Environmental Engineering
How Do Outdoor Pollutant Concentrations
Vary Along the Height of a Tall Building?
enters
Abstract
Itis generally assumed that vertical pollutant dispersion
can reduce exposures to ambient pollutants in tall eceorch Seed Fenn
buildings, 2s concentrations of some ground-source ff Paam-tndy sponsored
pollutants are diluted at higher floors. However, no ‘Taipei Financial Center Corp.
‘measurements of pollutant concentrations have ever \ ooo
been made specifically along the height ofa building apes 5,
that would qualify as a supertall building by CTBUH NN
‘Height Criteria This paper summarizes the 2016 CTBUH
Research Seed Funding study, conducted during a one-week
period in the surnmer of 2017, which measured the vertical variation in the
concentrations of several outdoor pollutants and environmental parameters
«along the height of an approximately 60-story, 300-meter building in downtown
Chicago. Floor height was found to be more strongly correlated with PML, PMs
PM, CO, and O, concentrations than with local wind speed and direction,
Keywords: Pollution, Height, Environment,
Introduction
Elevated outdoor concentrations of abomne
pollutants such as particulate matter PM),
‘ozone (0), and nitrogen oxides (NO, are
associated with increased risks of variety of
heath effects (EPA 2009 & 2016). Howevet,
‘because outdoor pollutants can infitrate and
‘persist indoors where people in industrialized
Countries spend the majority of ther time
(Mepeis etal. 2001), much oftheir eposure to
pollutants of autdoor origin often occurs
Inside bullaings (Chen, Xnao, and Weschler
2012a & 20120; Meng et al 2005; Weschler
2006, Associations between outdoor
pollutant concentrations and adverse health
effects are commonly made using large
{epidemiological studies that rely on stationary
ambient measurements with alr sampling
heights of two to 15 meters above ground
(EPA 2012). But what does this mean for
‘occupants of tall buildings, where outdoor air
Intake heights can be hundreds of meters
above ground level?”
To the authors'knowledge, no measurements
cof pollutant concentrations have ever been
made specifialy along the height of
building that would classify as a tall or
supertall Building by the CTBUH Height
Ctra (CTBUH 2019). Several studies have
investigated this vertical variation fora
limited number of pollutants along the
height of midise buildings, including: a
35-meter bulding in Boston (Wu etal. 2014),
{240-meter building in China Li etal. 2005), 3
'5S-meter building in Chile (Vile etal,
2011),42-and a 127-meterbulding in
‘Singapore (Kalaarasan et al.2008). These
field studies have generally confirmed
findings from atmospheric measurements
‘and madels, demonstrating that particulate
matter concentrations tend to decrease with
building height, potential offering a
protective effect at higher floors, wile ozone
‘concentrations ae likely higher at higher
elevations, potentially offering 2 protective
effect at lower floors. However, none have
‘extended beyond 130 meters in height, and
the types of pollutant measurements have
been limite,
Despite the lack of measurements to date,
‘ew small epidemiology studies have
suggested that building height could play an
Important role inhuman health and that the
vertical variation in pollutant concentrations
might contribute to this effect. For example,
26 | Envecnmental Eginesing
(CTBUA ural | 2019}!recent study in Switzerland suggested that
ferences ln environmental exposures may
have contributed to reductions in al-cause
mortality that were associated with
increasing residential floor height in
buildings (Panczaketal.2013). Silay, 3
study of office buildings in the United States
found significantly higher building-elated
symptoms reported by occupants working
(on the loos of buldings that had outdoor
airintakes less than 60 meters above ground
level which may have been due to
greater levels of pollutants from vehicles
at arintakes nearer the ground (Mendel et
a, 2008),
This work presents results fom a pilot study,
funded by the Counci on Tal Buldings and
Urban Habitat (CTBUM) through sponsor
Taipei Financial Center Corparaton, in which
the vertical variation of several outdoor
polutants nd environmental parameters
‘were measured along the height ofa single
tall building in downtown Chicago, from
June 22-28, 2017. The aim was to provide
novel measurements to quantify the
dispersion of ambient pollutant
concentrations and environmental
