0. INTRODUCTION

0.1 The Department of Scientific and Industrial Research are conveners of the Committee on the Lighting of Buildings, This committee is studying the lighting requirements of post-war buildings. In order that provision can be made for efficient, natural and artificial lighting it was considered necessary to examine a sample of existing houses and to measure and describe their lighting. It was also considered desirable to find out what the housewife, who is the principal member of the family concerned, thought about artificial and natural lighting in relation to the main activities within the house. These objective facts and subjective impressions are related in the report to geographical position, to type and age of dwelling, to income group and to cost of electricity. (The Survey was confined to houses with electric lighting).

0.2 The inquiry was concerned with the following:-

The nature of the main part of the inquiry - which required a considerable amount of measurement, the putting up of the blackout and careful observation - would have left, a gap in the interview during which the housewife would have been a mere spectator. We therefore added certain extra questions related to fuel economy for the Ministry of Fuel and Power. These questions appear in the questionnaire, but the analysis has been made separately.

2 3 4

1. SAMPLE

1.1 The inquiry was planned on a basis of three thousand interviews, distributed regionally in proportion to the population. In the time at our disposal it was not possible to obtain more than 2,375 interviews, however, and there is some inequality in the regional distribution as a result.

The sample was designed to give equal numbers in three income groups, but in practice this aim was not quite realised. The difference was, however, unimportant.

The procedure adopted to choose households for interview was this:

The sample is subject to three general limitations imposed by the nature of the survey.

A numerical analysis of the sample is as follows:-

1. By Income Group (Wage of principal wage-earner)

In a normal sample, group (i) would be approximately 35%, group (ii) 40%, and group (iii) 20%, leaving 5% of the population unrepresented. We do not however know the proportions in which that part of the population using electricity is distributed:-

2. By Region

Here the North, N.E. & N.W. and London and S.E. are somewhat under represented.

3. By Age of Dwelling

Choosing houses lit only by electricity does not appear to have biased the sample in respect to age of dwelling as there are about 7½ million pre-war dwellings and about 5½ million post-war dwellings.

4. By House or Flat

5. By cost of electricity per unit

Note

Any total figures given in tables should not be taken as representing the national position. This could only be calculated if the correct proportions of the income groups with electricity and the correct proportions in regions, in old and new houses in houses arid flats and paying different prices for electricity were known.

The following towns were visited in the course of the investigation:-

The number of interviews carried out in these towns was from 20 to 160.

Refers to paragraph 2.2 and 2.3

Income Unclassified 9

5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

SECTION I
2. LIGHTING ANALYSIS OF THE MAIN DOWNSTAIR ROOMS

2.1 A detailed examination of the artificial lighting of the scullery or working kitchen, the Kitchen living room and the sitting room and parlour was made.

This comprised the following observations:-

All these observations have been related to the questions asked about the adequacy of artificial lighting.

2.2 Total watts available

In this analysis all rooms were described separately. In the case of the scullery and working kitchen 34% of them were lighted with lamps which had a wattage of 25 or less, 38% had 26 to 50 watts, 26% 51 to 75 watts and 2% 76 to 100 watts.

The kitchen living room had larger lamps: only 3% had up to 25 watts, 16% had 26 to 50 watts, 52% 51 to 75 watts, 24% 76 to 100 watts and 5% had over 100 watts.

(The distribution of lamps in the kitchen living room is given in Appendix 1 for reference).

The sitting room or parlour had even larger lamps, only 4% had up to 25 watts 13% 26 to 50 watts, 45% 51 to 75 watts, 23% 76 to 100 watts and 15% had over 100 watts. (Refers to Table 1).

It should be noted that in one third of dwellings the size of lamps has been reduced since the war. (Paragraph 7.9).

2.3 Comparison of Income Groups

In every case this analysis shows that in the high income groups the rooms have lamps with greater wattage. In the scullery or working kitchen 46% of the lowest income group have up to 25 watts, whereas in the highest income group the proportion is 25%. In the kitchen living room, in the lowest income group 21% have over 75 watts, whereas in the highest income group the proportion is 41%. Likewise in the sitting room or parlour, in the lowest income group, the proportion with, over 75 watts is 13% compared with 58%. (Table 1).

The average watts in each income group in the kitchen living room was as follows:-

2.4 Analysis by cost of electricity

Electricity costs were grouped into three price ranges; up to and including 3d. per unit (of which about half were rates up to ½d. per unit, plus a standing charge, one-third from ½d. to 1d. per unit, plus a standing charge, one-fifth from over 1d. to 3d. per unit without a standing charge and the rest were combinations of other rates all being less than 3d.) (1), over 3d. and including 4½d. per unit and over 4½d. per unit.

An analysis of the size of lamps by cost of electricity showed that as the cost of electricity went up the size of lamps went down. This is best demonstrated by the average wattage as shown below for the kitchen living room:-

Separate analyses were made for each room and by income groups. These showed that not only did the size of lamp go down as the cost of electricity went up, but that this was true in each income group and that at each cost the size of lamps varied with the annual income of the principal wage earner.

2.5 Watts per square foot

The size of lamps used in each room has been analysed in relation to the area to be lighted and the number of watts per square foot computed.

44% of sculleries were found to have up to half a watt per square foot, 39% up to one watt per square foot, 11% up to one and a half watts per square foot and 6% had more than one and a half watts per square foot.

In the kitchen living room the proportions were 54% up to half a watt per square foot, 40% up to one watt per square foot, 4% up to one and a half watts per square foot, and 2% had more than one and a half watts per square foot. Thus the kitchen living room was less well lighted than the scullery.

In the sitting room the proportions were 56%, 38% 4% and 1%.

Thus although the number of watts available was greater in the kitchen living room than in the scullery, and greater still in the sitting room the differences were not proportional to the increases in room area, the scullery was therefore best lighted and the sitting room worst lighted in watts per square foot. (Refers to Table 2).

(1) There were sufficient cases in the first two groups to permit of a separate analysis of the watts in the Kitchen living room and this analysis showed a significant difference between the two groups and provided further evidence of the effect of the cost of electricity on the number of watts used.

2.6 Comparison of houses and flats

In each case the lighting of flats was significantly better than that of houses as the following abstract shows:-

The differences in the sculleries and working kitchens are probably the result of differences in area. Sculleries in flats are much smaller than those in houses. The differences in the other rooms are not wholly explicable in this way as room sizes are not very different. (See Appendix 2 Room Size).

