# How to best model within canyon air temperature

**URL:** <https://community.suews.io/t/how-to-best-model-within-canyon-air-temperature/34>\
**Category:** General\
**Created:** [30 January 2026 08:18 UTC](https://community.suews.io/t/how-to-best-model-within-canyon-air-temperature/34 "2026-01-30T08:18:17Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 2\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![biglimp](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/b19c9b/32.png) [@biglimp](https://community.suews.io/u/biglimp)\
**Post date:** [30 January 2026 08:18 UTC](https://community.suews.io/t/how-to-best-model-within-canyon-air-temperature/34/1 "2026-01-30T08:18:17Z")

</div>

Hi,

Would it possible to get some guidance for how to setup the model to model intra-urban Ta variations. We (me and Janka) see very small changes in T2 when we change various vegetation parameters. We suspect that it has to do with physics settings i.e. profile scheme etc. Would it be possible to get some info on best practice for this? /Fredrik and Janka

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sunt05](https://dub1.discourse-cdn.com/flex014/user_avatar/community.suews.io/sunt05/32/5_2.png) [@sunt05](https://community.suews.io/u/sunt05)\
**Post date:** [30 January 2026 13:47 UTC](https://community.suews.io/t/how-to-best-model-within-canyon-air-temperature/34/2 "2026-01-30T13:47:43Z")

</div>

Good question, Fredrik — and yes, the physics settings matter a lot here. The small T2 sensitivity is likely not a bug but a consequence of how SUEWS constructs the temperature profile. Let me walk through what’s happening and how to get better results.

**How T2 is computed**

T2 in SUEWS is not a direct output of the energy balance. Instead, the model builds a vertical temperature profile from the surface up and then **interpolates to 2 m**. The profile shape depends on T\_\* (the temperature scale from Q\_H), u\_\*, and the Obukhov length L, with stability corrections applied via \psi\_h(z/L).

The key question is _which profile scheme_ is used — and this is where `rslmethod` matters.

**`rslmethod` and its effect on T2**

With `rslmethod: 2` (which Janka’s config uses), SUEWS auto-selects between two schemes:

- **RSL (roughness sub-layer)** — a two-layer profile with an exponential within-canopy decay and MOST + RSL corrections above canopy. T2 is interpolated at **2 m above ground level**
- **MOST (Monin-Obukhov similarity)** — a simpler log-linear profile. Here, T2 is interpolated at **2 m + z\_d + z\_0** above ground — i.e. displaced upward

The auto-selection logic requires all of: plant area index 0.1 \< \mathrm{PAI} \< 0.68, and canopy height z\_H \> 2\,\text{m}. If these conditions aren’t met, SUEWS falls back to MOST.

**Why this causes low T2 sensitivity**

If your grids are falling back to MOST mode, the effective “2 m” measurement height becomes 2 + z\_d + z\_0, which in a dense urban area can be 6–10 m above ground. At that height, the temperature profile is well-mixed and barely responds to surface-level changes in vegetation parameters. Changing tree cover or conductance alters Q\_E and Q\_H, but by the time you interpolate the profile at ~8 m effective height, the signal is heavily damped.

Even in RSL mode, the coupling pathway is indirect:

\text{vegetation} \;\to\; Q\_E/Q\_H \;\text{partition} \;\to\; Q\_H \;\to\; T\_\* = \frac{-Q\_H}{\rho c\_p \, u\_\*} \;\to\; \text{profile shape} \;\to\; T\_\text{2m}

The profile shape scales with T\_\*, so T2 only responds if Q\_H changes meaningfully. Vegetation parameters primarily affect Q\_E — and while Q\_H = Q^\* - Q\_S - Q\_E does respond, the response is diluted by the other terms.

**Practical recommendations**

1. **Check whether RSL is activating** — look at the output PAI and canopy height for each grid. If PAI falls outside 0.1–0.68 or z\_H \leq 2\,\text{m}, you’re in MOST mode and T2 will be insensitive. You can force RSL with `rslmethod: 1`, but only if the canopy geometry supports it

2. **Compare \Delta Q\_H first** — before looking at T2, check whether Q\_H actually differs between your runs. If \Delta Q\_H is small, \Delta T\_2 will be small regardless of the profile scheme

3. **Consider \Delta T\_s (surface temperature)** — for cooling efficiency studies, the surface temperature or the canyon air temperature difference relative to a reference grid may be more diagnostic than T2, which is inherently smoothed by the profile interpolation

4. **RSL level setting** — `rsllevel: 1` in Janka’s config means diagnostic output at a single level. If you want the full vertical profile for analysis, check the RSL output options

For the cooling efficiency study specifically, working with \Delta Q\_H or \Delta T\_s may be more physically meaningful than \Delta T\_2 — the profile interpolation inherently dampens near-surface contrasts, especially in MOST mode.