patameters along the height ofthe case
study building, and to determine the
importance of.ouilding height and local
meteorological factors in influencing the
‘observed variability inthe resiting data Ths
‘work has aleady been published inthe
Journal Building and Environment (Azim ot
4.2018) here only brief summary and
several excerpts ae presented,
Methods
Field measurements
The case study bulding, which will emain
unnamed and whose awneship will nt be
‘entiied was approximately 60 stories (300,
meters tal Several eld measurement
‘approaches were discussed with the
building engineers and ownership
representatives in order to balance
equipment cost accuracy, and practicality,
including: (1) multiple instruments
measuring simultaneously on multiple oors
(0 (2 one set of mobile instruments to scan
G6No previous measurements of pollutant
concentrations had ever been made specifically
along the height of a building that would
classify as a ‘supertall’ building, according to
the CTBUH Height Criteria.99
the height ofa building via (@)a pulley
system or similar technology to lower and
raise an instrument lator or (6) using a
‘drone or other aerial vehicle to lower and
‘alse lkely much small) instrument
platform. Both options a and 2b were
deemed impcactical for the purposes ofthis
otk, 2s nether approach would allow for
longer-term measurements (le, atleast one
‘week continuous) but would be limited t0
short-term measurements (ie, 2 few hours)
‘Additional, nether approach would allow
{or actual simultaneous measurements,
‘meaning that a wue comparison of matched,
simultaneous, time-stamped data could
ever ealy be made (Le, only repeated
scans of the bulging height would be
achievable) Option 1 was chosen asthe
‘most realistic approach fiom the standpoints
‘ofboth data quality and practicality,
However, Option 1 also has ts own
letations For example, ar qualty monitors
‘that are formally designated as Federal
Reference Methods (FRM) or Federal
Equivalent Methods (FEM) to most accurately
‘measure pollutant concentrations are often
at least US$10,000 and thus prohibitively
expensive for simultaneous measurements
in five locations. Therefore to beable to
establsha finer vertical solution in
‘matched time-resolved pollutant
measurements, a numberof more cost-
effective air quality monitors on the market
‘were used and calibrated against each other
and/or against research-grade FRM/FEM
‘methods ina lab when possible,
imately, several commercially avaiable
rmanitors were selected to measure
concentrations of size-resolved particulate
‘matter (PM; 03-10 ur), ozone (0, nitvogen
dioxide (NO), carbon dioxide (CO, and
carbon monoxide (CO}, along with
temperature and relative humidity in
‘outdoo. air along the height ofthe building
Size-resolved PM number concentrations
were also used to estimate PM, PM and
PM mass concentrations Simultaneous
‘measurements were made using multiple
sets of instruments placedin the outdoor air
intakes on the mechanical systems located
‘on four iffeent floors ie, the second, 16th,
29th, and 44th), as well asin an open-air area
‘nthe 61st Moor located undemeath a
‘wo-meter-high cooling tower stand. The
location of measurements within the
‘outdoor air intakes was upstream of ary
filtration or mixing processes. Measurements
were made within approximately 200,
rmilimeters downstream ofa coarse metalic
grate located on the exterior facade of the
building, through which outdoor a lowes,
and approximately three meters upstream
rom adjustable louvers that were located
downstream of the exterior grate. The
louvers controled mixing between outdoor
air and retum at, and were located two to
three meters upstream ofa downstream
fiter bank.
All five sets of instruments were placedin
the top drawer in Five identical ring tool
carts with uninterruptible power supplies
Installed in the bottom drawer (ee Table 1).
“The top drawer ofeach rolling tool cart was
rmodtfied to include a smal exhaust fan on
‘one side and small holes for ar intake dled
‘on the opposite side to continuously draw in
sample airflow. A team of researchers
distributed the monitoring instruments to be
Installed on each floor with the help ofthe
(TRUM Jura | 2019801
Enoronmenta nginering | 27Contin in in five ong tol carts deployed
{ora 2¢houreotacaon ts postionedon he
Interiors ofan outdoor arintake:
‘Aeroqual 50 OEM oxne mento
‘tec $0200 C02 montre
-Aeroua SS00NO2 mentors
LASCAR CO gers
Onset 12013 HO80 2 chanel Tempentue!
Fave Homi datogacr
Smalleshaut fn
eink oles
Instrument poner supplies
Unite power spies (UPS)
Table Equipment seo conduct the expert
building’ fcities personnel. In the
‘mechanical rooms, the rolling too carts were
placed as close as possible to the exterior
{fates on the outdoor air intakes, and a box
fan was operated continuously to ensure
that outdoor airwas lowing into the plenum
area even ifwhen the HVAC outdoor air
Intake happened to shutoff for periods of
time For the 6st floor installation the ling
tool cart was placed underneath a cooling
tower stand that nas approximately two
‘meters tall and located in an otherwise open
area that provided for substantial outdoor
airflow tothe instrument cat,
Allinstuments were synchronized to collect
data at approximately the sare time
Intervals of ether one or two minutes,
depending on instrument imitations. In
order to launch the other monitors
simultaneously team members were
deployed to each floor and communicated
via two-nay racos to manually iniate data
logging on each instument athe same
Interval and at approximately the sare time,
“The results a set of data that includes
synchronized time-stamped data for which
cach instrument for each measurement type
Issynchronized tothe other instruments
with the same measurement type, while all
‘measurement types are synchronized 10
within approximately 30 seconds of each
other (0: closer. The monitors were then left
torecocd data for approximately one week.
™ =m a
j= j= j=
Fo Fe Fo
J Ae 3 so
a ° ome
i” 1” i” a”
jo ju jum jo
Foo Fu Fm Fv
i i i i
Jie Je 2 i
mem tm ct vee
‘gure. Average standard devon ef theCO 0, NO» Pb, Pes and Ply concertos and the at
‘emperture a humiy ratios nested or etnated during the weeiog Bt campaign pote asthe
spprsitscoreponcing ght ofthe ter bling.
Data analysis
Calibration factors were applied to the raw
data collected fram each instrument during
the caration campaigns. To evaluate the
statistical significance ofthe floor-by-foor
‘comparisons, nonparametric Wioxon
signed-rank tests were used to make paired
Compatisons ofeach simukaneousy
‘measured parameter across the five foots.
‘Adjusted p-values that account forthe ge
sample sizes were used to determine
statistical significance (le, p= 1~(1—
(005); where n = the number of recorded
data points for each instrument)
"Nonparametric Spearman rank correlation
coefficients were used to evaluate the
statisial signficance of comparisons
‘between parameter measurements and floor
height and wind speeds and clrections from
2 nearby weather station.
Results
‘Summary of measurements
The 0,0, and ternperature and relative
humidity dataloggers successuly collected
data fr the entre weellong period,
synchronized at one-minute intervals. PM
measurements were also successful
collecting at two-minute intervals imited by
‘onboard data storage capacity. The NO;
monitors recorded data at one-minute
intervals, only forthe last~55 days of the
measurement campaign, because thelr
Internal memory cards were fle, and ealer
data points wete automatically overwritten,
The CO loggets resulted in primary
‘observations below the detection limi, and
‘thus CO data are excluded.
Comparisons between floors
Figure 1 shows average (+ standard
deviation) values fo all measured parameters
‘over the weeklong monitoring period,
Plotted versus approximate building height
‘Alliferences in measured parameters
between floors were statistically significant
‘except for comparisons of () PMs
concentrations measured on the 4ath and
61s loors and (i) humidity ratio measured
con the 16th and 61st floors. Belowisa
summary of results for each measurement
type. The second: loor measurements were
28 | Emonmenal Engineering
(CTBUA ural | 2019}!used asa close-to-ground:-evel reference for
all comparsons,
Temperature. The average temperature was
'~28%6 higher on the 16th floor compared to
the second floor, but was ~1 7% (ie, ~04"C),
~238%6 (1e, ~05°0) and ~7 686 (ie, ~1.7O)
lower on the 29th, 44th, and 613 floors
compared tothe second float respectively.
The average temperature ciference of =1.°C
between the 6st flor (height of ~300
meters) and the second floor {height of ~5
meters yields an average temperature lapse
rate of about 058°C per 100 meters along the
height of the bulging. which is within ~10%
‘ofthe commonly used Standard Lapse Rate of
65°C per 1,000 meters (\e, 265°C per 100
‘meters (Els and Torclin 2005; Leung and
‘Weisenantle 2008). However, the temperature
lapse was not constant across each floor
‘compatison, which suggest that the
temperature lapse rate assumption fora
building ofthis size inthis urban context may
not be linear, and may be influenced ty other
factors such as surrounding buildings or
highly localized meteorological conditions
(Tong, Chen, and Malkawi 2017).
Hurmidity ratio The average absolute humidity
ratios were ~5.2%,~7.9%,~8 0% and ~5.1%
lower on the 16th, 25th, 44th, and 61st floors
‘compared tothe second floor respectively,
‘There was no clea linear trend observed
between humidity rato and building height,
but the humidity ratio was lower on al lors
above ground level
Parteulate matter. The average PM,
concentration was estimated to be ~18,486,
248%, ~34.5% and ~23796 lower on the
16th, 29th, 4th, and 61st floors compared to
the second floor respectively, suggesting a
fairly consistent trend of PM, concentrations
decreasing with building height (see Figure
2. Similar, the average PM25 concentration
vas estimated to be ~10-4%6, ~ 180%,
~30.3%, and ~31.7% lower on the 16th, 29th,
“48th and 61 floors compared to the
second loo, respectively The trend for both
Mand PM. was near linear from floors 2
‘through 44, with a deviation inthe open-air
6st floor location. The PM and PMs
concentration dispersion data are reasonably
consistent with prior ambient measurements
(Chan and Kwok 2000; Li et a-2008) The
average PM, concentration was estimated
tobe ~129%, ~324%% and ~31 5% lower on
‘the 29th, 44th and 61st floors compared to
the second floor respectively, but actually
‘was ~158%6higher on the 16th floor
compared to the second flea (see Figure 3),
This inconsistent tend atthe lower levels is
suggestive of aca ground sources with
greater dition occurring at higher
‘elevations Interestingly the standard
deviation of PM concentrations was largest
‘on the 16th floor, which means that there
‘were peridicaly very high PMix
concentrations measured on the 16th floor,
and suggests an influence from nearby
transient PM sources around this height.
Note that the average PM, PM, and PMs
concentrations estimated from number
‘measurements inthe second floor outdoor
air intake as a near-ground reference were
15 ugit,-23 yal’ and ~106 afm,
respectively, which are Surpisingly low foran
Urban environment such as Chicago
However, the average dally PM:
concentration measured atthe nearest
ambient regulatory monitor (-9 lometers,
away) was only 28 ya/m? during the
‘measurement campaign (EPA 2014) For
comparison, the average dally PMs
concentration fr the year 2017 measured at
the same regulatory monitor was ~8.6 y/
rm Although ths presents only a limited
comparison it demonstrates thatthe field
campaign happened to occur during a
period of elatvely ow ambient
PM concentrations.
(zone and Oxides For 0, only data above the
highest measured limit of detection 0D)
forthe inexpensive instruments (which was
estimated to be ~30 ppb) were used for
‘comparison, as varying LODs make it
Impossible o compare null values with
actual values recorded at concentrations
lower than ~30 ppb. The average O;
concentration above this LOD was ~11.9%6
and ~11.3% lower on the 16th and 29th
floors compared tothe second floor
respectively, but “160% and ~180% higher
‘onthe 44th and 61st lors compared tothe
second foo, respectivly (se Figure 4.
204 Noor [6th Noor fl 290 Noor I 4th Noo il 61st Noor
Ho 4
iit
a 1
PM, concentration (g/m)
7
PMs concentration (g/m!)
-oure 2 Boxplots of existe of Ph, Ps and Pla mas concentrations mde fom number concentration mesardon ach the fv oor: Outer are ela or
‘yooh cry, The PM mast concentration ae einer made suming apheral siape an density = 15 ge Noma: Below. um it counted 9 mae concentton
ety underestimated
(TRUM Jura | 2019801
Emornmenta nginering | 2966Concentrations of carbon dioxide were
consistently lower on all floors above the
second floor, suggesting dilution or dispersion
of ground-level sources at higher floors.99
“This inconsistent vertical wend in;
concentrations is not unlike the limited data
from aircraft measurements, in which
concentrations ist decrease and then
Increase with elevation (Zhang and Rao
1998), This may be due to tration of O, by
[NO from ground:evel tailpipe emission
Sources, which might not reach the higher
elevations or might be diluted and/or
reacted away bythe time air masses reached
higher elevations The average NO;
concentration was ~25 3% lower onthe 16th
floor, 47084 higher on the 29th lor,
03-05 um
~15.1%6 ower on the 4éth flor and ~5.3%
oweron the 6st floor each compared to
the second floor. The average CO;
concentration was ~76%6,~1.5% ~49% and
'~699%lower on the 16th, 29th, 4ath, and
61st floors compared to the second floor,
respectively. These relative diferences
cortespond to average absolute differences
(of ~30 ppm, ~6 ppm, ~20 ppm, and ~28
‘opin, respectively. There was no consistent
linear trend in average CO, concentrations
acrossall elevations, though once again,
concentrations were consistently lower on all
floors above the second floor suggesting
lution or dispersion of croundevel
sources a higher floots.
