Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Sustainable Cities and Society

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/scs

A quantitative assessment of the dependence of outdoor thermal-stresses on

tree-building morphology and wind: A case-study in sub-tropical
Patna, India
Venkatesh Raman a, *, Manoj Kumar a, Anjali Sharma a, Andreas Matzarakis b, c
a
Department of Architecture, National Institute of Technology Patna, Ashok Rajpath, Patna, Bihar 800005, India
b
Institute of Earth and Environmental Sciences, University of Freiburg, 79085, Freiburg, Germany
c
Research Centre Human Bio-meteorology, Deutscher Wetterdienst, Stefan-Meiere-Str. 4, 79104, Freiburg, Germany

A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This study quantifies the changes in thermal-stresses due to changes in tree-building-morphology and
SkyHelios Pro background-wind, at a site in sub-tropical Patna, India, where new residential buildings are under-construction,
Tree-building morphology after demolishing the old, including felling of around 180 trees. Six morphological-variants are compared
Thermal stress
through simulations, using the diagnostic model SkyHelios Pro, to identify the individual/synergetic thermal-
Mean radiant temperature (TMRT)
Physiological equivalent temperature (PET)
effects of different morphological-attributes/ background-wind. SkyHelios allows for a fast spatial/temporal
analysis of the thermal changes at a point of time/space, giving maximum output parameters. The highest
spatial-mean-rise in mean radiant temperature/ physiological equivalent temperature of 3.4/2.9 ◦ C occurs at
noon, at background-wind 4.0 m/s, due to trees-removal-area of 30 % and built-up area addition of 79 %,
simultaneously. Individual changes manifested by trees and buildings are quantitatively conservative/additive.
Buildings contribute heat, related positively to horizontal built-up density, negatively to wind-permeability, and
regardless of building-height/volume. Spatial-mean cooling by trees is higher at lower-winds, related positively
to plantation-density though not necessarily linearly, depends on tree-building overlaps, ground-conditions, and
wind-permeability. Wind-sheltered zones, oblique-narrow canyons, and building-skins are dominant heat-
contributors and best beneficiaries of tree-shading at all background-winds. The study is limited to day-hours,
excludes thermal-effects of tree-species and building-materials. Recommendations for passively-cooled out­
doors, a core-issue concerning thermally-sustainable cities, are proposed.

1. Introduction Matzarakis, & Hwang, 2010), defined by built-up geo­

Global climate change and its local impact in terms of adverse effects
on human health, life, urban eco-system, and energy use are increasingly
becoming a hot concern, especially in urban areas. The present-day
urban areas by virtue of high built-up densities, scale, and materials
with high thermal-mass content (Arnfield, Herbert, & Johnson, 1999;
Oke, 2002) and several other manmade factors, including de-vegetation
of urban areas, have brought forth higher urban temperatures. Local
thermal bio-climate largely depends on the design of a place (Herrmann
& Matzarakis, 2010), consisting of urban green (de Abreu-Harbich,
Labaki, & Matzarakis, 2015; Lee, Mayer, & Chen, 2016; Shashua-Bar,
Pearlmutter, & Erell, 2011), surface materials, built-up morphology
(Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2013; Hwang, Lin, & Matzarakis, 2011; Lin,
metry/density/orientation/aspect ratio (H/W ratio), etc., and the
meteorological conditions, e.g., air temperature, wind, insolation, etc.
Vegetation in various forms is a vital effector of the surrounding
microclimate of a place (Dimoudi & Nikolopoulou, 2003; Matzarakis,
Rutz, & Mayer, 2010), however, trees are reported to have better
effectiveness in climate moderation than the other vegetation elements
(El-Bardisy, Fahmy, & El-Gohary, 2016; Lee et al., 2016). Trees have an
“elevated significance” (also ‘aesthetically’) in solar-heat mitigation
outdoors through evapotranspiration (Eniolu Morakinyo, Kong, Ka-Lun
Lau, Yuan, & Ng, 2017), and shading, the most effective way of pro­
tecting urban areas from solar heat gains (Lee & Mayer, 2013). However,
trees can also alter the thermal-stress conditions by reducing
wind-speed, changing wind-directions (Brown & Gillespie, 1995; Chen

* Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: jrdarchitects@gmail.com (V. Raman), andreas.matzarakis@dwd.de (A. Matzarakis).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.103085
Received 18 January 2021; Received in revised form 31 May 2021; Accepted 8 June 2021
Available online 15 June 2021
2210-6707/© 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
V. Raman et al.
& Ng, 2012; He, Ding, & Prasad, 2020b; Park, Hagishima, Tanimoto, &
Narita, 2012; Perini, Chokhachian, & Auer, 2018), and by emission of
longwave radiations (LWR) in tropical/ sub-tropical areas (Tan, Wong,
& Jusuf, 2013; Zheng, Guldmann, Liu, & Zhao, 2018; Raman, Kumar,
Sharma, Froehlich, & Matzarakis. 2021). Denser clusters of trees can
attenuate wind quite substantially (Kong et al., 2017), thus, a treeless
area, however lacking trees’ solar attenuation benefits, can have better
wind, lower LWR, hence at times, overall reduced heat conditions
(Grimmond, Souch, & Hubble, 1996; Potchter, Cohen, & Bitan, 2006).
However, in the case of sparsely laid (especially larger) trees, the
wind-speed may slightly increase below the tree-canopy (at the human
level) due to the fraction of wind-currents deflected downwards by
tree-crowns (Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2018). The overall integrative ef­
fect of trees in thermal-stress moderation is highly positive, yet, the
‘trade-off’ between positive-negative properties of trees needs meticu­
lous attention while designing a morphology (He et al., 2020b; Kong
et al., 2017).
Built-up morphology, reported to be a more significant effector of
microclimate in tropics than the vegetation (Emmanuel & Johansson,
2007), adds to the heat-stress of the area by shortwave radiation (SWR)
absorption followed by long-wave radiation (LWR) emissions. Aspect
ratio and solar orientation are reported to be better indicators of
(vegetation effect on) mean radiant temperature (TMRT) (Shashua-Bar,
Potchter, Bitan, & Yaakov, 2009; Tan, Lau, & Ng, 2015), while surfa­
ce/volume ratios and form factors, of air temperature (Ta) and relative
humidity (RH) (Sharmin, Steemers, & Matzarakis, 2015). The concen­
tration of buildings alters the wind interface by blocking ventilation/
turbulent transports, and wind-sheltering, etc., in the urban canopy
layer, based on their height, density, and orientation (Cheng, Ng, Chan,
& Givoni, 2011; Ali-Toudert & Mayer, 2007a; Jiang, Han, Shi, & Song,
2019; Oke, 2002). Conversely, buildings/ streets based on their geom­
etry/ orientation can also help mitigate the heat-stress of the area by
increasing (wind) convective heat transfers through corner-flow,
wind-channelling (Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2018; He, Ding, & Prasad,
2020a; Shashua-Bar & Hoffman, 2000; Wai, Yuan, Lai, & Yu, 2020), and
by solar attenuation through shading (Hien, Kardinal jusuf, Samsudin,
Eliza, & Ignatius, 2011; Hwang et al., 2011; Matzarakis & Wetterdienst,
2011).
However, trees, despite their heat-abatement and other
environment-friendly properties, are being replaced by buildings in
course of urban development, particularly in developing countries
(Kong et al., 2016). Recently, around 450 trees have been felled at Patna
(India) to accommodate the new, more densely residential quarters for
the Members of Legislative Assembly (MLA’s), Government of Bihar.
The construction work commenced in 2015 by demolishing a hundred
years old existing quarters including the felling of the trees and is still in
progress. The whole transformation consisting of the new quarters in
long chunks of continuous blocks and relatively higher built-up density,
laid in random orientations (both N-S and E-W), compared to the old
isolated quarters with a lot more open spaces and trees in between, can
substantially alter the thermal environment of the place, and requires a
quantitative assessment to provide knowledge to the decision-makers, to
help improve thermal comfort outdoors passively by climate responsive
design/ greening.
Several past studies concerning thermal effects of built-up
morphology have focussed mainly on the contribution of street-design,
considering aspect ratio, solar orientation, etc., e.g., (Ali-Toudert &
Mayer, 2007a; 2006; Amirtham, Horrison, & Rajkumar, 2015; Yang,
Wong, & Li, 2016). Others have explored different morphological as­
pects affecting the thermal phenomena manifesting in urban outdoors, e.
g., the effect of building forms (Taleghani, Kleerekoper, Tenpierik, &
Van Den Dobbelsteen, 2015), the effect of changing building configu­
ration and density on Ta (Hien et al., 2011), ventilation potential of
residential street-orientations with different building forms (Peng, Gao,
Buccolieri, Shen, & Ding, 2021), thermal and aerodynamic effects of
heterogeneous high rise urban buildings on microclimate and
2
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
subsequently on the outdoor (air conditioner) cooling units (Hadavi &
Pasdarshahri, 2021), etc. He et al. (2020a, 2020b), He, Ding, & Prasad
(2020c) have reported ‘precinct ventilation performance (PVP)’ in
low/mid/high-rise grid-iron precincts being independent of
street-orientation, in contrast to the findings of street scale study by
Ali-Toudert and Mayer (2006), who emphasize street orientation as a
major determinant of cooling through ventilation. On the other hand,
several past studies have explored the impact of trees on the microcli­
mate, in terms of tree-species e.g., (de Abreu-Harbich et al., 2015; Eniolu
Morakinyo et al., 2017; Shashua-Bar et al., 2009), tree planting pattern/
location and orientation (Atwa, Ibrahim, & Murata, 2020; Eniolu Mor­
akinyo & Lam, 2016; Wang & Akbari, 2016), etc.
While heat abatement by trees is reported to depend mainly on the
canopy-coverage and planting-density, etc. (Dimoudi & Nikolopoulou,
2003; El-Bardisy et al., 2016) though “little on other species charac­
teristics” (Shashua-Bar et al., 2009), it is also found to be strongly related
to the built-form geometry (Kong et al., 2017; Shashua-Bar et al., 2009;
Tan et al., 2015) and the background meteorological conditions
(Amirtham et al., 2015; de Abreu-Harbich et al., 2015; Dimoudi &
Nikolopoulou, 2003; Eniolu Morakinyo & Lam, 2016; Potchter et al.,
2010; Sangkertadi & Reny, 2016; Shashua-Bar & Hoffman, 2000). On
the other hand, the heat-mitigating properties of wind also depend on
the absolute values of TMRT and Ta (Ali Toudert, 2005). Lower Ta can
better ease the thermal stresses within the urban canopy level, and
neutralize urban-rural thermal differences by advection. Outdoor ther­
mal sensation (OTS) thus, is a function of the dynamic interactions be­
tween various elements of tree-building morphology and the
background meteorological variables; depending highly on the trees’
and buildings’ relative layout among each, entwinement with the other,
and relative to wind/ solar radiation (Hong & Lin, 2015; Yang et al.,
2018). While many previous studies have added significant ‘strands’ to
the knowledge of OTS, it is not possible to comprehensively explain the
phenomena by accounting for only one parameter (Saun, Aghamo­
hammadi, Ramakreshnan, & Meriam, 2019). Analyzing these elements/
variables jointly, thus, is pertinent to comprehensively explain OTS.
Besides, many of the past studies are based on Ta (as the main in­
dicator), advocated being “inappropriate as the main indicator” for
thermal comfort studies in hot-sunny-outdoors due to its ‘morpholog­
ical-inertness’ (Ali-Toudert & Mayer, 2007a; Ali-Toudert, Djenane,
Bensalem, & Mayer, 2005; Lee & Mayer, 2013). Thus, OTS can be better
improved by controlling TMRT and wind, the morphologically more
sensitive variables, having higher fluctuation indices (0.2 and 0.5)
compared to Ta (≤0.05) (Lai, Maing, & Ng, 2017; Taleghani et al.,
2015). Albeit multiple morphological aspects have been analysed by
some studies at city scale (some in terms of Ta, the ‘inappropriate
parameter’) e.g. Amirtham et al. (2015), Perini and Magliocco (2014),
etc., however, at the (more controllable) site scale, the issue of the
thermal influence of trees, built-up morphology, and wind, etc., have
been mostly dealt with separately (including those in terms of Ta), or, at
best jointly at the limited domain of the urban street/ canyon, the
“recent area of major concern” (Jiang et al., 2019). Quantitative studies
at a site scale, exploring the synergetic influence of tree-building
morphology and the background-weather variables, especially based
on thermo-physiologically significant (Mayer & Matzarakis, 2006) and
morphologically sensitive parameters (e.g. wind and TMRT) (Taleghani
et al., 2015), incorporating larger domains (beyond the street), and
considering the urban-planning attributes related to effective use of the
urban land e.g., built-up area/ density, building-layout patterns,
plantation-area/ density of trees, etc., are severely lacking.
The present study primarily aims to quantify and compare the
(spatial) mean thermal changes effected by various (tree-building)
morphological changes, in terms of the most critical mean radiant
temperature (TMRT) (Lee & Mayer, 2013; Matzarakis et al., 2010; Tan
et al., 2013), and physiological equivalent temperature (PET) (Höppe,
1999), using a diagnostic model SkyHelios Pro (Fröhlich & Matzarakis,
2018). The study is comparative, focussing more on sensitivity analysis,
V. Raman et al.
attempts to identify the more influential attributes (of background
weather, tree-building morphology, etc.), and their individual/ syner­
getic roles as drivers of the microclimate of the place.
Thus, the prime objective of this study is to quantify/compare the
(spatially) mean thermal changes along with the spatial distribution of
changes taking place in the horizontal direction, at a given point of
time/ date at the human level, at the MLA quarters’ site due to the
removal of trees and changes in the building-morphology. Thus, we
attempt to identify the various thermal synergies between the different
aspects of tree-building morphology, e.g., built-up area/density,
plantation-area/density, building height/volume, building layout-
pattern/orientations, and the background wind-speed. The study is
limited to a point of time/date during day-hours, excludes the effects of
individual/arboreal properties of trees, and building materials, on the
thermal environment.
2. Methodology
The study area: Patna (25◦ 34′ –25◦ 39′ N, 85◦ 02′ –85◦ 14′ E, 57 m
AMSL), is located on the southern bank of river Ganges. The MLA
quarters’ site, selected for this study, is located in the heart of the city at
the junction of Serpentine Road (on the south) and Beer Chand Patel
Road (on the east) (Fig. 1). It is a part of a larger renewal scheme, started
in 2015 and presently in progress, involving the construction of new
MLA quarters after demolishing the old, including felling of around 180
trees (total ~ 450), by the Government of Bihar.
Patna Urban Agglomeration (PUA) has a population base of more
than two million (Chandramauli, 2011). Patna, a composite climate city,
has dry summers, April to June (RH 30–40 %), having temperatures up
to 44 ◦ C, with insolation up to 900 W/m2, and humid monsoons during
July to October (RH 75–80 %). November to February are mostly calm
having westerly/ south-westerly winds 0− 4 m/s, whereas summer/
monsoon winds are mostly easterly/ north-easterly 2− 6 m/s (occa­
sionally up to 12 m/s) (“India Meteorological Department,” 2019). The
prevailing annual wind-directions are shown in Fig. 1b (“Indian Climate
- Climate of Patna, ” n.d.).
This study is based on model simulations using a freely available
model SkyHelios Pro (Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2018). Six morphological
Fig. 1. (a) Study area - MLA Quarters site and the vicinity, its location in Patna Urban Agglomeration (PUA) (Google Earth imagery) and a map of India showing
location of Patna. (b) Wind-rose diagram for Patna (source: www.indianclimate.com).
3
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
‘scenarios’ (tree-building combinations) are compared based on a
methodology well adopted in the past, e.g. by Shashua-Bar et al. (2009).
The six ‘scenarios’ basically consist of combinations of two
building-morphology types: the demolished- ‘Past’ (existing before
2015), and the redesigned- ‘Present’ (under construction); each
entwined with three tree-morphology types: ‘All trees’ (before felling),
‘Lesser trees (after felling)’, and, ‘No tree’ (hypothetical). Thus, the
‘scenarios’, either existing in ‘past’/ ‘future’ (under construction), or
non-existent (hypothetical) are temporally/ physically ‘inaccessible’ for
empirical data collection. Model simulations, especially useful for such
‘inaccessible’ situations, provided to “overcome the operable limitations
of field measurements” (Sun et al., 2017), yet providing a holistic spatial
scenario of the compared domains, like in many previous studies (Eniolu
Morakinyo et al., 2017; Ali-Toudert & Mayer, 2007a; Fröhlich & Mat­
zarakis, 2013; Perini & Magliocco, 2014). SkyHelios Pro is a very fast
diagnostic model, with a very high resolution, giving most of the output
parameters affecting the thermal environment. It has been used in this
study to get a more comprehensive assessment of the atmospheric pro­
cesses/ parameters (Hwang et al., 2011), as against the misleading
“piece-meal analysis” by empirical methods (Shashua-Bar et al., 2009).
2.1. Areas of interest (AOI‘s)
The selected site consists of approximately 325m × 350m area. Two
square parcels or ‘Areas of Interest’ (AOI-1 and AOI-2, as named herein),
each measuring 149m × 149m (Fig. 2), consisting of contrasting
building-orientations, different tree/ built-up densities, etc., were judi­
ciously selected from the site to optimize the simulation time with a
moderate resolution and to enable comparisons among various
morphological aspects affecting the thermal conditions in the area, and
the cooling potential of trees.
2.2. The compared morphological variants – the six ‘scenarios’
The entire study involves six morphological ‘scenarios’, two ‘real’,
and four ‘hypothetical’, as below:
The Real scenarios, consisting of:
V. Raman et al.
Fig. 2. Location of the Areas of Interest, AOI-1/ AOI-2 at the site, showing the
demolished (past) and the new (present) buildings, existing/ felled trees, and
the abutting roads.
a) Past Buildings and All the Trees (or, “Sc.2010BAT”, as named herein),
consists of old isolated quarters, around 5 m apart along N-S and
13− 15 m along E-W, and all the trees (before felling) (Figs. 3a, 4 a).
b) Present Buildings and Remaining Trees (or “Sc.2020BRT”, as named
herein), consists of long continuous blocks of quarters (under-con­
struction), oriented N-S or E-W (each block containing around 4.5 m
wide central canyon), and a lesser number of trees (after felling)
(Figs. 3b, 4 b).
Fig. 3. Google views of the MLA Quarters site (a) Past scenario (Imagery dated 15.06.2010) - old quarters with all the existing trees (b) Present scenario (Imagery
dated 23.04.2020) – new buildings under construction, and the remaining trees.
4
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
The hypothetical (non-existing) scenarios, consisting of:
c) Past Buildings and Remaining Trees (after felling) (or “Sc.2010BRT”,
as named herein) (Fig. 4c)
d) Present Buildings and All the Trees (or “Sc.2020BAT”, as named
herein) (Fig. 4d)
e) Past Buildings only (or “Sc.2010B”, as named herein) (Fig. 4e)
f) Present Buildings only (or “Sc.2020B”, as named herein) (Fig. 4f)
Thus, a total of 24 simulations were run in SkyHelios incorporating
the above six scenarios, each consisting of two sub-scenarios (Table 1b,
Fig. 4) or the two AOI’s (Section 2.1), at two input-wind-speeds ‘v’
(Table 2). Following comparisons are made, by deducting the grid-wise
outputs of more-tree/ past-building-scenarios from the corresponding
those of lesser-trees/ present-building-scenarios, separately in each AOI
(Indicated by Sub-scenarios, Table 1b, Fig. 4), and at each input-v
(Table 2), to assess the thermal repercussions of:
• Changes in tree-building together: Scenario (b) minus (a),
[“Sc.2020BRT” - “Sc.2010BAT”], (or SS 1b- SS 1a and SS 2b- SS 2a)
• Changes in buildings only: Scenario (f) minus (e), [“Sc.2020B” -
“Sc.2010B”], (or SS 1f- SS 1e and SS 2f- SS 2e), and,
• Changes in trees only, entwined with past buildings: Scenario (c)
minus (a) [“Sc.2010BRT” - “Sc.2010BAT”] (or SS 1c- SS 1a and SS 2c-
SS 2a), and, with present buildings: Scenario (b) minus (d), or
[“Sc.2020BRT”- “Sc.2020BAT”] (or SS 1b- SS 1d and SS 2b- SS 2d)
Net thermal repercussions of the removal of trees have been studied
in both past and present building-scenarios to assess the effect of tree-
building articulations in different morphologies (Table 1).
2.3. Applied model
Sky Helios Pro (Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2018) is an extended version
of SkyHelios (Matzarakis & Matuschek, 2010). It is a very fast diagnostic
micro-scale model for the calculation of several microclimatic parame­
ters, e.g. mean radiant temperature (considering reflections), shortwave
and longwave radiations, sky view factor, sun-duration, wind speed/
direction, and the thermal indices, physiological equivalent temperature
V. Raman et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085

Fig. 4. (a)–(f) SkyHelios generated models of Real/ Hypothetical scenarios; the compared sub-scenario pairs (SS, Refer para 2.2, Tables 1, 3) are linked by arrows as
per Legend; alpha-numeric characters on arrows show corresponding column numbers in Table 3 (results of the comparisons).

Table 1
Morphological Data and Simulated Sub-scenarios.
1a. Morphological data
AOI-1 (22201.0 m2) AOI-2 (22201 m2)
a
Sl. No Ground-coverage Area Built-up/ tree Density Ground-coverage Area Built-up/ tree Densitya

Present 6726.34 0.30 7501.27 0.34

1. Built-up area (m2) Past 5917.99 0.27 4191.26 0.19
ΔABUILD 808.35 0.03 3310.00 0.15
Total 7987 0.36 6843 0.31
2. Trees area (m2) Remained 226 0.01 180 0.01
ΔATREE 7761 0.35 6663 0.30
3. Tree-building Overlaps (% of ΔATREE at respective AOI’s)
3a “Sc.2010BAT” (Real) 3260 42 % 1332 20 %
3b “Sc.2020BAT” (Hypothetical) 3725 48 % 4064 61 %

1b. Simulated Sub-scenarios (Named as SS (AOI No) (Scenario Sl. No)) (Refer Fig. 4 with this Table)

AOI-1 AOI-2

Sl. Morphological Scenarios Simulated Sub-scenarios Compared Sub-scenarios Simulated Sub-scenarios Compared Sub-scenarios
No (Base) (deducted) (Base (deducted)

a) “Sc.2010BAT” SS 1a SS 2a
Real
b) “Sc.2020BRT” SS 1b SS 1a*, SS 1d** SS 2b SS 2a*, SS 2d**
c) “Sc.2010BRT” SS 1c SS 1a** SS 2c SS 2a**
d) “Sc.2020BAT” SS 1d – SS 2d –
Hypothetical
e) “Sc.2010B” SS 1e – SS 2e –
f) “Sc.2020B” SS 1f SS 1e*** SS 2f SS 2e***

Total number of Simulated Sub-scenarios = 6 (AOI-1) + 6 (AOI-2) = 12.

Total number of Simulations run = 12 (Simulated Sub-cenarios) × 2 (Input wind-speeds, 4.0 and 0.5 m/s) = 24.
Comparisons exploring: *- Simultaneous changes in Trees + Buildings; **- changes in Trees only; ***- changes in Buildings only.
a
Built-up/ tree density is expressed as the ratio: Ground-coverage Area of Buildings, trees ÷ Area of respective AOI.

