Solar Energy Materials and Solar Cells 29 (1993) 1-26

Nort h-Hol l and

Solar Ener w Materi al s
and Solar Cells
Perf ormance of l aser cut light def l ect i ng panel s
in daylighting appl i cati ons
I an R. Ed mo n d s
School of Physics, Queensland University of Technology, P.O. Box 2434,
Brisbane, Q 4001, Australia
Received 23 April 1992; in revised form 16 Sept ember 1992
The manufact ure, application and performance of a mat eri al which combines light deflecting
propert i es with good viewing t ransparency is described. The material, of similar thickness to
conventional glass glazing, is produced by l ami nat i ng laser cut acrylic sheet bet ween sheet s of
glass. It is designed t o replace glass in in clerestory windows and at ri a t o improve t he distribution
of daylight in rooms. Equat i ons for t he deflection angle and amount of light deflected are
derived and rel at ed t o applications of t he mat eri al for daylighting and for sunlight exclusion.
Measured performance of t he mat eri al in t he daylighting application is obt ai ned, in model
rooms, for a wide range of sky conditions. The mat eri al is most effective as a hung or tilted
window in di rect sunlight, however i mprovement in i nt eri or illumination with t he window
vertical and in overcast conditions is also significant.
1. I nt r o duc t i o n
In large modern buildings the distribution of adequat e daylight into the interior
is made difficult by the economies of modern design which lead to large horizontal
working areas of small vertical dimension. Daylight, flowing in a generally down-
ward direction, does not effectively penet rat e such structures, and most modern
buildings rely almost entirely on electric lights for interior illumination. The
advantages of daylight are that it is free, is derived from an inexhaustible,
nonpolluting source and provides more pleasant illumination than electric light.
Therefore the question arises as to whet her daylight may be distributed more
effectively into buildings.
The technically complicated approach involving solar tracking mirrors and light
pipes has been explored [1-4]; however, the simpler approach of replacing all or
part of existing windows with devices which redirect light into a more effective
direction seems more economically attractive. Previously described optical ele-
ments which transmit and deflect light have been based on refraction in prismatic
elements [5], refraction and total internal reflection in prismatic elements [6],
reflection at metallic surfaces [7], and diffraction [8]. Prismatic glass is suitable for
diffuse daylighting and has been used commercially for some time in the form of
Correspondence to: I.R. Edmonds, School of Physics, Queensl and University of Technology, P.O. Box
2434, Brisbane, Q 4001, Australia.
0927-0248/ 93/ $06. 00 1993 - Elsevier Science Publishers B.V. All rights reserved
LR. Edmonds / Laser cut light de~ctmg panek
Fig. 1. Deflection of light in a transparent rectangular parallelepiped.
prismatic glass blocks [5]. When the prismatic profile is elevated a high proportion
of the. light may undergo total internal reflection at an external face of the prism in
addition to refraction. Prototype elements of this type have been produced and
shown to be suitable for beam daylighting [6]. However the elevated prismatic
profile is difficult to clean and in practice a double glazing is necessary for
protection. Additionally the view through any type of prismatic panel is severely
distorted. It is desirable for practical, economic and aesthetic reasons that optical
elements replacing windows should be similar in appearance, viewing transparency,
method of installation and maintenance to ordinary glass sheet. The previously
mentioned optical elements do not meet these criteria, in particular in respect to
viewing transparency.
Light entering a rectangular parallelepiped may suffer total internal reflection
at the adjacent face and be deflected through a large angle as in fig. 1. An array of
such elements placed one above the other as in fig. 2a, forms a light deflecting
panel with excellent viewing transparency provided the viewing direction is near
normal to the panel. If the elements of such an array are of the more general form
as in fig. 2b, the internal interfaces may be angled so as to deflect incident light
towards the normal to the panel and more deeply into a room. Methods for
producing practical panels in these forms will now be described.
[ [
F i g . 2 . A n a r r a y o f r e c t a n g u l a r e l e m e n t s f o r m s a l i g h t d e f l e c t i n g p a n e l w i t h g o o d v i e w i n g t r a n s p a r e n c y
n o r m a l t o t h e p a n e l ( a ) . W h e n t h e i n t e r n a l i n t e r f a c e s s l o p e i n t o t h e r o o m i n c i d e n t l i g h t i s d e f l e c t e d
m o r e d e e p l y i n t o t h e r o o m .
I . R E d m o n d s / L a s e r cut light deflecting panels 3
2. Fabrication
A light deflecting panel of the form shown in fig. 2 may be assembled from
machined or extruded elements mount ed one above the ot her in an array bet ween
plane transparent sheets of glass. This met hod was used in the present work to
produce panels in the form shown in fig. 2b but proved to be laborious. The use of
laser cutting to divide a transparent sheet of plastic into the required elements
proved very much more convenient, [9]. The laser cuts acrylic plastic by melting
and ablation and produces highly polished total internal reflecting interfaces
within t he material. Connection of t he elements may be maintained by leaving a
perifery of solid material or by ensuring the laser cuts only part way through the
material. The panel may be prot ect ed by laminating to one or two thin sheets of
glass or ot her transparent material. Magnified crossections through a 6 mm panel
and a 7 mm panel are shown in fig. 3. Each of these panels has been produced in
the standard width (152 ram) appropriate for commercial louvre panels. One such
louvre panel is shown in fig. 4 to demonst rat e the excellent transparency when
viewed at near normal incidence. A near specular pattern of the deflected light is
demonst rat ed in fig. 5 where direct sunlight is deflected sharply upwards across a
wall. Careful examination reveals that the deflected light is spread to some extent
due to slight irregularities in the reflecting surfaces produced by laser cutting.
The relevant optical properties of the laser cut panel (LCP) are the deflection
angle, the fraction of light deflected for a given incidence angle and the spread or
Fi g. 3. Magni f i ed cr ossect i ons t hr ough l aser cut panel s. The upper panel , 6 mm thick, compr i s es 3 mm
l aser cut acrylic l ami nat ed be t we e n t wo 1.5 ram gl ass sheet s. The l ower panel , 7 mm thick, is 5.5 mm
acrylic cut part l y t hr ough and l ami nat ed t o 1.5 mm acrylic.
4 LR. Edmonds / Laser cut light deflectingpanels
Fig, 4. A laser cut louvre panel showing excellent transparency when viewed normally.
divergence of t he light due t o t he surface roughness of t he i nt erfaces produced by
t he laser. The former may be found from el ement ary optics while t he spreadi ng of
t he light depends on t he type of laser used and the rat e of cutting and must be
measur ed directly with t he manuf act ur ed panel.
