Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Power Earth Science Technology

Prism Glass Windows Making a Comeback 89

Posted by timothy from the thinly-veiled-ix dept.
Steve Daley writes "Prism window glass like Luxfer was big back in the 19th century, but now it seems to be making a high-tech comeback in Japan, where several companies are commercializing similar technology that gets enough natural light into factories and offices to do away with electric lighting. It's easy on the pocket and the planet."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Prism Glass Windows Making a Comeback More

Prism Glass Windows Making a Comeback

Comments Filter:

  • Neat, it is very much like... (Score:5, Interesting)

    by clonan ( 64380 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:15PM (#23588641)
    A Window!

    • Re:Neat, it is very much like... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by synthparadox ( 770735 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:21PM (#23588713) Homepage
      Yes if windows could be a glass dome on the roof that captured light and distributed it to many rooms on many floors separated by a novel invention, walls --or even better, ceilings.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by crow ( 16139 )
        I heard about this at least a decade ago. It was on some future technology program ("Beyond 2000" perhaps?), and they showed some building in Japan where they had glass domes (perhaps a foot or two in diameter) on the roof collecting sunlight, which was distributed via fiber-optic cables to the lobby.
        • Good so someone else remembers that show and more importantly that episode. I was looking for a reference to it. I always wondered why it never took off. Just walking around the modern office I can't even imagine how much electricity they use to light up the place in the middle of the day...
          • there is a lot to be said for a highly controlled constant light in an office, it is a place where there are likely to be a lot of monitors all of which create thier own light (which means you don't want wide variation in ambiant light levels or colors) many of which are also annoyingly reflective (so you need to carefully control lighting direction).

            and office lighting is nearly all flourescent which is one of the more efficiant types of lighting.

            so the big questions are
            1: can you collect enough natural li

            • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

              by sjames ( 1099 )

              Actually, I have seen studies showing that varying light levels through the day can enhance productivity. The fiber optic piped sunlight will come from controlled points in the room, so glare on monitors will be no worse than with overhead fluorescent lights.

              The other questions remain to be answered. The probable answer is that it makes sense sometimes.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by jhesse ( 138516 )
          Two decade ago. I saw this on the Discovery Channel, circa 1988. Beyond 2000 (formerly Towards 2000) was a fun show to watch.

          The roof collectors looked like giant flowers.
        • I don't think it was a decade, but at least say, 5 years ago, I saw technology like you describe not on a futurist "one day" show like B2K, but on one of the home improvement shows ("Home Again", IIRC), where it was being installed in someone's house. I'm not sure why this warrants "news" status now.


      • http://www.solatube.com/ [solatube.com]

        So has the prism glass.

        Nothing new here, move along...

        • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

          by Garridan ( 597129 )

          Nothing new here, move along...
          ... hence the title: "Prism Glass Windows Making a Comeback"
          • I know that's rare around here, but does it warrant a posting as "News for Nerds..."?

            The Sun rises again.

            Al Gore makes more hot air.

            They might be true. They might be decent summaries of the article, but does that qualify them as "news"?
            • Ambient lighting to the cubicles, savin' watts for the CPUs, sounds relevant.
            • I guess I should respond, "If the US put Japanese-Americans into internment camps again, would that not be news?" (noting that I cleverly skirt Godwin here)

              But instead, I suggest that you tag the article "accurateheadline".

      • Yes if windows could be a glass dome on the roof that captured light and distributed it to many rooms on many floors separated by a novel invention, walls --or even better, ceilings.
        That would be much more useful than all the other versions of Windows I've seen.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Dr. Eggman ( 932300 )
      Except windows can create odd, non-uniform lighting situations in rooms with irregular geoemetries or furnature which my obscure the window from potions of the room. This setup is more like a skylight coming from the wall.

    • Re:Neat, it is very much like... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by corsec67 ( 627446 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:25PM (#23588799) Homepage Journal
      It really looks like a light tube [wikipedia.org] with a fancy projector on the end.

