POLLACK PERIODICA

An International Journal for Engineering and Information Sciences

DOI: 10.1556/606.2019.14.3.13
Vol. 14, No. 3, pp. 131–140 (2019)
www.akademiai.com

WATER BODY EFFECT ON MICROCLIMATE IN

SUMMERTIME: A CASE STUDY FROM PÉCS
1
Mohammad S. ALBDOUR*, 2 Balint BARANYAI
1
Marcel Breuer Doctoral School, Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology
University of Pécs, Boszorkany u. 2, 7624 Pécs, Hungary, e-mail: albdour_m@yahoo.com
2
Department of Building Structures and Energy Design, Institute of Architecture
Faculty of Engineering and Information Technology, Boszorkány u. 2
and János Szentágothai Research Center, Ifjúság u. 20, University of Pécs
H-7624 Pécs, Hungary, e-mail: balint.baranyai@mik.pte.hu

Received 2 January 2019; accepted 21 March 2019

Abstract: The relationship between water body (fountains) scale and climate parameters like
wind speed, air temperature, relative humidity, as well as thermal comfort index was modeled and
analyzed via Envi-met code. Taking the water impact and factors analysis as a research object, the
factors mainly discussed in this research are square area to water-body area ratio and the location
of the water element. However, the computational fluid dynamics simulations were conducted on
the following scenarios: 3% (original base case), 6%, and 9% of the total square’s area, then the
outputs of the two simulation results were compared to the original base case. The results
revealed that water scale has a slight effect on the micro-climate of the built environment in the
summertime in moderately warm-wet climate zone. However, it is beneficial to adjust
temperature and humidity in public spaces of central European cities. Nonetheless, the main aim
of this paper is to quantitatively investigate the impact of the water bodies on the urban weather
parameters and human thermal comfort under the influence of different scale ratios in Pecs-
Hungary.

Keywords: Water body, Microclimate, Summertime, Numerical tool

1. Introduction
The energy demand of the built environment is almost 50% of the total energy
demand of a national economy [1]. Water bodies have the ability to adjust the
surrounding microclimate. The temperature mitigating capacity of water bodies in an
urban environment can potentially reduce energy consumption, increase outdoor

*
Corresponding Author

HU ISSN 1788–1994 © 2019 The Author(s)

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

132 M. S. ALBDOUR, B. BARANYAI

thermal comfort and mitigate the Urban Heat Island (UHI) effect [2]. X. Sihan
conducted studies on the water effects of China’s traditional Lingnan garden and found
that water can effectively adjust the microclimate environment of garden [3], [4]. H. Du
taking Shanghai, for example, found that with a fixed area of the water body, the
geometry of the water body should be relatively simple. However, the existing studies
mainly focus on the climate effect of large-scale waters, the researches on the influence
of small-scale water on the public spaces are rare [3], [5]. Moreover, Mirela Robitu
found that greening and water have certain effect on the sunshine, temperature,
humidity and wind speed of square in summer through the simulation analysis on two
models which the difference is whether having the greening and water [3], [6].

1.1. Physical characteristic of water

The physical characteristics of the water include the area, depth, and shape. The
expansion of the water area can increase the evaporation area of the water surface, and
then increase the latent heat exchange between water and atmospheric environment [7].

1.2. Water body effects on urban microclimate

In order to control the urban temperature, architects and urban planners have
employed water bodies in their design [8]. A study in Singapore found that air
temperatures near water features, like ponds and water walls, were found cooler by up
to 1.8°C as compared to surrounding built areas during sunny, clear days [9].
Furthermore, a study by Nishimura [10] shows that air temperatures above an urban
water pond was 1°C to 2°C lower as compared to the surrounding park during the
daytime and with the introduction of water sprays the reduction is increased. Although
most of the researches have shown clear evidence of water bodies’ cooling effect, there
is still a need to have a better understanding of the issues of thermal environments being
influenced by the urban water bodies and its association with the microclimate.
Therefore, the effective use of urban water bodies could be established within limited
spaces in urban areas needs more investigation.

2. Methodology
As a practicing architect, who have to deal with energy efficiency in real urban
condition [1], the heterogeneity makes it difficult to assess the cooling benefits and to
isolate the effects of the individual parameters (like shape, surface area, wind condition
or solar radiation) under the complex physic process involved in the urban meteorology
[2]. As an alternative method, an outdoor numerical model was conducted in the
summertime at Széchenyi square in Pécs-Hungary. In this section, the methodology is
presented.

