Industry Noise

Acoustic Technology
Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs Research Contract Noise Mapping Industrial Sources
Final Report
Technical Report No: AT 5414/2 Rev 1
FINAL REPORT ON DEFRA RESEARCH PROJECT NOISE MAPPING INDUSTRIAL SOURCES TECHNICAL REPORT NO: AT 5414/2 REV 1
TECHNICAL REPORT NO: AT 5414/2 REV 1 DATE: 13TH OCTOBER 2003
SUBMITTED TO:
DEFRA ZONE 4/G17 ASHDOWN HOUSE 123 VICTORIA STREET LONDON SW1 6DE
ATTENTION:
MR JOHN STEALEY
SUBMITTED BY:
BUREAU VERITAS ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY 36-38 THE AVENUE SOUTHAMPTON SO17 1XN
PREPARED BY:
S J STEPHENSON SENIOR CONSULTING ENGINEER
B C POSTLETHWAITE PRINCIPAL CONSULTANT
APPROVED BY:
B R WOOD PRINCIPAL CONSULTANT
PROJECT QUALITY ASSURANCE This Project has been undertaken in accordance with both the Group and local Quality Management System specifics registered by BSIQA to ISO 9001. (Certificate No. FS34143 in the name of Bureau Veritas Group , of which Bureau Veritas Acoustic Technology forms part of the UK organisation).
SUMMARY
The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, Defra, has commissioned Bureau Veritas Acoustic Technology (BVAT) to undertake a research project to investigate the acoustic modelling of noise from industrial sources to assist in its noise mapping processes. The development of a standardised approach on how to map sources of industrial noise is critical to mapping the ambient noise climate in England as the UK has no national standard. A simple methodology, which allows consistent and reasonably accurate representation of industrial noise sources for noise mapping, will provide the necessary firm basis for assessing the effects of industrial noise and mitigation where this is considered necessary. A methodology for representing industrial sources in a noise model which is simple, reproducible and robust has therefore been developed. Provision has been made within the study to allow different sizes and complexities of industrial development to be modelled. As part of the project, BVAT has investigated the formats of some national databases and population density databases and reviewed the impact this will have on the methodology to represent industrial noise sources. The project also researched the feasibility of using non-acoustic means to assign noise levels to sources of industrial noise. A review was conducted to establish the types of information routinely gathered by different industries and its accessibility and confidentiality. In addition, a review of work carried out in other European countries in this field was carried out. At present, it is not considered a viable proposition, in England, to use non-acoustic means to determine noise source strengths. It is, however, possible that such a method might be developed in due time in the light of more extensive experience. It was therefore considered necessary to use measurements to assign noise levels to sources of industrial noise. The most appropriate method of measurement for different types of sources has been investigated and clearly specified. The results illustrate that source determination can be carried out utilising both closeproximity (i.e. site boundary) and distant measurements. However, a correction for ground effects is necessary when using distant measurements over soft ground. The preferred measurement method depends upon access to measurement locations as well as residual noise etc. In terms of the subsequent distribution of the source sound power for the purposes of noise mapping, the research established that the most accurate way of modelling a noise source is by distributing the sound energy in a manner as similar as possible to the real situation. However, where this is either not practicable, or the true sound power distribution is not known, a reasonable degree of accuracy can be obtained by modelling the sound power as either a 2 dimensional area source or a point source.
AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003
Acoustic Technology
The results of the modelling also indicated that the directivity of the source can significantly influence the accuracy of the noise contour values. For this reason, the proposed method includes provision for determining the acoustic centre and directivity of the source. Research has also been conducted to investigate the potential errors incurred by utilising the overall Aweighted (single band propagation) terms defined in ISO 9613. Whilst calculations based on octave band frequency data give greater accuracy, a single figure calculation is the preferred option and would be more consistent with the mapping of other sources. The results of the modelling show that, in general, a single band approximation of the propagation of sound offers a relatively accurate approximation for industrial noise. It has therefore been recommended that the mapping of industrial noise for strategic purposes be conducted using overall dB(A) values, with attenuation terms for the 500 Hz octave band being used to estimate the resulting attenuation. Measurements were conducted at two sites to provide data to assist validation of the model. A variety of close proximity and far field measurements were conducted to allow the relative accuracy of different methods to be determined. It is concluded that the proposed methodology allows consistent and reasonably accurate representation of industrial noise sources for strategic noise mapping purposes. This will provide the necessary firm basis for assessing the effects of industrial noise and mitigation where this is considered necessary.
ii
Acoustic Technology
CONTENTS 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. INTRODUCTION AIMS AND OBJECTIVES DOCUMENT REVIEW PROJECT CONSULTATION REVIEW OF NATIONAL DATASETS REVIEW OF SOUND PROPAGATION CONCEPTS INCLUDING EFFECTS OF TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY DETERMINATION OF SOURCE NOISE LEVEL SITE INVESTIGATIONS RECOMMENDED METHODOLOGY FOR SOURCE NOISE LEVEL DETERMINATION RECOMMENDED MEASUREMENT METHOD APPLICATION OF DATA CONCLUSIONS Page 27 Page 62 Page 69 Page 71 Page 85 Page 86 Page 1 Page 1 Page 2 Page 9 Page 21 Page 23
REFERENCES GLOSSARY OF TERMS APPENDIX 1: APPENDIX 2: APPENDIX 3: APPENDIX 4: APPENDIX 5: APPENDIX 6: APPENDIX 7: APPENDIX 8: APPENDIX 9: Local Authority Questionnaire Stakeholder Contact Letters European Government Departments Contact Letters List of Local Authorities Who Responded To Questionnaire Review of National Databases Results of Relative Humidity and Temperature Review Calculations Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Building With Even Radiation Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Building With Directional Radiation
APPENDIX 10: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Two Buildings With Directional Radiation APPENDIX 11: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Four Buildings With Directional Radiation APPENDIX 12: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source Between Buildings APPENDIX 13: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source on Roof of Building APPENDIX 14: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source on Stack APPENDIX 15: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Industrial Zone APPENDIX 16: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Open Site
iii
Acoustic Technology
LIST OF FIGURES Figure No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Title Page No. Comparison of Geometrical Correction Determined by Stber method and EEMUA 6 Summary of the Range of Industries Identified in LA Response 10 Weighted Summary of the Range of Industries Identified in LA Response 10 Summary of the Percentage of Sites with Characteristics 11 Graphical Representation of Calculation Method 34 Calculation Method for Point Source 35 Calculation Method for Building with Even Radiation Re-Modelled by Smearing the 38 Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade Calculation Method for Building with Even Radiation Re-Modelled as a Point 38 Source Calculation Method for Building with Even Radiation Re-Modelled as a 2D Area 39 Source Calculation Method for Building with Directional Radiation Re-Modelled by 41 Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade Calculation Method for Building with Directional Radiation Re-Modelled as Point 42 Source Calculation Method for 2 Buildings with Directional Radiation Re-Modelled by 44 Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade Calculation Method for 4 Buildings with Directional Radiation Re-Modelled by 46 Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade Calculation Method for Point Source Between 2 Buildings Re-Modelled by 48 Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade Calculation Method for Point Source on the Roof of a Building Re-Modelled by 50 Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade Calculation Method for Elevated Point Source Re-Modelled by Assuming Point 52 Source at Lower Height Relationship Between Adjacent Sources Showing Influence on Lw Determination 54 Calculated Error for Measurement of Sound Power Level of Extended Sources as a 55 Relationship of Angle Subtended Between Adjacent Sources Worked Example Extended Source 56 Calculation Method for Combination of Several Source / Screening Concepts Re58 Modelled as a 2D Area Source Calculation Method for Combination of Several Source / Screening Concepts Re58 Modelled as a Point Source Graphical Representation of Site Layout for Combination of Several Source / 59 Screening Concepts Graphical Representation of Oil Gathering Station Cadna Model 60 Difference in Calculated Sound Pressure Level Between Hard and Soft Ground 61 Calculations For Oil Gathering Station Model Community and Boundary Measurement Locations Factory Unit Tests 64 Measurement Positions Open Site Tests 67 Measurement Positions for Close Proximity Method 75 Worked Example Close Proximity Method 79 Measurement Positions for Distant Measurement Method 80 Worked Example Refined Distant Method 83
iv
Acoustic Technology
LIST OF TABLES Table No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Title Page No. Summary of LA Responses 9 Number and Percentage of Sites Identified with Various Characteristics 11 Normalisation Values for Spectrum Shapes 25 Example Spectrum Shape for Falling Spectrum for 100 dB(A) Overall Level 25 Summary of Results for Deviation for Extremes of Temperature and Relative Humidity 26 Comparison of Sound Power per Square Metre for Various Types of Industry in 28 Holland Comparison of Sound Power per Square Metre for Container Terminals in UK 28 Comparison of Sound Power Level per Unit Throughput for Various Gas Terminals 31 Comparison of Sound Power Level Determination for Full Octave and Single Band 65 Calculations for Factory Unit Tests Comparison of Calculated Sound Pressure Levels With Measured Values for Factory 65 Unit Tests Comparison of Calculated Sound Power Level for Different Methods of Determination 68 Open Site Tests Comparison of Calculated Sound Pressure Levels with Measured Values Using Full 68 Octave Band Calculations - Open Site Tests Comparison of Calculated Sound Pressure Levels with Measured Values Using Single 69 Band Calculations - Open Site Tests Suggested Methods of Representing Different Types of Industrial Source for Noise 85 Mapping
Acoustic Technology
1.
INTRODUCTION The Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, Defra, has commissioned Bureau Veritas Acoustic Technology (BVAT) to undertake a research project to investigate the assessment of noise from industrial sources to assist in its noise mapping processes. This final report presents the work conducted during the project, the findings of each of the main tasks and draws conclusions from those findings.
2.
AIMS AND OBJECTIVES The aims of the project were specified in the invitation to tender (ITT) as follows: to develop a methodology for mapping sources of industrial noise as part of the first phase of noise mapping; to ensure that the methodology developed will integrate fully with national databases and reflect relevant GI data management issues. The ITT stated that the aims of the projects would be met by the following objectives: understanding Defras requirements for noise mapping to meet the EU Directive 2002/49/EC (Reference 1); familiarity with the interim computational method for assessing noise from industrial sources set out in Directive 2002/49/EC; devising a method for representing industrial sources in the noise model; this method must be simple, reproducible and robust; making recommendations to Defra on the most appropriate method that meets the industrial noise requirements of Directive 2002/49/EC; ensuring the methodology developed is fully compatible and consistent with national databases and other relevant GI data management issues; anticipating that, in general terms, the methodology eventually adopted will fall between the following bounds: representation of an industrial site by modelling a single point source located at the centre of the site and, representation of an industrial site by modelling every noise source that exists on the site to a high level of spatial and acoustic accuracy.
Acoustic Technology
Each of these issues has been addressed fully in the course of the project and is reported herein.
3. 3.1
DOCUMENT REVIEW National Ambient Noise Strategy Defras Consultation Paper Towards a National Ambient Noise Strategy (Reference 2) sets out the Governments proposals for developing a National Ambient Noise Strategy for England. A threephase approach is described which would result in Government setting the necessary policies to allow a strategy to be implemented. The first phase of the proposals aims to gather information on the following issues: The ambient noise climate in the country; The adverse effects of ambient noise; The techniques available to improve poor areas and preserve good; The methodology to be used to undertake economic analysis.
The development of a standardised approach on how to map sources of industrial noise is important to the first of these, as the UK has no national approach or standard. A simple methodology, which allows consistent and reasonably accurate representation of industrial noise sources for noise mapping, will provide the necessary firm basis for assessing the effects of industrial noise and mitigation where this is considered necessary. 3.2 European Noise Directive Directive 2002/49/EC defines a common approach, which is intended to prevent or reduce the harmful effects to humans of environmental noise, including annoyance. It identifies three actions to be carried out progressively; The determination of exposure to environmental noise through noise mapping; Provision of information to the public on environmental noise and its effects; Adoption of action plans based on the results of noise mapping with a view to prevention or reduction, particularly where levels may induce harmful effects to humans and to preserving areas of good environmental noise.
