The research design will describe further avenues to be taken in this research, including evaluating the current lighting system through the simulation and evaluation of retrofitted alternatives. It acts as a guide by which all stages of the work are linked together so that the objectives are approached logically and in an organized manner. The entire process is depicted in Figure 1, displaying the flowchart of the study.

The research process will commence with the identification of the current lighting infrastructure at the Satria Residence College, UTeM. The information about

Figure 1. Flowchart of the study.

the quantity, the character, and the layout of FL lamps were taken at this stage to develop a transparent image of the existing system and its energy efficiency. This is an important step towards the identification of the given state of affairs before any changes are suggested.

The second step was to model the current setup of DIALux Evo software [18]. Simulating the current design using FL lamps, the energy consumption and the compliance with the Malaysian Standard MS1525 [19] were calculated. It is based on this baseline analysis that a comparison of the current installation and other designs was done [20].

The simulation environment had FL lamps, which were switched with LED luminaires once the baseline had been set. This step allowed the post-retrofit performance to be assessed at the same spatial and operational conditions. Parameters like levels of illuminance, energy requirement and uniformity of distribution were evaluated to establish how the retrofit could enhance overall efficiency.

The next step was dedicated to the analysis of the developed LED-based lighting setup. This analysis was done by observing that the proposed retrofit was in compliance with the minimum lux requirements as stipulated in residential and educational building standards. The result of this step decided whether the design would continue or it would need additional changes.

Lastly, in case the minimal lux requirement was met, the suggested setup was adopted as the most appropriate design to be used in the study. This was the conclusion of the study process, which offered a reviewed lighting solution that ensures energy saving and yet students in Satria Residence College are comfortable with the visuals.

The DIALux Evo simulations were developed using the actual dimensions and lighting layouts of the selected living halls and toilet spaces in Lekir Building. The simulation inputs included room dimensions, luminaire quantity and placement, mounting height, lamp wattage and luminous flux, surface reflectance values for ceiling, wall, and floor finishes, maintenance factor, and working plane height. Existing FL luminaires rated at 28 W and proposed LED luminaires rated at 20 W were simulated under identical spatial configurations to ensure a fair comparison. Standard indoor assumptions available in DIALux Evo were applied, while daylight contribution and automatic lighting control systems were excluded to maintain consistency between baseline and retrofit simulations.

The assessment of the lighting design was based on the Malaysian Standard MS1525 [19], which specifies the illuminance and lighting uniformity requirements for residential and educational buildings. These criteria were applied during the DIALux Evo simulation process to ensure that the proposed LED retrofit satisfied the required visual comfort and safety conditions [21]. In addition to MS1525:2014, several lighting standards were incorporated to provide a more comprehensive evaluation of lighting performance. EN 12464-1 was referenced for indoor lighting quality and uniformity assessment, while CIBSE recommendations were applied to circulation and walkway spaces. This combination of standards enabled the study to address both local compliance requirements and international visual comfort practices. Table 1 summarizes the minimum illuminance and uniformity criteria for the functional spaces evaluated in Satria Residence College, UTeM.

Table 1. Standard regulation.

To determine the financial viability of the proposed changes on the replacement of the current FL lamps with LED luminaires in Satria Residence College, UTeM, a cost analysis was done. As a result, the baseline energy consumption of the FL was compared to the simulated performance of the LED system. The analysis was based on a 24-hour daily operating schedule, which represents normal usage in a residence college where lighting is always necessary. The annual energy savings for each luminaire were calculated by comparing the power consumption of FL and LED luminaires. The annual energy savings for each lighting point were computed using Equation (1) [22]:

where P is the power differential between FL and LED luminaires and H is the total number of hours in a year. The corresponding cost savings were computed using Equation (2):

Tenaga Nasional Berhad sets a standard tariff of RM0.365 per kilowatt-hour (kWh) for institutional consumers in Peninsular Malaysia. The investment cost per luminaire is estimated at around RM100, which depends on market rates for commercial-grade LED products available in Malaysia. The simple payback period was then determined using the conventional financial expression in Equation (3) [7].

This section describes the entire study process utilized in the strategic installation of a retrofitted LED lighting system at Satria Residence College, UTeM. The process has started by evaluating the current lighting structure and efficiency. Simulations of FL and LED luminaire configuration using DIALux Evo. To guarantee illuminance and uniformity provisions, such simulations were compared with the Malaysian Standard MS1525:2014 [19], European Standard: EN 12464-1 [23], and Chartered Institution of Building Services Engineers (CIBSE) standards [24]. It is worth noting that the analysis of costs and payback assumptions was created to ascertain the economic viability of the upgrade of LED lighting in the student houses [22], especially in the scenario of student houses where lighting is on at all times of the day.

The Lekir building was tested to evaluate the lighting performance in the living hall to determine efficiency in terms of energy consumption and visual comfort. The living hall is often used as a common room wherein students have group discussions, social gatherings and other occasions. The existing FL lamps and a suggested LED retrofit were compared.

