University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Guidelines to airport design: accounting for glare from buildings during takeoff and landing – an LAX case study

(USC Thesis Other)

Guidelines to airport design: accounting for glare from buildings during takeoff and landing – an LAX case study

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content i

Guidelines to Airport Design:
Accounting for Glare from Buildings during Takeoff and Landing – an LAX Case Study

By

Erica Leung

Presented to the
FACULTY OF THE
SCHOOL OF ARCHITECTURE
UNIVERSITY OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
In partial fulfillment of the
Requirements of degree
MASTER OF BUILDING SCIENCE

AUGUST 2019

ii

Acknowledgements

To Tyler: Thank you for the moral and emotional support you’ve given me over these last few years even though
you’re so far away. You kept me sane throughout my Grad School years, and working hard at school always meant
that I could take more days off at Thanksgiving to come hang out with you. You’re the best. I love you.

To Mom/Dad: Thanks for all the support you’ve given Toby and me over the years. Here’s to the last year of school
and the last year of being a patron of the Leung’s ATM!
To Toby: Thanks for being there when I needed. If I was able to finish Grad School, you can too.

To my Thesis Committee: I wouldn't have been able to get this far without your help and chair shaking. Thanks for
being the push I needed to motivate myself to accomplish something so great. I couldn’t see myself grinding this out
without your constant encouragement.
To Marc: Look at how far we’ve come! A year ago, we were talking about how no one has really been able to tie in
aviation (Our passion, what a coincidence, high 5!) in an MBS thesis previously. Now here we are, everything’s done
and dusted. What a journey! Thank you for your expertise, motivation and encouragement throughout this whole
process. Couldn’t have done it without you.
To Doug: Thank you for proposing that I work on a thesis in a topic that I am very passionate about. You were right.
Since I was so passionate about it, I didn't get too overwhelmed.
To Joon-Ho: Thanks for being the first professor at USC who made me realize that I do fit in in this program, even
though I was an incoming Engineering student, at an Architecture school. ARCH-515 made me realize that maybe I
did have something to bring to the table.
To Karen: Thank you for teaching me how to use Revit. That pretty much is the backbone of my entire thesis. Thank
you also for sitting with me at the beginning of my thesis, when we were stuck in that render rut. I will be forever
grateful for the encouragement to “keep working on your thesis!”

To the MBS Corner Office Squad: Nekter breaks never felt so good!
Brandt: Let’s go grab a muffin. Thanks for being another person I could bounce thesis thoughts off of, no matter how
wild they were. And also thanks for covering when I couldn't make it to class!
Casey: Hey let’s go play a round this weekend. Thanks for carrying our team projects with your Rhino models. I
promise I’ll do your math for you forever. No guarantees for accuracy though!

To the MCP MATT Team: Thanks for being so patient with me this last year as I was trying to crank this out. I can’t
wait to see you at my Thesis Defense to share probably the biggest thing I’ve done in my school life.
Marcos: Where would I be if I couldn't bounce my stupid ideas off you? Thanks for being patient with everything
and having my back at work when I had to rush to class.
Graham: Like I said, you’re quoted in my thesis. Be honored. Thank you, too, for being patient and supportive. This
is a pretty big accomplishment and I couldn’t have done it without Friday Ceviche.
Adam: “Go and be smart!” Thanks Adam, I did, and here’s what I have to show for it! Thanks for being flexible and
allowing me to work around my school schedule. But at the end of the day, we know USC > The OSU.
Chase: You’re awesome. And your motivation, “Are you done with your paper yet, can you come and help Marcos
out with this field stuff now” kept me going and rushing to finish this. Thank you!
Casey: “Are you at work today?” Well Casey, even if I were on my way to class, I’d happily take your call. Thanks for
having my back whilst I was in/on my way to class.

To Marie: Thank you for being there when I needed it. Ups and Downs and Ups and Downs. The motivation to sit
down and crank this baby out. Hearing me vent when I was about to explode. You’ve done more than you think and
I love you for it.
To Vicki/Charmaine: West Coast Best Coast! You two are amazing, never a dull day when I get a Whatsapp
notification. Thank you for all the motivation, laughs and support not only during Grad School, but also beyond.

To Deano: Thank you for the emotional support. The early morning and late night wakeups.
iii

Committee Members

Chair: Marc Schiler
Title: Professor
Affiliation: USC Building Science Faculty
Email: MarcS@usc.edu

Second Committee Member: Douglas Noble
Title: Associate Professor
Affiliation: USC Building Science Faculty
Email: DNoble@usc.edu

Third Committee Member: Joon Ho Choi
Title: Assistant Professor
Affiliation: USC Building Science Faculty
Email: JoonHoCh@usc.edu

iv

Abstract

Takeoff and landing of a plane requires the pilot's full and complete attention. Correct altitude
must be sustained, glide path must be adhered to, and communication must be maintained.
Glare at this point in time can cause a pilot's attention to be thrown off, and risk the hundreds of
passengers they are responsible for. The purpose of these guidelines is to instruct an architect
on how to build an airport from a pilot's point of view. Through trial and error, different methods
of measuring glare were tested, including Revit’s own rendering engine and Rhino/Grasshopper
glare tool. It was then found that the V-Ray rendering plugin within Revit was the most
appropriate for the situation due to its ability to render external reflections. Los Angeles
International Airport was chosen as a case study and the airport was then modeled in Revit.
Through V-Ray renderings of the model, instances in which daytime and nighttime glare can occur
was analyzed. Critical times at which glare is the brightest were recorded, and shading devices
were drawn and implemented. The goal of the shading devices was to eliminate glare with
minimum material usage and therefore construction cost, whilst maintaining ample daylighting
within the terminal buildings. The end product of these guidelines will provide direction on ideal
glare-mitigating façades to avoid accidents during takeoff and landing. The guidelines will also
incorporate directions on where not to locate skylights, and if skylights have already been built
within these areas, methods on shading these areas to mitigate glare to pilots.

v

Key Words: glare, airports, rendering, brise soleil, shading
Research Objectives
- Determine a rendering software that is able to determine exterior building specular
reflections
- Determine a way of mitigating glare during critical parts of flight, i.e. landing.
- Determine a solution if Los Angeles International Airport decided to implement skylights,
and where to locate them and shade them to mitigate glare to pilots but at the same time
increase daylighting within terminal areas.

vi

Table of Contents
Acknowledgements ii
Committee Members iii
Abstract iv
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Ivanpah Solar Plant, Mojave Desert 1
1.2 Pilots’ Issues with the Ivanpah Solar Plant 1
1.3 How does Glare affect a Pilot’s Duties? 3
1.4 Glare Defined 6
1.4.1 Causes of Glare 8
1.4.2 Discomfort Glare 9
1.5 Disability Glare 11

1.5.1 Distribution of Light in Materials 12

1.5.2 Stochastic Distribution and Lambertian Surfaces 13
1.6 Specular Reflection 14
1.7 Methods of Mitigating Glare in Existing Infrastructure 15
1.8 Methods of Mitigating Glare in New Infrastructure 15
1.9 Summary 16
2 Background of Glare Mitigation 17
2.1 Measuring Glare 17

2.1.1 Daylight Glare Probability (DGP) 17
2.2 Glare Mitigation at the Walt Disney Concert Hall 18
2.3 Glare Mitigation at 20 Fenchurch St., London (“Walkie Scorchie”) 20
2.4 Glare Mitigation at the Vdara Hotel, Las Vegas 23
2.5 Glare Mitigation as Part of a Greater Façade 24

2.5.1 Reducing Specularity in Glass 24

2.5.2 Capillary Structures within the IGU 25
2.6 Glare Mitigation Devices in Los Angeles 27
2.7 Wilshire Federal Building in Sawtelle, Los Angeles 28
2.8 The Broad Museum, Downtown Los Angeles 29
2.9 Summary 32
3 Exploring Methodologies 33
3.1 Pinpointing External Glare using Revit and Rhino and its Pitfalls 33
3.2 Further Rendering in Revit 35
3.3 Rendering External Glare through V-ray for Revit 38

3.3.1 Testing V-ray’s Ability to Render Specular Surfaces 38

3.3.2 Rendering a Realistic Facade 42

3.3.3 Rendering an Obscured Reflection 43
vii

3.3.4 Brise Soleil To Reduce Glare 45
3.4 From a Pilot’s Point of View 47

3.4.1 Morning Glare on Vertical Surfaces 50

3.4.1.1 Mitigating Morning Glare through a Perpendicular Brise Soleil 51

3.4.1.2 Mitigating Morning Glare through an Angled Brise Soleil 56

3.4.1.3 Angled Fin Throughout the Year 61

3.4.1.4 Special Considerations to Facades with Different Orientations 66
3.5 Afternoon Glare on Horizontal Surfaces 67

3.5.1 Determining Critical Glare Times 67

3.5.2 Mitigating Afternoon Glare on a Horizontal Surface with an Angled Fin 73

3.5.3 Application of Glare Mitigation on Horizontal Surfaces at Other Locations 83
3.6 Summary 84
4 Other Conditions 86
4.1 Parametric Design of Brise Soleil – a la the Broad Museum 86
4.2 Night Lighting 87

4.2.1 Uplights at the Horseshoe at LAX 88

4.2.2 Airway Markings in the Rain 90
5 Conclusion

93
5.1 Identifying Glare 93
5.2 Glare Mitigation on Vertical Surfaces 94
5.3 Glare Mitigation on Horizontal Surfaces 95
5.4 Other Conditions 96
5.5 Summary 97
6 Appendix

98
A. Original Brise Soleil Excel Calculator – With Formulas 98
B. Angled Fin Brise Soleil Excel Calculator – With Formulas 98
C. Angled Skylight Brise Soleil Calculator – With Formulas 99

1

1. Pilots’ Issues with Glare
1.1 Ivanpah Solar Plant, Mojave Desert
The Ivanpah Solar Electric Generating System is a solar plant located on the border of California
and Nevada, in the Mojave Desert. It has a capacity of 377 megawatts and generates electricity
for PG&E and Southern California Edison. The solar plant works by focusing over 340,000 mirrors
at central towers containing water boilers, which then generate steam, driving turbines and
creating electricity. The plant’s output generates enough energy to power more than 140,000
Californian homes during the day and displaces more than 400,000 tons of CO 2 a year.
(BrightSource, 2015)
1

1.2 Pilots’ Issues with the Ivanpah Solar Plant
Pilots’ main concern with the plant is the glare created from the light that is reflected off the
mirrors. As the plant is located 40 miles southwest of Las Vegas McCarran International Airport
(LAS), it ends up affecting nearly 500 flights that depart from the commercial airport daily.
2

In a report recorded in August 2013 in NASA’s Aviation Safety Reporting System, a general
aviation pilot flying from the neighboring Boulder City Airport complained that the glare created
by the mirrors is comparable to “looking into the sun” as the plane climbed from 6,000 ft to

1
BrightSource, “Ivanpah” BrightSource Limitless. 2015.
http://www.brightsourceenergy.com/ivanpah-solar-project#.W-0d8XozaCQ
2
Kudialis, Chris. “Las Vegas by the numbers” Las Vegas Sun. 2016.
https://lasvegassun.com/news/2016/dec/25/mccarran-international-airport-by-the-numbers/
2

12,000 ft. In the same report, an air traffic controller noted that complaints from the glare have
been received from pilots during the late morning and early afternoon hours daily.
3
In a further
study conducted by Sandia Laboratories, it was found that the glare generated by the power plant
was strong enough to cause significant ocular impact up to a distance of 6 miles.
4

Figure 1.1: Los Angeles Sectional Chart showing the location of Las Vegas McCarran
International Airport (North), Boulder City Airport (Southeast of LAS) and the Ivanpah Solar
Farm (Southwest of LAS). “Los Angeles Sectional Aeronautical Chart” Federal Aviation
Administration.
https://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/flight_info/aeronav/productcatalog/vfrcharts/sectional/

3

In response to the numerous complaints received by pilots, the FAA issued a Letter to Airmen
detailing the potential glare hazards. A note has also been published by the FAA in sectional
charts used by pilots flying under Visual Flight Rules, as seen above in Figure 1.1.
1.3 How does Glare affect a Pilot’s Duties?
Although automation has alleviated many flight tasks for pilots, several tasks remain
irreplaceable. These include: active scanning of the flight’s surroundings, which may be one of
the most important tasks during flight, and takeoff and landing, which involves active scanning
as well. Active scanning of the horizon as well as vertical scanning between the ground and the
space above the plane is crucial to maintaining the flight’s safety, as the pilot is looking for
potential hazards that may affect the flight.
Should flight instruments be inaccurate or calibrated incorrectly, it is up to the pilot to maintain
spatial awareness of the aircraft. Like in the previous section, concentrated reflections from
infrastructure can easily affect a pilot’s ability to scan the airspace. Glare is generated as a result,
as the hotspot of light floods the aircraft’s windshield, disabling the pilot’s ability to judge their
environment. This effect within the cockpit can be seen in Figure 1.2 below, where the low setting
sun generates a bright reflection in some buildings visible off the wingtip of the plane. This
reflection makes it uncomfortable to scan the horizon around that area, which may cause pilots
to be indifferent about looking for air traffic within that portion of the airspace.
4

Not only is glare an issue during daytime flight, it can also be a problem during nighttime flight.
However, unlike during the day, nighttime glare is caused mainly by lighting, whether it be street
lighting or event lighting from stadiums. Figure 1.3 below shows what the city of Los Angeles
looks like at night. It can be seen in the center of the photo that floodlights from sporting venues
can easily generate glare within the cockpit and distract pilots.
Figure 1.2: Glare generated by the reflection of the sun in infrastructure as seen on the end of
the wing.