2.7 Comparison of Income Groups

This analysis shows that in all cases the lighting of the higher income groups is better than that of the lower income groups. The proportion having over ½ watts per square foot in the scullery was 52% in the under £187 per annum group, 58% in the £187 - 260 per annum group and 58% in the £260 - 520 per annum group. In the kitchen living room the proportions were 41% 46% and 52% and in the sitting room 33% 41% and 51%.

2.8 Analysis by cost of electricity

The analysis by cost of electricity shows that lighting becomes less adequate as the cost of electricity increases.

The proportion with over ½ watt per square foot was above 60% of those who were paying up to 3d. per unit for electricity. It was 54% of those paying between 3d. and 4½d. per unit and 47% of those paying over 4½d. In the kitchen living room the proportions were 52%, 43% and 32% and in the sitting room 51%, 34% and 30%. (Table 3).

2.9 The influence of the area of rooms

In order to test the hypotheses that the adequacy of lighting expressed as watts per square foot was a function mainly of the size of room, rooms were grouped by size to show the proportion of them with different watts per square foot.

This analysis showed quite clearly that the larger the room the greater was the proportion with less than ½ watt per square foot. For example, in sculleries of up to and including 50 square feet only 14% of them had ½ watt per square foot or less. In sculleries of between 51 to 100 square feet the proportion was 49%, with sculleries 101 to 150 square feet the proportion was 79% and in sculleries larger than this the proportion was, in all cases, over 90%. The same tendency occurs to a lesser degree in the kitchen living room and in the sitting room or parlour. (Table 4).

Refers to Paragraph 2.8

Cost unclassified = 47

Refers to Paragraph 2.9

2.10

2.10 Changes in lamps since the war

Blackout restrictions and fuel economy have caused a considerable number of households to reduce the size of lamps used. This was so in 608 out of 1,954 houses in relation to the working kitchen, in 514 out of 1,859 houses in relation to the kitchen living room and in 477 oof 1,491 houses in relation to the sitting room.

In order to find out the effect this had on lighting, the cases in which lighting was the same as pre-war was compared with those where the lighting had been reduced. It was found that in all cases a greater proportion of rooms had less than half watt per square foot where the wattage had been reduced since the war. This is shown in detail in the abstract table below:-

2.11 Watts per square foot analysed in relation to the housewife's statement about her ability to see when doing certain jobs

The answers of the housewife to the question “How are you able to see when doing the following jobs by artificial light”, were analysed according to the watts per square foot in the rooms concerned and the results show a certain relationship between the amount of light available and the housewife’s opinion, although this relationship is less clear in the kitchen than in the sitting room.

The reason for this is probably that in the living room the housewife can adjust her position for reading or sewing in relation to light, but in the kitchen her position is often determined by the location of the sink, cooker or kitchen table. As the light is usually placed in the centre of the room, the housewife is often in her own light.

Washing-up

Of those housewives who had less than ¼ watt per square foot, 28% said they could see well, 17%, all right and 25% badly, of those who had ½ watt per square foot the proportions 39%, 47% and 14% and of those who had ¾ watt per square foot the proportions were almost exactly the same, 38%, 48% and 14%.

Preparing Food

Of the housewives who had less than ¼ watt per square foot in their kitchens, 32% said they could see well 50% all right and 18% badly, in the case of those who had ½ watt per square foot the proportions were 40%, 51% and 9%.

Cooking

The answers to the question about cooking followed very closely those of the two previous questions. Of those who had ¼ watt per square foot, 30% said they could see well, 46% all right, 24% badly, of those who had ½ watt per square foot 40% said they could see well, 47% all right and 13% badly and to those who had ¾ watt per square foot the proportions were exactly the same.

Reading, and Sewing in the Kitchen Living Room

The possibility of adjusting one’s position to the lighting for reading or sewing is made evident in the clearer divisions in this analysis. As has already been seen the kitchen living room and the sitting room are somewhat better lighted than the other rooms only a small proportion having as little as ¼ watt per square foot.

This analysis shows a very much higher proportion able to see well in rooms which are better lighted as is shown below:-

Note:- About 2% of those with a kitchen living room did not answer the question and for watts per sq. foot rather less than 2% were unknown.

Reading and Sewing in Sitting Room or Parlour

The analysis of this question follows closely that of the previous question and shows that housewives' opinion of their lighting is much higher where the rooms are, in fact, better lighted.

Note:- Rather more than 4% of those with a sitting room or parlour did not answer the question and for watts per sq. foot 4% were unknown.

2.1 2 Position of Fitting

Our investigators were asked to note whether the fitting was in the ceiling, on a wall bracket or a movable fitting and it was found that the fitting was in the ceiling in 98% of sculleries or working kitchens, in 99% of kitchen living rooms and in 98% of sitting rooms and parlour.

In the case of the second fitting most were movable, the proportions for second fittings were for the kitchen living room 16% in the ceiling, 16% on a bracket and 68% movable. In the case, of the sitting room or parlour 9% ceiling, 15% bracket and 76% movable.

The numbers in the scullery or working kitchen were too small to be analysed.

The proportions having movable fittings were highest in the two higher income groups.

2.13 Type of Electric light fitting

Out interviewers were asked to classify the electric light fitting according to the main types agreed upon by the Electric Lamp Manufacturers Association lighting analysis. These were: Direct (1) and (2), Semi Direct (General), Semi Indirect and Indirect, (see illustration below).

This diagram is reproduced from “Electric Illumination” by W. T. O’Dea D.Sc., A.M.I.E.E. H.M.S.O. 1937.

The main type of light fitting used in all rooms was the direct, being conical and bell shaped shades with bulb showing below. Many of these were of vellum open at the top. This accounted for 86% of the first lights in sculleries or working kitchens, 72% in the kitchen living room and 60% in the sitting room or parlour. The next most popular type was the semi

indirect, in most cases a translucent glass bowl. This type was found in 10% of sculleries or working kitchens, in 14% of kitchen living rooms and in 21% of sitting rooms or parlours.

The only other type which occurred in large numbers was the general, the totally closed glass fitting which was found in 7% of kitchen living rooms and 7% of sitting rooms or parlours.

7% of sitting rooms or parlours had the indirect type of fitting consisting of opaque bowl beneath the bulb.

2.12 1 Comparison of income groups

The higher income groups in our sample had a greater proportion of fittings which obscured the lamp in their kitchen living room or parlours than the lower income groups. For the purpose of this comparison the general, semi-indirect and indirect type of fittings have been grouped together and the proportions are:-

The position in the sitting room or parlour was similar, the proportions being:-

2.14 The proportion having more than one lamp in the different income groups

This analysis shows that in the higher income groups in all rooms there is a greater proportion having more than one lamp.

