Which is more accurate, in daylight simulation

Hello friends
I’ve heard that HOLIGILM software is used to simulate deep light tubes.Does the honeybee work accurately in deep (long) light tubes?

Honeybee uses Radiance which uses backwards ray-tracing for finding the light source. The out-of-the-box components in honeybee are not well suited for modeling light-pipes but there are workarounds which has been discussed. You will see them if you search the forum.


1 Like

thank you mostafa
Would you recommend using honeybee to write an article about deep (long) light tubes? Or it is better to use another software !! ??

Hi Ali,
I saw your question on the other thread too. As Mostapha pointed out, there are no out-of-the-box solutions for simulating light pipes with Honeybee. If HOLIGLIM can meet your requirements in terms of the geometry, I would strong suggest using that. Miroslav Kocifaj is a very experienced daylighting researcher and I am sure that their research on this topic is thorough.

Using the Four-Phase Method, as I suggested in the other thread, requires a fairly advanced knowledge of Radiance command line programs.


1 Like

Thankful @sarith
I had a question about importing the bsdf file.
To apply the bsdf file to the light tubes, do we have to insert the file into all three geometries (collector, body, diffuser) ??? Or just drag the file to the diffuser (inside the room)
I really need it. Thanks if you answer