5
V. Raman et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085

(PET), perceived temperature (PT), and universal thermal climate index results (than by empirical methods); also, as the cooling by trees is
(UTCI), providing spatially and temporally resolved parameters with substantially affected by background-weather (de Abreu-Harbich et al.,
low computation time in simple and complex environments (Fröhlich, 2015; Dimoudi & Nikolopoulou, 2003; Perini & Magliocco, 2014; Sha­
2016; Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2018). The input data can be of different shua-Bar & Hoffman, 2000), and entwined morphology (Shashua-Bar
file formats supported by the Geospatial Data Abstraction Library et al., 2009; Raman et al., 2021).
(GDAL) and their combination, however, functionalities involving wind Vector inputs for simulations consisted of polygon shape files for
essentially require vector files e.g. polygon/ point shapefiles (for buildings, and point shapefiles for trees with attributes as per Table 2.
buildings/ trees) (Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2018). The radiation calcula­ Morphological elements other than trees and buildings (e.g. pavements
tions are performed on a vector basis using the morphological etc.) have been excluded from the simulated scenarios, in pursuance of
vector-files considering the surroundings in terms of pixels in a fish-eye the objectives of the study, to identify the net effects of changes in trees
image while wind modeling is performed by considering up to four and buildings only. Thus, the ground is considered uniform in the sim­
stream modifications, e.g. upwind stagnation zone, downwind ulations with LWR emissivity and SWR albedo as per Table 2. Building
velocity-deficit zone, recirculation zone, and street canyon vortex zone. data of redesigned quarters was procured from the Building Construc­
tion Department (BCD), Government of Bihar. Shapefiles of trees and
2.4. Input data adjacent buildings were created using Google Earth imagery dated
23.04.2020. Shapefiles for the past scenario were derived from Google
This study used a three-hourly synoptic dataset derived from Ogimet historical imagery dated 15.06.2010 and inputs from BCD. All spatial
(“Ogimet entrance,” 2019). Moreover, cloudiness and the global radia­ input files were projected in metric projection system WGS 84, UTM
tion data for Patna were procured from the India Meteorological zone 45 N (SRID no 32645). All simulations are run with a grid resolu­
Department (IMD), Pune (“India Meteorological Department,” 2019). tion of 1m × 1m (149 × 149 = 22,201 grids) and a camera height of
All weather-data (Table 2), correspond to the meteorological station 1.1 m.
Patna, around 3 km west of the site. 12 P. M. (noon), 9th of June 2019
was the hottest time/ day on record during the last four years (Tripathi, 2.5. Quantities analyzed
2019), whereas, 12:00–13:00 P. M. is the time reported by Zheng et al.
(2018) showing maximum PET reduction by trees, in sub-tropical China. This study, limited to daytime only, focussing on thermal implica­
Hence, all simulations correspond to 12 P. M. (noon), 9th of June 2019. tions of morphology, analyses PET in relation to the morphologically
The actual background wind-speed (i.e. wind-speed at 10 m above two most sensitive variables, wind, and TMRT (Taleghani et al., 2015).
ground level, henceforth also referred to as ‘input-v’) at this time/date
was 4.0 m/s, however, additional simulations at an arbitrary wind-speed 2.5.1. Mean radiant temperature (TMRT)
of 0.5 m/s were conducted to compare the effects of wind-speed on TRMT is the sum of all short and longwave radiation fluxes (direct and
trees’-cooling, and the thermal environment of different tree-building reflected), the human body is exposed to, thus a key factor affecting
morphologies. human thermal sensation under sunny conditions (Ali Toudert, 2005;
The study aims to compare the thermal environments that would Mayer & Höppe, 1987). The procedure for determining TMRT experi­
prevail at noon, 9th of June 2019 at the six morphological scenarios mentally is very complex, time-intensive, and expensive. It can be
(each at the two AOI’s, at two input-v), if they existed at their corre­ calculated from several measured parameters, by small-scale modeling
sponding original places at this time/date. This is done by comparing at (Matzarakis, Rutz, & Mayer, 2007, 2010), or by various methods,
a time, the simulation outputs of two tree-scenarios (e.g. more-trees/ equations, but all of them bear uncertainties (Chen, Lin, & Matzarakis,
less-trees), two building-scenarios, or two tree-building scenarios, by 2014). Numerical modeling is the most convenient way (Fröhlich,
considering a hypothetical existence of all the six scenarios at noon, 9th 2016).
of June 2019, at their corresponding original places, and with the same
background weather data corresponding to this time/ date (Table 2). 2.5.2. Physiological equivalent temperature (PET)
This method is advocated/adopted by Fröhlich and Matzarakis (2013), PET is defined as the air temperature in a typical indoor (where
Shashua-Bar et al. (2009) etc., for more ‘correct and comprehensive’ Ta = TMRT, VP =12 hPa, v =0.1 m/s), in which the heat budget of the
human body is balanced to the same core and skin temperature as under
the complex outdoor conditions to be measured. (Höppe, 1999; Mayer &
Table 2
Höppe, 1987). It accounts for all the four environmental parameters
Simulation Input data.
influencing thermal sensation e.g. air temperature, wind-speed, hu­
Meteorological data, at Vector (shape-files) attributes data
midity, and mean radiant temperature. A profusely used outdoor ther­
noon, 9th of June 2019, at
Patna
Trees Buildings Ground mal index, e.g. (Ali-Toudert et al., 2005; Eniolu Morakinyo et al., 2017;
Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2013; Lee et al., 2016; Mayer & Matzarakis,
Time 12:00 Height (m) 11.0− 25.0 4.3− 12.0 –
PM *
2006; Taleghani et al., 2015), also adopted by the German guidelines for
Air temp. (◦ C) 42.4 Emissivity 0.8 0.9 0.9 urban and regional planners (VDI, 1998), it was used for this study.
Wind speed 4.0, Albedo 0.2 0.3 0.2
(m/s) 0.5** 3. Results
Wind direction Transparency 0.9 0.1
(360◦ -north, 90◦ –
clockwise)
Tree type Leafy The simulation outputs consisted of many variables, however, ther­
Relative mal changes have been discussed mainly in terms of the spatial-mean
Trunk
Humidity 26.6
diameter (m)
0.4− 0.9 – – changes in TMRT and PET only. Thermal repercussions of morpholog­
(%) ical changes have been studied on three fronts, i.e.: i) Changes in
Radiation
Global (W/ 953.0
Trunk length
3.0− 4.0 – –
buildings only, ii) changes in trees only, and iii) Changes in tree-building
(m) together. The spatial distribution of (point-to-point) changes in TMRT/
m2 )
Cloud cover Crown radius PET is discussed briefly using ‘points-of-reference’, typically represent­
0 5.0− 13.0 – –
(Oktas) (m) ing the locations with extremes of positive changes e.g. (erstwhile) tree-
*
Height of past buildings- 7.5 m, present building-blocks consist of quarters shaded buildings, narrow canyons, wind-sheltered pockets on wind-
each with staggering heights 4.3− 12.0 m. ward/ lee-ward sides of buildings, irradiated building-skins, etc. (Ali-­
**
- Arbitrary wind-speed, adopted for additional simulation. Toudert & Mayer, 2007a; Cheng et al., 2011; Oke, 2002), and negative

6
 V. Raman et al.
changes e.g. (removed) tree-surrounded unshaded areas, locations
vacated by old buildings, etc. Henceforth, prefix ‘Δ’ before a parameter
(e.g. ΔTMRT, ΔPET, ΔTs, etc.) will represent the parameter changes be­
tween the compared scenarios.
3.1. The net effect of changes in building morphology only (hypothetical
treeless case)
Hypothetical scenarios “Sc.-2020B”-“Sc.-2010B” (Refer para 2.2,
Fig. 4) were compared to assess the changes in thermal-stresses, only
due to changes in (treeless) building morphology. Absolute spatial-mean
01 TMRT and PET-ranges are found higher in the present scenarios
(68.2–72.5 ◦ C and 57.0–61.5 ◦ C respectively) than in the past
nkatesh Raman(67.7–72.3 C and 56.3–61.0 C respectively).
◦ ◦
02 3.1.1. Spatial distribution of changes
Spatially, ΔTMRT/ ΔPET at input-v = 4 m/s are higher at new build­
nkatesh Ramanings (points 1/5/10/12/14/18 Fig. 5a/c/d/f) than the unshaded windy
03 ground areas in both the AOI’s, in the range of 4–9.6 ◦ C/ 5− 12 ◦ C, e.g.
ΔTMRT/ ΔPET at AOI-2 are: 7.6/ 9.6 ◦ C at point 10, 4.8/ 7.4 ◦ C at point
nkatesh Raman12; but only 0.4/0.1 ◦ C at point 4 and 0.5/0.2 ◦ C at 21 (Fig. 5c/f). Wind-
sheltered ground areas (abutting the buildings, points 6/7/11/19) and
the new-building-canyons (points 9/16) are hotter at both the wind-
Fig. 5. ΔTMRT/ ΔPET (◦ C) distribution due to changes in buildings only (Hypothetical) at AOI-1/AOI-2 at input wind-speeds 0.5/4.0 m/s; Temperature changes (◦ C)
are represented by different colors as per the color-indices with each spatial diagram; Points of reference relate to text descriptions, ‘SS’- refers to Simulated Sub-
scenarios (Refer Fig. 4).
7
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
speeds, in both the AOI’s (Fig. 5a–f) (but substantially more in wind-
oblique AOI-2). However, ΔTMRT’s at input v = 0.5 m/s (Fig. 5b/e) at
the new buildings (e.g. points 8(0.0 ◦ C), 18(0.3 ◦ C) AOI-2) and (windy)
ground (e.g. points 4(0.2 ◦ C), 21(0.1 ◦ C) AOI-2) are almost equal.
ΔTMRT’s are negative, at input-v = 4.0 m/s, at the ground areas vacated
by the old buildings/ their wind-shaded surrounds (e.g. pts.2/3/17, etc.
Fig. 5a/c/d/f). Grids vacated by past buildings now occupied by the
present have mostly negligible ΔTMRT’s at all input-v (e.g. points 8
(-0.02 ◦ C) and 20 (-0.05 ◦ C) Fig. 5c), despite height differences in the
two buildings. ΔPET follows the pattern of ΔTMRT. (Compare Fig. 5a/
c–d/f). This shows that buildings are heated more than the windy
ground at higher winds while the two are found heating almost equally
at lower winds. The wind-sheltered unshaded building-skin areas (up­
wind/downwind side), narrow canyons (normal to wind), etc. are
relatively hotter at all background winds. Thus, it is inferred that at
higher background winds, buildings contribute more to the spatial-mean
TMRT/PET than the (windy) ground, in direct relation to their built-up
density (compare Fig. 5a/c), but regardless of their heights (hence vol­
umes), while at lower/no wind, the built-up density may become less
effective in morphologies with hard-dry/un-turfed ground.
3.1.2. Synergetic effect of wind-orientation and the built-up density
Contrary to the inference above, showing a direct relationship of the
V. Raman et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085

Table 3
Effects of changes in morphology and input wind-speed on thermal parameters.
AOI-1
Comparison Criteria ⇓
(Removed trees-area 7761 m2, Δ Built-up area: 808.35 m2)

Sc.2020BRT – Sc.2010BAT Sc.2020B – Sc.2010B Sc.2020BRT-Sc.2020BAT Sc.2010BRT-Sc.2010BAT

Compared scenarios >>>
(SS 1b – SS 1a) (SS 1f – SS 1e) (SS 1b – SS 1d) (SS 1c – SS 1a)

Morphological Changes in >>> Trees + buildings Only buildings Only trees Only trees