Acoustic Technology
The Directive also requires the development of measures to reduce noise from transportation and external industrial noise sources and mobile machinery. The Directive requires the use of the day-evening-night level Lden and the night-time noise indicator Lnight. Industrial noise in the UK is normally assessed in terms of resultant LAeq levels; however, it is a simple conversion to the required indicators, if all relevant information is available. Annex I of the Directive acknowledges that it may be necessary to use special noise indicators and limit values. This is of particular interest as, unlike transportation noise, industrial noise can exhibit distinctive characteristics, with tonal, low frequency or impulsive noise of special note. expected to be of concern. The data to be sent to the Commission specified in Annex VI of the Directive requires Lden values above 55 dB and Lnight values above 45-50 dB. This may act as a filter on the number of industrial noise sources that will need to be included under the first phase of noise mapping. sources, the limit for industrial sources to be mapped will be lower than the total value. The Directives further aim is to provide a basis for developing community measures to reduce noise emitted by the major sources, including industrial equipment and mobile machinery. 3.3 ISO 9613-2 The European Noise Directive discussed above recommends ISO 9613-2: Acoustics Attenuation of sound propagation outdoors; Part 2 General Method of Calculation (Reference 3) as the interim computational method for industrial noise. ISO 9613-2 is based on using octave band frequency source data to calculate resultant environmental noise levels from source sound power levels. A simpler method for mapping industrial noise would be to use overall dB(A) values and the standard does contains reference to such a methodology. The standard states that: If only A-weighted sound power levels of sources are known, the attenuation terms for 500 Hz may be used to estimate the resulting attenuation. It is acknowledged, that as industrial noise sources will need to be mapped separately to transportation These characteristics can often lead to annoyance at levels lower than those that would normally be
Acoustic Technology
Whilst it is clear that calculations based on octave band frequency data would give greater accuracy and information (especially in terms of low frequency noise and tonality of sources), it is acknowledged that a single figure calculation is the preferred option and would be more consistent with the mapping of other sources, easier to use and would be likely to give a sufficient level of detail for strategic mapping purposes. A method based on single figure calculations will also result in faster calculation times and easier data handling. The relative benefits and disadvantages of octave band frequency versus single figure calculations have been reviewed fully as part of the study. The methodology developed will also need to take into account industrial sources that do not operate for the whole of the periods of interest (day, evening, night). As a specific requirement of this project a review has been conducted of the effect on sound propagation values (and hence resultant noise levels) of different values of temperature and relative humidity. The results of this review are presented in Section 5 of this report. 3.4 ISO 8297 This standard (Reference 4) specifies an engineering method for determining the sound power level of multi-source industrial plants for the assessment of noise in the environment. This method was first proposed by Stber in 1972 and submitted to ISO for consideration as a standard in 1982. The standard states that the method is applicable to industrial areas where most of the equipment operates outdoors, not enclosed by a building. This would exclude a large number of manufacturing plants, unless the view was taken that the noise sources of concern in this situation are more likely to be those that are external to the factory building. It is applicable to industrial plants in which the largest horizontal dimensions of the plant area lie between 16 m and 320 m. Stber when developing the method, rather than acoustical or physical constraints. The standard is based on the measurement of sound pressure levels on a closed path surrounding the plant with individual sources within the site treated as a single source at the geometrical centre of the plant. The standard states the data obtained by this method is suitable for use in determining contributions of industrial areas to sound pressure levels in the surrounding environment, however it is limited to large multi-source plants with noise radiation substantially uniform in all directions. Some aspects of practical use of the standard are worthy of discussion as follows. The standard requires measurement of sound pressure levels on a closed path surrounding the plant, thus requiring access to all sides of the industrial plant. The allowable distance of the measurement points to the However, it is understood that these limitations are based on the limits of the measurement exercises carried out by
Acoustic Technology
perimeter of the noise sources is very precisely defined, varying from 5 m to 35 m, with a precisely defined spacing between the measurement points. In the majority of cases, measurements on a fully closed path would be difficult to achieve, depending on the available access to the industrial site. Often industrial plants are located adjacent to other private properties with no intervening public access. As stated above, the measurement contour needs to meet specific requirements, which would require some assessment prior to mobilising to site. If access difficulties were then encountered, a new measurement contour would need to be defined and assessed against those requirements. This would be difficult to do on site and may involve a repeat visit. The height of measurements around the industrial plant needs to be determined from the average height of the sources on the site. This would need to be obtained from equipment lists and site plans and elevations prior to mobilising to site. In addition, some assistance might be obtained from height databases, although it should be recognised that the height of individual buildings would not necessarily reflect the height of all the major noise sources on a site. The standard requires measurements to be made at a height, determined by:
h = H + 0.025 S m 5m
where H is the average height of the plants noise emitting equipment and Sm is the measurement area. This equation is derived based on an assumed radius of curvature for sound of 5000 m (i.e. assuming an average wind gradient of 7 ms-1 per 100 m, irrespective of height). For large industrial sites, the measurement height would be impractical. For example, a 1 km2 site would require a measurement height typically greater than 30 m, and this would increase to more than 55 m for a 4 km2 site. This implies that the measurement method would need some modification if it were to be extended for use on large-scale sites. The standard does allow for this and states that the microphone should be placed as high as possible above the minimum height of 5 m. Industrial plants may be located adjacent to other significant noise sources (i.e. main roads, other industrial plants). It is often not possible to conduct measurements to separate contributions from the industrial and other sources and hence the standards requirement for background noise levels 6 -10 dB lower than the industrial source may be difficult to achieve and even where it could be achieved, may be difficult to demonstrate. The standard requires that, where the industrial plant contains individual noise sources that are significantly elevated above ground, these should be identified and measured individually to
Acoustic Technology
determine their sound power levels. This requires a reasonably detailed knowledge of the site and would require access onto the site. Sound power level determination of elevated sources can be complex, sometimes involving the use of cherry pickers and cranes to gain access. The average sound pressure level along the measurement contour is then combined with a relatively complex area term, and other correction factors to take into account proximity to the grouped noise sources, atmospheric absorption and a microphone correction factor (if omni-directional microphones are not used). Due to the practical difficulties of the methodology set out in this standard, it is considered that it would not be appropriate to specify the full use of this standard for the purposes of strategic noise mapping. However, it is envisaged that a simplified version of this standard could be used to measure sound power levels for mapping purposes. Appendix C of EEMUA Noise Procedure Specification, Publication 140 (Reference 5) contains a simplified version of the Stber method. The EEMUA version does not specify such stringent requirements on the measurement height and distance etc. The main difference is, however, the geometric near-field error term, which is based upon Stichting Concawe Report No. 2/76, Determination of Sound Power Levels of Industrial Equipment, Particularly Oil Industry Plant (Reference 6). In this case, the geometrical near-field error is based upon the angle subtended at the microphone position by the source. For convenience, this can also be determined by the quotient, Q, of the plant area to the measurement area. Figure 1 shows the values of error determined using the EEMUA method, plotted against the errors determined in ISO 8297:
4
Stber Correction
Geometrical Correction, dB
EEMUA Correction
3
0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Q 0.8 1 1.2
FIGURE 1: Comparison of Geometrical Correction Determined by Stber method and EEMUA
Acoustic Technology
It can be seen from Figure 1 that the geometrical near-field correction recommended in EEMUA is in fact a simplified approximation of the values derived via the Stber method. 3.5 ISO 3744 & ISO 3746 These two standards (References 7 and 8) present similar methodologies for determining source sound power levels from measurements over a reflecting plane to engineering grade and survey grade of accuracy respectively. unrestricted access to the source. Most industrial sites, where noise is a consideration, consist of several noise sources and these methods for sound power level determination would require relatively detailed measurement of each individual source. Access to industrial sites is not generally available without prior arrangement and this can often be time consuming. Whilst these methods are suitable for many applications, it is considered that for the purposes of strategic noise mapping, they are not suitable for larger industrial developments, and are too complex and time consuming. In principle, it is felt that adherence to these more detailed methods of sound power level determination for individual noise sources may be appropriate if, as a result of the initial strategic noise mapping exercise, a more detailed assessment of the noise radiation characteristics of the industrial site was deemed to be required. 3.6 Good Practice Guide on the Sources and Magnitude of Uncertainty Arising in the Practical Measurement of Environmental Noise This document (Reference 9) was published by the University of Salford in October 2001 and aims to present the uncertainties arising in measurement of environmental noise in as simple a manner as possible. It is intended to enable users to define probable sources of uncertainty and to determine the magnitude of those uncertainties. The document proposes a procedure for formulating uncertainty budgets by considering the measurement chain in three sections i.e. source, transmission path and receiver. The uncertainty for each section is then combined to provide an overall uncertainty, which can be expanded to give 95% confidence. A flowchart is provided for the procedure along with a checklist to assist with the identification of sources of measurement uncertainty. They are suitable for use with a single source and require
Acoustic Technology
As part of the study, controlled measurement exercises were conducted to investigate the lower limits of uncertainty. These measurements showed significantly greater uncertainty in reproducibility (same source and measurement procedure but different operators, equipment and times) than repeatability (same source, equipment, method and operator within short time interval). Further examples are provided of determination of uncertainty for real measurement exercises. The principal potential sources of uncertainty in noise measurements, under the three sections identified previously, are as follows: Noise Source Spectral content; Point/line/area source; Operating conditions; State of repair of source; Source height; Static/mobile sources; Enclosures/barriers close to source; Weather. Transmission Path Weather; Ground effects; Barriers. Receiver Microphone position (height, orientation, reflecting surfaces); Instrumentation/calibration; Background noise. Each of these potential sources of uncertainty is discussed with Good practice guidelines and Useful notes included where appropriate.
Acoustic Technology
4. 4.1
PROJECT CONSULTATION Local Authorities A questionnaire was sent to the Principal Environmental Health Officers of all Local Authorities in England. This was followed on two occasions by an email reminder. A copy of the questionnaire and the covering letter are included in Appendix 1 of this report. The questionnaire was intended to assist in the identification of the range and composition of industrial noise sources in England. It asks for identification of the three main industrial noise sources in each region and, where information is available, the level and type of noise they emit. A reasonable response was received and this is summarised in Table 1.
Number of questionnaires sent: Number of responses to July 2003: Number of responses with NO major industrial noise sources within their area: Number of authorities who indicate that they hold noise data for industrial sites: Number of authorities who included noise data in their response: TABLE 1: Summary of LA Responses
368 166 43 83 12 45% 12% 23% 3%
The questionnaires returned identified some 300 industrial sites across England that the Local Authorities considered noise from the sites to be affecting their areas. Of those 300 sites, approximately half (147 sites) were considered to be significant sources of noise in that area. The range of industries identified is shown in Figure 2, overleaf.
Acoustic Technology
Landfill sites / waste to energy schemes Waste incinerators Gas terminals
Coke ovens Cement mills
Oil refineries Sewage works
FIGURE 2: Summary of the Range of Industries Identified in LA Response
Paper mills Printing Warehouse and distribution Wood mills Waste transfer stations Ports Mineral extraction sites Car and transport manufacturing Mineral processing Power stations Chemical plants Industrial Estates (Mixed) Food Industry (inc. drink / bottles) Production and processing of metals Other
Manufacturing industry
In order to place emphasis on those industries that were considered to be significant sources of environmental noise in a particular area, a scoring system of 2 was given to these industries, with the other entries being given a score of 1. This rating is reflected in the Figure 3.
Gas terminals Landfill sites / waste to energy schemes Waste incinerators Paper mills Warehouse and distribution Printing Ports Waste transfer stations Wood mills Mineral processing Mineral extraction sites Other* Oil refineries Coke ovens Sewage works Cement mills
Production and processing of metals
FIGURE 3: Weighted Summary of the Range of Industries Identified in LA Response
Car and transport manufacturing Power stations Chemical plants Industrial Estates (Mixed)
Food Industry (inc. drink / bottles) Manufacturing industry
* Other includes: Airfields / Airports, Brickworks, Bus Depots, Civic Amenity Centres, Drycleaners, Dyeworks, Glassworks, Motor Speedways, Petrol Stations and Train Depots.
10
Acoustic Technology
The questionnaires also requested information regarding the characteristics of the major industrial sources, and the response is summarised in Table 2 and Figure 4, below.
Number and percentage of sites with tonal characteristics: Number of sites with impulsive characteristics: Number of sites with low frequency characteristics: Number and percentage with no characteristic: Number and percentage with just one characteristic: Number and percentage with two characteristics: Number and percentage with all three characteristics:
153 114 111 65 123 81 31
51 % 38 % 37 % 22 % 41 % 27 % 10 %
TABLE 2: Number and Percentage of Sites Identified with Various Characteristics
Sites with all three characteristics
Sites with no characteristic
Sites with two characteristics
Sites with only one characteristic
FIGURE 4: Summary of the Percentage of Sites with Characteristics A degree of caution must be expressed in the interpretation of these results, as some Local Authority areas will be heavily industrialised as compared to others. Thus the pie chart in Figures 2 and 3, above, should not be used as a direct indication of the percentages of the different types of industry throughout England that are considered as major sources of noise, but only as an indication of the range of industries that Local Authorities believe are significant in their area. Further contacts were made with the local authorities, which indicated that they might have had useful data. This was targeted to represent a cross-section of the main industries identified by the feedback from LAs.
11
Acoustic Technology
A list of the local authorities that responded to BVATs questionnaire is included in Appendix 2. There were several authorities that did not reply but where BVAT is aware of significant industrial noise sources affecting their area. However, no attempt was made to target specific authorities with reminders because this could skew the data. 4.2 4.2.1 Stakeholders Stakeholder Contacts Early in the project, initial contact was made with the following stakeholders to inform them that BVAT was undertaking this research. Environment Agency Lesley Ormerod CBI Janet Asherson CIEH Howard Price CPRE original contact Abigail Jermain, now Rebecca Richings NSCA Mary Stevens The NSCA was included as CPRE cited them as a more relevant stakeholder - as CPRE follows NSCA guidance on noise issues. This was followed up in May 2003 with further information regarding the content of the project to allow stakeholders to express any opinions on the main aspects of the research. Copies of both letters sent to the stakeholders are reproduced in Appendix 3. With the exception of the Environment Agency (see below), no formal responses were received from any of the stakeholders. 4.2.2 Environment Agency More detailed contact has taken place with the Environment Agency. Initial telephone discussions took place to ensure that any issues that they consider to be critical were addressed. From these initial discussions, it was clear that the EA considered it very important to research the following issues:
12
Acoustic Technology
the merits of using a methodology based on overall single figure dB(A) levels versus octave band calculations; accounting for character of industrial noise e.g. tonality, low frequency, impulsiveness etc; the validity of using non-acoustic means to generate sound power levels for industry.
Whilst it was acknowledged that the methodology proposed under the current project would be used for strategic noise mapping, concerns were expressed regarding the significance of local site variations being lost within a simplified methodology. This related to the character of industrial noise, which was considered to be a significant factor in response to that noise in the environment. Also in relation to the use of non-acoustic means, concern was expressed that this method would not account for the considerable variations that can occur between similar industries within this country. For example, the level of noise from an industrial source can often depend on the proximity of noise sensitive receiver locations to it. The EA considers that there are no industries that fall under IPPC legislation that could readily be identified as being of low concern with regard to noise issues. Experience has shown that variation within sectors is such that all applicants for permits are required to demonstrate that a plant is inherently quiet for a full noise assessment to be avoided. Where sites already exist, the EA always requires measurements to be conducted rather than relying on the results of acoustic modelling. Another issue raised by the EA is the concern that any methodology derived for strategic mapping of industrial noise sources would be used out of context where a more detailed assessment should be undertaken e.g. in an application for a permit under IPPC. It was requested that, should BVAT propose a simple methodology, clear guidance be given as to where its use is appropriate. In June 2003 a meeting took place between representatives of BVAT, the EA and Defra. following items were discussed at this meeting: Background to the study Defra provided a short presentation detailing why this research is being undertaken as well as general background information about other activities taking place in parallel. Presentation overview BVAT presented an overview of the project and issues being considered, including a synopsis of modelling methods being developed for the project. The
13
Acoustic Technology
Databases
BVAT summarised the LA responses to date and gave an overview of the statistical analysis carried out.
Additional concerns
The EA reiterated concerns about providing a clear scope / guidance on the appropriate use of any simplified methodologies developed. Of particular concern was any conflict with IPPC applications. BVAT and Defra agreed that such guidance would be prudent to prevent confusion.
4.3 4.3.1
European Contacts European Government Contacts The following European governmental departments have been contacted to determine relevant standards or guidelines in use in these countries for mapping industrial noise sources. The letters sent are reproduced in Appendix 4. German Federal Environment Agency - Volker Imer Danish Environmental Protection Agency - Hugo Lyse Nielsen French Ministry of County Planning and Environment - David Delcampe Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment - Martin Van den Berg Other similar contacts made include TNO1 in the Netherlands and Mller BBM2 in Germany. Initial letter contacts were followed up during the project with email reminders.
4.3.2
Relevant EU research It is understood that research is underway at a European level regarding issues relevant to mapping of industrial noise sources. These include the adaptation and revision of the interim computation methods for the purposes of strategic noise mapping, and the preparation of tool kits for noise mapping different sources of noise. However, it is understood that none of these tool kits were relevant to this project. Another item of research in the UK that may be of relevance, is the work being undertaken to define best practice in noise prediction for surface mineral workings in consultation document MPS2. It is
1 2
TNO - Nederlandse Organisatie voor Toegepast Mller BBM GmBH is a German engineering consultancy company
14
Acoustic Technology
also understood that there is another area of research in the UK into quiet areas, and this may have some relevance to the present study. 4.3.3 Review of European Countries Defra publication of June 1999 Noise Climate Assessment: A Review of National and European Practices (Reference 10) contains a comprehensive review of legislation in European countries other than the UK at that time relating to noise and the environment within the context of strategic noise mapping. It is acknowledged that this document is somewhat out of date; however, it does give a useful indication of the techniques in use in recent years in those countries, albeit these techniques have been in use in the period preceding the publication of the EC noise mapping directive. The following paragraphs give BVATs initial findings on methodologies in use in other European countries in relation to industrial noise. Netherlands The Defra publication found that the Noise Abatement Act 1979 required noise zoning close to new roads and industrial areas by 1982. During the authorisation process, noise models were being used to establish noise zones in which particular industrial activities could take place. Industrial noise had been mapped for around 1200 industrial zones. In noise mapping of industrial sources, standard calculation methods were in use to calculate noise emissions based on non-acoustic means i.e. class of industry and post-code. Noise limits were in place for industry and for new residential development close to existing industry. It is noted that, at that time, TNO was undertaking research into integrated noise mapping systems. A response has been received from the Dutch Ministry of Housing, Spatial Planning and the Environment in the Netherlands. Martin van den Berg has confirmed that considerable work has been undertaken over recent years to determine the impact of industrial noise and that noise zones have been calculated around approximately 1000 major industrial areas. This was done using the calculation procedure described in the Noise Abatement Act. He was unable to provide details of this procedure, but provided a number of further contacts, see below, who he considered were likely to be able to assist further. DCMR Technical Environmental Services Rotterdam area, Henk Wolfert DGMR Acoustic Consultants, Hans van Leeuwen RIVM National Institute for Health and Environment, Ton Dassen
15
Acoustic Technology
Henk Wolfert referred BVAT to his colleague Astrid van Wijk, who has undertaken a considerable amount of work in this field. Generally, the Netherlands has industrial zones but some areas have industry outside these zones. Most mapping is the responsibility of the industrial operators themselves. For mapping industrial noise, source noise levels supplied by equipment manufacturers are used and are supplemented with measurement where necessary. Manufacturers are required by law to provide sound power data and this is therefore readily available. Individual noise sources are mapped with detailed knowledge of the site. Where measurements are required, these are usually carried out by acoustic consultants and are detailed measurements of individual sources rather than global boundary or community measurements. A propagation model is then used, based on a Dutch standard, which is similar but not identical to ISO 9613. The planning regime has two procedures. Where industry is to be developed within an industrial zone, then it is allocated an allowable sound power level per unit area and an allowable sound pressure level at the nearest property. It is then up to the industry to design the plant to make best use of their noise allowance e.g. using buildings to screen towards residential properties.
3
If
development is proposed for outside an industrial area, then it is required to use ALARP and usually has an overriding limit of 50dB(A) at the nearest property, although often a lower limit is set if this is considered achievable. A further response was received from Rob Witte of DGMR, who has carried out some research on non-acoustic means of determining the sound power levels of industrial premises. presented in Section 7.2.1, below. Denmark The Defra research paper indicates that in Denmark, limits were set for environmental noise based on Best Available Techniques (BAT). Guidelines were in existence, one of which, Guideline No. 6, described methods for measurements of noise from industrial plants. industrial noise source varied depending on the surrounding area. A further guideline was published in 1993 on the calculation of noise from industrial plants. The requirements placed on an This work is
As Low As Reasonably Practicable
16
Acoustic Technology
Although noise mapping had been undertaken for transportation sources, nothing similar was in place for industry. Transportation noise mapping was generally based on noise prediction rather than noise measurements. A limited number of industries, or recreational sources were required to have noise zones (shooting and motor sport). Some gas processing plants were also understood to use the program SoundPlan to determine environmental noise levels. The Danish Acoustical Institute published a report (No. 105) in 1983 entitled Noise Immision from Industry Measurement and Prediction of Environmental Noise from Industrial Plants. (Reference 11). It compared four methodologies for global measurement of sound power levels of entire industrial plants. The measurements were conducted in 1982 around an asphalt plant with more limited measurements around an oil refinery. The first of these was the General Nordic Short Distance Method. This involves measuring sound pressure level on a box-shaped measurement surface which envelopes, and is close to the source. Measurements are conducted at a number of heights depending on the source height (2.2 m and 12.5 m for this case). The sound power level is then determined from the sound pressure level (corrected for environment) integrated over the area of the measurement surface, with a near field correction applied. The General Nordic Long Distance Method requires sound pressure level measurements on a hemisphere around the source at a minimum of four equally spaced positions on the circle (at a height of up to 10 m). Sound power level is then determined by integrating the sound pressure levels over the measurement surface and with corrections applied for directivity. The Nordic Large Source Method is designed for determination of sound power level of very large industrial plants. This method is more flexible than the general methods as measurements are conducted at greater distances from the site and need not necessarily be conducted on all sides of the source. Measurements are conducted at a height between 5 and 10m and are normalized to a free field sound pressure level at 1m from the centre of the source by backward application of the General Prediction Method. The normalised sound pressure levels are averaged and a sound power level calculated along with corrections for directivity. Meteorological conditions necessary for the method are specified and an integration time of at least 10 minutes is recommended. The final method investigated was the Stber Method (which has formed the basis for ISO 8297) and, as such, has already been considered in Section 2.
17
Acoustic Technology
Sound power levels were then determined for individual sources on the site by detailed measurement. Comparison of the methods found that the levels determined by the general long distance method, the large source method and the Stber method all agreed within a few dB. It was found that the general Nordic Short Distance Method gave consistently higher results (1 4 dB) than the others due to a geometrical error inherent in the method. France The Defra research paper indicates that although noise studies were undertaken to predict the impact of industry on environmental noise levels, no significant research has been undertaken regarding industrial noise sources for the purposes of strategic noise mapping. It is understood that a number of towns have produced local noise maps, including Paris whose results have been published on the Internet. Bureau Veritas met with le Ministre de L'cologie et du Dveloppement Durable (The Ministry for Ecology and Durable Development) on the 25th June 2003 to discuss mapping of industrial noise. The French ministry indicated that there was no specific method developed or in development for mapping of industrial noise. Noise measurement data exists for industrial sites under French law and noise mapping in France will therefore use this existing data. However, it is not known how the French authorities will utilise these existing noise measurement data to produce industrial noise maps. The Paris noise map was carried out by the Service Technique de l'Ecologie urbaine (Engineering Department of Urban Ecology), a department of French local government. However, this does not include noise from industrial sources. It is not known whether the map will be developed further to include industrial noise. Germany From the Defra research paper it is known that considerable noise mapping had been undertaken in Germany, however this had focussed on transportation noise. Because noise maps are currently widely used in Germany, they are commonly used to designate permitted noise levels for proposed industrial developments. Noise levels for industry are therefore subject to strict limits (TA Lrm). Hence, there are currently two methods used for mapping industrial noise in Germany: i. Measurements can made of noise emission from industrial sites to establish an overall sound power level.
18
Acoustic Technology
ii.
Alternatively, the overall noise emission of a site can be determined in terms of a sound power level per square metre. This information would be available in the case of new premises and is particularly used to designate permitted emissions from proposed facilities.
Because noise maps have normally been used to designate limits, the latter method of determining sound power levels can be easily applied. measurements. 4.4 Birmingham City Council Birmingham City Council, through its Environmental Services Committee and its active involvement with EC Noise Policy, has been instrumental in the UK in pioneering the feasibility and benefits of undertaking city noise mapping. Using the services of a German consultancy deBakom, in 1999, a noise map of the City of Birmingham was produced. For the area mapped, industrial noise was not considered to be a major noise source in comparison to transportation and hence an in-depth assessment was not conducted. Industrial sites included in the project were selected using Birmingham City Councils knowledge of the area, choosing large industrial plants that may have previously or currently had some noise issues associated with them. Noise measurements were conducted at the majority of these sites. For these, sound power levels were determined by measuring noise levels at a small number of measurement locations, from public access locations. Measurements were conducted at a height of 10 m to reduce the effect of localised screening. It is also understood from discussions with Birmingham City Council, that all measurement locations had line of sight to the industrial plant. A distance to the centre of the source was assumed and a corresponding sound power level determined. These sound power levels were then placed along factory facades and roofs in the model and it is understood that a degree of adjustment was necessary in this procedure to ensure that the computed noise contour values equalled the measured sound pressure level values at the measurement locations. All measurements were taken using the LA95 noise index, to minimise interference from non-industry related intermittent noise sources. It is understood that no attempt was made to correct the LA95 measured values to obtain more typical LAeq values due to the industrial site. It is also understood that no attempt was made to correct for background noise. A pragmatic approach was taken that, if the noise from the site could be clearly heard, then it could be measured. With the exception of one site where continuous measurements were made (railway shunting site) measurements were taken during the daytime or evening periods. Sample lengths were typically 10 minutes long. In other cases, it is necessary to undertake
19
Acoustic Technology
All contour calculations were undertaken in overall A-weighted values, although samples of noise were tape-recorded and A-weighted narrow band analyses are included in the deBakom report. An assumed value of 2 dB per 1000 m was used for air absorption for industrial noise. Ground effects were not included in the calculations. No attempt was made in the mapping exercise to quantify, in any sense, some of the industrial noise characteristics that often give rise to concern (e.g. tonal, impulsive, low frequency). For sites where measurements were not conducted, levels were assumed to be 10 dB lower than the background due to traffic. For all the sites where measurements were taken, night-time sound power levels were taken to be similar to daytime noise levels with the exception of shunting activities at the Rover site. For some chosen sites, it was not possible to measure noise from the industrial site, due to the presence of background noise from other sources (mainly traffic). In this situation, the assumption was made for the purpose of deriving the industrial noise map of Birmingham, that the ambient noise level due to the industrial site was 10 dB(A) less than the background level due to road traffic. It is understood that no contact was made with the industrial site concerned to ascertain plant operating conditions at the time of the measurements. Calculated overall sound power levels at the various industrial sites where measurements were made varied from 93 dB(A) to 116 dB(A). An accuracy of +/- 2 dB on the derived sound power levels is claimed in the report, although the basis for the claimed degree of accuracy is not stated.
20
Acoustic Technology
5. 5.1
REVIEW OF NATIONAL DATASETS General As part of the research project, a review of national datasets has been carried out. The results of this research at the time of this review are presented in detail in Appendix 5, and is summarised below. It should be noted that national datasets are constantly being updated and that the information contained in this section will need to be constantly reviewed to ensure its future applicability.
5.2
Industrial Noise Mapping Data Sources No nationally consistent building height dataset is available from which to contribute to industrial noise mapping either from consideration of the heights of the industrial buildings, or the heights of the buildings surrounding the industrial site. OS has announced its intention to add this as an attribute to the OS MasterMap digital topographic database, but this is unlikely to be ready in the short term to supply specific height information attached to building polygons. In the absence of a nationally consistent building height data, a combination of approaches is likely to be necessary to add height data. Research into the appropriate datasets in each locality is needed. Commercially sensitive telecommunications data and MOD data may provide the most comprehensive information (although this would need to be investigated further). This alternative approach is likely to include a combination of existing attributed building height surveys and processing of industrial areas with data derived from digital elevation models. NEXTMap SAR4 data now has complete national coverage and appears to offer an opportunity for a national source terrain and surface model dataset which is useful for both terrain and feature height mapping, but within stated tolerances. These tolerances (0.5 1 m) would be more than sufficient for industrial noise mapping. The surface models would need to be differenced from the terrain model to capture feature heights. It is also clear that more datasets are becoming available for urban areas, and before the industrial noise mapping is undertaken, a search for new data releases should be carried out which would target the few companies producing products in this field. Often these datasets of building heights are part of a suite of products (e.g. Cities Revealed have both building class for residential properties and
Synthetic Aperture Radar
21
Acoustic Technology
building height data for selected cities). London is a data rich city but other UK cities still do not have full coverage. It should be noted that the height of a building does not necessarily indicate the height of the noise sources on an industrial site, thus height datasets may be more appropriate to sound propagation modelling rather than industrial noise source modelling. 5.3 Population Data Population datasets are based on the UK Census. The Census 2001 data for local areas, based on the geographic framework of the Output Areas, was released in June 2003. It is of interest to note that some 88% of Output Areas in the census contain between 110 and 139 households. This should provide the appropriate product set to help to assess noise impacted areas, and to obtain an approximation of the number of people exposed to particular noise levels. 5.4 Dwelling numbers Census data offers a description of the dwellings and the nature of accommodation at the date of Census, but will not identify the specific locations of accommodation, being reported at an aggregated level of Enumeration districts or Output Areas. New 2001 Census data will be available to use with industrial mapping projects. The Census data would not, however, be sufficiently detailed to identify the intersection of noise contours with dwelling numbers, should this be deemed necessary, (this is a requirement under the EU directive). Data derived from OS topographic databases offer the best opportunity to accurately locate buildings (either as point locations or footprints) but do not distinguish the nature of the building or whether there are multiple dwellings within a building. New products being developed by OS, the National Buildings Data Set would fill the gaps in classification and links between building boundaries and address data. Commercial products may provide a more immediate solution, such as QuickAddress and local data for selected cities is available from Cities Revealed. However, there is still a problem in using these datasets to identify dwellings as certain types of structure are classified as buildings but would not be dwellings, and other types are not included (temporary buildings and caravans etc) which would be covered in Census data.
22
Acoustic Technology
The Valuation Office maintains the database of rated listings for Council Tax, and this appears to offer the best identifier of dwellings and occupancy. In order to spatially query this data it would be Further necessary to link to AddressPoint or similar products to derive a point-based dataset. negotiation would be needed with the Valuation Office to access this source. A hybrid approach may be necessary to identify the actual number of dwellings within a locality and updates based on new buildings would need to be checked at the local levels with the planning authority. New datasets will become available within the future and planned databases from the Valuation Office appear to offer a solution, but the terms of release of such data is not known.
6.
REVIEW OF SOUND PROPAGATION CONCEPTS INCLUDING EFFECTS OF TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY
6.1
Sound Propagation In the derivation of noise modelling concepts for industrial sources, it is necessary to have a fundamental understanding as to how sound propagates from a noise source. This is in order to quantify potential errors that simplified modelling techniques may introduce (e.g. just using A-weighted levels rather than frequency dependent data). There are a number of attenuation mechanisms in calculating a sound pressure level at a defined distance from a noise source based on a knowledge of the sound power level of the source, or vice versa. These include: (i) (ii) (iii) geometrical divergence of sound energy; ground interaction effects; absorption directly by the atmosphere;
In addition to these, barriers and topographical features will also provide an attenuation mechanism. The first factor relates to the way in which sound energy dissipates with distance in a geometrical fashion. In general, sound decays at a rate of 6 dB per doubling of distance from a point source although this factor is modified close to the source by the physical source size. Other factors may also temper this generalised rate of attenuation with distance. The ground interaction effect is a phase cancellation phenomenon caused by the destructive interference of direct rays and rays reflected from the ground. This effect is significant for a range of mid-frequencies over acoustically soft ground (e.g. grassland, ploughed fields etc.) but is less
23
Acoustic Technology
significant, and less frequency dependent, if the ground is acoustically hard (e.g. concrete, water). The actual ground profile between source and receiver may also modify this phenomenon. Wind and temperature gradients in the atmosphere play a very important part in modifying sound attenuation characteristics. A positive vertical temperature gradient causes sound to be refracted downwards, which enhances sound propagation. This type of temperature gradient, known as a temperature inversion, frequently occurs just before sunset and extends to just after sunrise if skies are clear. During the day, if it is sunny, a negative vertical temperature gradient occurs in the In reality, vertical temperature gradients in the atmosphere and sound is refracted upwards. If it is cloudy, the cloud acts as a blanket and the temperature gradient tends to be more neutral. complex sound propagation conditions. Sound is also refracted downwards, in a downwind direction, and upwards in an upwind direction. The combination of wind and temperature gradients may lead to shadow zones upwind of a noise source, where the source of noise may be seen, but not heard. In a downwind direction, downwards sound refraction may modify the ground interaction phenomenon, and also, at longer distances, give rise to sound focusing effects. Generalised models of sound propagation cannot take into account the detailed structure of the atmosphere on a day-to-day basis, therefore some differences between measurements and predictions must always be expected. The most stable sound propagation direction is downwind of a source, and typically within a distance of about 1 km. It is for this condition and for this range that the best correlation with standard sound propagation models would be expected to occur. Sound absorption by the atmosphere involves a real loss mechanism in that a direct transfer of energy occurs between the acoustic wave and the constituents of the atmosphere. There are a number of different attenuation mechanisms involved concerning thermal and viscous losses and transfer of energy to nitrogen and oxygen molecules. The main factors influencing atmospheric sound absorption are temperature and relative humidity. This is a frequency dependent phenomenon, with the greatest effect occurring at high frequencies. There are a number of currently available noise modelling software packages which take these factors into account by use of the appropriate standards for sound propagation effects. In the course of this project BVAT has used the noise modelling software Cadna. atmosphere can be complex and change from positive to negative or vice versa, giving rise to more
24
Acoustic Technology
6.2
Relative Humidity and Temperature Review As part of the research into industrial noise modelling, BVAT has reviewed the sound attenuation effect of the range of temperature and relative humidity values that may be expected to occur in England for distances likely to be considered in industrial noise modelling. The approach taken was to consider noise sources with different spectrum shapes and then calculate the resultant sound pressure level over distances of 500 m, 1 km and 2 km, for a range of temperature and humidity conditions which are provided as the default range in the Cadna software. The extremes used are a temperature of -10C to 35C and relative humidity of 50% to 100%. Different spectrum shapes have been considered. These include a spectrum decreasing at 3 dB per octave, a flat spectrum across the octave bands, a spectrum increasing at 3 dB per octave, a humped spectrum peaking at 500 Hz with a fall off of 3 dB per octave either side, and a typical industrial spectrum. Specifically the spectra used, relative to overall dB(A) levels, are shown in Table 3.
Spectrum Shape Falling spectrum, dB Rising spectrum, dB Flat spectrum, dB Humped spectrum, dB Typical industrial spectrum, dB
Octave Band Centre Frequency 31.5 +9 -27 -7 -14 +17 63 +6 -24 -7 -11 +12 125 +3 -21 -7 -8 +4 250 0 -18 -7 -5 -1 500 -3 -15 -7 -2 -3 1k -6 -12 -7 -5 -5 2k -9 -9 -7 -8 -9 4k -12 -6 -7 -11 -12 8k -15 -3 -7 -14 -16
TABLE 3: Normalisation Values for Spectrum Shapes Example: To produce a sound pressure level of 100 dB(A), the falling spectrum shape would comprise the following octave band values, as shown in Table 4.
Overall, dB(A) 100 31.5 109 63 106 125 103
Octave Band Centre Frequency 250 100 500 97 1k 94 2k 91 4k 88 8k 85
TABLE 4: Example Spectrum Shape for Falling Spectrum for 100 dB(A) Overall Level
25
Acoustic Technology
The predicted sound pressure levels for noise sources with these different spectrum shapes, for the range and extremes of temperature and humidity considered, have been compared to predicted sound pressure levels for more typical values of 10C and 70% RH. In this calculation a source height of 2 m has been assumed and receiver heights of 2 and 4 m. Consideration of the variation in height of the source or receiver is only relevant to propagation over soft ground. The results of these calculations are given in Tables A6.1 and A6.2 in Appendix 6, and are summarised below. These values are for propagation over a 2 km distance.
Spectrum Type: Flat Typical Industrial Humped Rising Falling
2 m Receiver Height Max. Deviation, Mean Deviation, dB(A) dB(A) -7.8 -1.8 -2.3 -0.7 -7.1 -1.5 -11.2 -2.5 -3.7 -0.9
4 m Receiver Height Max. Deviation, Mean Deviation, dB(A) dB(A) -6.8 -1.7 -2.3 -0.7 -6.2 -1.3 -9.8 -2.4 -3.3 -0.9
TABLE 5: Summary of Results for Deviation for Extremes of Temperature and Relative Humidity These show that for a typical industrial noise spectrum (similar to a falling spectrum shape) the deviation in the results from assuming meteorological conditions of 10C and 70% RH, as compared to actual temperature and relative humidity values is only -0.7 dB(A) on average across the range of extremes, with a maximum deviation of -2.3 dB(A). (A negative deviation implies an overprediction of noise levels). Higher deviations occur for non-typical industrial noise spectra, as would be expected. For example a flat spectrum shape exhibits a maximum deviation of just under 7.8 dB out to a distance of 2000 m (for -10C and 50% RH), and a rising spectrum shape gives a deviation of 11.2 dB at a distance of 2 km. In principle, these results indicate that there is no need to consider varying temperature and humidity effects in strategic industrial noise mapping, as long as the spectrum shape is not abnormally high frequency in content. It is thought likely that this would apply to very few, if any, industrial sites. It is, of course, still necessary to utilise a generic value for atmospheric absorption effects in the propagation models.
26
Acoustic Technology
7. 7.1
DETERMINATION OF SOURCE NOISE LEVEL Basic Concepts Fundamental to this research project is the investigation of the most appropriate method to determine the strength of an industrial noise source (sound power level) to be used as an input parameter for the strategic noise mapping process. In concept, three possibilities exist. These relate (i) to the prediction of industrial source sound power levels through non-acoustic means; (ii) to the determination of industrial source sound power levels through direct measurement of sound pressure levels (or sound intensity levels), and then integrating the measured parameter with an assumed radiation area term to give the sound power level of the source and (iii) a combination of the two previous methods.
7.2 7.2.1
Use of Non- Acoustic Means Netherlands Experience Whilst prediction of sound power levels through non-acoustic means is an attractive possibility, it is questionable whether in this country, sufficient relevant data exists to allow this to happen, although it 1is understood that this method is used in the Netherlands. Rob Witte of DGMR5 has carried out some investigations of determining sound power levels by nonacoustic means. The work consisted of investigations in the Rotterdam Harbour area of the noise emissions of different types of existing industry. Because of Dutch legislation, a lot of detailed acoustical data was already available. Noise data for each type of industry was then collated and analysed, the results of which are presented in Table 6, below. The comparisons were made on the basis of sound power per square metre (SPM).
Part of the Brel & Kjr partnership in Holland
27
Acoustic Technology
Type of Industry Chemical plants Liquids and gas storage Container terminal Multi purpose terminal Shipyard Container repair Distribution Waste processing Construction
SPM, dB(A)/m2 70 59 66 68 76 70 58 66 70
Standard Deviation, dB 4 4 1 3.5 5 3 3 2 2
Number of Plants 45 25 23 23 5 18 20 14 10
TABLE 6: Comparison of Sound Power per Square Metre for Various Types of Industry in Holland For comparison, the SPMs for three UK container ports is shown in Table 7. Although this is based on far fewer sites than the Dutch study, there appears that there is a greater degree of variation for these container terminals, with a larger standard deviation of around 3.5 dB.
Site Container Terminal 1 Container Terminal 2 Container Terminal 3 Standard Deviation
Sound Power, dB(A) 123 130 122
Operational Area, m2 240000 1040000 700000
SPM, dB(A)/m2 69 70 64 3.5
TABLE 7: Comparison of Sound Power per Square Metre for Container Terminals in UK The type of comparison undertaken in the Netherlands could presumably be carried out in the UK. However, there would need to be either a legal requirement for industries to supply such data, or a voluntary effort from industry, in order to gain sufficient data. 7.2.2 Review of Industrial Process Information As information regarding the main noise producing industries in England was gathered, any available process information was also collated and reviewed. This was used to determine the feasibility of using non-acoustic means to determine the source strengths of industrial noise sources. It is BVATs experience that, in the UK, noise due to very similar industrial plants can vary significantly depending on the sensitivity of the surrounding area. For the situation where an industrial plant is close to residential properties, then the planning regime will have imposed a suitable noise limit, which may have necessitated noise mitigation measures being incorporated into the plant design. Conversely where an industrial plant has no sensitive receiver locations nearby, much less mitigation is likely to
28
Acoustic Technology
have been required. This is one respect in which England may differ from other European countries such as the Netherlands and Germany where industrial plants tend to be located in zones allocated for such purposes and are, therefore, not subject to such variation in the surrounding community. Consideration was given to including in the proposed methodology, a correction for the level of noise mitigation included in the design, however, this would require a reasonable level of knowledge of each industrial site which may not be sufficiently simple for the current purpose. With regard to the use of non-acoustic means as a method for determining the noise emission of industrial premises in England, a review has been conducted to determine if process information is readily available for industry in this country. This review has focussed on the Environment Agency (EA) and the Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) as sources of the required information. The EA collates information regarding individual sites, which are within prescribed industries in the form of an IPPC Public Register. This is held centrally and could be reviewed as a potential source of process information. The individual applications for permits are likely to contain process information for those sites; however, this information is not held in a central database but is held in regional EA offices local to the sites in question. information for prescribed industries. The Energy Report published by the DTI gives information on the gas throughput of oil and gas process sites in the United Kingdom. BVAT has conducted a comparison of a number of gas transmission sites to determine the feasibility of this method and this is reported below. In terms of other industries, publications readily available on the DTI website were reviewed. The only parameter generally reported was energy consumption. transport. Furthermore, documents were identified which attributed energy consumption to some individual industries. Energy its impact on the environment and society (Reference 12) identified industrial energy consumption in terms of millions of tonnes of oil equivalent for 1999 between the following categories: Chemicals; Metal products, machinery and equipment; Food, beverages and tobacco; Paper, printing and publishing; A number of documents were identified which assigned energy consumption between different users i.e. domestic, industry, services and This does not therefore provide easy access to process
29
Acoustic Technology
Other industries.
The more recent publication, UK Energy Sector Indicators 2003 A supplement to the Energy White Paper, Our energy future. equivalent. Engineering and metals; Iron and steel; Chemicals; Food, beverages and tobacco; Mineral products; Paper, printing and publishing; Textiles; Other industry (including construction). Creating a low carbon economy (Reference 13) includes figures for energy consumption in the following industries for 2001 in terms of thousands of tonnes of oil
Other than the Energy Report identified above, no further reference was found which attributed energy consumption, or any other process information, to individual sites. From the sources of information quoted in the above documents, it is considered likely that the DTI and the Office of National Statistics hold this information. More in depth research would, however, be required to pinpoint this further. 7.2.3 Gas Transmission Site Comparison BVAT has conducted a significant amount of work on and around gas process sites. This has
generally involved detailed on-site noise measurements to determine the sound power levels of individual equipment items, building a model of the site and predicting community noise levels. Predicted community noise levels are then checked by measurement. BVAT has also developed a model for the design of a new gas process site, which is yet to be confirmed by measurement. A number of these sites have been selected to compare gas throughput with resultant sound power level to give an indication as to whether such a parameter might be useful in determining the possible sound power level of a similar site. The results of this comparison are summarised in Table 8, below.
30
Acoustic Technology
Sound Power Level, dB Site Gas Terminal A Gas Terminal B Gas Terminal C Gas Terminal D Gas Terminal E dBA 31.5 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 99 8k 95
Gas Throughput, MMscmd* 4 28 26 26 30 Lw per unit throughput 103 104 113 100 99
109 117 115 110 107 105 104 102
119 124 120 118 116 114 112 112 110 102 127 132 134 128 123 122 121 121 117 107 115 130 132 123 114 110 107 106 114 133 125 121 115 112 109 104 98 88 94 86
*MMscmd = Million Standard Cubic Metres per Day
TABLE 8: Comparison of Sound Power Level per Unit Throughput for Various Gas Terminals The calculated sound power levels per unit throughput presented in Table 8 vary by as much as 14 dB(A), with a relatively large standard deviation of 5.5 dB. Gas Terminal C contained old, and relatively noisy gas turbine driven compressors, and this is the main reason why its normalised noise emission is significantly greater than the other sites. This comparison has indicated, by way of example, that there is no simple relationship between site throughput and sound power level that could be used for this purpose. Knowledge of the type and age of the plant would also be required to improve the relationship of the sound power level with gas throughput. In addition, it is clear that the very distinct characteristics of the noise from some of the sites is ignored by the use of a single figure value, but it is known that this is a very important factor in terms of resultant disturbance (and hence annoyance) in the community. For example, Site E has a relatively low A weighted sound power level but has high low frequency noise content. At present, it is not considered a viable proposition in England to use non-acoustic means to determine noise source strengths. It is, however, possible that such a method might be developed in due time in the light of experience gained using measurement techniques. 7.3 7.3.1 Modelling Concepts and Methods General As noise source strength determination through non-acoustic means is not considered a viable proposition in this country, at least until a much greater database of industrial noise sources has been collated, it is necessary to consider measurement techniques for this purpose.
31
Acoustic Technology
As part of this research project, a fundamental decision needed to be made whether, for the purposes of strategic noise mapping, any measurements to determine industrial plant noise source strengths should be restricted to site boundaries or other freely accessible positions and/or involve detailed noise measurements within the confines of an industrial site. To maintain Defras requirement for developing a method that is considered to be simple, it has been assumed that detailed on-plant measurements would not be undertaken, but that any measurements would be confined to accessible positions outside the site. This simplified approach then needs to be investigated to see how robust it may be for different acoustic scenarios. It must be accepted, however, that a simplified measurement technique is not likely to capture noise character attributes, and in relation to annoyance or complaints about industrial noise, it is known that these character attributes are of great significance. Computer based noise modelling has been undertaken to quantify the potential errors in predicting noise contours around industrial sites based on simplified measurement techniques to determine plant sound power levels. The noise modelling has explored the following parameters: Measurement location relative to plant (distance and height); No of measurement locations; Spatial distribution of plant noise sources; Spectral content of plant noise; Topography and ground cover.
To determine the errors likely to be incurred in generating sound power levels and resulting contours for industrial sources, based on sound pressure level measurements at plant boundaries or similar locations, using simplified techniques, a number of scenarios have been identified which were modelled using Cadna software. The reason for initially using a noise mapping package, as opposed to real sites, was that the variables of propagation could be controlled. This allows for the effect of various parameters to be analysed one at a time and, therefore, to be quantified individually. It was therefore possible to investigate the effects of measurement height, screening, ground effects, source types, directivity and to examine the errors introduced by model simplification. Furthermore, this approach allowed for the methods of sound power level determination to be judged absolutely, as opposed to relative against each other. calculations.) (Sound power levels cannot be directly measured and it is not possible, therefore, to determine the absolute error in sound power level
32
Acoustic Technology
7.3.2
Modelling Method Assumptions The modelling method developed was based on the basic assumption that the ISO 9613 propagation model (as implemented by Cadna) is a realistic approximation of real-world propagation of sound. Although it could be argued that there are potential inaccuracies in the ISO 9613 model, this will always be the case for any method chosen. The ISO 9613 method and Cadna software were therefore scrutinised in detail before commencing work so that any quirks in the method / software were understood. This meant that results could be analysed making an allowance for the modelling method. It should therefore be possible to gain an understanding of the potential errors of measurements and modelling methods as long as these limitations are recognised. It should be noted, however, that the effects assessed are inherently a function of the propagation model. This will be particularly sensitive for the cases where screening and barrier effects are encountered.
7.3.3
Modelling Method The figure below represents graphically the modelling method utilised to assess the potential errors due to measurement of sound power levels and the subsequent mapping of contours. The general approach is to assume that noise modelling using assumed sound power levels for individual sources and sound propagation characteristics to ISO 9613 is correct (Cadna modelling) and to compute noise levels initially at hypothetical locations where in a real life situation measurements might be made for noise source strength determination. This measured noise level (actually computed using the Cadna model) is then back-calculated to a site sound power level in two main ways: (i) by assuming an acoustic centre for the site (including height) and using straight hemispherical propagation over the ground (could be either hard or soft, or a mixture); and (ii) by using a method based on ISO 8297 (Stber method) which has a different area term in it.
The sound power levels so obtained are then re-used to give predicted noise contours around the site at different distances. These are then compared with the noise contours obtained from the true situation based on the Cadna modelling. The predictions could either be done by reverting to an assumed point source for the industrial plant, or by assuming a distributed area source (e.g. for open air process plant) or by smearing the sound power level over the walls and roof of a factory (for factory type industrial sources). The modelling method is summarised in Figure 5.
33
Acoustic Technology
Lp Contours (True - Cadna) Lw (True) Actual conditions
Actual conditions
Lp Measured (True - Cadna)
Error determination
Spreadsheet
Lp Contours Assumed conditions Predicted
Lw (Calculated)
FIGURE 5: Graphical Representation of Calculation Method The hypothetical industrial site was initially simple and was then gradually built up in its complexity until essentially modelling what might be considered to be a real site. The potential errors in using single frequency approximations to the overall sound power level (500 Hz approximation), as compared to full octave band calculations, were also investigated. 7.3.4 Point Source The first scenario to be modelled was a point source. First of all, calculations were performed to estimate the errors likely to be incurred in determining the sound power level of a source, depending upon the following parameters: Ground type (hard / soft); Source height; Receiver height; Spectrum shape. The method used was to model a point source in Cadna, along with a receiver point representing a microphone position. This measurement was then used to calculate the sound power level of the source (Lw calc) using a simplified propagation method, modelled using an Excel spreadsheet. This was then compared to the true sound power level (Lw true) of the point source.
34
Acoustic Technology
The results of these calculations are presented in Tables A7.1 to A7.5 in Appendix 7. It can be seen from the results that: The largest errors in determining sound power level were for either flat or rising spectrum shapes. However, it is envisaged that this type of spectrum shape would not be commonly encountered for industrial sites. The smallest errors were encountered for falling and typical industrial spectrum shapes. Errors can be minimised by increasing the measurement height (this minimises ground effects). The largest errors were encountered for a mismatch of ground types, between the actual ground type and assumed ground type. Thus, if the actual ground is soft but it is assumed to be hard for the purposes of modelling, errors of between 4 7 dB(A) can be expected (discounting effects due to screening etc). However, using an estimate of ground effects at 500 Hz can reduce these errors. For a typical industrial spectrum, this can reduce the error to within 2 dB(A). Following this initial assessment of errors in determining sound power levels, some further modelling was carried out for point sources to determine the combined error of sound power level determination and propagation effects at varying distances from the source, as well as quantifying the errors due to carrying out modelling using a single figure (500 Hz propagation) model. The method used is summarised in the Figure 6.
Lw true
G=0.5 G=0 or G=1 calc at 100m
Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true) Lp contours (calc)
XL Lw calc G=0.5
FIGURE 6: Calculation Method for Point Source
35
Acoustic Technology
The calculation was performed as follows: Point Source at 2 m and 4 m height. Measurements at 1.5 m and 4 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between source and measure has been set at 50 m and 100 m. Models use different types of spectra (falling, rising, humped and typical industrial spectrum). Back-calculation performed in a spreadsheet for hard ground (G = 0) Assumed Ground Cover, for a single frequency (500 Hz) and for full spectrum propagation. Sound power level, Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm. Contours calculated with Cadna for mixed ground (G = 0.5) True Ground Cover. The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 7. The results of each parameter on the modelling are discussed below. Ground Type: When modelling, it will be necessary to make assumptions about the ground type, both when determining the sound power level of the source and when predicting contours to community locations. It is likely that both the true and assumed ground types will be different in each case. For example, it is likely that the ground cover in the vicinity of industrial premises will comprise mostly hard ground (and that sound will therefore propagate hemi-spherically with minimal ground effects). It is therefore proposed that a simplified modelling technique should assume that the ground type in the immediate vicinity of industrial premises is hard. However, it is possible that the ground will comprise soft ground and this will introduce errors. Obviously, the greatest error will be when the actual ground cover is soft, where it has been assumed to be hard for the purposes of modelling. In this case, errors of more than 3 dB(A) can be expected. However, this varies depending upon the distance between the source and measurement point and errors of as high as 7 dB(A) can be expected in the worst case scenario. Source Height: Increasing the source height decreases the effect of ground effects. Therefore, the potential errors are less for higher source heights. It is not envisaged that this effect will particularly impact the modelling method since the source height is predetermined. However, potential errors could be introduced by simplifying a model such that the source height is set to a value lower than it actually is. (This may happen when noise is coming from an elevated source but the surveyor cannot determine
36
Acoustic Technology
the point where the noise is coming from.) In this case, then the predicted contours could then be underestimated. It will therefore be necessary to ensure that a reasonably accurate estimate of source height is made in order to accurately model sound propagation over the ground. This topic is dealt with in more detail for stacks, since this will be the extreme case where errors may occur. Receiver Height: The modelling concentrated on two receiver heights of 1.5 m (to represent a hand held sound level meter) and at 4 m (to represent a microphone on an extension pole as well as the receiver height defined for noise mapping). Again, increasing the receiver height reduces the ground effects. In general, the best correlation between true and predicted noise levels was when the sound pressure measurements on which the sound power calculations were based were conducted at the same height as the source. Spectrum Shape: The results of the modelling show that the spectrum shape of concern has a significant effect on propagation effects. This is to be expected since both atmospheric absorption and ground effects are frequency dependent. The largest errors were introduced for a rising spectrum shape, with the errors being significantly less for a typical industrial and a falling spectrum shape. However, it is not thought that a rising spectrum shape will be encountered often for industrial noise modelling. Overall vs. Full Octave Band Calculations: Approximating the propagation of sound to a single band model introduces errors into noise modelling. Because propagation of sound is frequency dependent, as discussed above, the largest errors will occur if assuming propagation for a single band (500 Hz) when the true spectrum shape is upward sloping. The calculations show that in some cases this error may be as high as 10 dB(A). Furthermore, this error is not particularly dependent upon either source or receiver height, since the greatest difference in attenuation occurs at high frequencies (due to atmospheric absorption effects). However, for the falling spectrum shape and the typical industrial spectrum shape the errors introduced by approximating to a single band propagation model are relatively small (less than 1.5 dB(A) in most cases). Summary of Key Findings: The largest errors were for flat or rising spectra; The smallest errors were for falling and typical industrial spectra; Errors can be reduced by increasing measurement height; Largest errors were found for mismatch of ground types; Using an estimate of 500 Hz for ground effects reduces the potential error.
37
Acoustic Technology
7.3.5
Building with Even Radiation The purpose of this modelling scenario was to determine the errors incurred when calculating the sound power level of a simple building, based on sound pressure measurements at various distances back from the building faade. The building was assigned even radiation of sound per square meter over each of its faades, including the roof. The sound power level was calculated based on the calculated 'measurement' values assuming hemispherical radiation from the centre of the building. The following figures show the calculation methods used. Figure 7 shows the modelling performed by smearing the calculated sound power level equally over each faade, whilst Figure 8 shows how modelling was performed by representing the sound power level as an equivalent point source. The third scenario examined, shown in Figure 9, was representing the building as a 2-dimensional area source, with the sound power level smeared over the area.
Lw true G=0.5 G=0 at 50,100,150m
Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true)
XL Lw calc G=0.5 FIGURE 7: Lp contours (calc)
Calculation Method for Building With Even Radiation Re-Modelled by Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade
Lw true G=0.5 G=0 at 50,100,150m XL Lw calc G=0.5
FIGURE 8:
Calculation Method for Building With Even Radiation Re-Modelled as a Point Source
38
Acoustic Technology
Lw true G=0.5 G=0 at 50,100,150m XL Lw calc G=0.5 FIGURE 9:
Calculation Method for Building With Even Radiation Re-Modelled as a 2D Area Source
The calculation was performed as follows: Measurements at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m from faade Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 10 m high building Assume Building with Smeared Sources on each facade Model using a Falling Spectrum Lw = 90 dBm-2 for each Faade: Roof, East, West, North, West faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), for 500 Hz and full spectrum Sound power level, Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with Cadna for mixed ground (G = 0.5). The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 8. The results of the modelling are discussed below: Smeared vs. Point Source Results show that smearing the derived sound power level equally over the faades and roof of the building is generally a more accurate way of predicting contours. This is not particularly surprising since the distribution of sound energy is being modelled as per the real situation. It is important to remember that this is a perfect theoretical situation that would infrequently be experienced in the real world, where it is likely that there would be a combination of point sources as well as area sources etc. By modelling the source as a 2-dimensional area source produces smaller errors, particularly when predicting contours closer to the source, than by modelling as a point source (typically, within one source dimension). However, the point source method is slightly more accurate at greater
39
Acoustic Technology
distances, (two source dimensions or greater). It is not as accurate as smearing the sound power over the faades. The results therefore demonstrate that there is some benefit to be gained by attempting to distribute sound energy in a manner as near as possible to the true situation when carrying out modelling. In order to keep the modelling method practicable, it may be that utilising the 2-dimensional area source method is the best compromise between accuracy and simplicity. Single vs. Octave Band Results show that the full octave band method of calculating contours generally provides a more accurate result. The benefit of carrying out full octave band calculations is an increase in accuracy of only around 1 2 dB(A) for a typical industrial spectrum. No. of Measurement Points / Access The results show that large inaccuracies can be encountered when it is not possible to measure all around a plant. This shows the importance of the source directivity in relation to the faades of the building, as compared to an omni-directional point source. The greatest errors due to restricted access happen when measurements are conducted close to the building. The results also show that increasing the number of measurement points can reduce the potential for error. There may be locations that would, alone, provide a more accurate result than multiple points, although in practice, it would not be possible to identify these points either in the field or afterwards, unless a full comparison and calibration of the noise maps was carried out. Measuring Distance Results show that when measurements are performed further away from the building, representing the building as a point source is generally just as accurate as smearing the energy over the faades. However, this method of representing the building is not as accurate at predicting sound pressure levels in the near-field. If the measurements are conducted close to the building then the smeared faade method is a more accurate representation. However, the gain in accuracy is only around 1.5 dB(A) for the size of building investigated. Building Height The results of the modelling show that the building height does not significantly affect the prediction of sound power level or the subsequent accuracy of noise mapping, as long as a representative source height is set. Spectrum Shape: Again, spectrum shape significantly affects the accuracy of noise mapping, with the highest errors being introduced for a rising spectrum shape.
40
Acoustic Technology
Summary of Key Findings: The lowest error was found by smearing the derived Lw over building; An area source is better than point source close in (i.e. less than 1 source dimension); A point source is better at longer distances; Full octave bands are more accurate than single frequency calculations; Errors can be minimised by increasing the number of measurement points; Building height is not critical in this case; The highest errors were encountered for a rising spectrum. 7.3.6 Building with Directional Radiation (Faade) The purpose of this modelling scenario was to determine the errors incurred when calculating the sound power level of a building with directional sound radiation, based on sound pressure measurements at various distances back from the building faades. The building was assigned a radiation of sound per square metre over one of its faades. The sound power level was calculated based on the calculated 'measurement' values assuming hemispherical radiation from the centre of the building. The building was then re-modelled but without directivity. The purpose of doing this was to quantify the errors introduced by simplification of the noise mapping technique so that directivity is not taken into account. The other principal objective of this modelling scenario was to investigate how increasing the number of measurement positions could decrease potential errors. The following figures show the calculation methods used. Figure 10 shows the modelling performed by smearing the calculated sound power level equally over each faade, whilst Figure 11 shows how modelling was performed by representing the sound power level as an equivalent point source.
Lw true
G=0.5
G=0
at 50,100,150m XL
Lw calc G=0.5 FIGURE 10:
Calculation Method for Building With Directional Radiation Re-Modelled by Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade
41
Acoustic Technology
Lw true
G=0.5
G=0
at 50,100,150m XL
Lw calc G=0.5 FIGURE 11:
Calculation Method for Building With Directional Radiation Re-Modelled as Point Source
The calculation was performed as follows: Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m from faades Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m from centre Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 10 m high building (has also been done at 5m) Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dBm-2 for South Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), for 500Hz Sound Power Level, Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with Cadna for mixed ground (G = 0.5) The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 9. The results of the modelling are discussed below. Some degree of caution should be exercised when analysing the results since, for this scenario, self shielding effects will be one of the biggest causes of error. To some extent, the modelling is therefore testing the barrier calculations as per ISO 9613. No. of Measurement Points / Access Results show that increasing the number of measurement points can reduce the potential errors due to directivity, particularly over greater distances. However, without accounting for directivity in the modelling, the errors are arguably too great in each individual direction to be considered robust. The greatest errors are encountered when no measurements are made in the direction of the radiating faade, or in the opposite direction. This reinforces the need for as many measurements as possible to be carried out, in as many directions as possible.
42
Acoustic Technology
Smeared vs. Point Source Results show that the potential maximum errors are higher when representing the source as a point source. However, the point source method is more accurate in certain directions, particularly where measurements have been conducted at greater distances from the building. Neither method of representing the source can be considered as accurate without accounting for directivity. Measuring Distance In general, the magnitude of errors decreased for greater measurement distances. This was the case for a range of contour prediction distances. However, the errors encountered were arguably still too great to be considered an accurate method of modelling. If the actual source has directivity and this is not identified from the measurements, then large errors can be expected when carrying out noise mapping. The potential errors are greatest when access is only available for either the noise radiating face, or in the opposite direction. In the specific cases examined, these errors were as much as 24 dB(A). This degree of error is assumed unacceptable in terms of noise mapping. account directivity. Summary of Key Findings: Self-screening (barrier) effects become important, relying on ISO 9613; A greater number of measurement points reduces the error; Errors can be minimised by accounting for directivity; A point source model is better in certain directions (but still requires directivity); Increasing the measuring distance reduces the error. 7.3.7 Building with Directional Radiation (Faade Between Two Buildings) The purpose of this modelling scenario was to determine the errors incurred when calculating the sound power level of a building with directional sound radiation and screened by another building, based on sound pressure measurements at various distances back from the faade of the relevant building. The source building was assigned a radiation of sound per square metre over one of its faades, facing another (reflecting) building. The sound power level was calculated based on the calculated 'measurement' values assuming hemispherical radiation from the centre of the two buildings. The building was then re-modelled but without directivity. The purpose of doing this was to quantify the errors introduced by simplification of the noise mapping technique so that directivity is not taken into account for more complex scenarios. The other principal objective of this modelling Therefore, in order to minimise potential errors in noise mapping, the method of determining and distributing the sound power level of the source will need to take into
43
Acoustic Technology
scenario was to investigate how increasing the number of measurement positions would affect potential errors. Figure 12 shows the calculation method used.
Lw true
G=0.5
G=0
at 50,100,150m XL
Lw calc G=0.5
FIGURE 12:
Calculation Method for 2 Buildings With Directional Radiation Re-Modelled by Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade
The calculation was performed as follows: 10 m high buildings 10 m gap between the two buildings Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dBm-2 for South Faade Brick absorption coefficient = 0.05 Max. order of reflection = 5 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G=0), for 500Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with Cadna for a mixed ground (G =0.5) with barrier effect Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 10. The results of the modelling are discussed below:
44
Acoustic Technology
No. of Measurement Points / Access The results show that large errors can be expected if no account is taken of directivity. The error is largest where results from one direction have been used to predict contours in another direction. In some cases, these errors were as high as 26 dB(A). Again, increasing the number of measurement points reduces the potential for error, although this may conversely increase the error in certain axes. Measuring Distance The relationship between measurement distance and error is rather complex for this scenario. The results show that, whilst increasing the measurement distance may improve accuracy in one axis, this would have a detrimental effect on the other axes. Furthermore, the magnitude of the error also depends upon the distance to which the contours are plotted. Results show that any modelling method developed must include provision for directivity of sources if it is to be reasonably accurate. This implies a need for measurements on all sides of an industrial site (always, assuming of course, that there are noise sensitive locations on all sides of the site). Summary of Key Findings: Large errors are encountered if no account is taken of directivity; Increasing the number of measurement points reduces the potential error; The relationship between the number of measurement points and distance is complex; Directivity expressions are necessary to minimise errors. 7.3.8 Building with Directional Radiation (Faade Between Four Buildings) The purpose of this modelling scenario was to develop the scenarios examined above, but for a more complex case of a single source faade between four buildings. The purpose of doing this was to quantify the errors for an increasingly complex scenario and to investigate whether multiple reflections more likely to be experienced in real life would reduce errors due to screening etc. Figure 13 shows the calculation method used.
45
Acoustic Technology
Lw true
G=0.5
G=0
at 50,100,150m XL
Lw calc G=0.5
FIGURE 13:
Calculation Method for 4 Buildings With Directional Radiation Re-Modelled by Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade
The calculation was performed as follows: 10 m high buildings 10 m gap between the four buildings Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dBm-2 for South Faade Brick absorption coefficient = 0.05 Max. order of reflection = 5 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), for 500Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with Cadna for a mixed ground (G = 0.5) with barrier effect Measurement at 4m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 11. The results of the modelling are discussed below: No. of Measurement Points / Access The results show that large errors can be expected if no account is taken of directivity. Again, the error is largest where results from one direction have been used to predict contours in another direction. However, the magnitude of the potential errors is greatly reduced in comparison to a source between two buildings, due to on-site reflections etc. However, the errors would still be unacceptable for noise mapping unless directivity was taken into account.
46
Acoustic Technology
Measuring Distance The relationship between measurement distance and error is, again, rather complex for this scenario. The general trend is that errors are slightly smaller for greater measurement distances. However, the degree of error again depends on not only measurement distance, but the distance to which sound pressure levels are to be predicted. Results show that increasing the complexity of the source, particularly by introducing multiple reflecting surfaces, reduces the effects of on-plant screening. This reduces the potential errors likely to be incurred when modelling the site by a simplified methodology. However, the potential errors are arguably still too high for modelling without accounting for directivity in some way. Summary of Key Findings: Large errors are encountered if no account is taken of directivity; The error can be smaller due to on-site reflections; Errors are slightly smaller for greater measurement distances; Greater in-plant reflections reduce the error, but directivity information is still required. 7.3.9 Point Source with Building Providing Screening The purpose of this modelling scenario was to determine the errors incurred when representing a point source between buildings by smearing the sound power level over the building faades. The sound power level was back-calculated based on the calculated 'measurement' values assuming hemispherical radiation from the centre of the buildings (actual source location in this case). The building was then re-modelled without directivity. The purpose of doing this was to quantify the errors introduced by simplification of the noise mapping technique where it is not known what type of source is to be represented, as well as to quantify errors due to screening effects. Figure 14 shows the calculation method used.
47
Acoustic Technology
Lw true
G=0.5
G=0
at 50,100,150m
XL Lw calc G=0.5
FIGURE 14:
Calculation Method for Point Source Between 2 Buildings Re-Modelled by Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade
The calculation was performed as follows: 10 m high buildings 10 m gap between the two buildings Point Source at 5 m high between two buildings Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB for the point source Brick absorption coefficient = 0.05 Max. order of reflection = 2 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), for 500Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with Cadna for mixed ground (G = 0.5) with barrier effect Measurement at 4m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 12. The results of the modelling are discussed below: No. of Measurement Points / Access The results show that large errors can be expected if no account is taken of directivity. The error is largest where results from one direction have been used to predict contours in another direction. The potential error is reduced for a greater number of measurement points, although the error in each direction would arguably still be too great for noise mapping purposes. Although the error would reduce for more complex sites, it would arguably still be too great in magnitude for such a
48
Acoustic Technology
simplification to be acceptable. This therefore re-iterates the need for directivity to be accounted for in the proposed method. Measuring Distance The results show that, for this scenario, measurement distance does not significantly affect the potential errors incurred. Single Band vs. Octave Calculations The results show that, in this particular scenario, there is no significant advantage of using octave full octave band calculations rather than single figure calculations. Summary of Key Findings: Large errors are encountered if directivity is not taken into account; The error can be reduced by increased the number of measurement points; The measurement distance is not significant; No significant benefit is achieved by using full octave band instead of single frequency calculations (for industrial spectrum). 7.3.10 Elevated Sources (Point Source on Roof) The purpose of this modelling scenario was to determine the errors incurred when representing a point source on the roof of a building by smearing the sound power level over the building faades. The sound power level was back-calculated based on the calculated 'measurement' values assuming hemispherical radiation from the centre of the building. The building was then re-modelled without directivity. The purpose of doing this was to quantify the errors introduced by simplification of the noise mapping technique where it is not known what type of source is to be represented, as well as to quantify errors due to screening effects. Figure 15 shows the calculation method used.
49
Acoustic Technology
Lw true
G=0.5
G=0 at 50,100,150m (4m and 1.5m) XL Lw calc G=0.5
FIGURE 15:
Calculation Method for Point Source on the Roof of a Building Re-Modelled by Smearing the Calculated Sound Power Level Equally Over Each Faade
The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 13. The calculation was performed as follows: 10 m high buildings Model using a falling spectrum Lw = 90 dB for the point source Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), for 500Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with Cadna for a mixed ground (G = 0.5) with barrier effect Measurements at 4 m and 1.5 m height and 50 m,100 m,150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 The results of the modelling are discussed below: Effect of Measurement Height The actual relationship between measurement height and errors is rather complex, depending upon not only the type of calculation performed, but also on the distance to which the contours are calculated and the side of the building on which measurements were taken. In general, the results show that the errors incurred can be reduced in this scenario by increasing measurement height when the sound power is determined using full octave band calculations. However, the opposite is true if single-figure calculations are used. In any case, there appears to be no significant advantage in using higher measurements for this particular scenario. Nevertheless, some degree of caution must be used since the ISO 9613 calculation procedure uses a barrier calculation which results in a 5 dB barrier effect as long as the observation point is below the line of sight of the barrier. Therefore, for a
50
Acoustic Technology
10 m building and for contour plots at 4 m, there will always be a self screening (barrier) effect no matter how far away from the building. Whether this would happen in the real world is debateable due not only to refraction, but also to reflections from other buildings etc. Single Band vs. Octave Calculations The results show that, in this particular scenario, there is no advantage of using octave full octave band calculations rather than single figure calculations. Indeed, the 500 Hz propagation appears to represent the true scenario in this case more accurately. This is perhaps due to the reduction in self screening effects at 500 Hz as opposed to higher frequencies. Measuring Distance The errors incurred are reduced by measuring further away from the building. This is because the magnitude of the self screening (barrier) effect reduces with distance. As discussed above, this would be even more pronounced in the real world. Summary of Key Findings: Potential errors can be reduced by increasing measurement height for full octave calculations; The opposite effect was found for single frequency calculations; These errors are possibly due to barrier effects (ISO barrier model used in calculation); The potential error can be reduced by measuring further from the building. 7.3.11 Elevated Sources (Stacks) The purpose of this modelling scenario was to determine the errors incurred when representing a tall stack by a point source nearer to the ground. The sound power level was back-calculated based on the calculated 'measurement' values assuming hemispherical radiation from the stack, which was then re-modelled based on an assumed height. The purpose of doing this was to quantify the errors introduced by simplification of the noise mapping technique where it is not known where the noise source is located (i.e. whether noise is coming from an elevated source or a ground level source). Figure 16 shows the calculation method used.
51
Acoustic Technology
Lw true
G=0.5
Top
G=0
Top at 50,100,150m XL
Lw calc G=0.5 FIGURE 16: 4m
Calculation Method for Elevated Point Source Re-Modelled by Assuming Point Source at Lower Height
The calculation was performed as follows: Models using industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), for 500 Hz and full spectrum Contours calculated with Cadna for mixed ground (G = 0.5) Measurements at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m The stack directivity was set using the automatic configuration provided in Cadna. This assigns vertical directivity to the stack exit, based on German standards (Reference 14). The parameters included are source height, distance from receiver to source, downwind speed, temperature and exit speed of the emission medium, and the ambient temperature. The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 14 and are discussed below: Effect of Source Height A larger source height generally gives rise to greater errors, particularly when predicting contours further back from the stack from measurements made closer to the stack. This is because stacks are very directional, depending upon the angle to the vertical axis. Increasing the stack height, whilst maintaining the measuring distance, effectively increases the angle to the vertical, and therefore increases the errors due to directivity. Furthermore, there is also a difference between ground effects at, source heights of say 100 m and 4 m. This means that, even without any error incurred in measuring the sound power of the stack exit, errors will be introduced by representing the source at the incorrect height.
52
Acoustic Technology
Single Band vs. Octave Calculations The results show that the full octave band calculations are slightly more accurate than the single band calculations. However, the difference between the two methods is only around 1 or 2 dB(A) at the most, compared with total errors of up to 14 dB(A). It is not, therefore, considered that this increase in accuracy is significant. Measuring Distance The incurred errors are reduced by measuring further away from the stack. This is due to a combination of two factors: directivity and reduced error in the estimated distance to the source. Stacks are highly directional, particularly in the vertical axis, with a greater proportion of the sound energy being directed upwards (this is frequency dependent). Therefore, measurements made directly under a stack will underestimate the sound power level by a large amount. For example, measurements conducted under a stack, at an angle of 120o from the vertical axis, could underestimate the sound power of the stack exit by between 10 and 20 dB(A), depending upon frequency content. It is possible to correct for this, but only with a detailed knowledge of the stack characteristics, such as exhaust gas velocity and temperature, stack exit diameter, wind speed at the tip etc. and it is unlikely that these parameters would be available. Without gaining access to the site and carrying out very detailed measurements (probably going up to the stack exit in a crane basket or cherry picker) it is unlikely that noise from a stack could be separated from noise from the rest of the site. Furthermore, it is likely that stack noise could be the significant source at distances further away from the site, due to the stack directivity, and reduced ground effects and small air absorption due to the assumed low frequency nature of the stack noise. (Note: some stacks may also emit mid to high frequency noise). Summary of Key Findings: Greater errors are found with increasing the height of the stack; The errors are due to change in directivity and ground effects; There is no significant benefit in using full octaves (for industrial spectrum); The error is reduced by measuring further from stack. 7.3.12 Extended Sources Some investigation has been carried out into the potential errors that could be incurred when determining the sound power level of extended sources. When representing an extended source as a series of point sources, it is important that the sound power level of each point can be determined
53
Acoustic Technology
independently of the adjoining points. This means that the influence of adjacent sources must be fully understood in order to both measure and model noise in this manner. For an extended source comprising of n elements (represented by a point source in the centre of each element: n = nth element or source Lw,n = sound power level of each source centre Lp,n = sound pressure level at measurement point opposite point source n. r = distance between measurement point and source This is shown in Figure 17, below.
Lw1 x Lw2 x Lwn
x2 + r 2
(n1)2 x2 +r2
Lp1
Lp2
Lpn
FIGURE 17: Relationship Between Adjacent Sources Showing Influence on Lw Determination
n L p = 10 log 10 n =1
[Lw
n 10 log 2
{(n 1 )x 2 + r 2 }]

In order to calculate the effects of adjacent sources, then it is necessary to simplify the situation such that Lw1 = Lw2 = Lwn. Therefore, if Lp = 10 then there will only be a small contribution (0.5 dB) from Lw2 to the sound pressure level Lp1.
54
Acoustic Technology
Then
L p = 10 = 10 log
x2 + r 2 r2
x = 3r
= 72
Therefore, in order for an adjacent element to have a small impact on the measurement position then the angle subtended, must be at least 72o. Figure 18 extends this concept to consider up to 10 sources in each direction, thus calculating the cumulative effect for large extended sources. This would, in principle, allow a correction to be made to any measurements in order to assign a sound power level to an element. It should be noted that when the calculation is extended to several points on each side, then the calculated error at = 72o (i.e. an angle of view between elements of 144o) increases to 1.2 dB(A)
14 12 10
Error, dB
8 6 4 2 0 0 45 90 Angle of View (n-1 to n+1) 135 180
FIGURE 18:
Calculated Error for Measurement of Sound Power Level of Extended Sources as a Relationship of Angle Subtended Between Adjacent Sources
55
Acoustic Technology
Worked Example:
Lw 1
Lw 2
Lw 3
130o
Lp
FIGURE 19: Worked Example Extended Source In this case, the purpose of taking a measurement at the position shown, is to attribute a sound power to the middle segment, Lw 2, and this gives a value of, say, 100 dB(A). However, segments 1 and 3 will contribute to the measured sound pressure level and the calculated sound power level will therefore be too high. It is possible to estimate the error introduced due to the adjacent elements by applying a correction, using Figure 18, above (assuming the adjacent elements have a similar sound power level). For the angle shown (130o), the error is approximately 2 dB(A). This can then be subtracted from the value for the calculated sound power level to give a corrected value of 98 dB(A). The use of this type of correction factor is relevant to large extended sources where there could be a requirement to relate measured sound pressure levels at boundary points, or other positions, to particular areas of the site and to model each of these areas as a small source to determine partial sound power levels for the different areas of the site. In principle, and according to Reference 5, a source can be considered as small when the measurement distance from the centre of the source is at least twice the characteristic source dimension. This is a function of the dimensions of the site and the height of the noise sources, but for a rectangular site where one side is twice the length of the other and the dimensions are large compared with the source height, then the characteristic dimension is 1.1 x site width. Thus noise measurements would need to be made at a minimum distance of 2.2 x site width from the centre of that part of the site to allow that element to be considered as a small source. Conversely, knowing the distance of the noise measurement from the centre of the site, and the width of the site, enables a calculation to be made of the approximate length of the site that would then form an area which would be considered to be small in relation to that measurement position, (for the purposes of calculating the sound power level of that element of the site). Having divided up the site in this fashion then correction factors can be calculated for individual measurement positions, although this relies on the assumption of uniformity of sound power level density over the site area.
56
Acoustic Technology
Summary of Key Findings: It is possible to represent an extended source as sequence of point sources; The error can be minimised by considering the angle of view to adjacent elements; Use elements of site which are considered small in relation to measurement distance. 7.3.13 Combination of Several Source / Screening Concepts The purpose of this modelling scenario was to investigate the errors incurred when calculating the sound power level of a complex industrial site, based on different methods of determining sound power and of modelling the site. The two methods investigated for sound power level determination were: i. ii. BS ISO 8297 Method (i.e. Stber method) see Section 3.4; Hemi-spherical Propagation Method (Based on ISO 9613).
Each of these was calculated for both single band and full octave methods. The resultant sound power levels were then distributed in two ways: as a point source and as a 2dimensional area source. The purpose of this exercise was to investigate the potential errors in both determining sound power levels and for calculating noise contours at a more complex generic industrial site. This way, the errors should combine in a rather more realistic way than the theoretical extreme cases examined above and allow a more pragmatic approach to developing a noise mapping method to be developed. The calculations are summarised in the following figures. Figure 20 shows the modelling performed by representing the sound power level as a 2D area source, whilst Figure 21 shows how modelling was performed by representing the sound power level as an equivalent point source
57
Acoustic Technology
G=0.5 Lw true G=0 at 500,1000,2000m Lp meas (true) XL Lw calc G=0.5 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true)
FIGURE 20:
Calculation Method for Combination of Several Source / Screening Concepts Re-Modelled as a 2D Area Source
G=0.5 Lw true G=0 at 500,1000,2000m Lp meas (true) XL Lw calc G=0.5 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true)
FIGURE 21:
Calculation Method for Combination of Several Source / Screening Concepts Re-Modelled as a Point Source
The site has been constructed using a combination of several different scenarios, including elevated point sources, directional sources, faade sources, screening effects etc. Furthermore, the site has been surrounded on three sides by reflective buildings (with 50 % acoustic transparency). The site ground has been set as hard, whilst the remainder of ground has been set as 50% hard / 50% soft. The dimensions of buildings etc were based on real site maps and represent a typical layout that could be expected for a factory complex in a mixed residential / industrial area. Various spectrum shapes were used in the model, based on the types of source likely to be encountered in typical
58
Acoustic Technology
industry. The model does not try to recreate an existing site but, rather, is an attempt to set up a generic industrial source. A representation of the site layout is shown in Figure 22, below:
FIGURE 22:
Graphical Representation of Site Layout for Combination of Several Source / Screening Concepts
The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 15. The results of the modelling are discussed below: Stber vs. Hemispherical The results show that the Stber method is more accurate at predicting the sound power level of the site than the distant hemi-spherical method. This is because of the screening encountered between distant measurement positions and the site. Indeed, it is very likely that this type of situation will arise in built up areas and it will therefore be very important to take measurements with direct line of sight to the site. However, it is apparent that the Stber method is an accurate method of measuring the sound power level of a site and would therefore be recommended over the hemi-spherical method where access is available. 2D Area vs. Point Source Results show that representing the site as a 2 dimensional area source is more accurate than the point source method when the Stber method has been used to determine the sound power level. The relationship between the methods is, however, rather more complex for the hemispherical sound power determination results. The point source method is very accurate at predicting noise levels at the same distance back from the site as the sound power measurements were conducted. However, this error generally increases at other ranges.
59
Acoustic Technology
Full Octave vs. Single Band Results show that the full octave calculations are generally about 1 dB(A) more accurate than the single band calculations. Summary of Key Findings: A generic industrial site has been modelled; The Stber method is better for determining LW than the distant hemispherical method; The error can be reduced by representing the site as an area rather than point source; Full octave band calculations are only 1 dB(A) more accurate than single frequency calculations. 7.3.14 Modelling of Real (Open) Site Following on from the modelling carried out above, some additional modelling work has been carried out based on a noise model of a real industrial site (an oil gathering station). Hence the site layout, sound power levels of equipment, directivities etc. are all based on a real world situation, albeit modelled. The site differs from the one modelled previously by being even more complex as well as being an open plan site, rather than a factory. The same modelling concepts were investigated as the theoretical generic site above. Because the model has been calibrated and validated by surveys at community locations, there is some degree of confidence in the results of the true model. Figure 23, below, shows a 3D view of the site model.
FIGURE 23: Graphical Representation of Oil Gathering Station Cadna Model
60
Acoustic Technology
The results of the noise modelling are presented in summary sheets in Appendix 16, and are discussed below: Stber vs. Hemispherical The results show that the Stber method is more accurate at predicting the sound power level of the plant than the hemispherical method. Because the errors for the hemispherical method reduced when modelled over flat land and with the bund removed (as opposed to the true land profile), it is thought that the errors are largely due to ground effects and attenuation due to the bund surrounding the site. Further modelling (setting the ground in the model to be hard) showed that the errors are largely due to ground effects, accounting for around 5 dB(A) of the total error. This shows that it will not be possible to dismiss ground effects over soft ground when determining the sound power level of plants, based on measurements from further afield. In order to gain an understanding of the magnitude of ground effects when calculating the sound power level by the hemispherical method, the difference in levels for hard and soft ground was computed. This effect is plotted in the Figure 24, below.
8
Difference between G=0 and G=1, dB
7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 10 100 1000 10000
Distance, m FIGURE 24: Difference in Calculated Sound Pressure Level Between Hard and Soft Ground Calculations For Oil Gathering Station Model (Receiver Height 4m)
The figure shows that the difference in levels increases from 1 dB(A) at 50 m and steadies off at around 8 dB(A) at 5km.
61
Acoustic Technology
2D Area vs. Point Source The relationship between the errors incurred and the distribution of the sound source is rather complex and also depends on the method used to determine the power level in the first place. For the Stber method, representing the source as a 2D area source appears to be slightly more accurate, particularly nearer to the site. However, the actual difference in errors is not significant. For the hemispherical method, the difference in errors between distributing the sound power as a point source and as a 2D area source is, again, not significant. In particular, the two methods calculate almost identical sound pressure levels at larger distances from the source (greater than 1 km).
8. 8.1
SITE INVESTIGATIONS General The theoretical modelling work started from very simple concepts and gradually built up in complexity until representing a situation likely to be encountered in real life. The next logical step was to take this one step further, and to carry out measurements on real sites. This would introduce further variables that cannot be controlled, such as background noise, meteorological conditions and real access restrictions. However, since these are the parameters that will affect the results when the mapping method is put into practice, it is important to appreciate these effects. As part of this research project, it was agreed with Defra that noise measurements were to be undertaken at two industrial sites. This had the following objectives: To test the logic and robustness of determining sound power levels and subsequent contour predictions; To further determine the potential errors inherent in the modelling methods; To appreciate the practicalities of undertaking noise measurements for the purpose of strategic noise mapping. The sites were chosen such that one site represented a typical factory unit, with a significant portion of it as a building structure, situated in a mainly residential area. The second site was chosen to be an open industrial noise source with dominant sound pressure levels at the plant boundary, and where plant boundary measurements could be made. This site was also the one modelled in Section 7.3.14, above, allowing comparison of the data with sound power levels measured using a sound intensity technique.
