[Radiance-general] rcontrib with 2-phase method?
J. Alstan Jakubiec
alstan at jakubiec.net
Wed Aug 12 08:09:19 PDT 2015
Dear Ikrima,
Yes, I think that is a fair series statements, and it sounds right. You
may want to read the Daysim paper in order to understand the methods a
bit more,
Reinhart, Christoph F., and Oliver Walkenhorst. "Validation of
dynamic RADIANCE-based daylight simulations for a test office with
external blinds." /Energy and Buildings/ 33.7 (2001): 683-697.
Best,
Alstan
On 8/12/2015 12:21 AM, Ikrima Amaireh wrote:
> Dear Alstan,
>
> Yes, you actually did :)
>
> What exactly I want to do is: modelling different CFS to assess their effect on indoor illuminance (Workplane). So, Daysim (with its current old version Radiance binaries) can do that; isn't it? At the same time, one can still say that simulations are based on the powerful Radiance tools, does that sound right, too?
>
> So far, I don't think I still need to use BSDF as there is no need for 3- nor 5-phase methods for such level of work!
>
> Can you please correct me if there is something wrong with my understanding/assumptions?
>
> Best regards
> Ikrima
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org [mailto:radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org]
> Sent: 11 August 2015 17:00
> To: radiance-general at radiance-online.org
> Subject: Radiance-general Digest, Vol 138, Issue 22
>
> Send Radiance-general mailing list submissions to
> radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> radiance-general-owner at radiance-online.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific than "Re: Contents of Radiance-general digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Re: rcontrib with 2-phase method? (J. Alstan Jakubiec)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 11 Aug 2015 23:38:14 +0800
> From: "J. Alstan Jakubiec" <alstan at jakubiec.net>
> To: radiance-general at radiance-online.org
> Cc: radiance-daysim at radiance-online.org
> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] rcontrib with 2-phase method?
> Message-ID: <55CA16E6.1020404 at jakubiec.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"; Format="flowed"
>
> Dear Ikrima,
>
> Daysim comes with its own special version of the Radiance binaries that can be downloaded at the Daysim website <http://daysim.ning.com/>. These get stored in c:\DAYSIM\bin\ after installation on Windows.
> Unfortunately the binaries are based on an older Radiance version, so you miss some options like using BSDF data. Still, Daysim is perfectly serviceable for most cases. I hope I understood your question.
>
> Best,
> Alstan
>
> On 8/11/2015 11:09 PM, Guglielmetti, Robert wrote:
>> I really have no experience with Daysim at this point so I really am
>> not the best person to answer this one, sorry. In a general sense,
>> with respect to Daysim and Radiance you'd use one or the other, not
>> both. The Radiance daylight coefficient method (i.e. using rcontrib
>> and other tools in Radiance to do a 2-phase annual simulation) *is*
>> basically the same thing as Daysim. Hope this helps but it probably
>> doesn't. =/
>>
>>
>>
>> On 8/11/15, 4:54 AM, "Ikrima Amaireh" <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear Robert,
>>>
>>> Thanks for making clear that using rcontrib and using 3/5 phase
>>> methods need a recent version of radiance. does that apply to using
>>> 2-phse
>>> (Daysim) or one can still use old versions of radiance (as I have a
>>> problem yet with installing recent versions of radiance and link it
>>> with Daysim tool)?
>>>
>>> Many thanks for you in advance:
>>>
>>> Regards,,,
>>> ikriam
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> Message: 2
>>> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 17:03:49 +0000
>>> From: "Guglielmetti, Robert" <Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Ray-tracing with Radiance
>>> Message-ID: <D1EE1EEF.1B923%Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>
>>> There is a daysim-specific mailing list that may be useful for some
>>> of your questions:
>>>
>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/community/mailing-lists/subscribe/radi
>>> ance-
>>> d
>>> aysim
>>>
>>>
>>> I can tell you that if you're planning to use rcontrib and do 3- or
>>> 5-phase type stuff, you definitely should be using a recent version
>>> of Radiance. Either build from latest source, or use one of the NREL
>>> pre-built packages (I recommend v5):
>>>
>>> https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/tag/5.0.a.3
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 8/10/15, 9:14 AM, "Ikrima Amaireh" <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Germ?n,
>>>>
>>>> Many thanks for you. I agree with you totally that all Radiance
>>>> works need to apply ray-tracing approach as the core principle of it.
>>>> However, what I meant by using ray-tracing in radiance, was the
>>>> using of RTRACE directly through stand-alone radiance tool (as you
>>>> kindly mentioned).
>>>>
>>>> As you clarified, Daysim uses 2-phase method to do annual simulation
>>>> (2nd
>>>> phase) fast, based on pre-calculated Daylight Coefficient Matrix
>>>> (1st phase). Now, if I need to produce the illuminance levels
>>>> (produced by specific CFS) at the Workplane under static scene, can
>>>> I still use Daysim for that? Or, shall I stick to RTRACE tool
>>>> directly through pure Radiance?
