DIALux Evo - New Calculation Method PDF

Article: DIALux evo New calculation method
Characters: 21.059 (incl. space character, headline and table) + 7 pictures

Words: 4843
Author: Dipl.-Ing. (FH) Daniel Witzel
DIALux evo new calculation method

DIALux evo
The new generation of DIALux - DIALux evo - has been available since October 2012. As well as providing new
software for architecture the objective of the new version was to enable the planning of complete buildings. The
frontier between indoor and outdoor planning would be removed and buildings would no longer be seen as the sum
of individual rooms but be calculated and presented as a complete unit. Glass is playing an increasingly important role
in modern architecture so this means that individual rooms and the outdoor area have to be photometrically
integrated into each other.
Furthermore, almost all existing elements of DIALux had to be created anew. The operation of the software had to be
adapted to the new requirements, the CAD had to have a substantially better performance than the technology
previously used and the calculation kernel had to be able to calculate much larger and more complex scenes. When
dealing with a whole building, lighting scenes obviously play a much more significant role. This also had to be taken
into account when recreating the conceptual design.
Previously the radiosity method was used in DIALux and many other lighting calculation programmes. With this
method the energy exchange between each surface in the scene is calculated. In order to visualise the exact light
distribution on the individual surfaces of the scene, the individual surfaces are divided up into patches. Using
"adaptive meshing" the software ensures that the surfaces are not statically divided within fixed grids but are divided
1, 2

Words: 4843
up very finely where large differences in the illuminance arise. Thus a high resolution visualization is achieved in as
short a calculation time as possible. However, this method is in direct contrast to the usual standard calculation
methods where fixed grids of measuring points as in EN 12464-1 are prescribed. In order to fulfil these requirements,
either calculation points must be determined in addition to the calculation of the surfaces or the results at the
calculation points must be interpolated from the results on the surfaces.
This procedure is well-proven and in many case provides a sufficiently exact calculation. Why then do we need a new
procedure? Radiosity has two weaknesses: on the one hand the calculation of large scenes can tke a very long time.
Individual and simple rooms can be calculated very quickly using radiosity, but for complex geometries or whole
buildings the calculation time is to lng. On the other hand the calcualtion method takes only diffusely reflecting
materials into consideration. A simple calculation of transmission and mirroring surfaces is only possible by employing
a few tricks.
After experiments with several alternative calculation methods, photon shooting was decided upon. According to the
light distribution light is distributed on the visible surfaces. From these surfaces photons are sent out or diffusely
passed on or, depending on the material properties, transmitted or absorbed. The photons are gathered on the
surfaces affected and an evaluation of the density is made. From the number of photons per surface and their energy
content the luminance or iluminance is determined. The benefit of this principle is obvious: It is roughly approximate
to the distribution of light in reality. It is simple to draw parallels from this procedure.
What are the disadvantages of this principle?
Firstly, simple geometries take a relatively long time when compared with the radiosity method because the number
of photons used is bound to be relatively high. Secondly, it might well be that , despite the large number of photons,
small surfaces are not hit or are insufficiently hit by the photons. With future optimisation of the photon shooter the
aim is to emit a sufficiently large number of photons or adapt the number of photons dynamically to the given
situation.
Calculating with control groups

Words: 4843
Whatever method is used, calculations take time. Therefore it is a pity, when , after a successful calculation, a
completely new calculation is required when individual lighting scenes are adapted in order, for example, to optimise
the energy consumption or to a achieve a specific lighting effect. DIALux is treading a completely new path: for each
lighting scene the lighting designer defines luminaire groups which he would like to dim or set independently of each
other in each respective lighting scene. Prior to calculation DIALux evo identifies from all the lighting scenes the
control groups which are necessary for these lighting scenes. Thus DIALux evo prevents a luminaire group from
acquiring different dimming levels within one lighting scene. Each control group is now calculated separately by
DIALux evo. In doing this the calculation time is initially multiplied. However, this method means that the result of a
lighting scene can be adjusted later. The results of the individual control groups are added after each adjustment.
Instead of having to run through the whole calculation again, it is now only necessary to recreate the lighting textures
on the surfaces.
The calculation kernel in practice