Input wind-speed ‘v’ (m/s) >>> 0.5 4.0 0.5 4.0 0.5 4.0 0.5
Parameters of change ⇓ (A1) (B1) (A1/B1) (C1) (D1) (D1/ C1) (E1) (F1) (E1)/ (F1) (G1)
Absolute mean
TMRT (◦ C) 73.3–70.3 69.7–67.5 72.1–72.3 68.2–68.4 73.3–70.3 69.7–67.3 73.5–70.3
(compared scenarios)
-0.2
Cumulative mean 3.0 2.2 1.36 -0.2 (-0.19) 1.19 3.0 2.4 1.25 3.2
(-0.16)
ΔTMRT
Max. 20.6 22.1 4.9 10.1 19.6 19.5 20.2
Min. − 22.7 − 23.8 − 4.0 − 9.4 − 20.9 − 15.1 − 22.6
Absolute mean
PET (◦ C) 61.8–60.0 58.1–56.8 60.9–61.0 57.0–57.0 61.8–59.9 58.1–56.8 62.0–60.0
(compared scenarios)
Cumulative mean 1.8 1.3 1.38 -0.1 0.0 – 1.9 1.3 1.46 2.0
ΔPET Max. 15.9 17.7 5.6 11.5 14.5 14.5 14.7
Min. − 15.6 − 15.8 − 5.3 − 10.9 − 12.8 − 12.5 − 16.0
ΔTs Cum’ mean 6.2 4.5 1.37 -0.3 -0.4 1.33 6.5 5.1 1.27 6.6
ΔLWR Cum’ mean − 29.2 − 29.0 0.0 0.1 − 28.9 − 28.8 − 29.3
ΔSVF Cum’ mean 0.4 0.0 0.3 0.4
ΔSWR Cum’ mean 232.7 − 4.7 232.7 238.5
Δv Cum’mean 0.01 0.05 0.01 0.1 0.00 − 0.04 0.00

SS – Simulated Sub-scenario(s) (Refer Fig. 4); ‘Δ’ shows– Cumulative Mean changes (in): TMRT- Mean radiant temperature (◦ C), PET- Physiological equivalent
temperature (◦ C), LWR/ SWR- Longwave/ Shortwave radiations (W/m2), SVF- Sky view factor, ΔTs- Surface temperature (◦ C).

mean ΔTMRT/ ΔPET to the changes in the built-up density, these were
found slightly negative at AOI-1 (Cols. C1-D1 Table 3), despite a (slight)
built-up density-increase of 0.03 in ‘SS 1f’ (Table 1a). Hence, this
inference was further examined in two differently oriented building-
layouts (at the two AOI’s) to identify the role of wind-wise orientation
on ΔTMRT/ ΔPET. Built-up area increase in SS 1f, AOI-1 (Say, ΔAAOI-1) is
808.35 m2, and at SS 2f, AOI-2 (Say, ΔAAOI-2), it is 3310.0 m2 (Table 1a),
thus,
ΔAAOI-1/ ΔAAOI-2 = 808.35/ 3310.00 = 0.24
whereas, at input v = 4.0 m/s,
(2) ΔTMRT AOI-1 / ΔTMRT AOI-2 = -0.2/1.90 = -0.1 (Cols. D1/ D2
Table 3)
Comparing (1) and (2), we get,
ΔTMRT AOI-1 / ΔTMRT AOI-2 < ΔAAOI-1 / ΔAAOI-2 Or,
ΔTMRT AOI-1 / ΔAAOI-1 < ΔTMRT AOI-2 / ΔAAOI-2
In-equation (3) shows that ΔTMRT per unit additional built up area is
greater at AOI-2 than at AOI-1, at input-v = 4 m/s, and, (can be shown)
also at v = 0.5 m/s (but with a lesser ratio). ΔPET changes in the pattern
of ΔTMRT at the two AOI’s, at two wind-speeds.
Long building blocks in AOI-1 in the scenario “Sc.-2020B”, laid E-W
(i.e. along the input-wind, east) with wider unobstructed ‘wind corridors
(compared to the isolated/staggered blocks in “Sc.-2010B”) allow
slightly enhanced wind-flow, more advection-cooled surfaces (ΔTs,
Cols.C1-D1 Table 3), resulting in negligibly negative mean ΔTMRT. In
AOI-2, contrarily, the N-S -oriented building blocks substantially retard
the (eastern) wind in the area at human level, effecting substantially
higher (positive) mean ΔTs/ ΔTMRT, despite a mean SWR drop of
12.3 W/m2 (and almost constant SVF and LWR). This shows that mean
TMRT in an area will rise more prominently with its built-up density, at
morphologies with lower wind-permeability. Contrarily, the negative
‘wind-permeability-effect’ can supersede the positive ‘built-up-density-
effect’, at all background winds (Dimoudi & Nikolopoulou, 2003).
3.1.3. Synergetic effect of background wind-speed, built-up density, and
wind-permeability
Mean ΔTMRT’s are greater at input-v = 4.0 m/s while their ratio at
the two input wind-speeds is much greater at AOI-2 (6.33, Col. D2/C2
Table 3) than at AOI-1 (1.0, Col. D1/C1 Table 3), i.e. AOI-2 is far more
sensitive than AOI-1, to the changes in background-wind (due to a
substantially greater permeability-differential between present-past
buildings). This shows that the positive and negative effects (refer to
3.1.2) of built-up density and wind-permeability on the mean TMRT of an
(1) area get intensified at higher background wind-speeds.
3.2. Net thermal effects of the removal of trees
‘All-trees’ and ‘(remaining) lesser-trees’ scenarios were compared at
present buildings (Sc.2020BRT-Sc.2020BAT) and the past (Sc.2010BRT-
(3) Sc.2010BAT) (Refer para 2.2, Fig. 4) to assess the net effect of trees-
removal. The absolute mean TMRT’s are found between 67.3–71.6 ◦ C
(all-trees) and between 69.7–74.2 ◦ C (lesser-trees). The mean PET’s are
between 56.8–61.2 ◦ C (all-trees) and 57.4–62.8 ◦ C (lesser-trees). The
highest mean ΔTMRT /ΔPET (3.2/ 2.0 ◦ C), is found at AOI-1 (at input-
v = 0.5 m/s), and the lowest (1.6/ 0.6 ◦ C), at AOI-2 (at input-v = 4.0 m/
s).
3.2.1. Spatial distribution of ΔTMRT/ΔPET
Spatially, higher ranges of ΔTMRT/ΔPET (up to 21.0/16.8 ◦ C) occur
at the (removed) tree-shades (e.g. points 5/6/11/14/16/19/21
Fig. 6a–f), with greater prominence at the tree-shades in wind-shaded
zones (e.g. point 6 Fig. 6a–d), building-skin areas (e.g. points 11/19)
and present-building narrow canyons at AOI-2 (orthogonal to the wind,
points 9/16 Fig. 6b/e) at the two input-v, while at the buildings (e.g.
points 5/14 Fig. 6a/b), at input-v = 4.0 m/s only. Lower ranges of
ΔTMRT/ΔPET (up to − 22.6/− 17.0 ◦ C) occur at the unshaded buildings/
ground surrounded by (removed) trees, getting cooler due to increased
wind and SVF, and reduction in LWR/ reflected SWR by the removal of
trees (e.g. at Point 4 (unshaded) Fig. 6d: ΔPET − 0.9 ◦ C, ΔTMRT − 2.0 ◦ C,
ΔTs − 1.0 ◦ C, ΔLWR − 19.7 W/m2, ΔSWR − 9.34 W/m2, ΔSVF 0.24, Δv

8
V. Raman et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085

AOI-1 AOI-2

(Removed trees-area 7761 m2, Δ (Removed trees-area 6663 m2, Δ Built-up area: 3310.00 m2)
Built-up area: 808.35 m2)

Sc.2010BRT-Sc.2010BAT Sc.2020BRT-Sc.2010BAT Sc.2020B – Sc.2010B Sc.2020BRT-Sc.2020BAT Sc.2010BRT-Sc.2010BAT

(SS 1c – SS 1a) (SS 2b – SS 2a) (SS 2f – SS 2e) (SS 2b – SS 2d) (SS 2c – SS 2a)

Only trees Trees + buildings Only buildings Only trees Only trees

4.0 0.5 4.0 0.5 4.0 0.5 4.0 0.5 4.0

(H1) (G1)/ (H1) (A2) (B2) (A2/ B2) (C2) (D2) (D2/ C2) (E2) (F2) (E2)/ (F2) (G2) (H2) (G2)/ (H2)
70.0–67.7 74.2–71.3 71.5–68.1 72.5–72.2 69.6–67.7 74.2–71.6 71.5–69.4 73.9–71.3 69.7–68.1
2.6 2.6
2.3 1.39 2.9 3.4 0.85 0.3 1.9 6.33 2.1 1.24 1.6 1.63
(2.56) (2.63)
20.2 19.8 21.5 5.3 9.6 19.6 21.0 19.5 20.0
− 22.5 − 22.5 − 21.9 − 3.8 − 10.4 − 21.1 − 17.8 − 20.5 − 22.0
58.0–56.8 62.8–60.4 59.7–56.8 61.5–60.7 58.4–56.3 62.8–61.2 59.7–58.5 61.9–60.4 57.4–56.8
2.5

1.2 1.67 2.4 2.9 0.83 0.8 2.1 2.63 1.6 1.2 1.33 1.5 0.6

16.0 15.5 17.0 6.2 11.1 14.4 16.8 14.6 16.2

− 16.7 − 14.7 − 15.5 − 5.6 − 11.7 − 13.6 − 10.6 − 14.4 − 17.0
4.7 1.4 6.1 7.4 0.82 0.6 3.7 6.17 5.8 4.8 1.21 5.6 3.6 1.55
− 29.2 − 26.7 − 26.7 0.4 0.5 − 26.3 − 26.3 − 27.0 − 27.0
0.4 0.3 0.0 0.3 0.3
238.5 196.6 − 12.3 200.0 208.6
− 0.01 − 0.09 − 0.74 − 0.09 − 0.70 0.00 − 0.03 0.00 − 0.06

