Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

ScienceDirect
Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234

8th International Conference on Sustainability in Energy and Buildings, SEB-16, 11-13 September
2016, Turin, ITALY

Simulation Based Analysis on the Energy Conservation Effect of

Green Wall Installation for Different Building Types in a Campus
Sinchita Poddar, Dong Yoon Park, Seongju Chang*
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology (KAIST), 291 Daehak-ro, Yuseong-
gu, Daejeon 34141, Republic of Korea

Abstract

The energy consumption behaviour in campus buildings are less well understood than other non-domestic buildings.
Energy simulation analysis is a beneficial method in measuring building energy consumption as well as investigating
different energy management strategies for the existing buildings. This research has been established through
investigating the heating and cooling load reduction potential of green wall as an energy saving measure for three
different activity buildings (i.e., research, dormitory and administration) at KAIST campus, using a simulation tool.
The focus has been facilitated while exploring how different functional buildings act in response to vertical vegetation
in terms of energy savings, considering operational pattern, occupancy schedule and physical characteristics as the
deciding parameters. Maximum occupancy during night time in dormitory turned out to be advantageous for reduced
heating energy consumption (60%) compared to the research (7%) and administrative (3%) building, which are mostly
cooling and day-time dominated. This is because; the largest savings in heating due to vegetation were associated with
extreme temperature condition, which is close to zero or sub-zero. Conversely, in summer, vegetation led to become
less effective in saving cooling energy, especially for the research and administrative facility where cooling is crucial
due to daytime dominated occupancy. Moreover, the cooling energy savings was found to be closely associated with
the area covered by plants irrespective of opaque wall and fenestrations
© 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of KES International.
Keywords: Green wall; Campus buildings; Occupancy; Energy saving measure; Energy simulation

* Corresponding author. Tel.: +82-42-350-3627

E-mail address: schang@kaist.ac.kr

1876-6102 © 2017 Published by Elsevier Ltd. This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
Peer-review under responsibility of KES International.
doi:10.1016/j.egypro.2017.03.024
 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234 227

1.
Introduction

Campus buildings need to go through the process of energy modelling and simulation in order to identify the current
energy consumption patterns. This is crucial since these energy profiles disclose the fact that whether the existing
practices and policies relating to demand management of the campus buildings set by the facility managers are
potential enough in optimizing energy efficiency. Moreover, research scope for creating new ideas and technologies
for an efficient management of campus buildings get promoted. In this study, the energy saving potential of green
wall has been investigated for different types of campus buildings using a simulation tool. Addition of vertical
vegetation on building façade ameliorates the thermal performance for cooling through reducing the temperature,
whereas the concept of applying vegetation around structures help for conserving energy for space heating through
windbreaks [1]. Wind chill and infiltration of cold air along with the associated heat loss by conduction/convection
through façade and fenestrations are the most significant contributing factors in the poor energy performance of
buildings during heating season [2], [3], [4] and [5].
The main purpose of this research is to explore if vertical vegetation is effective in reducing cooling and heating
consumption of three activity (dormitory, research and office) buildings at KAIST campus, Daejeon, South Korea, as
a proposed energy saving measure. Considering energy saving strategies, different building types act differently in
response to different variables in terms of heating and cooling energy savings as well as human comfort levels.
Occupancy schedule, operational patterns and physical characteristics are the crucial factors that need to be considered
while making policies or regulations for different campus buildings. The thermal performance of green wall has been
explored through generating green wall models in Design Builder.
Though there are different classifications of vertical vegetation systems, however this research used the concept of
green wall where pre-vegetated sheets have been attached to the structural wall [6]. In an attempt to minimize the
variations encountered in experimental studies, seasonal changes of LAI values have been incorporated in this study.
South Korea, classified of having a temperate climate, possesses quiet notable temperature difference between the
hottest period of summer (22 to 30 °C) and the coldest winter (5 to −2.5 °C). Hence this research findings are not
limited to only summer or winter, rather targeted to investigate the kWh savings and the heat flux reduction of the wall
due to green wall throughout the whole year, considering summer (June, July, August), fall (September, October,
November), winter (December, January, February) and spring (March, April, May).