      Actually, it does sound like the new thing is that projector at the end of the light tube, which creates a natural window appearance on an interior wall.

      • Re:Neat, it is very much like... (Score:5, Informative)

        by peacefinder ( 469349 ) <alan.dewittNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:32PM (#23588917) Journal
        The article appears to describe two different products, a "light tube" similar to a Solatube [gizmodo.com] and also a prism-glass window. I believe it's the prism window pictured.

        It's a good idea, and a pity that it's so expensive. Hopefully the cost will come down again in time.
        • Ah, quite right. I interpreted the picture wrong.

          The window is one that reflects 70% to the ceiling and lets 20% go straight through to the floor.
          Is the point of that that it lets light into the room, unlike a window with closed blinds, but doesn't have too much light going onto the floor like an open window?

          That doesn't quite seem worth $5K per window.
          • The other advantage of this system over traditional windows or skylights is that there is less heat loss. I also hope the price comes down; this is a very good idea.

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by srmalloy ( 263556 )

          It's a good idea, and a pity that it's so expensive. Hopefully the cost will come down again in time.

          The article also doesn't mention whether this is the cost to install such a system during construction, or to retrofit it to an existing building. I expect that costs to pipe light into the interior of multi-story buildings will be significantly higher because of the difficulties in installing light pipes down through several floors of existing office space, while planning for such pipes in an architectural job would lower the cost.

  • Bonus (Score:5, Funny)

    by steveo777 ( 183629 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:25PM (#23588793) Homepage Journal
    This should cut back significantly on the amount of vampire activity in dark, corporate areas.
  • According to TFA, an install of this fixture capable of lighting a 10x10 room (on a bright day) costs on the order of $5,000. I know the plan is to make the money back in energy savings over the long run, but compared to the relatively small and cheap Fluorescent light you need to light a 10x10 room, it's going to take a very long time to make your money back, even if the cost of energy goes up by a factor of 10 tomorrow, especially if you only turn the light on when you are actually in the room.

    • Re:Slightly better than a window, for 10x the pric (Score:5, Interesting)

      by moderatorrater ( 1095745 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:30PM (#23588877)
      There are a lot of advantages of natural light over fluorescent in terms of productivity and employee satisfaction. I don't know if you're talking $10,000 worth of advantage, but it is a factor.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by Splab ( 574204 )
        Indeed, some types of light can make me feel ill - $5000 on proper light is much less than the cost of having a worker only doing 25-50% of his or her capabilities because they aren't feeling good.
        • my office is about 15x8 with three two tube 4' florescent fixtures.

          With regular bulbs it is knd of gloomy, but if we replace just two of the lamps with daylight bulbs the office becomes a light brighter and easy on the eyes. Additional costs $1.00.

          I can't stand florescent lights, but i done right with the right color mix for lamps it looks good, and takes away the headaches. Doing it right and keeping it that way though is a bit harder though.

    • Re:Slightly better than a window, for 10x the pric (Score:4, Informative)

      by chinakow ( 83588 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:32PM (#23588919)
      Lucky for us companies tend to want to have the lights on all the time so it is not a big deal. also, HP shut off half the lights in one if its call centers for 8 hours during the dead of night to saver money. The result, multiple thousand dollar savings PER MONTH. So $5k will pay off quickly in the summer for companies using these.

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by chinakow ( 83588 )
        Preview is a good thing. It would have saved me from all those spelling errors if I hadn't been in such a hurry.
      • True, but we're not talking 5k. This is 5k PER Window. It would probably take upwards of 10 years to even come close to paying for itself.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Xzzy ( 111297 )
          But if you had widespread adoption it wouldn't take long to see a real drop in electricity usage. May not save an individual business money, but from a "save the planet!" perspective it could end up being economical for society.

          • But if you had widespread adoption [...] being economical for society.
            Not if that $5k per window were better spent on something else. E.g., more fuel-efficient cars.

            • But if you had widespread adoption [...] being economical for society.