5

As glare prevents pilots from actively scanning airspace meticulously, measures must be taken to
reduce glare in instances where a pilots’ full attention is required. This is especially true during
takeoff and landing, where a pilot needs to be attentive to not only their surroundings, but also
to the plane’s altitude and airspeed, as well as the flight path and proper takeoff and landing
procedures.
Figure 1.3: During nighttime flight, bright flood lighting from sportsgrounds can cause glare
within the cockpit as well.
6

During landing, the plane cannot approach from too high an altitude and land too far down the
runway, as there will not be enough runway for the plane to slow down on. At the same time,
the plane cannot approach from too low and land before the start of the runway, as this will risk
damage to the plane. The same applies during takeoff, where the pilot needs to maximize usable
runway space to allow the plane to reach its takeoff speed prior to takeoff. Should takeoff speed
not be reached, the pilot risks overrunning the runway and losing control of the plane.
Therefore, during these critical portions of flight, measures must be taken to reduce the amount
of distractions within the aircraft to allow pilots to safely maneuver the plane. With glare being
a major obstacle to pilot concentration, measures can be taken to reduce glare generated by
infrastructure around planes during critical maneuvers. Since the airport itself represents the
major built environment surrounding airport runways, and with takeoff and landing being one of
the critical maneuvers, airport terminals can be redesigned to minimize glare.
1.4 Glare Defined
Glare, according to the International Commission on Illumination (CIE), can be split up into two
types: disability glare and discomfort glare. Disability glare is defined as “glare that impairs the
vision of objects without necessarily causing discomfort”, and discomfort glare is defined as
“glare that causes discomfort without necessarily impairing the vision of objects.”
5
The
convolutedness of this definition is very much an analogy of what people perceive glare to be.

5
Vos, Johannes J. “Reflections on Glare.” Lighting Research & Technology 35, no. 2 (June 2003):
163–75. doi:10.1191/1477153503li083oa.

7

When asked, many people have no idea what glare is, but they know what it feels like, as they
have experienced glare in many parts of their life, when they are temporarily blinded when
viewing a luminous source. Please note, however, that the definitions are not really intended to
be mutually exclusive.
In one sense, glare is simply the contrast between a very bright light on a comparatively dimmer
background. As a person stares into the bright light source, the eye’s circular and radial muscles
in the iris contract to protect the eye by limiting the amount of light that enters into the eye. The
lens behind these muscles focuses this light into the back of the eye into the rods and cones,
where an image is generated and is transmitted to the brain via the optic nerve. The eye is then
acclimated to this level of light, so when the person decides to look at a dimmer light source or
surface, an image cannot be generated, as there is not enough light entering the eye due to the
contracted muscles. When the retina is not overstressed, the circular and radial muscles relax,
allowing more light to enter the eye and therefore allowing for an image to slowly be generated
as the person regains vision. The muscles that limit and permit the amount of light to enter the
eye is one of the human body’s safety mechanisms to prevent damage to the retina.
1.4.1 Causes of Glare
There are two main causes of glare: relative glare and absolute glare. Sometimes, a third cause
called veiling reflection may also be considered. Veiling reflection is both a cause and an effect,
and is discussed in the next section below. Relative glare is caused by a difference between
luminances.
Relative glare is named so because it acts on a relative scale. A large difference in luminance is
what generates this type of glare. Every person has a different perception of glare, so there is no
8

definitive number to categorize glare. However, as defined by Greg Ward for the Radiance
program, if the luminance level of an object is more than 7 times the luminance of the
background, the situation can be categorized as glare.
6
Although this is not an accepted standard,
it allows for a physical characterization of relative glare.
Absolute glare is glare generated when there is too much luminance no matter what. An example
of this is the sun. On Earth, it is generally accepted that the brightest object around is sunlight.
There is nothing around us that is brighter than this. It is impossible to look at the sun without
experiencing glare. The eye cannot adjust far enough to keep the retina safe. That is why one
should never look directly at the sun. The absolute luminance is too high. Therefore, solar glare
can be considered absolute glare.
7

Although it is not as strong as discomfort or disability glare, the third category is still significant,
often combined with the other two and certainly comes into play in flying. This is called Veiling
Reflection. It occurs when specular reflected light from a surface is brighter than the light from
the surface that contains information. Consider the reflection off of a glossy magazine cover
which is so bright that the content of the cover is completely hidden. Consider reflections off the

6
Schiler, Marc. 2009. “Examples of Glare Remediation Techniques: Four Buildings.” Paper
presented at PLEA2009, Quebec City, Canada, June 22-24, 2009.
http://www.plea2009.arc.ulaval.ca/Papers/2.STRATEGIES/2.1%20Daylighting/ORAL/2-1-11-
PLEA2009Quebec.pdf
7
Suk, Jae Y. 2007. “Post-treatment analysis of the glare remediation of the Walt Disney Concert
Hall.” Thesis presented to the Faculty of the School of Architecture at the University of Southern
California, Los Angeles, California, May 2007.
http://digitallibrary.usc.edu/cdm/ref/collection/p15799coll127/id/497517

9

surface of glass or water, if you need to see what is behind or under the surface. In a more
scientific sense, it is whenever the signal to noise ratio drops too low and the information
(content) is obscured. This does not necessarily hurt physically, but is annoying and problematic
in flying.
8

1.4.2 Discomfort Glare
Discomfort glare affects visibility, but this can be easily remediated by looking away. A scientific
way to look at this is to imagine the light source as a parallel ray of light. When that entire parallel
ray of light enters a person’s field of view, discomfort glare is realized. A good example of this is
driving on a freeway at night that has at least two lanes, each going the opposite way. As a car
comes from the opposite direction, each car’s headlights generate a blinding effect towards their
respective drivers. This glare can be averted by the driver looking away. Another example affects
people on the street and occurs during sunset or sunrise, when the sun is low in the sky. If there
is infrastructure with reflective surfaces surrounding these people, there is a high chance that
one of these people will experience disability glare when the sun is reflected off of the building
and directly into a person’s field of view. An example of glare generated from Los Angeles’
Downtown AECOM building can be seen below in Figure 1.4. The building opposite the AECOM
building is illuminated by the glare generated by the AECOM building.

8
Schiler, Marc. (Professor, University of Southern California), in discussion with author. January
2019.
10

1.5 Disability Glare
On the other hand, disability glare is one that is strong enough that an action cannot be
completed. This type of glare causes the eye to be unable to discern the information, no matter
what. An example is within a built environment, where a worker is looking at a computer. The
office lighting within that space is semi-reflected off of the screen and into the viewer’s eyes. The
glare isn’t enough to blind the viewer temporarily, but in the long run, the glare will cause strain
in the viewer’s eyes. This type of glare can be remediated by installing an overhang, or embedding
Figure 1.4: Glare generated by the AECOM building in Downtown Los Angeles, illuminating the
AT&T Signaling Tower in front of it.

11

the light source into a light shelf that diffuses the light to reduce the amount of direct light rays
hitting workstations.
1.5.1 Distribution of Light in Materials
At the Los Angeles airport, many of the building materials used reflect light to the outside. These
materials may have been chosen for their maximizing daylighting, and their ability to reflect infra-
red radiation, which reduces energy bills required for cooling and heating the interior. At the
right angle, reflected sunlight will cause glare. Both the international terminal and the domestic
terminals are guilty of this. Figure 1.5 and Figure 1.6 show that a large part of the terminals are
constructed with glass to allow for daylighting, and matte metal panels cover most of the fifth
façade, the roof. Light distribution off of these materials vary greatly, and these can be
categorized into stochastic or specular.
Figure 1.5: Building materials at Terminal 2 at LAX show
reflective glass and a matte metal.
12

1.5.2 Stochastic Distribution and Lambertian Surfaces
A Lambertian surface is essentially an ideal matte surface, which diffuses and reflects light in all
directions. Microscopically, a material with a matte surface is extremely rough and has ridges and
valleys that accept incoming light and reflects the ray outwards in a random pattern, as seen in
Figure 1.7 below. The theory that governs the distribution of light in this case is called Stochastic
Distribution. This is a mathematical probability term, and essentially is a model that can predict
the distribution of a ray. Therefore, as a ray of light hits the surface as a vector, the distribution
of light can be calculated. In a Lambertian surface, the luminance of the surface is the same
regardless of the angle of view. This is an ideal matte surface and therefore the ideal surface for
the mitigation of reflected glare.

Figure 1.6: TBIT pictured, with reflective glass and matte metal panels as
well.
13

1.6 Specular Reflection
On the other hand, specular reflection is essentially a perfect mirror. Light travels towards a
surface, and in this material, the angle of incidence and the angle of reflectance are equal, as in
Figure 1.7 below. Therefore, in a perfectly reflective mirror, 100% of the light entering the surface
is reflected 100% with no light scatter, generating a specular reflection, as seen in Figure 1.7
below.
Conventional mirrors are great at preserving images, so when the sun’s entire light ray hits the
surface, almost all of that luminance is reflected off, creating glare and making the viewer
perceive that they are looking directly into the sun.
Mirrors are not the only object that generate specular reflection. Nowadays, many structural
glasses are laminated glass, as laminated glass will often hold together when shattered, instead
of breaking apart into shards. The interlayers between panes of glass are usually either polyvinyl
Figure 1.7: Diagram showing path of light in a mirror reflection (left), specular reflection (center)
and stochastic distribution (right). “Reflection of Light” Science Learning Hub,
https://www.sciencelearn.org.nz/resources/48-reflection-of-light
Mirror Reflection Specular Reflection Stochastic Distribution
14

butyral (PVB), ethylene vinyl acetate (EVA), or SentryGlass Plus (SGP) made by DuPont. These
various interlayers all have their own respective properties for indoor heat reduction, UV
reflection and minimal thickness to name a few. They also have different reflectivity, which would
affect the amount of light reflected. Therefore, to mitigate glare when choosing structural,
laminated glass, it would be wise to pick an exterior glass layer and an interlayer that reduce
specularity and reflectivity, to mitigate the amount of light mirrored back into the outside.
1.7 Methods of Mitigating Glare in Existing Infrastructure
If infrastructure has already been built using certain glare-causing reflective materials, it may not
be cost-efficient to remove these materials to rebuild the entire structure. Expenses accrued
through replacement could include the cost of the material and the labor to install it and the loss
of business due to construction disruption to name a few. Therefore, a less imposing, yet
permanent option should be explored. One idea is to reduce the glare by dissipating the light,
but at the same time still allow light to pass through into the infrastructure for ample daylighting.
Others ideas might include surface articulation such louvers, a brise-soleil and appropriately
placed fins or overhangs.
1.8 Methods of Mitigating Glare in New Infrastructure
In new infrastructure, care can be given to orient terminal buildings and runways in a fashion that
will not generate glare affecting pilot duties. If considered early in the design stages, glare can be
easily mitigated by astutely orienting terminal buildings and runways. Although most runways
are governed by weather and environmental factors for efficient and safe flight, smart terminal
building material choices and orientation can easily remove the concern for exterior glare.
15

1.9 Summary
Glare occurs regardless of whether it is daytime or nighttime. Daytime glare caused by the sun
or its reflections and nighttime glare caused by bright lights are both issues that generate
problems for pilots. Specular reflection, in particular, is the main problem, especially as more
architects incorporate reflective glass into airport design to allow for better a passenger
experience. Rethinking the façade can be a solution in mitigating glare while accounting for
daylighting when creating a space for transiting passengers.

16

2. Background of Glare Mitigation
2.1 Measuring Glare
Most glare comes from the difference in luminance between a background and a source. There
are many means and methods of measuring this difference, and many of them make the
contrasting light the focal point. Some measurements go beyond this and examine the
orientation the glare is being viewed at, for example Daylight Glare Probability.
2.1.1 Daylight Glare Probability (DGP)
This method of glare measurement was developed by Wienold and Christoffersen, and the
measurement determines glare as a function of the solid angle and the position index of a glare’s
source luminance as well as the vertical eye luminance.
9
This measurement was generated
through human studies conducted in identical built environments at the Danish Building Research
Institute and at Fraunhofer Institute for Solar Energy Systems, to test for replication of data.
Background measurements were taken to ensure that the two locations had the same
illuminance levels, and this was done using a CCD (Charge-Coupled Device) camera. The photos
from the camera were then processed through the lighting simulation software, EvalGlare, to
record the illuminance levels within the environment. The participants in the aforementioned
study conducted daily tasks such as computer work and reading a paper, after which their

9
Wienold, Jan. “Evaluation methods and development of a new glare prediction model for
daylight environments with the use of CCD cameras.” Energy and Buildings 38, no. 7 (July 2006):
743-57. doi: 10.1016/j.enbuild.2006.03.017

17

perception of the environment was surveyed. The responses allowed for the generation of an
equation which would measure discomfort glare relatively accurately when matched to the
photos.
2.2 Glare Mitigation at the Walt Disney Concert Hall
The Walt Disney Concert Hall in Downtown Los Angeles is designed by Frank Gehry and was
unveiled in 2003. Following its unveiling, countless complaints were received due to the
building’s reflective surfaces. Originally, the building’s façade was planned to be made of stone,
but following the positive acclaim of his work at the Bilbao in Spain, Gehry chose to switch the
façade material from stone to polished stainless steel.
10
The stainless steel had about the same
reflectance as the stone, but a more mirror-like effect. However, the specular effect was not
thoroughly researched prior to installation. As the façade is complex, with concave and convex
surfaces, as seen in Figure 2.1, hotspots and heat reflectance quickly became a problem.
According to Schiler, in the condominiums around the Concert Hall, residents expressed
temperature increases of 15F at different times throughout the day.
11
Other hearsay tales of woe
from the reflective façade include melted traffic cones due to light and heat focusing onto hot
spots, as well as combusting trash cans.