2.1. Model description

The weather parameters namely (air temperature (TA), relative humidity (RH),
Wind Speed (WS), Main Radiant Temperature (MRT), as well as the Predicted Mean

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

 WATER BODY EFFECTS ON MICROCLIMATE 133

Vote (PMV) will be studied. However, in order to investigate the effects of water,
different scales are simulated to evaluate the role of the water body in the case study’s
area.

2.2. Numerical simulation and settings

Problem-solving matrix creates sustainable solutions without common and widely
used technical systems is employed [11], with the aim to predict the microclimatic
changes in an urban environment, the work started by creating a simulation model via
ENVI-met and unified set parameters, the original case study being used in this work is
the urban setting and water body of Pécs city center as shown in Fig. 1. In addition, the
Original Base Case (OBC), two more scenarios were posited, in all cases, the wind
direction is 5◦ (blowing North-East), Geographic coordinates of Pécs, Hungary’s
Latitude: 46°04′59″ N, longitude: 18°13′59″ E, elevation above sea level is 153 m, and
the total area is almost 11222 m2.

Fig. 1. ENVI-met original base case model

On one hand two independent water bodies in the public square had previously
designed and constructed. However, they were modeled by the author for simulating
water area occupancy, the case was named the original base case (the real situation in
the square at the present). On the other hand, two more of water body scales are
simulated and compared with each other as well as with the original bas case. The water
area is divided into three occupies of 3%, 6%, 9%, in order to illustrate the effects of

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

134 M. S. ALBDOUR, B. BARANYAI

water surface on the surrounding microclimate. Nonetheless, Fig. 2 shows the satellite
image of the real scenario (original base case), in this case, water constitutes around 3%
of the total site’s area as it can be seen in Table I.

Fig. 2. The water bodies location of the case study’s site [12]

Table I
The water element analysis of the case study’s site (original case)

Water element number Area m2

1 169
2 120
Total 289 m2 (3%) of the total study area

In additional to the original case two more scenarios were modeled, which can be
seen in Fig. 3. They are 6% and 9% water-square area ratio as it can be seen in two,
three, and four rectangles. However, the water elements will be positioned in a way not
to block or hinder the motion in and around the square with achieving the highest water
body area ratio as shown in Fig. 3.

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

 WATER BODY EFFECTS ON MICROCLIMATE 135

Fig. 3. The original case, first scenario and second scenario from left to right, respectively

3. Results and discussion

3.1. The effect of water body on air temperature and relative humidity
The simulation results of the air temperature and relative humidity on the original
base case 3%, 6%, and 9% of the water-square area ratio are shown in Fig. 4 and
discussed below:
• On average the air temperature on the 21st of July at 14:00 PM is 305 K, which
means the temperature ranges from warm to hot;
• Moreover, the relative humidity is 34.5%, which falls within the comfort range
in the summertime;
• It can be noticed from the mentioned figure that the air temperature over most of
the spaces is constant or with little enhancement 0.3 K compared to original
base case;
• The average relative humidity was found to increase with increasing the water
element scale;
• Nine percent water-square ratio scenario has achieved the minimum temperature
among the set of scenarios 304.5 K as well as the higher relative humidity
36.7%;
• It can be noticed from the mentioned figures that the air temperature over most
of the spaces is constant or with little enhancement 0.3 K compared to original
base case;
• The temperature of the water element is lower than the temperature of the
surrounding built-up area by 0.6-1.5 K;
• Relatively large water has shown a high temperature impact close to their edges
and in downwind areas;
• The average relative humidity was found to increase with increasing the water
element scale;

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

136 M. S. ALBDOUR, B. BARANYAI

• Evaporation from open water bodies may lower the temperature, but on the
other hand also increases the humidity, which dampens the positive effect on
thermal comfort.
It can be clearly seen from Fig. 4 that areas close to water body experienced a lower
air temperature and higher relative humidity than other cases. However, the water
element has a significant impact on TA and RH just within 1-2 meters distance from the
water body. It can therefore be concluded that the evaporation cooling effect on water
body is strongly impacted nearby spaces.
Furthermore, this research shows a very little thermal response due to the larger
scale of the square when compared with the water scale.

