Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy and Buildings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enbuild

Design of an energy-saving controller for an intelligent

LED lighting system
Ivan Chew a , Vineetha Kalavally a, , Naing Win Oo a , Jussi Parkkinen b
a
Department of Electrical and Computer Systems Engineering, Monash University Malaysia, Malaysia
b
School of Computing, University of Eastern Finland, Finland

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: In this paper, we present an energy-saving controller that is capable of shaping the light output of an LED
Received 13 July 2015 lighting system autonomously based on data received from sensors. We implement an optimized smart
Received in revised form 15 March 2016 algorithm on a controller to process the sensor feedback and employ pulse width modulation dimming
Accepted 16 March 2016
to vary the brightness of the luminaire. A wireless sensor module was designed to provide accurate
Available online 19 March 2016
sensor feedback to the controller. A purpose-built smart luminaire complete with an LED driver was
designed and constructed to study the performance of the control system. We validate the energy saving
Keywords:
potential of the designed controller under different real world situations. It is shown experimentally that
Daylight harvesting
Energy saving
the controller achieved 55% energy savings in a continuous usage pattern environment and 62% energy
Intelligent lighting savings in a discrete usage pattern environment under our test conditions. A cost analysis showed that
LED lighting system the proposed energy-saving system is 32% more cost-effective than a near-equivalent commercial system
Occupancy sensing while promising greater energy savings through the use of additional energy-saving techniques.
Smart lighting 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Occupancy sensing based energy-saving systems typically demon-