10
Walt Disney Concert Hall. “Architecture: Designed from the Inside Out.” Walt Disney Concert
Hall 10
th
Anniversary. http://wdch10.laphil.com/wdch/architecture.html
11
Schiler, Marc. 2009. “Examples of Glare Remediation Techniques: Four Buildings.” Paper
presented at PLEA2009, Quebec City, Canada, June 22-24, 2009.
http://www.plea2009.arc.ulaval.ca/Papers/2.STRATEGIES/2.1%20Daylighting/ORAL/2-1-11-
PLEA2009Quebec.pdf
18

Following photographic analysis of the building, it was found that some areas had three times
the luminance levels of the surrounding areas, generating observed glare to passersby. On top of
that, thermal glare was simulated and detected where focal points generated by the concave
surfaces are located. Thermal dataloggers implanted in the sidewalk showed temperatures in
excess of 140F and freestanding, light weight objects were measured at over 300F.
Banners and increased landscaping were several quick fixes that were suggested, but with the
geometry of the building, banners would have obscured the entire character of the building.
Landscaping already exists within the site, but due to thermal reflection, the landscaping was
unable to grow efficiently in the environment.
In the end, to reduce the mirror-like effect of the panels, a plastic coated cloth was used to hide
the panels that were deemed to be sources of visual and thermal glare. This method worked, as
Figure 2.1: Complex surfaces at the Walt Disney Concert Hall
19

it provided about the same reflectance as the original surface, but no longer has the mirror-like
effect. This method was a temporary solution to the glare problem, while testing led to the more
permanent solution of sanding the surface down. Pulling the measurement, “Gloss Units” from
the steel, paper and paint industry, a reduction in Gloss Units of at least 60% was realized,
resulting in the quashing of the glare complaints.
12

2.3 Glare Mitigation at 20 Fenchurch St., London (“Walkie Scorchie”)
20 Fenchurch st. is a building in London that resembles a walkie-talkie and was designed by
renowned architect Rafael Viñoly, who also designed the Vdara Hotel in Las Vegas. 20 Fenchurch
features a concave curve on its southern face, which causes a specular reflection. The reflection
often lands on the same spot, which happens to be several parking spots on Eastcheap, a road to
the south of the building.
There have been several accounts of the specular reflection affecting cars, including the Vauxhall
van of HVAC engineer Eddie Cannon. According to Eddie, the dashboard and plastic paneling on
the van has melted off. In addition, a bottle of energy drink that was sitting on the dash had also
looked like it was baked. However, Eddie was not the only victim. A tiling company director,
Martin Lindsay, has claimed that after parking his Jaguar XJ on the same road, the plastic paneling
and the side mirror melted. On top of melted cars, there has been evidence of the reflection
being hot enough to cook eggs, as well as setting fire to some shops’ welcome mats. Computer
20

simulations claim that at its worst, the radiation was 10-15 times worse than direct solar
radiation, at 3320 W/m
2
.
12

Following these incidents, the building earned the name “Walkie Scorchie”. As these incidents
were brought up whilst the building was still in construction, a temporary screen was set up along
Eastcheap to prevent the ray of light from hitting the road. An additional screen was attached to
the building to reduce reflections. Glare complaints from single locations stopped after several
weeks from the initial complaint, and this is presumed to be because the sun moved along and
generated specular reflections elsewhere in the city. However, the building’s developers were
still pressured into looking for a solution, and they found it in overhangs. More precisely,
aluminium fins installed in the brise soleil style, as seen below in Figure 2.2. Brise soleil, meaning
sun breaker in French, are louvers orientated vertically to allow sunlight through from the top
down, but when the sun is at an angle, the louvers act like venetian blinds, blocking part of the
sun out. A diagram representation of this is seen in Figure 2.2 below. On the 37-storey building,
the louver system is installed on thirty-five of the floors, from floor 3 to floor 37.

12
Zhu, Jiajie, W. Jahn and G. Rein. 2018. “Computer simulation of sunlight concentration due to
façade shape: application to the 2013 Death Ray at Fenchurch Street, London.” Journal of
Building Performance Simulation. doi: 10.1080/19401493.2018.1538389
21

Figure 2.2: Above: An example of a Brise Soleil product manufactured by door/window
company, Arcadia. “Sun Shade Brise Soleil Design Series” Arcadia, Inc.
https://www.arcadiainc.com/products/system/sun-control-sun-shade/Design-Series
Below: Brise Soleil at 20 Fenchurch as a form of Glare Mitigation. “Walkie Scorchie Solution
Submitted for Planning” Architect’s Journal. https://www.architectsjournal.co.uk/news/walkie-
scorchie-solution-submitted-for-planning/8659674.article
22

2.4 Glare Mitigation at the Vdara Hotel, Las Vegas
The Vdara hotel is located off the Las Vegas Strip, and is designed by architect Rafael Viñoly as
well. Similar to 20 Fenchurch, the Vdara hotel also features a curved façade on the south side of
the building. And like the specular reflection problem in London, the building in Las Vegas has
the same issue as well. The only difference between 20 Fenchurch and the Vdara is that the
reflection issue at the Vdara occurs year round, whereas the 20 Fenchurch issue only occurs for
around two hours a day, several weeks in a year.
13
In this case, building was curved in plan.
Since the concave façade faces the south, and the building is located in the northern hemisphere,
the façade generates a reflection towards the pool below at patrons which affects hotel guests
through much of the day. As the reflection moves along the hotel property opposite the path of
the sun, it is not possible to cordon off an area to prevent guests from being affected. A guest,
Bill Pintas, has complained that the heat of the reflection was so extreme that he thought he had
realized the effects of a “destroyed ozone layer”. He felt his hair burning, and later added that he
thought he smelled his burnt hair.
12
The hotel has, however tried to mitigate this issue by applying a reflective film that blocks out
70% of the light on the façade, according to a spokesman, Gordon Absher, on behalf of the hotel
owner, MGM. The specifications of the reflective film, according to the spokesman, exceed the
specifications written by a solar convergence experts, Loisos + Ubbelohde. The hotel has offered

13
Vollmer, M., “Achtung Solarofen: Kaustiken von Hochhausverglasungen.” Physik. Unserer Zeit
45, no. 3 (May 2014): 134-39. doi: 10.1002/piuz.201401360
23

its guests several other temporary solutions, such as larger, thicker umbrellas, and plants to block
off areas where the reflection may occur.
14

2.5 Glare Mitigation as Part of a Greater Façade
2.5.1 Reducing Specularity in Glass
Glass is often used today as the main façade material, as it allows building occupants a full,
uninterrupted view to the outside world. Glass is also a sturdy structural material, and when
processed through various means, can be strengthened even more.
Glass can be laminated to increase strength, durability and ensure safety should the glass break.
The interlayer binding the glass is designed to hold shards of glass together as one sheet, to
reduce the chance of glass pieces from shattering. The interlayer in laminated glass can also be
treated with an agent to reduce light or UV transmission. Furthermore, glass can also be treated
in a process called tempering, where the glass is heated to about 1200F and quenched when
removed. This process is similar to making hardened stainless steel, and it allows the glass to be
4 to 5 times stronger than what it previously was. When tempered glass is broken, it shatters into
a lot of small pieces, making it safer than shards of glass.
15

Beyond laminating and tempering, glass can also be paired up to make a sealed box, called an
insulated glass unit (IGU). IGUs often have a frame, usually made of aluminum, and two panels

14
Mayerowitz, S. 2010. “Las Vegas Hotel Knew of Pool “Death Ray” Back in 2008.” ABC News,
September 30, 2010. https://abcnews.go.com/Travel/las-vegas-hotel-knew-pool-death-ray-
back/story?id=11760093
15
Vaglio, J. “ARCH 518: Advanced Surface Tectonics; Methods in Material and Enclosure.”
Lecture, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA, February 2018.
24

of glass, one on the interior and one on the exterior. Within the sealed glass-aluminum box is
often an insulating gas that is unreactive. There are many advantages to having a sealed,
impenetrable unit as a façade, as the material kept within the unit will not be affected by outside
environmental factors. In the next few sections, various examples of inserts that have been used
in glare mitigation will be discussed.
14

2.5.2 Capillary Structures within the IGU
According to Schneider, honeycomb-like capillary structures can be inserted into the IGU to
achieve a better thermal insulation, as well as better light diffusion. In examples such as a gym in
Herzebock, per Figure 2.3, and the Nelson Atkins Museum in Kansas City, shown below in Figure
2.4, capillary IGUs have been installed, and have seen a U-value decrease of about 1.0W/m
2
-K,
compared to conventional, gas-filled IGUs.
16

On top of that, the capillaries within the unit have the ability to allow light transmission, whilst
diffusing it to reduce internal glare, and still maintaining a color rendering index (CRI) of about
100%. CRI is basically a measurement of how well a light source keeps its color based on its
wavelength, and by having a CRI of about 100, it means that the capillary IGU is pretty much
perfect in retaining the wavelength of light through the window unit. Therefore, this unit would
be efficient in transmitting bright, white light within the building, as the light waves diffuse
through the IGUs, bouncing throughout the capillaries, allowing for daylighting.
15

16
Schneider, Frank. 2012. “Individual Glass Solutions for Modern Building Skins.” Paper
presented at Advanced Building Skins, Graz, Austria, June 14-15, 2012. ABS_25. Graz: Technical
University of Graz Publishing.
25

However, as much as this unit would reduce glare for its interior occupants, it is unconvincing
whether it will mitigate exterior glare caused by specular reflection. As the outer layer could still
Figure 2.4: Section of the Capillary IGU at the Nelson Atkins Museum in Kansas City. (Schneider,
2012)
Figure 2.3: Herzebock Gym with capillary IGUs, showing light transmission without
specularity. (Schneider, 2012)
26

be the same glass that generates specular reflection, the capillary IGU may not be an adequate
method of reducing exterior glare. Furthermore, due to the capillaries being within the IGU, the
building’s occupants are unable to see the outside.
In airport applications, the capillary IGU can be used in transit areas where outside view has never
been a consideration or a factor, such as in the federal immigration area at LAX’s Tom Bradley
International Terminal (TBIT). Although the façade replacement process may be costly, savings
may be realized through natural daylighting, allowing the airport to rely less on artificial lighting.
This method can also be used as skylights throughout the airport, to maximize the amount of
lighting into the terminal areas throughout the day. However, a pitfall of this method is that the
glass layer facing the exterior may still generate some specular reflection, as it is still glass, despite
removing interior glare. Therefore, when utilizing this method to mitigate glare, care must be
taken in choosing the outer material, as unwanted specular glare may still occur.
2.6 Glare Mitigation Devices in Los Angeles
Los Angeles is not completely new to the glare mitigation game, as the city experiences 147 clear
days a year.
17
Therefore, several buildings throughout Los Angeles have already implemented
ways in which glare can be mitigated from their facades, mostly to reduce energy costs involved
with cooling buildings. Buildings often use a brise soleil system, where fins attached to the façade
help shade the interior of the building, and only let a reduced amount of light to enter from a

17
"Annual Days Of Sunshine In California - Current Results", Currentresults.Com
https://www.currentresults.com/Weather/California/annual-days-of-sunshine.php.
27

certain angle. The fins or louvers generally act like external blinds, filtering sunlight. A couple
examples of these are detailed in the sections below.
2.7 Wilshire Federal Building in Sawtelle, Los Angeles
The Wilshire Federal Building was built in the late 60s during the Cold War era by architect Charles
Luckman Associates, as seen in Figure 2.5 below. It is clad in white concrete, and incorporates
precast white concrete fins on the north and south facades for shading.
18
The fins are also
implemented to highlight the height of the building. The east and west facades of the building
are windowless, likely a design to maintain the building’s core temperature low. During an era
where recessed windows and fins were a means to shade a building from the exterior façade, the
Wilshire Federal Building is one of many buildings in Los Angeles that had this fin feature. Another
similar structure is the current USC Tower in Downtown Los Angeles, originally named the
Occidental Center Tower, which features fins on all sides of the building, built by William Perreira
& Associates in 1965.
19

18
"Federal Building | Los Angeles Conservancy", Laconservancy.Org, accessed 28 March 2019,
https://www.laconservancy.org/locations/federal-building.
19
Nathan Masters, "Citydig: The Loneliest Skyscraper In Los Angeles Los Angeles Magazine", Los
Angeles Magazine, Last modified 2014, https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/citydig-the-loneliest-
skyscraper-in-los-angeles/.