Nomenclature

KAIST Korea Advanced Institute of Science and Technology

LAI Leaf Area Index

2.
Modeling of the targeted buildings

Geometry for each considered building was created in Design Builder, where the required data was extracted from
the designed drawings and technical specifications supplied by KAIST facility management team. The key façade
parameters used in the building model were based on the ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G Standards. Moreover, being
representative of campus facilities, our studied buildings are operated under the strict schedule of KAIST facility
management system for cooling and heating supply (Table 1); which included cooling and heating set-point
temperatures for the dormitory as 24
and 22
respectively, whereas for the research and administrative building as
26
and 20
. Weather data for Daejeon has been customized using the basic weather file issued from THE KOREAN
SOLAR ENERGY SOCIETY website

The considered residential facility is a fifteen storied dormitory building with an overall size of 16,664 square meter
while accommodating 600 students, whereas the research facility is five storied with 3,328 square meter and possesses
a large south facing glass façade (66% per floor area) which has direct impacts over the heating and cooling energy
consumption of the building. And the office facility is the main administrative building of the KAIST campus having
228 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234

an area of 5,040 square meter with a fenestration percentage of approximately 50%, 28%, 42% and 42% in south,
north, east and west façade of each floor respectively.

Table 1. Cooling and heating supply plan of the campus facilities

Building Type Outdoor Temperature Indoor Temperature Cooling/Heating Period Cooling/Heating Schedule
Research /Administrative Above 29
Below 29
2012.6.15-2012.8.31 (Cooling) Weekday: 09:00-17:00
Facility Above 10
Below 18
2012.11.15-2012.3.31(Heating) Weekday: 09:00-17:00

Dormitory Facility Above 29
Below 29
2012.6.15-2012.8.31 (Cooling) Weekday:

09:00-17:00,
14:00-16:00,
20:00-02:00
Weekend &Holiday: 12:00-
24:00
Above 0
22
standard 2012.10.15-2012.4.30
: 19:30-22:30
(Heating)  : 04:30-06:00
Under 0
22
standard
: 18:00-20:30
 : 23:00-01:00
 : 04:00-06:00

2.1.
Modeling of green wall

The green wall models for the considered dormitory, research and office buildings were generated in Design Builder
(Fig. 1 (a), (b) and (c)), considering the outer most surface of the exterior wall as a soil layer of 80 mm, acting as
growing media for the plants. H. helix was selected as the plant material since it represents a very commonly growing
landscape plant at the campus. The soil properties used in the building model were based on the literature regarding
vertical vegetation parameters [7]. The leaf area index was estimated by referring to an ecological survey carried out
in UK [14] and counting the area of ivy leaves in an image of a random vegetated façade of KAIST campus. The soil
properties and the key façade parameters used in the building models were based on the ASHRAE 90.1 Appendix G
Standards and the literature regarding vertical vegetation parameters [16].

Table 2. Soil Properties and plant parameters of green wall model

Soil properties
Conductivity (W/m-K) - 0.40
Specific heat (J/Kg-K) – 1100.00
Density (kg/m3) – 641.00
Plant parameters
Height of plants-0.2m, Leaf emissivity-0.95, Leaf absorptivity-0.78, Minimum stomatal
resistance-180 s/m
Leaf Area Index- 2.78 (summer), 4.29 (fall), 3.66 (winter), 3.72 (spring)

(a) (b) (c)

Fig. 1. Design Builder geometry model of the (a) dormitory; (b) administrative and (c) research building with green wall
 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234 229

2.2.
Validation of the Simulation Model

In order to assure the validity of the simulation outcomes, the simulated annual energy consumption results (without
vegetation) were compared with the actual monthly energy consumption data of the studied buildings (Fig. 2). Whole
building energy consumption included all the electricity and gas uses in the building (by lighting systems, HVAC
system, and appliances).

