5 Phase annual metric results issue

I am trying to analyze an office tower floor plate with open offices on the north and south sides. There is vision glazing with roll down shade and then panelite above and to the side. The north side looks reasonable, but the results for the south side are difficult to interpret. They show less light coming through right at the vision windows. I’m looking at DA

There are horizontal shades on the south side that are translucent glass (tvis 50). Is this the issue? I tried running it without them and still get the same results. I should probably be using the 6 phase method, but I’m not sure how to do implement that.
I’m sure there are multiple things that I am doing wrong, so any help would be appreciated.


Not directly an answer to your question but why don’t you just use the 2-phase (AKA annual daylight) simulation for this?

I thought since I have both dynamic shades and complex glazing (the panelite is bsdf material) I should use the 5-phase method. We are also concerned about direct sun through the panelite material, which led me to think the 5 -phase method would be the better option. I am not sure how to incorporate the translucent exterior horizontal shade for the full 6-phase method, but I am curious on how to do that as well.

Based on what you described, I don’t think so. The 6-Phase method is only of use when you need to do parametric analysis of shading systems that are protruding out significantly with respect to the plane of the glazing/wall. Some use-cases would be grill-shaped overhangs, light-tubes etc.

The translucent exterior shade can just be a part of the geometry that forms the context for the Daylight matrix in the Three-Phase Method.

What type of shading system is panelite? Is it that Honeycomb structure type panel? Is the BSDF file that you have a Klems-basis BSDF?


Hi Sarith,
Panelite is similar to a honeycomb structure incorporated into the IGU, but it uses tubes (sort of like straws bundled together) as the shading structure. The BSDF file is a Klems Full angle basis.


Hi Michael,

Have you tried using the 2-Phase method with BSDFs in-scene as @mostapha originally suggested? It’s be a while since I looked into the exact commands that are being written out by HB[+]. If I remember correctly, there was an issue with the handling of BSDF primitives in the direct-sun part of the calculation.

Can you share the Radiance folder that is written out by HB[+]? My Rhino installation is currently all over the place and I cant get most of the grasshopper plugins to work properly.


Hi Sarith,
Thanks for your response, but I eventually managed to get the 5 phase method running by rebuilding a simplified model. The original attempts were done with a model exported from Revit with a complex facade and mullions. I am not sure what the original issue was, but If found a work around, but I am still curious what was causing it.

Since I moved on, it is hard for me to determine which of the many runs to send you. I had another post about a way to view the results folder independent of RunRadianceAnalysis component.

I am still trying to understand the workflow of the HB+ components with the matrix methods and how to incorporate it into the work we do. Once I got the 5-phase simulations to run it was a very helpful since we could separate out the impact of the dynamic blinds from the panellite product and the runs were comparatively fast.

I guess this is all part of the learning curve - but coming from a starting point of analyzing daylighting with physical models with a heliodon and skybox, to using Ecotect (remember that program), then Rhino w/ DIVA plug-in, then Honeybee, and now Honeybee+ - it sometimes feels like I’m learning more about the tools than daylight.

That said, I have enjoyed all the work you have done with the Ladybug tools, which is why I keep trying things out.