Lighting contributes up to 20% of the worlds total energy usage
[1]. Interestingly, commercial and ofce buildings account for up to
71% of the total energy usage, of which 18% is used for lighting [2].
The typical total annual energy usage in ofce buildings range from
100 to 1000 kWh/m2 , depending on geographic location, ofce
equipment use, operating hours, use of HVAC systems, and installed
lighting technologies, among other factors [3]. Recently, the 2010
Energy Performance of Buildings Directive (EPBD) emphasized the
need for near-zero energy use levels in European buildings for
a sustainable future [4]. Fortunately, research has indicated that
modern buildings have a high potential for energy savings [5]. Elec-
tric lighting is a key target area for power consumption reduction
as energy-saving lighting systems promise high energy savings and
are relatively straightforward to retrot.
Intelligent lighting systems seek to achieve this by utilizing
integrated sensors to provide feedback in a closed-loop control
system. A common energy-saving technique is occupancy sensing,
which obtains feedback from integrated occupancy sensors [6,7].
Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: ivan.chew@monash.edu (I. Chew), vineetha@monash.edu
(V. Kalavally), naing.win.oo@monash.edu (N.W. Oo), jussi.parkkinen@uef.
(J. Parkkinen).
strate 1760% energy savings depending on occupant usage
patterns [8]. However, most occupancy sensing systems report
lower energy savings of around 350% when placed in environ-
ments with a continuous usage pattern [9,10]. These systems are
normally based on single-point detection, which can potentially
introduce signicant uncertainty in the sensor data, especially if
the lighting system is not tuned or optimized well [11]. Preset time
delays are often introduced to compensate for this uncertainty.
Some smart lighting systems also rely on manual user feedback
to control the luminaires via remote control as a complement to
occupancy sensing [12,13].
Other than that, techniques such as daylight harvesting and
automatic dimming control can also be employed to increase
energy savings [1416]. Daylight harvesting takes advantage of
natural light from building apertures to complement the arti-
cial lighting from luminaires in order to reduce the brightness
needed to achieve a certain level of illumination. Daylight-linked
control systems can be very effective as most commercial and
ofce spaces have sufcient daylight from windows to eliminate
the need for electric lighting [17]. Additional techniques such as
illumination balancing [18], enhanced presence sensing [19], and
adaptive illumination rendering [20] can also be employed to
enhance system performance. The reported energy savings from
daylight-linked systems are typically above 40%; however, the
effectiveness is highly dependent on multiple factors, including:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2016.03.041
0378-7788/ 2016 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
2 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19
altitude and orientation, window characteristics, shading devices,
surface reectance, ceiling height, and partition height [21,22]. As
a result, the reported real world performance of daylight harvest-
ing systems are generally much lower compared to the simulated
performance [23].
It stands to reason that improved energy-saving performance
can be achieved by combining multiple energy-saving techniques
in a single control system [24]. The integration of daylight-linked
control can alleviate the inherently poor energy-saving perfor-
mance of occupancy sensing based systems in continuous usage
pattern environments. Roisin et al. reported simulation results of
between 4963% for a combined occupancy sensing and daylight
harvesting system [25] while Hughes et al. recorded up to 68%
energy savings with a similar system [26]. However, it is also nec-
essary to verify the performance of energy-saving systems in real
world environments under different usage patterns as simulation
results do not always provide an accurate representation of real
world situations. Besides that, optimal system performance should
be ensured through controller optimization or calibration.
Controller optimization is an important step to ensure favor-
able system performance. An example of an optimization method is
model predictive control, which is normally used in industrial pro-
cess control systems, and more recently in power system balancing
models [27]. This control method optimizes a nite-time horizon,
while only implementing the current time slot. Recent works in this
area include improving the stability of model predictive controllers
for open-loop stable systems [28] and implementing a model pre-
dictive controller on an FPGA based system to improve the on-line
computational performance [29]. Another popular optimization
method is the hill climbing optimization technique which is an
iterative algorithm that attempts to nd the optimal solution by
incrementally changing a single element during each iteration. Ben-
ets of hill climbing optimization include its relative simplicity and
excellent ability to nd a local optimum solution in a search space.
Recent research has shown stochastic hill climbing optimization to
be effective when applied to lighting control [30].
In this paper, we combine multiple autonomous energy-saving
techniques to achieve greater energy savings. A smart lighting sys-
tem was developed as a platform to implement and optimize our
energy-saving controller. The performance of the controller was
validated experimentally under different usage patterns, which
should be an accurate indication of the real-world performance
of the system, offering a different approach compared to popu-
lar simulation-based methods. In addition to that, we also perform
a cost analysis on the energy-saving controller to further quan-
tify the impact of the energy saving system. The rest of this paper
is structured as follows: Section 2 describes the energy saving
techniques used in the implemented control algorithm and dis-
cusses the controller optimization; Section 3 presents the system
design; we verify the energy saving performance of the controller
through experimentation under different usage patterns in Section
4; Section 5 describes a cost analysis of the system, and nally the
conclusion is discussed in Section 6.
2. Energy saving techniques
It is apparent that a substantial amount of energy can be saved
by exercising a greater degree of control over the lights that we
use. Therefore, we choose suitable sensors to provide feedback on
relevant information to a 16 MHz 8-bit AVR RISC-based microcon-
troller. We use a passive infrared (PIR) sensor which measures
infrared light radiating from objects to provide feedback on the
occupancy status within its eld of view. When a human passes
through the sensors eld of view, the sensor will convert the result-
ing change in the infrared radiation into a change in sensor voltage,
Fig. 1. The relative spectral response of the TEMT6000 ambient light sensor over
the visible light region [31]. The spectral response is adapted to match the human
eye responsitivity.
which triggers the detection. This sensor returns a logic high sig-
nal when movement is sensed at distances of up to 7 meters in
a 110 cone eld of view. The PIR sensor is used for occupancy
sensing, where we program the luminaire to automatically turn off
when there are no users within the eld of view. We allow the user
to dene a suitable timeout, . The timeout is the time difference
between a logic high signal from the PIR sensor and the luminaire
output dropping to zero. A small timeout value will ensure signi-
cant energy savings but may lead to the luminaire turning off while
there are users in the room if they are motionless for a period of
time. A larger timeout value will solve this problem, but will lead
to lower energy savings.
We also utilized a light sensor, which is a silicon NPN epitaxial
planar phototransistor that is sensitive to the visible spectrum. The
incident illuminance on the sensor is directly proportional to the
collector light current. We chose a TEMT6000 ambient light sensor
[31] which can measure the incident illuminance up to 1000 lx with
peak sensitivity at around 580 nm, with a spectral sensitivity curve
which is adapted to match the human eye responsitivity (shown
in Fig. 1). The sensor output analog photo-current is converted
to a variable voltage (05 V) that is read by the micro-controller
by connecting a 10 K series resistor. Consider a room with a win-
dow. During the day, the user may elect to leave the curtains open
which allows sunlight to illuminate the room. In this situation, the
articial lighting may be redundant as there is more than enough
ambient light in the room to illuminate the work space. We can har-
ness the ambient light to complement the existing lighting, which
is a technique called daylight harvesting. This will lead to increased
energy savings as the luminaires need not be constantly switched
on at maximum brightness.
2.1. Control algorithm
We implement a control system that automatically adjusts the
luminaire state based on feedback from the sensors. The block dia-
gram energy saving control system is shown in Fig. 2. The user
dened inputs to the control system are the target brightness (SP),
gain (K), hysteresis (H), timeout (), and sampling period (T). The
non-user denable inputs to the control system are the user pres-
ence [M(t)] and the measured brightness [PV(t)]. These non-user
denable inputs are obtained via feedback from the sensors. The
maximum ambient light intensity is assumed to be within the
sensing limits of the ambient light sensor. Furthermore, the samp-
ling period is assumed to be large enough to account for the clock
speed of the controller. Table 1 summarizes the inputs for the
energy saving control system.
 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19 3