400000 Energy consumption from simulation results Energy consumption from simulation results
80000
Actual building energy consumption Actual building energy consumption

Total Energy (KWh)

Total Energy (KWh)

300000
60000

200000
40000

100000
20000

0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Time (Months), 2012 Time (Months), 2012

150000
Total Electrity (KWh)

100000

50000
Energy consumption from simulation results
Actual building energy consumption
0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Time (Months), 2012

Fig. 2. Annual building energy simulation profiles (Simulation vs. Empirical Data) for the residential, research and administration facility

A noticeable difference between the simulation results and the actual energy consumption in the coldest months of
the year: i.e. December, January and February has been found for the dormitory. The studied building is equipped
with a solar thermal system and the heat transferred from the solar thermal panel to the building varies with the daily
weather conditions. Considering the research building, the simulation results reported maximum energy use in July,
whereas actual energy profile showed that August is the one having highest energy consumption (Fig. 2), which is
explainable as August was the hottest month of Korea in the year 2012 [13].However, in the weather data generated
from Design Builder simulation, the mean air temperature of July and August found to be quiet similar. However, In
practice, the discrepancies that are being observed between energy models’ predictions and actual building energy use
resulted from a combination of inaccurate assumptions of different occupancy behavioral parameters as well as
technical assumptions related to building technical parameters, irrespective of building functionalitites. Based on the
above mentioned justifications and reasons, authors would like to claim that the simulated energy consumption of the
buildings is pratically reliable and valid. Therefore the same energy models were used to evaluate the other defined
scenarios of green wall intallations.

3.
Results of the performed simulations

3.1.
Dormitory building

For a heating dominant region like Korea, wind shielding effect of vegetation is beneficiary as it ensures a lower
infiltration rate and hence, a lower heating power requirement (Fig. 3 (a)); but during cooling period, wind shielding
can be detrimental since it increases the resistance of convective air film, resulting an increase in building surface
temperature exposed to the sun. Hence, in certain months, reduction of potential natural ventilation might increase
conductive heat gain through green wall (Fig. 3(c). However, the wind-shielding effect of vegetation on cooling is
230 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234

insignificant when compared with the substantial energy savings due to the reduced solar gain from shading (Fig. 3
(b)).
400000 60000 Cooling (Bare Facade)
Heating (Bare Facade)
Cooling (Green Wall)
Heating (Green Wall) 50000
Heating Load (KWh)

300000
40000

Cooling Load (KWh)

200000 30000

20000
100000
10000

0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Time (Months) Time (Months)

(a) (b)
50000

0
Energy Transfer (KWh)

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-50000

-100000 Energy transfer through Bare façade

Energy Transfer through Green Wall
-150000

-200000 Time (Months)

(c)

Fig. 3. (a) Heating load comparison; (b) Cooling load comparison; (c) Heat transfer through bare façade and green wall while vertical vegetation
attached to all over the building

3.2.
Research building

Though the cooling period in the simulation included June, July and August, however, a constant cooling
requirements (Fig. 4(b)) throughout the year can be explained by the fact that naturally South-facing façades receive
the most sun light which creates a possibility of overheating, particularly in summer months [8]. The most important
role of South-facing facades that is to utilize available solar energy to heat up a building in winter had actually become
a drawback in case of this simulated building considering the cooling performance. Full coverage of building facades
by vertical vegetation did not possess significant impacts over the heating energy consumption of the building while
the cooling energy savings were generally lower. Overall there was a 7% advantage in heating consumption (Fig. 4(a))
whereas for cooling load there has been 1% and 0.16% increase as well as 1.5% and 3% decrease during winter,
summer, spring and fall respectively (Fig. 4(b)).
In the heating season, the presence of foliage around the building ameliorated the heating energy through wind
breaking effect, though not considerate enough. On the contrary, during cooling season, high percentage of glazing on
north and southern façade ended up increasing the cooling energy as the fenestrations were not covered with
vegetation, rather only the opaque walls.
150000 Cooling (Bare Facade)
Heating (Bare Facade) 80000 Cooling (Green Wall)
Heating (Green Wall) 70000
Cooling Load (KWh)

