beautiful forms are more functional (form follows
The results reveal differences in mean and individual
floor-bay values of daylight level and daylight factor
in the rooms under study. Whether these differences CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
are significant or not, they suggest that one or the
two window design variables (form and position)
The study attempted to ascertain the effects of
under study affect daylight quality and quantity. The window forms and positions on day-lighting and
effect of individual variables may be appreciated by aesthetics of buildings.
paired comparison of daylight in rooms with
It was revealed that rooms with a rectangular
windows of only one different design parameter. For window-form conduce to higher values of daylight
instance, comparisons of elevation H- and J-rooms, level and daylight factor than those with two
and L- and M-rooms reveal that windows at higher (smaller) square window-forms. However, daylight
level conduced to lower mean daylight levels (DL) levels are more evenly distributed in the room with
and daylight factors (DF) on the room floor. It also two smaller (square) windows than in the room with
shows that daylight is more evenly distributed (of one rectangular window.
better quality) on the floor of rooms with higher
It was also found that windows at higher level
level windows. A comparison of H- and K-rooms conduced to lower mean daylight levels (DL) and
(having same window form) also reveals the same daylight factors (DF) on the room floor. It also shows
pattern of more evenly distributed daylight on floor that daylight is more evenly distributed (of better
of room with higher window level.
quality) on the floor of rooms with higher level
A comparison of G- and L-rooms (of same widow windows.
height) reveal that L-room with a rectangular
Window forms and vertical positions on walls
window-form conduce to higher values of daylight were also found to affect aesthetic ranking of
level and daylight factor than G-room with two buildings. Aesthetic ranking stepped up as window
(smaller) square window-forms. However, daylight form got closer to the golden ratio; lower aesthetic
levels are more evenly distributed in the room with values were observed as window moved vertically
two smaller (square) windows than in the room with away from the centre of wall. A high or an
one rectangular window.
appreciable and positive correlation between
The aesthetic rankings of the elevations are also aesthetics and daylight design of windows on walls
different, again suggesting that one or the two was discovered in the study. To enhance aesthetics
variables under study (window form and position) and daylight through window designs, it is
affect aesthetics. There is some level of consistency recommended that: (i) windows form be of
in the rankings among the respondent groups. For rectangular geometry of proportion close to the
instance elevations J, L, and M were ranked as 6th, golden ratio; (ii) windows be positioned to minimise
1st, and 5th respectively by the four respondent eccentricity on individual room-walls.
groups. L and M have same window form but differ
only in window vertical position on wall. Their
aesthetic ranking gap (1st to 5th) seem too wide to
ignore, and this is suggestive of a significant
aesthetic effect of window vertical position on wall.
The same pattern is noticeable between J and H
having same form but different window positions on
wall. Lower aesthetic values are observed as window
moves vertically away from the centre of wall. L and
G are of the same height but different window forms,
and were ranked seemingly different in aesthetic
All authors have directly participated in the
planning, execution, or analysis of this study, and
have read and approved the final version submitted.
The authors declare that they have no competing
appeals, also suggesting that window form has effect interests.
on aesthetics. The ratio of the rectangular window
(1:2) in L is closer to the golden ratio (1: 1.62) than
that of square windows (1:1) in G. This result
concurs with Lidwell et al.  and Idowu and
Okonkwo , and further strengthens the aesthetic
harmony theory of the golden ratio.
 Nick Z (2007). Aesthetic judgement. In: Stanford
encyclopaedia of philosophy.
The Spearman’s Rank Order Correlation
Coefficients of +0.94 in three of the four ranking
groups and +0.77 in one suggest that there is a high
positive correlation between aesthetics and daylight
design of windows on walls. It indeed reinforces the
believe [12, 13] that attractive things work better or
 Architecture-student (n.d): Aesthetic components
of architecture. Online: Retrieved 15th April 2011.
 Lang J (1987). Creating architectural theory:
The role of the behavioural sciences in
environmental design. New York: Van Nostrand
Citation: Idowu O. M. and Humphrey S. (2018).
Aesthetics and day-lighting correlation: an experimental
study of form and placement of windows on buildings. J
Art Arch Stud. 7 (1): 01-10.
Journal of Art and Architecture Studies (JAAS)
Volume 7, No. 1: 01-10.