Algorithm 1. Psuedocode for the energy-saving controller

1: if movement 1 then movement is sensed
2: DaylightHarvesting 1; begin daylight harvesting
3: timeoutPIR millis() + timeout; reset PIR timeout
4: movement 0;
5: end if
6: while DaylightHarvesting 1 do
7: AverageLightData(); average ambient light data
8: error = LightData - SP; calculate error
9: if error > hysteresis then adjust brightness
10: brightness = brightness - gain;
11: end if
12: if error < -hysteresis then adjust brightness
13: brightness = brightness + gain;
14: end if
15: end while
16: analogWrite(light, brightness); write duty cycle

Fig. 2. The block diagram of the energy saving control system.

Table 1
The control inputs.
Inputs Symbol Description
Target SP The targeted brightness value in terms of lux
brightness measured by the light sensor. User denable input.
Gain K Step size of the output duty cycle adjustment per
clock cycle. This value is a positive integer. At K = 1,
the duty cycle is increased by 0.39% per clock cycle
(the step size for an 8 bit integer from 0 to 255
corresponds to the minimum and maximum duty
cycle respectively). User denable input.
Hysteresis H The hysteresis denes the acceptable range of
errors in terms of brightness (lux) before the
controller starts to adjust the duty cycle of the
luminaire. User denable input.
Timeout  Time delay in seconds between a returned logic
high signal from the occupancy sensor and the
luminaire switching off. User denable input.
Sampling T Time period in seconds between each subsequent
period reading of the measured process variable. User
denable input.
User presence M(t) The current state of the occupancy sensor. This is
either logic high or logic low. Non-user denable
input.
Measured PV(t) The instantaneous measured brightness value in
brightness terms of lux measured by the light sensor.
Non-user denable input.
The target brightness, SP is stored in the EEPROM section of the
microcontroller as non-volatile read-only memory. Based on the
inputs, the controller adjusts the pulse width modulated (PWM)
signal, p(t) that is sent to the LED driver. A PWM dimming scheme
was chosen over a constant current reduction dimming scheme due
to the lower chromaticity shift when the LEDs are dimmed using
pulse width modulation [32]. By varying the duty cycle, d(t) of this
PWM signal, the controller can regulate the LED string current, and
as a result, the LED brightness. The controller measures the duty
cycle as an unsigned 8 bit integer (0255). A PWM frequency of
1000 Hz was chosen to mitigate unwanted biological effects such
as headaches, nausea, and seizures that could arise due to invis-
ible icker at low frequencies up to 165 Hz [33]. The goal of the
control system is to minimize the error, e(t) within the bounds
of the acceptable range of errors. The error signal is calculated
with:
From Eq. (2), it can be seen that the user presence, M(t) has the
highest impact on the state of the control system followed by the
error signal, e(t). It is also notable that the rise time of the duty
cycle is dependent on the gain (K) and that the error tolerance is
dependent on the hysteresis (H) variable of the control system. The
rate of change is dependent on the user denable sampling period
(T). The response of the system to the control algorithm is shown
in a timing diagram in Fig. 3. The system responds on the rising
and falling edge of the clock signal at the controller clock speed of
16 MHZ. In practice, there will be a small rise time and fall time
at the edges of each signal. The light sensor data feedback rate
and wireless transmission frequency is dependent on the sampling
period of the control system.
2.2. Controller optimization
We can optimize the controller by tuning certain input param-
eters: the gain (K), hysteresis (H), and sampling period (T). Varying
any of these parameters will have an effect on the response of
the control system. In this section, we study the control system
response through experimentation to provide a guideline on how
to optimize the controller. We rst dene a base case where K = 1,
H = SP/20, T = 200 ms and SP = 1200 lx at 0.5 m from the luminaire.
K, H and T are then varied individually to observe the controller
response by measuring the luminaire output power until steady
state is reached.
First, we vary the sampling period, T. The results are shown in
Fig. 4(a). We observed that as T increases, the response time of
the controller decreases, where a 200 ms increase in the sampling
period results in a 30 s decrease in the controller response time.
In the case of T = 800 ms, the controller takes almost two minutes
to reach its steady state. However, the sampling rate is limited by
the bandwidth of the wireless module, which transmits the sam-
pled data and associated packet header. We found the minimum
sampling period to be T = 200 ms to ensure reliable wireless data
transmission. A lower sampling period also results in a more abrupt

e(t) = SP PV (t) (1)