2.15 Utilization factor

2.15 1 The utilization factor is the proportion of the artificial light available which is actually used in any room (Reaches the Plane of work), that is to say, which is not absorbed by the fitting, or the walls or the ceiling, This depends upon five factors.

The first is size and shape of the room, that is to say, the distance of the walls from the source of light. The nearer that the walls are, the more light they absorb.

The second is the height of the electric light fitting above the plane of work, the intensity of light at any point diminishes in proportion to the square of the distance from the source.

The third is the colour of the walls and from this the proportion of the light reaching the walls which is reflected. For our purpose the colour of the walls was divided into two groups, walls fairly dark with a reflection factor of around 25% and a wall fairly light with a reflection factor of about 50%.

The fourth is the colour of the ceiling. Ceilings were graded by our interviewers into two main groups, fairly light with a reflection factor of about 40% and very light with a reflection factor of about 70% These reflection factors were judged on the basis of information in the E.L.M.A. booklet.

The fifth is the type of fitting which has already been described above. Both the direction of the light and the amount absorbed by the fitting are taken into account.

It should be noted that these factors are based on a series of estimations and are therefore only approximate.

Scullery and Working Kitchen

The utilization factors for the scullery and working kitchens fall into three main, groups. 9% were between .3 and .39, 47% between .4 and .49 and 19% between .5 and .59.

Kitchen Living Room

The distribution of utilization factors was somewhat wider in the kitchen living room, and in the main the utilization factor was higher. 11% had utilization factor between .2 and .29, 9% between .3 and .39, 18% between .4 and .49 and 57% between .5 and .59. This is due entirely to the fact that kitchen living rooms are larger than sculleries or working kitchens.

Sitting Room or Parlour

This distribution was similar to that of the kitchen living room, but the utilization factors were somewhat lower, 15% being between .2 and .29, 9% between .3 and .39, 21% between .4 and .49 and 47% between .5 and .59.

Refers to Paragraph 2.15 1

2.15 2 Comparison of house and flat

In the case of the scullery or working kitchen the utilization factor in houses was higher than that in flats. 88% houses had a utilization factor higher than .4, compared with 74% of flats. In the case of the kitchen living room the utilization factors were almost the same in both houses and flats, there being 75% of the kitchen living rooms in houses with a utilization factor higher than compared with 76% in flats. On the other hand the sitting room or parlour in flats had a slightly higher proportion with a high utilization factor, there being only 68% of houses having a utilization factor above .4, compared with 73% in flats.

These results are probably due to the fact that whereas sculleries are larger in houses than flats there is no great difference in the size of living rooms or parlours. (Appendix).

2.15 3 Comparison of Pre-War and Post-War Dwellings

In all cases the pre-war dwelling had a higher utilization factor than post-war dwellings, This is in spite of the fact that post-war houses have larger rooms. The proportion having a utilization factor of more than .4 are give below:-

The standard errors of the first pair second and third pairs of the order of 1 and of the second and third pair of the order of 1.5.

2.15 4 Comparison of income groups

The comparison of income groups shows interesting differences. In the case of sculleries or working kitchens the proportions having a utilization factor of above .4 are very close in the two lower income groups, being 84% and 86%. In the high group, however, it is 90%. This is probably due to the larger kitchens in the houses of the higher income group.

In the kitchen living room differences are small, the proportions being 78%, 75% and 71%, slight decline in the higher income groups being probably due to the higher proportion having light fittings which obscure the lamp. These are found in the following proportions in the three income groups, 21%, 23% and 31%.

In the sitting room or parlour, however, this tendency is much more marked. The proportions having a higher utilization factor than .4 were 72% in the lowest income group, 71% in the next income group and 65% in the highest income group - in spite of the larger rooms found in the higher income groups. The proportions having a fitting obscuring the lamp in the sitting room or parlour were as follows:-

These proportions refer only to the first light.

2.15 5 Utilization factor in relation to room area

This analysis shows the considerable importance of room area in determining the utilization factor. In the case of the scullery or working kitchen the proportions of rooms having a utilization factor above .5 were as follows :-

In the case of kitchen living room a similar tendency can be seen, although in the case of one size of room the trend is interrupted:-

The sitting room or parlour also showed a similar trend, the proportions having a utilization factor above .5 were as follows:-

The consistency in the results of the larger rooms is due, in some cases, to the fact that two lamps were employed. This has the effect of reducing the utilization factor since these are not placed in the centre of the room but are spaced and therefore come nearer to the walls.

2.16 Light Meter Readings

2.16 1 Our investigators measured with a light meter the amount of light in foot candles at a number of points in the kitchen or scullery, in the kitchen living room and in the sitting room.

In the case of the observations made in the sink, on the cooker, on scullery table and on the kitchen living room table two readings were taken. The first was with the meter unshadowed and the second with the housewife in the position where she normally stood when working.

It will be seen that at the working positions in the scullery very few families have as much light as 5 foot candles either ‘unshadowed’ or ‘as used’. In the kitchen living room table a small proportion had this amount of light, and a larger proportion in the kitchen living room by the fire and in the sitting room by the fire.

(TABLE 6)

2.16 2 Observations in the scullery or kitchen

The Kitchen Sink

It will be seen from the abstract below that more than half of kitchen sinks had 1 foot candle or less unshadowed and nearly three quarters 1 foot candle or less as used,

Tne standard deviations of these percentages are of the order of 1 or less.

Cooker

45% of the cookers had an illumination of less than 1 foot candle or less unshadowed and 76% had an illumination of 1 foot candle or less when the housewife was in the working position.

Scullery Table

The scullery table was better lighted than either the cooker or the sink due to the fact that the housewife has some choice in the placing of her table, whereas there is no choice about the sink or the cooker. A little over one-third of scullery tables had 1 foot candle or less unshadowed and about two-thirds had 1 food candle or less as used this showed that even though housewives had some choice in the placing of their kitchen table they were unable to avoid getting in their own light when working at it.

The Standard deviation of these percentages are of the order of .1 or less.

Refers of Paragraphs 2.16.1 and 2.16 2

Unclassified - 9

Kitchen Living Room Table

The Kitchen living room table was generally much better lighted than the scullery table as will be seen from the following abstract:-

The standard deviations of these percentages are of the order of 1 or less

5 ft. from the Kitchen Living Room fire, 3 ft. from the floor

In this position of the room light was measured unshadowed only and the illumination was somewhat better than in any other position in kitchen living rooms or sculleries. In only 8% of the observations was the meter reading less than 1 foot candles. (Table 6).

5 ft. from the Sitting Room fire

Illumination in this position was the best of any of those measured, only 5% having 1 foot candle or less. (Table 6).

