4.5 Article

Trees as a solar control measure for southern-oriented street frontages. Analysis of a selected street model for a humid continental climate

期刊

URBAN ECOSYSTEMS
卷 25, 期 1, 页码 111-119

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11252-021-01128-0

关键词

Trees; Shading; Solar radiation; Street canyon; Sustainable planning

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The study aimed to analyze the potential of shading the southern frontage of a street by a single row of trees oriented along the E-W axis. Results showed that 20-25 year old Sycamore Maples located within 4 meters of buildings on a street 30 meters wide and 18 meters high could effectively provide solar protection. However, placing greenery 4-5 meters away led to a significant reduction in shading possibilities, with just 0% of wall surfaces shaded at a distance of 5 meters.
The present study is aimed at the analysis of possibilities for shading southern frontage of street oriented along the E-W axis by the single row of trees, parallel to the southern elevations. The effectiveness of solar control shading was tested depending on the geometric relationships between trees and buildings. Numerical simulation analyses were conducted in Rhinoceros (R) program for the street located in humid continental climate in city Plock, Poland (52 degrees 32 ' 50 N 19 degrees 42'00 E), for the day of the highest degree of total solar radiation in the year i.e. June 7th, during hours: 8.00a.m - 5.00 p.m. The analysis has proved that a row of 20-25 year old Sycamore Maple 'Rotterdam' in the street 30 m wide and 18 m high (H/W = 0.6), can provide solar protection for the southern frontage, especially when trees are located no more than 4 m away. Location of greenery within the range of 4 to 5 m from the buildings leads to a radical reduction in the possibility of shading the wall surfaces (at 5 m to 0%). Over 90% of the shading area of the ground floor facade walls was found when trees were within the distance 2 and 3 m away from the building.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据