34 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 52, NO.
1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016
A Procedure to Estimate the Energy
Requirements for Lighting
Giuseppe Parise, Fellow, IEEE, Luigi Martirano, Senior Member, IEEE, and Luigi Parise, Member, IEEE
Abstract—The amount of the electrical energy used for the
interior lighting of medium and large buildings is generally con-
siderable. The European Standard EN15193 was devised to es-
tablish conventions and procedures for the estimation of energy
requirements of lighting in buildings by an energy performance
numeric indicator. This methodology is based on the three derat-
ing factors that consider the influence of the daylight exploitation,
the occupancy behavior and, if present, of a constant illuminance
sensor. The factors are evaluated by a statistical approach on the
basis of general reference data tabulated by the same Standard,
not considering more detailed parameters of the control system
that can impact severely in the effective energy savings. The
Standard methodology appears extremely useful for a preliminary
evaluation. For a more accurate evaluation, this paper suggests
an improvement of the procedure that considers the effective
operation time and occupancy behavior, the type of control and
lamps, the number of control groups, the technique of modulation
(dimming or switching), and the delay in turning off. The sug-
gested procedure is compared with the Standard one to highlight
the improvements.
Index Terms—Building automation, efficiency evaluation, en-
ergy certification, green building, interior lighting system.
I. I NTRODUCTION
I N large buildings, a significant component of the energy
used is spent in illuminating the interior of the building [1].
The design of a lighting system has to be comprehensive in
regard to the basic design constitution, as well as its operation
and management. The comprehensive design has to survey and
define both aspects during the system configuration and during
the overall operational life cycle of the system [2].
Frequently encountered examples of excessive use of elec-
tric lighting occur when a room is partially or completely
unoccupied and when daylight is available to satisfy lighting
requirements partially or totally [3], [4]. In lighting systems,
the rational use of energy consists in the proposal of active
and passive measures to minimize the energy consumed by
the system maintaining the same performance or increasing
comfort and safety [5]. In order to reduce the energy W, two
Manuscript received March 8, 2014; revised June 25, 2014; accepted
August 2, 2014. Date of publication August 3, 2015; date of current version
January 18, 2016. Paper 2013-PSEC-0995.R1, presented at the 2014 IEEE
Industrial and Commercial Power Systems Technical Conference, Fort Worth,
TX, USA, May 20–23, and approved for publication in the IEEE T RANS -
ACTIONS ON I NDUSTRY A PPLICATIONS by the Power Systems Engineering
Committee of the IEEE Industry Applications Society.
The authors are with the Department of Astronautics, Electrical and Ener-
getics Engineering, Sapienza, University of Rome, 00184 Rome, Italy (e-mail:
parise@ieee.org; martirano@ieee.org; l.parise@ieee.org).
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TIA.2015.2463761
0093-9994 © 2015 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
kinds of actions are available: one that acts on the efficiency
and one on the effectiveness.
The system efficiency (W/m2 ) can be improved by minimiz-
ing the installed power PN . The strategy consists in adopting
equipment (lamps, control gear, luminaires, etc.) with high
classes of performance and in installing the system with good
practices (optimal choice of matrix of luminaires, optimal
choice of kind of optical, localized task lighting zones, etc.) in
order to guarantee the best illuminance level with the minimum
power [6]. A good strategy consists to subdivide the total area in
the actual task area (TA) and the surrounding area (SA) (zoning
strategy). The maintained illuminance EREF for the SA can be
lower (i.e., 200 lx) than the TA (i.e., 500 lx for office), according
to the Standard EN 12464-1 [7].
The effectiveness (kWh/m2 ) that is the usage efficiency can
be improved by minimizing the annual energy spent W. The
strategy consists in adopting Building Automation and Control
Systems BACS to avoid energy waste for unoccupied and
daylight hours [8]. In high-performance systems, a Technical
Building Management System (TBMS) has to be organized.
