu Aikhoje

University of Benin
11 PUBLICATIONS   3 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

ANALYSIS OF ELECTRIC POWER OUTAGES IN UGBOWO INJECTION SUBSTATION 11kV FEEDERS View project

Remote Battery Monitoring and Control Device Using the Internet of Things (IoT) Technology View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Prophet Tepu Aikhoje on 08 September 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Journal of Energy Technology and Environment Vol. 4(3) 2022 pp. 54 - 64 ISSN-2682-583x

Comparative Analysis Between Lumen Method Calculation and Dialux

Simulation for Electrical Lighting Design.
Aikhoje P.Ta* and Oriakhi O.Ma
aDepartmentof Electrical/Electronic Engineering, University of Benin, Edo State, Nigeria.
*Corresponding Author Email: prophet.aikhoje@uniben.edu

Article information Abstract

This paper presents a comparative analysis between Lumen method

Article History and Dialux simulation for lighting design for an office block. The
Received 5 August 2022 analysis is to determine which method gives the number of
Revised 20 August 2022 luminaires which produces the recommended photometric
Accepted 25 August 2022 parameters by Illumination Engineering Society of North America
Available online 9 September 2022 (IESNA) standards for an office. The number of luminaires required
for the office block was computed with Lumen method and Dialux
Keywords: Lumen, Dialux, Electrical Evo 9.2 using Spectral MIREFA luminaires specifications. Results
Lightning, Photometric Parameters, was simulated on Dialux Evo 9.2 to determine the photometric
Comparative parameters; illumination, uniformity of illumination and Unified
Glare Rating (UGR). The Lumen method had one luminaire more
than the Dialux simulation. Results from the photometric analysis
showed that for a target value of 300lx, the Lumen Method achieved
a better perpendicular illuminance of 367lx, 347lx and 314lx against
https://doi.org/10.37933/nipes.e/4.3.2022.7
213, 248 and 241 from Dialux. Also, the Lumen method achieved
better uniformity of illumination, having values of 0.034, 0.020 and
https://nipesjournals.org.ng 0.030 against 0.074, 0.002 and 0.024 gotten from Dialux design for
© 2022 NIPES Pub. All rights reserved the small, medium and large offices respectively, though both results
were not up to the standard value recommended by IESNA as 0.4.
The UGR results for Lumen method had points with stronger glare
exceeding the standard of 19 set by IESNA, while Dialux had lower
glare, making it the better design in terms of glare rating. Overall
comparism shows that the Lumen method is better suited for lighting
design calculations using Spectral MIREFA and Philips RC540B
lighting fittings, while Dialux is suitable for lighting simulation and
presentation.

1. Introduction

Lighting plays a very important role in regular human activities which is constantly available from
the sun during the day time [1]. To cater for the night time, artificial lighting is required. Such
artificial lighting should be as close as possible in replicating the natural lighting.

The lighting system is one of the major elements of the Electrical service design for buildings
consisting of lighting fittings and their controls [2]. The lighting system should be designed such
that it may; provide adequate illumination, provide light distribution all over the working plane as
uniform as possible, provide light of suitable colour, avoid glare and hard shadows as much as
possible, ensure low energy consumption and adhere strictly to standard [3]. In designing a lighting
54
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64
system for a building, there are some factors to consider such as; day lighting, physical dimensions
of the room and the building as well as its location and position, the activities to be done in the room
space, the power and luminous rating of the lighting fitting, the losses and maintenance factors and
the budget for the project [4].

There are two methods of modelling a lighting system; manual method and the use of software. The
manual method involves the use of mathematical calculations calculated manually in determining
the number of lighting fittings and the spacing between them given the recommended illumination
for the room according to IES (Illumination Engineering Society) standards. The manual method
consist of three sub methods; point-to-point method, watts per square metre method and Lumen
method. The Lumen method is the most widely used method of the three due to its simplicity and
level of accuracy [5].

The lumen method, which is also called zonal cavity method, is an easy method to calculate the light
level in a room. The method is a sequence of calculations that use horizontal illuminance criteria to
create a uniform luminaire layout in a space. In its simplest form, the lumen method is merely the
total number of lumens available in a room divided by the area of the room [6]. To perform this
calculation, many factors, coefficients, lamp lumen data, and other quantities must be gathered.
Despite the scientific impression of the lumen method equations, there are imprecisions and
assumptions made into the method.