2.16 3 Comparison of Houses and Flat

Comparison of the meter readings taken in houses and flats show that in the ‘unshadowed’ readings the flat is better lighted at the sink, cooker and on the scullery table, the proportions of flats and houses having a reading of 1 foot candle or less were as follows:-

This is perhaps due to the fact that Sculleries and Working kitchens are smaller in flats than in houses so that these places are grouped nearer.

On the other hand it will be seen that this advantage is lost in the case of the sink and cooker when the meter reading is taken with the housewife in the working position, again possibly due to the fact that the sculleries or kitchens of flats are smaller than those of houses there being consequently less room for manoeuvre.

In the case of the kitchen living room table the superiority of the flat was marked in both the ‘unshadowed’ and the ‘as used’ meter reading, the proportions were 25% of houses having 1 foot candle or less on the kitchen living room table ‘unshadowed’ compared with 11% of flats; and 42% having 1 foot candle or less ‘as used’, compared with 31% of flats.

The readings taken 5 feet from the kitchen living room fire ‘unshadowed’ and 5 feet from the sitting room fire ‘unshadowed’ showed a superiority for houses in both cases. Only 7% of houses had 1 foot candle or less, compared with 14% of flats in the cases of the kitchen and 4%, compared with 11% in the cases of the sitting room. In this analysis emphasis has been placed on the bad lighting rather than the good.

2.16 4 Pre-war and post-war houses compared

This comparison showed that there was very little difference between pre-war and post-war houses in the light meter readings in the principal working positions of the downstairs rooms. If anything there was a slight superiority of the post-war house particularly in the ‘as used’ positions of the sink and cooker.

This result should be compared with the watts per square foot analysis which showed a definite superiority of the post-war houses and suggests that general lighting is better in the post-war house, whereas lighting over the main working positions has been arranged similarly in both sorts of houses.

2.16 5 Comparison of income groups

The analysis by watts per square foot showed a marked superiority of the illumination in the rooms of the higher income group. This superiority is shown by the analysis of meter readings, but to a lesser degree, and in one case, that of the kitchen living room table, the kitchen living rooms of the poorer class are better illuminated than the upper classes. This is due no doubt to the fact that the kitchen living room has a different function in the houses of families under £260 per annum than in the houses of families with incomes between £260 - £520 per annum.

In the case of the analysis of the kitchen living room fire and the sitting room fire there is very little difference between the income groups as the following abstracts show.

It will be seen that the effect of shadowing is very important in all cases and somewhat reduces the superiority of the lighting of the higher income group.

In the following abstract the proportions having less than 5 foot candles in the kitchen living room 5 feet from the fire and in the sitting room 5 feet from the fire are shown. A higher value has been taken because these rooms are better illuminated.

2.16 6 Analysis by cost of electricity

In the analysis of illumination by watts per square foot the effect of the cost of electricity was quite marked, but in this analysis of light meter readings there is no such clear falling off in the lighting where the cost of electricity is higher. As in the case of the previous analysis this is possibly the result of the fact that the main positions where lights were measured are grouped at a point fairly near to the centre of illumination, whereas watts per square foot are an indication of the illumination of the whole surface of the room. That is to say, the one is an average of the light and the other is the light at a few particular points insufficient in themselves to be representative of the whole situation. The following abstract shows the proportion in each room having one foot candle or less at each point:-

2.16 7 Housewife's opinion of her ability to see analysed in relation to light meter readings

In every category, namely housewives who could see well, all right or badly, cases were found where there were meter readings from 0 to 12 foot candles showing that ability to see is a subjective as well as an objective matter. However, if an average is taken it is found that the housewives who say they can see well have better lighting than those who can see all right, and those who say they can see all right have better lighting than those who can see badly. The following abstract table shows the position:-

The readings in each case are ‘as used’.

The standard deviations on these numbers are of the order of .1 so that all the differences except perhaps those between “all right” and “badly” for cooking and washing up are significant.

2.17 CONCLUSION

2.17 1 Watts available

The most striking point of this analysis is the small wattages found in the scullery or working kitchen where most of the detailed household tasks are done almost all had less than 75 watts and a third had less than 25 watts. The other rooms had more powerful lamps, but, of course, the rooms were larger and in many cases the fittings absorbed some of the light.

The size of lamps was significantly larger in the higher income groups.

2.17 2 Watts per square foot

This analysis showed that 44% of scullery or working kitchens, 54% of kitchen living rooms and 56% of sitting rooms had less than half a watt per square foot.

The analysis taking account of size of room showed that householders often failed to use more light in larger rooms.

2.17 3 Changes in Lamps since the war

About one-third of households are using lamps of less power than before the war. This has produced a marked difference in their lighting measured in watts per square foot.

2.17 4 Watts per square foot analysed in relation to housewives' views about their ability to see

This analysis shows that although at every point there are housewives who say they can see well in spite of very small amount of light. In general, the higher the watts per square foot the greater is the proportion who are able to see well.

2.17 5 Fittings

The main type of fitting used was the direct fitting which accounted for two-thirds of the fittings in the sitting room or parlour and more in the other rooms. The type of fitting which obscured, the lamp was found more in the sitting rooms or parlours than elsewhere and more in the higher income groups than in the lower. The proportions having more than one lamp was much higher in the highest income group than in the two others.

2.17 6 Utilization Factor

In the scullery and working kitchen, two-thirds of dwellings had a utilization factor higher than .4, in the kitchen living room the proportion was four-fifths and in the sitting room or parlour the proportion was about three-quarters. The falling off in the sitting room or parlour is probably due to the use of fittings which obscure the lamp as there were no very great differences in the proportions having light and dark walls.

2.17 7 Light meter readings

The most striking feature of the tests made with the light meter was the fact that of the main working positions of the scullery or kitchen, only in the case of the kitchen living room table and the fire place position was there a considerable proportion of dwellings with 5 foot candles or more. At the sink and cooker a very large proportion of housewives had less than one foot candle and the proportion having this amount of light was quite large at the scullery table. The lighting of the sitting room fire position was much better, over half having more than 5 foot candles.

There were no very great differences between houses and flats or between pre-war and post-war dwellings, nor was there any marked differences between the income groups.

The analysis by cost of electricity did not show the same tendency as the analysis of watts per square foot, probably due to the fact that these working positions are very near the centre of light.

The average meter readings at each of the main working positions showed that the housewives who could see well had more light than those who said they could see all right or badly, although within each group there was a wide range in the amount of light available.