60000
100000
Heating Load (KWh)

50000
40000

50000 30000
20000
10000
0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Time (Months) Time (Months)
(a) (b)
 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234 231

15000

10000

Energy Transfer (KWh)

5000

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
-5000
Energy transfer though Bare façade
-10000
Energy transfer through Green Wall
-15000

-20000 Time (Months)

(c)
Fig. 4. (a) Heating load comparison; (b) Cooling load comparison; (c) Heat transfer through bare façade and green wall while vertical vegetation
attached to all over the building

3.3.
Administrative building

When green wall was considered to be attached to all four orientation walls, cooling energy got detrimental with
around 3% increase throughout the year (Fig.5 (b)). In summer, significant cooling energy savings could occur due to
the reduced solar gain from vegetation (Fig.5 (c)). However the evident window wall ratios of south, east and west
facades, which considered being the major source of heat gain in summer, have not been covered with foliage.
Consequently, the benefit of protection from direct solar radiation that is lowering the energy cooling load has not
been achieved significantly for our considered building. Moreover, the wind shielding effect of green wall might
increase the fenestration temperature by increasing the resistance of the opaque walls and resulting more conductive
heat gain into the building.

However, the wind-shielding effects of vegetation on cooling energy are minor compared to the substantial advantages
over heating energy consumption; the heating energy reduced up to 3% and 8% for winter and spring (Fig. 5(a)) in
case of full foliage attached around the building.

140000 Cooling (Bare Facade)

Heating (Bare Facade)
120000 Cooling (Green Wall)
120000 Heating (Green Wall)
Heating Load (KWh)

Cooling Load(KWh)

100000
100000
80000 80000

60000 60000

40000 40000
20000 20000
0 0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec
Time (Months) Time (Months)
(a) (b)

5000
Energy Transfer (KWh)

0
Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

-5000

-10000
Energy transfer through Bare façade
Energy transfer through Green Wall
-15000

-20000 Time (Months)

(c)
Fig.5. (a) Heating load comparison; (b) Cooling load comparison; (c) Heat transfer through bare façade and green wall while vertical vegetation
232 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234

attached to all over the building

4.
Discussion

4.1.
Building functionality and green wall

Examination of energy consumption is considered to be especially relevant for the campus buildings, where
depending on the functionality, the heating and cooling supply plans as well as occupancy profiles have some unique
features (such as high variability within small time intervals and often periods of low but non-zero occupancy).

The energy savings potentials of green wall have been found to be variant for the studied residential, research and
administrative building. Green wall managed to reduce the heating consumption 60%, 7% and 3% for the residential,
research and administrative building respectively, considering full ivy coverage of the building. Typically, a campus
dormitory building exhibits a unique occupancy pattern possessing higher to maximum occupancy level (percentage
of occupants present at a given moment) [9] during night time whereas periods of low but non zero occupancy at
daytime. The higher heating energy reduction of the dormitory building can be explained with its night time based
occupancy, when the outdoor temperature is reasonably much lower as well as close to zero or sub-zero. In heating
dominated climates, like Korea, the benefits of energy savings are mostly achieved from the wind-shielding effects of
vegetation, when incorporated in building façade. Vegetation as windbreaks or wind speed reductions of vegetation
are particularly advantageous in cold regions, where infiltration of air is considered to be the major contributor of total
heat loss from building façade and fenestrations [4]. Moreover, during night, when the contribution of winter sunlight
is null, the wind-chill effect is influential and hence the associated energy savings is greater. The lower air temperature
as well as the dominating wind and consequently the higher heating energy savings in the dormitory building supports
the fact that green wall works better under severe winter conditions. In addition, trapping of warmed air during daytime
and maintaining the temperature higher than the ambient at night contribute to energy savings. Administrative building
operated during day time (9am-7pm) and Research wing typically runs from morning till night. Extended operation
period up to night in research facility lead to greater heating energy savings (7%) as wind-chill effect is influential
after sunset and hence the associated energy savings is greater. However, during fall and spring months (November
and March), when the temperature is bit higher but the chilling effect of winter is quite evident, green wall managed
to reduce 44%,4.5%, and 0.5% average heating load for dormitory, research and administrative facility, indicating that
extreme weather conditions lead to a greater heating energy savings.