3. Optics of the LCP
The cross section of an LCP el ement is shown in vertical ori ent at i on in fig. 6a.
Assumi ng t he i nt ernal i nt erfaces are optically fl at and t he i nt ernal cuts are of
negligible wi dt h t he panel is defi ned by four paramet ers; D, t he di st ance bet ween
t he cuts; W, t he di st ance t he cuts ext end t hr ough t he sheet; 0, t he angle of t he cuts
relative t o t he normal and n, t he refractive index of t he mat eri al . Li ght i nci dent on
t he face of t he el ement may be defl ect ed (ray 1), or may pass t hrough undef l ect ed
(ray 2). I f consi derat i on is rest ri ct ed to light i nci dent in t he pl ane of t he crossection
t hen for light which is defl ect ed (ray 1 in fig. 6a) t he angle of incidence on t he exit
face is
i 2 ----- r I -- 20. (1)
The angle at which defl ect ed light leaves t he exit face, r2, is
r 2 = aresi n(n sin( r I - 20) ) . (2)
The total angle t hrough which i nci dent light is defl ect ed is i I + r 2. For example,
when t he cuts are made at an angle 0 - - 0 , (rect angul ar cross section), light
i nci dent at il = 60 is defl ect ed t hrough an angle 120 .
LR. Edmonds / L aser cut light deflecting panels
d e f l e c t e d
interior 90%
Fig. 5. A laser cut panel placed end on against a wall showing near specular deflection of direct sunlight
incident from above right.
8%
For t he daylighting of rooms t he elevation at which light is defl ect ed into t he
room, r2, is more rel evant t han t he total deflection. The vari at i on of r 2 with
elevation of t he i nci dent light, it, is given in fig. 6b. Positive values of # (t he cuts
sloping downwards t owards t he room) result in t he defl ect i on of light towards t he
normal and more deepl y into a room. Also, positive values of O result in
collimation of t he light i nci dent in a given i nput angul ar range into a narrower
out put angul ar range; as i l l ust rat ed by t he dot t ed lines in fig. 6b.
Ther e is an angul ar range wi t hi n which all light is defl ect ed. If, as shown in fig.
7a, light is i nci dent on t he upper corner of t he el ement at such an angle, imj,, t hat
t he refract ed ray meet s t he lower corner, all light i nci dent at this angle will be
6 I. R Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels
D
I
w
( a )
0/
~ 8 0 - 7
7t / / 7
"o
6 0
~0
~3o
/ : ',
~101/ / : ',
0 ~ '
0 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 8 0 9 0
(b) I n c i d e n c e a n g l o
Fig. 6. Light incident on a general element may be deflected, ray 1, or pass through undeviated, ray 2
(a). The elevation of the deflected light depends on incident elevation and the slope, e, of the internal
interfaces (b).
def l ect ed. An g l e s i n ~ a n d r=i n ar e r es pect i vel y t he mi n i mu m angl es o f i nc i de nc e
a nd r e f r a c t i on at whi c h all i nci dent l i ght is de f l e c t e d by t he e l e me nt . F r o m fig. 7a,
t an r ~ m = ( D + W tan O) / W=D/ W + t an 0. (3)
As t he angl e o f i nci dence is i nc r e a s e d all i nci dent l i ght is def l ect ed unt i l t he r ay
i nci dent on t he l ower c o r n e r o f t he e l e me nt is r e f r a c t e d a n d r ef l ect ed i nt er nal l y t o
t he u p p e r c o r n e r o f t he e l e me n t as s hown i n fig. 7b. He r e
( D - W t an O) / W= t an i 2 = t an( r m=, - 2 0 ) ( 4)
def i nes t he ma x i mu m angl e o f r ef r act i on, rrr ~ , and, t h r o u g h Snel l ' s l aw t he
l!= ~ ~ v w w=. o w= 0 ~
(a) Co)
Fig. 7. Optical paths determining the maximum and minimum angles of the angular range within which
all incident light is deflected.
LP,. Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels 7
m a x i m u m a n g l e o f i n c i d e n c e , imax, a t wh i c h al l l i g h t i s d e f l e c t e d . F o r e x a m p l e
w h e n D/ W= 2 / 3 , 0 = 50* a n d n = 1. 5; i m, = = 74. 96 a n d imi ~ = 65. 58 , a n d al l
l i g h t i n c i d e n t wi t h i n t h i s 10. r a n g e i s d e f l e c t e d . Wh e n 0 = 0 , rm= , = rrain----r0,
ira= , = i m i . = i 0 a n d e qs . ( 3) a n d ( 4) r e d u c e t o t a n r o f D / W w h e r e r 0 i s t h e
r e f r a c t i o n a n g l e a t wh i c h al l i n c i d e n t l i g h t i s d e f l e c t e d .
T h e f r a c t i o n o f l i g h t d e f l e c t e d f o r i < imi * a n d i > ira, = m a y a l s o b e f o u n d b y
e l e m e n t a r y g e o me t r i c a l o p t i c s ( A p p e n d i x 1). F o r i < im~ n t h e f r a c t i o n d e f l e c t e d , f d,
i s g i v e n b y
f d = ( W t a n r 1 - W t a n O)/ D = ( t a n r 1 - t a n O)W/ D. ( 5 )
F o r i > im= , t h e f r a c t i o n d e f l e c t e d i s g i v e n b y
f d = 1 - ( { W [ t a n ( r t - 2 0 ) + t a n 0] - D } c o s ( r 1 - 2O) / ( D c o s r ] ) ) . ( 7 )
I n e a c h c a s e t h e f r a c t i o n wh i c h i s n o t d e f l e c t e d i s 1 - f d. Wh e n 0 = 0 t h e f r a c t i o n
d e f l e c t e d f o r i < imtn b e c o m e s f d = ( W t a n r l ) / D a n d t h e f r a c t i o n d e f l e c t e d f o r
i > ira, = b e c o m e s f d - - 2 - ( W t a n rl ) / D. R e f l e c t i o n l os s a t t h e i n p u t a n d o u t p u t
f a c e s b e c o m e s i m p o r t a n t a t h i g h a n g l e s o f i n c i d e n c e . T h i s a s p e c t o f t h e o p t i c s o f
t h e d e v i c e i s d i s c u s s e d b r i e f l y i n A p p e n d i x 3. T h e f r a c t i o n d e f l e c t e d i s s h o wn a s a
f u n c t i o n o f i n c i d e n c e a n g l e f o r t h e s i mp l e c a s e w h e n 0 = 0* i n f i g. 8 a a n d w h e n
0 - - 7 , i n f i g. 8b. T h e g e n e r a l f e a t u r e s t o n o t e a r e t h a t a s t h e r a t i o D/ W i n c r e a s e s
m o r e l i g h t i n c i d e n t a t h i g h e r a n g l e s o f i n c i d e n c e i s d e f l e c t e d . F o r 0 = 0 t h e r e i s
j u s t o n e a n g l e o f i n c i d e n c e a t wh i c h al l l i g h t i s d e f l e c t e d w h e r e a s f o r 0 > 0 t h e r e i s
a n a n g u l a r r a n g e wi t h i n wh i c h al l l i g h t i s d e f l e c t e d . Wi t h 0 > 0 . t h e a n g u l a r r a n g e
o f i n c i d e n c e wi t h i n wh i c h a s u b s t a n t i a l f r a c t i o n o f l i g h t i s d e f l e c t e d s h i f t s t o h i g h e r
' t
D/W-O. D/W - 0.3
0.9 0.9
0.8 0.8
0.7 ~ 0.7
0.6 ~ 0.6
0.5
o ~ o.s
0.4 g 0.4
0 . 3 ~o 0 . 3
0.1 0.1
0.0 0 . 0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
( a ) I nci dence angl e ( b ) I nci dence angl e
Fi g. 8. T h e f r ac t i on o f i nc i de nt l i ght d e f l e c t e d f or t h e c a s e wh e r e t h e e l e me n t i s r e c t a ng ul a r ( 8 = 0) a n d
wh e r e t h e i nt e r nal f a c e s o f t h e e l e me n t ar e s l o p e d (O = 7 . ) f or di f f e r e nt v a l u e s o f t h e s pa c i ng t o d e p t h
rat i o, D / W.
8 LI~ Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels
"12
0
=_
Q
" 0
t -
O
0

1.0
0. 9-
0. 8-
0. 7-
0. 6-
0. 5-
0.4
0 . 3
0.2
0 . 1
0 . 0
D / W = 0 . 5
= | = i | | | w
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
e l e v a t i o n a n g l e ( o )
Fig. 9. The fraction of light deflected versus elevation of i nci dent light illustrating t hat , in t he case of
oblique incidence when t he azimuth angle A > 0 , t he fraction of light deflected is only weakly
dependent on azi mut h angle.
angles by approximately 20. For 0 = 0 and the panel in vertical orientation the
elevation of the deflected light equals the elevation of the incident light so that the
graph, fig. 8a, contains all relevant information. When 0 > 0 the fraction of light
deflected is found from fig. 8b and the elevation into which it is deflected is read
from fig. 6b. It is evident from eqs. (5) and (7), that for rays incident in the normal
plane the fraction of light deflected depends on the geometrical parameters, D, W
and 0 and the angle of refraction at the front face of the element. For oblique rays
it is the angle of the projection of the refracted ray onto the normal plane which
will determine the fraction deflected. It is shown in Appendix 2 that for a panel, in
vertical orientation and on which light of elevation, E, and azimuth, A, relative to
the normal is incident, the angle made by the projection of the refracted ray on the
normal plane, rp, is given by
tan rp = sin E / ( n 2 - 1 + cos2A cos2E) ]/2. ( 8 )
Substitution of r p for r t, in the expressions for elevation angle, (eq. (2)), and for
fraction of light deflected (eqs. (5) and (7)), gives the required dependence with
azimuth angle. For example the fraction of light deflected by a vertical panel as a
function of elevation angle and for two azimuth angles is shown in fig. 9. It is
evident that the optical properties are only weakly dependent on azimuth angle.
This dependence will be neglected in the general discussion of applications to
daylighting which follows but should be taken into account in detailed analyses.
LIL Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels
Fi g. 10. T h e p r i ma r y a r c h i t e c t u r a l a p p l i c a t i o n o f l i g h t d e f l e c t i n g p a n e l s i s t h e d i s t r i b u t i o n o f d a y l i g h t
o v e r t h e c e i l i n g o f a r o o m.
4. Applications
Sunl i ght is an economi c sour ce of i l l umi nat i on and heat f or buildings. Passing
t hr ough convent i onal wi ndows di rect sunlight or beam daylight gives, on hori zont al
wor k surfaces close t o t he windows, i l l umi nat i on levels of approxi mat el y 100,000
lux. As this level is about 100 t i mes t he comf or t abl e i ndoor worki ng level di rect
sunlight is usually excl uded f r om work areas by shades or ot her means t her eby
r educi ng t he cont r i but i on f r om f r om di r ect sunlight t o zero. However wi t h light
defl ect i ng panel s t he possibility exists of defl ect i ng all or most of t he di rect
sunlight and di rect i ng it over t he ceiling deep within t he building. The advant ages
of this t echni que, known as beam daylighting, have been discussed by a number of
wor ker s [3,4,7]. In this t echni que di r ect sunlight ent er i ng a wall aper t ur e is
def l ect ed by a devi ce in t hat aper t ur e as a col l i mat ed beam at a low angl e of
el evat i on, V, across t he ceiling as in fig. 10. An aper t ur e 1 m in hei ght can pr ovi de
an even i l l umi nance of appr oxi mat el y 105 t an V cos E lux across t he ceiling t o a
dept h of 1/ ( t a n V) met res. For exampl e when V = 3 and t he el evat i on of t he sun,
E = 60 t he i i l umi nance of t he ceiling t o a dept h of 20 m (60 ft) is 2500 lux (230 ft
candl e). The i l l umi nat i on on work surfaces di rect l y bel ow t he i l l umi nat ed ceiling
woul d be appr oxi mat el y hal f this val ue [7]. To mai nt ai n t he emer gent beam near
hor i zont al as t he i nci dent sunlight varies over t he el evat i on r ange bet ween summer
and wi nt er (typically f r om 70 t o 20 in t emper at e climates) t he devi ce must be
adj ust ed by tilting about a hori zont al axis. Rosenf el d and Selkowitz [7] and ot her s
[6] have descr i bed tiltable devi ces t o accompl i sh beam daylighting. The LCP is
most conveni ent l y made t i l t abl e by i ncor por at i ng t he panel in a hung wi ndow as in
fig. 10 or by i ncor por at i ng several panel s in a l ouvre window, as in fig. 11. In t he
simplest case when t he l aser cuts in t he LCP are made at 0 = 0 and light is
def l ect ed hori zont al l y i nt o t he room, t he r equi r ed tilt angl e of t he louvres, T,
equal s t he angl e of i nci dence on t he panel , i, and T + i = E, t he sol ar el evat i on.
Thus t he l ouvres shoul d be t i l t ed t o T = E/2. For exampl e as t he sol ar el evat i on
changes f r om 20 t o 70 t he l ouvres shoul d be t i l t ed f r om 10 t o 35 . The angl e of
i nci dence on t he panel s will also vary f r om 10 t o 35 , Ref er r i ng t o fig. 8a, f or
10 I.R Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels
/
1
i
( a ) C o )
Fig. 11. Several light deflecting panels in a louvre window may be tilted to direct sunlight deeply into a
room (a). When the louvre panels are fully open for viewing and ventilation the window has the
additional property of excluding direct sunlight from the room (b).
D/ W= 0.3 and light i nci dent on t he panel in t he r ange 10 t o 35 , t he aver age
f r act i on def l ect ed is appr oxi mat el y 75%.
Di ffuse dayl i ght , t hat is t he light scat t er ed f r om t he bl ue or over cast sky,
pr oduces i l l umi nat i on levels of t he or der of 1000 lux on wor k surfaces near
windows. Thi s level falls rapi dl y wi t h di st ance f r om t he wi ndow so t hat at 4 or 5 m
f r om t he wi ndow s uppl ement ar y lighting is usually r equi r ed. Li ght def l ect i ng
panel s can di rect a si gni fi cant pr opor t i on of di ffuse dayl i ght t owar ds t he ceiling
and mor e deepl y i nt o t he r oom t her eby levelling t he di st ri but i on of dayl i ght wi t hi n
t he r oom. The dayl i ght f r om over cast skies comes pr edomi nant l y f r om t he zeni t h
and t hi s det er mi nes t he geomet r y of t he r equi r ed LCP. For exampl e choosi ng a
LCP wi t h W/ D- - 0 . 7 and O = 0 and fixing this as a vert i cal wi ndow panel
provi des, accor di ng t o fig. 8a, for def l ect i on of about 80% of t he i nci dent light in
t he el evat i on r ange bet ween 45 and 90 . By choosi ng a panel cut at O = + 7 t he
light i nci dent in t he s ame el evat i on r ange is di r ect ed i nt o t he el evat i on r ange
bet ween 20 and 45 and t her ef or e mor e deepl y i nt o t he r oom, fig. 6. In this case,
accor di ng t o fig. 8b, t he choi ce of W/ D = 0.5 woul d pr ovi de near 90% def l ect i on
of t he light in this el evat i on range. Li ght f r om t he zeni t h is col l ect ed mor e
effect i vel y by a panel which is t i l t ed out f r om t he bui l di ng as in fig. 10. For
exampl e a panel t i l t ed out f r om a bui l di ng at 20 i nt er cept s about twice as much
light in t he el evat i on r ange above 45 as a vert i cal panel . A panel t i l t ed at 20 and
I.R. E d m o n d s / L a s e r c u t light deflecti,'sg p a n e l s 1 1
with cuts at 0 = 0 directs light incident in the elevation range 450-90 into the
elevation range between 50 ~ and 5 and deeply into the room. An LCP with
W/ D -- 0.7 would be appropriate in this case providing approximately 75% deflec-
tion in this range.
Exclusion of direct sunlight from the windows on the South, East and West
facades of buildings (Northern hemisphere), is usually achieved by shades, over-
hangs and light shelves. However, the same exclusion may be accomplished when
necessary, for example to avoid overheating, by an LCP when it is utilised as a
tiltable hung window or as louvres. If the panels are tilted to the near horizontal
all direct sunlight may be deflected exterior to the building as shown in fig. 1lb.
For the exclusion of all direct sunlight by this method a relatively high ratio of
D/ W is required, for example, D/ W = 0.7 in fig. 8a or D/ W= 0.5 in fig. 8b. In
this application the tiltable LCP has the unique property of totally excluding direct
sunlight while being fully open for viewing and ventilation. Since it is usually
desirable that louvres or hung windows be closed and admit sunlight in winter and
be open and reject sunlight in summer this application of the LCP seems well
suited for environment control of houses or community buildings such as schools.
The ability to selectively reject light from different angles of elevation provides
an important application to the design of atria. An atrium is usually provided to
maximise light input from above to an enclosed space in the building. However in
summer the accompanying heat input frequently becomes excessive demanding the
provision of high cooling capacity in the building. If the glass panels of conven-
tional atria, which are usually mounted in triangular configuration, are replaced by
light deflecting panels the high elevation summer sunlight is effectively rejected
from the atrium, fig. 12, while low elevation light, that is, winter and diffuse light,
is admitted.
5. Measurements
5.1. Performance of laser cut panels (cut at 0 = 00) in model rooms.
The performance of various types of light deflecting panels under clear and
overcast sky conditions was tested in a scale model room provided with a luxmeter
to measure illumination levels at workplace height at equally spaced intervals into
the room, fig. 13. Note that a small aperture i~ provided at the rear of the room for
direct observation of light level and glare and for photography. The dimensions of
the model, fig. 14, were chosen to give a very deep room with a window aperture
about half the height of the room at one end. The panels placed in the aperture
could be tilted to a known angle as necessary. All measurements were taken in the
open on top of a building such that obstructions to the horizon were neglible.
Laser cut light deflecting panels were mounted in the window aperture of the
model room and tilted so that the light was deflected across the ceiling of the
room, fig. 15a. The performance of an LCP when tilted was was compared with the
performance of an LCP in vertical orientation and with a clear acrylic panel
12 1,R. Edmonds / Laser cut light deflating ~md s
s u m m e r l ~ '

s u mme r wi nt er
Fig. 12. When the conventional glass panels of atria are replaced by laser cut panels the high elevation
summer sunlight is rejected from the atrium space and the entry of low elevation diffuse or winter
sunlight is enhanced.
( r epr esent i ng a convent i onal window), figs. 15b and 15c. The phot ogr aphs , t aken at
t he s ame exposur e set t i ng and wi t h t he s ame pr ocessi ng show cl earl y t hat tilting an
LCP t o def l ect di r ect sunl i ght over t he ceiling is ver y effect i ve in i ncreasi ng
i l l umi nat i on on wor ksur f aces deep in a r oom. The changes in i l l umi nat i on ob-
ser ved visually ar e s omewhat less pr onounced t han i ndi cat ed in t he t hr ee pho-
t ogr aphs due t o t he l ogar i t hmi c r es pons e of t he eye. I t is di ffi cul t t o j udge t he level
of gl ar e as in each of t hese phot ogr aphs t he vi ew t hr ough t he wi ndow t owar ds t he
hor i zon over exposed t he film. However , it was obser ved visually t hat t he gl are
associ at ed wi t h t he LCP was not excessively hi gher t han t he gl are associ at ed wi t h
t he vi ew of t he cl ear sky.
The i mpr ovement in wor ksur f ace i l l umi nat i on as me a s ur e d by a l uxmet er at
var i ous di st ances f r om t he wi ndow was most ma r ke d in di rect sunlight. Meas ur e-
ment s obt ai ned wi t h an LCP t i l t ed to 25 and in vert i cal or i ent at i on (0 ) ar e
c ompa r e d in fig. 16 wi t h me a s ur e me nt s obt ai ned wi t h a cl ear acrylic wi ndow in t he
LR~ Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting paneb 13
Fig. 13. The model room used to measure the performance of laser cut panels is deep and provided
with a luxmeter for the measurement of worksurface illumination at various depths into the room.
m
14 LR Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels
Fig. 14. Di me n s i o n s of t he mode l r oom in ram. Th e wi ndow wi dt h f or t he l aser cut pa ne l s is 500 mm
a n d for t he ma c h i n e d pa ne l s is 260 r am.
aperture. The measurements show the very substantial improvement in worksur-
face illumination (300% to 400%) may be achieved by a tilted the panel. The
analysis in section 4 shows that the panel should be tilted to half the elevation
angle of the sun to deflect eight horizontally into the room. For the conditions
corresponding to the measurements shown in fig. 16 (solar elevation 62), this
would require a tilt angle of 31 , however, as observed during the experiment, the
glare from the window then becomes excessive. The tilt of 25 provides a compro-
mise between improved illumination and increased glare. Assuming the panel
deflected light specularly it is simple, from the equations of section 3, to calculate
the distribution and intensity of the sunlight deflected onto the ceiling. The
resultant rectangular diffuse source on the ceiling may then be treated by the usual
methods for calculating illumination levels due to extended sources [10] to estimate
the worksufface illumination levels in t he room. Calculation using this procedure
resulted in the predicted distribution shown in fig. 17. Also shown is the measured
distribution. It is apparent that while the predicted level approximates the mea-
surements in the front half of the room, the prediction under estimates levels deep
in the room by a large factor. The discrepancy is due to neglect of spreading of the
deflected light. The spreading of the light will be examined in detail in section 5.3.
The effect of tilting a laser cut panel when the sky is overcast was examined by
measuring the daylight factor. Under overcast skies short term variations in
illumination make it necessary to base measurements of interior illumination on
the daylight factor [10] defined as the ratio of the interior worksurface illumination
to the illumination measured on an exterior horizontal surface. The daylight factor
was measured at an interior point five window depths into the room while the
panel was tilted from vertical through 180 . The result is shown in fig. 18. Interior
illumination initially increases then decreases until at about 90 (the panel near
horizontal) most of the high elevation light incident on the window is rejected from
I. R Edmond~ / Laser cut light deflecting panels 15
Fig. 15. Phot ographs t aken duri ng cl ear sky, di rect sun condi t i ons t o show t he distribution of i nt eri or
light when t he laser cut panel is tilted t o di rect sunlight over t he ceiling, upper photo, when t he laser
cut panel is vertical, middle photo, and when a convent i onal window (clear acrylic) is in t he window
space, lower photo. The phot ographs were t aken at t he same exposure setting and processed identi-
cally.
16 I. R Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panel~
J l \ \ I
. 1 ~ 0 . . . . . -
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
w i n d o w d e p t h I n t o r o o m w i n d o w d e p t h I n t o r o o m
Fig. 16. Measurement under clear sky with the sun at 62* elevation of worksurface illumination versus
depth into a model room. The three curves of the left hand graph are of illumination levels obtained
with a vertical (0") and tilted (25*) laser cut panel and for a plane clear acrylic panel. In the right hand
graph the illumination versus depth obtained with the laser cut panel is plotted as a ratio to the
illumination with depth obtained with a plane clear acrylic panel.
the room. The illumination then increases again as the panel tilts above the
window and the window becomes an open aperture. The distribution of light
within the room when the panel is tilted at 30* is compared with the distribution
100
1o,
|
| 1,
i c~c~aaKl ( . 35)
. 0 1 , , - , - , - ,
0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2
w l n d o w d e p t h I n t o r o o m
Fig. 17. Calculation of worksurface illumination versus depth assuming sunlight is deflected specul~ly
compared with the measured worksurface illumination.
I . R Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecdng panels 17
0.18
0.16
0.14
0.12'
0. 10
0. 08
i I I i I
0 30 60 90 120 150 180
angl o of t i l t In dogrees
Fig. 18. Measur ement under overcast skies of t he vari at i on of t he daylight factor, measured at
work.surface hei ght five window dept hs inside t he model room, as t he laser cut panel in t he window is
tilted upwards from t he vertical (0 ~) position in t he window, t hrough 180 t o fully open.
for a vertical panel and a clear panel in fig. 19. While a vertical panel effects only
small improvement a tilted panel provides substantial improvement in light levels
deep into the room. Under a clear blue sky with no direct sunlight incident on the
.1
~m>'.O 1
.001
30"df
O'of
clear df
- I i I " I I
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
wi ndow dept h Into room
2 . 0
o
m
o, o
1.0
0. 0
----O--- ~ - rztlo
: O" mUo
I I - i i i
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
wi ndow depth Into room
Fig. 19. Measur ement under overcast skies of t he vari at i on of daylight factor with dept h in t he model
room when t he window comprises a laser cut panel vertical (0 ) and t i l t ed (30") and a clear acrylic panel
(left hand graphs). The daylight factor obt ai ned wi t h t he vertical and t i l t ed laser cut panel s as a rat i o to
t he daylight factor obt ai ned with a cl ear acrylic panel (ri ght hand graphs).
18 I.R. Edmonds / Laser cut//ght dotltct/ng pane/s
1 0 ~ - - - - - o - - - at)"
j , .
i '
|
. 1 1 1 . . . .
0 2 4 6 8 1 0 1 2
w i n d o w d e p t h I n t o r o o m
Fig. 20. Measurements under clear blue sky with no direct sunlight on the window of the variation of
worksurface illumination versus depth into the model room with a vertical (0") and tilted (30 ) laser cut
panel and with a clear acrylic panel in the window aperture.
wi ndow t he LCP pr oduces no change in t he i nt er i or light di st ri but i on whet her
t i l t ed or vertical, fig. 20. The di f f er ence in per f or mance under di ffuse cl ear and
di ffuse overcast skies evi dent l y arises f r om t he fact t hat light comes pr edomi nant l y
f r om t he hor i zon under bl ue sky and pr edomi nant l y f r om t he zeni t h under overcast
skies.