>>>>
>>>> And, if I have to stick to using Pure Radiance (RTRACE), is the
>>>> method detailed in the attached document (hope, you see that: where
>>>> Geometry and Workplane sensors are built in Ecotect and directly
>>>> exported to Radiance engine), is it still valid?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Finally, in both cases (using pure Radiance and/or Daysim), shall we
>>>> replace the Radiance tool (works as engine) by the latest released
>>>> version (i.e. Version 4.2 or recent?) as the one works with
>>>> Ecotect-Radiance approach (I'm not sure about Daysim, yet) is old
>>>> version (2.0; in think!)?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Really, I am grateful to you for your appreciated help and looking
>>>> to hear from you again :)
>>>>
>>>> Regards,,,
>>>>
>>>> Ikrima
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> As some of you may remember, I am trying to model a set of CFS to
>>>>> compare their effect on indoor horizontal illuminance of a room.
>>>> So far, I have been advised by you for several stages, which really
>>>> helped me a lot for better understanding of radiance and how it works.
>>>> Now, I have a question about how I use ray-tracing method in radiance?
>>>> Is it similar to the way explained through the following attachment?
>>>> As here, calculations are run using Radiance engine but Ecotect or
>>>> Daysim interface (for geometry modelling and material assignment).
>>>> Document:
>>>> http://web.mit.edu/sustainabledesignlab/projects/TeachingResources/G
>>>> ett
>>>> ing
>>>> StartedwithEcotectRadianceDaysim.pdf
>>>>
>>>> I hope if you can kindly advise me on that asap, please?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ikrima,
>>>>
>>>> Strictly speaking, Radiance always use ray-tracing. Whenever you
>>>> call RPICT, RTRACE or RCONTRIB, there will always be a ray-tracing
>>>> simulation performed. However, when you want to perform annual
>>>> simulations, you will want to do as few ray-tracing simulations as
>>>> possible since they take time.
>>>> RTRACE, for example, is a method used to calculate the illuminance
>>>> or luminance of a point (sensor) in a static scene. Doing this for a
>>>> whole year would require 8760 or more RTRACE calls, which means 8760
>>>> or more ray-tracing simulations, which is slow.
>>>>
>>>> Accordingly, Daysim (which uses the 2-phase method) runs one
>>>> ray-tracing simulation that calculates the Daylight Coefficient
>>>> matrix (this can be done in pure radiance by using RCONTRIB). This
>>>> matrix relates the sensors
>>>> (workplane?) in the scene with the sky, mich means that you can
>>>> modify the sky and quickly evaluate illuminance in the same points.
>>>> This allows performing annual simulations fast (only the sky changes
>>>> in a static annual simulation). 3 and 5 phase method are extensions
>>>> to this that allow also modifying the CFSs in the scene.
>>>>
>>>> Hope that clarify a little bit.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org
>>>> [mailto:radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org]
>>>> Sent: 10 August 2015 14:20
>>>> To: radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>> Subject: Radiance-general Digest, Vol 138, Issue 12
>>>>
>>>> Send Radiance-general mailing list submissions to
>>>> radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>
>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>>
>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>> radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org
>>>>
>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>> radiance-general-owner at radiance-online.org
>>>>
>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>>> than
>>>> "Re: Contents of Radiance-general digest..."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Re: Ray-tracing with Radiance (Germ?n Molina Larrain)
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> Message: 1
>>>> Date: Mon, 10 Aug 2015 10:19:18 -0300
>>>> From: Germ?n Molina Larrain <germolinal at gmail.com>
>>>> To: Radiance general discussion
>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Ray-tracing with Radiance
>>>> Message-ID:
>>>>
>>>> <CAF-iH4LVHB_V+Vmy-mSiv2EtUE25KDxtTAyJfao5Mi6fzFDU1g at mail.gmail.com>
>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>>
>>>> Ikrima,
>>>>
>>>> Strictly speaking, Radiance always use ray-tracing. Whenever you
>>>> call RPICT, RTRACE or RCONTRIB, there will always be a ray-tracing
>>>> simulation performed. However, when you want to perform annual
>>>> simulations, you will want to do as few ray-tracing simulations as
>>>> possible since they take time.
>>>> RTRACE, for example, is a method used to calculate the illuminance
>>>> or luminance of a point (sensor) in a static scene. Doing this for a
>>>> whole year would require 8760 or more RTRACE calls, which means 8760
>>>> or more ray-tracing simulations, which is slow.
>>>>
>>>> Accordingly, Daysim (which uses the 2-phase method) runs one
>>>> ray-tracing simulation that calculates the Daylight Coefficient
>>>> matrix (this can be done in pure radiance by using RCONTRIB). This
>>>> matrix relates the sensors
>>>> (workplane?) in the scene with the sky, mich means that you can
>>>> modify the sky and quickly evaluate illuminance in the same points.
