Sample result: a past project check

Real lot: the municipal sports-complex parking lot in South Dakota · customer details withheld · this is the result you get by email

The customer sent the AGi32 file of a parking lot: 15 poles at 25 ft, 75 W LED area lights. Runnax Engine read the fixtures, aiming and calculation points straight from the file and recalculated every point on its own, in about 4 seconds.

Your numbers hold, and the lot meets your targets. Runnax matches AGi32 within 0.03 % on every zone. Average illuminance is 1.24 fc against your 1.0 fc target; Avg:Min is 3.13 against 3.3. One thing to fix before the plan goes out: the light loss factor.

1 · Zone by zone

ZoneAGi32 avg / minRunnax avg / minDifferenceYour targetMeets it
Parking area, horizontal at grade (271 points)1.237 / 0.395 fc1.237 / 0.395 fc0.01 %Eavg ≥ 1.0 fc, Avg:Min ≤ 3.3Yes
Vertical at 5 ft, facing 71° (495 points)0.553 / 0.000 fc0.553 / 0.000 fc0.03 %none given–
Vertical at 5 ft, facing 251° (495 points)0.485 / 0.000 fc0.485 / 0.000 fc0.03 %none given–

Foot-candles, direct light. Point by point, the largest difference on the parking area is 0.3 % of its average. The vertical grids in this file run into the corners of the lot, which is why their minimum is 0.

2 · What the file assumes

Light loss factor 1.0. No lamp or dirt depreciation, so these are initial levels. At a typical 0.9 the average drops to about 1.11 fc: still above your 1.0 fc, with less room. Some reviewers ask for the factor to be stated on the plan.

3 · Can fewer poles do it?

Not run for this lot. Your criteria are average-based (Eavg, Avg:Min), and the layout search currently takes minimum-based targets; the lot is also wider than the single-aisle arrays it searches today. When a lighter layout can be searched and passes, this section shows it next to yours: pole count, mounting height, the same zone table and the pole positions, so you can rebuild it in AGi32. When none passes, it says so.

4 · Inputs on record

5 · Check it yourself in AGi32

Direct light only. Not a code-compliance statement and not a construction approval; the engineer of record signs the design. Something look wrong in your result? Reply to our email; we read every reply.

Check one of your projects, free