1) CurrentLightingConfigurationusingFluorescentLamp

The recreational and social activities that involve the living halls in Figure 2 have to be provided with a comfortable and reliable lighting environment. According to the MS1525 guidelines [19], it is recommended that the minimum illuminance level should be 100 lux and the uniformity ratio should be at least 0.6. The FL lamps simulation indicated that the average illuminance of the lamps was 217 lux, with a uniformity of 0.78. These values reveal that the FL current setting of the living halls is bright and corresponds to the minimum requirements in terms of providing students with the necessary comfort.

2) NewLightingConfigurationusingLEDLuminaires

Simulation of LEDs in Figure 3 showed that the living halls had an average illuminated value of 269 lux and a uniformity ratio of 0.8. These values are beyond the minimum of 100 lux and 0.6 uniformity of MS1525, indicating that the conditions of lighting are appropriate for social activities.

3) ComparisonofusingFluorescentLampandLEDLuminaires

The lighting simulation data was also examined to draw a comparison on energy performance between current FL lamps and the proposed LED luminaires, as presented in Table 2. The parameters assessed include illuminance levels, uniformity, power usage, annual energy consumption, and energy consumption. The detailed discussion of illuminance and uniformity has been presented in earlier sections, and both systems met the minimum requirements outlined in MS1525. The LED retrofit was intended to provide at least equivalent lighting service while improving energy efficiency. Due to the higher luminous efficacy of LED luminaires compared to FL lamps, the simulated LED configuration produced higher illuminance levels despite operating at lower power consumption. This demonstrates that improved visual performance can be achieved simultaneously with reduced energy demand.

Figure 2. Living halls using FL lamps.

Figure 3. Living Halls using LED Lamps.

Table 2. Comparison of using FL and LED at living halls.

An evaluation of the toilets in the Lekir building was also conducted. Adequate lighting in these spaces is essential to support safety, hygiene, and comfort. However, it often represents an overlooked area for potential energy savings. This case study, therefore, compared existing FL lamps with LED-based designs to determine the extent of improvement achieved through retrofitting.

1)CurrentLightingConfigurationusingFluorescentLamp

Toilets require consistent illumination to support safety and functionality in daily use. Figure 4 illustrates an average illuminance of 283 lux with a uniformity of 0.87. These values indicate that the toilets are highly illuminated and well above the recommended minimum, suggesting potential over-illumination in the current configuration.

Figure 4. Toilets using FL lamps.

2) NewLightingConfigurationusingLEDLuminaires

The toilets were simulated using LED luminaires in Figure 5, which recorded an average illuminance of 348 lux with a uniformity ratio of 0.85. These values are well above the MS1525 minimum requirement of 100 lux with 0.6 uniformity, suggesting that the lighting conditions are more than sufficient for safe and effective use of the toilet facilities.

Figure 5. Toilets using LED luminaires.

3) ComparisonofusingFluorescentLampandLEDLuminaires

The lighting simulation data was further analyzed to compare energy performance between the existing FL lamps and the proposed LED luminaires, as shown in Table 3. The parameters assessed include illuminance levels, uniformity, power usage, annual energy consumption, and the energy consumption. The detailed discussion of illuminance and uniformity has been presented in earlier sections, and both systems met the minimum requirements outlined in MS1525. Lighting simulation data was also examined to draw a comparison on energy performance between current FL lamps and the proposed LED luminaires, as presented in Table 3. The parameters assessed include illuminance levels, uniformity, power usage, annual energy consumption, and the energy consumption. The detailed discussion of illuminance and uniformity has been presented in earlier sections, and both systems met the minimum requirements outlined in MS1525.

Table 3. Comparison of using FL and LED at toilets.

The payback analysis for the FL to LED retrofit was performed to assess the financial feasibility of upgrading the existing lighting system at Satria Residence College. The baseline annual energy consumption of the FL lamps was calculated at 51,464 kWh. In comparison, the simulated LED luminaires configuration showed a reduced annual demand of 33,117 kWh. This corresponds to an annual saving of 18,347 kWh as shown in Table 4.

Table 4. Summary of cost payback analysis.

The total annual cost saving of RM6696.66 using RM0.365 per kWh. In this case, the cost of investment was calculated in terms of the total number of luminaires of the building. According to the lighting plan and the simulation, 718 lamps have to be replaced. Using a lamp-only retrofit method, where FL tubes would be replaced by LED tubes and the existing fittings would remain, it was estimated that RM100 would be the average cost per point.

To sum up, the total investment amounted to RM71800. The capital cost was divided by the savings per year using the simple payback formula. The payback period of 10.7 years might seem quite high in comparison with the commercial consideration, since shorter returns are a common priority. Nevertheless, in the case of institutional structures like student residences, this duration is viewed as reasonable since the building has a very long life of operation. After reaching the payback point, the retrofit will still produce continuous financial savings and, in the process, it will minimize the energy demand. This renders the investment financially sustainable and strategically oriented towards the smart campus vision of UTeM and its overall sustainability objectives.