>>>> This allows performing annual simulations fast (only the sky changes
>>>> in a static annual simulation). 3 and 5 phase method are extensions
>>>> to this that allow also modifying the CFSs in the scene.
>>>>
>>>> Hope that clarify a little bit.
>>>>
>>>> Best,
>>>>
>>>> Germ?n
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 2015-08-10 8:51 GMT-03:00 Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Robert,
>>>>> Hello all,
>>>>>
>>>>> As some of you may remember, I am trying to model a set of CFS to
>>>>> compare their effect on indoor horizontal illuminance of a room. So
>>>>> far, I have been advised by you for several stages, which really
>>>>> helped me a lot for better understanding of radiance and how it works.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now, I have a question about how I use ray-tracing method in radiance?
>>>>> Is it similar to the way explained through the following attachment?
>>>>> As here, calculations are run using Radiance engine but Ecotect or
>>>>> Daysim interface (for geometry modelling and material assignment).
>>>>>
>>>>> Document:
>>>>> http://web.mit.edu/sustainabledesignlab/projects/TeachingResources/
>>>>> Ge t tingStartedwithEcotectRadianceDaysim.pdf
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope if you can kindly advise me on that asap, please?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Best regards
>>>>> Ikrima
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org [mailto:
>>>>> radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org]
>>>>> Sent: 12 July 2015 20:37
>>>>> To: radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>> Subject: Radiance-general Digest, Vol 137, Issue 12
>>>>>
>>>>> Send Radiance-general mailing list submissions to
>>>>> radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>>
>>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>>> radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org
>>>>>
>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>>> radiance-general-owner at radiance-online.org
>>>>>
>>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>>>> than
>>>>> "Re: Contents of Radiance-general digest..."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Git for Windows and starting tutorials (Ikrima Amaireh)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> --
>>>>> -
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 1
>>>>> Date: Sun, 12 Jul 2015 20:36:19 +0100
>>>>> From: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Cc: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> Subject: [Radiance-general] Git for Windows and starting tutorials
>>>>> Message-ID:
>>>>> <
>>>>> D697763F9F216044A99BC674C00561961358CA9C4C at EXCHANGE1.ad.nottingham.ac.
>>>>> uk>
>>>>>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Robert,
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks for your help.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have installed Git for Windows as you adviced :) Now, Before I
>>>>> start with 3 or 5-phase tutorials, I'm thinking to go through
>>>>> "radiance tutorial"
>>>>> (by Axel Jacobs) as a beginner with almost a shallow
>>>>> knowledge/experience of radiance. So, do recommend this (radiance
>>>>> tutorial would be enough to start with 3 or 5-phase methods and
>>>>> understanding of BSDF data approach,
>>>>> etc) or advice another tutorial/source for better understanding of
>>>>> radiance basics (using command prompt)?
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks again :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Ikrima
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 2
>>>>> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 15:52:23 +0000
>>>>> From: "Guglielmetti, Robert" <Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Radiance-general Digest, Vol 137,
>>>>> Issue 8
>>>>> Message-ID: <D1C542EA.1AE88%Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>
>>>>> OK so it sounds like you first tried the Windows installer
>>>>> (presumably a NREL-provided one such as this:
>>>>> https://github.com/NREL/Radiance/releases/download/5.0.a.3/radiance-5.
>>>>> 0.a-w in64.exe), and this most likely worked fine, you just had
>>>>> some issues actually *doing* anything with it. This is normal. =)
>>>>>
>>>>> I recommend you install Git for windows
>>>>> (https://msysgit.github.io/), as that will add a little BASH
>>>>> emulator in your Windows system. This way you can run most of the
>>>>> commands exactly as they appear in most of the tutorials out there
>>>>> that are written from a UNIX perspective (as you point out). If you
>>>>> run the "Git BASH shell" you will be able to try out all the multi-phase methods, use and generate BSDFs, etc.
>>>>> Once you have Git for Windows installed, head over to Andy McNeil's
>>>>> tutorials for 3- and 5-phase, fire up the Git BASH shell (it'll be
>>>>> in the Git program group in the Windows start menu), and get started!
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing to keep in mind is that when running any commands that
>>>>> read/write data (e.g. rcontrib), be sure to use ASCII format rather
>>>>> than float. Windows has issues with float data (among many other
>>>>> things).
>>>>>
>>>>> Good luck!
>>>>>
>>>>> - Rob
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/10/15, 8:08 AM, "Ikrima Amaireh" <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Robert,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My PC is running on Windows 7 Enterprise.
>>>>>> Initially, I installed Radiance for Window using its installer but
>>>>>> I found that most of the tutorials are provided for pc with Linux
>>>>>> and/or Linux-like operating systems; So I had to install try
>>>>>> learnix (that did not work) and Ubuntu (also did not work)!