The strengths and weaknesses in the new calculation kernel have proved in practice to be as expected. For individual
rooms the calculating time with the photon shooter is longer than with the radiosity calculation kernel. For more
complex scenes the benefits of the new method are clear. The calculation time for such scenes is much shorter than
with the old method. For very complex scenes which it was previously not possible to calculate results can now be
calculated in a reasonable period of time.
Calculation time in relation to complexity of scene
Time
DIALux 4.x
DIALux evo
nicht mehr zu
calculation
notberechnen
possible
Complexity of scene
Test case 1 - uniform distribution
In Karlsruhe a few years ago a simple test case was developed for lighting calculation software. For this test an
artificial light source was placed in a 5mx5mx5m room, the reflection coefficient for each surface was 50%.
Theoretically the uniform illuminance calculated for each surface in the room should have been 200lx, 100lx through
directly distributed light and 100l through indirect lighting.

Words: 4843
Illustration 1: First test case - before calculation

Words: 4843
Illustration 2: first test case - after calculation
Illustration3 3: first test case - false colour rendering
Calculation points - surface of floor indirect lighting

Position
0,25
0,25
0,75
1,25
1,75
2,25
2,75
3,25
3,75
4,25
99,9 100,1 100,4
99,8
99,9 100,1
99,8
99,8
99,9 100,7
0,75
100,2
1,25
100,3 100,0 100,1 100,0 100,0 100,1 100,1
99,9 100,2 100,0 100,2
4,75
99,9 100,1 100,0 100,1 100,1

99,9 100,0
99,6
99,9
99,9
99,8
99,8 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0
99,8
99,6
1,75
99,8
99,9
99,9 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,1
2,25
99,6
99,8
2,75
99,3
99,7 100,0
3,25
99,7
99,8
99,9 100,1
99,9 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,0
99,8
99,9
99,9 100,0
99,9 100,0 100,0 100,0 100,1 100,1
3,75
4,25
,75
100,3 100,0
99,9
99,8
99,8
99,9 100,0
99,9
99,9
99,8 100,2
99,9
99,9
99,9 100,1
99,8 100,1 100,0 100,4 100,4
99,8
99,7
99,9 100,1 100,3 100,6 100,5
99,9
Calculation points- surface of floor direct lighting

Position
0,25
0,75
1,25
1,75
2,25
2,75
3,25
3,75
4,25
4,75
0,25
100,5 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,5
0,75
100,5 100,5 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,5 100,5
1,25
100,4 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,4

Words: 4843
1,75
100,4 100,5 100,5 100,4 100,3 100,3 100,4 100,5 100,5 100,4
2,25
100,4 100,4 100,4 100,3 100,4 100,4 100,3 100,4 100,4 100,4
2,75
100,4 100,4 100,4 100,3 100,4 100,4 100,3 100,4 100,4 100,4
3,25
100,4 100,5 100,5 100,4 100,3 100,3 100,4 100,5 100,5 100,4
3,75
100,4 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,4
4,25
100,5 100,5 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,4 100,5 100,5
4,75
100,5 100,5 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,4 100,5 100,5
The visualization itself shows the uniformity to be as expected. The charts indicate that the deviation from the
theoretically correct value is less than 1% at all measuring points.
Calculation comparison with CIE
As already mentioned, the strength of the photon shooter is in the calculation of complex scenes. Therefore the
comparatively simple test scenes in CIE TC 3.33 are not ideal for testing a photon shooter. Nevertheless a lighting
calculation software is expected to fulfil these requirements.
3
CIE test case 4.1

A simple rectangular room of 6,78 x 6,72 with a room height of 3,24 is used for the first comparative test. The
luminaires are fluorescent lamps in a 2x2 grid. The exact description of the experiment can be found in CIE171:2006.
Photon shooter calculation points 4.1