Original (3%) 6% 9%
105 105 105

95 95 95

Pot. Temperature
85 85 85

below 303.55 K
75 75 75
303.55 to 303.97 K

303.97 to 304.39 K 65 65 65

304.39 to 304.81 K

Y (m)
55
Y (m)

55
Y (m)

55

304.81 to 305.23 K
45 45
45

305.23 to 305.66 K
35 35
305.66 to 306.08 K 35

306.08 to 306.50 K 25
25 25

306.50 to 306.92 K 15 15
15

above 306.92 K
5 5
5

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 X (m) X (m)
X (m)

105 105 105

Relative Humidity 95 95 95

85 85
below 30.30 % 85

30.30 to 31.27 % 75 75 75

31.27 to 32.25 % 65 65
65

32.25 to 33.22 %
Y (m)

55
Y (m )

55
Y (m)

55

33.22 to 34.20 %
45 45
34.20 to 35.17 % 45

35.17 to 36.15 % 35
35 35

36.15 to 37.13 % 25 25
25

37.13 to 38.10 %
15 15
15

above 38.10 %
5 5
5

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 X (m)
X (m)
X (m)

Fig. 4. The effect of water body current situation, 6%, and 9% water-square ratio on air
temperature and relative humidity

3.2. The effect of water body on wind speed and mean radiant temperature
Three parameters of the water body were conducted and analyzed. However, Fig. 5
shows the average wind speed and mean radiant temperature in the cases after applying

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

 WATER BODY EFFECTS ON MICROCLIMATE 137

the proposed water scales to the selected square. In general, it can be seen from the
results below that:
• The water body has no effect on increasing or decreasing the wind speed 1.4 m/s
was seen in almost all scenarios;
• Water body has a significant impact on MRT, the improvement of (7 K)
compared to the original base case was observed (Fig. 5);
• On average radiant temperature was found to decrease with increasing the water
element scale;
• Areas close to water body experienced to lower mean radiant temperature than
other cases of the public place. However, the water element has a significant
impact on MRT just within 1-2 meters distance from the water body. It can
therefore be concluded that the evaporation cooling effect on water bodies is
strongly impacted nearby spaces.

Original (3%) 6% 9%
105 105
105

Wind Speed 95
95
95

below 0.23 m/s 85

85
85

0.23 to 0.45 m/s 75

75
75

0.45 to 0.67 m/s

65 65
65
0.67 to 0.89 m/s

0.89 to 1.11 m/s Y (m) 55

Y (m)

55
Y (m)

55

1.11 to 1.33 m/s

45 45 45

1.33 to 1.56 m/s

1.56 to 1.78 m/s 35 35 35

1.78 to 2.00 m/s 25

25 25

above 2.00 m/s

15 15 15

5 5
5

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50
X (m) X (m) X (m)

105

105
105

Mean Radiant Temperature 95

95

95

below 310.10 K 85
85
85
310.10 to 315.89 K
75
315.89 to 321.68 K 75 75

321.68 to 327.47 K 65
65 65

327.47 to 333.25 K
Y (m)

55
333.25 to 339.04 K
Y (m)

55 55
Y (m )

339.04 to 344.83 K
45
45 45

344.83 to 350.62 K

350.62 to 356.41 K 35
35
35

above 356.41 K
25 25
25

15
15 15

5
5 5

0 10 20 30 40 50
X (m) 0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
X (m) X (m)

Fig. 5. The effect of water body current situation, 6%, and 9% water-square ratio
on wind speed and mean radiant temperature

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

138 M. S. ALBDOUR, B. BARANYAI

3.3. The effect of water body on predicated mean vote and CO2
Numerical simulation was used to analyze the water body effect on predicated mean
vote and CO2 in the summertime. Nevertheless, results revealed that:
• The water body has only minor effect on increasing or decreasing the predicted
mean vote and negligible impact on CO2 in this particular work. Moreover,
water body has a modest effect on PMV, the enhancement of 0.4 when
compared to the original base case was spotted (Fig. 6).

Original (3%) 6% 9%
105 105 105

PMV Value 95 95 95

below 2.39 [??] 85 85 85

2.39 to 2.80 [??] 75 75

75

2.80 to 3.21 [??]

65 65
65

3.21 to 3.62 [??]

Y (m)
55
3.62 to 4.03 [??]

Y (m)
55
Y (m)

55

4.03 to 4.44 [??] 45

45
45

4.44 to 4.85 [??]

35
35
35

4.85 to 5.26 [??]

