Archinect
anchor

best daylighting analysis software?

chop924

Hi all,

Question regarding daylighting and solar analysis for concept-stage design. Our firm is currently investigating alternative software ot use for analysis. Our shortlist includes:

- IESVE w/ FlucsDL module

- DIVA for Rhino

- Sefaira

We currently use Ecotect w/ Radiance and Daysim for early analysis efforts and LEED EQc8.1 compliance but would like to stay current. Ecotect is a bit buggy. My knee-jerk reaction is to go with DIVA but I cannot seem to find any definite pro/cons to all of them.

Any insight as to which one may be better than the others? They all seem to offer relatively similar analysis.

Our main objective is to produce actual daylight/shadow/solar METRICS rather than just visuals. Radiation maps and renderings are great but we would like to see hard data in order to graphically and numerically represent design options and their implications.

Thank you.

 
Mar 13, 15 12:48 pm
Carrera

U.S. DE has some free software that I have used, didn’t like using it but got the job done for free. Can't remember exactly which one listed that I used but you can peck around.

http://apps1.eere.energy.gov/buildings/tools_directory/subjects.cfm/pagename=subjects/pagename_menu=materials_components/pagename_submenu=lighting_systems

Mar 13, 15 3:53 pm  · 
 · 
Mr_Wiggin

AGI 32, enough said...

Linky:  "AGI32, The lighting industry's premier calculation tool."

Mar 13, 15 4:27 pm  · 
 · 
chop924

Thanks both - 

@Carrera - I am aware of this site, and based much of my initial research off those options. I have noticed that the capabilities for the various daylighting/glare/lighting analysis software available is broad. Some are very specific (i.e. EvalGlare) while some are way more robust (i.e. DIVA). We are looking at these more robust options as we hope to potentially invest in a few licenses. 

@Mr_Wiggin - can you elaborate? Why is AGi32 better than the others? Our lighting designers do use AGI but I'm dubious about its daylighting analysis capability. I've heard that its fairly basic.

If anyone has any other insight please feel free to share...

Mar 17, 15 9:29 am  · 
 · 
mces

@chop924 - all you shortlisted software actually uses similar engine, Radiance. The difference is in GUI part and how the GUI design limits software capabilities. Diva gives more flexibility to maximize the engine than others. You can change Radiance parameters easily. Diva also has LEED v4 calculation as well. I won't recommend AGI if you dabble more in daylight.

Feel free to contact me directly if you have further questions.

Mar 18, 15 5:13 pm  · 
 · 
JReynders

It might be worthwhile to check out Ladybug/Honeybee plugin for Grasshopper if you're running Rhino. The interface takes a bit of getting used to, and being familiar with grasshopper is helpful too. But it's free, it's powerful, it uses Radiance and you can get actual numbers to go along with your visualizations.

Mar 18, 15 5:58 pm  · 
 · 
danielha

Try here. 

https://easysiteanalysis.com 

This website helps to collect site analysis data.

Jan 23, 19 12:55 pm  · 
 · 
jasonbird

www.mbs-software.co.uk

Does daylight calculations (VSC, No sky line,Annual probable sunlight hours, Climate based daylight calculations for LEED/BREEAM) with full excel exports as well as facade analysis. Runs in AutoCAD with a simpler version in Sketchup and a version for Revit on it's way.

Apr 2, 19 6:32 am  · 
 · 
AlinaF

Foster and Partners use AGI 32.



Aug 22, 19 10:13 pm  · 
 · 
betuluc

hi, my name is betül

Yıllık parlamayı hesaplıyorum. ancak, bir kullanım süresi olarak, her zaman 8-18 ve 7-15: 00 saatleri tanımlarım, ancak simülasyon sonucu aynıdır. Örneğin, 7-15: 00 kullanımı için, 15: 00'ten sonra parlama grafikte görünmemelidir, sonuç olarak 18: 00'da bile parlama gözlenir. Ben simülasyon hesabını tekrar tekrar yaptığımda aynı sonucu alıyorum. Gergedan için divadaki eğitim videosuna göre simülasyon verilerini veriyorum. bu konuda yardım edin.


Apr 3, 20 2:21 pm  · 
 · 
betuluc

hi,

I calculate an annual glare. however, as a time of use, I always define 8-18 and 7-15: 00 hours, but the simulation result is the same. For example, for the use of 7-15: 00, the glare after 15:00 should not appear on the graph, as a result, even at 18:00 glare is observed. I get the same result when I do the simulation account over and over again. I make the data for the simulation according to the training video on the diva for rhino site. please help with this.

Apr 3, 20 2:22 pm  · 
 · 

Block this user


Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?

  • ×Search in: