Relación de la ficción con el concepto de «verdad»

TF Part 5. Research question 2. In what way can laws, recommendations and methods for lighting design be developed to support the individual user in a better way PPV: Light needs to be designed close to the subject’s visual sensitivity in order to be supportive? A general visual approach to the support from light is merely theoretical and of low value for the user. The user centered lighting design process on the other hand has the possibility to support the individual user in a visually comfortable way and psychologically and physiologically as well. Laws need to be followed by explanations about light- related public health. Recommendations need to be developed for user specific support and methods need to be verified scientifically in a positive impact on light-related public health.

TF Part 5. Will the light-related goals of health stipulated in EC Treaty 137 and Pörn´s health theory in WHO target 9 and 13-17 adopted by the Member States of European Region and visual comfort in the European standard for indoor workplaces be fulfilled by the use of EN 12464-1:2011: Studies 4 and 5 in the Thesis project show that the use of EN 12464-1:2011 does not give all normal sighted employees of the 502 million inhabitants in Europe (2011) an experience of visual comfort. This is hard not to debate since the 318 subjects that participated in study 4 varied 50 times between each other in preference for level of a visually comfortable light at the working table and almost 60 times in preference for level of a complementary comfortable level in the ambient light. The subjects were almost unique in their preferences for the combination of light at the working table and for the ambient light. The result of the 2 subjects in study 5 that was measured every hour between 9.00-17.00 varied 3 times (from 1000-3000 Lux) during the day between the lowest and highest level of light experienced as visually most comfortable. The variability of the visual function [Ronchi 2009; 2010] is not supported by a predesigned static level of light as recommended in the lighting standard. The impact of the use of the standard on the subject’s health can be a target for discussion. The standard does not recommend in what way the artificial light should be used or be mixed with daylight at a specific workplace. It is a

135

principal statement that a static level of light from a non daylight mimicking artificial light source is counteracting basic light-related health since we need to stay in daylight in the outdoor environment and in the rhythm of daylight to get a healthy input from light. The security aspect at work needs to be balanced together with the need of staying in the rhythm of daylight and to be alerted by changes in the environment. We are modern people that need light to be safe at work and for quality of life, but we cannot live a life to far from the daylight rhythm in a way that is negative for health. These contradicting needs should be balanced together. The subject that works in artificial light only, or is situated far away from windows, is more affected by the use of artificial light compared to those who sit nearby the window. Subjects that work to a high extent at night, early in the morning or late in the evening are the most exposed to the impact on diurnal rhythm from artificial light. The standard does not give recommendations about spectral profile, time, duration. The recommended static level of light seen in the standard can be carried

out with different lighting techniques and in that way have a varied impact on the user.

TF Part 6. Will the use of the CCLDP and the UCLDP fulfill goals about visual comfort and light-related health set out in EN 12464-1:2011, EC Treaty 137, WHO target 9 and 13-17 adopted by the member States of European Region: The evaluation of the CCLDP not being PPV supportive is a logical conclusion based on common knowledge in lighting design, the analysis of the interaction of MLCS, the analysis of the lighting design process (LDP) step 1-4 and TF in the thesis. The CCLDP do not use the analyses that are needed to establish a

supportive interaction of MLCS (TF 3.2-3.10). The evaluation of the UCLDP being PPV supportive is in the same way based on a logical conclusion, common knowledge in lighting design, and the analysis of the interaction MLCS, the analysis of the LDP step 1-4 and TF in the Thesis. The UCLDP uses the analyses that are needed to design a supportive interaction of MLCS (TF 2.3-2.10) and by that are the goals fulfilled in the way that is possible for the technical part of the shadings for daylight and the complementary lighting application for artificial light used in the space.

TF Part 7. In what way does the end user, designer or client perspective to LQ differ in PPV support for the user?