In light of technological advancement, lighting design softwares have been designed to handle
complex lighting calculations and simulate the design in 3D display. Examples of these software
include: AG132, Dialux, Relux, Ecotect, Radiance etc. [7]. Dialux software, Developed by DIAL
GmbH is a widely used commercial package in lighting design, which is available for free through
lighting manufacturers’ websites. This program is customized for interior and road lighting. The
program provides output in customized pdf format and additionally uses POV Ray to produce
photorealistic images. It has an inbuilt calculation system that automatically generate the number of
lighting fittings for a room space given the desired illumination.

This work aim to compare the two methods to determine which is best suited for lighting design.

2. Methodology

The comparative analysis carried out in this work are as follows:

• Calculation for the number of luminaires Lumen method and Dialux Evo 9.2
• Simulation of number luminaires result to determine lighting spacing and the photometric
parameters using Dialux software.

2.1 Overview of architectural plan

The architectural plan is the office block of the Department of Electrical/Electronic Engineering,
University of Benin. It comprises of 30 offices, one classroom, two toilets and a control room. The
offices on the floor differ in dimension and presented accordingly:

a) Small offices: office whose area is 3.5m by 4.3m.

Office: 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25 and Exam Office
(21 offices).

b) Medium offices: office whose area is 5.4m by 4.3m.

55
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64
Office: 1, 9, 16, 17, 26 (5 offices).

c) Large offices: office whose area is 7.1m by 4.3m

Office: 21, Graduate Assistants office, HOD’s office, Conference room (4 offices)

2.2 Calculation for the Number of Luminaires

Specifications spectral MIREFA luminaires (25 Watts, 300 Lumen) was used for the luminaires
computation.

a) The Lumen Method: this method was used to calculate the number of luminaire per office
per recommended illuminance in lux by IESNA.
The Lumen method is given by the formula:
𝑳𝒖𝒙 × 𝑨
Number of lighting fixtures = (1)
𝑭𝑳 × 𝑳𝑳𝑭 × 𝑪𝒖
Where:
Lux = lighting requirement of the room or office (Lux)
A = area of the room or office (mm2)
FL = luminous intensity of the lighting fixture (Lumen)
LLF = light loss factor
Cu = coefficient of utilization
The following values were used for the calculation (IESNA):
Lighting requirement of the room or office (Lux) = 300 Lux
Light loss factor (LLF) = 0.8
Coefficient of utilization (CU) = 0.75

b) Dialux Simulation: the architectural plan of the office floor (.dwg file) was imported into
Dialux software and was simulated as presented in Figure 1. It generated the number of luminaires
per office using the same assumed values for Lux, LLF and CU. Table 1 shows the results of the
number of luminaires calculated using both methods

Figure 1: Importing of architectural plan from AutoCAD into Dialux

56
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64
Table 1: Comparative analysis between the number of luminaires from Lumen method and Dialux
simulation
OFFICE AREA FLUX NUMBER OF LUMINAIRES
(m2) (Lumen) Lumen Method Dialux Simulation
Small Offices 14.74 3000 3 Nos 2 Nos
Medium Offices 22.98 3000 4 Nos 3 Nos
Large Offices 30.35 3000 5 Nos 4 Nos

It can be observed that the number of luminaires obtained using Lumen method is one luminaire
more than that obtained using Dialux simulation for the same room size.

2.3 Photometric Parameters Generated from Dialux Simulation

For comparative analysis Dialux software was used to simulate the photometric parameters using
results of the obtained for both methods. The project was simulated with the generated number of
luminaires from Dialux for each office category, likewise the calculated number of luminaires using
Lumen method. The outcome of the project simulation generates the photometric parameters for
performance of the method and comparative analysis. The photometric parameters are as follows:

a. The perpendicular illuminance of the office work plane in Lux

b. The uniformity of illumination (g1)
c. The Unified Glare Rating (UGR) of the selected calculation space in the room

a. Perpendicular illuminance: this is the vertical light hitting a horizontal surface. It is measured
in Lux. The value of perpendicular illuminance must be greater than or equal to the recommended
value of illuminance for the office by IESNA (300lx).

b. Uniformity and non-uniformity of illuminance (g1 & g2): is a quality issue that addresses how
evenly the light spreads over a task area.
Uniformity of illuminance (g1): It can be calculated using the equation:
𝑬
𝒈𝟏 = 𝒎𝒊𝒏 ̅
(2)
𝑬
Non-uniformity of illuminance (g2) It is calculated by the formula:
𝑬
𝒈𝟐 = 𝑬 𝒎𝒊𝒏 (3)
𝒎𝒂𝒙
Where,
Emin = minimum illuminance (lx)
𝐸̅ = work plane perpendicular illuminance (lx)
Emax = maximum illuminance (lx)