28

2.8 The Broad Museum, Downtown Los Angeles
As technology and times progress, smarter ways of light filtering have been built in a more
architecturally pleasing manner, almost as if it were a part of the building as a sculpture. A prime
example of this is the Broad Museum, jointly built by Gensler and Diller Scofidio + Renfro, per
Figure 2.6 below.
The structure of the museum’s outer façade, better known as the Veil, was designed using
computer aided software, and coordinated through Revit. The overall structure within is made
of steel, and is sandwich-clad by precast glass fiber reinforced concrete panels on the front and
Figure 2.5: Concrete fins on the North facade as seen on the Wilshire Federal
Building.
29

back. Figure 2.7 below shows the panels up close. 2,500 panels comprise the Veil, and its joints
are filled with gaskets for better maneuverability during installation, according to Graham
Whaley, an assistant project manager with MATT Construction, the general contractor for the
Broad Museum.
20
The precast concrete panels were made in San Jose, CA from 380 different
molds, with 30% of the molds going towards shaping the oculus, the “recessed opening” within
the façade, seen in Figure 2.6.
21

20
Graham Whaley, APM at MATT Construction Interview
21
The Broad, “The Broad Architectural Factsheet”
https://www.thebroad.org/sites/default/files/pressroom/the_broad_architectural_fact_sheet_1.pdf
Figure 2.6: The Broad Museum in Downtown Los Angeles. The porous façade allows only filtered
light into the interior.
30

The roof of the veil involves the same type of panels throughout, filtering light diffusing in from
the northeast into the 35,000 square foot column-less gallery below. Only light coming in from
the northeast is allowed into the gallery, as this light is deemed to be the least damaging to the
artwork within the space.
21

Although the light filtering mechanism in this example serves to reduce damage to the priceless
artwork it houses within, rather than to reduce heat gain outright, the Broad Museum’s façade
can be adapted by other buildings in a brise soleil application. Through today’s technology, it is
possible, like at the Broad, to use parametric design to generate a façade that is not only
aesthetically pleasing, but also functional in filtering specific angles of light. Examples like the
Figure 2.7: The Broad’s porous façade panels up close,
held together by gaskets.
31

Broad only go to show that it is indeed possible to generate a light filtering façade that allows
occupants a view to the outside, as well as daylighting.
2.9 Summary
Several solutions have been carried out to mitigate external glare on existing facades. Some, like
the Walt Disney Concert Hall, where the façade was sanded down and 20 Fenchurch, where sun
breakers were installed, have been successful. Others, like the Vdara hotel where window films
were applied, have been less so. One way to reduce glare, but still ensure daylighting is to
incorporate glare mitigation within the glass itself, such as by using capillary units inside IGU.
However, in this case, care must be taken to ensure that the external facade ensures daylighting,
but at the same time does not cause specular reflection. The middle ground between daylighting
and glare mitigation can be further analyzed and satisfied through computer simulations of
parametric shapes, to generate a façade that is both aesthetic and functional.

32

3. Exploring Methodologies
3.1 Pinpointing External Glare using Revit and Rhino and its Pitfalls
To locate the areas in which external glare needed mitigation, in the case study of Los Angeles
Airport, a detailed model, per Figure 3.1, was procured through SketchUp 3D Warehouse, where
many accurate drawings have been drawn and uploaded. This model was then simplified in Revit,
using the massing tool to identify discernable shapes of the terminal buildings. The intent was to
then run a solar study to determine where the sun would be reflected from at critical times of
the day. The result would then be rendered and the photo captured can then be run through
glare analysis software, EvalGlare. However, the drawback to this method is that the rendered
image does not contain accurate enough information for glare analysis, so it was halted and
alternative software was explored.
Many architects and engineers studying glare nowadays rely on Rhinoceros to run analyses, so
this was a sound second choice. Programs and Plugins available in Honeybee and Ladybug as a
Figure 3.1: SketchUp model of Los Angeles Airport used as reference.
33

part of Grasshopper allow lighting to be examined, so a Glare Analysis program, per Figure 3.2
below, written by user Mostapha Roudsari was used.
Out of many glare analysis tools written in Grasshopper, this pre-written program from the
learning site Hydra was the simplest to follow, and was the most applicable for the purpose.
However, there was a pitfall to this program as well: as the program’s intent is to study, calculate
and release a high dynamic range (HDR) photo of an internal application, assigning constraints
for the program to calculate became difficult when faced with an extensive LAX model. Even
when simplified into one terminal and assigning the viewpoint from outside of the terminal, a
DGP value of 0.99 was returned, meaning that “absolute glare” was observed. This is an error
value, and is likely attributed to the incorrect use of the program, meaning that this Grasshopper
program is likely inadequate for measuring external glare.
Figure 3.2: Glare-measuring Grasshopper program by Mostapha Roudsari.
34

3.2 Further Rendering in Revit
Following the Rhino backfire, it was realized that a method to determine whether specular
reflections would occur must happen before any glare mitigation analysis was investigated.
Therefore, Revit’s rendering engine was given another chance, through a different type of
analysis. Several tests were set up to investigate the engine, the first being a box test with a hole
in the ceiling. The point of this is to explore whether Revit is able to render the reflection of
sunlight from the hole in the ceiling off the wall and onto the ground, as shown in Figures 3.3 and
3.4.
The wall where the sunlight lands is specified to be a reflective material within Revit. The test will
be positive, if the light spot gets reflected off the wall and onto the ground directly in front of it.
Figure 3.3: Box model with hole in the ceiling for sunlight to enter.
Figure 3.4: Interior of the box model, where the light is to bounce off the specular wall and onto
the ground.
35

Several renderings were completed at different times of day, to examine the different ways in
which the spotlight moves. For example, if the rendering system were accurate, an early morning
light would come in from the East and the reflection off the specular wall would be found on the
ground to the left of the hole. The first few renderings that were done simulated solar lighting at
12 noon, the most straightforward rendering as the light would be expected in the same plane
as the hole, showed some promise as the illuminance result was somewhat as hypothesized, per
Figure 3.5 below.
However, when the render was run again as a realistic effect, the luminated, suspected reflection
spot seen in the illuminance rendering did not appear, per Figure 3.6 below. This leads to the
judgment that Revit’s rendering system may not be entirely accurate in rendering reflected light.
Figure 3.5: Illuminance rendering of the test box, with a high illuminance spot in the same plane
as the ceiling hole.
36

Before Revit’s rendering engine was eliminated completely as an option, another test was run
where the lighting was not 12 noon, just to see how the light would reflect off of the specular
wall. To be able to discern accurately where the light lands, another illuminance render was
completed in the morning light, as seen below in Figure 3.7.
From Figure 3.7, it can be seen that the light does indeed enter the hole at an angle, from the
orientation of the illuminated light spot on the bottom left. However, as the reflection of the
spotlight off the specular wall is not clearly denoted on the ground, the results generated by the
Revit rendering system can be classified as inconclusive, as it is not known if the system can
render reflected light like in real life.

Figure 3.6: Realistic rendering of the same situation as Figure 3.4. However, the clear,
illuminated spot on the ground is not seen.
Figure 3.7: Illuminance Rendering in the morning light, showing clearly where the light lands but
not the reflection off the specular wall.
37

3.3 Rendering External Glare through V-ray for Revit
Following failed attempts at rendering an image that would illustrate external glare, efforts were
redirected into researching other rendering engines. To be precise, animated movie-style
rendering engines were explored. Begun originally as a design and animation studio, V-ray
creators Chaos Group developed a program that is able to render atmospheric effects to be able
to cast realistic shadows. As the topic in question is external glare, V-ray is an optimal program
to generate renderings showing how daylight reflects off of specular surfaces at certain
orientations. The highlight of the program is that it is a plug-in, and is available for download and
use within Revit, enabling easy modeling.
3.3.1 Testing V-ray’s Ability to Render Specular Surfaces
To generate a baseline clarification that V-ray is able to render images showing changes in
specular reflection throughout the day, renderings were made of a single day, spaced an hour
apart to show the path of light. This can be seen below in Figure 3.8. To simplify and expedite the
rendering process, only Terminals 3, 4 and Tom Bradley International Terminal (TBIT) were
modeled, per Figure 3.9. The reason behind this choice is that these buildings have uninterrupted
façade orientations to the project North, South and West. Furthermore, reflections on these
surfaces will be less affected by shadows caused by the surrounding terminals. To enhance
specular effects, and to pinpoint any potential glare locations, the walls of the terminals are all
specified to be a reflective surface, even though in reality, the façade may not be entirely
specular.
38

From rendering iterations, it has been found that the most effective way to simulate the sun
within V-ray is to use the “Lighting, In Session Lighting” function within Revit’s solar study. To do
so, solar azimuth and altitude angles must be referenced and input for different times of day and
year. Azimuth and altitude angles used can be seen below in Table 3.1. In the Figure 3.8 example
below, the solar altitude and azimuth chosen was Los Angeles, as the model’s location is based
there. Renders were produced for different times in the morning, and reflections were tracked
along the southeast facades.
9am, December 21st
39

10am, December 21st
11am, December 21st
12pm, December 21st
40

Figure 3.8: Tracking the movement of the sun through specular reflections on Terminal 4’s
southeast façade. Times rendered are: 9am, 10am, 11am, 12pm and 1pm from top to bottom.
Date chosen for the rendering is December 21
st
.
1pm, December 21st
Figure 3.9: Model used for V-ray rendering, with Terminal 3 in the back, TBIT on the left, and
Terminal 4 in the front. Runways 25L and 25R are shown in the foreground as well.
41

The location used for the renderings are denoted with the orange dot in Figure 3.2. The reason
why this location was chosen is because of its façade orientation in relation to the path of the
sun. As the façade is perpendicular to the southeast direction, the solar reflection should be seen
relatively easily in the morning light.
Table 3.1: Solar altitude and azimuth angles used to show the sun's location.
Time Solar Altitude (
o
) Solar Azimuth (
o
)
9am 19.6 138.5
10am 26.7 151.3
11am 31.2 166.2
12pm 32.5 182.3
1pm 30.3 198.2

As the light was able to “travel” across the façade at different times of the day, it was determined
that V-ray may be a contender for rendering specular reflections. V-ray also took less time in
producing the rendering compared to Revit’s own rendering engine, making the program more
enticing.
3.3.2 Rendering a Realistic Facade
Once it had been established that the solar specular reflection shows up on a fully reflective
façade, the façade was then updated to match the airport’s environment more closely. This
involved modeling the matte surfaces as well as reflective surfaces to see if any reflections still
show up in the same location. Figure 3.10 below is rendered at 9am on December 21
st
, and shows
a reflection in the same location as the that in Figure 3.8 at the same time.
42

Figure 3.10 above goes to show that even when the entire façade is split up into matte and
reflective materials, it can generate a specular reflection where appropriate on the reflective
material, and no reflection on the matte material. Therfore, V-ray as a rending engine is able to
discern materials of different specularity and only project reflections onto the specular materials.
3.3.3 Rendering an Obscured Reflection
A further rendering test that needs to be conducted is the effect of overhangs on the specular
reflection. As further steps involve testing overhang types to see what kind of shading devices
can mitigate specular reflection, a software that is able to discern between shade and reflection
is key. Therefore, to test whether an obscured reflection can be rendered, the same building is
processed under the same conditions as above, but with varying overhang sizes to find a size that
would obscure some of the specular reflection. Figure 3.4 below shows a rendering on December
21
st
, at 9am, with varying overhang depths.

9am, December 21st
Figure 3.10: Facade updated to reflect Terminal 4's likeness.
43

8 foot Overhang
12 foot Overhang
16 foot Overhang
Figure 3.11: The differences between 8, 12, and 16 foot overhangs can be seen in the obscured
reflection, highlighted by the red box.
44

As the overhang gets deeper, it can be seen that more of the sunlight gets obscured by the
overhang. This is in line with what would be expected in real life, where a larger overhang would
block out more light. Furthermore, it can be seen that the shaded window is in a uniform color
throughout, meaning that no light penetrated through the overhang when the software rendered
the scene. This means that the software is calculating the image of the specular reflection based
on the objects the light hits, and not where it thinks the reflection is supposed to be.
The only downside to using an overhang as pictured in Figure 3.11 is that even the largest
overhang simulated, at 16 feet deep, can only shield half the reflected glare from the building.
Structurally and financially, it would be impractical to install such a deep overhang throughout
the airport, as the overhang would require a plethora of extra supports.
3.3.4 Brise Soleil To Reduce Glare
As it is not feasible to install overreaching overhangs at LAX, efforts must be made to design a
less overreaching overhang that would still be able to shield observers from the glare. The
method used in mitigating glare at the “Walkie Scorchie” is another approach.
12
Vertical and
angled louvers can increase the surface area blocking the sun, meaning that the overhang does
not need to protrude as much. A new time of 9:30 am on December 21
st
was chosen, as this
would show the most glare on the top row of windows. Figure 3.12 below shows what the render
at 9:30 am looks like, without overhangs, and Figure 3.13 below that shows what the rendering
at the same time looks like with a 6 foot brise soleil.
45

When placed lower and closer to the window, it can be seen that the shading effects of a 6 foot
brise soleil are comparable to a 12 foot overhang, in Figure 3.13 above. To quantitatively measure
the amount of light shaded, it can be said that the first row of the three are fully shaded using a
6 foot brise soleil, whereas the same row is fully shaded under a 12 foot overhang. It is possible
for a brise soleil to be placed so close to the window, because the fins allow for air flow
throughout the brise soleil itself, whereas a solid overhang will trap air within the space outside
Figure 3.12: Rendering at 9:30 am on December 21st, with no overhang.
Figure 3.13: Rendering at 9:30 am on December 21st, with a 6 foot brise soleil.
46

the window. The fins allow for convection currents to cool the outside of the window, making it
conducive to keeping the façade both shaded and cool, through continuous airflow. Furthermore,
the fins are able to allow diffuse light into the building, allowing for daylighting, but are still able
to create shading to prevent glare and to reduce heat gain.
Therefore, brise soleil are a smarter method to reduce glare, compared to the overhangs, as brise
soleils overreach less, but still generate the same amount of shade.
3.4 From a Pilot’s Point of View
As the original purpose of this investigation is to determine whether LAX has explicit reflective
spots that may affect a pilot during the final approach portion of flight, it is therefore imperative
to use this software to see what pilots should expect during flight. As the software has already
gone through and passed the tests mentioned in the previous subchapters, it can be considered
that the renderings that are generated by V-ray should be relatively accurate in showing where
the sun would be reflected.
To show a pilot’s point of view during approach, runways 25L and 25R were drawn within the
Revit model, as well as the final approach path beyond the start of the runway. Due to the fact
that LAX is located in the northern hemisphere and that these two runways are to the south of
the airport, any glare that is to be expected from the terminal buildings’ vertical facades will
mostly be seen during final approach at these two runways. To ensure rendering resolution, but
still maintain a pilot’s wide perspective, a distance of ½ miles from the end of the runway was
chosen for the simulation location. At a “½ mile final”, as it is colloquially called by pilots, most
attention is placed on looking down the runway and aiming the plane, but little distractions like
glare and reflective glimmers within the field of view can still affect pilots’ duties.
47