The controller attempts to minimize the error by adjusting the duty

cycle, d(t) of the PWM signal that is sent to the LED driver. The
controller regulates d(t) with the equation:

M(t)[d(t) + K] if e(t) H
d(t) = (2) Fig. 3. The timing diagram of the control system with 0s rise time and the PIR
M(t)[d(t) K] if e(t) H
timeout,  = 0.
4 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19

Fig. 4. The controller response over 120 s with varying paramenters.

Fig. 5. The developed smart luminaire.

change in the illumination level which may not be comfortable
for the user. Also, decreasing the sampling period increases the
processing load on the controller.
Next, we observe the effect of varying the gain, K which is the
step size between subsequent duty cycle adjustments. The results
are shown in Fig. 4(b). We observed that the response time of the
controller increases when K increases which means that the system
converges faster toward its steady state. In the case of K = 1, it takes
around 30 s for the controller to achieve its steady state. This sug-
gests that the response time of the system is a function of the gain
and the sampling period. However, a large gain will lead to over-
shoot, especially when the error is small as can be seen when K = 10.
When there is an overshoot, sinusoidal oscillation around the target
PV will occur as the system attempts to correct itself by decreasing
the duty cycle. This is not acceptable for general illumination if the
light ickers at a frequency that is visible to humans.
Finally, we vary the hysteresis, H which is the acceptable range
of errors before the controller begins adjusting its output and is
dened as a function of the set point, SP. The hysteresis helps to sta-
bilize the controller in noisy environments. If the hysteresis value
is not signicant enough, it will lead to a constantly varying out-
put which will result in noticeable ickering at lower frequencies
as shown in Fig. 4(c). Based on the results, we notice that a large
hysteresis can lead to inaccuracy in the steady state level of the
controller. There is a noticeable deviation from the target set point
when H = SP/5. The deviation is even larger when H = SP/2. We also
observe that the hysteresis has no effect on the response time of
the system, as evidenced by the similar gradient, dP/dt for different
values of H.
Based on the experimental results, the recommended input
parameters for the controller are K = 2, H = SP/20, and T = 200 ms.
These parameters were selected to give an optimal rise time,
a stable steady state performance and an accurate steady state
output level.
3. Smart luminaire design
A smart LED luminaire was designed and constructed to imple-
ment the proposed controller. The smart luminaire consists of an
LED driver, LED strings, a ZigBee module, a microcontroller and sen-
sors. A wireless sensor module was also designed to interface the
ambient light sensor to smart luminaire via the IEEE 802.15.4 Zig-
Bee standard. We place the ambient light sensor at the work plane
level rather than with the luminaire to allow the ambient light sen-
sor to collect ambient light data accurately at work plane height.
Fig. 5(a) describes the relationship between all the system compo-
nents; the constructed smart lighting system and wireless sensor
module are shown in Fig. 5(b).
3.1. The LED driver
An LED driver with high electrical efciency is important to
achieve higher energy savings. We designed a DCDC LED driver
to power eight LED strings at a maximum string current of 700 mA
for each channel. We used the Texas Instruments LM3406 constant
current buck converter as the power controller of our driver. The
LM3406 contains a high side N-channel MOSFET switch with a suit-
able current limit. It also has a dimming pin that can be driven
by the ATMega328 microcontroller to achieve step-wise dimming
using PWM. Through experimentation, we veried that the bright-
ness of the LED strings driven by our designed LED driver is directly
proportional to the string current and the duty cycle of the PWM
signal as shown in Fig. 6.
 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19
Fig. 6. The brightness of the luminaire at 1.6 m and the PWM duty cycle versus the
LED string current.
Fig. 7. The input and output power consumption of the designed LED driver.
We used a Tektronix PA1000 power analyzer to measure the
power consumption of the luminaire. The electrical power input
at the maximum duty cycle was measured at 82.08 W. The elec-
trical power output at the maximum duty cycle for all channels
was measured at 75.86 W, which translates to a 92.41% maxi-
mum electrical efciency. Fig. 7 illustrates the variance in the input
power and output power over the entire dimming range. From the
graph, we notice that the efciency remains near constant over
the entire duty cycle range. In fact, the average electrical efciency
was measured at 91.96%, which is close to the maximum measured
efciency.
4. Experimental power consumption analysis
The amount of power saved can be calculated with the following
equation:
 t  t
Psaved (t) = P0 (t)dt Pc (t)dt
0 0
where Pc (t) and P0 (t) represent the output power of the designed
luminaire with and without the implemented control system
respectively. Fig. 8 shows a visualization of the power consumption
of the lighting system with and without the control system imple-
mented. From the gure, we can see that the energy consumed is
equivalent the area under the graph. Fig. 8 also shows the response
of the control system to the various inputs that were dened by the
user. We investigated the power consumption of the luminaire in
two different environments. Pc (t) and P0 (t) were logged to calcu-
late Psaved (t). In the rst experiment, the luminaire was placed in
5
Fig. 8. The power consumption of the luminaire visualized with and without the
control system.
Fig. 9. Test setup in the laboratory. The luminaire was switched on for 8 h and the
power consumption data recorded.
a laboratory that is used continuously throughout the day. In the
second experiment, the luminaire was tested in a classroom which
experiences a discrete usage pattern according to a timetable. We
present the results in the following section.
4.1. Continuous usage pattern environment
First, we tested the luminaire in a laboratory with a continu-
ous usage pattern. The luminaire was placed near two windows
to allow a large variance in the ambient light during the test.
The test area has pre-installed uorescent lights. The brightness
due to the uorescent lights alone was measured to be 467.2 lx at
table height (0.8 m) using a Konica Minolta CL-200A chroma meter
before the luminaire was switched on. We switched on the lumi-
naire at the required brightness to produce SP = 1200 lx at 1 m in
a dark room for a six hour period (1.30 PM-7.30 PM) to record our
base results for comparison. The power consumption was recorded.
Then, we included our closed-loop control system and switched on
the luminaire for a similar six hour period and measured the power
(3) consumption again. The power consumption was logged using a
Tektronix PA1000 power analyzer at an interval of 10 s. Fig. 9 shows
our test setup.
The results of the test are shown in Fig. 10(a). The power con-
sumption of the luminaire with the implemented control system
can be seen to increase over time as the ambient light in the room
decreases. The power consumption is at its highest after the sun
sets at around 7 PM. The average power consumption of the base
case was recorded at 35.8 W over the six hour period. In contrast,
the average power consumption of the luminaire with the control
system implemented was measured at 19.43 W. The energy saved
can be calculated by:
6 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19