25
25
5.26 to 5.67 [??] 25

above 5.67 [??] 15

15
15

5
5
5

0 10 20 30 40 50
X (m) 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 X (m)
X (m)

105 105

CO2 105

95 95
95
below 356.15 ppm

356.15 to 356.73 ppm 85 85 85

356.73 to 357.31 ppm 75 75 75

357.31 to 357.90 ppm

65 65 65

357.90 to 358.48 ppm

Y (m)

55
358.48 to 359.06 ppm
Y (m)

55
Y (m)

55

359.06 to 359.65 ppm 45

45 45

359.65 to 360.23 ppm 35

35 35

360.23 to 360.82 ppm

25 25
25
above 360.82 ppm
15 15
15

5 5
5

0 10 20 30 40 50 0 10 20 30 40 50
0 10 20 30 40 50 X (m) X (m)
X (m)

Fig. 6. The effect of water body current situation, 6%, and 9% water-square ratio
on PMV and CO2

4. Conclusion

Through the numerical simulation to analyze the water body’s effect on

microclimate in summer, it can be concluded that:

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

 WATER BODY EFFECTS ON MICROCLIMATE 139

• Water body has only a slight effect on increasing or decreasing the predicted
mean vote and other weather parameters except on relative humidity and air
temperature;
• The temperature of a water element is lower than the temperature of the
surrounding built-up area by 0.6-1.5 K;
• The water element has a significant impact on TA and RH within 1-2 meters
distance from the water body;
• Water body has a great effect on mean radiant temperature, the improvement of
7 K compared to the original base case was observed.

5. Recommendation for future study

• More investigations are needed in different climate zones especially in hot-dry
regions;
• Further researches are required to study the large water bodies like (rivers and
lakes) effects on microclimate in Central Europe.

Open Access statement

This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution 4.0 International License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/),
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided
the original author and source are credited, a link to the CC License is provided, and
changes - if any - are indicated. (SID_1)

Reference
[1] Baranyai B., Kistelegdi I. Energy management monitoring and control of public buildings,
Pollack Periodica, Vol. 9, No. 2, 2014, pp. 77–88.
[2] Syafii N. I., Ichinose M., Wong N. H., Kumakura E., Jusuf S. K., Chigusa K. Experimental
Study on the Influence of urban water body on thermal environment at outdoor scale
model, Procedia Engineering, Vol. 169, 2016, pp. 191–198.
[3] Jin H., Shao T., Zhang R. Effect of water body forms on microclimate of residential
district, Energy Procedia, Vol. 134, 2017, pp. 256–265.
[4] XUE Si-han, WAnG Kun, XIAO Yi-qiang. A simulation research on the thermal
environment around water body in the traditional Lingnan Garden Taking Yu Yin Shan
Fang as an example, Landscape Architecture, No. 6, 2014, pp. 50‒53.
[5] Du H., Xuejun S., Hong J., Zenghui K., Zhibao W., Yongli C. Research on the cooling
island effects of water body: A case study of Shanghai, China, Ecological Indicators,
Vol. 67, 2016, pp. 31–38.
[6] Robitu M., Musy M., Inard C., Groleau D. Modeling the influence of vegetation and water
pond on urban microclimate, Solar Energy, Vol. 80, No. 4, 2006, pp. 435–447.
[7] Zeng Z., Zhou X., Li L. The impact of water on microclimate in Lingnan Area, Procedia
Engineering, Vol. 205, 2017, pp. 2034–2040.

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC

140 M. S. ALBDOUR, B. BARANYAI

[8] Shafaghat A., Manteghi G., Keyvanfar A., Lamit H. B. Saito K. Street geometry factors
influence urban microclimate in tropical coastal cities: A review, Environmental and
Climate Technologies, Vol. 17, No. 1, 2016, pp. 61–75.
[9] Syafii, N., M. Ichinose, E. Kumakura, K. Chigusa, S. Jusuf, and N. Wong. Enhancing the
potential cooling benefits of urban water bodies, Journal of Environmental Design and
Planning, Vol. 13, 2017, pp. 29‒40.
[10] Nishimura N., Nomura T., Iyota H., Kimoto S. Novel water facilities for creation of
comfortable urban micrometeorology, Solar Energy, Vol. 64, No. 4-6, 1998, pp. 197–207.
[11] Kistelegdi I., Baranyai B. Dynamic simulations supported indoor climate and energy
building modeling, International Journal of Engineering and Technology, Vol. 5, No. 2,
2013, pp. 181–186.
[12] Google Search, Google, www.google.com/maps/@46.0767199,18.2284531,320a,35y,
3.69h,0.48t/data=!3m1!1e3, (last visited 1 March 2019).

Pollack Periodica 14, 2019, 3

Unauthenticated | Downloaded 11/04/20 02:01 PM UTC