Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

Tubular daylight devices (TDDs) require a much smaller roof opening than conventional skylights and, because of their highly reflective tube, they can deliver daylight farther away from the building envelope. This can provide lighting energy savings, increasing resilience in new and existing buildings. Different types and configurations are available amongst commercially available TDDs, including domes/diffusers with varying optical properties and the diameter of the TDD. This paper presents a comprehensive experimental evaluation of the lighting and visual comfort performance of multiple configurations of commercially available TDDs, varying dome type (prismatic and clear), diffuser type (Fresnel and prismatic), and diameter (53 and 35 cm), under a range of environmental conditions (different times of day/year, sky cover). Based on illuminance measurements, estimated lighting energy use is also presented. Results indicate that, for clear sky, light levels increase and energy use decreases with solar altitude (e.g., 16 Wh/m2 daily energy use intensity on a high maximum daily solar altitude (MDSA) day and 34 Wh/m2 on a low MDSA day) and TDD diameter (e.g., 34 Wh/m2 and 69 Wh/m2 for 53 cm and 35 cm TDDs, respectively, for low MDSA). The daily illuminance profile is more rounded for prismatic domes and has higher peaks for clear domes; this translates into a somewhat higher average daily useful daylight illuminance (DUDI) for prismatic domes (86 %) when compared to clear domes (80 %). No clear impact of diffuser type was apparent. Measurements indicated no discomfort glare for any of the conditions tested.