[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Skylights: The Flourescent Conspiracy
-
To: london@sunsite.unc.edu
-
Subject: Re: Skylights: The Flourescent Conspiracy
-
From: nick@vu-vlsi.ee.vill.edu (Nick Pine)
-
Date: 14 Jun 1995 07:26:48 -0400
-
Organization: Villanova University
-
References: <3rk3a0$ahs@eplet.mira.net.au>, <Pine.PTX.3.91j.950613115504.2670A-100000@carson.u.washington.edu>, <beartoe-1306952351550001@ivy-a3.aip.realtime.net>
-
Sender: london@sunsite.unc.edu
Robert Anderson <beartoe@ddg.com> wrote:
>...south-facing glass in clerestories is problematic, don't you think?
No... Or maybe yes, but the problems seem solvable.
>Yes, it does induce solar gain when needed, but strongly beamed
>light, hot spots and shadows, etc.
Seems like some diffuse reflection would help here.
>Give me north-facing clerestory lights any day, well-insulated in the north.
Less light that way, and not much solar heat gain. Net losers. Facing south,
perhaps with a reflective parabolic sunscoop that acts as a summertime
overhang, skylights could be net gainers in wintertime. (Although Norman
Saunders' house had some North-facing solar collectors, as an experiment...)
>Nice even sky illumation, predictable, diffuse....
Nature is somewhat unpredictable. Perhaps you could make the store lighting
more predictable by adding some flourescents that dim when daylight is
available, making a more constant illumination.
Nick