>>>>>> Finally, I tried to use Cygwin to run Radiance on Window OS. I
>>>>>> could install Cygwin (works fine), Xming (not sure if working) and
>>>>>> Radiance (not all its programs are working!).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I'm a bit confused as I'm not sure if running Radiance on windows
>>>>>> using Cygwin will be enough for carrying my work. For example, can
>>>>>> I work out phases methods and generate BSDF data?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wish if you can help me to do that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many thanks
>>>>>> ikrima
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Message: 3
>>>>>> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 16:44:49 +0000
>>>>>> From: "Guglielmetti, Robert" <Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Could not install Radiance!!!
>>>>>> Message-ID: <D1C400AC.1ADAC%Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi Ikrima,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We'll need a bit more info, here. What OS are you on? How are you
>>>>>> attempting to install it (using an installer, compiling from
>>>>>> source, or what)? What happens when you try??
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/9/15, 10:38 AM, "Ikrima Amaireh" <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> After one a few weeks of trying, I could not manage to install
>>>>>>> radiance properly. I am almost disappointed! Please any help?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>> Ikrima
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and
>>>>> immediately delete it.
>>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions
>>>>>> expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect
>>>>>> the views of the University of Nottingham.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 3
>>>>> Date: Fri, 10 Jul 2015 17:34:30 +0100
>>>>> From: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Cc: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> Subject: [Radiance-general] Modelling CFS
>>>>> Message-ID:
>>>>> <
>>>>> D697763F9F216044A99BC674C00561961358CA9BAF at EXCHANGE1.ad.nottingham.ac.
>>>>> uk>
>>>>>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks Robert and Larrain for your detailed replies, that helped me
>>>>> a lot.
>>>>>
>>>>> I would summarise here what I got form your appreciated replies, as
>>>>> following:
>>>>> - Radiance is convenient and best of tools to model daylighting due
>>>>> to its ray-tracing method.
>>>>> - 3 or 5-phases methods are used to facilitate the calculations.
>>>>> - Generating BSDF data is also used to facilitate these
>>>>> calculations but it is limited to Klems resolution of some CFS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Initially, I'm not planning to do annual calculations. It's just
>>>>> for specific hours of the day and the target is to produce a
>>>>> illuminance levels for indoor grid under different CFSs. Hence,
>>>>> according to my understanding from Larrain words, I can use either
>>>>> 2-phase or Ray-tracing methods. My question is how can I
>>>>> draw/define the CFS geometry and Space for these calculations? Is
>>>>> it similar to the way use in Ecotect/Radiance calculations?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Ikrima
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>> From: radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org [mailto:
>>>>> radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org]
>>>>> Sent: 09 July 2015 19:56
>>>>> To: radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>> Subject: Radiance-general Digest, Vol 137, Issue 8
>>>>>
>>>>> Send Radiance-general mailing list submissions to
>>>>> radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>>
>>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>>>>> radiance-general-request at radiance-online.org
>>>>>
>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at
>>>>> radiance-general-owner at radiance-online.org
>>>>>
>>>>> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>>>>> than
>>>>> "Re: Contents of Radiance-general digest..."
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's Topics:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. CFS with Radiance (Ikrima Amaireh)
>>>>> 2. Could not install Radiance!!! (Ikrima Amaireh)
>>>>> 3. Re: Could not install Radiance!!! (Guglielmetti, Robert)
>>>>> 4. Re: CFS with Radiance (Guglielmetti, Robert)
>>>>> 5. Re: CFS with Radiance (Germ?n Molina Larrain)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> --
>>>>> -
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 1
>>>>> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:26:29 +0100
>>>>> From: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Cc: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> Subject: [Radiance-general] CFS with Radiance
>>>>> Message-ID:
>>>>> <
>>>>> D697763F9F216044A99BC674C00561961358CA9710 at EXCHANGE1.ad.nottingham.ac.
>>>>> uk>
>>>>>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi G. Larrain,
>>>>>
>>>>> Thanks for your detailed clarification (below).
>>>>>
>>>>> I wonder if you kindly can help me toward better understanding and
>>>>> answering the following:
>>>>>
>>>>> We agreed that for daylight modelling of spaces with CFS, Radiance
>>>>> is a suitable tool as it applies ray-tracing method. And for annual
>>>>> and/or climate-based daylight calculations, as calculation time
>>>>> becomes a critical factor, using BSDF data for CFS is highly
>>>>> recommended to tackle the task with radiance (using phases methods).
>>>>> However:
>>>>>
>>>>> - if someone needs to perform daylight calculations for given space
>>>>> with different CFS (different cases for comparison purposes) to get
>>>>> illumination levels for horizontal grid points (and not pictures
>>>>> nor scenes), is Radiance still the most convenient option?
>>>>> - is it still needed to use any of the phase methods (2, 3 or 5)?