Position
TE UL
MB UL
1
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
2
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
3
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
Sensor
1
91
85
70,3
65
59
Sensor
1
103
96
77,9
74
67
Sensor
1
112
105
84,1
81
73
Sensor
1
115
2
107
100
80,2
77
70
3
115
108
85,8
83
75
4
118
110
87,6
85
77
5
116
108
86,9
83
76
6
107
100
78,8
77
70
7
93
87
67,0
67
61
2
124
116
85,8
89
81
3
130
122
99,0
94
85
4
129
120
95,6
93
84
5
129
121
97,7
93
84
6
124
116
91,0
89
81
7
105
98
76,9
75
68
2
132
123
100,3
95
86
3
141
132
105,0
101
92
4
141
132
105,1
102
92
5
141
132
104,6
101
92
6
131
122
96,6
94
86
7
113
106
87,3
81
74
2
133
3
143
4
146
5
143
6
133
7
116

Words: 4843
MB UL
4
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
5
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
6
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
7
MB LL
TE LL
108
87,9
83
75
Sensor
1
113
105
86,3
81
74
Sensor
1
103
97
78,8
74
68
Sensor
1
92
86
69,4
66
60
124
99,1
96
87
133
107,3
103
93
137
112,4
105
96
133
108,0
103
93
124
99,9
96
87
108
86,0
83
76
2
132
124
96,1
95
86
3
141
131
104,6
101
92
4
140
131
105,2
101
92
5
141
131
104,8
101
92
6
132
123
99,0
95
86
7
112
105
84,6
81
73
2
124
116
92,6
89
81
3
130
121
98,2
93
85
4
127
119
100,3
92
83
5
130
121
97,9
93
85
6
123
115
92,4
89
81
7
104
97
79,8
75
68
2
108
100
78,4
77
70
3
116
108
86,2
83
76
4
117
109
87,5
84
76
5
115
107
88,5
83
75
6
108
100
80,4
77
70
7
92
86
67,9
66
60
In the above chart the upper and lower limits of the prescribed measuring points are given. TE UL: upper limit of the
total error tolerance, + 10,5%
TE LL: lower limit of total error tolerance, -10,5%
MB UL: upper limit of measuring tolerance, + 6,7%
MB LL: lower limit of measuring tolerance, - 6,7%
The value calculated by the photon shooter at each position is shown in the middle. It is clear that all the values lie
within the admissible error tolerance, with the exception of two calculation points even within the measuring
tolerance.
Display of calculated values within the measuring / error tolerance for position 1

Words: 4843
80
70
Illuminance (lx)
60
50
TE UL
40
MB UL
30
20
MB LL
TE LL
10
0
1
Measuring points
CIE test 4.2

For the second comparative test lamps emitting diffused light were used instead of fluorescent lamps.
Position
TE UL
MB UL
1
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
2
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
3
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
Sensor
1
50
47
36,4
36
33
Sensor
1
65
61
46,8
47
43
Sensor
1
65
61
47,1
47
42
Sensor
1
61
57
2
68
63
46,9
49
44
3
66
62
47,3
48
43
4
60
56
44,5
43
39
5
66
61
47,7
47
43
6
68
63
47,4
49
44
7
51
48
36,7
37
33
2
93
87
63,0
67
61
3
88
83
62,0
64
58
4
77
72
56,0
55
50
5
87
81
62,6
63
57
6
93
87
64,0
67
61
7
67
62
47,5
48
44
2
90
84
62,0
65
59
3
87
81
62,0
62
57
4
77
72
57,6
56
50
5
85
80
63,1
61
56
6
90
84
63,5
65
59
7
66
62
48,5
48
43
2
79
74
3
77
72
4
72
67
5
77
72
6
79
73
7
61
57