During cooling period, the cooling consumption got increased approximately 2% for the administrative building
(Fig. 5(b)), whereas for research facility this increase in negligible (Fig. 4(b)), though the heat gain through green wall
got reduced significantly for both cases (Fig. 4(c) and Fig. 5(c)). Administrative building and research wing generally
indicate a daytime dominated occupancy and high cooling load (Fig. 4(b) and Fig. 5(b)). Therefore, the main concern
for the buildings would be to reduce the cooling load throughout the year, especially in summer without compromising
occupancy comfort [10]. Gates reported that temperatures of sunlit leaves are frequently 10°C to 20°C above air
temperature and often reaching 50°C, which is close to the denaturation temperature for most plant proteins, required
for physiological processes [12]. Hence, the relative higher temperature in summer, turned out to be less effective in
cooling the interior as well as saving the energy for the administrative and research buildings. In addition to higher
temperature, higher glazing percentage turned out to be one of the causes for less thermal efficiency of plants layer.
On the contrary, the dormitory building showed 10% decrease in cooling load on average in the summer, which
indicates that occupancy in summer increases the energy consumption irrespective of the functionality of the building,
whereas, energy consumption is not that dependent on occupancy in winter [9].

4.2.
Building physical properties and green wall

The effectiveness of green wall in reducing energy consumption is directly related with the thermal effects of plants
on façade and fenestration. The main advantage of plants during daytime, especially in the cooling season comes from
 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234 233

the substantial energy savings due to reduced solar radiation from vegetation shading, hence the temperature reduction.
Previous studies showed that vertical vegetation decrease excessive heat transfer through concrete wall [6]. This
supports the significant amount solar gain reduction observed after applying vegetation in buildings’ facades (Fig.
3(c), Fig. 4(c) and Fig. 5(c)). In spite of having such a considerate reduction in thermal transfer, there has been
negligible improvement in cooling performance in summer for the two cooling dominated buildings. And the reason
behind lies in the higher percentage of glazed fenestrations these two buildings are possessing, which have not been
covered by foliage. The vertical vegetation only covered the opaque wall while increasing the R-value of the wall and
reducing heat transfer by conduction through the wall [11]. However, the main source of heat gain is heat transfer by
solar radiation through the fenestration where green vegetation has not been incorporated, led to increase the cooling
load in summer. Therefore, it is evident that to reduce cooling energy in a building, the main concern should be
protection of façade and fenestration from direct solar gain. On the contrary, the discontinuous and smaller
fenestrations, moreover the night based occupancy pattern managed to save approximately 10% cooling in summer
for the dormitory building. Presence of higher thermal mass in the wall layer ameliorated the heating performance of
the buildings. However, the insignificant improvement in both heating and cooling load (Fig. 5(a) and 5(b)) in case of
the administrative building indicated that façade treatment is not the only measure to consider while considering energy
retrofitting.
This study showed that green wall or vertical vegetation did not respond equally in terms of energy saving
potentiality. Though weather turned out to be strongly influential over the annual efficacy, however, functional pattern
of buildings, that is, the occupancy schedules as well as consequent HVAC operation possessed a direct influence over
the green wall performance. Energy consumption was found to be less dependent on occupancy in winter, while much
dependent in summer. In previous studies, a very much ideal condition (no occupancy, no HVAC system, no lighting
etc.) has been considered while adopting vertical greenery system regardless of experimental or modeling studies.
Therefore, the scope of space heating and cooling over an annual cycle, and mostly the potential of energy savings are
yet to be quantified. Hence these findings can be important consideration while incorporating green wall in campus
buildings near future. However, though this research is limited to campus facilities only, the findings could be
supportive for any activity buildings while green wall is the option to enhance insulation.