>>>>> - most importantly, is it still needed to get BSDF data for CFS or
>>>>> just can model the detailed CFS in Radiance (and, if yes, how?)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Many thanks for your kind help :)
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Ikrima
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Ikrima,
>>>>>
>>>>> I am going to try to build the puzzle of CFS, Phases, BSDF and
>>>>> calculations.... at least the way I understand it.
>>>>>
>>>>> *CFS* are those systems that, via interreflection or other light
>>>>> transport phenomena, redirect light (or solar radiation). Thus, in
>>>>> order to get a reliable result you will have to consider all the
>>>>> phenomena involved.
>>>>> Then, *common
>>>>> simple performance indexes*, such as the miss-used Shading
>>>>> Coefficient and the Aperture Percentage, *always loose a lot of
>>>>> information, trying to reduce all the complex behavior of a CFS to
>>>>> one single number*. We all know that venetian blinds are more
>>>>> "transparent" from certain viewing directions than from others,
>>>>> but these performance indexes do not tell you that.
>>>>>
>>>>> Now... Radiance can certainly perform calculations of spaces with
>>>>> CFS using its "common" Ray-tracing. However, this may be slow for
>>>>> some purposes (i.e.
>>>>> annual simulations and climate-based daylight modelling), and *this
>>>>> is why 2, 3 and 5 phase methods have been developed*. The *BSDF*
>>>>> representation, I would say, goes in the same direction... It allow
>>>>> summarizing all the bounces, reflections, refractions, etc. that
>>>>> occure withing the CFS in a single matrix or tensor.* By using
>>>>> BSDFs*, Radiance itself and other tools (i.e. EnergyPlus) can treat
>>>>> CFS as blackboxes, avoiding all the opcits within the system. A
>>>>> BSDF that uses the Klems Full representation has
>>>>> 21,045 numbers (instead of one, such as the Shading Coefficient).
>>>>>
>>>>> Being said all that, I would not trust a calculation method unless
>>>>> it can actually deal with the optics of a CFS that is drawn and/or
>>>>> it can use BSDF (or similar) information.
>>>>>
>>>>> Lets remember that a perforated screen, a venetian blind, a light
>>>>> diffusing device can all have a Shading Coefficient of 50%, but all
>>>>> of them will behave very differently. I made some presentations
>>>>> about this on my previous work (we sold complex Shading Devices),
>>>>> trying to promote the use of BSDF in EnergyPlus calculations... the
>>>>> differences (in solar heat gains) were more than considerable.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hope that someone else gives us his/her perspective on this topic...
>>>>> there are a lot of concepts that I might be misunderstanding.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best!"
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed
>>>>> by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of
>>>>> the University of Nottingham.
>>>>>
>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 2
>>>>> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:38:41 +0100
>>>>> From: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Cc: Ikrima Amaireh <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk>
>>>>> Subject: [Radiance-general] Could not install Radiance!!!
>>>>> Message-ID:
>>>>> <
>>>>> D697763F9F216044A99BC674C00561961358CA9719 at EXCHANGE1.ad.nottingham.ac.
>>>>> uk>
>>>>>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>
>>>>> After one a few weeks of trying, I could not manage to install
>>>>> radiance properly. I am almost disappointed! Please any help?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>> Ikrima
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed
>>>>> by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of
>>>>> the University of Nottingham.
>>>>>
>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 3
>>>>> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 16:44:49 +0000
>>>>> From: "Guglielmetti, Robert" <Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] Could not install Radiance!!!
>>>>> Message-ID: <D1C400AC.1ADAC%Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Ikrima,
>>>>>
>>>>> We'll need a bit more info, here. What OS are you on? How are you
>>>>> attempting to install it (using an installer, compiling from
>>>>> source, or what)? What happens when you try??
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/9/15, 10:38 AM, "Ikrima Amaireh" <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> After one a few weeks of trying, I could not manage to install
>>>>>> radiance properly. I am almost disappointed! Please any help?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>> Ikrima
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and
>>>>> immediately delete it.
>>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions
>>>>>> expressed by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect
>>>>>> the views of the University of Nottingham.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 4
>>>>> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 17:29:39 +0000
>>>>> From: "Guglielmetti, Robert" <Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>> To: "radiance-general at radiance-online.org"
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] CFS with Radiance
>>>>> Message-ID: <D1C40477.1ADCA%Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>>>>>
>>>>> Some very quick replies and clarifications within:
>>>>>
>>>>> On 7/9/15, 10:26 AM, "Ikrima Amaireh" <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi G. Larrain,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for your detailed clarification (below).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I wonder if you kindly can help me toward better understanding and
>>>>>> answering the following:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We agreed that for daylight modelling of spaces with CFS, Radiance
>>>>>> is a suitable tool as it applies ray-tracing method. And for
>>>>>> annual and/or climate-based daylight calculations, as calculation
>>>>>> time becomes a critical factor, using BSDF data for CFS is highly
>>>>>> recommended to tackle the task with radiance (using phases methods).