0.2 m/s). Notably, some points with ΔPET positive are associated with
most of the changes positive, yet a negative Δv, despite the removal of
trees (Fröhlich & Matzarakis, 2018), e.g. point 15, shaded by a large tree
(ΔPET 3.7 ◦ C, ΔTMRT 9.38 ◦ C, ΔTs 11.2 ◦ C, ΔSWR 753.2 W/m2, Δv
− 0.5 m/s). Cooling by tree-shades is, thus, maximum at wind-sheltered
ground areas at all input-v, at buildings at higher input-v only, but
negative at unshaded areas surrounded by trees.
3.2.2. Synergetic effect of tree-building articulations, background wind, and
wind permeability on trees-cooling
Mean ΔTMRT/ΔPET due to trees-removal at the present buildings,
compared to the past, are slightly greater at input-v = 4.0 m/s, but lesser
at v = 0.5 m/s (Cols. F1 > H1, F2 > H2, E1 < G1, E2 ≥ G2 Table 3), i.e.
removed trees, if existed, would have provided relatively greater mean
cooling at the present buildings (particularly at AOI-2), than at the past,
at noon, 9th of June 2019, at v = 4.0 m/s, and contrarily at v = 0.5 m/s.
Obviously, the thermal behaviour of the (removed) trees ‘oscillates’
as a function of morphology and wind. This is due to different tree-
building articulations in the present and past scenarios. The ground
(Refer input data, Table 2) undergoes substantial temperature-rise due
to insolation, equally in the past and present scenarios. At higher
background wind-speed (linearly related to wind at the human level),
the windy unshaded ground is better advection-cooled, thus, the
buildings remain the main source of heat (in both past and present
scenarios). The removal of a greater percentage of ‘overlapping’ trees
manifests relatively greater mean ΔTs/ΔTMRT/ΔPET in the present
scenario (Refer Table 1a, Figs. 2, 4a/d) (despite relatively lower mean
ΔSWR Table 3), more prominently in AOI-2 (ΔCols.F2-H2> ΔCols.F1-
H1 Table 3) due to greater overlap-differences (between present/past
scenarios). Removal of a greater percentage of isolated-trees in the past
scenario causes relatively greater mean ΔSWR (AOI-1 238.5 > 232.7,
AOI-2 208.6 > 200.0 W/m2; Table 3) due to the increased solar-access to
ground, resulting in greater mean ΔTs/ΔTMRT/ΔPET at background
wind-speed 0.5 m/s in the past scenario. However, this effect is super­
seded in AOI-2 (at input-v = 0.5 m/s) by a relatively greater drop in the
overall wind in the (low permeability) present scenario, resulting in
slightly higher ΔTs and ΔPET (Col.E2 > G2) while ΔTMRT’s remain
equal. Thus trees, in spatial-mean thermal-stress abatement, are more
effective, in morphologies with a greater percentage of hard/dry
ground, at lower background wind-speed, when isolated from buildings,
and, in morphologies with soft/ turfed ground, and/or at higher back­
ground wind-speed, when overlapping with buildings. Notably, at
morphologies with a relatively higher latent-heat capacity ground, e.g.
turfed/ high-moisture ground, etc., the mean thermal-stress reduction
shall be more by overlapping trees than by isolated trees even at lower
background winds, and still more at higher background winds.
3.2.3. Synergetic effect of plantation-density, built-up morphology, and
wind on trees’ cooling potential
The net rise in the mean TMRT in an area due to the removal of trees is
generally expected to be proportional to the (crown-top view) area of
the removed trees (say ΔA) (El-Bardisy et al., 2016). Thus, the ratios of
mean ΔTMRT’s in different scenarios at AOI-1 to the corresponding those
at AOI-2 should be equal to the ratio ΔAAOI-1/ ΔAAOI-2 (i.e. 7761/
6663 = 1.16, Refer Table 1a). The ratios ΔTMRT-AOI-1 / ΔTMRT-AOI-2 are as
below:
• At the present scenario Sc.2020BRT-Sc.2020BAT :
At input wind speed v = 0.5 m/s, 3.0/2.56 = 1.17, and, at v = 4.0 m/
s, 2.4/2.1 = 1.14 (Col. E1/ E2 and F1/ F2 Table 3), i.e. in the present
scenario, (removed) trees are slightly less efficient in TMRT mitigation in
AOI-1 (than in AOI-2) at input-v = 4.0 m/s (1.14 < 1.16), but slightly
more efficient at v = 0.5 m/s (1.17 > 1.16).
• At the past scenario Sc.2010BRT-Sc.2010BAT :
At input wind speed v = 0.5 m/s, 3.2/2.6 = 1.23, and, at v = 4.0 m/s
2.3/1.6 =1.44 (Cols. G1/ G2 and H1/ H2 Table 3), i.e. (removed) trees
in the past scenario, AOI-1, are substantially better TMRT mitigators
(than those in AOI-2) (Fig. 4a/c), at all input wind-speeds.
Obviously, the TMRT mitigation potential of the (same) tree-
morphology (in an AOI) varies depending on the entwined building-
morphology and background wind. This is because of the differences
in the quantum and type of (buildings and differently advection-cooled
ground) surfaces shaded by the trees in the two AOI’s. As discussed

9
V. Raman et al.
Fig. 6. ΔTMRT/ ΔPET (◦ C) distribution due to removal of trees only, at AOI-1/ AOI-2 at input-v = 0.5/4.0 m/s in present/ past building scenarios; higher changes
(shown in red/orange) occur at removed tree-shades (Refer color-indices with each diagram); points of reference relate to text descriptions, ‘SS’- refers to Simulated
Sub-scenarios (Refer Fig. 4).
above (para 3.2.2), the mean ΔTMRT at v = 0.5 m/s, due to the removal
of trees, mostly depends on the tree-building isolation percentages
(affecting ΔSWR), whereas, at v = 4.0 m/s, ΔTMRT is directly related to
the ‘overlap percentage’ and inversely to the wind-permeability. In the
present scenario above, a greater tree-building isolation-percentage at
AOI-1 (52 %), than at AOI-2 (39 %) explains the slightly greater ratio
(1.17 > 1.16) at v = 0.5 m/s, The ratio is slightly lesser at v = 4.0 m/s
(1.14 < 1.16) due to lesser overlap-percentage at AOI-1 (48 % <61 %)
(Including a relatively greater wind-drop in AOI-2). In the past scenario
at v = 4.0 m/s, again, a much higher percentage of overlapping trees at
AOI-1 (42 %) than at AOI-2 (20 %) explains a much higher ratio (1.44) of
ΔTMRT’s, however, at v = 0.5 m/s, the higher ratio (1.23 > 1.16) is not
explained by the tree-building overlap percentage. This is due to rela­
tively higher density buildings at AOI-1, causing relatively hotter
ground/ ΔTs and higher LWR emissions at lower wind in the past sce­
nario (Fig. 6c/f). This shows that a greater plantation-density in an
urban block does not ensure greater heat-stress mitigation in the same
proportions. Morphological formations in terms of built-up density, tree-
building overlaps, ground conditions, wind-permeability, and back­
ground wind influence the cooling effects of plantation-density.
10
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
3.2.4. Effect of background wind-speed on cooling by trees
The net mean ΔTMRT’s and ΔPET’s, due to the removal of the trees
only, are higher at input-v = 0.5 m/s, than at 4.0 m/s, at both the AOI’s
in both the past and present scenarios (Cols. E1 > F1, G1 > H1, E2 > F2,
G2 > H2 Table 3). Removal of trees, at lower wind-speeds, causes higher
mean ΔTs (Table 3) hence, higher mean ΔTMRT’s due to reduced
advection cooling of unshaded surfaces.
Further, the ratios ΔTMRT v=0.5 / ΔTMRT v=4.0, in different scenarios/
AOI’s, are as below, in decreasing order: 1.63 (col. G2/H2) >1.39 (col.
G1/H1) >1.25 (col. E1/F1) >1.24 (col. E2/F2): (Table 3) The different
scenarios/AOI’s relating to the above ratios are put up below in the same
corresponding order as above, showing built-up % / tree-building
overlap% (in the parentheses): Past/AOI-2 (19/ 20 %) <Past/AOI-1
(27/ 42 %) <Present/AOI-1 (30/ 48 %) <Present/AOI-2 (34/ 61 %)
The above order shows increasing built-up%, increasing tree-
building overlap% (in parentheses), and decreasing wind-
permeability. Obviously, the effect of changes in the background wind
speed is most prominent in the Past/AOI-2 (1.63) having minimum
built-up density (19 %) and minimum tree-building overlap-percentage
(20 %). A similar relation holds good for ΔPET and ΔTs also (Table 3).
Minimum built-up density generally induces maximum wind-
V. Raman et al. Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085

permeability, whereas, minimum tree-building overlap means
maximum tree-shaded ground-area which is better advection-cooled at
higher background-winds in unshaded conditions. Thus, the mean
temperature difference between shaded (by trees) and unshaded (tree­
less) conditions is minimized at higher background wind, contrarily
higher, at the lower wind. This shows a greater temperature reduction
by tree-shades at lower background wind while the ratio of temperature
reductions at the lower wind to that at higher is found directly related to
the wind-permeability and inversely to the associated built-up density
and the tree-building overlap-percentage in the morphology.
3.3. The combined effect of changes in buildings and removal of trees on
the thermal conditions of the area
The absolute mean TMRT’s (before/ after morphological changes) are
found between 67.5–71.3/ 69.7–74.2 ◦ C and PET’s between 56.8–60.4/
58.1–62.8 ◦ C. The highest and lowest mean ΔTMRT/ ΔPET are found at
AOI-2 and AOI-1 respectively (Cols. B2, B1 Table 3) at input-v = 4.0 m/
s. The differences between means (maxima-minima) are far greater at
v = 4.0 m/s (1.2 ◦ C Col. B2 - B1 Table 3) than that at v = 0.5 m/s (0.1 ◦ C
Col. A1- A2 Table 3). This shows a higher dependence of TMRT/ PET on
morphology at higher background wind-speeds.
3.3.2. Effect of the layout pattern of buildings, and the characteristic
thermal behavior of trees and buildings
Net mean ΔTMRT’s/ΔPET’s due to changes in buildings at AOI-1
(Cols. C1/D1 Table 3), compared to those in AOI-2 (Cols. C2/D2) are
minimal and almost equal at the two input-v, despite substantial dif­
ferences in the layout-patterns of past and present buildings in AOI-1
(Fig. 4). Moreover, the ΔTMRT’s/ ΔPET’s due to trees removal at pre­
sent and past building scenarios differ minimally (± 0.2 ◦ C) at a given
AOI and given input-v (Cols. E1~G1, E2~G2, F1~H1 Table 3), despite
substantial differences in the past and present building layout-patterns
(Fig. 4) (Except at AOI-2, v = 4.0 m/s, Cols. F2 > H2).
Further, mean ΔTMRT’s at AOI-1 due to individual and simultaneous
changes in buildings and trees (Table 3), at a given input-v, differ
minimally (up to ±0.2 ◦ C) as shown below (ΔTMRT’s in parentheses, ◦ C):
At v = 0.5 m/s; Col. A1 (3.0) ᴝ Cols. [C1 (− 0.2) + E1 (3.0), G1 (3.2)];
and at v = 4.0 m/s; Col. B1 (2.2) ᴝ Col. [D1 (− 0.2) + F1 (2.4), H1 (2.3)].
This shows that the mean thermal changes manifested independently by
changes in buildings and trees are conservative/ additive quantitatively
and may depend little on the building layout patterns, if other aspects, e.
g. built-up density, plantation-density, tree-building articulations,
ground conditions, wind-permeability, and the background weather-
conditions, etc., remain same.

4. Discussion
3.3.1. Spatial distribution and mean of changes
The spatial distribution of ΔTMRT’s/ΔPET’s, due to the simultaneous
This study investigated the thermal changes, in terms of TMRT and
changes in tree-building, follows the pattern of those due to individual
PET, due to changes in building morphology and removal of trees at a
changes in trees and buildings, as discussed in para’s 3.1.1/ 3.2.1. The
residential site undergoing redevelopment in Patna, India, hence, we
higher range of ΔTMRT’s/ΔPET’s are found at input-v = 4.0 m/s at the
examined the individual/ synergetic roles of different aspects of tree-
tree-shades lying at buildings (points 5/14), wind-shaded ground (point
building morphology and the background wind on the thermal envi­
6), building-skins (points 11/19), etc. (Fig. 7), and the lowest, again at
ronment of a locality, using SkyHelios Pro simulations (at input wind-
input-v = 4.0 m/s at ground areas vacated by the past buildings/ their
speeds 4.0 and 0.5 m/s). Subsequently, strategies for passively-cooled
wind-shaded surrounds (points 2/3/17 Fig. 7).
urban outdoors are proposed at the ‘more controllable’ site level,
The highest (of all) mean ΔTMRT /ΔPET (3.4/ 2.9 ◦ C, Col. B2 Table 3)
which can collectively contribute to achieving larger-scale thermally
occurs due to tree-building (simultaneous) changes at AOI-2 at input-
sustainable cities (in light of the rising urban temperatures), through
v = 4.0 m/s, associated with the lowest mean Δv = − 0.74 m/s (hence,
proper design of the tree-building morphology.
highest mean ΔTs = 7.4 ◦ C, despite relatively lower ΔSWR 196.6 W/
m2). This, obviously driven more by wind-drop than by radiation-
increase shows a greater influence of building (permeability) than of 4.1. Net thermal changes due to changes in buildings
trees (on the wind) affecting thermal stresses (Emmanuel & Johansson,
2007) as the wind-drop (− 0.74 m/s) is contributed the most by changes 4.1.1. Spatial distribution of net ΔTMRT/ΔPET due to changes in buildings
in buildings (Δv = − 0.7 m/s Col. D2 Table 3). Buildings are found contributing more to the mean TMRT/PET of the

Fig. 7. ΔTMRT/ ΔPET distribution due to removal of trees and changes in buildings at different AOI’s/ input-v, points of reference relate to text descriptions, ‘SS’-
refers to Simulation Scenarios (Refer Fig. 4).

