SN EN 17037:2019 vs SN EN 17037/AC:2021 Comparison
This page compares SN EN 17037+A1:2022 against SN EN 17037:2019 vs SN EN 17037/AC:2021 to help the reader decide which applies to their situation. Understanding these standards is crucial for architects, builders, and regulatory bodies aiming to optimize natural light in buildings while adhering to established guidelines.
Why compare SN EN 17037+A1:2022 and SN EN 17037:2019 vs SN EN 17037/AC:2021
Comparing SN EN 17037+A1:2022 with its predecessors, SN EN 17037:2019 and SN EN 17037/AC:2021, is vital for industry professionals who need to understand the evolution of daylighting standards. Architects, engineers, and building planners are often faced with decisions that require them to choose the most relevant and compliant standards for their projects. This comparison helps clarify the distinctions in recommendations, applicability, and regulatory requirements, ultimately guiding stakeholders in making informed choices in daylight optimization and compliance.
How SN EN 17037+A1:2022 approaches the topic
SN EN 17037+A1:2022 expands on the previous standards by providing detailed guidelines for maximizing natural light in buildings while addressing the needs of occupant well-being and energy efficiency. This standard emphasizes the importance of daylighting in interior spaces, outlining minimum recommendations for daylight availability in various building types. It highlights not only the impact of daylight on energy consumption but also its psychological and biological benefits, emphasizing the necessity of integrating daylighting strategies early in the design phase. Furthermore, it aligns with existing Swiss standards, ensuring consistency in regulatory frameworks and providing clear instructions for architects and planners.
How SN EN 17037:2019 vs SN EN 17037/AC:2021 approaches the topic
SN EN 17037:2019 laid the groundwork for daylight standards in buildings by establishing baseline criteria for daylight availability and distribution. It focused on the quantification of daylighting metrics and their implications for energy consumption and user comfort. The subsequent amendment, SN EN 17037/AC:2021, introduced clarifications and adjustments to enhance its applicability, particularly in addressing specific use cases and scenarios that practitioners might encounter. Both documents emphasize the role of natural light in enhancing indoor environments but lack the comprehensive updates provided in SN EN 17037+A1:2022, particularly concerning occupant well-being and summer overheating considerations.
Side-by-side comparison
| Criteria | SN EN 17037+A1:2022 | SN EN 17037:2019 | SN EN 17037/AC:2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Scope | Comprehensive guidelines for daylighting in buildings | Baseline criteria for daylight availability | Clarifications and adjustments to SN EN 17037:2019 |
| Audience | Architects, building planners, engineers | Building designers and planners | Industry professionals seeking clarifications |
| Cost/Effort | Moderate, requires training on new aspects | Low to moderate, foundational knowledge | Low, more straightforward updates |
| Certification Mechanism | Aligned with CEN standards | Not applicable | Not applicable |
| Typical Use Cases | New building designs, renovations | Initial daylight assessments | Specific case adjustments |
When to choose which
- If you need comprehensive guidelines for optimizing daylight in new building designs, choose SN EN 17037+A1:2022.
- If your project involves basic daylight assessments without the need for recent updates, SN EN 17037:2019 may suffice.
- For scenarios requiring specific clarifications from the original 2019 standard, especially if working with existing regulations, opt for SN EN 17037/AC:2021.
- If your project must consider summer overheating and occupant well-being comprehensively, it is advisable to go with SN EN 17037+A1:2022 for its updated insights.