5.
Conclusion

The theory of vertical vegetation in energy savings was investigated for different types of buildings (residential,
research, office) at KAIST campus. A comparative analysis between the simulated energy consumption and the actual
energy usage of the studied buildings was conducted in this study. Design Builder was the main software used for the
simulation. The energy simulation data of the studied buildings demonstrated that plant layer on a façade can
effectively ameliorate the heating energy consumption of the building through reduced wind speed, particularly on
days with strong wind and zero or sub-zero temperature. Though extreme weather conditions turned out to be
beneficial for winter, converse findings were noted for the cooling season where plant layer has been less effective in
terms of façade thermal performance during relatively higher temperature. A higher magnitude of heating (60%),
cooling (10%) as well as total energy savings (31%) were achieved for the residential facility because of possessing
higher to maximum occupancy level during night. However, the research and administrative building did not show
any notable energy savings. The simulation results further explored that heat gain and heat loss through the walls can
be reduced significantly by covering the wall with green vegetation during summer and winter respectively. The
analysis also showed that plant layers covering the fenestration are likely to be most effective in reducing cooling load
for a glazing dominated building.
234 Sinchita Poddar et al. / Energy Procedia 111 (2017) 226 – 234

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by Grant No. EEWS-2015-N01150033 from EEWS Research Project of the KAIST
EEWS Research Center (EEWS: Energy, Environment, Water and Sustainability) and financially supported by Korea
Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport(MOLIT) as U-City Master and Doctor Course Grant Program.

References

[1] Dewalle DR, Heisler GM. Use of Windbreaks for Home Energy Conservation; In: Brandle JR, Hintz DL and Sturrock JW, editors. Windbreak
Technology. Elsevier; 1998. p. 243-260
[2] Cameron RWF, Taylor J, Emmett M. A Hedera green façade – Energy performance and saving under different maritime-temperate, winter
weather conditions, Build. Environ. 2015; 92:111-121.
[3] Perini K, Ottelé M, Fraaij ALA, Haas EM, Raiteri R. Vertical greening systems and the effect on air flow and temperature on the building
envelope, Build. Environ. 2011; 46:2287–2294.
[4] McPherson EG, Herrington LP, Heisler GM. Impacts of vegetation on residential heating and cooling, Energy Build. 1988; 12:41-51.
[5] Sadineni SB, Madala S, Boehm RF. Passive building energy savings: a review of building envelope components; Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev.2011; 15:3617-3631
[6] Safikhani T, Abdullah AM, Ossen DR, Baharvand M. A review of energy characteristic of vertical greenery systems, Renew. Sustain. Energy
Rev. 2014; 40:450–462.
[7] Sailor DJ. A green roof model for building energy simulation programs, Energy and Buildings. 2008; 40:1466–1478.
[8] Sinchita Poddar, Dongjun Suh, and Seongju Chang. Sensitivity Analysis of Building Energy for Energy-Efficient Building Design in a Smart
Grid Enabled Campus. In: International Smart Grid Conference; October 12-14, 2015
[9] Sekki T, Airaksinen M,, Saaric A. Impact of building usage and occupancy on energy consumption in Finnish daycare and school buildings,
Energy Build. 2015; 105:247–257.
[10] Susorova I, Angulo M, Bahrami P, Brent Stephens. A model of vegetated exterior facades for evaluation of wall thermal performance, Build.
Environ. 2013; 67:1–13.
[11] Wong NH, Tan AYK, Tan PY, Yok P, Wong NC. Energy simulation of vertical greenery systems, Energy and Buildings. 2009; 41:1401–
1408.
[12] Gates DM, Keegan HJ, Schleter JC, Weidner VR. Spectral Properties of Plants, APPLIED OPTICS 1965; 4:11–20.
[13] Historical Weather for 2012 in Seoul, South Korea. 2012.
https://weatherspark.com/history/33287/2012/Seoul-Seoul-Jikhalsi-South-Korea
[14] Pitman R & Broadmeadow M. Leaf area, biomass and physiological parameterisation of ground vegetation of lowland oak woodland. Forest
Research 2001. An agency of the Forestry Commission. Surrey, UK.