              Not if that $5k per window were better spent on something else. E.g., more fuel-efficient cars.

              But the $5k spent on a more fuel efficient car could be used to find a more efficient fuel, or that money could be spent to cure cancer, or or or or or or ...

              The argument that $x could be spent better by applying it to y is almost always false when it comes to the environment. The fact remains, environmental / ecological change happens on a thousand different fronts. Imagine if we had the most fuel efficient cars possible (zero carbon footprint) yet our factories poured carcinogenic effluent into the at

              • The argument that $x could be spent better by applying it to y is almost always false when it comes to the environment.

                That generalizes nicely: "An arbitrary statement s about x and y is almost always false for arbitrary values of x and y." Or even "Most arbitrary statements are false."

                It sure sounds like you're saying "we should not use logic when it comes to spending money on the envrionment."

                The fact remains, environmental / ecological change happens on a thousand different fronts.

                Perhaps, but that fact lends no support to your sweeping generalization.

                Imagine if we had the most fuel efficient cars possible (zero carbon footprint) yet our factories poured carcinogenic effluent into the atmosphere, our houses ran as efficiently as a dead horse and leaked heat, cold, moisture, etc.

                In such a situation you want to put your (finite) resources where they would provide the most benefit. In fact, the only plausible way you would get into

    • It's not a fair comparison if the quality of the light is important to you.

      The light is way better than an el cheapo flourescent, especially if color matters to you at all. Or if spraying mercury in the room when the bulb breaks does. So plenty of people might be willing to take the penalty.

      Obviously that depends somewhat on how sunny your locale is, though.

      • ...for patients in hospitals. When the City of Hope had their new hospital, the Helford Clinical Research Hospital, designed, one of the goals was to maximize the amount of natural light in the hospital. Lots of windows, skylights, and lobbies on all floors that are almost half glass and show a spectacular view of the Sierra Madre mountains. The result is something less clinical and alien, and something more like a hotel instead of a hospital.

        I would think that heating and cooling a hospital with that huge
    • I don't know... when you consider all the costs of illuminating 900+ square feet of space, a $5,000 one time cost to get light isn't bad, especially considering:
      - electricity during the middle of the day is at peak usage and cost
      - electrical lights (even fluorescent) warm up the room, increasing climate control demands

      Taking those items into account, you wind up with a good case for implementing it, not to mention the fact that big businesses love having unique things that they can brag about to customers a
    • On the [plus side, and Orcs complexion looks better with natural lighting...sorry, when I see 10x10 room I naturally assume there will be an Orc in it.
    • an install of this fixture capable of lighting a 10x10 room (on a bright day) costs on the order of $5,000.

      This involves very low tech... No fiber-optics, no nanoscale materials, no sun-tracking servos. Just a giant fish-eye lens on the roof, shiny tubes for light distribution, and prisms (an optional, and IMO silly, "feature" for those fixated on the "window" look - you can get good illumination a lot easier by using a ceiling-mounted diffuser box).

      If not a total flop, you can expect to see clones at
    • It's probably only $5,000 because of patent lawyers. It can't be that hard to build one yourself.
  • at $4800 for a 10 sq m, I dont think this technology can make it to home use and offices. Further, the lightening is non-uniform making it difficult for working. Ofcourse, with a greater adoption, the prices may come down but..

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by trongey ( 21550 )
      Too expensive for my house, and apparently yours, but if you go to a high end design store you can find faucets that cost that much. Some people will pay a LOT of money for stuff to go in their houses.

  • Wow! (Score:5, Funny)

    by Bogtha ( 906264 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:35PM (#23588969)

    Ladies and gentlemen, I give you a world first! A Slashdot post that praises windows!

    • When I clicked on this story title for a second I thought it was referring to Vista SP1.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by oloron ( 1092167 )
      correction, it is just like all the other slashdot posts, it is praising things which are similar to windows, and share many of the same features, but seems to work better..
      nothing new to see here, move along

  • 150 year old house (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 29, 2008 @12:37PM (#23589009)
    Gee... I knew I loved this old house for some reason :) lots of glass windows and tall ceilings. No Luxfer prisms, but lots of stained glass and multiple large windows per room. Effectively we use almost no artificial light during daylight hours (except in the kitchen - tacked onto the house in 1910 or so). Similarly, we don't need air conditioning well into late June here in Illinois due to the way the house was built (and creative use of basement and attic doors).

    • Re:150 year old house (Score:5, Informative)

      by cowscows ( 103644 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @01:12PM (#23589571) Journal
      I design buildings for a living, and am involved in a lot of projects that consider sustainable design important. One of the most interesting things about sustainable design as it's evolving right now is how many of its basic principles are really just rediscovering all the techniques that were used for hundreds (or even thousands) of years before air conditioning was invented. Old houses have plenty to teach us.

      One of the best ways to design a house for natural lighting is to pretend that youo won't have any artificial lighting. It's a limitation that architects spend centuries finding solutions to. There are plenty of good answers out there. New technology and new materials are helping to create new answers, but it doesn't have to be anything crazy or even innovative. The same thing goes with heating/cooling strategies, there's a bazillion little design "tricks of the trade" that are incredibly straight-forward and easy. You don't need state-of-the-art materials, you don't need computer design tools, you don't need to be a highly educated architect. People were finding solutions to these problems hundreds of years ago when all they had to build out of was mud bricks.

      The important part is how we can use technology to augment those techniques (things like low-e glass), or how we integrate those techniques with newer technologies (A/C, solar panels, etc.)

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by mikael ( 484 )
      Bay windows are my favourite, along with skylights in attic rooms and plate glass wall conservatories -it's really cool being inside when there's a heavy rain storm and seeing the rain falling all around, but still remaining dry. Cats seem to find it entertaining as well.

      Some friends had stained glass windows for their apartment staircase - large rectangular windows with the edges replaced with stained glass - red for the corners, blue for the horizontal rectangles and yellow for the vertical rectangles. I
  • This is nothing new at all. Companies have been making stuff like this for decades. This is not going back to some forgotten technology. For crying out loud, look in the back of any Popular Mechanics from the last twenty years and you will see ads for this kind of thing along with the lawn mower hovercrafts and folding boats.
    • Hence the summary "was big back in the 19th century, but now it seems to be making a high-tech comeback..." I am guessing from that statement that these have been being built for centuries, not just decades. Old news indeed.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by spun ( 1352 )
        Well, the part that is wrong is "now it seems to be making a high-tech comeback." It started a comeback decades ago, and it was all the rage for a while. More accurate, but less functional as advertising, would be to say, "It was popular in the 19th century, made a comeback in the 80s, and people continue to do it."

        "Making a comeback" means it is new and exciting, a scrappy little underdog technology pioneered by forward thinking individuals. "Hasn't caught on like we want it to yet, despite our decades of
        • Um, I would think "making a comeback" means "actually starting to get mainstream use again." I don't think this type of thing was in mainsteam use in the 80s or 90s.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by spun ( 1352 )
            I certainly heard of it from several sources during that time. Popular science, popular mechanics, sci-am, and nova, at the very least.
            • If it never went away then it can't be making a comeback.
            • "Heard of it" and "being deployed more and more" are two different things though. To make a comeback, you'd need the later.. not just hearing it was being done in exceptional cases.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by spun ( 1352 )
                I heard back then that it was being deployed more and more. The stories then read exactly like the story now. But whatever, its not worth arguing over, I'm sure you are right and I am wrong and this is new and exciting and totally different and this time it will catch on for sure, any day now, buy buy buy, new and improved, now with more photons per square inch, guaranteed to satisfy.
  • Consider the prism apprach in particular. How much more is it going to cost to cool the office in the summer? How much more to heat in the winter? Plus how good is it going to be for light in the winter period if the winters are darker and cloudy.

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by Evets ( 629327 )
      Natural lighting typically produces significantly less heat than electrical lighting, so you generally see a reduction in electricity costs related to air conditioning as well as for lighting (in commercial facilities where there is a lot of electrical lighting, these costs are measurable). I don't know about heating costs increasing in the winter time - but I would imagine the same phenomina is reversed.

      http://natures-lighting.com/products.php?pid=2100 [natures-lighting.com]

      I imagine there's no way around the need for augmented

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by mzs ( 595629 )
        No you completely missed the point, it is not about light. Glass is a very poor heat insulator, look at some IR photos of properly insulated modern buildings.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by Evets ( 629327 )
          LOL. Yep! :)

          But to your point - would the number of externally facing windows or the total amount of externally facing glass change significantly? I wouldn't think so.
  • Put a large lens on the roof to focus a large amount of sun light and pipe it through the building. Split the beam along the way to distribute light to different areas.

    Irises can be installed in various places to control intensity depending on user preferences and how intense the sun is at the moment. The irises can be controlled automatically and it will still be more efficient than using electric lights.

    How do you keep the concentrated beam of light from starting a fire?
    • How do you keep the concentrated beam of light from starting a fire?

      Aim it at someone in Sales?

      • How do you keep the concentrated beam of light from starting a fire?
        Aim it at someone in Sales?
        Your ideas are intriguing to me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
    • slap another lens at the output to diffuse the light again?
      • Right, I forgot to mention that part. I was actually worried about the fire starting after it was concentrated and before it was diffused.
    • There are a few systems that I've read about that are supposed to use optical fibers to bring sunlight into parts of the building, but it hasn't really taken off for a few reasons. First off, it's complicated. Any time you're running another set of pipes/conduit/cables through a building you're adding another layer of work/coordination/cost. And that's not including things like "irises", which would not only be expensive to purchase, but would likely also require a source of electricity and computer control

  • Cool, but hardly new (Score:3, Funny)

    by H0p313ss ( 811249 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @01:38PM (#23589961)

    A big deal was made of the natural lighting system at the National Gallery of Canada [gallery.ca] in Ottawa when it was built 20 years ago. There's a NY Times article [nytimes.com]:

    The light tumbles in from light monitors lined with Mylar, so it reflects as it bounces down into the gallery, and it is exquisite and constantly changing.

    I don't exactly spend my free time hanging out there, but if I was to choose a gallery to hang out in, this would be it.

  • Very Similar to Sun Tunnels.. (Score:3, Informative)

    by puppetman ( 131489 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @02:33PM (#23590733) Homepage

    Sun tunnels [wisementrading.com] pipe light in from the roof of a house to the interior ceiling.

    They've been around for years, and look more practical than these things. At $229 for a 14" tunnel, and $329 for a 22" tunnel, they look a lot cheaper. There are many manufacturers [ecotun.com], as well.

  • The hell with the Windows... (Score:3, Funny)

    by BiggerIsBetter ( 682164 ) on Thursday May 29, 2008 @05:31PM (#23593243)
    ...I want a quality date in Japan!
  • After the big summer-time power outage a few years ago in Eastern Canada and the US, there was a whole lot of pressure to increase power conservation. At that time, I started turning off the light in my office and only used the lights in my place when essential. I found shopping at the mall more relaxing (and I spent more) and I was more productive at work. If the Prism glass takes off and becomes affordable, I'll certainly buy one.

    Otherwise, I have a few prisms I bought for $5. I won't mind if after crazy-

  • I want a screen filter like that (Score:3, Funny)

    by SomeoneGotMyNick ( 200685 ) on Friday May 30, 2008 @08:05AM (#23598335) Journal
    Having a prism screen filter would allow me to better fill my basement with the soft green glow of Slashdot. 70% on the ceiling, 20% on the floor. The remaining 10% will hit my face in a vain attempt to color my pale complexion.

Slashdot Top Deals

To stay youthful, stay useful.

Close