Fig. 10. (a) Power consumption over time of the luminaire for a 6-hour period. We set t = 300 s, K = 1, H = SP/10, T = 200 ms, and SP = 1200 lx at 1 m. (b) The power consumption
of the luminaire with and without the proposed control system for a 7 day period. We set t = 300 s, K = 1, H = SP/10, T = 200 ms, and SP = 1200 lx at 1 meter.

Fig. 11. The effect of varying the ambient light conditions on the luminaire brightness in a classroom. (a) The ambient light level is set to maximum. (b) The ambient light
level is set to 50%. (c) The ambient light level is set to 25%. (d) The ambient light level is set to minimum.

Psaved (t) 4.2. Discrete usage pattern environment

Ps (t) = 100%
P0 (t)
Under the test conditions, the addition of the control system saved
16.37 W per hour or 98.22 W h over the test period. This translates
to 45.73% energy savings during this test period.
We then logged the power consumption of the luminaire for
a seven day period with and without the control system. The
luminaire was switched on for seven days from 8 AM to 8 PM
(12 h) during the normal laboratory working hours. The results are
summarized in Fig. 10(b). The average daily power consumption
without the proposed control system was measured at 70.94 W h
while the average daily power consumption with the proposed
control system was measured at 31.89 W h. By implementing the
proposed control system, we managed to achieve energy savings
of 55.05% over the 7 day test period.
(4)
We also installed a luminaire in a classroom with a discrete
usage pattern to analyze the power consumption of the luminaire
with the designed control system (shown in Fig. 11). The classroom
has pre-installed uorescent lights. The brightness due to the u-
orescent lights alone was measured to be 536.8 lx at table height
(0.8 m) using a Konica Minolta CL-200A chroma meter before the
luminaire was switched on. The power consumption was logged
using a Fluke 345 Power Quality portable clamp meter at an interval
of 10 s.
The average power consumption of the reference test where
the luminaire was switched on at all times (8.30 AM3.30 PM) was
14 W. In contrast to this, the average power consumption of the
luminaire with the implemented control system was 5.2 W. We cal-
culated that the control system implementation managed to save
 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19 7

Fig. 12. Power consumption from 8.30 AM to 3.30 PM for a typical day in a classroom. We set t = 300 s, K = 1, H = SP/10, T = 200 ms, and SP = 1200 lx at 2 m.