>>>>> However:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> BSDF data in an annual simulation context is generally limited to
>>>>> Klems basis BSDF data, which may not be high enough resolution for
>>>>> some CFS. And the 5-phase method, which can circumvent this, is not
>>>>> necessarily "quick".
>>>>> This is all still very much a quandary and the newest daylight
>>>>> metrics have added confusion to all of this, IMO.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - if someone needs to perform daylight calculations for given
>>>>>> space with different CFS (different cases for comparison purposes)
>>>>>> to get illumination levels for horizontal grid points (and not
>>>>>> pictures nor scenes), is Radiance still the most convenient option?
>>>>> Absolutely. The lack of an image-as-output requirement does not
>>>>> change the fact that ray tracing is a good/convenient algorithm
>>>>> option for daylight simulation problems, especially when dealing
>>>>> with diffusing media and CFS in general. BSDFs allow you to do
>>>>> lots of "what-ifs", relatively quickly, but are beholden to the
>>>>> limitations of the resolution of the BSDF.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> - is it still needed to use any of the phase methods (2, 3 or 5)?
>>>>> Is what still needed? BSDF data? Ray tracing? I don't know of other
>>>>> lighting simulation tools that can employ the multiphase methods. I
>>>>> would say BSDF data is optional for 2-phase, required for 3-phase,
>>>>> and optional for 5-phase.
>>>>>
>>>>>> - most importantly, is it still needed to get BSDF data for CFS or
>>>>>> just can model the detailed CFS in Radiance (and, if yes, how?)
>>>>> Again I'm confused as to what "it" is. A couple of approaches are
>>>>> available to you in general. If you have a geometric model of the
>>>>> CFS you can use Radiance (genBSDF) to make a BSDF of the CFS and
>>>>> use that in a 3- or 5-phase context. However in an
>>>>> annual/climate-based simulation context, you will be stuck with a
>>>>> Klems basis BSDF and that will not be very good resolution for a
>>>>> lot of CFS; here you may want to use the 5-phase method and stick
>>>>> the actual CFS geometry in the building model.
>>>>>
>>>>> Some things to consider here are the photon map, now a part of
>>>>> Radiance proper, or using the 2-phase method where appropriate. By
>>>>> 2-phase method I mean generating a daylight matrix for your
>>>>> calculation points (or view), and modeling the window material as-is.
>>>>> If the "CFS" is a shade cloth, you can approximate that with a
>>>>> Radiance "trans". Same for translucent panels.
>>>>> With this single daylight matrix, you can throw a vector of sky
>>>>> matrices at it and get an annual climate-based result very quickly.
>>>>> Problem is, we want to do stuff to the windows, sometimes at the
>>>>> time step level, so:
>>>>>
>>>>> Blinds and compact daylight redirection devices (e.g. Lightlouver)
>>>>> are best represented as BSDF, and if most of the redirected flux
>>>>> is headed up and away from the points of interest, a Klems basis
>>>>> BSDF is good enough IMO. In these cases you could use the 3-phase method.
>>>>> Problem is when you have a BSDF for blinds, and you also want to
>>>>> simulate the blinds-up condition (i.e. clear, specularly
>>>>> transmitting glass). Using a Klems basis BSDF for this is
>>>>> sub-optimal. You end up needing to do two annual simulations, one
>>>>> as 2-phase for the clear glass scenario, and again as a 3-phase
>>>>> (with a blinds BSDF for the transmission
>>>>> matrix) for the blinds down condition. If you have a lot of
>>>>> different window groups, your simulation space can get large in a
>>>>> hurry. But it's still do-able and you can get results that tell a
>>>>> story you simply couldn't tell 5 years ago, informing the newest
>>>>> daylight metrics as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> Message: 5
>>>>> Date: Thu, 9 Jul 2015 15:56:11 -0300
>>>>> From: Germ?n Molina Larrain <germolinal at gmail.com>
>>>>> To: Radiance general discussion
>>>>> <radiance-general at radiance-online.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [Radiance-general] CFS with Radiance
>>>>> Message-ID:
>>>>> <CAF-iH4LSr=y12F1khTrHh6hnf-kS=EmaFuo8uWKvHqMs=
>>>>> FZL-Q at mail.gmail.com>
>>>>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>>>>>
>>>>> I must say that I agree with Rob, however, a short answer that
>>>>> might help.
>>>>>
>>>>> For evaluating illuminance levels in a space with different CFS
>>>>> you, strictly speaking, DO NOT HAVE TO do anything. You may choose
>>>>> between different methods that have some pros and cons.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *ray-tracing*
>>>>>
>>>>> - Requires ray-tracing for each time-step and each system,
>>>>> which is slow
>>>>> (*four systems simulated annualy in an hourly basis --> 4*8760
>>>>> =
>>>>> 35,040
>>>>> simulations*.)
>>>>> - As accurate as it gets, if options are defined correctly.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *2 phase method*
>>>>>
>>>>> - Do not need the BSDF
>>>>> - Requires ray-tracing for each CFS (*4 systems --> 4 ray-tracing
>>>>> simulations*)
>>>>> - After ray-tracing, annual simulation is fast.
>>>>>
>>>>> *3-phase method:*
>>>>>
>>>>> - Requires BSDF data in KLEMS basis, which may be slow to compute,
>>>>> unless it can be exported from WINDOW, for example, or such data has
>>>>> already been calculated (the idea is to make a database, I think).
>>>>> - Does not really work well for specular systems (Klems patches
>>>>> are too
>>>>> big)
>>>>> - Requires 2 ray-tracing runs, always (*4 systems --> 2 ray-tracing
>>>>> simulations*)
>>>>> - After ray-tracing and BSDF calculation, annual simulation is
>>>>> fast
>>>>>
>>>>> *5-phase method:*
>>>>>
>>>>> - Requires BSDF data in KLEMS basis AND/OR Tensor tree format,
>>>>> which
>>>>> may be slow to compute, unless it can be exported from WINDOW,
>>>>> for example,
>>>>> or such data has already been calculated (the idea is to make a
>>>>> database, I
>>>>> think).
>>>>> - Works well for specular systems
>>>>> - Requires 4 ray-tracing runs + 1 for each system, always (*4
>>>>> systems
>>>>> --> 4+1 = 5 ray-tracing simulations*)
>>>>> - Hard to code...?
>>>>> - After ray-tracing and BSDF calculation, annual simulation is
>>>>> fast
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I would not say there is a recipe. If you have to choose between 1
>>>>> or
>>>>> 2 CFSs, maybe it is faster to just draw them and use the 2 phase
>>>>> method (or ray-tracing if an annual simulaton is not required). On
>>>>> the contrary, if you are going to test 10 different CFSs, 3 and 5
>>>>> phases may make sense, since you reduce the expensive ray-tracing
>>>>> calculations... However, this will also depend on weather you have
>>>>> the BSDF data AND/OR if it makes sense to calculate it and store it
>>>>> AND/OR if you intend to simulate a dynamically controlled CFS.
>>>>>
>>>>> Best!
>>>>>
>>>>> 2015-07-09 14:29 GMT-03:00 Guglielmetti, Robert <
>>>>> Robert.Guglielmetti at nrel.gov>:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Some very quick replies and clarifications within:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 7/9/15, 10:26 AM, "Ikrima Amaireh" <ezxia at nottingham.ac.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi G. Larrain,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Thanks for your detailed clarification (below).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wonder if you kindly can help me toward better understanding
>>>>>>> and answering the following:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> We agreed that for daylight modelling of spaces with CFS,
>>>>>>> Radiance is a suitable tool as it applies ray-tracing method. And
>>>>>>> for annual and/or climate-based daylight calculations, as
>>>>>>> calculation time becomes a critical factor, using BSDF data for
>>>>>>> CFS is highly recommended to tackle the task with radiance (using phases methods).
>>>>> However:
>>>>>> BSDF data in an annual simulation context is generally limited to
>>>>>> Klems basis BSDF data, which may not be high enough resolution for
>>>>>> some CFS. And the 5-phase method, which can circumvent this, is
>>>>>> not
>>>>> necessarily "quick".
>>>>>> This is all still very much a quandary and the newest daylight
>>>>>> metrics have added confusion to all of this, IMO.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - if someone needs to perform daylight calculations for given
>>>>>>> space with different CFS (different cases for comparison
>>>>>>> purposes) to get illumination levels for horizontal grid points
>>>>>>> (and not pictures nor scenes), is Radiance still the most convenient option?
>>>>>> Absolutely. The lack of an image-as-output requirement does not
>>>>>> change the fact that ray tracing is a good/convenient algorithm
>>>>>> option for daylight simulation problems, especially when dealing
>>>>>> with diffusing media and CFS in general. BSDFs allow you to do
>>>>>> lots of "what-ifs", relatively quickly, but are beholden to the
>>>>>> limitations of the
>>>>> resolution of the BSDF.
>>>>>>> - is it still needed to use any of the phase methods (2, 3 or 5)?
>>>>>> Is what still needed? BSDF data? Ray tracing? I don't know of
>>>>>> other lighting simulation tools that can employ the multiphase
>>>>>> methods. I would say BSDF data is optional for 2-phase, required
>>>>>> for 3-phase, and optional for 5-phase.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> - most importantly, is it still needed to get BSDF data for CFS
>>>>>>> or just can model the detailed CFS in Radiance (and, if yes,
>>>>>>> how?)
>>>>>> Again I'm confused as to what "it" is. A couple of approaches are
>>>>>> available to you in general. If you have a geometric model of the
>>>>>> CFS you can use Radiance (genBSDF) to make a BSDF of the CFS and
>>>>>> use that in a 3- or 5-phase context. However in an
>>>>>> annual/climate-based simulation context, you will be stuck with a
>>>>>> Klems basis BSDF and that will not be very good resolution for a
>>>>>> lot of CFS; here you may want to use the 5-phase method and stick
>>>>>> the actual CFS geometry in the
>>>>> building model.
