Lumeitalia

Caricamento

Il caricamento sta impiegando più tempo del previsto.

Torna alla home

Lumeitalia

How to compare luminaires for park and green area lighting without mistakes

A comparison method for luminaires intended for park and green area lighting: what to look at, what to ignore, how to make data comparable.

Studio illuminotecnico con planimetria, ottiche e simulazione della luce
Studio illuminotecnico con planimetria, ottiche e simulazione della luce. Immagine illustrativa generata con AI.

Overview

Comparing two datasheets is not the same as comparing two installations. In park and green area lighting projects the right choice only emerges by simulating both solutions in the real geometry and assessing their behaviour over time. In urban parks light defines the evening usability of public space, but directly affects wildlife, vegetation and the night sky.

Applicable standards

The regulatory reference for park and green area lighting is not a single document but a coordinated set of standards covering performance, safety and environmental impact. In design practice the following documents drive the main choices.

  • EN 13201-2 — P classes for internal paths.
  • CIE 150 — limitation of obtrusive light from outdoor installations.
  • regional laws — protection zones and zero ULOR.

Making data comparable

The first step is checking that data come from homogeneous test conditions and that photometric files refer to the configuration actually offered, not to a different variant of the same family. Comparing data gathered under different conditions produces arbitrary conclusions, however precise the numbers look.

Simulate, do not extrapolate

Meaningful comparison happens in the project geometry: same grid, same heights, same maintenance factor, same reflectances. Only then can you see which solution meets requirements with lower installed power or fewer light points. Extrapolating from headline figures often leads to conclusions opposite to those of the simulation.

The lighting result should then be paired with an assessment of maintainability, spare-part availability and compatibility with the planned control systems: factors absent from the calculation but decisive over the whole life cycle.

Comparisons that mislead

  • Comparing luminaires with different distributions using wattage alone.
  • Using photometric files from a variant other than the one offered.
  • Ignoring the maintenance factor, which depends on environment and cleaning cycle.
  • Assessing purchase price without considering spares and maintenance access.

Recurring critical points

The difficulties that most often emerge in park and green area lighting projects are not about product selection, but about defining requirements and verifying results.

  • Lighting paths without turning the park into an over-lit area.
  • Reducing impact on insects and nocturnal birdlife.
  • Keeping perceived safety during low-attendance hours.

Design approach

An orderly method drastically reduces variations during works and disputes at commissioning. Three choices make the difference from the earliest stages.

  • A lighting hierarchy distinguishing main paths, secondary paths and rest areas.
  • Spectra and colour temperatures chosen to reduce insect attraction.
  • Dimming profiles with partial switch-off aligned to opening hours.

Parameters to verify

  • P class — EN 13201-2 — internal pedestrian paths
  • Environmental zone — CIE 150 — E1 to E4, sets spill-light limits
  • ULOR — regional laws — upward flux brought to zero
  • Time scheduling — management plan — consistent with park usage

Most frequent mistakes

Non-conformities found at commissioning almost always come from three causes: requirements not declared or declared without a reference standard, calculation run on idealised geometry, and an optimistic maintenance factor. All three can be avoided at zero cost during design.

Key takeaways

A park and green area lighting project holds up over time when requirements are declared, the calculation reproduces real conditions and on-site verification follows an agreed protocol. Component selection matters, but comes later: without measurable requirements even the best product delivers a result that cannot be demonstrated. Centro Studi Lumeitalia makes its technical office available to review requirements and design checks.

Methodological note: This content is written for technical information purposes by Centro Studi Lumeitalia and does not replace the lighting design or a full reading of the standards cited. Applicable performance values are those of the standards in force at design time.

Domande frequenti

Does more light make a park safer?+

Not automatically: uniformity, face recognition and the absence of deep shadow pockets matter more than the average level.

How is wildlife impact reduced?+

By limiting upward and sideways spill, choosing spectra with a lower blue component, and dimming or switching off where no surveillance is needed.

Where should a park and green area lighting project start?+

From a written definition of performance requirements and verification conditions: this step drives every later choice and makes the result either disputable or defensible at commissioning.

Which documents should be requested from the supplier?+

Photometric files of the proposed luminaires, declaration of conformity, lifetime data declared per IES LM-80 with its conditions, the maintenance schedule and warranty terms.