11
V. Raman et al.
Table 4
Recommendations for spatial-mean thermal stress abatement: major heat sources and strategies.
Micro-climate type Morphological Details (Ambient ground
conditions, built-up density, wind-
permeability)
Low density, soft/
moist ground Permeability less
Low (ᴝ 0.5 m/s)
Low density, hard/dry effective
ground
Low density, high permeability, soft ground
High (ᴝ 4.0 m/
s) Low density, high permeability, hard/dry
Background wind-
ground
speeds
High density, low permeability, all types of
ground
Variable All density, all permeability, hard/ dry ground
(0–4.0 m/s)
Wind-oblique narrow canyons
Wind-oblique building skins
Unshaded areas surrounded by trees
Ts – surface temperature, SWR – Shortwave Radiation, LWR – Longwave Radiation, *** shows higher mean cooling efficacy of trees in the given situation.
area (Arnfield et al., 1999) at the human level, proportional to the
built-up density as also confirmed by Perini and Magliocco (2014),
(Hien et al., 2011), etc., however, as per our results, this holds good only
at higher background-winds (BgW, 4.0 m/s), as buildings and (bare-­
dry/un-turfed) ground are found having nearly equal TMRT’s at lower
BgW (0.5 m/s), irrespective of built-up density. This may happen at all
bare-dry/un-turfed grounds at around noon in the lower latitude
sub-tropical/ tropical regions with high altitude summer sun (minimal
shadow-cast). We found wind-sheltered pockets, upwind/ downwind
vicinity of buildings, narrow ‘angled’ canyons and building-skins
(Lindberg & Grimmond, 2011), etc., among the potential heat contrib­
utors in the area at all BgW, thus proper ventilation of outdoor spaces
through proper wind-orientation and density controls (Hien et al.,
2011), as also verified and suggested by Ali Toudert (2005) and Ali-­
Toudert and Mayer (2007a), is found a crucial heat mitigation strategy
for the sub-tropics.
4.1.2. Synergetic effect of built-up density, wind-permeability, building
height, and background wind-speed
The spatial-mean rise in TMRT/PET is found inversely related to the
wind-permeability (Ali-Toudert & Mayer, 2006), however, slight
changes in the building heights (hence volumes) showed no effect on
TMRT, as also reported by Sharmin et al. (2015). Further to the previous
findings, we found the positive effects of built-up density on TMRT get­
ting pronounced at lower (negatively related) wind-permeability, and
vice-versa, whereas, both the positive (density effect) and negative
(permeability) effects (on TMRT) get further intensified at higher BgW, e.
g., a change in built-up density of 0.15 (at AOI-2) causes a mean
ΔTMRT/ΔPET rise from 0.3/0.8 ◦ C (at BgW 0.5 m/s), to 1.9/2.1 ◦ C (at
BgW 4.0 m/s). Negative permeability-effect was found superseding
positive density-effect in concurrence with the findings of Dimoudi and
Nikolopoulou (2003), reporting stronger effects of wind depending on
built-up geometry. A quantitative analysis in terms of TMRT/PET
exploring the relationship between more built-up densities, background
wind-speeds, and wind-wise building orientations in different micro­
climates could make an interesting future study.
4.2. Net thermal changes due to the removal of trees
4.2.1. Spatial distribution and mean of ΔTMRT/ΔPET due to the removal of
trees
Higher ranges of ΔTMRT/ΔPET (up to 21.0 ◦ C/16.8 ◦ C) are found at
wind-sheltered zones of (erstwhile) tree-shades at all BgW, and at
buildings, at higher BgW (4.0 m/s). Negative ΔTMRT/ΔPET (up to
− 22.6 ◦ C/− 17.0 ◦ C), occur at unshaded areas surrounded by (removed)
12
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
Major heat Dominant Strategies (For best mean cooling by trees,
source cause morphology-wise)
Overlapping trees *** (Most effective mean
Buildings Ts
cooling)
Isolated trees (on equator-side of buildings)
Ground SWR
(Moderate mean cooling)
Overlapping trees *** (Most effective mean
Ts
cooling)
Buildings
Ts Overlapping trees (Moderate mean cooling)
Overlapping trees max. numbers *** (Most
Buildings Ts
effective mean cooling)
Wind-sheltered
– Trees, induce ventilation
pockets
Ts Orient larger skin parallel to the wind
Buildings
Ts Overlapping/ clinging trees
Trees LWR Avoid tree-encircled open areas/ buildings
trees. Our ΔTMRT maxima are lower than 24 ◦ C, found by Park et al.
(2012), and 32.8 ◦ C, found by Lee and Mayer (2013) in Freiburg (albeit
the BgW is not referred to), but higher than 14.8 ◦ C, found by Zheng
et al. (2018) in Guangzhou, China, possibly due to the higher ambient
air temperature (Shashua-Bar & Hoffman, 2000) in our case (42.4 ◦ C)
than in Guangzhou (ᴝ35.0 ◦ C) and other background/ morphological
conditions in Freiburg (Potchter et al., 2010).
Mean Δ PET found by us (the arithmetic averages of grid-wise pos­
itive/ negative changes) due to trees-removal, are all positive and
mainly affected by ΔSWR. Positive changes due to trees-removal are
generally brought forth at (removed) tree-shades by an increase in SWR,
TMRT, and Ts. The negative changes, occurring at unshaded areas are
combined outcomes of a decrease in LWR, reflected SWR (from tree-
crowns), and Ts (better advection-cooled due to increased wind, after
trees-removal). Trees are reported to reduce wind-speed and change
wind-directions (El-Bardisy et al., 2016; Perini et al., 2018), at the same
time accumulate LWR higher (up to 55 W/m2) than the surroundings
(Zheng et al., 2018; Raman et al., 2021), due to lower SVF conditions
below the tree-crowns (Lai et al., 2017; Oke, Crowther, McNaughton,
Monteith, & Gardiner, 1989) which get removed/ dissipated above into
the cooler sky (Lindberg & Grimmond, 2011) by the trees-removal.
Negative ΔTMRT/ΔPET, thus occur at unshaded areas surrounded by
(removed) trees. Some previous empirical studies have also found
vegetated areas warmer than the surrounding built-up areas during
day-hours, e.g. (Grimmond et al., 1996; Potchter et al., 2006).
However, we also found wind-speed slightly decreasing under some
removed (larger) trees (e.g. at point 15, Fig. 6d, below a large tree), since
wind, in the case of sparsely-laid trees, can be slightly increased below
larger trees at the human level by the fraction of wind-currents deflected
downwards by larger tree-crowns, as also confirmed by Fröhlich and
Matzarakis (2018).
4.2.2. Effect of plantation area, tree-building articulations, surrounding
ground, and BgW/ permeability
Mean thermal-stress mitigation by trees in an area is found directly
related to the plantation area/ density (El-Bardisy et al., 2016; Lee &
Mayer, 2013), however, as per our results, the relation is found not
strictly linear, as cooling by trees is affected by other morphological
properties, e.g. tree-building overlaps, wind-permeability, and BgW, etc.
Further, Yang et al. (2018) have found the trees “clinging to the build­
ings” providing better thermal mitigations, however, as per our results,
spatial-mean thermal-stress mitigation by trees is maximum when iso­
lated from buildings, at lower BgW/ low wind-permeability, and
ambient hard/dry/un-turfed ground. Contrarily, it is maximum when
overlapping with the buildings, only at higher BgW, higher
V. Raman et al.
wind-permeability, and/or in ambient moist/high latent-heat-capacity
ground. Previous studies have also reported better cooling by
wind-parallel tree-layouts (Abdi, Hami, & Zarehaghi, 2020; Ng, 2009;
Tan et al., 2015). Still, very little literature is found on the tree-building
overlapping effects on spatial-mean cooling by trees, especially under
different ground/wind conditions. Further studies are required to
identify the best proportions of tree-building overlaps providing the best
average cooling at different background wind-speeds, in different
microclimates/ground conditions and tree-building morphologies.
Net mean cooling provided by trees is found higher, at BgW 0.5 m/s
than at 4.0 m/s, in ratios of 1.24–1.63 (at different tree-building sce­
narios), i.e. when thermal stresses are higher due to reduced advection
cooling of unshaded surfaces (Arnfield et al., 1999). The ratio of mean
thermal-stress reductions by trees, at the lower wind to that at higher, is
found related directly to the wind-permeability while it is related
inversely to the associated built-up density and tree-building over­
lap-percentage, at the extremes of which, the mean cooling effect by
trees shall turn relatively ‘inert’ to the fluctuations in BgW. The above
findings corroborate the finding of Kong et al. (2017) that trees provide
higher reductions in PET at higher built-up densities (i.e. lower
wind-permeability), which according to our results should also be ‘inert’
to the changes in BgW. Higher TMRT’s at lower BgW have been reported
by Raman et al. (2021) and Amirtham et al. (2015) in India, and
Sangkertadi and Reny (2016) in Indonesia. Stronger heat mitigation by
trees in hotter background conditions is reported by Shashua-Bar and
Hoffman (2000), in a comparative study in Germany-Israel by Potchter
et al. (2010), and in (hotter) summer than in winter in sub-tropical
Brazil by de Abreu-Harbich et al. (2015). The cooling effect of trees
was found reduced at increased wind-speed, also by Dimoudi and
Nikolopoulou (2003) and Eniolu Morakinyo and Lam (2016).
4.3. The combined effect of simultaneous changes in trees and buildings,
and layout patterns of the buildings
Mean thermal changes manifested independently by changes in
buildings and trees are found quantitatively conservative/ additive. The
highest mean ΔTMRT/ΔPET were found manifested mainly by wind-drop
due to tree-building-simultaneous changes and affected more by the
buildings (orientation) than by the trees. This is concurrent with the
observation by Emmanuel and Johansson (2007), of a dominant role of
buildings than of vegetation (in the tropics). However, the mean thermal
changes manifested in other scenarios, individually by trees are mostly
higher than those by the buildings, due to the substantially greater areas
of vegetation than the buildings, changing in our case, as also the
orientation of the new buildings in AOI-1, getting wind parallel, effected
little changes in ventilation.
We found the mean changes in TMRT/PET of an area depending on
the changes in several morphological aspects, more prominently at
higher background wind-speeds, however, least on layout-designs, if
remaining others (e.g. built-up density, plantation-density, tree-building
articulations, ground-conditions, wind-permeability, and the back­
ground weather-conditions, etc.) are kept constant. The mean highest
TMRT/PET of 74.2/ 62.8 ◦ C found by us are close to that found by Ali
Toudert (2005) in Algeria (i.e. 74.0/ 55 ◦ C). Yang, Wong, and Lin (2015)
found PET differences of up to 15 ◦ C between deep and shallow canyons,
whereas, Lindberg and Grimmond (2011) found relatively higher TMRT
close to building walls and in sunlit areas under tree-canopies. TMRT is
reported to be directly decreased by shading (Tan et al., 2013), sub­
stantially affected by vegetation, and “very sensitive to geometrical
properties” of morphology, by Ali-Toudert and Mayer (2006, 2007b).
Trees cooling effect was found “strongly related to the built-form ge­
ometry” by Shashua-Bar et al. (2009).
Radiation and wind, mostly contending each other as contributors
and mitigators of urban heat, have been identified as the two vital ele­
ments affecting the urban thermal environment in synergy with the
morphology. Hard horizontal surfaces (e.g. hard/dry ground and
13
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
building roof), are the chief recipients of solar radiation forming major
‘gateways’ of solar heat entry into urban areas, especially in higher solar
altitude conditions. Meticulous care is needed in choosing between
shading and ventilation as a more effective (yet economical) heat miti­
gating strategy. While the thermal stresses at pedestrian level, mostly
due to the LWR from the heated (hard/ dry) ground (Ali-Toudert &
Mayer, 2007a), can be moderated a lot by advection in windy zones, the
same needs to be checked through (tree) shading in stale conditions, at
priority. On the other hand, the heat flux in (wind stagnant) higher
concentration of (low rise) buildings can only be checked through
shading by trees (Oke et al., 1989). However, strategies involving
modifications in built-up morphology can be more effective (particu­