Table 2 Table 3
Power consumption analysis for a discrete usage pattern environment. Cost analysis of the developed energy-saving controller and a near-equivalent com-
mercial system.
Region (time) Analysis
Item Unit cost (USD) No. Total cost
1 (8 AM10 AM) We see a gradual reduction in the power
(USD)
consumption during the class. This is due to the
increasing ambient sunlight coming in from the ATMEGA328-PU 1.84 1 1.84
windows as the sun rises. The control system micro-controller
compensates for this by reducing the luminaire TEMT6000 ambient 2.03 1 2.03
light output intensity and by extension, the power light sensor
consumption of the luminaire. Circle 1 shows PIR sensor 2.37 1 2.37
when the class ended, leading to zero occupancy. 10 F capacitor 0.03 2 0.03
Therefore the control system turns off the 10 K resistor 0.01 1 0.01
luminaire. 220 resistor 0.01 2 0.02
2 (10 AM11 AM) We notice that the power consumption is near 16 MHz clock crystal 1.00 1 1.00
constant. The sun was almost fully risen at this 22 pF capacitor 0.03 2 0.06
time, which means that the ambient light level is LM3409 Buck 1.86 1 1.86
now near constant. Converter
3 (11 AM11.27 AM) The luminaire remains switched on between Power MOSFET 0.13 1 0.13
region 2 and region 3 because the class in region 2 1 F capacitor 0.08 3 0.24
ended late. This is shown by Circle 2. Therefore, the 470 pF capacitor 0.05 1 0.05
occupancy data remains constantly high. Circle 3 Resistors 0.06 4 0.24
shows the time when the class nally ended, and Inductor 0.35 1 0.35
the occupancy data goes to low. Diode 0.37 1 0.37
4 (11.27 AM12 PM) There were no classes during this region as Terminal block 0.11 2 0.22
evidenced by the zero power consumption. The CREE XT-E LED 0.82 6 4.91
power consumption is high during the start and tail ZigBee Module 3.19 2 6.38
end of this region as students were late to leave. PCB cost 2.37 2 4.74
5 (12 PM1.30 PM) During this time, the natural sunlight received by Proposed energy-saving system cost (USD) 26.85
the classroom is the highest since the sun is
Philips dimmable 19 W 18.99 1 18.99
shining at its brightest; hence the power
LED bulb [34]
consumption is the lowest in this region as
Motion sensing light 20.22 1 20.22
compared to the previous two regions. The power
socket [35]
consumption is also now near constant. Circle 4
Near-equivalent commercial system cost (USD) 39.21
shows when the lights were still switched off
because the class at this time started late.
6 (1.30 PM3.30 PM) During these regions, no classes were held.
However, the classroom was used by students to
sensors and the wireless module is 48.83% of the total system cost.
study. The usage pattern can be seen to be more
sporadic as students come and go. The ambient For comparison, the cost of a near-equivalent commercial system
brightness in the room can be seen to be almost is also presented. The commercial setup is manually dimmable and
constant. has an integrated PIR sensor. However, it does not take advantage of
the additional daylight harvesting technique proposed in this paper
and does not include a wireless sensor module. Our total system
8.8 W per hour or 61.6 W h over the 7-hour test period. This trans- cost was calculated to be 31.52% cheaper than the commercial sys-
lates to a total of 62.86% energy savings. The results are recorded tem. Although packaging, improved optics and commercialization
in Fig. 12. The power consumption of the luminaire can be divided can add to the nal total system cost, it is reasonable to assume that
into a few notable regions which are presented in Table 2. the total price of our system is still comparable and which has supe-
rior energy-saving capabilities, can be further decreased as smart
5. Cost analysis lighting becomes more prevalent in the global lighting market.
To further analyze the cost-saving potential of our designed
The total setup cost of the implemented smart luminaire with system, we conducted a cost analysis on campus in a total of 28
an integrated controller and wireless module is calculated and classrooms of various sizes for a period of 3 months (1 semester),
presented in Table 3. The cost of the micro-controller, integrated summarized in Table 4. Based on the number of hours that the
8 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19
Table 4
Cost analysis for 28 classrooms of varying sizes.
Type Rooms Occupied hours/week Required luminaires
Small 13 25.5 6 26.85