23 24 25

SECTION II
3. ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING

3.1 The housewife was asked whether she was able to see well, all right or badly by artificial light when she was doing the following jobs:-

Washing-up

Preparing Food

Cooking

Reading or sewing in the Kitchen Living Room

Reading or sewing in the Sitting Room or Parlour

and whether she considered the children were able to see well when they were doing their homework in the kitchen living room and when they were doing their homework in the sitting room.

From the answers given it appears that housewives were much better satisfied with the lighting in their kitchen living room and parlour than in their kitchen or scullery. (Refers to Table 7).

3.2 Washing-up

36% of housewives said that they could see well when washing-up, 47% said that they could see all right and said that they could see badly. (Refers to Table 7).

3.4 Preparing Food

The analysis of the answers about preparing food was similar to that about washing-up, the proportions being 38% able to see well, 49% able to see all right and 13% who saw badly. (Refers to Table 7).

3.4 Cooking

The analysis of the answers about cooking was similar to those of the two previous analyses, the proportions being 37% able to see well, 46% able to see all right and 16% who saw badly. (Refers to Table 7).

3.5 Reading or Sewing in Kitchen Living Room

This analysis showed that housewives considered lighting in the kitchen living room rather better than lighting for washing-up, preparing food or cooking; 47% said that they saw well, 46% said that they could see all right and 6% that they could see badly. (Refers to Table 7).

3.6 Reading or Sewing in Sitting Room or Parlour

This analysis shows a slight improvement over the previous one, the proportions able to see well were 54%, all right 41% and badly 5% (Refers to Table 7).

3.7 For Children to See Doing Homework in the Kitchen Living Room

As in the other analysis of the lighting in the kitchen living room the housewife considered it to be satisfactory; 46% said that the children could see well, 52% said that the children could see all right and only 3% thought that children saw badly. (Refers to Table 7).

3.8 For Children to See Doing Homework in the Sitting Room or Parlour

As in the case of the housewife sewing this analysis showed that the lighting of the sitting room or parlour was more satisfactory than any other room in the house and more satisfactory than the kitchen living room or for children to do their homework. The proportions of children able to see well 51%, 45% could see all right and only 4% saw badly. (Refers to Table 7).

3.9 Comparison of Houses and Flats

The lighting in flats appears to be significantly better than the lighting in houses for the main jobs which are done in the scullery or working kitchen for example the proportion who say they see badly when washing-up is 13% ± 1.7 in flats, compared with 19% ± .9 in houses. In the case of preparing food the proportions are 6% ± 1.2 and 14% ± .8 and in the case of cooking 14% ± 1.8 and 17% ± .8.

In the kitchen living room and sitting room the lighting for Reading or Sewing is, however, better in houses. There is not much difference in the proportions who see badly, but the proportions who say they see well are rather higher in houses. In the kitchen living room the proportions are 49% ± 1.2 compared with 37% ± 2.9, and in the sitting room or parlour 55% ± 1.3 compared with 50% ± 3.5. The same differences occur in the answers about children doing homework in these two rooms.

3.10 Comparison of Pre-War and Post-War Dwellings

The post-war dwellings have a slightly higher proportion of housewives who thought they could see well when working in the kitchen than the pre-war. The differences were small. In the kitchen living room, and sitting room and parlour the proportion of housewives who said that they could see well when reading or sewing was considerably higher in the post-war houses than in the pre-war houses. The proportions for the kitchen living room were 52% compared with 44% and for the sitting room or parlour 58% compared with 51%.

The proportion of children of whom their mothers said that they could see well whilst doing their homework was similarly greater in post-war dwellings.

3.11 Comparison of Income Groups

In this analysis a very clear trend is shown from the lowest income group to the highest. The lowest income group has the smallest proportion who see well, the middle income group a larger proportion and the highest income group the largest proportion. The differences are significant in all the kitchen tasks; for example in preparing food, the proportion who could see well is 32% ± 1.7 in the £187 per annum group, 36% ± 1.5 in the £187 - £260 per annum group and 47% ± 1.8 in the £260 - £520 per annum group.

The difference is even greater in the kitchen living room, where the proportions are 42% ± 1.9, 48% ± 1.9 and ± 2.1 and in the sitting room or parlour 49% ± 2.9, 51% ± 2.1 and 59% ± 1.9. In the case of children doing their homework the same trend was apparent in the kitchen living room. In this analysis, however, the samples were rather small.

3.12 Analysis by Cost of Electricity

The households in the sample were divided, according to the cost of electricity per unit, into three groups; those who paid up to 3d., those who paid from 3d. and up to 4½d. and those who paid from 4½d.. There were only very small differences between the proportions who could see well, all right or badly whilst doing the different tasks in the home. The differences in the analysis are by no means clear cut, but taken as a whole they indicate that the proportion who see well is, in general, a little higher in the households where electricity is cheapest, and the proportion who see badly is somewhat higher in the two groups which have the dearer electricity. In the case of washing-up, preparing food and cooking the highest proportion who could see badly is in the middle group.

3.13 Conclusion

This section has been analysed on the basis of a rating of lighting on a simple three point scale; the division “well” indicating positive satisfaction, “all right” indicating a neutral attitude towards the lighting and “badly" meaning positive dissatisfaction. The fact that there are differences about the satisfaction with the lighting at different points and the fact that there is not a normal distribution of answers around the three points, suggests that this scale has given meaningful answers.

The main conclusions are that for the jobs which have to be done in the scullery over one-third see well and for the jobs that have to be done in the living room or parlour about one-half see well, between two-fifths and one- half see all right in all places and one-half to one-fifth see badly in the scullery, and about one-twentieth in the kitchen or parlour.

Reference to Section I will show the relationship of watts per square foot as a measure of artificial light to housewives' views about their lighting.

There was a significantly larger proportion of housewives who said they could see well in the groups with more watts per square foot than in the groups with less, although there was a wide range of watts per square foot within each opinion group. In the same way the housewife's opinion about her lighting correlated with the average amount of light available in foot candles.

The detailed analyses of this question showed that satisfaction with artificial lighting was greater in flats than in houses, in post-war dwellings than in pre-war dwellings and that the satisfaction with electric lighting was highest in the highest income group, lower in the next and lowest in the lowest income group.

26 27

SECTION III
4. OBSERVATIONS WITH MIRROR

4.1 It is possible to discover whether or not there is direct daylight at any point in a room by placing a small mirror upon the spot and seeing if it is possible to obtain a reflection of the sky in the mirror.

This observation was made in some of the main working positions in the house, they were:-

The centre of the bottom of the sink.

The work table in the kitchen.