The elevation of the “½ mile final” was taken from LAX’s final approach procedures, where planes
have to be at certain altitudes at certain distances away from the beginning of the runway.
Therefore, the camera angle used for the renderings is placed at about 400 feet above ground
level, and aimed towards the terminal buildings, with the view widened to encapsulate all the
terminal buildings modeled. The camera’s reach was also extended so it goes beyond the
terminal buildings, per Figure 3.14 below, allowing for a complete field of view.
Other than final approach into LAX, there are other routes where glare from LAX would affect
pilots, and these are the “mini-route” and the “Special Flight Rules routes”. These routes allow
pilots in planes without turbojets to navigate over LAX in the North-South direction at 2500, 3500
or 4500 feet right above the runway numbers and over the terminal itself. This route is usually
utilized by pilots as a shortcut to get past the stringent LAX airspace and southwards towards
Long Beach, or northwards towards Malibu. Any reflective surfaces in the horizontal plane could
generate glare and affect these pilots. One of the responsibilities of the pilots operating within
Figure 3.14: South elevation of the airport model, with the orange line being Runway 25L, and
the green line being LAX’s final approach path. The camera is placed at ½ mile away from the
beginning of the runway, and the simulated view frustum reaches just beyond the airport’s
terminal buildings, shown by the black box.
Final Approach
Runway 25
Terminals
48

these routes is that they must scan their horizons for any oncoming aviation traffic. Scanning for
traffic entails looking not only left and right, but also up and down for any other aircraft that may
be flying above or below. Therefore, pilots flying in these routes are highly susceptible to any
glare generated by horizontal surfaces being reflected upwards, as this would cause confusion
and distraction whilst scanning for traffic.
To generate a rendering of what a pilot may see whilst flying in these special routes, a camera
was placed within the model over runway letters at the beginning of runway 25L. This camera is
placed at an elevation of 2500 feet, to simulate what a pilot flying through the “mini-route” would
see at certain times of the day. The camera’s location and its reach can be seen below in Figure
3.16.

Figure 3.16: South elevation of the airport model, with the orange line being Runway 25L. The
camera is placed over the beginning of Runway 25L, and is at an elevation of 2500 feet. The
camera’s reach is extended over the terminal buildings and beyond it to generate a rendering of
what a pilot may see when looking towards the terminals whilst flying the mini route.
Runway 25
Terminals
49

3.4.1 Morning Glare on Vertical Surfaces
Simulations were run on June 21
st
, as this is the longest day, from sunrise until around mid-
morning, at 8:30am to determine how much glare can be seen along the façade, as well as when
the most glare can be seen. Simulations were first run at 30-minute intervals, from 6:00am to
8:30am. It was then determined that the brightest glare was seen at around 6:30am, as seen in
Figure 3.17 below.
Following the conclusion that out of all the 30-minute interval renderings, 6:30am had the
brightest glare, smaller increments of time were rendered to pinpoint a time in which brighter
glare can be seen. Increments of 5-minute intervals were then rendered, starting with 6:05am. It
was then determined that 6:25am had the brightest glare, as per below in Figure 3.18, than
6:30am, so an assumption was made that 6:25am is when the glare intensity peaks.
Figure 3.17: Glare as seen at 6:30am on June 21
st
, on the East face of TBIT.
50

3.4.1.1 Mitigating Morning Glare through a Perpendicular Brise Soleil
Once it has been determined that 6:25am on June 21
st
would generate the most glare in the
mornings, efforts must be made to determine ways in which the glare can be mitigated. Looking
at what has been done in the past, a brise soleil system may be the most straightforward
approach, as it can just be built as an extension to the façade, without excessive disruption to
daily operations within the airport. The most simple form of brise soleil is akin to the one at the
FBI building in Los Angeles, vertical fins, placed perpendicular and protruding from the building.
Using TBIT’s East façade as a case study, an efficient brise soleil system is conceptually designed,
using basic trigonometry. The main constraint for this process is answering the following
question: what is the best brise soleil system that would mitigate glare at critical times but at the
same time require the least material to build? As the critical time has been determined previously
Figure 3.18: Glare as seen at 6:25am on June 21
st
, on the East face of TBIT.
51

to be 6:25am, the solar azimuth can also be derived, at 66.4
o
. This means that to mitigate critical
glare, the brise soleil system should be able to block solar rays coming at 66.4
o
or the reflected
rays, if the direct rays are too difficult.
The first iteration of the brise soleil system was drawn as a family in Revit, then placed within the
Revit model, per Figure 3.19 below. To determine the exact measurements of the fins and the
brise soleil itself, a further constraint was determined, and this was the brise soleil’s fin
protrusion length from the building’s edge. With this length and the aforementioned critical glare
azimuth, an optimal brise soleil fin can be calculated using trigonometry, per the Excel snapshot
below in Figure 3.20. Using this approach also shields glare without removing the view or
excessively blocking diffuse daylight. Furthermore, the exterior fins are able block direct sunlight
at critical periods, reducing 90% of solar heat gain on the facade.

Figure 3.19: Location of the brise soleil system on the TBIT East façade.
52

The measurements derived include the secondary fin spacing within the primary fin, per Figure
3.21 above, as well as their respective fin spacing. The fin spacing is dependent on the solar
azimuth. Per Figure 3.22 below, it can be seen that the fins have been spaced apart just enough
so that at the height of the glare, the fins will block all light coming from the specified angle. This
method is the most efficient way of reducing the amount of material used, as well as blocking as
much of the sun’s rays as possible at the critical azimuth.
Figure 3.20: Brise Soleil Fin Spacing Calculator. Through trigonometry, the secondary fin spacing
and secondary fin length can be calculated.
Figure 3.21: Measurements calculated within the brise soleil system.
Wall Width
Primary Fin Length (Intended Brise Width in Calculator)
Secondary Fin Length
(X in Calculator)
Secondary Fin Spacing
(Y in Calculator)
53

The calculator also determines how many secondary fins are required within the primary fin,
based on the primary fin length. Furthermore, the length of material required to build a single
fin, as well as enough fins to shade a 200-foot wall is calculated. However, this length does not
take into account the height of the material, which would give the area of material required. In
the example of the TBIT, the height at the east elevation is assumed to be 20 feet. The amount
of material used can then be optimized by varying wall widths.
This method was then tested through Revit V-ray simulations, to ensure that the calculator is
valid in generating a brise soleil system that is efficient in mitigating glare. The simulations were
run on June 21st at 6:25am, the predetermined time where glare was at its most powerful, in Los
Angeles solar conditions. The point of view at which the renderings are run are at the “1/2 mile
final”, 0.5 miles from the beginning of the runway, simulating the last part of final approach. From
the calculator, the spacing between the primary fins are set to be 2.5 feet apart, 5 feet deep, and
6 inches wide. Figure 3.23 below shows the effect of the vertical fins, as compared a façade
without the fins.
Figure 3.22: Efficient fin spacing as shown to reduce the
material used as well as shading the façade from any
incoming rays at peak glare.
54

June 21, 6:25am, without fins
June 21, 6:25am, with vertical fins
Figure 3.23: The top figure shows the facade at 6:25am on June 21st, without the brise soleil.
The bottom figure shows the same facade at the same time, with vertical brise soleil spaced 2.5
feet apart, at 5 feet deep and 6 inches wide.
55

From Figure 3.23, it can be seen that the calculator highly accurate in calculating a brise soleil
system that is effective in blocking out the bright glare, as compared to the previous rendering
without the fins. Even without zooming in, it can be seen from the half mile rendering that the
bright glare along TBIT’s East façade is no longer there. This result gives the confirmation that
using trigonometry to calculate a brise soleil system is highly effective for the given application.
However, one setback of this brise soleil method is that the fins are rather deep, at 6 feet, and
this may be rather unsightly and not user-friendly. Also concerning is that a lot of resources will
be used. However, the brise soleil is clearly preferable to an opaque or solid wall, for material
efficiency, diffused daylighting and preservation of view.
3.4.1.2 Mitigating Morning Glare through an Angled Brise Soleil
From the previous method, it has been specified that the perpendicular brise soleil would require
at least 4,800 feet of material to mitigate glare along a 200-foot stretch of wall. This is an
abundance of material, and can translate into high construction material and labor costs. A way
to reduce the material is to angle the primary fins so that they become more perpendicular to
the peak glare’s azimuth. Instead of having the fins be perpendicular to the façade of the building,
the fins will be slanted. Another excel calculator was generated, and this time, the only option
was to pick was how far the fin extended from the façade in a locus matter. Now that the fins are
angled, the need for secondary fins is less crucial. With the calculator, it is then simple to optimize
the angle at which the fin would protrude from the façade.
Figure 3.24 below shows the updated fin angle calculator, with optimization based on the critical
glare azimuth, at 66.4
o
as mentioned in the above section. The loci chosen was 3 feet, where the
56

primary fin, regardless of length, is not to exceed 3 feet from the existing glass edge of the
building.
As the goal is to reduce the amount of material used, the fourth column is the most relevant. This
column calculates the length of material used to generate the all the fins required to cover 200
feet, with respect to the fin’s angle. A better way to visualize the output is to graph it, per Figure
3.25, to be better able to determine an appropriate balance between glare mitigation and
daylighting. The concern with daylighting lies in the fact that an 80
o
fin angle would mean that
almost the entire façade would be covered up, and insufficient light will be able to penetrate
through the brise soleil.
Figure 3.24: Slanted Brise Soleil Calculator, where
the input is the loci, and outputs are the fin length,
separation and the material required. The last
column determines the material difference from the
previous angle.
57

Per the graph above, it can be extrapolated that at 0
o
, the most material is required out of all the
angles. However, on the other hand, a plateau is seen when the fin angle starts to hit 50
o
. This
means that no matter how much more angled the fins get, the length of material used would still
be the same. Therefore, to ensure proper daylighting and glare mitigation, the ideal fin angle
would be right before the graph plateaus, at around 50
o
. At this orientation, slightly more than
191 feet of material would be ample to mitigate glare along a 200-foot wall. Furthermore, a 50
o

angle would also ensure that daylight is still allowed to enter into the interior, although no metric
has been investigated to determine how much, compared to the other angles.
The next step would be to test the calculator, to see whether the 50
o
fin would indeed mitigate
glare if it was 4’-11/16” long and placed 4’-7/8” apart per Figure 3.24. Like the perpendicular
brise soleil example, the 50
o
fins were created within a family in Revit, and added to the east
150.00
200.00
250.00
300.00
350.00
400.00
450.00
500.00
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80
Material Length (feet)
Fin Angle (degrees)
Material Required for a 200-foot wall
Figure 3.25: Graphical display of the material length required for a variety of fin angles
with a locus of 3 foot separation from the glass façade.
58

façade at the TBIT and simulated at the same time, June 21
st
at 6:15 am. By simulating the same
conditions throughout both examples, a comparison can easily be determined.
Figure 3.26 below shows the effect of the 50
o
angled fins on the east façade, compared to the
fin-less façade. With the half mile final render, it can be seen that even the 50
o
angled façade is
effective in reducing the amount of glare seen. Although, when compared to the perpendicular
fins, the coverage of the east façade in the angled fins is not as dark. However, this may be due
to the fact that the angled fins are spaced apart almost two times more than the perpendicular
fins. The closeness of these fins is efficient in absorbing light, resulting in a darker rendering
throughout the east façade area. The depth of the fins would also play into effect, as the
perpendicular fins are 5 feet deep, whereas the angled fins only extend 3 feet away from the
façade.
June 21, 6:25am, without fins
59

Another difference between the perpendicular fins and the angled fins is that the perpendicular
fins are made up of further secondary fins, which may play a bigger job in dissipating the
reflection of light within the brise soleil. The perpendicular fins also allow a greater field of view,
whereas the angled fins do not. However, for the same amount of coverage to mitigate glare
within the East façade, the perpendicular fins extend 3 feet more than that of the angled fins.
This can raise the argument of whether the difference in field of view is negligible.
Despite this, the key takeaway with the change is that the angled fin system will still mitigate
some glare, and it only requires 191.05 feet of material to cover 200 feet of wall. On the other
hand, the perpendicular fin system would require a little more than 4800 feet of material to cover
June 21, 6:25am, with 50
o
angled fins
Figure 3.26: The top figure shows the facade at 6:25am on June 21st, without the brise soleil.
The bottom figure shows the same facade at the same time, with 50
o
angled brise soleil spaced
almost 5 feet apart, at a loci of 3 feet from the building facade and 6 inches wide.
60

200 feet of wall. This amount is 24 times that of the angled fin system. Therefore, to save
material, time and labor, it is wise to use the angled fins as opposed to the perpendicular fins for
glare mitigation.
3.4.1.3 Angled Fin Throughout the Year
It has been established that the 50
o
fin works for the longest day of the year. The question that
remains is whether that specific fin would work throughout the rest of the year. Simulations were
carried out throughout the year, on May 21
st
, April 21
st
and March 21
st
. February 21
st
, January
21
st
and December 21
st
were not considered as the morning solar azimuth, beginning at sunrise,
starts beyond 90
o
, meaning that the sun is coming from the southeast. When the sun is coming
from this direction, glare would not be felt on the south LAX Runways 25L and 25R.
The first step, like previously done, is to check what time during the May, April and March dates
the reflection is the strongest. This is done through V-Ray simulations from the ½-mile final
location, and the solar azimuth, angles, dates and times shown simulated are shown in Table 3.2
below.
Table 3.2: Solar altitudes and solar azimuths of dates and times rendered at 1/2 mile final to
determine peak reflection.
Time May 21 April 21 March 21
Solar
Altitude (
o
)
Solar
Azimuth (
o
)
Solar
Altitude (
o
)
Solar
Azimuth (
o
)
Solar
Altitude (
o
)
Solar
Azimuth (
o
)
06:00 1.7 66.4
06:10 3.5 67.8
06:20 5.4 69.1 0.6 77.5
06:30 7.3 70.5 2.4 77.1
06:40 4.3 78.4
06:50 6.3 79.8
07:00 8.3 81.2 0.5 89.7
07:10 2.3 91.1
07:20 4.3 92.5
07:30 6.3 93.9
07:40 8.4 95.3
61

From the May renders, it was determined that 6:20 am (Figure 3.27) had the brightest glare and
7:00 am for April 21 (Figure 3.28). From Figure 3.28, it can be seen that the reflections are no
longer as bright as the June or May, and it can be gathered that glare on Runways 25L and 25R
may no longer be a problem as the days get shorter.

