TL;DR (How to get it right fast)

• Start with road geometry: road width, lanes, sidewalks/median, setbacks, pole positions.
• Pick a mounting height range: higher poles typically improve uniformity but usually increase lumen/power demand.
• Use spacing-to-height ratio (S/H) as a starting point: then validate with a lighting simulation.
• Lock the assumptions: optics/beam angle, CCT/CRI requirements, dimming profile, and runtime hours.

Related project pages:

• CCT / CRI / Sudut Sinaran
• Pengiraan Hari Autonomi
• Saiz Musim Hujan
• Bandingkan sebut harga (sama rata)

Step 1) Collect the minimum inputs (don’t design from “wattage”)

Road geometry (must-have)

• Road type: highway / arterial / local street / pathway
• Number of lanes and total paved width
• Sidewalk/shoulder width and pole setback from curb
• Median presence and width (if double-sided layout is possible)
• Intersections, curves, slopes, and conflict zones (crosswalks, bus stops)

Performance intent (must-have)

• Target lighting level and uniformity requirement (as specified by the project)
• Glare sensitivity (residential vs high-speed road)
• Preferred CCT/CRI constraints (if any)
• Dimming method (time dimming / PIR / hybrid) and runtime window

Rujukan dalaman:

• PIR vs Penggelapan Masa
• CCT / CRI / Sudut Sinaran

Step 2) Choose pole height (the tradeoffs you must understand)

Pole height affects all three: keseragaman, glare control, dan power demand.

General tendencies (project reality)

• Higher mounting height: can improve coverage and uniformity, but may require more total lumens to hit targets on the road surface.
• Lower mounting height: can reduce lumen demand in some cases but may create hotspots, patchy uniformity, and higher glare if optics are not matched.
• Wrong height + wrong optics: the most common reason a “high wattage” light still performs poorly.

Solar-specific note: if you increase lumen demand, you increase average power (Wavg) — which increases PV and battery sizing pressure.

• Pengiraan Hari Autonomi
• Saiz Musim Hujan

Step 3) Use S/H ratio as a starting point (then validate)

S/H = spacing (S) divided by mounting height (H). This is a starting heuristic, not a guarantee.

How to apply it correctly

• Pick an initial pole height H based on site constraints and road class.
• Choose optics/beam pattern appropriate for the road width and pole position (single-side vs staggered vs opposite).
• Select an initial spacing S using a conservative S/H starting point, then validate with simulation.

Layouts you should consider (and compare)

• Single-side: poles on one side only (simpler, but can challenge uniformity on wider roads).
• Staggered: alternating sides (often improves uniformity for medium widths).
• Opposite: poles on both sides aligned (best coverage but higher infrastructure cost).
• Median: poles in median (useful where setbacks or sidewalks limit side mounting).

Highway selection context:

• Highway: All-in-One vs Split Type

Step 4) Lock the optics and beam angle assumptions

You cannot compare two bids fairly if optics are different. Require every quote to declare optics clearly.

• Beam angle / distribution type (as provided by supplier)
• Mounting orientation and tilt (if any)
• CCT and CRI (if constrained)

Berkaitan:

• CCT / CRI / Sudut Sinaran
• Pengurusan Terma & Pengurangan Lumen

Step 5) Make every quote comparable (what to request)

Mandatory deliverables for each bid

• Layout sheet: pole height, spacing, arm length/overhang, pole position plan
• Optics declaration: beam/distribution and mounting orientation
• Simulation package: a lighting simulation report (PDF) showing the proposed layout meets project targets
• Lembaran belanjawan tenaga: dimming profile, Wavg, runtime hours, Wh/night

Internal references to enforce comparability:

• Bandingkan sebut harga (sama rata)
• Pengiraan Hari Autonomi
• Saiz Musim Hujan

---

Common mistakes (that cause rework and complaints)

• Choosing spacing based on “wattage” instead of layout + optics + targets
• Comparing quotes with different optics (not apples-to-apples)
• Ignoring shading or pole placement constraints (PV charging deficit later)
• Missing commissioning record of dimming profile (real Wavg differs from assumptions)

Prevention pages:

• Senarai Semak Pemasangan & Pengkomisionan
• Mod Kegagalan

Copy/Paste RFQ Clauses (Pole Height & Spacing)

Clause 1 — Layout disclosure (mandatory)

Supplier shall provide a layout sheet declaring pole height, pole spacing, arm length/overhang (if any), and pole placement (single-side/staggered/opposite/median) for the quoted solution.

Clause 2 — Optics declaration (mandatory)

Supplier shall declare the optical distribution/beam angle used in the layout. Quotes without optics declaration are not comparable.

Clause 3 — Simulation report (mandatory)

Supplier shall provide a lighting simulation report (PDF) demonstrating compliance with project lighting targets using the proposed pole height/spacing and declared optics.

Clause 4 — Energy budget alignment

Supplier shall provide an energy budget sheet (dimming profile, Wavg, runtime hours, Wh/night) consistent with the proposed layout and performance targets.

Request Pole Layout Worksheet

Get the editable worksheet used to standardize pole height/spacing decisions and quote comparisons:

• Road geometry input sheet (width, lanes, setbacks, pole layout type)
• Pole height & spacing options table (scenario A/B/C)
• Optics declaration checklist (beam/distribution + orientation)
• Simulation request checklist (what must be shown in the PDF)
• Energy budget alignment sheet (Wavg + Wh/night)

Soalan Lazim

Can I decide spacing without simulation?

Use S/H as a starting point, but a simulation is the safest way to confirm uniformity and compliance for the real road geometry and optics. For procurement, require a simulation PDF so quotes remain comparable.

Why does pole height affect PV and battery sizing?

Pole height and spacing change how many lumens are needed to meet targets. More required lumens usually means higher average power (Wavg), which increases PV and battery sizing pressure.

What makes two quotes “not comparable”?

If they use different optics, different dimming profiles, or they do not disclose pole height/spacing and provide a simulation report, the prices are not apples-to-apples.