000029914 001__ 29914
000029914 005__ 20180925193926.0
000029914 0247_ $$2doi$$a10.1016/S0038-092X(03)00115-4
000029914 02470 $$2DAR$$a3929
000029914 02470 $$2ISI$$a000183920700008
000029914 037__ $$aARTICLE
000029914 245__ $$aComparison between ray-tracing simulations and bi-directional transmission measurements on prismatic glazing
000029914 269__ $$a2003
000029914 260__ $$c2003
000029914 336__ $$aJournal Articles
000029914 520__ $$aEvaluation of solar heat gain and daylight distribution through complex window and shading systems requires the determination of the bi-directional transmission distribution function (BTDF). Measurement of BTDF can be time-consuming, and inaccuracies are likely because of physical constraints and experimental adjustments. A general calculation methodology, based on more easily measurable component properties, would be preferable and would allow much more flexibility. In this paper, measurements and calculations are compared for the specific case of prismatic daylight-redirecting panels. Measurements were performed in a photogoniometer equipped with a digital-imaging detection system. A virtual copy of the photogoniometer was then constructed with commercial ray-tracing software. For the first time, an attempt is made to validate detailed bi-directional properties for a complex system by comparing an extensive set of experimental BTDF data with ray-tracing calculations. The results generally agree under a range of input and output angles to a degree adequate for evaluation of glazing systems. An analysis is presented to show that the simultaneously measured diffuse and direct components of light transmitted by the panel are properly represented. Calculations were also performed using a more realistic model of the source and ideal model of the detector. Deviations from the photogoniometer model were small and the results were similar in form. Despite the lack of an absolute measurement standard, the good agreement in results promotes confidence in both the photogoniometer and in the calculation method.
000029914 700__ $$0241777$$aAndersen, Marilyne$$g103938
000029914 700__ $$aRubin, M. D.
000029914 700__ $$0240706$$aScartezzini, Jean-Louis$$g106368
000029914 773__ $$j74$$k2$$q157-173$$tSolar Energy
000029914 8564_ $$s44549$$uhttps://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/29914/files/05_2003_SEJ-RayTracPrism_1.png$$yn/a$$zn/a
000029914 8564_ $$s500175$$uhttps://infoscience.epfl.ch/record/29914/files/Comparison%20between%20ray-tracing%20simulations.pdf$$yn/a$$zn/a
000029914 909C0 $$0252313$$pLIPID$$xU12325
000029914 909C0 $$0252072$$pLESO-PB$$xU10262
000029914 909CO $$ooai:infoscience.tind.io:29914$$particle$$pENAC$$qGLOBAL_SET
000029914 917Z8 $$x106554
000029914 917Z8 $$x106554
000029914 917Z8 $$x106554
000029914 917Z8 $$x106554
000029914 917Z8 $$x173008
000029914 917Z8 $$x161229
000029914 937__ $$aLESO-PB-ARTICLE-2003-002
000029914 970__ $$a15452/LESO-PB
000029914 973__ $$aEPFL$$rREVIEWED$$sPUBLISHED
000029914 980__ $$aARTICLE
000029914 990__ $$zunexpected date u'February'