larly in tropical/ subtropical zones), and trees (involving urban ground
water implications and sometimes even heat augmentation - by
improper layouts), need to be laid meticulously based on their suitability
with the morphology and background meteorological conditions.
Wind and radiation, as more prominent determinants of outdoor
thermal environment, have been analysed in several previous studies
(Ali-Toudert & Mayer, 2006; Hong & Lin, 2015; Sharmin et al., 2015),
however, literature quantitatively investigating the thermal influences
of tree-building composite morphology (and their articulation patterns)
at larger site-domains, especially relative to background wind, is very
rare. In this context, our findings, and hence, the urban design strategies
proposed below, pertaining to the passive cooling of urban outdoors by
controlling wind and radiation, shall apply to all the hot arid climate
zones like in our study, especially at lower latitudes (with higher midday
solar altitudes).
5. Conclusions and urban design recommendations
Cumulative mean TMRT/PET in an area depends strongly on the tree-
building morphology, yet more strongly at higher background winds
(BgW) while the thermal changes manifested due to individual changes
in trees and buildings are quantitatively conservative and additive.
Buildings are great heat contributors, greater at higher BgW, related
positively to the horizontal built-up density and negatively to the wind-
permeability (though inert to the height/ built-volume). The Positive
(density) effect can supersede the negative (permeability) effect and
vice-versa, whereas both the effects are ‘visible’ more at higher BgW.
Trees are great heat-sinks, perform better at lower BgW. The ratio of
mean cooling by trees in a tree-building morphology at lower BgW to
that at higher is directly related to the wind-permeability and inversely
to the built-up density and tree-building overlaps. Overall mean cooling
by trees is related positively to the plantation-density (though not
necessarily linearly), but depends little on the layout pattern of the
entwined buildings, provided other parameters e.g. built-up density,
tree-building-overlaps, ground-conditions, wind-permeability, BgW,
etc. are constant. Wind-sheltered zones, narrow canyons oblique to
BgW, and building skins are dominant heat-contributors, and tree-
shading is most effective at all BgW at these zones in cumulative mean
heat mitigation in the area (while at buildings, at higher BgW only).
Urban design recommendations: for passive thermal-stress reduction
outdoors, based on our findings on the thermal behavior of trees and
buildings at different morphological variants, are as below (Also
Table 4):
• For new developments: Vertically-rising buildings should be
preferred to the horizontally spreading, especially in windy climates.
Long-continuous chunks of buildings/canyons oblique/orthogonal to
the prevalent winds shall contribute more to the average thermal-
stress in the area. Wind-shields of any kind, e.g. taller buildings,
trees, etc., on the upwind side of a canyon, court, or built-up block,
should be avoided. Trees are great heat-sinks, should be planted
maximum, especially in low-wind, high built-up density zones.
• For existing morphologies: Low-density/ high permeability blocks in
windy zones shall be better benefitted by trees at lower BgW only,
V. Raman et al.
while high-density built-up areas, orthogonal canyons, etc., shall be
the best beneficiaries of tree-shading at all BgW. For a limited
number of trees, the trees should be laid maximum detached from
the buildings, in low-density morphologies having lower
background-wind/ permeability, and hard-paved/ dry-bare grounds,
e.g. paved urban plazas surrounded by buildings, paved streets
oblique to the prevalent wind, etc., and maximum overlapping/
shading the buildings, in morphologies having higher background-
wind/ permeability, especially having turfed/ high-moisture
ground. Low-height residential colonies, generally dominated by
turfed ground, shrubs, etc., shall be best cooled by maximum over­
lapping trees, shading the buildings.
• Table 4
Funding
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding
agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that they have no known competing financial
interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence
the work reported in this paper.
Acknowledgment
The authors are thankful to Mr. Shree Niwas Sharma for proof­
reading and Mr. Varadraj, Patna, India, for his valuable assistance dur­
ing work, in data extraction/ tabulation, etc.
References
Abdi, B., Hami, A., & Zarehaghi, D. (2020). Impact of small-scale tree planting patterns
on outdoor cooling and thermal comfort. Sustainable Cities and Society, 56, 1–12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102085
Ali Toudert, F. (2005). Berichte des Meteorologischen Institutes der Universität Freiburg Fazia
Ali Toudert Dependence of Outdoor Thermal Comfort on Street Design in Hot and Dry
Climate (15).
Ali-Toudert, F., & Mayer, H. (2006). Numerical study on the effects of aspect ratio and
orientation of an urban street canyon on outdoor thermal comfort in hot and dry
climate. Building and Environment, 41(2), 94–108. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2005.01.013
Ali-Toudert, F., & Mayer, H. (2007a). Thermal comfort in an east-west oriented street
canyon in Freiburg (Germany) under hot summer conditions. Theoretical and Applied
Climatology, 87(1–4), 223–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-005-0194-4
Ali-Toudert, F., & Mayer, H. (2007b). Effects of asymmetry, galleries, overhanging
façades and vegetation on thermal comfort in urban street canyons. Solar Energy, 81
(6), 742–754. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.solener.2006.10.007
Ali-Toudert, F., Djenane, M., Bensalem, R., & Mayer, H. (2005). Outdoor thermal comfort
in the old desert city of Beni-Isguen, Algeria. Climate Research, 28(3), 243–256.
https://doi.org/10.3354/cr028243
Amirtham, L. R., Horrison, E., & Rajkumar, S. (2015). Impact of urban morphology on
microclimatic conditions and outdoor thermal comfort-a study in mixed residential
neighbourhood of Chennai, India. ICUC9-9th International Conference on Urban
Climate Jointly with 12th Symposium on the Urban Environment Impact.
Arnfield, A., Herbert, J., & Johnson, G. (1999). Urban canyon heat source and sink
strength variations: A simulation-based sensitivity study. Biometeorology, Sydney:
Congress of 1999.
Atwa, S., Ibrahim, M. G., & Murata, R. (2020). Evaluation of plantation design
methodology to improve the human thermal comfort in hot-arid climatic responsive
open spaces. Sustainable Cities and Society, 59(May), Article 102198. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scs.2020.102198
Brown, R. D., & Gillespie, T. J. (1995). Microclimatic landscape design: Creating thermal
comfort and energy efficiency, 1. New York [Etc.] : Wiley, 1995.
Chandramauli, C. (2011). Census of India 2011. Retrieved May 30, 2020, from Office of
the Registrar General & Census Commissioner, India website: https://censusindia.
gov.in/2011-prov-results/paper2/data_files/india.
Chen, L., & Ng, E. (2012). Outdoor thermal comfort and outdoor activities: A review of
research in the past decade. Cities, 29(2), 118–125. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cities.2011.08.006
Chen, Y. C., Lin, T. P., & Matzarakis, A. (2014). Comparison of mean radiant temperature
from field experiment and modelling: A case study in Freiburg, Germany. Theoretical
and Applied Climatology, 118(3), 535–551. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-013-
1081-z
14
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
Cheng, V., Ng, E., Chan, C., & Givoni, B. (2011). Outdoor thermal comfort study in a sub-
tropical climate: A longitudinal study based in Hong Kong. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 56(1), 43–56. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-010-0396-z
de Abreu-Harbich, L. V., Labaki, L. C., & Matzarakis, A. (2015). Effect of tree planting
design and tree species on human thermal comfort in the tropics. Landscape and
Urban Planning, 138, 99–109. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2015.02.008
Dimoudi, A., & Nikolopoulou, M. (2003). Vegetation in the urban environment:
Microclimatic analysis and benefits. Energy and Buildings, 35, 69–76.
El-Bardisy, W. M., Fahmy, M., & El-Gohary, G. F. (2016). Climatic sensitive landscape
design: Towards a better microclimate through plantation in public schools, Cairo,
Egypt. Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 216(October (2015)), 206–216.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sbspro.2015.12.029
Emmanuel, R., & Johansson, E. (2007). Urban shading-A design option for the tropics? A
study in Colombo Smart Building Energy Management View project Climate-
conscious design of low-income housing areas in Guayaquil, Ecuador View project.
Sri Lanka Article in International Journal of Climatology. https://doi.org/10.1002/
joc.1609
Eniolu Morakinyo, T., & Lam, Y. F. (2016). Simulation study on the impact of tree-
configuration, planting pattern and wind condition on street-canyon’s micro-climate
and thermal comfort. Building and Environment, 103, 262–275. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.buildenv.2016.04.025
Eniolu Morakinyo, T., Kong, L., Ka-Lun Lau, K., Yuan, C., & Ng, E. (2017). A study on the
impact of shadow-cast and tree species on in-canyon and neighborhood’s thermal
comfort. Building and Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.01.005
Fröhlich, D. (2016). Development of a microscale model for the thermal environment in
complex areas. Albert-Ludwigs-University Freiburg.
Fröhlich, D., & Matzarakis, A. (2013). Modeling of changes in thermal bioclimate:
Examples based on urban spaces in Freiburg, Germany. Theoretical and Applied
Climatology, 111(3–4), 547–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-012-0678-y
Fröhlich, D., & Matzarakis, A. (2018). Spatial estimation of thermal indices in urban areas —
Basics of the SkyHelios model (pp. 1–14). https://doi.org/10.3390/atmos9060209
Grimmond, C. S. B., Souch, C., & Hubble, M. D. (1996). Influence of tree cover on
summertime surface energy balance fluxes, San Gabriel Valley, Los Angeles C.
Climate Research, 6(1–2), 45–57. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00242527
Hadavi, M., & Pasdarshahri, H. (2021). Impacts of urban buildings on microclimate and
cooling systems efficiency: Coupled CFD and BES simulations. Sustainable Cities and
Society, 67, Article 102740. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102740
He, B. J., Ding, L., & Prasad, D. (2020a). Relationships among local-scale urban
morphology, urban ventilation, urban heat island and outdoor thermal comfort
under sea breeze influence. Sustainable Cities and Society, 60, Article 102289. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2020.102289
He, B. J., Ding, L., & Prasad, D. (2020b). Urban ventilation and its potential for local
warming mitigation: A field experiment in an open low-rise gridiron precinct.
Sustainable Cities and Society, 55, Article 102028. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scs.2020.102028
He, B. J., Ding, L., & Prasad, D. (2020c). Wind-sensitive urban planning and design:
Precinct ventilation performance and its potential for local warming mitigation in an
open midrise gridiron precinct. Journal of Building Engineering, 29, Article 101145.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jobe.2019.101145
Herrmann, J., & Matzarakis, A. (2010). Influence of mean radiant temperature on thermal
comfort of humans in idealized urban environments (April 2010) Retrieved from (pp.
522–527). Berichte Des Meteorologischen Institute http://www.researchgate.ne
t/publication/224944666_Use_of_a_mobile_platform_for_assessing_urban_heat_stre
ss_in_Rotterdam/file/32bfe50eec50357f54.pdf#page=522.
Hien, W. N., Kardinal jusuf, S., Samsudin, R., Eliza, A., & Ignatius, M. (2011). A climatic
responsive urban planning model for high density city: Singapore’s commercial
district. International Journal of Sustainable Building Technology and Urban
Development, 2(4), 323–330. https://doi.org/10.5390/SUSB.2011.2.4.323
Hong, B., & Lin, B. (2015). Numerical studies of the outdoor wind environment and
thermal comfort at pedestrian level in housing blocks with different building layout
patterns and trees arrangement. Renewable Energy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
renene.2014.05.060
Höppe, P. (1999). The physiological equivalent temperature - a universal index for the
biometeorological assessment of the thermal environment. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 43(2), 71–75. https://doi.org/10.1007/s004840050118
Hwang, R. L., Lin, T. P., & Matzarakis, A. (2011). Seasonal effects of urban street shading
on long-term outdoor thermal comfort. Building and Environment, 46(4), 863–870.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2010.10.017
India Meteorological Department. (2019). Retrieved December 28, 2019, from http://
www.imd.gov.in/WelcomeToIMD/Welcome.php.
Indian Climate - Climate of Patna. (n.d.). Retrieved March 29, 2021, from https://www.
indianclimate.com/show-data.php?request=NNO28V3MDK.
Jiang, Y., Han, X., Shi, T., & Song, D. (2019). Microclimatic impact analysis of multi-
dimensional indicators of streetscape fabric in the medium spatial zone. International
Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health. https://doi.org/10.3390/
ijerph16060952
Kong, F., Sun, C., Liu, F., Yin, H., Jiang, F., Pu, Y., … Dronova, I. (2016). Energy-saving
potential of fragmented green spaces due to their temperature regulating ecosystem
services in the summer. Applied Energy, 183, 1428–1440. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
apenergy.2016.09.070
Kong, L., Lau, K. K. L., Yuan, C., Chen, Y., Xu, Y., Ren, C., & Ng, E. (2017). Regulation of
outdoor thermal comfort by trees in Hong Kong. Sustainable Cities and Society, 31,
12–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2017.01.018
Lai, A., Maing, M., & Ng, E. (2017). Observational studies of mean radiant temperature
across different outdoor spaces under shaded conditions in densely built
V. Raman et al.
environment. Building and Environment. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2016.12.034
Lee, H., & Mayer, H. (2013). Urban human-biometeorology supports urban planning to
handle the challenge by increasing severe heat. Plea, 2013(September).
Lee, H., Mayer, H., & Chen, L. (2016). Contribution of trees and grasslands to the
mitigation of human heat stress in a residential district of Freiburg, Southwest
Germany. Landscape and Urban Planning, 148, 37–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
landurbplan.2015.12.004
Lin, T. P., Matzarakis, A., & Hwang, R. L. (2010). Shading effect on long-term outdoor
thermal comfort. Building and Environment, 45(1), 213–221. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.buildenv.2009.06.002
Lindberg, F., & Grimmond, C. S. B. (2011). The influence of vegetation and building
morphology on shadow patterns and mean radiant temperatures in urban areas:
Model development and evaluation. Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 105(3),
311–323. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00704-010-0382-8
Matzarakis, A., & Matuschek, O. (2010). Estimation of sky view factor in complex
environment as a tool for applied climatological studies. In Proceedings of the 7th
Conference on Biometeorology Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg (pp. 534–539).
Matzarakis, A., & Wetterdienst, D. (2011). Mean radiant temperature in idealised urban
canyons-examples from Freiburg, Germany Development of methods for the
quantification of climate for tourism and other climatological applications-CTIS
(Climate-Tourism/Transfer-Information-Scheme) View project. Article in
International Journal of Biometeorology. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-010-0394-1
Matzarakis, A., Rutz, F., & Mayer, H. (2007). Modelling radiation fluxes in simple and
complex environments: Basics of the RayMan model. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 54(2), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-009-0261-0
Matzarakis, A., Rutz, F., & Mayer, H. (2010). Modelling radiation fluxes in simple and
complex environments: Basics of the RayMan model. International Journal of
Biometeorology, 54(2), 131–139. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00484-009-0261-0
Mayer, H., & Höppe, P. (1987). Thermal comfort of man in different urban environments.
Theoretical and Applied Climatology, 38(1), 43–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/
BF00866252
Mayer, H., & Matzarakis, A. (2006). Impact of street trees on the thermal comfort of
people in summer: A case study in Freiburg (Germany). Merchavim, 6, 285–300.
Ng, E. (2009). Policies and technical guidelines for urban planning of high-density cities -
air ventilation assessment (AVA) of Hong Kong. Building and Environment, 44(7),
1478–1488. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2008.06.013
Ogimet entrance. (2019). Retrieved December 25, 2019, from https://www.ogimet.
com/.
Oke, T. (2002). Boundary layer climates.
Oke, T. R., Crowther, J. M., McNaughton, K. G., Monteith, J. L., & Gardiner, B. (1989).
The micrometeorology of the urban forest [and discussion]. Philosophical
Transactions Biological Sciences, 324(1223), 335–349. https://doi.org/10.1098/
rstb.1989.0051
Park, M., Hagishima, A., Tanimoto, J., & Narita, K. I. (2012). Effect of urban vegetation
on outdoor thermal environment: Field measurement at a scale model site. Building
and Environment, 56, 38–46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2012.02.015
Peng, Y., Gao, Z., Buccolieri, R., Shen, J., & Ding, W. (2021). Urban ventilation of typical
residential streets and impact of building form variation. Sustainable Cities and
Society, 67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2021.102735
Perini, K., & Magliocco, A. (2014). Effects of vegetation, urban density, building height,
and atmospheric conditions on local temperatures and thermal comfort. Urban
Forestry & Urban Greening. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2014.03.003
Perini, K., Chokhachian, A., & Auer, T. (2018). Green streets to enhance outdoor comfort.
Nature based strategies for urban and building sustainability. https://doi.org/10.1016/
B978-0-12-812150-4.00011-2
Potchter, O., Cohen, P., & Bitan, A. (2006). Climatic behaviour of various urban parks
during hot and humid summer in the mediterranean city of Tel Aviv, Israel.
International Journal of Climatology, 2029(May (2006)), 1695–1711. https://doi.org/
10.1002/joc.1330
Potchter, O., Holst, J., Shashua-bar, L., Cohen, S., Yaakov, Y., Tanny, J., … Mayer, H.
(2010). Comparative study of trees impact on human thermal comfort in urban
streets under hot-arid and temperate climates. In 7th Conference on Biometeorology
Albert-Ludwigs-University of Freiburg.
Raman, V., Kumar, M., Sharma, A., Froehlich, D., & Matzarakis, A. (2021).
Quantification of thermal stress abatement by trees, its dependence on morphology
15
Sustainable Cities and Society 73 (2021) 103085
and wind: A case study at Patna, Bihar, India. Urban For. Urban Greening, 63, 127213.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2021.127213
Sangkertadi, S., & Reny, S. (2016). Pair influence of wind speed and mean radiant
temperature on outdoor thermal comfort of humid tropical environment. Journal of
Urban and Environmental Engineering, 10(2), 177–185. https://doi.org/10.4090/
juee.2016.v10n2.177185
Saun, C., Aghamohammadi, N., Ramakreshnan, L., & Meriam, N. (2019). Holistic
recommendations for future outdoor thermal comfort assessment in tropical
Southeast Asia : A critical appraisal. Sustainable Cities and Society, 46(September
(2018)), Article 101428. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101428
Sharmin, T., Steemers, K., & Matzarakis, A. (2015). Analysis of microclimatic diversity
and outdoor thermal comfort perceptions in the tropical megacity Dhaka,
Bangladesh. Building and Environment, 94, 734–750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2015.10.007
Shashua-Bar, L., & Hoffman, M. E. (2000). Vegetation as a climatic component in the
design of an urban street an empirical model for predicting the cooling effect of
urban green areas with trees. Energy and Buildings, 31. Retrieved from www.elsevier.
comrlocaterenbuild.
Shashua-Bar, L., Potchter, O., Bitan, A., & Yaakov, Y. (2009). Microclimate modelling of
street tree species effects within the varied urban morphology in the Mediterranean
city of Tel Aviv, Israel. International Journal of Climatology, 57(March (2009)), 44–57.
https://doi.org/10.1002/joc
Shashua-Bar, L., Pearlmutter, D., & Erell, E. (2011). The influence of trees and grass on
outdoor thermal comfort in a hot-arid environment. International Journal of
Climatology, 31(10), 1498–1506. https://doi.org/10.1002/joc.2177
Sun, S., Xu, X., Lao, Z., Liu, W., Li, Z., Higueras García, E., … Zhu, J. (2017). Evaluating
the impact of urban green space and landscape design parameters on thermal
comfort in hot summer by numerical simulation. Building and Environment, 123
(July), 277–288. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2017.07.010
Taleghani, M., Kleerekoper, L., Tenpierik, M., & Van Den Dobbelsteen, A. (2015).
Outdoor thermal comfort within five different urban forms in the Netherlands.
Building and Environment, 83, 65–78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
buildenv.2014.03.014
Tan, C. L., Wong, N. H., & Jusuf, S. K. (2013). Outdoor mean radiant temperature
estimation in the tropical urban environment. Building and Environment, 64,
118–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2013.03.012
Tan, Z., Lau, K. K. L., & Ng, E. (2015). Urban tree design approaches for mitigating
daytime urban heat island effects in a high-density urban environment. Energy and
Buildings, 114, 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enbuild.2015.06.031
Tripathi, P. (2019). At 43.2 degrees Celsius, maximum temperature in Patna touches four-
year high in June. Retrieved November 2, 2020, from The Times of India website:
Patna News - Times of India https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/patna/at-43-
2c-max-temp-in-patna-touches-4-yr-high-in-june/articleshow/69716576.cms.
VDI. (1998). 3787, Part I : Environmental Meteorology, Methods for the Human
Biometeorological Evaluation of Climate and Air Quality for the Urban and Regional
Planning at …. Part I: Climate. Beuth, Berlin (p. 3787).
Wai, K. M., Yuan, C., Lai, A., & Yu, P. K. N. (2020). Relationship between pedestrian-level
outdoor thermal comfort and building morphology in a high-density city. The Science
of the Total Environment, 708, Article 134516. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scitotenv.2019.134516
Wang, Y., & Akbari, H. (2016). The effects of street tree planting on Urban Heat Island
mitigation in Montreal. Sustainable Cities and Society, 27, 122–128. https://doi.org/
10.1016/j.scs.2016.04.013
Yang, W., Wong, N. H., & Lin, Y. (2015). Thermal comfort in high-rise urban
environments in Singapore. Procedia Engineering. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
proeng.2015.09.083
Yang, W., Wong, N. H., & Li, C.-Q. (2016). Effect of street design on outdoor thermal
comfort in an urban street in Singapore. Journal of Urban Planning and Development,
142(1). https://doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000285
Yang, Y., Zhou, D., Gao, W., Zhang, Z., Chen, W., & Peng, W. (2018). Simulation on the
impacts of the street tree pattern on built summer thermal comfort in cold region of
China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 37, 563–580. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
scs.2017.09.033
Zheng, S., Guldmann, J. M., Liu, Z., & Zhao, L. (2018). Influence of trees on the outdoor
thermal environment in subtropical areas: An experimental study in Guangzhou,
China. Sustainable Cities and Society, 42(March), 482–497. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.scs.2018.07.025
Annotations

A quantitative assessment of the dependence of outdoor

thermal-stresses on tree-building morphology and wind: A
case-study in sub-tropical Patna, India
Raman, Venkatesh; Kumar, Manoj; Sharma, Anjali; Matzarakis, Andreas

01 Venkatesh Raman Page 7

29/8/2021 20:39

02 Venkatesh Raman Page 7

29/8/2021 20:38

03 Venkatesh Raman Page 7

29/8/2021 20:40