Medium 9 28.3 9 26.85
Large 6 27.3 12
Total setup cost for all classrooms (USD)
Fig. 13. Cost effectiveness analysis of the developed energy-saving controller.
classrooms were utilized and the results obtained in Section 4,
the total electricity cost with the energy-saving control system
implemented was estimated and compared with the current total
electricity cost, as shown in Fig. 13(a).
From the data presented in Fig. 13 (a), we notice an estimated
USD 1280.10 savings for a 3 month period, or a total savings of
USD 426.7 a month. The cost of setting up the new energy-saving
luminaires to produce comparable lighting performance in all 28
classrooms was calculated to be USD 6202.35 (Table 4). Based on
this sum, the time for the cumulative cost savings to exceed the
initial setup cost was calculated to be 14.54 months, as illustrated
in Fig. 13 (b).
6. Conclusion
In this paper, we developed an energy-saving controller for
a smart LED lighting system utilizing various sensors to provide
closed-loop feedback. Occupancy sensing and daylight harvesting
techniques are used to achieve high energy savings under dif-
ferent usage patterns, which are veried with real world tests.
The framework of the smart lighting system along with the con-
troller optimization process was also described. Experimentally,
the implemented control system managed to achieve 55% and 62%
energy savings in a continuous usage pattern environment and a
discrete usage pattern environment respectively under real world
test conditions. The results show increased energy-savings com-
pared to similar systems, especially for a continuous usage pattern
environment. Based on a cost-analysis, the designed energy-saving
control system is almost 32% more cost-effective compared to a
near-equivalent commercial setup, whilst introducing additional
autonomous daylight-linked control.
The scope of this paper was limited to the design of an energy-
saving controller and validation of its performance via real-world
experimental results. Further technical details regarding the design
of the smart lighting platform and the implementation of other
smart algorithms will be discussed in future publications. Possible
improvements include integrating additional energy-saving tech-
niques and implementing algorithms to take user preferences into
account.
Luminaire unit cost (USD) Setup cost/room (USD) Total setup cost (USD)
161.1 2094.3
241.65 2174.85
26.85 322.2 1933.2
6202.35
References
[1] C. Atici, T. Ozcelebi, J. Lukkien, Exploring user-centered intelligent road
lighting design: a road map and future research directions, IEEE Trans.
Consum. Electron. 57 (2) (2011) 788793, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCE.
2011.5955223.
[2] U. D. of Energy, Solid-State Lighting Research and Development Multi-Year
Program Plan, Tech. rep., 2013.
[3] M. Santamouris, E. Dascalaki, Passive retrotting of ofce buildings to
improve their energy performance and indoor environment: the ofce
project, Build. Environ. 37 (6) (2002) 575578.
[4] E. Union, 2010/31/eu Energy Performance of Buildings Directive, 2010.
Blomsterberg, M. Wall, Energy simulations for glazed ofce
[5] H. Poirazis, A.
buildings in Sweden, Energy Build. 40 (7) (2008) 11611170.
[6] J. Cooley, D. Vickery, A.-T. Avestruz, A. Englehart, J. Paris, S. Leeb, Solid-state
lamp with integral occupancy sensor, in: Applied Power Electronics
Conference and Exposition (APEC), 2010 Twenty-Fifth Annual IEEE, 2010, pp.
23052313, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/APEC.2010.5433558.
[7] Y.K. Tan, T.P. Huynh, Z. Wang, Smart personal sensor network control for
energy saving in dc grid powered led lighting system, IEEE Trans. Smart Grid 4
(2) (2013) 669676, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TSG.2012.2219887.
[8] B. Von Neida, D. Manicria, A. Tweed, An analysis of the energy and cost
savings potential of occupancy sensors for commercial lighting systems, J.
Illum. Eng. Soc. 30 (2) (2001) 111125.
[9] E.E. Richman, A.L. Dittmer, J.M. Keller, Field analysis of occupancy sensor
operation: parameters affecting lighting energy savings, J. Illum. Eng. Soc. 25
(1) (1996) 8392.
[10] D. Maniccia, A. Tweed, A. Bierman, B. Von Neida, The effects of changing
occupancy sensor time-out setting on energy savings, lamp cycling and
maintenance costs, J. Illum. Eng. Soc. 30 (2) (2001) 97110.
[11] X. Guo, D. Tiller, G. Henze, C. Waters, The performance of occupancy-based