5. 2. P e r f o r ma n c e o f p a n e l s wi t h i n t e r f a c e s a t 0 = 7 ~
The panel s used in this par t of t he st udy wer e pr oduced by t he met hod of
machi ni ng el ement s and assembling an ar r ay of t hese bet ween glass t o f or m panel s
with i nt ernal i nt erfaces sl oped at 7 and 0 . Thi s was necessary as it was not
economi cal f or small number s of pr ot ot ypes t o modi fy a commer ci al l aser cut t i ng
machi ne f or of f nor mal cutting. For consi st ency t he 0 panel used in this par t of
t he wor k was also manuf act ur ed f r om machi ned el ement s. The t wo light defl ect i ng
panel s wer e compar ed in per f or mance with a simple doubl e gl azed glass wi ndow of
t he same size; in this case of hori zont al di mensi on 260 mm ( cor r espondi ng t o t he
dot t ed lines in fig. 14). Resul t s obt ai ned with di r ect sunlight at el evat i ons of
appr oxi mat el y 60 and 40 ar e shown as rat i os of wor ksur f ace i l l umi nat i ons versus
dept h i nt o t he room, fig. 21. Gl are, as obser ved t hr ough t he aper t ur e at t he end of
t he room, was not excessive. It is evi dent t hat subst ant i al i mpr ovement in illumina-
tion,, appr oxi mat el y 50% f or 0 i nt erfaces and 100% f or 7 i nt er f aces may be
obt ai ned deep inside t he r oom in di r ect sunlight condi t i ons.
Unde r overcast skies measur ement s of daylight f act or versus dept h i nt o t he
r oom, fig. 22a, and daylight f act or ratios, fig. 22b, show t hat fixed vert i cal light
defl ect i ng panel s pr ovi de onl y modest i mpr ovement in light distribution.
LI~ Edmonds / Laser cut//#ht d e ~t mg p a n ~ 19
"o
o 1
0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 0 2 4 6 8 10
wi n d o w de pt h I nt o r oom wi n d o w de pt h I nt o r oom
Fi g. 21. Th e r at i o of wor ks ur f a c e i l l umi nat i on obt a i ne d wi t h a pa ne l wi t h i nt er nal i nt er f aces s l oped at
0 = 70 a n d wi t h a pa ne l wi t h hor i zont al i nt er f aces ( 0 = 0 ) r el at i ve t o t h e wor ks ur f ace i l l umi nat i on
obt a i ne d wi t h a cl ear acrylic panel . Re s ul t s obt a i ne d u n d e r cl ear ski es wi t h t he s un el evat i on 41 - 44
( l ef t si de) a n d t he s u n el evat i on 570- 59 ( r i ght si de).
114t 1 1 2
~
1.0
0. 6"
7"rdo
o" nuio
.0001 0 . 4 i - i | i
0 12 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
wi n d o w d e p t h I nt o r oom
- - - - O- - 7" day~t f=ctor
* o" d~t ght teztor
- - - - o- - - doul~ 9lazed clzylk~ht fac~
e i i ;
2 4 6 8 10
wi n d o w dept h I nt o r oom
Fi g. 22. Me a s u r e me n t s u n d e r over cas t ski es of t he dayl i ght f act or ve r s us d e p t h i nt o r o o m f or f i xed
ver t i cal l i ght def l ect i ng pa ne l s wi t h i nt er f aces at 7 a n d 0 = a nd f or a cl ear acryl i c pa ne l (left); a nd
dayl i ght f act or f or t h e def l ect i ng pa ne l s as a r at i o t o dayl i ght f act or d u e t o t h e cl ear acryl i c pa ne l ve r s us
d e p t h (ri ght ).
20 LP~ Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panel~
w in d o w ~ ~ . . . . ' / " / " " " " 40
\ I s l o_ 3 0
"~ 2 0
10 ' ~
O ~
6 , 0 .
( a ) ( b )
Fig. 23. (a) To determine the extent of light spreading, direct sunlight incident from left above is
deflected by a laser cut panel onto a wall. Measurements of illumination on the wall versus height
above the panel, (b), show that the deflected light is distributed within an angular range bounded by the
broken lines. The full line in (b) shows the distribution expected for specular deflection.
5. 3. Spreading of deflected light
The simple geomet r y of t he LCP provi des, in principle, specul ar def l ect i on of
light. However , in pract i ce it is f ound t hat l aser cut t i ng yields surfaces which ar e
not opt i cal l y flat. The resul t is t hat t he defl ect i on of di rect sunlight is not specul ar
but exhibits some spreadi ng, as shown by t he phot ogr aph of fig. 5. To investigate
t he ext ent t o which light is spr ead an LCP was pl aced in a wi ndow such t hat
i nci dent di rect sunlight t r ansmi t t ed and def l ect ed by t he panel fell on a near by
wall (fig. 23a). Measur ement s of t he di st ri but i on of i l l umi nat i on on t he wall ar e
shown in fig. 23b. Al so shown on fig. 23b is t he expect ed di st ri but i on of illumina-
t i on f or a geomet ri cal l y exact LCP. The expect ed val ues wer e obt ai ned as follows.
The LCP was a l ouvre t ype panel cut f r om 6 mm acrylic ( n -- 1.5), with a spacing
bet ween cuts of 4 mm and a cut wi dt h of 0.2 ram. Ther ef or e t he act ual D / W r at i o
of t he opt i cal el ement s in t he panel is 3. 8/ 6. Fr om eq. (7) t he fract i on of t he light
i nci dent at 52 which is def l ect ed is 0.72. Ref l ect i on losses l ead t o a t ransmi ssi on
f act or 0.9. As t he meas ur ed i nci dent flux was 60.5 kilolux t he expect ed i l l umi nat i on
due t o def l ect ed light is 60.5 x 0.9 x 0.72 x 3. 8/ 4 -- 38.7 kilolux. I f t he dat a in fig.
23b are t r ansposed t o fig. 23a it is evi dent t hat t he def l ect ed light is spr ead over an
angl e up t o about 8 on ei t her side of t he specul ar beam as shown by t he dot t ed
lines in fig. 23a.
1.R. Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels 21
6. Discussion
The effectiveness of t he laser cut panel in improving i l l umi nat i on in rooms
depends strongly on t he t ype of wi ndow fitting and t he on t he sky conditions. For
exampl e t he best per f or mance is obt ai ned in di rect sunlight when t he wi ndow
fitting is such t hat t he LCP may be t i l t ed about t he hori zont al axis t hr ough an
angle about hal f t he solar elevation. The LCP is least effective in fixed vertical
ori ent at i on under clear bl ue skies with no di rect sun. In t he fairly wide range of
condi t i ons in which t he per f or mance of t he LCP. has been t est ed t he i l l umi nat i on
on worksurfaces deep inside t he room was never observed to diminish below t hat
obt ai ned wi t h a convent i onal wi ndow panel. Il l umi nat i on near t he wi ndow may be
r educed very significantly, however this is oft en desirable.