To prove this theory, renderings were completed for March 21
st
just because at around sunrise,
there is a solar azimuth for 7:00 am that was still less than the 90
o
threshold. However, it was
determined through the render shown below in Figure 3.29 that the sun is too low to generate
any reflection on the East façade of the TBIT. Further renderings for March 21
st
did not generate
any bright reflections on the East façade of the TBIT either, as seen in Figure 3.30, leading to a
confirmation of the aforementioned statement that azimuths greater than 90
o
will not affect
glare on Runways 25L and 25R.

May 21, 6:20am
Figure 3.27: Peak glare on May 21
st
on the TBIT’s East façade was determined to be at 6:20 am.
62

April 21, 7:00am
Figure 3.28: Peak glare on April 21
st
on the TBIT’s East façade was determined to be at 7:00 am.
It can be seen that although this is the brightest render of all times tested, the reflections are
becoming less distinct.
March 21, 7:00am
Figure 3.29: ½ mile final viewpoint, at 7:00 am. Even though the solar azimuth here is just barely
90
o
, the sun is still not high enough in the horizon to generate a reflection in the East façade at
TBIT.
63

It has been determined through the above steps that the only critical times when glare would
occur other than June are the May and April months. The simulations and results for May and
April can also be applied to the July and August months as the solar altitudes and azimuths are
similar at the same times throughout the day. The next step is to apply the 50
o
fins onto the East
façade of the TBIT, to see whether it is effective in mitigating glare at critical times in those
months.
Figures 3.31 and 3.32 below show May 21
st
at 6:20 am and April 21
st
at 7:00 am with the 50
o
fins
covering the exterior of TBIT’s East Façade. Below each rendering and the enlarged snapshot is
its comparison to the rendering completed without the fins. The size and spacing of the fins
rendered are the exact same ones as those on the June 21
st
rendering (Figure 3.26).

March 21, 7:30am
Figure 3.30: Render at the ½ mile viewpoint on March 21
st
, at 7:30 am does not show glare on
the East façade of the TBIT either, leading to the conclusion that solar azimuths beyond 90
o
will
not create glare on this specific façade.
64

From the above Figure 3.31, it can be seen that the fins in fact provide some glare mitigation.
Although the coverage is not as complete as the effects of the fins on June 21
st
, the same fins in
the same configuration are still a contender in its aim to mitigate glare towards the pilot’s view.
This render provided is confirmation that the 50
o
angled fins are appropriate still in mitigating
glare throughout the May and July months with regard to the East façade of TBIT.

May 21, 6:20 am, with 50
o
angled fins
Figure 3.31: (Above) Rendering of TBIT East façade with the 50
o
fins. It can be seen that the fins
do indeed mitigate much of the glare. (Below) Comparison showing the same façade without
the fins.
65

With the fins, it can be seen that from Figure 3.32, the façade appears to be darker, even though
the reflection on the façade itself is not as prominent as that of June or April/July. Even though
the reflection is not as disturbing, the fins still aid in darkening the façade so as to remove it as a
distraction from the pilot’s field of view during critical procedures of flight.
3.4.1.4 Special Considerations to Facades with Different Orientations
As renderings were run at different times throughout the year, it was discovered that various
facades other than the scrutinized East façade of TBIT began showing specular reflections. It
should be noted that to mitigate glare from these surfaces, the slanted brise soleil method is still
April 21, 7:00 am, with 50
o
angled fins
Figure 3.32: (Above) Rendering of TBIT East façade with the 50
o
fins on April 21
st
at 7:00 am. The
fins do generate a darker surface that contrasts the brighter surface of the façade, even though
the glare has become less noticeable as the April and August months approach. (Below)
Comparison showing the same façade without the fins.
66

applicable, but calculations need to be run again to determine the most efficient fin angles for
those surfaces at critical times.
3.5 Afternoon Glare on Horizontal Surfaces
Beyond the surrounding walls, there is a fifth façade that many designers often overlook – the
roof. Generally, designers will add skylights to many roof surfaces to enhance daylighting within
a space, to give the building’s inhabitants another form of access to the outside. However,
something designers don't realize when designing airports is that skylights are a major cause of
glare for pilots, as they circle the airport prior to landing.
One particular instance is how the airspace directly above LAX is used as an “air highway” to
travel between north and south LA. Pilots know this route to be either the “Mini-Route” – a path
at an altitude of 2500 feet where planes are under LAX Tower’s control, and the “LAX Special
Traffic Rules” – a path at altitudes of either 3500 feet or 4500 feet along the 132
o
radial from
Santa Monica airport. These two routes allow pilots to travel directly over LAX, but at the same
time, it would also make them susceptible to any glare reflecting off of skylights if they were
present. Currently, LAX has no observable skylights from these altitudes. However, the purpose
of this subchapter is to determine where to locate skylights if designers opted to do so, and how
to shade them to mitigate glare.
3.5.1 Determining Critical Glare Times
The first step to addressing skylights is to determine at what time the sun would generate a
reflection off the roof. Like the procedure completed above, renderings were captured, where
67

the viewpoint chosen is a small portion of the Mini-Route, at an altitude of 2500 feet above
Runway 25R’s numbers at the start of the runway, southeast of the airport, per Figure 3.33 below.
The first step was to make the entire roof a reflective material, so if the sun hits any part of the
roof, a reflection can be captured. After that, renderings were run on the longest day, June 21
st
,
during the afternoon, when it is known that the sun would be coming in from the northwest
(solar azimuths between 270
o
and 360
o
).
Renders were run hourly, and the solar altitudes and azimuths are detailed in Table 3.3 below.
Beyond the changes in the solar altitudes and azimuths, nothing else within the rendering
environment was altered. This includes the viewpoint of the rendering. Figure 3.34 shows the
outcome of these renders.
Table 3.3: Solar Altitudes and Solar Azimuths of renders captured on June 21
st
to investigate any
effects of afternoon glare from the roof.
Time Solar Altitude (
o
) Solar Azimuth (
o
)
3pm 62.0 244.6
4pm 50.9 259.5
5pm 39.3 270.0
Figure 3.33: Mini-route viewpoint, where the camera is placed 2500 feet above the beginning of
Runway 25R, above the numbers. The camera is placed southeast of the airport, and is facing
northwest towards the airport buildings.
Runway 25
Terminals
68

6pm 27.7 278.9
7pm 12.0 290.3
8pm 5.6 295.9

June 21, 3:00 pm
June 21, 4:00 pm
June 21, 5:00 pm
June 21, 6:00 pm
69

From Figure 3.34, glare can be observed within the 7:00 pm rendering, whereas the other
renderings do not show any reflection or glare. To track what time glare can be seen on the roof
of the LAX buildings, renderings spaced 10 minutes apart were conducted, beginning with 6:50
pm and working backwards, beginning with 7:10 pm onwards in 10 minute increments. Figure
3.35 shows the results of these 10 minute increment renderings.

Figure 3.34: Rendering results of the Mini-Route viewpoint above the start of Runway 25L. A
reflection can be observed in the 7:00 pm render – meaning that more renderings should be run
before and after 7:00 pm to determine exactly when the glare begins.
June 21, 7:00 pm
June 21, 8:00 pm
June 21, 6:10 pm
70

June 21, 6:20 pm
June 21, 6:30 pm
June 21, 6:40 pm
June 21, 6:50 pm
June 21, 7:00 pm
71

June 21, 7:10 pm
June 21, 7:20 pm
June 21, 7:30 pm
June 21, 7:40 pm
June 21, 7:50 pm
Figure 3.35: 10 minute increment renderings from the Mini Route viewpoint on June 21
st
. At
6:10 pm, reflections can be seen on the south end of the building, and this reflection gradually
progresses northwards, until it moves out of view at 7:50 pm.
72

Figure 3.35 goes to show that the crucial azimuths at which glare will affect planes in the mini
route are between 278.9
o
and 295.9
o
. To determine a method of mitigating glare during this time
period, a case example and assumptions need to be made. Realistically, the entire roof would
not be made into a skylight. A standard skylight size of 8-feet by 12-feet shall be presumed.
Furthermore, skylights shall be scattered throughout the building and not concentrated within a
certain area.
3.5.2 Mitigating Afternoon Glare on a Horizontal Surface with an Angled Fin
As previously done, a good place to begin investigating a glare mitigation device for horizontal
surfaces is through trigonometry and mathematics. Another Excel calculator can be generated to
calculate the shading fin’s profile. The inputs of this calculator are solar azimuth and altitude for
a given date and time, as well as the assumption of the skylight length. Through right-angled
triangle trigonometry, one can simply calculate what the most efficient fin orientation and z-
direction angle is. Figure 3.36 below illustrates the fin orientation and z-direction angle in a plan
and elevation view.
Figure 3.36: (Left) Plan view of the fin as shown on top of the building, with the fin orientation
measured from North. (Right) Elevation view of the fin showing the fin angle measured from the
roof’s surface.
73

The basis of using trigonometry is that a shading device can be aligned directly perpendicular to
the direction of the sun’s rays, to allow for any ray coming from that angle to be blocked out. This
allows for the least amount of material to be used as only the critical portions of the skylight will
be blocked off when it would generate maximum glare. The length of the skylight beyond the fin
also determines the length of the fin, therefore the fin’s length is only long enough to mitigate
glare coming off the skylight. Figure 3.37 below illustrates how the fin length is just long enough
to block the skylight solar rays coming from a certain azimuth and altitude. Conversely, the
reflection could be blocked by allowing the sun to reflect off the glass and intercepting the
bounced light leaving at the reflected angle. This does not reduce heat gain within the building
and creates significant internal glare possibilities.
To enhance the case study, the roof of TBIT will be used again, and research completed within
this section can be applied to other roofs, orientations and locations in the future. As the glare
travels across the roof of TBIT, it would be wise to split the roof surface up into 3 segments – to
cover the surfaces on which glare exists at: 6:00-6:30pm, 6:30-7:00pm, and 7:00-7:30pm. The
segment between 7:30-8:00pm will not be considered, as the reflection during that time period
Figure 3.37: The fin blocking the solar rays is only long enough to block
solar rays from hitting the skylight. If the skylight were to grow longer, the
fin would have to as well.
74

is so minute. To do so, an average solar azimuth and altitude can be taken for these time periods,
and from that, a fin profile can be deduced. Once this is complete, the different fin profiles can
be applied depending on which segment of the roof designers would like to affix a skylight to.
Figure 3.38 below shows a graphical representation of the 3 segments.
Table 3.4 below shows the average solar azimuths and altitudes for each segment, taken from
the average between the start and end time of each segment. For example, the average values
for the 6:00-6:30pm segment will be determined from the 6:00pm and 6:30pm values. Once the
average values have been determined for each segment, the calculator can be used to calculate
the fin profile for each respective segment.
Table 3.4: Average solar altitude and azimuth values for each segment, to calculate fin profiles.
Segment Solar Altitude (
o
) Solar Azimuth (
o
)
6:00-6:30pm 20.9 284.8
6:30-7:00pm 15.0 288.5
7:00-7:30pm 9.2 292.3

To be able to notice the difference between a fin mitigating glare off a skylight, the skylights must
be rendered within the mentioned times in Table 3.4 and its effects observed. Therefore, several
Figure 3.38: Three different segments outlined for different fin profiles to be analyzed. If a
designer chose to affix a skylight to a space within each segment, the associated fin profile for
that segment can be applied to guarantee glare mitigation for the problematic timeframes in
which glare is felt.
75

skylights were scattered throughout TBIT’s roof, with multiple skylights covering each segment.
The roof’s material was reverted back to a default material that does not reflect 100% of light,
and the skylight material is specified to be a fully reflective one. The decision to scatter skylights
is intended to mimic a designer’s placement choice. After the designer has decided on the
locations of the skylights, the renderings completed in the following step will be able to
determine the fin profile required to mitigate glare for that exact skylight in that exact location.
Figure 3.39 below shows the renderings of the predetermined skylights within the 3
segment/time periods.
June 21, 6:00-6:30pm
June 21, 6:30-7:00pm
June 21, 7:00-7:30pm
Figure 3.39: Renderings showing skylight glare occurring at different time periods. From these
renders, it is possible to determine which skylights require which fin profile to mitigate glare.
76

From Figure 3.39, it can be seen that each skylight performs differently at different times. For
example, in the skylight circled, it is evident that it is the brightest during the 6:30-7:00pm
segment. Therefore, it can be deduced that that skylight would benefit from the calculated 6:30-
7:00pm fin profile. This exercise can be completed on all the other skylights, to determine the
most efficient fin profile to mitigate glare.
Referencing the calculator, fin profiles must now be calculated to mitigate glare. Figure 3.40
below shows the calculated fin angles, lengths and orientations for all three segments. To test
whether the calculations are accurate, the circled example from Figure 3.39 will be used. As that
particular skylight is brightest within the 6:30-7:00pm segment, the fin profile for this segment
will be used.
The fin was drawn as a separate Revit family, with a 75
o
fin angle, at 3.11 inches long, per Figure
3.41 below. It was then extruded to 12 feet lengthwise, enough to cover the skylight. This was
Figure 3.40: Calculated fin angles, lengths and orientations for each segment on
June 21
st
. The solar altitude and azimuths are input, as well as the intended length
of the skylight. The output values are the fin angles, lengths, orientations and the
material required to construct the fin.
Width
77

then brought into the Revit model, and placed at 18.5
o
from North abutting the skylight. A render
was run and the result is shown in Figure 3.42 below.