lighting control systems: a review, Light. Res. Technol. 42 (4) (2010) 415431.
[12] J. Byun, I. Hong, B. Lee, S. Park, Intelligent household led lighting system
considering energy efciency and user satisfaction, IEEE Trans. Consum.
Electron. 59 (1) (2013) 7076, http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TCE.2013.6490243.
[13] J. Han, H. Lee, K.-R. Park, Remote-controllable and energy-saving room
architecture based on zigbee communication, IEEE Trans. Consum. Electron.
55 (1) (2009) 264268.
[14] S. Matta, S.M. Mahmud, An intelligent light control system for power saving,
in: IECON 2010 - 36th Annual Conference on IEEE Industrial Electronics
Society, IEEE, 2010, pp. 33163321.
[15] M. Miki, M. Nagano, M. Yoshimi, H. Yonemoto, K. Yoshida, Intelligent lighting
system with an additional energy-saving mechanism, in: 2012 IEEE
International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics (SMC), IEEE,
2012, pp. 31733178.
[16] A. Fernndez-Montes, L. Gonzalez-Abril, J.A. Ortega, F.V. Morente, et al., A
study on saving energy in articial lighting by making smart use of wireless
sensor networks and actuators, IEEE Netw. 23 (6) (2009) 1620.
[17] K. Papamichael, E. Page, K. Graeber, Cost effective simplied controls for
daylight harvesting, in: ACEE Summer Study on Energy Efciency in Building,
vol. 3, 2006, pp. 208218.
 I. Chew et al. / Energy and Buildings 120 (2016) 19
[18] M.T. Koroglu, K.M. Passino, Illumination balancing algorithm for smart lights,
IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 22 (2) (2014) 557567.
[19] A. Pandharipande, D. Caicedo, Daylight integrated illumination control of led
systems based on enhanced presence sensing, Energy Build. 43 (4) (2011)
944950.
[20] A. Pandharipande, D. Caicedo, Adaptive illumination rendering in led lighting
systems, IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. Syst. 43 (5) (2013) 10521062.
[21] M.-C. Dubois, A. Blomsterberg, Energy saving potential and strategies for
electric lighting in future north European, low energy ofce buildings: a
literature review, Energy Build. 43 (10) (2011) 25722582.
[22] A. Pandharipande, D. Caicedo, Smart indoor lighting systems with
luminaire-based sensing: a review of lighting control approaches, Energy
Build. 104 (2015) 369377.
[23] A.D. Galasiu, M.R. Atif, R.A. MacDonald, Impact of window blinds on
daylight-linked dimming and automatic on/off lighting controls, Solar Energy
J. Int. Solar Energy Soc. 76 (5) (2004) 523544.
[24] M. Rossi, A. Pandharipande, D. Caicedo, L. Schenato, A. Cenedese, Personal
lighting control with occupancy and daylight adaptation, Energy Build. 105
(2015) 263272.
[25] B. Roisin, M. Bodart, A. Deneyer, P. Dherdt, Lighting energy savings in ofces
using different control systems and their real consumption, Energy Build. 40
(4) (2008) 514523.
[26] R.F. Hughes, S.S. Dhannu, Substantial energy savings through adaptive
lighting, in: Electric Power Conference, 2008, EPEC 2008, IEEE Canada, IEEE,
2008, pp. 14.
9
[27] M. Arnold, G. Andersson, Model predictive control of energy storage including
uncertain forecasts, in: Power Systems Computation Conference (PSCC),
Stockholm, Sweden, 2011.
[28] A. Gonzalez, D. Odloak, Robust model predictive controller with output
feedback and target tracking, Control Theory Appl. IET 4 (8) (2010)
13771390.
[29] H. Chen, F. Xu, Y. Xi, Field programmable gate array/system on a
programmable chip-based implementation of model predictive controller,
Control Theory Appl. IET 6 (8) (2012) 10551063.
[30] M. Miki, A. Amamiya, T. Hiroyasu, Distributed optimal control of lighting
based on stochastic hill climbing method with variable neighborhood, in:
IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man and Cybernetics, ISIC, IEEE,
2007, pp. 16761680.
[31] V. Semiconductors, Vishay temt6000 Technical Datasheet, Tech. rep.,
2004.
[32] M. Dyble, N. Narendran, A. Bierman, T. Klein, Impact of dimming white leds:
chromaticity shifts due to different dimming methods, in: Proc. SPIE, vol.
5941, 2005, p. 59411H.
[33] A. Wilkins, J. Veitch, B. Lehman, Led lighting icker and potential health
concerns: IEEE standard par1789 update, in: Energy Conversion Congress and
Exposition (ECCE), 2010 IEEE, IEEE, 2010, pp. 171178.
[34] P. Electronics, Philips Dimmable 75 W Equivalent a21 Led Light Bulb Soft
White, http://goo.gl/huvnRZ.
[35] F. Alert, First Alert pir725 Motion Sensing Light Socket, http://goo.gl/qzFRBn.