The negative aspects of applying t he LCP are t he reduct i on in viewing trans-
parency relative to a convent i onal wi ndow and t he possibility of i ncreased glare
from t he window.
In respect to viewing t ransparency t he parallel i nput and out put faces of t he
LCP provide a view which is not di st ort ed by refract i on effects. As shown in t he
phot ographi c crossections in fig. 3 t he laser cuts reduce t he near normal transmis-
sion of t he panel by only 5% t o 10%. Thus when t he panel is fi t t ed vertically in a
wi ndow t he reduct i on in viewing t ransparency is small. If t he panel is t i l t ed t he
t ransparency is r educed until, when viewed at t he angle of incidence at which all
light is defl ect ed, i0, t he panel appears opaque in t hat t he direct view is elimi-
nat ed. Since i 0 is usually about 60 and t he tilt woul d sel dom exceed 30 in normal
use, t he viewing t ransparency sel dom falls below 50%. Viewing t ransparency is also
rel at ed to t he amount of glare from t he wi ndow since this reduces t he clarity of t he
view. However t he possibility of glare disability is a more serious consequence.
Gl are disability results when t he l umi nance of t he window exceeds t he lumi-
nance of i nt eri or surfaces by a large and uncomfort abl e factor. Gl are from an LCP
may arise from defl ect i on of sunlight, or light from an overcast sky, into t he view of
an occupant . Thi s is not possible for panel s with cuts normal to t he face, as shown
in fig. 3, provi ded t he panel is fi t t ed vertically in t he window above t he eye level of
t he occupant s. The cut in t he panel is itself a source of divergent light since t he
surface of t he cut is not exactly normal to t he panel face but may be slightly curved
at t he ent ry poi nt of t he cut, fig. 3. The glare originating from this source is not
not i ceabl e against t he clear view of t he sky but is noticeable, t hough not uncom-
fortable, when t he viewing a dark background t hr ough t he wi ndow while direct
sunl i ght is on t he panel. When t he panel is tilted a compromi se bet ween improved
i nt eri or i l l umi nat i on and glare disability is always necessary. Thi s arises from a
spreadi ng of t he light up to 8 on ei t her side of t he geomet ri cal defl ect i on di rect i on
so t hat it is not possible t o defl ect di rect sunlight as a precisely col l i mat ed beam.
Thus for tilted windows at eye level t he tilt shoul d be such t hat t he mi ni mum
geomet ri cal elevation of defl ect ed light is at least 8 above horizontal. For
cl erest ory windows, and dependi ng on t he dept h of t he room, t he restriction on t he
mi ni mum elevation of defl ect ed light woul d be less stringent. Anot her source of
glare when light is defl ect ed across t he ceiling is t he diffuse refl ect i on from t he
22 LR. Edmonds / Laser cut / / ght deflect/rig paneb
ceiling itself. This may be larger t han t he glare from t he window, see fig. 15.
However this source of glare disability may be el i mi nat ed by use of ribbed ceiling
panels, with t he ribs parallel to t he window.
Taki ng i nt o account t he generally positive i mprovement in illumination obt ai ned
by using t he LCP in windows, and t he possibility of i ncreased glare, which
applications are most suitable?
As t hese panel s perform best in direct sunlight application on Sout h facing walls
in t he Nor t her n hemi sphere is appropri at e. In buildings, schools, hospitals, ware-
houses or office buildings, where t he hori zont al ext ent of t he rooms is large t he
panel s are effective at a fixed tilt of (E - 8*), where E is t he maxi mum summer
elevation of t he sun or when tilted occasionally or aut omat i cal l y to follow t he sun.
Ther e are also specialised applications. For example as t he windows in the walls
bet ween high office buildings receive daylight only from t he zenith, panel s in the
upper t hi rd of t he window tilted at about 30 would increase t he illumination in
rooms behi nd t hese windows by an or der of magni t ude or more.
As laser cut panel s have been pr oduced only as prot ot ypes comment on t he
economics of product i on are tentative. The st art i ng mat eri al is acrylic plastic sheet
which is about t he same cost as glass. A single 500 W laser beam cuts at about 5 m
per mi nut e and t he total cut l engt h per square met re of panel is about 300 m.
Ther ef or e while t he cut t i ng is comput er cont rol l ed and the runni ng cost for
electricity is neglible an oper at or usually must be present duri ng cut t i ng and
oper at or costs are high. Addi t i onal l y t he cost of a cutting machi ne, (about US$
100,000), must be regai ned t hrough profi t on t he panels. It is est i mat ed t hat t he
cost of l ami nat ed laser cut acrylic sheet may be 4 t o 5 times t he cost of glass and
the cost of a f r amed window 2 to 3 times the cost of a convent i onal framed
window.
Appendix 1. Fract i on of light deflected for i < i. ~ n and i > i Nx
Consi der a general el ement with light i nci dent at angle i I < imm, as in fig. 24.
The fract i on of i nci dent light which is t ransmi t t ed wi t hout defl ect i on is shown
D
Fig. 24. The fraction of incident light (shaded region) which is t ransmi t t ed wi t hout deflection t hrough a
light deflecting el ement of general form when t he angle o f i nci dence, i 1, is less t han imi . .
LR. Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels 23
~ , ~. q
W
~ ~ X
! , . '
(al ~,,' 9 0 - r 1 + 2 0 031
Fi g. 25. T h e f r a c t i o n o f i n c i d e n t l i g h t wh i c h i s t r a n s mi t t e d wi t h o u t d e f l e c t i o n ( s h a d e d r e g i o n ) t h r o u g h a
l i g h t d e f l e c t i n g e l e m n t o f g e n e r a l f o r m w h e n t h e a n g l e o f i n c i d e n c e i s g r e a t e r t h a n i t . ~ ( a) . A n
e n l a r g e m e n t o f t h e l o we r l e f t c o r n e r o f t h e e l e m e n t ( b) .
shaded. The f r act i on of i nci dent light def l ect ed, fd, is given by t he rat i o of Y t o D.