In Figure 3.42 above, it can be seen that the calculated shading device does in fact work – it
shades off almost all the glare coming off the skylight. However, there is a slight concern with the
corner of the skylight – a small part of the glare is still visible. Figure 3.43 below shows an enlarged
illustration of the situation.
Figure 3.41: Orthogonal and Section view of the 6:30-7:00pm fin, showing a
75
o
fin angle that, 3.11 inches long and extruded 12 feet. This was drawn as
a family and imported into the LAX Revit model.
Figure 3.42: Rendering of the skylight circled in Figure 3.39 after the shading device has been
applied. It can be seen that the fin does shade off a large part of the skylight. However, one
small spot remains unshaded.
78

To test whether this situation is applicable to all segments, a test on the other skylights must be
run. This would eliminate the interpretation that this phenomenon only occurs to the circled
skylight in Figure 3.39. A skylight from 7:00-7:30pm segment was randomly chosen and the fin
profile for that segment was applied. The rendering can be seen below in Figure 3.44.
Figure 3.43: A small percentage of the skylight glare remains
to be seen.
June 21, 7:00-7:30pm
Figure 3.44: The skylight circled in red in the top image was chosen to have its reflection blocked
off. However, when enlarged, it can be seen that the same phenomenon appears – the right
part of the skylight remains uncovered, with its reflection still visible.
79

One reason for this phenomenon may be due to the placement of the fin with regard to the
skylight. Currently, the fin is placed in line with the skylight, as seen in Figure 3.45 below. Since
the reflection is still visible on the right corner of the skylight, it may be wise to investigate the
effects of moving the fin towards the right of the skylight, in the northern direction. Figure 3.46
below shows a rendering of the effect of moving the fin associated with the circled skylight in
Figure 3.39 by 1.5 feet.
By keeping the fin the same width and moving it 1.5 feet towards the left, the small sliver on the
right has now been mitigated. However, this generated an adverse effect whereby now the left
side of the skylight is uncovered, and a bright reflection is perceived. This leads to a conclusion
where it is not possible to make the fin exactly the same size as the skylight width. The width of
Figure 3.45: Original intended layout of the fin with regards to the skylight. The fin is currently
aligned with the ends of the skylight. However, this configuration generated a small sliver of
visible glare from the skylight on the northern end of the skylight.
Figure 3.46: The fin from the circled skylight in Figure 3.39 was moved 1.5 feet towards the
north. However, this generated an adverse effect where now the left side of the skylight is
uncovered, and glare is perceived.
80

the fin must now be increased by a factor based on the length of the skylight, where fin width is
greater than skylight width.
As the fin was moved 1.5 feet towards the right and the sliver of glare originally on the right is
now covered, it is safe to assume that by extending the fin 12.5% (as 1.5 feet is 12.5% of 12 feet)
in width would be sufficient to cover small slivers of glare. Once the fin width has been increased,
the placement of the fin will remain where the southern end of the fin and skylight shall align,
but the northern end of the skylight will go beyond the edge of the skylight.
Figure 3.47 below shows the calculator updated to show the 12.5% fin width increase, and Figure
3.48 below shows an updated rendering of Figure 3.43, with the effects of the increased fin
length.
Figure 3.48 below shows the no reflections or glare over the entire skylight, meaning that
extending the fin width by 12.5% beyond the original skylight width is conducive to mitigating
Figure 3.47: Updated excel calculator showing the calculated fin width, accounting for the
increased width to cover the small sliver of glare.
Width
81

the small sliver of glare that appeared on the previous renders. Following this successful render,
a verification is to be carried out, on the 7:00-7:30pm segment, to see if the 12.5% extension
propagates throughout the horizontal surface. Figure 3.49 below shows an updated render of
Figure 3.44, with the updated extended fin width.
In Figure 3.49 above, the extended 13.5 foot fin has been successful in mitigating all glare from
the skylight used in the Figure 3.44 render in the 7:00-7:30pm segment. Like the previous
example, the fin was aligned with the southern end of the skylight, and the northern end of the
fin hangs beyond the northern end of the skylight. This is evidence that the 12.5% enhancement
in width of the fins works throughout horizontal surfaces in mitigating glare.

Figure 3.48: Rendering showing an extended fin width of 13.5 feet as opposed to 12 feet as
shown in Figure 3.42. The skylight shown in the circle no longer reflects any light. The fin was
aligned with the southern end of the skylight.
Figure 3.49: Updated render of Figure 3.44, with the extended fin width of 13.5 feet instead of
12 feet. The entire skylight has been shaded and there are no observable reflections.
82

3.5.3 Application of Glare Mitigation on Horizontal Surfaces at Other Locations
For LAX, the calculator generated is highly effective once the 12.5% fin width extension is applied
in mitigating glare on horizontal surfaces. Although only the roof of TBIT was tested, the output
of this calculator will propagate throughout all the terminals, provided that the proper segments
are chosen and the segments’ accurate solar altitude and azimuths are input. Furthermore, the
12.5% extension should also propagate through to the other terminals as well, since the critical
glare time should not deviate too far from the 6:00pm to 7:30pm range discovered within the
research noted.
To mitigate glare when designers are trying to include skylights into any further LAX renovations,
they must first determine the critical time at which glare is the brightest in that region, then
assign a segment to it. From that segment’s profile, i.e. solar azimuths and altitudes, the excel
calculator can compute a fin profile based on the skylight width chosen. Affix the fin to the
skylight, and glare should no longer be an issue.
The research noted in this section can also be propagated to other locations around the world if
designers decided to include skylights within an airport terminal design. However, this may
require further steps than that detailed in the previous paragraph. The designer may also have
to determine again what kind of extension is required to mitigate any slivers of glare that goes
beyond the fin’s width. For example, if the airport was located in the southern hemisphere,
there’s a chance that the fin and the skylight will have to be aligned on the southern end, with
the northern end of the fin extending beyond the skylight. Or, if the airport is located in a region
where the summer sun lays lower than it does at LAX, there is a chance that the fin width
83

extension will have to be larger than 12.5%. Verifying this value would require a trial and error
rendering process like the one outlined in section 3.4.3.2.
3.6 Summary
Several methodologies of examining external glare were explored in this section, from an open-
source Grasshopper code, to Revit’s own rendering engine. However, the method that prevailed
is a cinematic rendering engine, V-ray. V-ray is able to render reflections and therefore able to
detect glare in external applications. After several experiments were completed to test V-ray’s
reflection and shading rendering capabilities, solutions to mitigating glare on vertical surfaces in
the morning and horizontal surfaces in the afternoon were approached.
With regard to vertical surfaces in mornings, it was determined that the most prevalent time for
this to occur is during the early hours of Summer, and the best way to mitigate glare during this
period is to install slanted fins. The dimensions of the slanted fins can be calculated through
simple trigonometry, and this calculator’s formulas can be seen in Appendix B The fins are
calculated for the critical glare time – the time at which the glare is perceived to be the brightest
– and it was observed that this fin profile propagates to mitigate glare effectively throughout the
year. It is assumed that the same thing would occur on the Western façades in the evening. If
the ½ mile approach were from the West, this would be considered.
With regard to horizontal surfaces in the afternoons, it was determined that the best way to
mitigate glare from these surfaces is to install slanted fins as well. The formulas of the calculations
used can be seen in Appendix C. After critical glare time was determined, the horizontal surface
was broken down into segments for a more concentrated approach, and fin profiles were
calculated for each segment, with an applicable fin width extension to mitigate any slivers of
84

glare that may occur. This application can then be applied to other airport locations following a
thorough analysis of the location’s orientation with regard to the sun.

85

4. Other Conditions
4.1 Parametric Design of Brise Soleil – a la the Broad Museum
According to Los Angeles County Public Art Programs, all new construction jobs are to implement
a work of art within the project to enhance the quality of life for individuals working and living
around the project. However, any projects carried out to renovate LAX is currently not subject to
this code requirement. Despite this, it can be foreseen that the County may move toward this
requirement with renovations in the future, and it may be wise to plan for this now.
If Los Angeles World Airports, the governing body behind LAX and various other airports within
the Los Angeles area, were to decide to install and renovate the façades to a glare mitigating one,
it may be fascinating to investigate whether the brise soleil can be made into an art form. Much
like, and unlike, the Broad Museum’s veil, the glare mitigation system at LAX can be
parametrically designed to shade the building from light coming from certain directions, rather
than only filtering light in the Broad Museum’s instance.
Through parametric design within software like Grasshopper in Rhino or Dynamo in Revit,
parameters like date and time can be input to generate different artistic facades that can allow
diffuse light within the interiors, but at the same time, block out direct sunlight. Different forms
like waves, shapes and patterns can be coded to generate the ultimate brise soleil – a functional
piece of art. Furthermore, since LAX is not a high-rise building, weight constraints regarding a
façade form is less significant, as there is less concern for structural stability and attachment.

86

4.2 Night Lighting
At night, lighting is used mostly for navigation, for pilots to find the runway from the air, to
streetlights directing passengers to the airport and around it. Illumination on the taxiway and
terminals of the airport are also crucial for visibility and logistics – especially for those in the
control tower directing planes towards the terminal or runway. Therefore, lighting within and
around the airport is essential to nighttime operations, and must be designed efficiently.
However, one matter that must be considered with regard to night lighting at airports is how
much it contrasts with the darkness around the airport.
For example, if the airport were located in a populous, bright city like Los Angeles, then contrasts
wouldn't be an issue, as the areas surrounding the airport are relatively bright. This means that
the pilots flying the plane and looking for the airport at which to land wouldn't be blinded by the
glare as the light contrast isn’t as massive. Figure 4.1 below shows a night photo of Tokyo Bay in
Japan, where Haneda Airport can be seen on the left. As Tokyo is a large city, the bright lights of
the airport have a low contrast compared to the other lights in the city. On the other hand, if the
airport were located in an area outside of a city, or in a small town, light contrasts may start to
be a problem. If the uplights at the airport were powerful, pilots can easily get blinded by glare,
exposing the flight to errors. Therefore, it is essential that airport illumination be shaded to
reduce the uplighting, but still be strong enough to show the air traffic controllers the location of
planes within the airport. The only lights on an airport that should be allowed to have uplight are
the runway navigation lights, to help pilots align the plane for landing.
87

4.2.1 Uplights at the Horseshoe at LAX
Within the “horseshoe” area at LAX, where passengers get dropped off by buses, vans and cars,
the roads are illuminated by Y-shaped light poles, where 9 LED boards illuminate the lower
roadway and 18 LED boards illuminate the top. These new light poles were installed as part of
the Curbside Appeal Project, to replace the old high-pressure sodium fixtures. In addition to the
LED light pole upgrades, a light ribbon was installed as well, which frames the inner “U” of the
horseshoe.
22

Although luminosity tests were conducted from within the LAX control tower to ensure the
lighting would not disrupt visual sight lines, not much research was given to the new lighting’s

22
Deane Madsen, “Light Takes Flight at LAX”, Architectural Lighting, Last modified 2014,
https://www.archlighting.com/projects/light-takes-flight-at-lax_o

Figure 4.1: Night photo of Tokyo Bay in Japan. The airport can be seen on the left in the red box.
Compared to the rest of the city, the contrast of the airport lights against the city lights is not
high.
88

effects on pilots over and around the airport. Figure 4.2 below shows an aerial view of LAX at
dusk in March, where the illumination from the light poles can be seen. It is interesting to see
how each individual light pole can be identified from the illumination at dusk, let alone in the
evening. That isn’t to say that the luminosity tests conducted within the tower were moot,
however. As the controllers within the tower work with the traffic around LAX the most out of all
LAX employees, it is understandable that the lighting should be designed to generate the least
problems for the controllers.
When it comes to investigating the effects of these new lights on pilots, the effects of glare
associated with the light poles and the light ribbon can be determined through luminosity testing
whilst in the air, or through animation and renderings. To do so, the lighting type must be
identified, as well as any reflective surfaces around the lights that can generate uplight.
Furthermore, the lighting fixture must also be examined, to determine what kind of shielding or
covering can be attached or installed to remedy the uplight, should there be any.
Figure 4.2: Aerial photo of LAX at an altitude of 3500 feet at dusk – illumination from the light
poles within the horseshoe can be picked out. It will be interesting to see the lights’ effects at
night.
89