TBMS by means of BACS:
• provides complex and integrated energy saving functions
based on the actual use of a building, depending on the
user’s real needs to avoid unnecessary energy use;
• offers data and diagnostic information for a safer and
well-organized operation and maintenance.
For example, the Standard for the Design of High-
Performance Green Buildings [4] suggests the use of occupant
sensors with multilevel switching or dimming systems that
reduces lighting power when no persons are present. An auto-
matic control system utilizing time clocks, photocells, badges,
and other devices can be employed to switch or dim selected
groups of light. However, the kind and the layout of the control
system are to be correctly designed to efficiently exploit day-
light and no occupancy hours.
Several lighting active control strategies are available to
manage lighting energy use in buildings: scheduling (by pro-
grammed time clocks), occupancy (by switches or sensors),
daylighting (by sensors) and illuminance control [9].
It is well known that the presence of a control system cer-
tainly improves the energy performance of the lighting system,
but the quantification of the impact is more complex [10].
The EN 15193-1 [11] introduced a statistical methodology to
estimate the performance of an interior lighting system. The
procedure appears useful for a preliminary evaluation [12].
This paper suggests an improvement of the procedure taking
into the account also more detailed parameters that can have a
PARISE et al.: PROCEDURE TO ESTIMATE THE ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR LIGHTING
significant impact. The suggested procedure appears adequate
for more accurate evaluations. It is compared with the Standard
one to highlight the improvements.
II. C ONTROL S TRATEGIES
A lighting control system (LCS) could be classified accord-
ing to the following definitions [13]:
• Control technique (CT), that is, the way to regulate the
flux (switching or dimming);
• Control actuator (CA), which explains as is implemented
the CT (switch, relay not addressed, actuator addressed by
BUS, PLC);
• Control mode (CM), which explains as the CA operates
(manual, automatic stand alone, automatic centralized).
A LCS has to follow one or more of the following Control
Strategies CS:
• Occupancy: switching depending on the actual presence of
people in the local (room occupancy) or into the working
area (area occupancy). A typical occupancy strategy is the
time programming using a timer device (Scheduling);
• Daylighting: exploitation of the natural light coming
through windows [14];
• Integrating: integration of the LCS for a constant adjust-
ment to tracking an illuminance value constant in the
environment or in the work area considered [15].
A LCS operates by independent Control Groups CGs. A CG
is a part of the lighting system operated separately by a CA.
In a considered room, a CG can be: a single lamp, a single
luminaire, a group of lamps, a group of luminaires, and the
entire lighting system. In practice, when the CA is a switch or
a relay (not addressed systems), CGs of luminaires are chosen
in order to simplify the cabling. When an addressed system is
adopted, also single lamp, single luminaire and group of lamps
are implementable [16].
Combined Electric Light and Daylight Systems Ecodesign:
An integrated approach of combining electric and natural light
systems must be conceived from the beginning of the project,
including building orientation and siting, window and/or sky-
light design, and lighting and shading control systems de-
sign, as well as ongoing maintenance [17]. Daylight, electric
lighting, and shading systems cannot be considered separately
because daylighting affects electric lighting use and has the po-
tential of introducing direct sunlight and glare that may be un-
comfortable for building occupants. It is easy to demonstrate as
the presence of solar screens could improve the energy savings
not only in the air-conditioned system but also in lighting one.
A window without a screen works generally with blind down
in daylight time to avoid glare, and therefore, the electric light
works all on [15]. However, this requires cooperation between
architects and lighting engineers. Daylight, electric lighting,
controls and building design features must be seen as an integral
part of the overall energy optimization program. In particular,
the lighting designer has to consider not only a nighttime sce-
nario, but also a daytime one to consider the contribution of nat-
ural light in the rooms and the integration natural/electric light.
35
III. S TANDARD P ROCEDURE FOR I NTERIOR
L IGHTING S YSTEM E NERGY P ERFORMANCE
Taking into account the LCS, the energy spent by a lighting
system is [18]
W = (kP ∗ PN ) ∗ (kt ∗ t0 ) = FK ∗ PN ∗ t0 [kWh] (1)
where
PN is the total installed power for lighting [kW];
kP is a correction factor of the power [p.u.];
kt is a correction factor of the period [p.u.];
FK = kP kt is a global correction factor [p.u.];
t0 is the operating period of the building [h].
