This research examined the impact of daylight exposure on the health of office workers from the perspective of subjective well-being and sleep quality as well as actigraphy measures of light exposure, activity, and sleep-wake patterns. Participants (N = 49) included 27 workers working in windowless environments and 22 comparable workers in workplaces with significantly more daylight. Windowless environment is defined as one without any windows or one where workstations were far away from windows and without any exposure to daylight. Well-being of the office workers was measured by Short Form-36 (SF-36), while sleep quality was measured by Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). In addition, a subset of participants (N = 21; 10 workers in windowless environments and 11 workers in workplaces with windows) had actigraphy recordings to measure light exposure, activity, and sleep-wake patterns. Workers in windowless environments reported poorer scores than their counterparts on two SF-36 dimensions--role limitation due to physical problems and vitality--as well as poorer overall sleep quality from the global PSQI score and the sleep disturbances component of the PSQI. Compared to the group without windows, workers with windows at the workplace had more light exposure during the workweek, a trend toward more physical activity, and longer sleep duration as measured by actigraphy. We suggest that architectural design of office environments should place more emphasis on sufficient daylight exposure of the workers in order to promote office workers' health and well-being.
A growing awareness has recently emerged on the health benefits of exposure to daylight and views. Daylight exposure is linked to circadian rhythm regulation, which can have significant impacts on sleep quality and cognitive function. Views of nature have also been shown to impact emotional affect and performance. This study explores the impact of optimized daylight and views on the sleep and cognitive performance of office workers. Thirty knowledge workers spent one week working in each of two office environments with identical layouts, furnishings, and orientations; however, one was outfitted with electrochromic glass and the other with traditional blinds, producing lighting conditions of 40.6 and 316 equivalent melanopic lux, respectively. Participants in the optimized daylight and views condition slept 37 min longer as measured by wrist-worn actigraphs and scored 42% higher on cognitive simulations designed to test their higher order decision-making performance. Both sleep and cognitive function were impacted after one day in the space, yet the impacts became more significant over the course of the week. The positive effect of optimized daylight and views on cognitive function was comparable for almost all participants, while increases in sleep duration were significantly greater for those with the lowest baseline sleep duration. This study stresses the significance of designing with daylight in order to optimize the sleep quality and performance of office workers.
Daylighting metrics are used to predict the daylight availability within a building and assess the performance of a fenestration solution. In this process, building design parameters are inseparable from these metrics; therefore, we need to know which parameters are truly important and how they impact performance. The purpose of this study is to explore the relationship between building design attributes and existing daylighting metrics based on a new methodology we are proposing. This methodology involves statistical learning. It is an emerging methodology that helps us to analyze a large quantity of output data and the impact of a large number of design variables. In particular, we can use these statistical methodologies to analyze which features are important, which ones are not, and the type of relationships they have. Using these techniques, statistical models may be created to predict daylighting metric values for different building types and design solutions. In this article we will outline how this methodology works, and analyze the building design features that have the strongest impact on daylighting performance.
The assessment of the daylighting performance of a design solution is a complex task due to the changing nature of daylight. A few quantitative metrics are available to designers to assess such a performance, among them are the mean hourly illuminance (MHI), the daylight factor (DF), the daylight autonomy (DA) and the useful daylight illuminance (UDI). Each of these metrics has a purpose, a set of criteria and limitations that affect the outcome of the evaluation. When to use one metric instead of another depends largely on the design goals to be achieved. Using Design Iterate Validate Adapt (DIVA) daylighting simulation program, we set out to examine the performance behavior of these four metrics with the changing dimensions of three shading devices: a horizontal overhang, a horizontal louver system, and a vertical fin system, and compare their performance behavior as the orientation changes of the window to which these devices are attached. The context is a typical classroom of a prototypical elementary school. Our results indicate that not all four metrics behave similarly as we vary the size of each shading device and as orientation changes. The lesson learned is that not all daylighting metrics lead to the same conclusions and that it is important to use the metric that corresponds to the specific goals and objectives of the design and of the daylighting solution. The UDI is the metric that leads to outcomes most different than the other three metrics investigated in this paper.
The development of the fluorescent lamp and the air-conditioning system resulted in buildings being lit inexpensively without having to rely on daylighting to save energy, as was the case during the incandescent lamp era. Consequently, architects were able to design buildings with deep floor plates for maximum occupancy, placing workstations far away from windows since daylighting was no longer a necessity. Floor-to-ceiling heights became lower to minimize the inhabitable volumes that needed to be cooled or heated. With the rising costs of land in some major American cities such as New York City and Chicago at the beginning of the twentieth century, developers sought to optimize their investments by erecting tall structures, giving rise to densely inhabited city centers with massive street canyons that limit sunlight access in the streets. Today, there is growing awareness in terms of the impact of the built environment on people’s health especially in terms of the health benefits of natural light. The fact that buildings, through their shapes and envelope, filter a large amount of daylight, which may impact building occupants’ health and well-being, should cause architects and building developers to take this issue seriously. The amount and quality of light we receive daily impacts many of our bodily functions and consequently several aspects of our health and well-being. The human circadian rhythm is entrained by intrinsically photosensitive retinal ganglion cells (ipRGCs) in our eyes that are responsible for non-visual responses due to the presence of a short-wavelength sensitive pigment called melanopsin. The entrainment of the circadian rhythm depends on several factors such as the intensity, wavelength, timing, and duration of light exposure. Recently, this field of research has gained popularity, and several researchers have tried to create metrics to quantify photopic light, which is the standard way of measuring visual light, into a measure of circadian effective lighting. This paper discusses the relationship between different parameters of daylighting and their non-visual effects on the human body. It also summarizes the existing metrics of daylighting, especially those focusing on its effects on the human circadian rhythm and its shortcomings. Finally, it discusses areas of future research that can address these shortcomings and potentially pave the way for a universally acceptable standardized metric.