Words: 4843
4
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
5
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
6
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
7
MB LL
TE LL
44,2
44
40
Sensor
1
66
61
47,1
47
43
Sensor
1
65
61
46,6
47
43
Sensor
1
50
47
36,2
36
33
56,0
57
52
57,5
55
50
55,7
52
47
59,5
55
50
59,0
56
51
46,6
44
40
2
89
83
62,0
64
58
3
85
79
62,4
61
55
4
75
70
59,0
54
49
5
83
78
66,2
60
54
6
87
82
67,3
63
57
7
64
60
51,1
46
42
2
92
86
63,0
66
60
3
85
80
62,5
61
56
4
74
69
58,2
53
48
5
83
78
67,0
60
54
6
89
83
69,3
64
58
7
63
59
51,3
46
41
2
66
62
47,0
48
43
3
64
60
48,0
46
42
4
57
54
46,2
41
38
5
62
58
51,1
45
41
6
64
60
51,4
46
42
7
48
45
39,7
35
31
Again most of the calculated values lie within the admissible error limits. 58% of the values are even within the
measuring tolerance.
CIE test 4.3
In this test case luminaires with matt gloss reflectors were used. As the chart shows, all the values were within the
prescribed measuring tolerance.
Position
TE UL
MB UL
1
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
2
Sensor
1
178
166
161,6
128
116
Sensor
1
206
192
185,5
2
279
261
254,4
201
182
3
265
248
232,4
191
173
4
222
207
192,8
159
145
5
265
248
239,2
191
173
6
279
261
253,0
201
182
7
180
168
157,9
130
118
2
312
291
274,8
3
305
285
258,6
4
258
241
218,0
5
308
288
257,6
6
317
296
263,7
7
214
200
176,8

Words: 4843
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
3
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
4
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
5
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
6
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
7
MB LL
TE LL
148
135
Sensor
1
229
214
203,5
165
149
Sensor
1
209
195
185,4
150
136
Sensor
1
230
215
203,0
165
150
Sensor
1
221
206
181,9
159
144
Sensor
1
188
176
164,3
135
123
224
203
219
199
186
169
222
201
228
207
154
140
2
353
330
314,2
254
230
3
337
315
294,9
242
220
4
281
262
245,2
202
183
5
342
319
296,1
246
223
6
358
334
308,3
257
234
7
232
217
200,3
167
152
2
310
290
279,7
223
203
3
303
283
262,0
218
198
4
265
247
224,9
191
173
5
311
290
265,5
224
203
6
315
294
274,8
227
206
7
207
193
180,4
149
135
2
358
334
310,7
257
234
3
345
322
289,5
248
225
4
286
267
243,6
206
187
5
344
321
298,5
247
225
6
356
332
308,6
256
232
7
229
214
199,3
165
150
2
329
308
272,8
237
215
3
317
296
258,2
228
207
4
264
247
221,8
190
173
5
312
291
268,5
224
204
6
317
296
278,9
228
207
7
209
196
186,3
151
137
2
289
270
255,6
208
189
3
273
255
235,3
196
178
4
229
214
196,2
165
150
5
274
255
241,8
197
179
6
283
264
255,3
204
185
7
180
168
162,1
129
117
CIE test 4.4

In this test case the reflection factor of the walls was reduced to 4%, of the ceiling to 3% and of the floor to 6%. As
in the first test case, fluorescent lamps were used. Three values are within the permissible error tolerance, all other
values are within the measuring tolerance.
Photon shooter - calculation points 4.4
Position
Sensor