Potential Drivers of Variations in the
‘Measured Data
To investigate other potential meteorological
ders ofthe observed varatons in
measured parameters on each foo, data for
wind speed and wind direction from the
same time period asthe feld measurements
‘were obtained ftom a nearby weather station
(Weather Underground 2017). These data
‘were typically reported at five-minute
intervals, which were then summarized as
hourly averages fr analysis. The most
prevalent wind direction was ~200 to ~250"
(ie, predominantly fiom the southwest,
wihich would be expected to transport
‘tafic-elated pollutants from the heavily
traficked 190/94 and -290 highways toward
the bulding located in downtown Chicago.
2c foc 16th oor Ill 29th oo il eh Moor i 6st oor
05-1 ym
12m
_
1
aT
i
|
=
i
i
i”
+t
+
a ;
z 2aNo7
“Wono7 __6oesa7 B 1aaibs B0e;06 30806 40806 5806
‘Number concentration (#/m) Number concentration (#/m’)
2-5um 5104m
F10B6e0 20b%00 s08860 400000 500500
Number concentration (#/m’)
‘otal number concentration (0:3-10 um)
— ‘|| i 4|| 4
a a
Number concetnton i?) Numer concentration) Number concentration)
Faure 3. ox pl of a0 rere parte number concentration at measredon eich ofthe fe ors Bnd: 09-05 ym 05-1 en 1-24 2m 5-10 mando
umber concenvatons (03-10 ym), Outlers ate excused or graphical clay.
30 | Eenmenal Engineering
(CTBUA ural | 2019}![2nd oor I 16th oor I 23th oor Il 44th oor Ii 61st oor
--—_{i—+-
1
Hi
i -
1
4
be
a Ihe.
7
4 —
1[—-
+t
Hl H+ or
7 Fcwas wokamacn Cronus =
owe 4 explo xan (0 nitrogen nse NOs nd carbon doi (0 concent ata measteden each othe fe Rr
Lake Michigan isto the eas ofthe
‘measurement ste There was minimal afl
) 2018
Integrated cence stesment fr ides of open
Health Criteria ech Tale PS,
\VLLEWA , LEANN KURTENBACH RISEN,
SSE, RUB, MA, CRORATTO GB RAPENGLOC.
201 Nee aden HONO, NOxand Om Sago
eC: Amospher Ermer 423 386)-73 DO
\WEATHERUNDERGROUND, 2017-FS Data Mest oop
LCHCAO3"hes/twnanunergound cond
pesonalweter ato astbaweD-KLCHCMES
\WESCHLER 1 a08-O2onesnsuton abc ests
Conviowions fom indoor posure zene nd
Products of zone aed Chest Enaanmetal
Heath Perspect 0 98998 0011288"
etesrse
\WU.C.D, MACNAUGHTON FLY LANE.
‘ADRYMEWCZ G, DURANT, BRUGSE DE SNGLER
{10.2014 Mapong he eral Dtewton of osuaion
‘andar rFelizionin A Nes ghey Urban
Neshtorhood: nears tr Epos ssn
Jeurel ol posure Scere and Eieonrentl
Tptemitogy 33297-30400 1108201384,
2G 1 RAS 1998 leet engin
‘eTerpor Erion of Gund evel Ozne
once doumalot Ape Meteo 32:
1-91. Do Ta Ps snOSHSOSRP AIST TRON
>a0coa
232 | Envecnmental Eginesing
(CTBUA ural | 2019}!