The top of the cooker.

and at a point 3 ft. above the floor, 5ft. from the parlour fireplace.

4.2 Centre of the Bottom of the Sink

In 88% of all dwellings there was a visible sky from the centre of the bottom of the sink, in 10% sky was not visible and in 2% of the dwellings no observation was taken.

4.3 The Work Table in the Kitchen

In 83% of all dwellings sky was visible from the top of the kitchen table, in 15% there was no sky visible and in 1% no observation was taken.

4.4 Top of the Cooker

The lighting of the top of the cooker was worse than that of the other two work positions in the kitchen; 75% had sky visible from the top of the cooker, 24% had not and in 1% of the kitchens no observation was taken.

4.5 3 Ft. above the Floor, 5 Ft. from the Parlour Fireplace

This is taken to be the usual place where reading and sewing are done. The lighting here was rather better than the kitchen work places, 89% of dwellings having sky visible at this point, 8% having no sky visible and in 2% no observations were taken.

4.6 Comparison of Houses and Flats

There is no very great differences between the houses and flats in the sample, although at each of the points in the kitchen the flats have a slightly larger proportion with sky visible than houses. On the other hand in the case of the parlour, the house has a slightly greater proportion of cases where there is visible sky in the parlour position.

4.7 Comparison of Pre-War and Post-War Dwellings

In all cases the post-war dwelling is markedly superior to the pre-war, the proportions having clear sky to the three points in the kitchen are as follows:-

This superiority of the post-war dwelling is also found in the parlour though to a less extent, the proportions being 86% with visible sky in pre-war dwellings, compared with 93% in post-war dwellings.

4.8 Comparison of Income Groups

In every case this analysis shows that ascending through the income scale the proportion of dwellings having sky visible from the main working positions increases and the difference in some cases, between the lowest and the highest income group is quite large. The proportions are given below:-

4.9 Comparison of the Regions

In the case of the main working positions in the kitchen, Scotland and the North are superior in every case to the other regions and London is in every case the worst. In the parlour position the North, the South, South-West and Wales, and the Midlands all have a higher proportion with sky visible than London.

4.10 Conclusion

This analysis shows that there was direct daylight at the main working positions in between three-quarters and nine-tenths of all dwellings.

The detailed analyses showed that post-war dwellings were better in this respect than pre-war and that the dwellings of the higher income groups were better than those of the lower. London was markedly inferior to the other regions.

It should be noted that this analysis takes no account of shadowing which occurs in some cases when the housewife is working.

28 29 30

SECTION IV
5. DAYLIGHTING

5.1 This section follows exactly the section on artificial lighting except that the questions were asked about daylight.

The first thing which is notable about this analysis is that the proportion of housewives who could see well whilst doing their housework is much higher by daylight than by artificial light, for example 67% say that they see well whilst washing-up by daylight, compared with 36% by artificial light, 63% whilst preparing food by daylight, compared with 38% by artificial light, 60% whilst cooking by daylight, compared with 37% by artificial light. This is in itself an index of dissatisfaction with artificial lighting. Similar differences, though less in extent, exist in the case of the kitchen living room and sitting room or parlour.

Unlike the analysis by artificial light, there is no very great difference between the proportion who say they are able to see well whilst doing their jobs in the kitchen or scullery and the proportion who say they are able to see well in the kitchen living room and sitting room or parlour. (Refers to Table 8).

5.2 Comparison of Houses and Flats

In all cases, except in the analysis of how well children are able to see whilst doing their homework, the daylight of houses is considered better than that of flats, although the difference is not large; for example, in the case of washing-up 67% ±1.0 of housewives living in houses say they are able to see well compared with 62% ± 2.3 of those living in flats. In the case of reading or sewing in the kitchen living room 63% ± 1.1 of the housewives living

in houses say they are able to see well, compared with 53% of those living in flats.

5.3 Comparison of Pre-War and Post-War Dwellings

This analysis shows a very considerable superiority of the daylighting in post-war dwellings. In every case the proportion of housewives who say they can see well is very much greater; for example, in the case of washing-up 79% ± 1.3 of housewives living in post-war dwellings say they see well, compared with 56% ± 1.3 of those living in pre-war dwellings. In the case of reading or sewing in kitchen living room the proportion is 76% ± 1.5 compared with 52% ± 1.4. In all the other analyses similar differences occur. (Refers to Table 9.).

5.4 Comparison of Income Groups

In each of the analyses by income groups there is a similar significant trend from the lowest group to the highest. The proportions of housewives who are able to see well when washing-up are 60% in the lowest income group, 66% of the middle income group and 72% of the highest income group. In the case of reading or sewing in the kitchen living room the proportions are 53%, 62% and 73%.

(Refers to Table 10)

5.5 Analysis by Region

The analysis shows a clear trend from good in the north to poor in the south if the figures for London are excluded.

It is difficult to account for this except in terms of atmospheric pollution since the length of the solar day at this time of year is almost equal through the whole. country.

There is no correlation between the proportions seeing well and those having direct daylight.

The following abstract tables shows the proportions who can see well when doing various jobs and the proportions having direct daylight.

5.6 Conclusion

Daylighting is significantly more satisfactory than artificial lighting, about two-thirds saying they see well compared with one-third.

There were no very great differences between house and flat but the analysis by age of dwelling showed that the post-war dwelling was superior to the pre-war. The analysis by income showed the same trend as that of the artificial lighting analysis that lighting is better in the dwellings of the higher income groups.

31 32 33 34

SECTION V
6. THE USE OF ELECTRIC LIGHT IN THE DAYTIME

6.1 The housewife was asked whether it was necessary to use artificial lighting in the daytime (excluding the twilight period) in mid-summer, that is in June, and in mid-winter - December, and she was asked to say whether this was necessary often, occasionally or never.

These results are, of course, approximate and depend to some extent on the housewife's’ memory. Nevertheless, the results obtained are quite striking in the differences between mid-summer and mid-winter.

The results of this question were analysed into houses and flats, by age of dwelling, pre-war and post-war and by families of different income groups, namely under £187 per annum, £187 - £260 per annum and £260 - £520 per annum, (wage rate of principal wage earner). The purpose of this last analysis was to discover whether or not families in higher income groups lived in houses with better natural lighting.

6.2 The use of artificial lighting in scullery or working kitchen

In the scullery or working kitchen 83% of housewives answered that they never needed to use electric lighting in the daytime in summer, 14% said that they had to occasionally and 3% said that they had to often. In mid-winter the proportions were 41% never, 44% occasionally and 15% often.

This question was answered by 2,150 housewives in relation to mid-summer and 2,151 in relation to mid-winter. (Refers to Table 11).