The perspective on LQ is important as the goal for ambitions in lighting design. Lighting quality cannot be defined by any other person than the user and at the time. Humans live in a rhythm going from very alert to deep sleep. The visual sight is no exception from that. [Ronchi 2009]

Since diurnal rhythm changes the performance of the visual perception during the day, only the user knows when LQ is achieved. When the three perspectives on LQ, the designer, the client and the end user, are compared, only the actual end user knows the individual light-related needs at the time. The client and the designer perspective is a general approach to the use of light. This general perspective can only be put on the complementary artificial ambient light that has a role model in daylight. The task lighting, on the other hand, needs to be adapted during the day to the individual user. The evaluation of LQ from three perspectives shows two general approaches and one individual to the user. It can be argued if these are contradictory or complementary. A general perspective to light-related health is only theoretical and a matter of words with no

136

possibility to fulfil the individual subject´s changing light-related needs. But if the question about LQ is seen from the perspective of lighting design it is possible to describe a flexible lighting application that gives LQ to the individual user.

The results do not show LQ as general and vague; instead it is seen as a result of a triggering from PS in a way that gives a hormonal release close to the one seen outdoor and that suits the users nervous system and contributes to homeostatic balance, a well functioning diurnal rhythm

and a visual comfortable contrast situation for the individual user in the indoor environment.

TF Part 8. The UCLDP- Seen from the perspective of the LDP step 1-4 and the UCLD: If the UCLDP and the LDP step 1-4 are used in the design of light the interaction of MLCS will be well-functioning and the light will be possible to adapt individually. It is hard to question the need of light for PPV support that is individually adaptable. Light has for a long time been seen as something practical that should be designed in a cheap way and be economical to use. We pay a high prize for using light as a product on the market of the same importance as shoes, candy or toys. Light is fundamental for life [Hainifin & Brainard 2007] and needs to be designed carefully to have a positive impact not only on the individual user but on animals, plants and the

ecosystem as well. The use of the UCLDP changes the lighting design from general and static towards being individual and flexible. When many users work in the same space they need to cooperate about the level of the complementary ambient light. The UCLDP can be described with an increased amount of details and the use of UCLDP can be questioned by practical reasons. It takes time, it is more expensive to use and the light is often planned before the space is built. But lighting design is an ethical issue. It is important to as a lighting designer give the user the best possible support from light. A lighting designer should always strive for best practice since light is fundamental for life for the user. Maybe the use of UCLDP seems more complicated to use compared to the template. This is, of course, again an ethical issue. The goal for visual comfort and light–related health will not be fulfilled without the development of an individual approach to the user. With the UCLDP, it is easy to develop a user friendly and highly flexible lighting application instead of using mathematical formulas for calculations of levels of illumination to fit general recommendations with a static light.

TF Part 9. How can recommendations for a lighting design process be formulated that supports the individual user´s PPV needs, is related to the colours and surfaces in a specific space and

sets the user in contact with daylight at the site where the user lives?

It can be discussed if the support of basic human health is more complex than being in contact with colours and surfaces in the room, with daylight and having ergonomic task lighting. The question can be widened and include spectral profile, timing and duration close to daylight and the way light is spread in the room as well as a part of mimicking daylight, but this is not described in detail here. However, lighting design is always a matter of balance of contradictory needs and is re-evaluated for every situation. Nevertheless, the recommendations have the possibility to enhance the support for the diurnal rhythm and give an increase in visual comfort

for the individual user, which are the primary goals to fulfill.

137 5.3 Discussion related to research question nr. 3

TF Part 10. Research question nr. 3: In what way can a more qualitative research in lighting design be developed in collaboration among different research areas and different competences?

It is an unlucky circumstance that lighting design is developed to be merely visually supportive.

The establishments of the development of a PPV support from light demands cooperation in research among the light-related areas around the LDP. Knowledge about the room, architecture, windows, shadings, interior design, daylight, artificial light, man and light PPV, design and technique is needed when designing the light-related research. The high complexity in lighting design makes multidisciplinary teambuilding important for the research project. The Thesis shows a limited part of the complexity in the topic and a restricted amount of details. The

cooperation among the research areas and competences can be extended further.

5.4 DISCUSSION OF METHODS