As Z = Wt a n 0 a n d Z + Y= Wt a n r~,
fd = Y / D = ( W t an r 1 - W t an O) / D = ( t an r t - t an O) W/ D. ( 5)
When i 1 > i r e s x t he deri vat i on is mor e compl i cat ed. In fig. 25a t he f r act i on of t he
i nci dent light whi ch is t r ansmi t t ed wi t hout defl ect i on, fu, is shown shaded and is
given by fu = X / D . It is possible t o find an expressi on f or this rat i o by first fi ndi ng
t he rat i o of X t o Z. Thi s follows f r om exami nat i on of t he t ri angl es cont ai ni ng t he
segment s X and Z whi ch ar e shown enl ar ged in fig. 25b. Appl yi ng t he sine rul e t o
t hese t ri angl es
Z / s i n ( r I - 0 ) = B / s i n ( 9 0 - r~ + 20)
and
X / s i n ( r 1 - 0) = B/ s i n ( 9 0 - r l ) ,
whence
X = Z c os ( r I - 2 0 ) / c o s r 1. ( 6)
Fr om fig. 25a
D- W t an 0 + Z = W t a n ( r ~ - 20)
o r
Z = W [ t a n ( r ~ - 20) + t an 0] - D.
Subst i t ut i ng f or Z in eq. (6), t he f r act i on not def l ect ed, fu = X / D , is f ound t o be
fu -- ( { W[ t a n ( r t - 20) + t an O] - D } c os ( r I - 2 O) / D cos r~) ( 7)
24 LR. Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels
Y
b
N X
Fig. 26. The direction of rays incident obliquely on a laser cut panel oriented in the YZ (vertical) plane
such that the cuts are parallel to the Z direction may be specified in terms of an azimuth angle, A,
relative to the panel normal, N, and an elevation angle, E, relative to the XZ (horizontal) plane. An
incident ray, R, and refracted ray, R', are shown.
and the fraction deflected follows from, fd = 1- fu. When 0 = 0 the fraction
deflected for i 1 < imi n becomes fd -- (W tan r ~) / D and the fraction deflected for
i I > i ma x becomes fd = 2 - (W tan r t ) / D.
Appendi x 2. Opt i cal properties for l i ght i nci dent obliquely
The variation of optical properties with oblique incidence is conveniently
studied by specifying the direction of oblique rays in terms of an azimuth angle, A,
and an elevation angle, E, relative to a panel in vertical orientation. In fig. 26 the
panel is in the YZ plane with the normal, N, to the front face of the panel in the X
direction. If the geographic direction of the normal is South then the panel is in
the most useful orientation for a light deflecting panel and the azimuth and
elevation angles correspond to the conventional azimuth and elevation angles of
the sun. The unit vector of the incident oblique ray, R, is specified by direction
cosines cos a = cos A cos E, cos b = c os ( 90- E) a nd cos c = c os ( 90- A) c os E.
The direction of an oblique ray after refraction at the front face of the panel is
specified by the unit vector R' and the corresponding direction cosines cos a' ,
cos b' , and cos c' . The relationship between the two sets of direction cosines
follows from the ray tracing formula for refraction from air to a medium of
refractive index, n [11];
sin r = sin i / n
and
R' =R / n + (cos r - cos i / n ) N.
1.R Edmonds / Laser cut light deflectb~g panels 25
1.0
I 0.9
0.8'
0.7'
- " 0.6'
0 . 5 '
0.4"
0.3"
0.2"
"~ 0.1"
0.0
D/W-0.3 o / / " \ 0. 7 / / ~ X . - ~ \ 0 5 ~ . . / / ~ " "
Z
0 10 20 30 40 50 S0 70 80 90
I n c i d e n c e a n g l e (o)
Fig. 27. The fraction of i nci dent light deflected t hrough a rect angul ar el ement (O = 0 ) including the
effect of reflection loss (full lines) is t he product of t he geometrical fraction deflected (broken lines)
and t he energy transmission coefficient calculated using t he Fresnel equations. The effect of multiple
reflection within t he el ement at high angles of incidence is also shown.
For oblique rays t he angle of t he refract ed ray proj ect ed ont o t he pl ane cont ai ni ng
t he normal and t he vertical (t he X and Y axes in fig. 26) is given by t an rp =
cos b' / cos a'. As cos b' = cos(90 - E ) / n and cos a' = cos r and with use of t he
rel at i on sin r = sin i / n, t he quant i t y tan rp may be expressed directly in t erms of
t he elevation, E, and t he azi mut h, A, as follows:
t an rp -- s i n g / ( n 2 - 1 + cosEA cos2g) 1/2.
( 8 )
Subst i t ut i on of t an rp for t an r 1, in eqs. (3) t o (7) to det ermi nes t he proport i on of
light defl ect ed.
Appendix 3. Reflection losses
The amount of light passing t hr ough a panel when t he light is i nci dent at high
angles is r educed by t he cosine projection factor. Additionally, t ransmi ssi on
t hr ough t he panel is r educed by refl ect i on at t he i nput and out put faces. Reflec-
t i on loss may be cal cul at ed by applying t he Fresnel equat i ons for t he energy
t ransmi ssi on coefficient, T, to t he case of a t hi n acrylic sheet. The product of T
and t he geomet ri cal fract i on defl ect ed, fd, (eqs. (5) and (7)), yields t he fract i on
defl ect ed including refl ect i on loss, fig. 27. At high angles of incidence mul t i pl e
reflections occur wi t hi n t he device when t he D/ W rat i o is small and t he angle of
i nci dence is high. Thi s effect is i l l ust rat ed in fig. 27 for t he case D/ W- - 0.3.
26 LR. Edmonds / Laser cut light deflecting panels
References
[1] L.A. Whitehead, R.A. Nodwell and F.L. Curzon, Appl. Opt. 21 (1982) 2755.
[2] S.G. Saxe, Sol. Energy Mater. 19 (1989) 95.
[3] N.C. Rogers, J.A. Ballinger and C. Dunkerly, Arch. Sci. Rev. 22 (1979) 44.
[4] PJ. Littlefair, Lighting Res. Tech. 22 (1990) 1.
[5] R.G. Hopkinson, P. Petherbridge and J. Longmore, Daylighting (Heinemann, London, 1966).
[6] N.C. Ruck, Building Res. Pract. 6 (1985) 144.
[7] A.H. Rosenfeld and S.E. Selkowitz, Energy Building 1 (1977) 43.
[8] R. l an and E. King, Proc. International Daylighting Conf., Long Beach, CA (Nov, 1986) pp.
279-287.
[9] I.R. Edmonds, U.S. Patent 4,989,952 (1991).
[10] J.B. Murdoch, Illumination Engineering (Macmillan, New York, 1985).
[11] W.T. Welford, Aberrations of Optical Systems (Adam Hilger, Bristol, 1986).