6.3 Kitchen living room

The results in the kitchen living room were almost identical with those of the scullery or working kitchen. In mid-summer the proportion who never found it necessary to use artificial light was 82%, 16% used it occasionally and 2% used it often, whereas in mid-winter the proportions were 41%, 42% and 16% respectively. This part of the question was answered by 1,890 housewives in relation to mid-summer and 1,898 in relation to mid-winter. (Refers to Table 11).

6.4 Sitting room or parlour

The proportions who never found it necessary to use artificial lighting in the sitting room or parlour in mid-summer were 92% and 8% found it necessary to use artificial lighting occasionally. In mid-winter the proportions were 63%, 33% and 4%. The number of housewives answering this section of the question were 1,765 in relation to mid-summer and 1,760 in relation to mid-winter. (Refers to Table 11).

It should be noted, that this result may have arisen either from the fact that these rooms are less used than the scullery or kitchen living room or from the fact that these rooms have better daylighting.

6.5 The sculleries and working kitchens of houses and flats compared

In the case of the scullery or working kitchen the houses in our sample appeared, generally, to

be rather better lit than the flats as is illustrated by the proportion of housewives who never found it necessary to use artificial light. In mid-summer the proportions were 83% for houses, compared with 79% for flats. In mid-winter the proportions were 43% and 31% respectively.

6.6 The kitchen living room in houses and flats compared

This analysis shows exactly the same tendency as the analysis of the scullery or working kitchen. In the case of houses 83% found it unnecessary ever to have artificial light in mid-summer, compared with 78% in flats. In mid-winter the proportions were 44% and 29% respectively.

Refer to paragraphs 6.2, 6.3 and 6.4

6.7 Sitting room or parlour in houses and flats compared

The analysis of results for sitting room or parlour showed the same tendency as that of the other two rooms. The proportion of housewives living in houses who never used artificial light in mid-summer was 92% compared with 89% in flats, and in mid-winter 65% compared with 47%.

6.8 Houses and flats compared

This analysis shows that houses are better daylighted than flats. It should be borne in mind that the sort of flats most often found in cities and which are available to these income groups are almost always flats of the tenement type, most of them built during the last century and most of them with small windows and thick walls, necessitated by the solid brick or stone structure.

6.9 Comparison of the lighting in pre-war and post-war dwellings

This analysis shows that the lighting in the post-war dwellings in the sample is much better in all rooms than in pre-war dwellings. The superiority of the post-war dwellings is most marked in the kitchen living room. This is a consequence perhaps of the large amount of buildings undertaken by local authorities in which the kitchen living room is the main room of the house.

The following extract shows the proportion of households who never use artificial light in the three downstair rooms in mid-summer and in mid-winter.

6.10 Comparison of income groups

The households in the sample were divided into three income groups according to the wage of the principal wage earner. They were : Up to £187 per annum, £187 - £260 per annum and £260 - £520 per annum.

An analysis of the data into these three groups showed that the rooms of the lower income group need the use or artificial light a little more often in both summer and winter than in the other groups. The results of the other two higher income groups were almost identical.

6.11 Comparison of regions

The differences in the regions are probably the result of a number of factors, often conflicting factors. Latitude, housing density and atmospheric pollution may all play a part.

The influence of latitude is shown in the case of Scotland where the proportion of houses where it is never necessary to use artificial light, is higher than in all regions except the Midlands, in summer and lower than all other regions in winter. This result for summer is the more remarkable as housing density is much greater in Scotland than in England since a large proportion of it is of the tenement type.

The influence of less dense housing and of latitude is shown in the high proportion of houses in the South, South-west and Wales which do not need to use artificial light in winter. The absence of smoke m some of these areas may also be a factor.

The influence of dense housing, and possibly atmosphere pollution, is shown by the smaller proportion of houses which do not have to use artificial light in the north. This is true both in summer and winter although in winter latitude is also important.

House design may also be important but information was not collected on this point so that its importance could not be assessed.

The following abstract shows the situation.

The standard deviations of the Mid-Summer percentage are of the order of 2 or less and of the Mid-wintr percentages are of the order of 3.3 or less.

6. 12 Conclusion

The use of artificial light is only important in the winter and most important in the working kitchen or kitchen living room. The proportions having to use artificial light in the sitting room or parlour in mid-winter in the daytime are relatively small. This is possibly due to the fact that the sitting room or parlour is less often used in the daytime than the other rooms, rather than that it is necessarily better lighted.

The separate analyses showed two main points, that houses were rather better lighted than flats, and post-war dwellings were better lighted than pre-war dwellings.

35 38 39

SECTION VI
7. ASPECT

7.1. In order to discover the present position about sunlight in the main down-stair rooms, housewives were asked “In what room they got sunshine in winter in the morning and in the afternoon?” The proportions getting sunlight is determined by the aspect of the house and by the presence or absence of obstruction. Allowing that there are about 12 hours when sunlight is possible in the lighter periods of winter and that these have been included, (as sunny days are more likely to have impressed the housewife at this time than her recollection of the shortest day) we should expect that 50% of any type of room would receive direct sunlight in the morning or in the afternoon if these rooms were distributed at random as regards aspect. However, making allowance for the fact that the sun is low during a part of these 12 hours and that in urban areas there are many obstructions, any proportion which was near to this would indicate a southerly aspect predominating for that particular room rather than otherwise. Any proportion, however, very much below the 50% mark would indicate either considerable obstruction or the fact that a large proportion of such rooms were in the north and west in relation to morning sun, or in the north and east in relation to afternoon sun. Latitude is, of course, important here.

Morning

37% of sculleries or working kitchens had morning sunshine in winter, 41% of kitchen living rooms and 46% of sitting rooms or parlours. It appears from the comparison of these three rooms that either sitting rooms or parlours are more often in the south than the other rooms, or they are less often obscured.

Afternoon

30% of sculleries or working kitchens had afternoon sunshine in winter, 35% of kitchen living rooms and 44% of sitting rooms or parlours. This analysis shows a similar character to the morning analysis and again suggests that the sitting room or parlour is either better orientated or less obscured than the other two rooms.

7.2. Comparison of House and Flat

There are very small differences between the rooms in the houses and flats in this analysis, flats have sun more often in the kitchen arid kitchen living room in the morning than houses and more often in the sitting room or parlour in the afternoon. The proportions having sunlight are given in the abstract below:-

The standard deviation or the house percentages are of the order of 1 and on the flat percentages 3; the differences are, therefore, not important.