4.2.2 Airway Markings in the Rain
With regard to lighting within the taxiways and runway area, much of it comes from small lights
attached to the ground aptly called taxiway and runway lights. Figure 4.3 below shows one of the
runway lights at Runway 21 on Camp Pendleton. Affixed to the ground, these lights are usually
white and denote the edge of the runway. The one pictured is an LED lamp, and is capable of
being seen from above and down the runway, to indicate to the pilot the borders of the runway.
Compared to the runway lights, the taxiway lights are often of the same build, but they emit a
blue color denoting the edge of the taxiway.
The runway and taxiway lights, along with the directional taxiway illuminated signs, outline
where pilots can and cannot taxi. These lights and directions allow pilots to navigate from the
runway to the terminal efficiently. It is interesting to note, however, that compared to the
surrounding lights and illumination of the terminal, these navigational lights appear rather dim.
Figure 4.3: Directional lighting on Runway 21 at Camp Pendleton. The light is visible from above
and down the runway, to denote the edge of the runway.
90

There are no overhead floodlights around the taxiways and runways. This is due to several
reasons – one, light poles can be hazards if a flight does not land accurately, and two, more
importantly, the glare generated by the dim lights is almost negligible, allowing the pilot to
concentrate on landing the aircraft. Furthermore, as the pilot has already been flying around in
the dark night sky, their eyes may not be accustomed to the bright lights just yet, therefore the
dim navigational lights allow for pilots to get used to seeing lighting again after flying in darkness.
At the terminal areas where these planes transition to after landing, illumination is provided by
strong floodlights, often in yellow. This is because white lights would generate too much glare
from the white directional markings on the dark taxiways and runways, distracting and
eliminating crucial information to pilots. Yellow illuminates well off white, and allows all the white
markings around the terminals to be highly visible, without the glare. However, on top of white
markings, there are several yellow markings as well on the ground. Although these often indicate
taxiways that are further away from the terminal, they are still visible at night. However, when it
rains, these markings become invisible, much like road markings do at night in the rain, according
to EasyJet pilot Richard, who was interviewed regarding lighting issues at airports.
Another interesting direction for further work could be to alleviate this illumination issue, and
determine a method that allows yellow markings to be seen at night should it rain. One solution
may be to change the temperature of the terminal lighting, to one that would not generate glare
off the white markings, illuminate the yellow markings in the rain, but still be bright enough to
allow ground staff to carry out their daily duties. A method to solving this could involve
91

simulations again, but this time, investigating how lighting colors affect each other, and how
different colored markings on the ground can be illuminated.

92

5. Conclusion
Taking off and landing are the two most critical parts of flight. Therefore, any opportunity to
reduce incidents during this section of flight should be seized. One element of airport
architecture that many designers may overlook is how airport building materials may affect glare,
not just on the ground, but in the air as well. Both vertical and horizontal facades have the
possibility of creating glare that could disrupt critical flight operations. The research conducted
within this thesis began with an exploration of the potential locations of glare at the Tom Bradley
International Terminal (TBIT) in Los Angeles. This was followed by an examination and
exploration of glare mitigation techniques that were both efficient and economic.
5.1 Identifying Glare
The first part of the investigation was to determine a technique or method that would identify
glare locations across LAX facades. The original intent was to import a model from SketchUp into
Revit, then have Revit’s rendering engines produce an image that would have enough
information to be processed through EvalGlare to determine glare locations. However, Revit’s
rendering engine did not have this capability, so the next method was explored.
The model was then run using an open source code within Rhino’s Grasshopper. The code would
determine locations where glare was present. However, the code was designed to determine
glare in indoor conditions and not in exterior circumstances. Therefore, an erroneous glare
resulted.
Finally, the cinematic rendering engine, V-Ray, was scrutinized. V-Ray had the capability to render
exterior facades with glare and reflections present. Following a quick test that simulated the sun
93

moving across the sky and identifying that the glare would progress along the sun’s path
throughout the day, it was determined that V-Ray would be the optimal tool to identify glare
locations at LAX throughout the day, throughout the year.
5.2 Glare Mitigation on Vertical Surfaces
A single façade was chosen to be the case example for glare mitigation on a vertical surface: the
East façade of TBIT. Simulations were run on the morning of June 21
st
, the longest day of the
year, and snapshots were taken from the ½ mile final point of view. By doing this, an analysis
from the pilot’s point of view can be conducted. In the mornings, the visible glare was highly
distinct, and it was determined that 6:25 am on June 21
st
produced that brightest glare. This time
was then aptly named the critical glare time.
Following the critical glare time identification, methods to mitigate glare was explored. A
perpendicular brise soleil with embedded fins was first analyzed, and through simple
trigonometry, a successful brise soleil system was implemented to block out the glare. However,
this perpendicular system required a large amount of material, and had 6-foot fins abutting the
building, which reduces passengers’ view to the outside world.
An alternate fin was examined, and in this circumstance, the fins were angled. The optimum
angled fin was determined, with the constraint that the fin be extended only 3 feet from the edge
of the building. Through a graphical analysis, it was then determined that the compromise
between allowing passengers’ a view to the outside and using the least material resulted in a 50
o

fin protruding from the wall, almost perpendicular to the direct ray during critical glare time.

94

5.3 Glare Mitigation on Horizontal Surfaces
With regard to a horizontal surface, i.e. the roof, skylights are usually the glare-causing factor. A
unique feature of LAX is that there are several “aviation highways” above the airport that allow
planes to travel in the North-South direction from the Santa Monica area to the Long Beach area
to eliminate going around the airport. However, these routes are highly susceptible to glare that
would be generated by skylights. Currently, there are no observable skylights at LAX, but the
analysis conducted in this section would aid designers in implementing skylights properly, should
they want to do so.
Like in vertical surfaces, for horizontal surfaces, the first step is to determine the locations where
glare would occur throughout the day. For June 21
st
, this was determined to be in the late
afternoon hours between 6:00pm to 7:30pm. Standard skylights of 12 foot by 8 foot were then
drawn and installed on the roof of TBIT. The roof was then split into 3 segments, where each half
hour from 6:00pm was a segment, and an average solar azimuth and altitude were calculated to
determine an accurate brise soleil fin to mitigate glare from the skylight.
Again, through simple trigonometry, a distinct fin profile was generated exclusively for each
segment. This fin was then installed in the model, and renders were run. The resulting renderings
showed that the fin was in fact able to cover almost 90% of the skylight, mitigating a majority of
the glare. However, for the minor section of the skylight that was not shaded, the fin was then
increased by a small factor, and the resulting fin was capable of shading the entire skylight,
mitigating 100% of glare from the specified skylight. This factor was then applied to all segments,
as the phenomena was seen throughout the segments, and the resulting renderings showed all
glare mitigated from the skylights tested.
95

5.4 Other Conditions
Although much work was done in determining methods of glare mitigation that may occur on
vertical and horizontal surfaces, there is still work that can be done beyond what has been stated
in this research. The types of brise soleil used to mitigate glare on both the types of surfaces have
been an elementary attempt at generating a shading device that would efficiently alleviate any
glare issues due to material choice. A large part of the research completed and outlined also
involved determining a method of simulating the glare that is expected to be seen.
A next step to continuing this research is to determine how glare affects the airport at night. The
first thing that comes to mind is airport lighting. With regard to lighting, there are many different
types used by airports. Some are used for navigation and wayfinding on the ground outlining
runways and taxiways. Others are used on the roads where passengers arrive for illumination.
Some lights, such as the runway navigational lights that illuminate upwards so pilots can see the
outline of the runway for landing, may cause issues with glare if a façade is too reflective.
Another direction is to investigate methods in which the brise soleil can be attached as an artistic
addition to the façade, rather than installing dull fins. Although this may involve using more
material and may cost more, it would also make LAX a more attractive icon for passengers and
those living around it. The Theme Building has always been an artistic magnet for LAX’s
passengers – generating a form and façade that has functionality yet exquisite form may also
enhance the terminal buildings to complement the spaceship-like building at the center of the
airport.

96

5.5 Summary
The research conducted within this thesis is intended to provide designers with a guideline to
mitigate glare with the pilots’ needs in mind. As takeoff and landing are the most critical parts of
flight, any distractions that can be alleviated should be, to protect the lives of those on board.
That said, the procedure to determine where glare occurs should be conducted through a V-Ray
render, at consistent intervals throughout the day to pinpoint locations where glare occurs. Once
located, exact brise soleil fins can calculated through trigonometry to mitigate glare at both
vertical and horizontal surfaces, by shading direct rays of sunlight as specified by the glare’s solar
azimuth and altitude. Through iterations, it has been determined that an angled fin is much more
economical and efficient than perpendicular fins. Beyond simple fins, a designer also has the
opportunity to explore a brise soleil façade that also functions as a piece of art, much like the veil
located at the Broad Museum. However, this extension would require extensive work in
parametric design and complicated analysis.
Beyond solar glare, there are also other sources of glare, especially at night, where lighting can
play a large part in pilot distraction. Airport navigational lighting and terminal lighting all serve to
illuminate pathways, but care has to be taken to ensure uplight reduction to mitigate
interference in pilot duties.
97

6. Appendix
A. Original Brise Soleil Excel Calculator – With Formulas
B. Angled Fin Brise Soleil Excel Calculator – With Formulas

98

C. Angled Skylight Brise Soleil Calculator – With Formulas

Abstract (if available)

Abstract Takeoff and landing of a plane requires the pilot's full and complete attention. Correct altitude must be sustained, glide path must be adhered to, and communication must be maintained. Glare at this point in time can cause a pilot's attention to be thrown off, and risk the hundreds of passengers they are responsible for. The purpose of these guidelines is to instruct an architect on how to build an airport from a pilot's point of view. Through trial and error, different methods of measuring glare were tested, including Revit’s own rendering engine and Rhino/Grasshopper glare tool. It was then found that the V-Ray rendering plugin within Revit was the most appropriate for the situation due to its ability to render external reflections. Los Angeles International Airport was chosen as a case study and the airport was then modeled in Revit. Through V-Ray renderings of the model, instances in which daytime and nighttime glare can occur was analyzed. Critical times at which glare is the brightest were recorded, and shading devices were drawn and implemented. The goal of the shading devices was to eliminate glare with minimum material usage and therefore construction cost, whilst maintaining ample daylighting within the terminal buildings. The end product of these guidelines will provide direction on ideal glare-mitigating façades to avoid accidents during takeoff and landing. The guidelines will also incorporate directions on where not to locate skylights, and if skylights have already been built within these areas, methods on shading these areas to mitigate glare to pilots.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Natural ventilation in tall buildings: development of design guidelines based on climate and building height

PDF

Daylighting in Riyadh and Los Angeles: comparison of cultural factors in potential market penetration

PDF

Impacts of building performance on occupants' work productivity: a post occupancy evaluation study

PDF

Human-building integration: Investigation of human eye pupil sizes as a measure of visual sensation in the workstation environment

PDF

Streamlining sustainable design in building information modeling: BIM-based PV design and analysis tools

PDF

Leaf module panel system: novel vertical wall wind energy production

PDF

Building information modeling: guidelines for project execution plan (PxP) for India

PDF

Multi-domain assessment of a kinetic facade: determining the control strategy of a kinetic façade using BIM based on energy performance, daylighting, and occupants’ preferences; Multi-domain asse...

PDF

An analysis of building component energy usage: a data driven approach to formulate a guideline

PDF

Blind to light loss: evaluating light loss through commercial building facades as a contribution to urban light pollution

PDF

Exploration for the prediction of thermal comfort & sensation with application of building HVAC automation

PDF

Energy use intensity estimation method based on building façade features by using regression models

PDF

Mitigating thermal bridging in ventilated rainscreen envelope construction: Methods to reduce thermal transfer in net-zero envelope optimization

PDF

Pushing the solar envelope: determining solar envelope generating principles for sites with existing buildings

PDF

Single & multi-family housing: the complex behind the simple: a kit of parts for minimally invasive interventions

PDF

Pre-cast concrete envelopes in hot-humid climates: examining envelopes to reduce cooling load and electrical consumption

PDF

Acoustics simulation for stadium design using EASE: analyzing acoustics and providing retrofit options for the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum

PDF

Nursing comfort study: are hospitals performing for nurses? IEQ analysis of working conditions inside hospitals

PDF

Development of data-driven user-centered building façade design guideline models: machine learning-based approaches to predict user preferences

PDF

Building bridges: filling gaps between BIM and other tools in mechanical design

Asset Metadata

Creator Leung, Erica Hoi Kiu (author)

Core Title Guidelines to airport design: accounting for glare from buildings during takeoff and landing – an LAX case study

School School of Architecture

Degree Master of Building Science

Degree Program Building Science

Publication Date 07/03/2019

Defense Date 05/06/2019

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Airport,brise soleil,glare,Lax,OAI-PMH Harvest,render,rendering,Revit,shading

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Schiler, Marc (committee chair), Choi, Joon Ho (committee member), Noble, Douglas (committee member)

Creator Email erica.leung@aol.com,ericaleung07@gmail.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-c89-179879

Unique identifier UC11660537

Identifier etd-LeungErica-7526.pdf (filename),usctheses-c89-179879 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-LeungErica-7526.pdf

Dmrecord 179879

Document Type Thesis

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Leung, Erica Hoi Kiu

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the a...

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA