Ground vibrations caused by road

construction operations
by

D. J. Mahin
 GROUND VIBRATIONS ~USED BY ROAD CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS
by D J Martin

The Control of Pollution Actl has given local authorities discretionary powers to limit
noise and vibration generated by operations carried out on construction and demolition
sites. Several studies have been carried out by TRRL of the noise generated by road
construction operations, and the work described in this report is an extension of these
studies to ground-borne vibrations. This work forms part of a programme of research
which is intended to provide information for those implementing vibration controls on
road construction sites.
It is convenient to classify road construction operations into three categories for
the purpose of identifying the ground vibration characteristics. These are:-
1) tracked plant, such as dozers and tractor shovels,
2) rubber-tyred plant, such as motorised scrapers and dump trucks,
3) continuous or intermittent impacting plant, such as pile drivers and
vibratory rollers.
Measurements of tie ground surface vibrations generated by several items of con-
struction plant in each of these categories were carried out. Only the vertical
vibration component was measured and a frequency analysis was performed to calculate RMS
acceleration in one-third octave frequenq bands.
Figure 1 shows results from three measurements, all at 10 m from tie plant which
were being operated on gravelly or sandy soils. It can be seen that parts of each
frequency spectru were above the 1S0 level of human perception which is the proposed
base line for calculating acceptable vertical vibration levels for people in buildings.
Rubber-tyred plant were found not to generate ground vibration levels high enough to be
detected by human stijects.
Further measurements at 20 m from certain itms of plant showed that vibration
levels were below the level of human perception because of attenuation in the soil. All
the levels measured were very much lower than those likely to cause building damage.
It is suggested, however, that there may be circumstances in which the presence of
underlying layers of soil or bedrock may cause reflection and refraction effects of the
body waves generated by tie vibration source, and may produce and enhance the trans
mission of subsurface Rayleigh waves. These effects may not be detected on the ground
surface, but they may produce large vibrations in an adjacent building~ and cause damage
either by repetition of stress loading or by direct rupture, or cause disturbance to
the occupants. Further work is suggested on this topic.
Buildings can be protected against ground vibrations by a number of methods. A
trench or ditch constructed between the site and adjacent buildings can reduce the
transmission of vibrations through the ground provided the ditch is sufficiently deep.
Alternative methods of working, such as the use of wheeled dozers rather than tracked
dozers could be considered where ground conditions permit. Vibrations from sheet piling
can be reduced by the use of specialized piling equipment which employs hydraulic pressure
rather than impact loading to drive the piles.

.. ..-
 ~ Large
tracked
dozerat10m
~ Motorized compactor at 10m

~ Sheet piling rig at 10m

------ Limit for human perception (Ref. 2.)

100
I I

.10

0.1
1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz)

Digest Fig. 1 VIBRATION FREQUENCY SPECTRA FOR VARIOUS ROAD

CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS

REFERENCES
1. HOUSE OF COMMONS Control of Pollution Act, 1974 Ch.40 London, lg74 (HM StatiOne~
Office) .
2. INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORWIZATION. Draft Proposal. Vibration and shock limits
for occupants in buildings ISO/TC 108/sc 4 1975 (British Standards Institution) .

The work described in tiis Digest was carried out in the Environment Division of we
Transport Systems Department of T=.
If this information is iwufficient fop your needs a copy of the full ~epo~t, SR328,
may be obtained on uritten request to the Technical Information ad Librmy Sewices,
Trmsport md Road Reseoch Laboratory, Old ~ioki~hm Road, Crmthorne, Berkshire.
Crown Copyright. Any views expressed in this Digest are not necessarily those of the
Department of the Environment or of the Department of Transport. Extracts from the text
may be reproduced, except for commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.

5.5m9.77T.A. Ltd. 1093 Printed in England.

 TRANSPORT and ROAD
RESEARCH LABORATORY
Department of the Environment
Department of Transport
SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT 328

GROUND VIBWTIONS CAUSED BY ROAD CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS

by

D J Martin, BSC, PhD, MInsW

Any views expressed in this Report are not necessarily

those of the Department of the Environment
or of the Department of Transport

Environment Division
Transport Systems Department
Transport and Road Research Laboratory
Crowthorne, Berkshire
1977

ISSN 0305-1315
 CONTENTS
Page

Abstract 1

1. Introduction 1

2. Sources and propagation of ground vibrations 2

2.1 Sources 2
2.2 Propagation 2
3. Vibration assessment 3
3.1 Human response 3
3.2 Building damage 4
4. Experimental measurements 5
4.1 General 5
4.2 Measurement techniques 5
4.3 Analysis techniques 6
5. Results and discussion 6
5.1 Results of measurement 6
5.1.1 Tracked earthmoving plant 6
5.1.2 Rubber-tyred earthmoving plant 7
5.1.3 Compaction plant 7
5.1.4 Sheet piling a

572 Discussion a

6. Conclusions and further work 10

7. Acknowledgements 10

8. References 10

(C) CROW COPYRIGHT 1977

Extracts from the text may be reproduced, except for

commercial purposes, provided the source is acknowledged.
 GROUND VIBRATIONS CAUSED BY ROAD CONSTRUCTION OPEWTIONS

ABSTRACT

This report describes the general,problem of ground vibrations

generated in road construction operations, and presents results of
measurements of ground vibrations on the soil surface caused by
several different operations. The vibration sources, the levels
of vibration and the attenuations with distance for ground vibra-
tions are considered, together with the criteria and standards for
vibration assessment with respect to human response and building
daage. It was found that ground vibration levels at distances, of
about 10m from some sources were above the level of human percep-
tion although vibration levels fell off very rapidly with distance,
due to attenuation in the soil. The operations which gave rise to
the highest levels were tracked earthmoving, vibratory and motorized
compaction and sheet piling. Ground vibrations caused by these
operations were well below the vibration thresholds thought to
cause architectural damage to buildings.

1. INTRODUCTION

Noise and vibration from construction and demolition works frequently cause
complaints by people working or living nearby. The Control of Pollution
Actq has given local authorities the powers necessary to limit noise from
construction , and a British Standards Institution Code
is available
of Practice2 and molition to Sites
give general guidance on the measurement,
prediction and control procedures that can be employed to deal with this
form of noise nuisance.

The Act also includes vibration within the terms of the control powers.
In the context of construction and demolition operations, v@rations can be
induced via two mechanisms, namely ground-borne vibrations and air-borne low
frequency noise. Ground vibrations can be generated by the movement of
heavy machinery and by the operation of,impact devices such as pile drivers
and rock hammers. Alternatively, vibrations can be produced in the struc-
ture of a nearby building by the low frequency sound (generally below 100 Hz)
generated by the power unit of the machinery involved. Vibrations induced
by both of these mechanisms may be a source of disturbance to people living
and working near the site, and in certain cases ground vibrations may cause
some architectural damage to the fabric,of nearby buildings.

Several studies have been carred out by TRRL on the noise generated
3
during road construction operations . The work described in this report is
an extension of these studies to ground-borne vibrations. The aims of this
report are to review the general problem of ground vibrations generated in
road construction and to present some results of measurements of ground
vibrations generated in the soil surface caused by different road construc-
tion operations. This work forms part of a programme of research which is
intended to provide information for those implementing vibration controls on
road construction sites.

1
 2. SOURCES AND PROPAGATION OF GROUND VIBRATION

2.1 Sources

Ground vibrations induced by road construction processes may be generated

byvariations in the forces applied to the ground surface by the process or
by acoustic coupling of infra-s,ound into the ground. The magnitude of these
forces will be determined by the nature of the work being carried out, the
type of machinery or plant in use and the applied load.

Road construction activities can be divided into the three phases of

earthworks, structures and paving. During the earthmoving phase, the major
operations are the formation of cuttings and embankments to achieve the
planned vertical alignment of the final road. Material is excavated in the
cut area, transported along a haul road and placed in the fill area where it
is compacted and graded. The ground vibration characteristics of earthworks
plant will depend on whether the plant is tracked or wheeled (with rubber
tyres) and on the type of operation which the plant carries out.

The most common types of earthmoving haulage plant are motorized scrapers
and off-highway dump trucks. The motor scraper loads by taking a shallow
cut using a cutting edge activated by hydraulic pressure and requires assis-
tance from a tracked dozer. Earthmoving by off-highway dump trucks requires
excavation plant in the cut, such as wheeled or tracked tractor shovels. In
the fill area the material is dumped and then spread by a dozer and compac-
tor. Compaction plant may be self-propelled or towed, and may rely on
dead-weight or a vibratory mechanism to achieve the required compaction.

The structures phase involves the construction of bridges, culverts and

retaining walls. The plant used in these constructions are tipper lorries,
excavators and cranes, and in some circumstances piling equipment.

Paving operations are carried out by specialized paving machines, which

require materials to be brought into the site, usually by tipper lorry.

For the purpose of classifying the vibration caused by different road

construction operations it is convenient to categorise the construction plant
used according to whether it is:-

(1) tracked plant, such as dozers, tractor shovels and excavators,

(2) rubber tyred plant, such as motor scrapers, off-highway dump trucks
and tipper lorries,

or, (3) impacting plant, such as compactors, vibratory rollers and piling
rigs.

2.2 Propagation

For a localised vibration source on the surface of the ground, energy

propagates away from the source via the generation of elastic body waves
which radiate energy into the gro~d in all directions and s~face waves
which carry energy along the ground surface. The ground motion at some
point away from the source is the sum of all the wave motions at that point.
The transmission of energy is further complicated by refraction and reflec-
tion effects due to layers of different soils and changes of soil density.

2
 The two types of body wave are those of compr~ssion and shear, and the
most important at the surface is the Rayleigh wave . The5partition of
energy between these waves has been studied theoretically , and it was fomd
that the Rayleigh surface wave contained the largest energy. The Rayleigh
wave has both vertical and horizontal components of wave motion, the former
usually predominating.

men wave motion has been generated, the waves will be attenuated as
they travel. The two main mechanisms for wave attenuation are:

(i) enlargement of the wavefront as the distance from the source

increases, and

(ii) internal damping of the transmitting medium.

Since Rayleigh waves propagate cylindrically and body waves propagate

spherically, at large distances from the source the contribution from the ,
Rayleigh wave motion is likely to be predominant. Attenuation with distance
in excess of cylindrical spreading will be determined by the characteristics
of the soil material.

A further consideration is the change in frequency content of the vibr-

ations as they travel through the ground. This change arises because differ-
ent wavelengths travel at different speeds in non-elastic materials and
because the ground internal damping is itself frequency dependent.

Soils va~ considerably in composition, and hence wave speeds and atten-
uation rates also differ widely. Although it is possible to give a broad
classification for soils, eg fine grained soils and coarse grained soils, it
&
is felt that soils at a particular site would comprise a complex dynamic
system so that it is not possible to define dynamic properties with any
degree of certainty.

3. VIBRATION ASSESS~NT

3.1 Human response

w individuals reaction to vibration seems to depend on whetier the

subject is being physically e~osed to the vibrations or assessing their
effects on ,buildings or their contents. In the former case, interpretation
is in the form of tolerance, intrusion and fears for personal safety,
whereas in the latter the fears of architectural damage to the f~ric and
structural damage to the building are involved.
p
Tolerance has been a,widely used concept for interpreting vibration
levels, particularly in studies to derive criteria for assessing passen er
comfort in various forms of transport. Several reports are available7# 8 fgllo
which describe investigations into human sensitivity to continuous sinu-
soidal vibrations. The data are usually in graphical form, and expressed as
peak particle velocity or peak acceleration level plotted as a function of
frequency for various degrees of disturbance. These curves are used as a
basis for design guidance in transport engineering, and some of the data
have been incorporated into the Intern ~~onal Standard for the evaluation of
human exposure to whole-body vibration. . An amendment to this standard
proposes
bui,dings~~mits for acceptable vertical vibration levels for people in
# and the basic curve is shown in Figme 1. This curve applies

3
to hospital operating theatres and otier critical working areas for all types
of vibration occurring both day and night. A weighting factor of 2 above
this basic level applies to residential areas during the day for continuous
or intermittent vibration and repeated impulsive shock, and a factor of 1.41
during the night. Other weighting factors are proposed for office and work-
shop environments and for impulsive shocks of less than three occurrences
per 24 hour period.

I Legislation to regulate vibration from industrial lants, construction

19
work and road traffic was enacted in Japan during 1976 . Vertical accel-
eration levels are used as the measuring unit, and the allowed levels are
based on the 1S0 exposure levels. One example of the maximum WS acceler-
ation levels to be permitted is shown in Figure 1, for pile driving using
impact hammers or demolition using impact balls.

3.2 Building damage

In assessing the possibility of building damage, many factors should be

taken into account, for example, the additional stresses set up by the
vibration, the size and type of building, the fatigue properties of the
building materials and the possibility of structural resonance.

Most of the available data relating to the effects of g~~und vibrations

on buildings have been obtained during tests with explosives . These tests
have enabled working rules to be established for the possibilities of
building damage. From data relating ~~o quarry blasting, two regimes of
building damage have been identified . These are structural dmage, such
as major failures of the whole or parts of the building structure, and
architectural damage, such as the cracking of plaster or other brittle
materials. Architectural damage is thought to be more annoying than
dangerous and would begin at a much lower level than structural damage.

An analysis of the explosiveinduced vibration tests showed that

damage in a building was most directly related to the peak particle velocity
in the ground (ie the peak velocity of the soil particles, not the propa-
gation velocity of the wave itself). This does not imply that velocity is
the direct cause of damage, as waveform and duration will clearly be import-
ant factors, and the magnifying effects of suspended floors would also
influence the severity of any damage. The threshold velocity level ~~ struc-
tural damage has been variously estimated at between 70 and 120 mm/s over
the frequency range from 5 to 50 Hz. The threshold level f architectural
1s
damage was found to be a peak particle velocity of 5 mm/s ~9r modern
buildings, and a recent recommendation for ancient buildings is a peak
particle velocity of 2.5 mm/sOover the range from 10 to 100 Hz. This latter
criterion is shown in Figure ~, where the velocity level has been converted
to acceleration, assuming a simple sinusoidal waveform. It can be seen that -
this btilding damage threshold is some thirty times higher than the 1S0
hman sensitivity curve.

Cases where vibration has caused definitely authenticated damage to

buildings have been extremely rare and the generalisation can be made that
vibration must become unpleasant or painful to the occupier long before there
is any possfiility of building damage.

In addition to any damage due directly to the levels of vibration,

their cumulative effects may also be important. The repetition of stresses
can result in fatigue damage, and vibrations could also cause additional

4
stresses to be superimposed on an existing high concentration of str,ess,
thus triggering off a failure.

Measurements of vertical ground vibrations generated by several items

of construction plant were carried out in each of the categories described
in Section 2.1. The measurements were made at the sides of the haul road or
adjacent to the site boundaq on three construction sites. The locations of
the measurements were chosen to ensure that the ground surface nearby was
reasonably uniform and that there were no other sources of vibration present
which would contribute to background levels. In order to facilitate com-
parison between vibrations from different plant types, the soil type at each
;~;~~k~~~ntified according to the British Standard Code of Practice for
. Exact details of the substrata and water content were not
available.

4.2 Measurementt echiques

The measurement of ground vibrations was carried out using piezoelectric

crystal accelerometers. These instruments produce a voltage outputpropor-
tional to the acceleration of the surface to which they are attac ed. The .
3
accelerometers, used had a voltage sensitivity of about 1 volt/m/s (10 v/g)
over a frequency range from 0.2 Hz to 1 kHz. To attach them to the ground..
surface, a 100 mm square metal plate with a 200 mm long spike at each corner
was driven into the ground, and the accelerometer was fixed to the metal . -
surface using a mounting screw.

The voltage signals from each accelerometer were fed through a built-in
preamplifier and then recorded on a portable magnetic tape recorder.
Electrical connections between the preamplifier and the recorder were made
by low noise miniature cable. The tape recorder included a facility whereby
a recording made at 38.1 mm/s (1.5 inches per second) could be replayed at
381 mm/s (15 inches per second) to give .a ten times frequency transformation.
This enabled field recordings to be made with a lower frequency limit of
2.5 Hz, and using the frequency transformation facility, it was.possible to
analyse the recordings on equipment designed for conventional acoustic
analysis in the frequency range from 25 Hz to 20 kHz.

Acceleration signals were recorded from an accelerometer at 10 m from

the centre of the construction operation. In the case of an item of vehicular
plant, the centre was taken to be the centre of the drive-by track, and for
stationary plant, the centre was the position of ground contact of the
vibration source.

Some measurements were taken with an additional accelerometer at 20 m

from the centre of the operation, in order to obtain information on the
attenuation with distance of the ground vibrations. In these cases, simul-
taneous recordings from the 10 and 20m positions were made.

For calibration purposes, a reference signal at 1 kHz and at a level

+10 dB above the maximum recording level was recorded on the tape at the ..
start of each measurement. This signal was used to calibrate the analysis
system which is described inSection 4.3. ..:

. 5
4.3 Analysis tectiiques

The analysis of the recorded data was designed to present the vibration
signals in a suitable form for identifying the major frequency components of
ground vibrations from particular items of plant, and, where possible, to
indicate the attenuation of vibration levels with distance.

Standard on the evaluation of human exposure to vib-

r~ti~!? relates
lnternationa~
various levels of MS acceleration with frequenq. The
frequenq spectrum is split, for analysis purposes, into one-third octave
bands as defined by acoustical standards with the reference centre frequen~
of 1 kHz. The use of this analysis spectrum was adopted in this study.

The analysis procedure was to locate the maximum level of the drive-~
signal or the impact signal and to carry out a frequency analysis using a
real time analyser which incorporated a set of one-third octave analog
frequenq filters. This instrument had a centre frequency range from 25 Hz
to 20 kHz, and in order to examine frequencies below 25 Hz, a speed trans-
formation of the recorded signals was necessary. This transformation was
accomplished by replaying the tape at ten times the recording speed, so that
the effective frequen~ range was from 2.5 Hz to 1 kHz, the upper limit being
determined by the frequency response of the accelerometer.

In order to facilitate the analysis, the portion of vibration signal to

be analysed was stored in a digital event recorder before being fed to the
real time analyser. The event recorder captured the signal by storing in a
digital memory with 10,000 storage spaces. Thus the transient or single-event
vibration phenomena could be isolated and stored, and then replayed from the
event recorder repetitively into the analyser. The analyser was set to
integrate the signal into WS levelsin each frequency band for an integra-
tion period of about 4 seconds. The input sampling rate of the event
recorder could be varied between 100 samples/s and 100 K samples/s, and on
playback the rate could be varied between 0.5 samples/s and 500 K samples/s.
Antialiasing filters were included in the recorder to ensure that the
sapling theorem frequen~ criteria were always obeyed (ie the maximum
frequency allowed in the sample is one-quarter of the input sampling rate).

The standard procedure was to record and replay the vibration signals
in the event recorder at the same rate, having replayed the original signal
from the tape recorder at ten times real speed. The event recorder replayed
the captured signal repetitively during the integration period of the
frequenq analyser. The portion of the original speed which was analysed
was either 5 or 10 seconds duration in real time for the measurements of
vehicular plant and 1 second duration for the sheet piling.

5. RES~TS AND DISCUSSION

5.1 Results of measurement

t

This section presents vibration level histories and frequency spectra

of ground vibrations generated by a number of road construction operations.

5.1.1 Tracked earthmoving plant: Figure 2 shows vibration levels during

the drive-by of two types of tracked earthmovers. The larger tracked dozer
was measured at 10 and 20 m from the centre line of the drive-by on a haul
road, and the vibration histories are shown in Figure 2(a) and 2(b). The

6
soil type on the haul road was a fine, dry grained soil having medium com-
pressibili@. The smaller tracked dozer in Figure 2(c) was measured at 10 m
from the centre line of the drive-by while the-dozer was in a fill area where
it was carrying out a final levelling operation. The soil type in the fill -
area was a uniform gravelly soil, which was well compacted and had a high
moisture content because of recent rain.

One-third octave frequency spectra of these vibration signals are shown

in Figure 3, where the analysis was carried out over the portion of the
record indicated in Figure 2.

It can be seen that the vibration levels for the large tracked dozer
fell by about 10 dB between 10 m and 20 m , indicating a significant attenu-
ation with distance. The main component of the frequency spectrm at 10 m
was in the region 30-40 Hz , whereas at 20 m, the main component was at
25 Hz, and was some 7 dB below the peak level at 10 m. This shift in the
predominant frequency indicates a frequency-dependent ground attenuation
function in this particular soil material.

Vibration levels for the smaller tracked dozer are higher than the
corresponding levels at 10 m for the larger machine. This can be accounted
for by the nature of the ground through which the vibrations were being
transmitted. In the case of the smaller dozer, the ground was well compacted
and was thus able to transmit vibrations with less ground attenuation.

Both machines had frequency components at 10 m above theISO level of

human perception.

5.1.2 Rubber-tyred earthmoving plant: Figure 4 shows vibration levels during

the drive-by of three types of rubber-tyred haulage plant, all measured,on
the haul road at 10 m from the centre line of the drive-by. Figure 5 shows
the corresponding frequency spectra. The ground was a gravelly soil.

The types of plant observed were an off-highway dump truck, a motorized

scraper (laden and unladen) and a tipper lorry. The main frequency peaks
were between 25 and 60 Hz for the motorized scraper and the tipper lorq,
whereas the dump truck exhibited a fairly uniform spectrum between 40 and
160 Hz. The levels from the scraper when laden were 10 dB greater at 25 Hz
and 19 dB greater at 60 Hz than when the scraper was unladen, indicating
that the ground loading was an important factor controlling the actual levels
emitted.

All these rubber-tyred earthmovers produced vibration levels below the

1S0 human perception curve.

5.1.3 Compaction plant: Figure 6 shows vibration levels recorded during the
operation of two types of motorized compaction plant, measured in the fill
area at 10 m from the centre line of the drive-@, and Figure 7 shows the
frequen~ spectra calculated from the records. In the case of the motorized
compactor, the spectrum was the average of the two analysis periods shown in
Figure 6(b).

The self-propelled v~ratory roller was provided with a pair of inde-

pendent straddle-mounted eccentric weights housed within the roller. These
weights produced the vibrating action of the roller at a variable frequency
up to about 40 Hz. The large peak in the frequency spectrum at 31.5 Hz is
caused by this vibrating mechanism, and is ;he dominant feature of the

7
vibration signal. The fill material being compacted was a coarse grained
soil containing well graded sands and gravelly sands.

The motorized compactor also shows a dominant peak at about 12.5 Hz,
althoughthere was no specific mechanical source on the compactor which
could cause this peak. The fill material being compacted was a loose mixture
of sandy and gravelly soils. This dominant peak was above the 1S0 human
perception level, but the large peak in the spectrum from the vibratory
roller was only just above the perception level.

5.1.4 Sheet piling: Measurements were made at distances of 10 and 20 m from

a sheet piling rig which used a drop hammer activated by compressed air.
The vibration histories are shown in Figure 8. The soil type was a mixture
of coarse grained gravels and sandy soils and at the time of the measure-
ments the soil was well drained. Figure 9 shows the frequency spectra at
the two distances.

It can be seen that at 10 m there is a dominant peak at 25-30 Hz, which

has been attenuated by some 10 dB at 20 m. The remaining frequency compon-,
ents do not appear attenuated over this distance.

The large peak measured at 10 m was above the 1S0 human perception
level, but the ground attenuation was sufficient to reduce the peak at 20 m
to below the perception level. It is interesting to note that the peak at
10 m lies below the upper limit for impulsive vibrations contained in the
Japanese regulations concerning vibrations from construction sites. ~

5.2 Discussion

The vibration frequency spectra described in section 5.1 indicate that

vibration levels at 10 m from certain earthmoving plant and the sheet piling
rig were above the threshold of human perception, and could, therefore,
cause disturbance to people. The levels were, however, very much lower than
those likely to cause architectural damage to buildings. The results show
that the major sources of vibration in road construction are the tracked
earthmoving plant, compaction plant and intermittent impacting plant.
Rubber-tyred plant do not generate ground surface vibration levels high
enough to be detected by human subjects.

At distances greater than 10 m, ground attenuation effects may reduce

the vibration levels to values below human sensitivity. The actual reduction
in level is dependent on the nature of the ground soil type and substrata,
and on the magnitude of the applied forces because of the non-linear response
of the ground. At present there is very little information on the tr~~s-
mission characteristics of different ground types, although some work has
been reported on possible techniques for measuring attenuation rates due to
localised sources.

The measurements obtained in this investigation showed that ground vib-

ration levels are unlikely to be high enough to causeany disturbance to
people situated at distances greater than 20 m from the source of vibration.

-induced ground vibrations in the vicinity

, carried
of ro~h~~n~~~%ements of out on behalf of TRRL, indicated that the highest
traffic
levels were caused by heavy commercial vehicles but that the maximum levels
were at most one-third of the human perception threshold level. These maxi-
mm levels were measured directlyjabove the road tunnels and occurred at

\
8
frequencies below 20 Hz. The vibrations were thought to be caused by road
surface irregularities producing variable dynamic wheel loads as the vehicles
drove through the tunnels.

There are circumstances, however, in which a straightforward measure-

ment of surface ground vibration may not give an accurate indication of the
possible vibration disturbance or damage in a nearby, building. This is
because the presence of underlying. layers of soil or bedrock may cause
reflection and refraction effects of the body waves generated by the vibra-
tion ~~urce and may produce and enhance transmission of stisurface Rayleigh
waves . A schematic diagram of this propagation path is shown in Figure 10.
These effects may not be detected on the ground surface, but they may
produce large vibrations >n,an adjacent building, particularly when the
vibration source is pile driving where the pile may be 8-10 m deep and thus
have coupling to lower levels of the soil formation.

A further consideration is that of fatigue damage to an adjacent

building. Repetition of ground vibrations, even though the levels of the
vibrations are below dmage thresholds, may eventually cause a building
failure. This may be where a tracked dozer is working close to a building
for a sustained period of operation.

Buildings can be protected against ground vibrations caused by road

construction operations by a number of methods. A trench or ditch cons-
tructed between the construction site and adjacent bui
transmission of vibrations through the ground. Barkan~~ngshas can reduce that
suggested the
the depth of the trench should be at least one-third of the wavelength of
the vibration. For a frequency of 20 Hz, and a wavespeed of 300 m/s, the
wavelength in the ground would be 15 m , and the trench should be at least
5 m deep. For protection against lower frequencies, the trench would have
to be even deeper. This method of isolation could possibly be incorporated
in the road construction process because some form of drainage excavation
is usually carried out at the side of the site. However the depth of trench
required for protection is more than that needed for drainage, and some
additional costs would be incurred.

Another method of reducing vibration effects is to change the method of

working. Instead of tracked dozers, it may be possible to use wheeled
dozers, although there may be problems in operating wheeled plant in certain
ground conditions. .,

For piling operations, sheet piling is the main method of erecting

retaining walls, and novel pilin methods could be considered. One such
method is the Ta~ood Pilemaste J 2 which has been designed to reduce impact
noise and ground vibrations to a minimum. This equipment consists of eight
hydraulic rams arranged in a cross head side by side, each ram bearing on
top of a pile. It is suited mainly to cohesive soils such as London clay,
and is less effective in granular soils. The piles are driven by hydraulic
pressure, rather than by a drop hammer action, and provided that the power
generating equipment is silenced and isolated from ground contact, both
noise and vibrations are minimized.

fiother piling method which should not cause significant ground vibra-
tions is bored piling using a crane mounted auger. This method can be used
in certain circumstances as an alternative to sheet piling.

9
 6. CONCLUSIONS AND FURTHER WORK

The following conclusions were drawn from this investigation:-

(1) Ground vibration levels at distances of about 10 m from some road

construction operations were above the ISO level of h~an Perception.
The operations which give rise to these levels are tracked earthmoving,
vibratory and motorized compaction and sheet piling.

(2) At distances greater than 20 m, the vibration levels measured were

below the 1S0 level of human perception because of attenuation in the
soil. Thus it is unlikely that people would be disturbed by vibration
at distances of 20 m or more.

It is not yet possible to predict vibration levels inside buildings

because there is little information available on the am lification of ground
vibrations by the structure of a building. It is known B 3 that suspended
floors amplify this motion, but it is not known how this affects people
living or working in the building or how the amplification affects potential
damage. The general roblem of traffic-induced vibrations has been dis-
cussed in otier work2 5 124, but much of the data has related to specific
investigations of traffic or machinery vibrations and has not yielded any
general rules for predicting vibration levels in buildings and the effects
on people in their living or working environment. This is an area where
further work is needed.

Further work is also needed to determine whether and in what way fatigue
damage may be caused to buildings close to road construction sites because
of the repetition of stress loading, and on the effects of substrata on
ground vibration propagation.

Airborne low frequency noise generated,by the power units of vehicles

powered by internal combustion engines is thought to be a potential source
of disturbance to people in buildings. This area is important in the study
of the effects of road traffic on people, and is the subject of work currently
in progress at TRRL.

7. AC~OWLEDGEMENTS

This report was prepared in the Environment Division (Head, Mr L H Watkins)

of the Transport Systems Department of TRRL.

The author wishes to thank the resident engineers at the sites where
observations were made for their permission to carry out measurements.

Assistance in the measurement and analysis of data was given by Mr D

Sampson from.Sunderland Polytechnic who attended the Laboratory for 12 months
of industrial training.

a. REFERENCES

1. HOUSE OF COMMONS. Control of Pollution Act, 1974 Ch 40, London, 1974

(H M Stationery Office).

10
2. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Code of Practice for Noise Control on
Construction and Demolition sites. BS 5228: 1975. London, 1975
(British Standards Institution).

3. MARTIN D J. Road construction noise. Institute of Acoustics Spring

Conference, April 1977. University of Bath.

4. KOLSKY H. Stress waves in solids. New York, 1963 (Dover).

5. MIL~R G F and H PURSEY. On the partition of energy between elastic

waves in a semi-infinite solid. proc. Roy. Sot. London A233 (1955).

6. WHITMAN R V. Analysis of foundation vibrations. Proc. Symp. Brit.

Nat. Sot. Earthquake Eng. Imperial College London, 1965.

7. DIECKMANN D. A study of the influence of vibrations on man. Ergonomics

Vol 1 (4), 1958 pp 347-55.

8. SOLIMAN J I. A scale for the degrees of vibration perceptibility and

annoyance. Ergonomics Vol II (2), 1968 pp 101-122.

9. MIWA T. Evaluation methods for vibration effects. Part 1. Measurements

of threshold and equal sensation contours of whole body for vertical
and horizontal vibrations. Industrial Health, Vol 5, 1967 pp 183-205.

10. REIHER H and R J MEISTER. Human sensitivity to vibration. Forsch.

auf dem Gem. des Ingen. Vol 2 (11), 1931 PP 381-6.

11. INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION. Guide for the evaluation of

human exposure to whole-body vibration. 1S0 2631-1974. (British
Standards Institution).

12. INTE~ATIONAL STANDARDS ORGANIZATION. Draft Proposal Vibration and

shock limits for occupants in buildings. ISO/TC 108/sc 4. 1975
(British Standards Institution).

13. ENVIRONMENT AGENCY. Vibration Regulation Law. NO 64, 1976. Tokyo,

Japan. (Japanese Environment Agency).

14. EDWARDS A T and T D NORTHWOOD. Experimental studies of the effects of

blasting on structures. Engineer, London, 210 (5462) pp 538-46.
1960.

15. JACKSON M W. Thresholds of damage due to ground motion. Proc.

Internat. Symposium Wave Prop. Dyn. Props. Earth. Mats., New Mexico,
pp 961-9, 1967.

16. BUILDING RESEARCH STATION. Vibrations in buildings - I. BRS Digest

117. 1970. (Building Research Station).

17. DIN 4150. Vibrations in building construction. Draft revision of

German Standard, 1970.

18. BRITISH STANDARDS INSTITUTION. Code of Practice - Earthworks CP 2003:

1959 London, 1959 (British Standards Institution).

11
19. WHITE R G and M E J MANNERING. Techniques for measuring the vibration
transdssion characteristics ofthe ground. Journal of the Society of
Environmental Engineers. March, 1975.

~o. BE~R and JPAGE. Traffic induced ground vibrations in the vicinity
of road tunnels. Department of the Environment, TRRL Report SR 218 UC.
Crowthorne, 1976 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory).

21. B~ D D. Dynamics of bases and foundations. New York, 1962.

(McGraw-Hill).

22. HALLMANP J. A review of noise-reduced construction plant. Department

of the Environment, BRE Current Paper CP68/76. Garston, 1976 (Building
Research Establishment).

23. HOUSE M E. Traffic-induced vibrations in buildings. The Highway

Engineer, February 1973 pp 6-16.

24. WHIFFIN A C and D R LEONARD. A survey of traffic-induced vibrations.

Department of the Environment, RRL Report LR 418. Crowthorne, 1971
(Road Research Laboratory).

12
 .
..<
3160

Limit for
Building damage (Ref 17)
1000
.-.

316
Limit for
certain construction activities

100 \

31.6
Limit for
human perception (Ref 12)
in buildings
10

1
1 2 5 10 20 50 100
Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 1 STANDARDS FOR VERTICAL VIBRATIONS

 316

100

31.6

10

(a) Tracked dozer (static weight 39.6 Mg) drive-by at 10m

100

10

(b) Tracked dozer (static weight 39.6 Mg) drive-by at 20m

316

31.6

(c) Tracked dozer (static weight 18.1 Mg) drive-by at 10m

Fig. 2 VIBRATION LEVELS DURING DRIVE-BY OF TRACKED EARTHMOVERS

 ~ Large tracked dozer at 10m

~ Large tracked dozer at 20m

~ Small tracked dozer at 10m

------- Limit for human perception (Ref 12)

100

10

0.1
1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 3 VIBRATION FREQUENCY SPECTRA FOR TRACKED EARTHMOVERS

,,
31.6

10

3.1

(a) Off-highway dump truck (static weight laden 28.5 Mg)

100

31.6

10

3.1

(b) Motorized scraper (static

weight laden 74.5 Mg)

31.6

,
10

3.1

Analysis period
5s 1
\P 1-

(c) Tipper
lorry(static
weightladen3g.4Mg)

VIBRATION LEVELS DURING DRIVE-BY OF RUBBER-TYRED EARTHMOVERS

 ~ Motorized scraper, unladen

Measured
at 1Om

1
~

-------
Motorized

Off-highway

Tipper

Limit
scraper, laden

lorry,

for human
dumptruck,

laden

perception
laden

(Ref 12)

100

10

0.1
1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 5 VIBRATION FREQUENCY SPECTRA FOR RUBBER-TYRED EARTHMOVERS

31.6

10

3.1

(a)Self-propelled vibratory roller (static weight 10.4 Mg) one pass shown

100

31.6

(b) Motorized compactor with tamping foot drum wheels

(static weight 29.4 Mg) two passes shown

Fig. 6 VIBRATION LEVELS FOR DRIVE-BY OF COMPACTION PLANT

 ~ Self-propelled vibratory roller at 10m

~ Motorized compactor at 10m

------- Limit for humaniperception (Ref 12)

100

10

0.1
1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 7 VIBRATION FREQUENCY SPECTRA FOR COMPACTION PLANT

\
 316

100I

31.6

10

1
3.1 1s

(a) Measured at 10m from piling rig

100

31.6

10

3.1

1s

(b) Measured at 20m from piling rig

Fig. 8 VIBRATION LEVELS FOR SHEET PILING USING DROP

HAMMER ACTIVATED BY COMPRESSED AIR
 ~ 10m from piling rig

~ 20m from piling rig

------ Limit for human perception (Ref 12)

. . . . . . . . Limit for impulsive vibrations

(Japanese regulations Ref 13)
[

1 10 100 1000
Frequency (Hz)

Fig. 9 FREQUENCY SPECTRA OF SHEET PILING-INDUCED VIBRATIONS

 \

damage or
perception
by people

Vibration
source
Building
response
L=:urface_resPoYT
Direct ground
~ ~

J)$ Foundation

)) Primary
,y\
Secondary
response

body body waves

\ \ \ \ \ \
waves / / /

xl, ,yl~;:~:~:::nt
\
/ / / / / /

Fig. 10 VIBRATION SOURCE RECEIVER RELATIONSHIP

(1508) Dd443233 1,200 9/77 HPLtd Soton G1915

PRINTED IN ENGLAND
 ABSTRA~

GROUND VIBRATIONS CAUSED BY ROAD CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS:

D J Martin, BSC, Pm, MInstP: Department of the Environment
Department of Transport TRRL Supplementary Report 328: Crowthorne,
lg77 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory). This report
describes the general problem of ground vibrations generated in
road construction operations, and presents results of measurements
of ground vibrations on the soil surface caused by several differ-
ent operations. The vibration sources, the levels of vibration
and the attenuations with distance for ground vibrations are consi-
dered, together with the criteria and standards for vibration
assessment with respect to human response and building damage. It
was found that ground vibration levels at distances of about 10m
from some sources were above the level of human perception although
vibration levels fell off very rapidly with distance, due to attenu-
ation in the soil. The operations which gave rise to the highest
levels were tracked eartioving, vibratory and motorized compaction
and sheet piling. Ground vibrations caused by these operations
were well below the vibration thresholds thought to cause archi-
tectural damage to buildings.

ISSN 0305-1315

ABSTRA~

GROUND VIBRATIONS CAUSED BY ROAD CONSTRUCTION OPERATIONS:

D J Martin, BSC, Pm, MInstP: Department of the Environment
Department of Transport TRRL Supplementary Report 328: Crowthorne,
1977 (Transport and Road Research Laboratory). This report
describes the general problem of ground vibrations generated in
road construction operations, and presents results of measurements
of ground vibrations on the soil surface caused by several differ-
ent operations. The vibration sources, the levels of vibration
and the attenuations with distance for ground vibrations are consi-
dered, together with the criteria and standards for vibration
assessment with respect to human response and building damage. It
was found that ground vibration levels at distances of about 10m
from some sources were above the level of human perception although
vibration levels fell off very rapidly with distance, due to attenu-
ation in the soil. The operations which gave rise to the highest
levels were tracked earthmoving, vibrato~ and motorized compaction
and sheet piling. Ground vibrations caused by these operations
were well below the vibration thresholds thought to cause archi-
tectural damage to buildings.

ISSN 0305-1315