7.3 Pre-War and post-war houses compared .

This analysis shows the marked advantage of the post-war house over the pre-war house in both morning and afternoon, particularly in the kitchen living room and in the sitting room or parlour 50% of sitting rooms or parlours in post-war houses had sunlight in the morning and 49% had sunlight in the afternoon, compared with 42% and 41%.

The standard deviations of these percentages are of the order 1.5.

7.4 Comparison of Income Groups

Comparison of income groups shows no very clear differences. The group with the highest proportion having winter sunshine in the scullery is the £260-£520 group, in the kitchen sitting room it is the under £187 group and in the sitting room and parlour the £187-£260 group in the morning, and in the afternoon the groups having the highest proportion of sunlight in their sculleries or working kitchens are the under £187 and £187-£260 groups, in the kitchen sitting room the £260-£520 group and in the sitting room or parlour the £260-£520 group. The differences are all fairly small.

7.5 Comparison of Regions

There were differences between the proportions of each room having sunlight in the morning and the afternoon in the different regions and the result for Scotland suggests a tendency for sculleries and working kitchens to be orientated towards the south east as 51% of sculleries or working kitchens have morning sun in winter, compared with 27% who have sun in the afternoon. When the influence of latitude is borne in mind and the density of Scottish housing this seems to be a remarkable result.

High figures for all three rooms were obtained in the north and fairly high figures for the kitchen sitting room or sitting room, and sitting room or parlour in the Midlands in the morning.

In the afternoon fairly low figures were obtained in all sculleries and working kitchens (the north being the highest) and proportions over 40% were obtained in all sitting rooms and parlours in the afternoon.

The standard deviations of these percentages are of the order of 3.5 or less.

7.6 Housewives' Preferences for Aspect

Housewives were asked where they would prefer to have sunlight in the morning or afternoon if they could have it in one room. Only 29% of housewives would like to have sunshine in their scullery or working kitchen in the morning, 45% in the kitchen living room and 13% in the sitting room or parlour. These two together make 58% of housewives who would prefer to have sunlight in their living room rather than their scullery or working kitchen. 37 7% of housewives would prefer to have sunshine in their bedroom.

In the afternoon the proportion who would prefer to have sunshine in their scullery or working kitchen is only 5%, 40% would like it in their kitchen living room and 47% in the sitting room or parlour, a total of 87% who would like it in their sitting room. Only 2% wanted sunlight in their bedrooms in the afternoon.

7.7 Comparison of Houses and Flats

There were only small differences between houses and flats, the most important being the greater proportion of flat dwellers, 12% in the morning and 19% in the afternoon, who would prefer to have sunshine in their bedrooms, compared with 6% and 2% of dwellers in houses. This is probably due to the fact that in flats the bedroom has often subsidiary uses.

7.8 Comparison of Income Groups

Comparison of the opinions of income groups shows a difference in the type of new house expected (or the type of house to which they are accustomed) rather than a difference in preference. The proportion who would like sunshine in their scullery or working kitchen in the morning is approximately the same, whereas the proportion who would like sunshine in the kitchen living room is highest in the lowest income group and goes down as the income rises, the proportion being 52%, 47% and 39% This is compensated by the proportions who would prefer sunshine in their sitting room or parlour which have the opposite tendency, 7%, 14% and 18%. If these two are added together the proportions are very nearly equal, 59%, 44% and 57%.

In the afternoon the same feature is shown, the proportions for kitchen living room being 54%, 44% and 23% and for sitting room or parlour 32% 42% and 68%, the totals being 86% , 86% and 91%.

7.9 Comparison of the Regions

Comparison of the regions show that the North has a rather less proportion who would like sunlight in the scullery or working kitchen in the morning, compared with the other regions.

In the afternoon there are no important differences, bearing in mind the inter-changability of the kitchen living room and sitting room or parlour in different house types.

S. Refers to Paragraph 7 and 10

7.10 Rooms in which sunshine is desired, analysed in relation to the rooms in which sunshine is obtained at present.

This analysis shows a tendency for housewives to want sunshine in the room in which they already have it in both morning and afternoon. This tendency modifies the general tendency already seen for housewives to prefer to have sunlight in their living room in both morning and afternoon.

This conservatism shows itself in the following way:-

In the morning, of those who would prefer sunshine in the scullery or working kitchen 45% already have it there, of those would prefer it in the kitchen sitting room 47% already have it there, of those who would prefer sunshine in their sitting room or parlour 60% already have it there and of those who would prefer it in their bedroom 59% already have it there.

In the afternoon the proportions are, scullery or working kitchen 51%, kitchen sitting room 39%, sitting room or parlour 45%, bedroom 56%. In all cases these proportions are higher in the case where sunshine is already obtained in the room being discussed than in any other case. (Table 12)

7.11 Conclusion

In the morning about a third of housewives would prefer sunlight in their scullery or working kitchen and a little less than two-thirds in the sitting room, in the afternoon nearly nine-tenths want sunshine in the sitting room. In many cases housewives want to go on having sunshine in the same rooms as they have it at present.

40

SECTION VTI
8. CONCLUSION

8.1 Artificial Lighting

The adequacy of artificial lighting was tested in two main ways:-

(i) By a detailed lighting analysis of the main downstairs rooms

and (ii) By asking the housewife her views on artificial lighting for her housework.

These inquiries

(i) A large proportion of housewives who had less light than was necessary for comfort and efficiency at the main working positions measured in foot candles. This was particularly true for the scullery; lighting measured by watts per square foot was less adequate when electricity was dearer; householders in very many cases had failed to adjust the amount of light used to the size of their rooms, it was also found that the homes of the higher income groups were often better lighted than those of the lower income groups.

(ii) Only about one-third of the housewives thought they could see well by artificial light compared with the two-thirds who thought they could see well by daylight.

8.2 Daylighting

The adequacy of daylighting was studied in four ways;

(i) By finding out with a mirror whether or not there was direct daylight in the places where the main housework was done.

(ii) By asking the housewife's opinion of daylighting in. relation to her work.

(iii) By finding out whether or not it was necessary to use artificial light in the day time in winter and summer.

and (iv) By finding out which rooms had direct sunlight in the morning and in the afternoon.

The main results were as follows:-

(i) There was direct daylight in most of the main places where the housework was done.

(ii) Most housewives (two-thirds or more) thought they could see well when doing their housework by daylight.

(iii) The use of artificial light was only important in the winter and then only in the scullery or working kitchen and kitchen living room.

(iv) Dwellings appeared not to have been planned in relation to aspect, except in the case of some post-war dwellings and in the case of some of the dwellings in the higher income groups.

41

APPENDIX I
The Size of Lamps in the Kitchen Living Room