c. Unified Glare Rating (UGR): the glare caused by very bright luminance in the visual field. This
causes discomfort and fatigue to the eyes. This glare can be mitigated by not exceeding the suggested
light levels and by using lighting equipment designed to reduce glare. It is quantified by Unified
Glare Rating (UGR) given by Equation 4.
0.25 𝜔𝐿2𝑠
UGR = 8 𝑙𝑜𝑔10 ∑ (4)
𝐿𝑏 𝑃2
Where,
Lb = Background illuminance (cd/m2)
Ls = Luminance of the luminaire (cd/m2)
w = Solid angle subtended at the observer’s eye by the luminaire (Steradians)
p = Position index
57
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64
The recommended value of UGR by IESNA for an office is 19 at any angle.

3.0 Results and Discussion

The lighting design of the office categories is simulated using Dialux Evo 9.2 and the photometric
parameters are measured for the comparism of the design by Lumen method and Dialux software.

3.1 Simulation Results

Prequel to generating the parameters, the lighting spacing and layout is simulated, the following
factors are considered for simulation:

• Reflection factor (Ceiling, Walls & Floor)

• Clearance Height
• Mounting Height

Table 2 presents the assumed values for the simulation on Dialux.

Table 2: Assumed Values for the simulation on Dialux

Office Area Reflection Factor (%) Clearance Mounting
Category (m2) Ceiling Walls Floor Height (m) Height(m)
Small Office 14.74 70 50 20 2.670 2.670
Medium 22.98
Office
Large Office 30.35

For this paper pictorial of simulation and results of the medium office would be presented, however
results for comparative analysis of the three types of offices were presented.

Figure 2 presents light spacing (x & y axis) and the luminaire layout plan of the of number of
luminaires in the medium office obtained by using Dialux simulation while Figure 3 presents the
light spacing and the luminaire layout plan of the luminaires in the same office, obtained from
Lumen method. Figure 4 presents the 3-D rendition of the medium office from Dialux and Lumen
method.

58
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64

Figure 2: the light spacing and plan layout of the luminaires in the medium office from Dialux
software

Figure 3: the light spacing and plan layout of the luminaires in the medium office from Lumen
calculation

59
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64

Figure 4: the 3-D rendition of the medium office from Dialux and Lumen Method respectively

The results of the photometric parameters from the simulation are presented below:

a. Perpendicular illuminance: Figure 5 presents the isoline diagram of the office, showing its
illuminance for both methods. Figure 6 presents the calculation result for perpendicular
illuminance due to the luminaire arrangement by Dialux. The perpendicular illuminance
obtained was 248lx, which is lower than the recommended value (300 lux), hence the red
bad sign. While the value of perpendicular illuminance due to the luminaire arrangement
from Lumen calculation was 347lx which exceeds the recommended value as seen in Figure
7. Hence, the green tick sign is given.

Figure 5: Isoline diagram of the office, showing its illuminance for Dialux simulation and
Lumen calculation respectively

Figure 6: Calculation results from large office using Dialux arrangement

60
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64

Figure 7: Calculation results from large office using Lumen calculation arrangement

b. Uniformity and non-uniformity of illuminance (g1 & g2):

Figure 5 gives the values of the calculation objects performed by Dialux on the room space
showing values of Emin, 𝐸, Emax, g1 and g2 obtained for the calculation space selected at a
height of 0.80m, which is the height of the task area (Table) from the floor.
The value of g1 and g2 gotten from the arrangement by Dialux are 0.002 and 0.001
respectively, while the value of g1 and g2 from the arrangement by Lumen calculation are
0.02 and 0.01 respectively. These values are lower than the standard value of g1 for the
workplane, given by IESNA as 0.4 but the values from Lumen method are closer compared
to Dialux as seen in Figure 5 and 6 above. In general, the Lumen method has a higher
Uniformity value compared to Dialux.

c. Unified Glare Rating (UGR): The UGR for the office was calculated on the calculation
space at a height of 1.2m, which is the height of the eye level from a sitting position obtained
through measurement for a person 5 feet, 11 inches tall. Other parameters selected are the
viewing sector, which is the range of angle of rotation of the head when viewing, the step
width is the smallest change in angle of rotation that can be made by the viewer taken as 150.
The results are displayed in Figure 7. The maximum value of UGR in the office gotten from
Dialux arrangement is 23.4 at an angle of 1800, which is not suitable for good vision. While
the maximum value of UGR gotten from Lumen calculation arrangement is 24.9, at an angle
of 105o which also exceeds the standard rating of 19 but is better off than the results from
Dialux.