Words: 4843
TE UL
MB UL
1
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
2
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
3
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
4
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
5
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
6
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
7
1
30
28
25,7
22
20
Sensor
1
31
28
27,9
22
20
Sensor
1
39
36
33,6
28
25
Sensor
1
43
40
36,4
31
28
Sensor
1
38
35
33,7
27
25
Sensor
1
31
29
28,3
23
20
Sensor
1
31
29
26,4
2
32
29
28,6
23
21
3
39
37
34,3
28
26
4
43
40
36,6
31
28
5
40
38
33,7
29
26
6
33
30
28,9
23
21
7
31
29
26,0
22
20
2
32
30
30,2
23
21
3
39
37
36,1
28
26
4
42
39
39,3
30
28
5
41
38
36,0
29
27
6
33
31
30,5
24
21
7
31
29
28,0
23
21
2
41
38
37,1
29
27
3
51
48
44,3
37
33
4
54
51
48,4
39
36
5
51
47
44,0
37
33
6
40
38
37,2
29
26
7
38
35
34,2
27
25
2
46
43
41,1
33
30
3
57
53
49,2
41
37
4
62
57
52,3
44
40
5
57
53
48,7
41
37
6
46
43
41,2
33
30
7
43
40
36,6
31
28
2
40
38
36,7
29
26
3
51
48
43,9
37
33
4
54
51
48,0
39
35
5
51
48
43,5
37
34
6
41
38
36,8
29
27
7
38
36
33,4
28
25
2
33
30
30,7
23
21
3
41
39
36,7
30
27
4
43
40
39,8
31
28
5
40
38
36,3
29
26
6
33
31
30,6
23
21
7
31
29
28,2
23
20
2
33
31
29,3
3
42
39
34,6
4
44
41
37,4
5
41
38
34,8
6
33
31
29,2
7
32
30
26,3

Words: 4843
MB LL
TE LL
22
20
24
21
30
27
32
29
29
26
24
22
23
21
CIE test 4.5

In this case, as in 4.4., the reflection factors were reduced to 6%, the luminaires used are as in 4.2.. The chart shows
that only two values are within the permissible error tolerance, all other values are within the measuring tolerance.
Position
TE UL
MB UL
1
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
2
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
3
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
4
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
5
MB LL
TE LL
Sensor
1
32
30
24,4
23
21
Sensor
1
46
43
34,7
33
30
Sensor
1
47
44
35,5
34
30
Sensor
1
43
40
32,9
31
28
Sensor
1
47
44
35,4
34
31
2
48
44
34,9
34
31
3
47
44
35,7
34
31
4
42
40
33,1
31
28
5
47
44
36,0
34
31
6
48
45
35,3
35
31
7
33
31
24,8
24
22
2
73
68
52,1
53
48
3
70
66
51,7
51
46
4
60
56
46,0
43
39
5
69
64
52,3
49
45
6
74
69
52,9
53
48
7
48
44
35,3
34
31
2
71
66
51,8
51
46
3
70
65
52,5
50
45
4
61
57
48,3
44
40
5
69
65
53,5
50
45
6
72
67
53,1
52
47
7
48
45
36,6
34
31
2
61
57
46,0
44
40
3
62
57
48,2
44
40
4
56
53
46,6
40
37
5
61
57
50,1
44
40
6
61
57
48,7
44
40
7
43
40
35,0
31
28
2
71
66
51,7
51
46
3
68
64
52,9
49
44
4
60
56
49,7
43
39
5
68
63
56,5
49
44
6
70
65
56,7
50
46
7
47
43
38,9
33
30

Words: 4843
Position
TE UL
MB UL
6
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
7
MB LL
TE LL
Sensor
1
46
43
34,5
33
30
Sensor
1
32
30
24,4
23
21
2
72
67
52,0
52
47
3
68
63
52,2
49
44
4
57
54
48,0
41
37
5
66
62
56,4
47
43
6
71
66
57,9
51
46
7
45
42
38,5
33
30
2
47
44
34,9
34
30
3
46
43
36,2
33
30
4
40
38
34,7
29
26
5
45
42
38,9
32
29
6
45
42
38,7
33
30
7
31
29
27,1
23
20
CIE test 4.6

Again the reflection factors are below 6%, as in 4.4 and 4.5. As a luminaire the photometry as in 4.3 was used. Only
one value is within the permissible total error range, all other values are within the measuring tolerance.
Position
TE UL
MB UL
1
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
2
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
3
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
Sensor
1
146
136
131,5
105
95
Sensor
1
172
161
159,8
124
113
Sensor
1
195
182
174,0
140
127
Sensor
1
178
166
2
249
232
212,1
179
162
3
237
221
199,6
170
155
4
197
184
170,5
142
129
5
237
221
209,4
170
155
6
252
235
216,5
181
164
7
149
139
131,6
107
97
2
288
269
250,8
207
188
3
282
263
240,6
202
184
4
236
221
207,6
170
154
5
284
265
244,7
204
185
6
294
275
247,4
211
192
7
179
168
156,4
129
117
2
329
307
278,4
237
215
3
313
292
267,2
225
204
4
258
241
227,6
185
168
5
317
296
271,9
228
207
6
335
312
278,4
241
218
7
196
183
174,1
141
128
2
287
268
3
278
259
4
242
226
5
285
266
6
290
271
7
176
164