>>>>>> Some things to consider here are the photon map, now a part of
>>>>>> Radiance proper, or using the 2-phase method where appropriate. By
>>>>>> 2-phase method I mean generating a daylight matrix for your
>>>>>> calculation points (or view), and modeling the window material as-is.
>>>>>> If the "CFS" is a shade cloth, you can approximate that with a
>>>>>> Radiance
>>>>> "trans". Same for translucent panels.
>>>>>> With this single daylight matrix, you can throw a vector of sky
>>>>>> matrices at it and get an annual climate-based result very quickly.
>>>>>> Problem is, we want to do stuff to the windows, sometimes at the
>>>>>> time
>>>>> step level, so:
>>>>>> Blinds and compact daylight redirection devices (e.g. Lightlouver)
>>>>>> are best represented as BSDF, and if most of the redirected flux
>>>>>> is headed up and away from the points of interest, a Klems basis
>>>>>> BSDF is good enough IMO. In these cases you could use the 3-phase method.
>>>>>> Problem is when you have a BSDF for blinds, and you also want to
>>>>>> simulate the blinds-up condition (i.e. clear, specularly
>>>>>> transmitting glass). Using a Klems basis BSDF for this is
>>>>>> sub-optimal. You end up needing to do two annual simulations, one
>>>>>> as 2-phase for the clear glass scenario, and again as a 3-phase
>>>>>> (with a blinds BSDF for the transmission
>>>>>> matrix) for the blinds down condition. If you have a lot of
>>>>>> different window groups, your simulation space can get large in a
>>>>>> hurry. But it's still do-able and you can get results that tell a
>>>>>> story you simply couldn't tell 5 years ago, informing the newest
>>>>>> daylight metrics
>>>>> as well.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>>>
>>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was
>>>>> scrubbed...
>>>>> URL: <
>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/pipermail/radiance-general/attachmen
>>>>> ts
>>>>> /
>>>>> 20150709/cfbdd4da/attachment.html
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> End of Radiance-general Digest, Vol 137, Issue 8
>>>>> ************************************************
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed
>>>>> by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of
>>>>> the University of Nottingham.
>>>>>
>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> End of Radiance-general Digest, Vol 137, Issue 9
>>>>> ************************************************
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed
>>>>> by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of
>>>>> the University of Nottingham.
>>>>>
>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> End of Radiance-general Digest, Vol 137, Issue 12
>>>>> *************************************************
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed
>>>>> by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of
>>>>> the University of Nottingham.
>>>>>
>>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>>
>>>> -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was
>>>> scrubbed...
>>>> URL:
>>>> <http://www.radiance-online.org/pipermail/radiance-general/attachmen
>>>> ts/
>>>> 201
>>>> 50810/959f6779/attachment.html>
>>>>
>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> End of Radiance-general Digest, Vol 138, Issue 12
>>>> *************************************************
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the
>>>> addressee and may contain confidential information. If you have
>>>> received this message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>>>
>>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in
>>>> this message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed
>>>> by the author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of
>>>> the University of Nottingham.
>>>>
>>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage
>>>> your computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks.
>>>> Email communications with the University of Nottingham may be
>>>> monitored as permitted by UK legislation.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>>>
>>>
>>> End of Radiance-general Digest, Vol 138, Issue 15
>>> *************************************************
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
>>> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
>>> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>>>
>>> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
>>> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
>>> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
>>> University of Nottingham.
>>>
>>> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
>>> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
>>> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
>>> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
>>> permitted by UK legislation.
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Radiance-general mailing list
>>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>> _______________________________________________
>> Radiance-general mailing list
>> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
>> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <http://www.radiance-online.org/pipermail/radiance-general/attachments/20150811/db767220/attachment.html>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiance-general mailing list
> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
>
>
> End of Radiance-general Digest, Vol 138, Issue 22
> *************************************************
>
>
>
>
> This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee
> and may contain confidential information. If you have received this
> message in error, please send it back to me, and immediately delete it.
>
> Please do not use, copy or disclose the information contained in this
> message or in any attachment. Any views or opinions expressed by the
> author of this email do not necessarily reflect the views of the
> University of Nottingham.
>
> This message has been checked for viruses but the contents of an
> attachment may still contain software viruses which could damage your
> computer system, you are advised to perform your own checks. Email
> communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored as
> permitted by UK legislation.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Radiance-general mailing list
> Radiance-general at radiance-online.org
> http://www.radiance-online.org/mailman/listinfo/radiance-general
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.radiance-online.org/pipermail/radiance-general/attachments/20150812/a5d36db0/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Radiance-general
mailing list