Six random points were selected on the calculation plane for the UGR calculation i.e. the
glare effect of the beam of light from the luminaire installed in the office on six random
positions at eye level height was calculated. The luminaire beam angle at the six random
points on the calculation space for the two methods is shown in Figure 8. The Figure shows
which of the points have the potential to give a glare effect on anyone who is sitting on that
position at a particular viewing angle (indicated by the red lines). Hence, lighting equipment
designed to reduce glare should be used.

61
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64

Figure 7: UGR results of the medium office using Dialux arrangement and Lumen arrangement
respectively

Figure 8: Luminaire beam angle at 6 random points on the workplane for Dialux arrangement and
Lumen calculation arrangement respectively

3.2 Comparative Analysis of Simulated Results between Lumen Method and Dialux

The summary of the simulated results from the Lumen method and from Dialux for all the office
categories is presented in Table 3. This would help in the comparison between the two methods to
determine which of the methods gives the best result.

62
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64

Table 3: Summary of simulated results from Lumen method and from Dialux
Office Category Method Perpendicular Uniformity of Highest Unified

Illuminance (lx) Illumination (g1) Glare Rating (UGR)

Small Office Dialux 213 0.074 18.3

Lumen 367 0.034 27.4

Medium Office Dialux 248 0.002 23.4

Lumen 347 0.020 25.8

Large Office Dialux 241 0.024 < 10

Lumen 314 0.030 24.9

3.3 Discussion

From the analysis presented in Table 3, it is observed that, for all the office categories, the Lumen
method achieved better perpendicular illuminance, having values above 300lx which is the
standard for an office by IESNA. This is due to the effect of the extra lighting fixture the Lumen
method had over Dialux calculation using the Spectral Mirefa’s specifications.

In terms of Uniformity of illumination (g1), neither method met the standard given by IESNA as
0.4. Values of g1 closer to 0.4 or higher, denote better uniformity of illumination. However, for the
small office, from Table 3, Dialux calculation gave a better uniformity of illumination due to its
arrangement and light spacing while for the medium office and large office, the Lumen method
performed better.

In terms of UGR results, the recommended value of UGR for an office by IESNA is 19. This means
that values of UGR above 19 denote high glare and would result to strain on the eyes. For all the
office categories, Lumen method had points with higher glare rating than Dialux software. This
imply that the design done using Dialux calculation has a better glare rating and is more
comfortable to the eyes.

4. Conclusion

From the observation, it is inferred that the automatically generated deign by Dialux has lower
number of lighting fixtures than the Lumen method using the Spectral Mirefa luminaire which
reduces energy consumption and cost, but the resultant illumination is not up to the recommended
value. The Lumen method with one more Mirefa luminaire on the other hand meets the target value
for illumination and thus becomes a better option for lighting design.

From the analysis done, though both the Lumen method and Dialux software are good for
calculating the number of lighting fittings for a room space given the desired illumination, Lumen
method gave better results and achieved the desired illumination compared to Dialux. It is therefore
recommended that the Lumen method be used for lighting design. A software that uses the syntax
of the Lumen method can be developed to automatically generate the number of lighting fittings
given the desired illumination and all required parameters. Dialux software has proved to be a very

63
 Aikhoje P.T and Oriakhi O.M/ Journal of Energy Technology and Environment
4(3) 2022 pp. 54-64
good software for simulation and calculation of photometric parameters. Hence, the generated
results gotten from Lumen method should be put into Dialux software for lighting design
simulation.

Reference
[1] Sathya P. and Natarajan R. (2014), Solar PV powered Energy efficient LED lighting system for a classroom,
Journal of Engineering Science and Technology review, vol. 7, pp. 34-39.The Florida Solar Energy Center,
University of Florida: Types of PV Systems, 2021.
[2] Hauck (2009), Electrical Plan Design. Electrical Design of Commercial and Industrial
Buildings, Jones and Bartlett publishers
[3] Researchgate (2016). “Energy Analysis of Efficient Lighting System Design for
lecturing Room using DIAlux Evo 3” https://www.ny-engineers.com/blog/effective-lighting-design-with-
dialux
[4] Gordon (2014), Interior Lighting for Designers, John Wiley and Sons, 5 th Edition.
[5] CIBSE Guide K (2004) Electricity in Building.
[6] "Light Calc". Glossary. Archived from the original on 2008-03-16. Retrieved 2008-03-20
[7] Shariful H. Shikder, Andrew D. Price and Monjur Mourshed (2009) Evaluation of Four Artificial Lighting
Simulation Tools with Virtual Building Reference. Department of Civil and Building Engineering, University
of Loughborough.

64

View publication stats