# A Methodology of Interactive Motion Facades Design through Parametric Strategies
## 5 Verification
### Performance Verification through Certification  
Daylighting design is a key aspect of building rating systems, such as Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design system (LEED). It uses metrics, such as Daylight Autonomy (DA), which is the percentage of annual work hours during which all or part of a building's lighting needs can be met through daylighting alone [24]. A survey of various Certification organizations in relation to daylight autonomy state values that need to be attained for accreditation, as seen in Table 3. As regards daylight, one to three points are given for office buildings. Three different options can be selected for the assessment. The first option offers 2-3 points and it involves the assessment of the spatial daylight autonomy, as well as the annual sunlight exposure. More specifically, it should be demonstrated that a certain area should have daylight autonomy (i.e., the illuminance levels exceed 300 lx for more than 50% of the working hours per year), while at the same time the annual sunlight exposure (i.e., the percentage of floor area that receives more than 1000 lx for more than 250 occupied hours per year) does not exceed 10% [25]. There are five score levels defined on the range of the daylight factor's ranges: Level 3, which indicates the average, is defined for values of daylight factor between 1.5% and 2%. The upper level, level 5, is defined for values of daylight factor exceeding 2.5%. The existence of daylight devices, i.e., fixtures that are used to harvest or guide daylight deep into the building, such as light shelves, light ducts, etc. are independently evaluated, given that they contribute to the improvement of daylight conditions, but cannot be quantitatively expressed through the daylight factor calculation [25]. In the case of BREEAM, daylighting is assessed on both a quantitative and a qualitative basis. The adequacy of daylighting is addressed via the use of daylight factor and illuminance levels on the working plane, while the quality of daylight is interrelated mostly with its uniform distribution across the indoor area. More specifically, an office building can get up to one credit for daylighting if one of two alternatives is satisfied. For the first alternative, the adequacy of the average value of 2% is required for more than 80% of the floor area [25]. The evaluation of this design process is according to the daylight credit of the LEED v4 Indoor Environmental Quality (IEQ) category provides the prospects for compliance to achieve optimal  
Figure 18: Immersive View of the Interactive Facade with Light and Textures. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l} \hline \hline
**Certifications** & **Daylight Autonomy Methods** & **Value \%** & **Credits/ Level** \\ \hline
**LEED** &
\begin{tabular}{l} Percentage floor area that \\ achieved sDA 300/ 50\% \\ \end{tabular} & 55\% \(\leq\) 75\% & 2 and 3 \\
**BREEAM** &
\begin{tabular}{l} Percentage of the floor area that \\ achieved modified average \\ \end{tabular} & 60\% \(\leq\) 80\% & 1 and 2 \\
**CASBEE** &
\begin{tabular}{l} Average Daylight Factor \\ \end{tabular} & 1\% \(\leq\) 2.5\% & 1–4 \\ \hline \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 3: Comparison of Certification Organizations Daylight Credit Standards. daylight in a building. While using simulation, the compliance criteria for this research are option 1 of compliance options of LEED, as seen in Table 4.  
Two metrics in LEED v4 are codified for evaluating daylight autonomy design, which allow for a day lit space to be evaluated for a one-year period while using two different evaluation metrics (IES, 2012). Spatial Daylight Autonomy (sDA) and Annual Sun Exposure (ASE) are these two metrics, which form a clear picture of daylight performance that can help architects to make good design decisions.