As energetic indicator it is possible to introduce the equiva-
lent period of use teq [hours] equal to
teq = W/PN = FK ∗ t0 [hours] (2)
Let us consider that in a system without control FK = 1,
and therefore, teq = t0 (the operating period of the system
coincides with the operating period of the building).
Standard EN15193 Procedure: The EN 15193 [11] provides
the lighting energy numeric indicator (LENI)
W
LENI = [kWh/m2 in a year] (3)
A
where A is the considered useful area [m2 ].
An estimate of the lighting energy required to fulfill the
illumination function and purpose in the building shall be es-
tablished using the following equation furnished by EN15193:
W = PN FC FO (tD FD + tN ) [kWh in a year] (4)
where
tD “daylight time usage” are the operating hours during
the daylight time, [h];
tN “nondaylight time usage” are the operating hours
during the nondaylight time, [h];
FO is the occupancy dependence factor that takes into
the account the annual energy saving due to the
occupancy strategy;
FD is the daylight dependence factor that considers the
annual energy saving due to the daylight strategy
[8], [9];
FC is the constant illuminance factor that considers the
annual energy saving due to the integrating strategy.
FC , FO and FD can be evaluated by formulas and tables
shown in the standard EN 15193 and simplified in previous
papers [8], [10], [18]. Let us note that the three factors are
estimated on the basis of statistical data [19]. It appears that
the data are generic and not applicable at national situations.
Occupancy Factor FO : FO is lower than 1 if an occupancy
detection is in operation in the room or zone. The detection can
be manual by a switch or automatic by a sensor, a badge or
other detectors. The manual switch can be local or centralized.
36 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 52, NO. 1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016
The Standard approach suggests the formulas
FO = 1−[(1−FOC ) ∗ FA /0.2] when 0 ≤ FA < 0.2 [p.u.] (5)
FO = FOC +0.2−F A when 0.2 ≤ FA < 0.9 [p.u.]
where
FA is the absence factor that is the proportion of the
time that the space is unoccupied; in the absence of
advanced analysis, the value of FA is determined at
either building or room level as given in Table D.2 of
the EN15193;
FOC is related to the control mode (manual, automatic or
centralized) by Table D.1 of the EN15193.
FO is equal to 1 in the following cases:
• if the lighting is switched on centrally, i.e., in more
than one room at once (e.g., a single automatic system,
for instance, with timer or manual switch for an entire
building, or for an entire floor, or far all corridors, etc.).
This applies whatever the type of “off-switch” (automatic
or manual, central, or per room, etc.).
• if the area illuminated by a group of luminaires that are
(manually or automatically) switched together, is larger
than 30 m2 .
Daylight Factor FD : FD is lower than 1 if a daylight
detection (manual by a switch or automatic by a sensor) is in
operation in the room or zone.
The FD factor is determined for a room or a zone in the
building as a function of the daylight supply factor FDS and
the daylight-dependent electric lighting control factor FDC , and
given by the following equation:
FD = 1 − FDS FDC [p.u.].
FDS depends on the daylight availability if weak, medium, or
strong, on the reference maintained illuminance value EREF ,
and on the latitude of building location.
FDC depends on the CM adopted for the control if manual or
automatic. The values of FD are tabulated (Table X) in [18].
To evaluate the daylight availability the Standard EN15193
introduced the factor Dc . In a previous paper the authors
suggested a simplified formula [18]
Dc = (0.5 + 7w) ∗ VT ∗ IO [p.u.]
where
w is the window index; it represents the ratio between the
window wide respect the wide of the room;
VT is the visible light transmitted by the glass of the
window. It depends on the glazing types (single-glazed
VT = 0.85) and could be modified adopting special
glasses or screens;
IO is an obstruction factor [p.u.] equal to
• cos(1, 5 ∗ γO ) for γO < 60◦
• 0 for γO > 60◦
γ0 is the obstruction angle [◦ ], as shown in Fig. 1.
(6)
Fig. 1. Obstruction factor.
The Standard [11] specifies the following relations:
DC > 3% strong daylight availability,
3% > DC > 2% medium daylight availability,
2% > DC > 1% weak daylight availability,
DC < 1% none daylight availability.
In zones without daylight availability (DC < 1%), FD = 1.
Constant Illuminance Factor FC : All lighting installations,
from the instant they are installed, start to decay and reduce their
output. In the design of the lighting scheme, the decay rate is
estimated and applied in the calculations known as the mainte-
nance factor (MF) [18]. As the task illuminance is specified in
terms of “maintained illuminance” to assure conformity, the sys-
tem should provide higher initial illuminance by a factor 1/MF.
In installations where a dimmable lighting system is provided,
it is possible to automatically control and reduce the initial lu-
minaire output to just provide the required EREF . Such schemes
(7)
are known as “controlled constant illuminance” systems.
FC is lower than 1 if a controlled constant illuminance
control is in operation in the room or zone. In this case, the
Standard suggests
FC = (1 + MF)/2 [p.u.]. (9)
Simplified EN15193 Procedure: In order to simplify (4) as
(1), the authors suggested to introduce the parameter τ = tD /t0
[p.u.] as the ratio between annual operation hours with daylight
(8) tD and total annual operation hours relating to building type t0 .
So (4) becomes equal to (1) with
∗
FK = FC FO FD [p.u.] (10)
where
∗
FD = [τ (FD − 1) + 1] [p.u.]. (11)
∗
FD is the daylight factor (DF) weighted on the annual operation
hours with daylight tD .
Revised EN15193 Procedure Implemented by the CG
Configuration:
Corrected DF: In order to consider the actual daylight avail-
ability, in some previous papers [8, 9, 10, 12, 18], the authors
introduced a parameter p = PD /P [p.u.] as the ratio between
PARISE et al.: PROCEDURE TO ESTIMATE THE ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR LIGHTING
Fig. 2. AD is the daylight area. Luminaires 1,2,3,4,5,6 are in the AD . In case
of an independent CD: p = 0.66. In case of a unique CG for all the luminaires
p = 0.
Fig. 3. Corrected illuminance factor FC according to the effective annual
operating hours t0 FO FD∗ assuming a complete maintenance cycle t
MF =
10 000 h and a MF equal to 0.6, 0.7, and 0.8.
the lighting power of luminaires group PD that is in daylight
area AD (see Fig. 2), and the total lighting power system PN . At
this aim, the authors suggested a methodology to estimate the
maximum possible depth aD of daylight area AD that receives
daylight through windows [14]. In first approximation, the deep
of the daylight penetration in the room aD could be assumed
equal to two times the height of the window h
aD ∼
= 2h [m]. (12)
In this approach (11) becomes
∗
FD = [pτ (FD − 1) + 1] [p.u.]. (13)
This correction allows to consider the CGs configuration (by
means of p parameter) but not the control technique.
Corrected Illuminance Factor: Let us note that the FC is
the ratio of the average input power over a given time to the
initial installed input power to the luminaire. This time has to
be the t0 (i.e., 2500 h for office buildings) reduced by FO and
∗
FD generally lower than a complete maintenance cycle tMF
(i.e., 10 000 h for fluorescent lamps). At this aim the FC of the
standard has to be reduced as the following formula:
∗
(1 − MF)t0 FO FD
Fc = 1 − [p.u.]. (14)
2tMF
Fig. 3 shows the impact of a constant illuminance sensor that
is inversely proportional to the effective annual operating hours
37
TABLE I
FOC E VALUATION , m I S M ANUAL , a I S AUTOMATIC ,
AND c I S C ENTRALIZED
∗
t0 FO FD . The installation of the sensor is strongly suggested
for the cases of a great number of operating hours t0 , in rooms
without daylight contribution and with a continuous presence
of persons or activities (corridors, halls, etc.).
IV. S UGGESTED P ROCEDURE FOR I NTERIOR
L IGHTING S YSTEM E NERGY P ERFORMANCE
A new approach is suggested to evaluate FO , FD , FC aban-
doning the general statistical data of EN15193 and adopting
more detailed parameters with respect to the characteristics of
the actual system. The factors are evaluated considering also:
1) the actual type of control like the number of the CGs; 2) the
CT (dimming or switching); and 3) the delay in turning off.
These aspects are generalized in the standard approach.
Occupancy Factor FO : The suggested approach introduces
the following formula:
FO = 1 − FA FOC [p.u.] (15)
where FOC is related not only to the control mode (manual,
automatic, or centralized) but also to the prospected behavior
of the occupants of the room representable by the factor FE
(see Table I).
FE factor is the exit factor and represents the number of exit
from the room in 1 h (see Fig. 4). It can be 0 < FE ≤ 6 ().
FR is the delay factor. It depends on tR [minutes], the delay
setting time in the automatic off switching, and on tA [minutes],
the absence time in 1 hour.
Considering that
tA = 60FA /FE [minutes] (16)
it is possible to evaluate
FR = 1 − tR /tA , if tA > tR (17)
FR = 0, if tA ≤ tR . (18)
Obviously, in the designing and installation it is necessary to set
the delay time tR in such a way that tR < tA .
Compared with the standard method, this methodology con-
siders the behavior of the occupants by means of the exit factor
FE , and the behavior of the automatic system by means of the
delay factor FR .
Fig. 5 shows a sample case of a room with FA = 0.4 and a
control manual on and automatic off. The impact of the occu-
pancy control, according to the suggested approach, depends on
FE and tR . According to the EN15193 FO = 0.6 regardless of
the behavior of the occupants (FE ) and the delay of the control
(tR ). According to the suggested approach FO = 0.6 for FE =
0.1 (i.e., an office) regardless of the delay of the control (tR ), or
38 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 52, NO. 1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016
Fig. 4. Prospected behavior of the occupants of a room. The tR is the delay
time in switching off the light.
Fig. 5. Occupancy factor FO for a room with FA = 0.4, for different FE and
tR and according to the Standard EN15193.
0.6 < FO = 1 depending on the delay time of the control (tR ).
If the room is a restroom with FE = 5, tR has to be < 5 min.
Let us know that the annual energy savings ΔWO in per unit
due to the occupancy strategy is
ΔWO = (1 − FO ) [p.u.].
Daylight Dependency Factor: This section describes a sim-
plified approach for determining the daylight dependence factor
FD . In this approach a room is subdivided in three zones [14]
according to the daylight penetration:
• a Window Zone WZ with a depth aWZ = h, with a full
daylight penetration;
• a Transition Zone TZ with a depth aTZ = aD = 2h, with
a mitigated daylight. The AD is the sum of the zones WZ
and TZ;
• an Interior Zone IZ with no daylight availability. The area
corresponds with the area AND of EN 15193.
The quantity of daylight in a zone can be quantified by
the DF [p.u.] that represents the ratio of external and internal
illuminance. The average DF for the WZ and TZ, for rooms
with strong, medium, weak and none daylight availability are
shown in Table II.
The room can be classified in:
• Narrow rooms, when d/h < 1. In this case of rooms, there
is present only the WZ.
• Deep rooms, when d/h > 1.
TABLE II
AVERAGE VALUES OF D F FOR WZ AND TZ
TABLE III
FDS FOR N ARROW ROOMS (d/h < 1) AND D EEP ROOMS (d/h > 1)
TABLE IV
FDC FOR D EEP ROOMS (d/h > 1)
Similarly to the standard approach, the daylight dependence
factor FD for a room or a zone in the building is determined as
a function of FDS and FDC (7).
Daylight Availability Factor FDS : By adopting the method
proposed in the previous paper [14], it is possible to estimate
the values of FDS and FDC (according to the EREF and the
CGs layout).
Table III shows the values of FDS for narrow rooms and
(19) deep rooms, respectively, as EREF and the daylight availability
change.
The FDS values shown in Table III are calculated by the
authors, considering the average DF shown in Table II.
Lighting Control Factor FDC : The FDC values are shown in
Table IV.
Let us note that in the deep rooms, the values depend on the
CGs layout (see Fig. 6). In Table IV:
S1GC one GC for all the luminaires of the AD in switching
mode (on/off);
S2GC two independent GCs for AD : one for the WZ and one
for the TZ, in switching mode (on/off);
S50% like S2GC but with the possibility to partialize each
group at 50% of the light output;
DM individual dimming.
Let us know that the annual energy savings ΔWD in p.u. due
to the daylight strategy is
∗
ΔWD = (1 − FD ) [p.u.] (20)
∗
where FD is evaluated by applying equations (7) and (13)
adopting the values of Tables III and IV.
PARISE et al.: PROCEDURE TO ESTIMATE THE ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR LIGHTING 39

Fig. 6. Control groups layout. S1GC: one group of control for all the lumi-
naires of the AD in switching mode (on/off), S2GC: two different groups of
control, one for the WZ and one for the TZ, in switching mode (on/off). S50%
like S2GC but with the possibility to partialize each group at 50% of the light
output. DM individual dimming.
Fig. 7. Illuminance and power in a lighting system during a life cycle. In the
case of absence of any control, the power density δNC is constant (flat dashed
line). With an illuminance constant control, the power density is growing but
with a different behavior for Fluorescent δC (FLUOR) and LED δC (LED)
systems.

Constant Illuminance Factor: The authors suggest a cor-

rected formula useful to determine the constant illuminance
factor, taking into the account the luminous flux decaying
MF(t) and the oversizing. It is known that a lighting system
should provide higher actual illuminance EA because the in-
stalled density power PN /A is definitely greater than the power
density δ [W/m2 ] theoretically required to illuminate the area.
The density δ that furnishes on the working plane a theoretic
illuminance ET more than the EREF , can be easily estimated
by the cavity method
EREF (1 + paux )
δ= [W/m2 ] (21)
εL CU MF Fig. 8. Power-flux linear characteristic of a test conducted for a 35-W LED
panel Pandora Green 35 W compared with the characteristic of a fluorescent
where 2x18W.

εL [lumen/W] is the lamp efficiency;

TABLE V
paux [p.u.] is the power needed for ballast’s operation; S UMMARY OF FACTORS E VALUATION
CU [p.u.] is the optical performance depending on the
luminaire and on the geometric and color
characteristics of the room;
Fig. 7 shows the decaying of the actual illuminance
MF(t)∗ EA and of the theoretic illuminance MF(t)ET during
the life cycle of the lamps.
The formula suggested useful to determine the constant
illuminance factor is
 ∗

∗ (1 − MF)t0 F0 FD Aδ
Fc 1 − × [p.u.]. (22)
2tMF PN The annual energy savings ΔWC in p.u. due to the constant
illuminance considering the dimming factor is
In order to consider the nonlinear light/power characteristic
for fluorescent or halogen lamps, the authors suggest the intro- ΔWC = 1 − FC = (1 − FC∗ )(1 − FCT ) [p.u.]. (24)
duction of a dimming factor FCT that can be assumed equal to 0
for LED (see Fig. 8) and 0.2 for fluorescent and halogen lamps The global correction factor FK is evaluated by (10), where
FO , FD , and FC are calculated by the proposed procedure
FC = 1 − (1 − FC∗ )(1 − FCT ) [p.u.]. (23) synthetized in Table V.
40 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON INDUSTRY APPLICATIONS, VOL. 52, NO. 1, JANUARY/FEBRUARY 2016
TABLE VI
C ASE S TUDY D ATA
TABLE VII
C ASE S TUDY R ESULTS
The annual energy savings ΔW due to the control system is
ΔW = ΔWO ΔWD ΔWC [p.u.] (25)
V. C OMPARISON B ETWEEN THE A PPROACHES
A sample case of a room is analyzed to compare the Standard
approach and the proposed one (see Table VI).
Table VII highlights the following.
• The EN 15193 procedure seems too generous in the
estimation of the spent energy particularly for deep rooms
(FK = 0.26 in comparison to higher values shown in the
SG1C or S2GC rows of the Table).
• The revised EN15193 procedure implemented by the CG
configuration corrects the DF FD as it considers the
luminaires group PD that is in daylight area AD .
• The proposed procedure gives results more accurate con-
sidering the actual control system.
• The FK value according to the EN15193 (Standard and
revised) is comparable with the FK evaluated by the
suggested procedure in the case of dimming mode.
VI. C ONCLUSION
This paper has suggested an improvement of the procedure
for the estimation of the lighting energy in the buildings. The
suggested procedure considers the actual type of control such
as the number of control groups, the technique of modulation
(dimming or switching), the delay in turning off, and the
prospected behavior of the occupants. The suggested procedure
has been compared with the Standard one to highlight the
benefits.
R EFERENCES
[1] F. Rubinstein, M. Siminovitch, and R. Verderber, “Fifty percent energy
savings with automatic lighting controls,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 29,
no. 4, pp. 768–773, Jul./Aug. 1993.
[2] D. R. G. Hunt, “The use of artificial lighting in relation to daylight levels
and occupancy,” Building Environ., vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 21–33, 1979.
[3] California Energy Commission, “Building energy efficiency standards for
residential and non-residential buildings,” in California Code of Regula-
tions, Title 24, Part 1, 2008.
[4] Standard 189 for the Design of High Performance Green Buildings,
ANSI-ASHRAE Std. 189.1, Jan. 2009.
[5] G. Parise and L. Martirano, “Ecodesign of lighting systems,” IEEE Ind.
Appl. Mag., vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 14–19, Mar./Apr. 2011.
[6] G. Parise and L. Martirano, “Impact of building automation, controls
and building management on energy performance of lighting systems,”
in Proc. IEEE ICPS, Calgary, AB, Canada, May 3–7, 2009, pp. 1–5.
[7] Light and Lighting—Lighting of Work Places—Part 1: Indoor Work
Places, EN Std. 12464-1, 2011.
[8] L. Martirano and S. Di Ponio, “Procedure to evaluate indoor lighting
energy performance,” in Proc. 11th EEEIC, Venice, Italy, May 18–25,
2012, pp. 200–2005.
[9] L. Martirano, “A smart lighting control to save energy,” in Proc. 6th IEEE
IDAACS, Prague, Czech Republic, Sep. 15–17, 2011, pp. 132–138.
[10] L. Martirano, “Lighting systems to save energy in educational class-
rooms,” in Proc. 10th EEEIC, Rome, Italy, May 8–11, 2011, pp. 1–5.
[11] Energy Performance of Buildings—Energy Requirements for Lighting—
Part 1: Lighting Energy Estimation, EN15193_1 Mar. 2005.
[12] G. Parise, L. Martirano, and G. Cecchini, “Design and energetic analysis
of an advanced control upgrading existing lighting systems,” IEEE Trans.
Ind. Appl., vol. 50, no. 2, pp. 1338–1347, Mar./Apr. 2014.
[13] G. Parise and L. Martirano, “Combined electric light and daylight sys-
tems ecodesign,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 1062–1070,
May/Jun. 2013.
[14] G. Parise and L. Martirano, “Daylight impact on energy performance of
internal lighting,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 49, no. 1, pp. 242–249,
Jan./Feb. 2013.
[15] L. Martirano, M. Manganelli, L. Parise, and D. Sbordone, “Design of a
fuzzy-based control system for energy saving and users comfort,” in Proc.
EEEIC, Krakow, Poland, May 10–12, 2014, pp. 142–147.
[16] D. L. Carni, D. Grimaldi, F. Lamonaca, L. Martirano, and G. Parise,
“A smart control to operate the lighting system in the road tun-
nels,” in Proc. IEEE 7th IDAACS, Berlin, Germany, Sep. 12–14, 2013,
pp. 786–790.
[17] L. Martirano, “A sample case of an advanced lighting system in an edu-
cational building,” in Proc. EEEIC, Krakow, Poland, May 10–12, 2014,
pp. 46–51.
[18] G. Parise, L. Martirano, and S. Di Ponio, “Energy performance of interior
lighting systems,” IEEE Trans. Ind. Appl., vol. 49, no. 6, pp. 2793–2801,
Nov./Dec. 2013.
[19] Energy Performance of Buildings—Impact of Building Automation,
Controls and Building Management, EN 15232, Oct. 2007.
PARISE et al.: PROCEDURE TO ESTIMATE THE ENERGY REQUIREMENTS FOR LIGHTING 41

Giuseppe Parise (M’82–SM’03–F’10–LF’15) re-
ceived the M.S. degree in electrical engineering from
the Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy, in
1972.
Since 1973, he has been with the Department
of Electrical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering,
Sapienza University of Rome, where he is currently
a Full Professor of electrical power systems and the
Coordinator of the Electrical Engineering Section,
Dipartimento di Ingegneria Astronautica, Elettrica
ed Energetica (DIAEE). He has been a Designer
of power electrical systems in building complexes, such as in the Sapienza
University City, the Engineering Faculty, the Polyclinic Umberto I, the Italian
Parliament, and the Campus Biomedical Research Center. He is the author or
coauthor of about 250 papers. He is the holder of two patents.
Prof. Parise has been a member of the Superior Council of the Ministry
of Public Works since 1983. He is active in the IEEE Industry Applications
Society (IAS, past Member-at-Large of the Executive Board) and is the Chair of
the Italy Section Chapter IA34, and he is a Member Expert of the International
Electrotechnical Commission, the Italian Electrical Commission (CEI), and the
Italian Association of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (AEIT). He is the
Vice President of the Association of Safety Technology Research for Industry
and a past President of the Rome Section of AEIT. Since 1975, he has been
a Registered Professional Engineer in Italy. He was a recipient of three Prize
Paper Awards from the IEEE/IAS Power System Department (PSD).
Luigi Parise (S’06–M’10) received the B.S., M.S.,
and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering from
Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy, in 2007,
2009, and 2014, respectively.
He is currently a Research Fellow with the Uni-
versity of Calabria (UNICAL), Arcavacada, Italy,
and he is a Tutor in electrical power systems in
hospitals with the University Biomedical Campus of
Rome, Rome, Italy.
Dr. Parise is a member of the Electrical Italian
Association (AEIT), the R8/Europe Area Chair of
the IEEE Industry Applications Society (IAS) Student Branch Chapters, and
the Secretary of the Italy Section, IAS Chapter. Since 2008, he has been a
Registered Professional Engineer in Italy. He was the recipient of the 2010
Italian Electrotechnical Committee (CEI) Award for the Best Thesis titled
Electrical Service Continuity in Critical Buildings–Protection of Hospitals
Against Lightning.

Luigi Martirano (S’98–M’02–SM’11) received the

M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in electrical engineering
from the University of Rome “La Sapienza,” Rome,
Italy, in 1998 and 2002, respectively.
He is currently a Researcher of electrical power
systems and an Assistant Professor of building au-
tomation and energy management with Sapienza
University, Rome. He is the author of more than
80 papers in international journals and conference
proceedings and is the holder of one international
patent. His research activities cover power system
design, planning, safety, lighting, home and building automation, and energy
management.
Dr. Martirano is a senior member of the IEEE Industry Applications Society
and a member of the Italian Association of Electrical and Electronics Engineers
(AEIT) and of the Italian Electrical Commission (CEI) Technical Committees
CT205 (Home and Building Electronic Systems) and CT315 (Energy Effective-
ness). He is a Registered Professional Engineer, in Italy.