Words: 4843
4
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
5
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
6
MB LL
TE LL
Position
TE UL
MB UL
7
MB LL
TE LL
168,3
128
116
Sensor
1
196
183
179,4
141
128
Sensor
1
186
174
163,2
134
122
Sensor
1
155
145
138,0
111
101
263,5
206
187
253,2
200
181
218,0
174
158
257,4
205
186
260,3
209
190
163,9
126
115
2
334
312
284,5
240
218
3
320
299
270,1
230
209
4
262
244
229,6
188
171
5
319
298
274,0
230
208
6
333
311
278,2
239
217
7
196
183
172,8
141
128
2
306
286
257,5
220
200
3
292
273
247,4
210
191
4
242
226
212,8
174
158
5
287
268
251,9
206
187
6
292
273
256,4
210
191
7
175
163
161,9
126
114
2
258
241
221,4
186
169
3
241
225
209,1
173
157
4
202
189
175,8
145
132
5
242
226
210,7
174
158
6
251
234
216,5
180
164
7
146
136
133,2
105
95
Further test cases

CIE 171:2006 test cases 5.2 to 5.7 are not based on physical scenarios. They examine the calculation accuracy
analytically , based on theoretical observation with point light sources. For details of this experiment please see CIE
171:2006.
Point
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
CIE test 5.2 - asymmetric CIE T9 photometry

d (m) Angle()
E (lx) DIALux
Error (%)
3,000
3,041
3,162
3,354
3,082
3,202
3,391
3,317
3,500
3,674
0,000
9,460
18,430
26,570
13,260
20,440
27,790
25,240
31,000
35,260
111,110
122,250
124,080
117,310
113,650
113,410
102,740
91,570
81,650
62,160
111,5
122,7
124,5
117,7
113,8
113,5
102,5
91,8
81,6
62,3
0,4
0,3
0,4
0,3
0,1
0,1
-0,2
0,3
0,0
0,2

Words: 4843
CIE test 5.2 - purely diffuse photometry

d (m) Angle()
E (lx) DIALux Error(%)
Point
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
3,000
3,041
3,162
3,354
3,082
3,202
3,391
3,317
3,500
3,674
0,000
9,460
18,430
26,570
13,260
20,440
27,790
25,240
31,000
35,260
111,110
105,210
90,020
71,110
99,730
85,640
68,060
74,360
59,980
49,390
111,1
105,1
90,0
71,0
99,7
85,7
68,1
74,4
60,0
49,4
0,0
-0,1
0,0
-0,1
0,0
0,1
0,0
0,0
0,0
0,1
CIE test 5.3 - asymmetric CIE T9 photometry
56,73
122,10
126,95
108,61
86,13
66,07
99,62
115,53
119,34
113,80
99,97
81,98
63,30
47,39
DIALux
56,3
121,9
126,8
108,4
86,0
66,1
99,6
115,3
119,3
113,6
100,0
82,0
63,5
47,9
Error (%)
-0,8
-0,2
-0,2
-0,2
-0,1
0,0
0,0
-0,2
-0,1
-0,1
0,1
0,0
0,3
1,0
E(lx)
CIE test 5.3 - purely diffuse photometry

A
E (lx) 32,68 75,09 81,38 69,12 53,41 39,90 61,27 79,18 95,52 105,89 105,89 95,52 79,18 61,27
DIALux
32,6
75,2
81,3
69,0
53,4
40,0
61,4
79,2
95,6
105,7
105,7
95,6
79,2
61,4
Error (%)
-0,1
0,1
-0,1
-0,1
-0,1
0,2
0,2
0,0
0,1
-0,2
-0,2
0,1
0,0
0,2
CIE test 5.6.2.1 - surface 0,5m x 0,5m

A
E/(Ehz) (%) 0,246 0,58 0,644 0,556 0,433 0,325 0,491 0,639 0,778 0,864 0,864 0,778 0,639 0,491
DIALux
0,2
0,6
0,6
0,6
0,4
0,3
0,5
0,6
0,8
0,9
0,8
0,7
0,6
0,5
Error(%)
-4,7
0,6
0,0
0,6
-2,9
1,1
-0,4
-3,5
0,8
-0,7
-2,3
-4,4
0,5
-0,1
CIE test 5.6.2.2 - surface 4m x 4m

A
E/(Ehz) (%)
DIALux
36,5
28,1
22,1
17,0
Error(%)
1,6
0,5
2,0
1,7
35,901 27,992 21,639 16,716 12,967 26,8 30,94 33,98 35,57 35,57 33,98 30,94 26,8
12,7 27,6
30,1
34,6
35,5
35,9
33,7
30,7 26,7
-2,3
-2,8
1,7
-0,1
0,8
-0,9
-0,7
3,1
-0,3

Words: 4843
CIE 5.6.2.3 - surface 500m x 500m

A
E/(Ehz) (%) 3,08 9,10 14,72 19,77 24,16 27,90 10,95 13,26 16,21 20,00 24,80 30,77 37,87 45,84
DIALux
2,9
8,6
13,2
19,1
23,6
27,0
10,5
12,5
15,3
18,1
23,8
28,9
35,0
42,4
Error(%)
-7,1
-5,3
-10,6
-3,4
-2,3
-3,2
-4,1
-5,5
-5,7
-9,4
-4,0
-5,9
-7,5
-7,5
Summary
Based on the calculation comparisons presented here we show that Dialux evo provides calculation results of high
accuracy and can bear comparison with standardized test procedures. However, we cannot exclude the possibility
that in certain cases there may be deviations from reality. Here are some examples:
-
the rule of photometric distance no along applies in near-fields

the material model on which the calculation is based is very simplified, although directed reflectance,
refraction index and transmission have been added to previous models
the number of photons used is restricted by the available storage capacity and the accepted calculation time
Scenes with large surfaces in which very exact results are required on small surfaces are problematic for a photon
shooter by reason of the system used. Since the number of photons is limited, the risk is present that insufficient
photons reach the relevant small surface. CIE test 5.6.2.3 is such an example. If more accurate calculation results are
required here, then we recommend placing calculation points.
-
Any situation simulated by software represents a simplified model of physical reality and can therefore not
provide 100% calculation accuracy.
Complex scenes for which the new calculation kernel was optimized are not taken into consideration in CIE
171:2006.
The new photon shooter is an important development. For the very first time it is possible not only to visualize
mirroring surfaces but also to take them into account exactly and sufficiently in photometric planning and calculation
in a time frame which is acceptable in practice. There is continuing development in the design and planning of
lighting systems in which there is a transition from looking at rooms, floors, buildings and outdoor scenes as single
elements to viewing these as a whole together with their photometric interaction.
1 M.F. Cohen, J.R. Wallace: Radiosity and Realistic Image Synthesis, Academic Press Professional (1993)
2 F.X. Sillion, C. Puech: Radiosity & Global Illumination, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers (1994)
3 CIE TC.3.33 Technical report, Draft, March 16 2004
th
4 Zuverlssigkeit lichttechnischer Planungsprogramme, Lichttechnisches Institut der Universitt Karlsruhe, Dr. S.

Kokoschka (Reliability of photometri planning programmes, Photometric Institute Karlsruhe, Dr. S. Kokoschka)

DIALux Evo - New Calculation Method PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

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

DIALux Evo - New Calculation Method PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Article: DIALux evo New calculation method

Characters: 21.059 (incl. space character, headline and table) + 7 pictures