62
Acoustic Technology
8.2 8.2.1
Factory Unit Tests Method The instrumentation comprised of a Brel & Kjr integrating sound level meter, type 2260. The meter was fitted with a Brel & Kjr type 4189 inch microphone, connected via an extension lead. The microphone was then attached to the end of a telescopic pole so that measurements could be conducted at the desired height. A record was made of overall A-weighted and linear octave band Leq, L90, and Lmax noise indices. Two sets of measurements were taken, as follows: a) Boundary noise measurements were conducted at a height of 5 m above grade. Measurements were conducted after midnight in order to minimise disturbance from other noise sources. Because noise from the site was steady, measurements were generally kept to approximately 30 seconds (or when the displayed sound level levelled out). This meant that measurements could be conducted in between events such as passing cars or aircraft. Any extraneous events not connected with the factory operation were paused out from the sample. b) Community noise measurements were conducted at a height of 4 m above grade. The
measurements utilised the same equipment and basic method as described for the boundary noise measurements (for pragmatic reasons the community measurement duration was kept to approximately 30 seconds at each site. In general a longer sampling period would normally be appropriate). These measurements commenced after 2 am to minimise background noise from other traffic etc, due to the reduced impact of site noise on the ambient noise environment. Any local events not connected with the factory operation were paused out from the sample. During the tests, a note was made of prevailing weather conditions, including temperature, wind speed and direction and cloud cover. A note was made of any sounds contributing to the measured level along with the surveyors subjective comments. The boundary measurements were conducted at the nearest publicly accessible location to the site boundary and marked on a map. From this, it was possible to determine the distance to the plant (in metres) by measuring the distances on the map following the survey. The measurement locations are presented in the Figure 25.
63
Acoustic Technology
Key:
E 2 1 F 5 SITE 6 7 8 4 3 D
Plant area, Sp
C 13 12 11 10 9 B A
Measurement Area, Sm Community Location Boundary Location

A
FIGURE 25: Community and Boundary Measurement Locations Factory Unit Tests It can be seen that there was no direct access to the southern site boundary and therefore no measurements were conducted here. A much larger industrial area, consisting of a container port, docks and other industrial premises, is located directly to the south of a main road which runs close to the site. This industrial area, along with the main road, are also significant sources of noise. 8.2.2 Analysis of Results The measured sound pressure levels at the site boundary were used to calculate the plants sound power level, based on the Stber method, utilising both the overall (500 Hz single band) method as well as a full octave band calculation. First of all, the average sound pressure level for the boundary measurements was calculated. No correction was made for background noise, as noise from the site was deemed to be dominant. (Noise levels of between 40 and 50 dB(A) were recorded, compared with an estimated residual noise of around 30 dB(A) or less.) The calculations used the measured L90 values in order to distinguish the steady noise from the factory from other time varying noise. However, a correction of 1 dB was made to the measured levels to effectively convert from L90 to Leq. The measurement area and plant area were worked out based on a scale map of the area, rather than measurements on site. These were as follows:
64
Acoustic Technology
Measurement area, Sm = 121142 m2 Measurement contour length, l = 1481 m Plant area, Sp = 77105 m2 Mean height, h = 10 m (based on estimate whilst on site, by observation, of the mean height of the noise sources) The results of the calculations are presented in Table 9.
Calculation Method Octave Band Single Band TABLE 9:
Sound Power level, dB(A) 97.1 97.7
Comparison of Sound Power Level Determination for Full Octave and Single Band Calculations for Factory Unit Tests
It can be seen from Table 9 that there is a very good correlation between the single band and full octave calculations. The sound power levels calculated above were entered into a simple 2D model of the area using Cadna software, in order to provide a comparison between calculated and measured sound pressure levels at community locations. The results of this analysis are presented in Table 10.
Method Octave Band Single Band Actual Measured Lp Estimated Residual Level Corrected Measured Level TABLE 10:
A 27.0 27.9 34.6 30 32.8
B 30.7 31.7 33.8 30 31.5
Sound Pressure Level, dB(A) C D 29.3 30.3 35.0 30 33.3 31.0 32.0 32.3 30 28.4
E 29.4 30.7 35.3 30 33.8
F 26.1 27.2 38.5 30 37.8
Comparison of Calculated Sound Pressure Levels With Measured Values for Factory Unit Tests
Because residual noise levels, in general, were estimated to be just under 30 dB(A), the measured sound pressure levels at most of the community locations are very close to the predicted ones. It should be noted that the site was not audible at Locations E and F, where noise levels were subjectively dominated by distant traffic and residual noise levels would have been higher.
65
Acoustic Technology
8.3 8.3.1
Open-Site Source Tests Method The instrumentation comprised of a Brel & Kjr integrating sound level meter, type 2260. The meter was fitted with a Brel & Kjr type 4189 inch microphone, connected via an extension lead. The microphone was then attached to the end of a telescopic fishing rod so that measurements could be conducted at the desired height. A record was made of overall A-weighted and linear octave band Leq, L90, and Lmax noise indices. Two sets of measurements were taken, as follows: a) Boundary noise measurements were conducted at a height of 5 m above grade. Measurements were conducted in the late evening in order to minimise disturbance from other noise sources. Because noise from the site was steady, measurements were generally kept to approximately 30 seconds (or when the displayed sound level levelled out). This meant that measurements could be conducted in between events such as gusts of wind in the trees etc. Any extraneous events not connected with the site operation were paused out from the sample. b) Further noise measurements were conducted at a further distance back from the site at a height of 5 m above grade. The measurements utilised the same equipment and basic method as described for the boundary noise measurements. Any local events not connected with the factory operation were paused out from the sample. During the tests, a note was made of prevailing weather conditions, including temperature, wind speed and direction and cloud cover. A note was made of any sounds contributing to the measured level along with the surveyors subjective comments. All boundary measurements were conducted at 1 m from the boundary fence. out following the survey. The measurement locations are presented in the Figure 26. The far-field
measurement locations were noted on a map and the distance to the centre of the site was worked
66
Acoustic Technology
North Far-field Measurement
South Far-field Measurement
FIGURE 26: Measurement Positions Open Site Tests Because of weather conditions, no measurements were conducted at community locations. 8.2.2 Analysis of Results The measured Leq sound pressure levels at the site boundary were used to calculate the plants sound power level, based on the Stber method. In addition, the distant measurements to the north and south were also used to calculate the sound power level for comparison. For each method, calculations were performed utilising both the overall (500 Hz single band) method as well as a full octave band calculation. The hemispherical method of calculating sound power included a correction for ground effects since the terrain between the site and measurement position was soft. This was based on the values presented in ISO 9613 for soft ground, using an Excel spreadsheet for the calculation. The measurement area, plant area and other relevant distances etc. were worked out based on a scale map of the area, rather than measurements on site. These were as follows: Measurement area, Sm = 23000 m2 Measurement contour length, l = 620 m Plant area, Sp = 19780m2 Mean height, h = 5 m (based on estimate whilst on site, by observation)
67
Acoustic Technology
Distance from centre of site to northern far-field measurement point = 260 m Distance from centre of site to southern far-field measurement point = 320 m The results of the calculations are presented in Table 11.
Calculation Method Stber Method Hemispherical Calculation (From North) Hemispherical Calculation (From South) Small Source Method (Intensity) TABLE 11:
6
Sound Power level, dB(A) Octave Band 105.4 105.3 105.8 103.9 Single Band 104.1 105.4 105.8 -
Comparison of Calculated Sound Power Level for Different Methods of Determination Open Site Tests
It can be seen from Table 11 that there is a very good correlation between the methods for sound power level determination. In particular, it can be seen that the difference between the full octave band calculations and the single band simplified calculations is negligible. Although all three methods yield a slightly higher result from the intensity (small source) method, this is not necessarily due to survey technique as the survey was conducted on a different day. The sound power levels calculated above were entered into a 2D model of the area using Cadna software, in order to provide a comparison between calculated and measured sound pressure levels at the more distant locations. The results of this analysis are presented in Tables 12 and 13.
Method Octave Band Stber Hemisphere North Hemisphere South Actual Measured SPL TABLE 12:
Sound Pressure Level, dB(A) 260 m North 320 m South 40.6 41.6 42.6 41.5 39.6 40.6 41.6 39.9
Comparison of Calculated Sound Pressure Levels With Measured Values Using Full Octave Band Calculations - Open Site Tests
The measurements to determine this value were made on a different day to the plant boundary and more distant measurements
68
Acoustic Technology
Method Single Band Stber Hemisphere North Hemisphere South Actual Measured SPL TABLE 13:
Sound Pressure Level, dB(A) 260 m North 320 m South 42.4 43.6 43.7 41.5 41.5 42.7 42.8 39.9
Comparison of Calculated Sound Pressure Levels With Measured Values Using Single Band Calculations - Open Site Tests
It can be seen that the model offers good correlation with actual measured levels for all of the methods used.
9. 9.1
RECOMMENDED METHODOLOGY FOR SOURCE NOISE LEVEL DETERMINATION Scope The purpose of this section is to present a methodology for representing industrial noise sources as part of the first phase of noise mapping (as defined in the National Ambient Noise Strategy and required by Directive 2002/49/EC). The development of a standardised approach on how to map sources of industrial noise is critical to determining the ambient noise levels as the UK has no national standard. The presented method has been developed to provide consistent and reasonably accurate representation of industrial noise sources for noise mapping and will provide the necessary firm basis for assessing the effects of industrial noise and mitigation where this is considered necessary. The method is a compromise between obtaining an adequate level of detail and accuracy, and making the method suitably simple in terms of use and output. It should therefore be noted that, whilst the method presented allows a reasonably robust determination of ambient noise levels for the purposes of the first phase of noise mapping, this does not replace more detailed measurements or modelling that may be required under planning conditions or IPPC applications etc. Furthermore, it must be remembered that this method is intended to assist in undertaking strategic noise mapping. It will almost certainly be necessary to make a more detailed assessment of plant noise levels in order to investigate a specific noise issue.
69
Acoustic Technology
9.2 9.2.1
Principle of Modelling Method Determination of Sound Power Level The presented method is based upon determination of sound power levels based upon measurements of sound pressure level at discrete points in the vicinity of, but not actually on, the industrial premises. Consideration has been given to ensuring easy access to measurement locations and it has therefore been assumed that this will exclude entry into the industrial site itself. The method has, therefore, been developed based on the assumption that measurements will need to be made at publicly accessible points close to the industrial premises concerned. It is anticipated that the available access points to different sites will vary widely. Some sites will have access points all around the boundary fence, whereas some sites will only have publicly accessible points at some distance from the site. The proposed measurement method has therefore been developed to allow a flexible approach to determining the sound power level of industrial sites.
9.2.2
Modelling of Industrial Plant Noise It is recognised that a flexibility of approach should be allowed in terms of assigning and distributing the sound power level of the sources, once determined by measurement. In principle, the most accurate method of representing an industrial site would be to distribute the sound power in a way as close as possible to the original situation (i.e. the physical distribution actually encountered). However, this will not always be practical because, not only will the true situation often be rather complex, but it will not always be possible to determine the distribution of sources based on observations from publicly accessible locations. The computer modelling carried out for this project demonstrated that correctly identifying the directivity of the source must play a significant role in distributing the sound power levels on site. For this reason, it is proposed that the noise mapping method includes a procedure to both calculate directivity and then to apportion this characteristic to the subsequent computer model, if at all possible. Following on from this, the modelling showed that it is important that the site be represented accurately in terms of position. The method therefore contains a procedure for calculating the acoustic centre of a site, where it is practicable to do so.
70
Acoustic Technology
9.2.3
Noise Mapping and Propagation Model European Directive 2002/49/EC specifies that the ISO 9613 propagation model should be used for noise mapping purposes. This report does not therefore specify the fundamental propagation algorithms that should be used. However, it is worthy to comment on one aspect of the standard with respect to the mapping of industrial noise. It should be recognised that currently, and in certain software packages, the simplified propagation model using a single frequency, is implemented for propagation over soft (or mostly soft) ground. In some cases, where propagation calculations are undertaken for hard ground using a single frequency, then it may be necessary to map industrial noise using a modified version of this, as provided for in Section 1, Note 1, of the standard. This could entail, for example, using full octave band calculations but only populating the 500 Hz octave band with data. algorithms in the standard. Thus when a noise modelling software package is being used it is important to fully understand how the package interprets the detailed
10. 10.1
RECOMMENDED MEASUREMENT METHOD Scope The determination of the sound power level of an industrial source by the proposed method is intended solely for the purposes of industrial noise mapping for strategic purposes. Whilst the results may have some use for planning and permitting requirements, it will invariably almost always be the case that a much greater detailed level of modelling will be required for these applications.
10.2
Plant Operating Conditions As the noise contours to be generated need to reflect the Lden,and Lnight parameters (which are annual average values), both seasonal and day to day operating condition variations may need to be taken into account. There will be some industries where operations can vary considerably depending on the time of year. In this case, both or all scenarios should ideally be measured and an average sound power value level determined. (In addition varying meteorological conditions will also need to be taken into account to determine the resultant Lden and Lnight although consideration of this aspect does not form part of this report). The duration of the relative operating conditions will play a part in the decision as to whether or not to consider alternative operating scenarios. For example if a particular operating condition takes place for only one week per year, then it can probably be ignored.
71
Acoustic Technology
Decisions regarding the appropriate time to determine noise levels under typical operating conditions will rely on either a good level of local knowledge and/or contact with the individual sites concerned. Operating conditions of a plant may vary according to the following cycles: Daily changes i.e. higher output at certain times of the day; Day / night changes i.e. may output more / less during night; Seasonal changes i.e. may operate differently in summer / winter etc; Random changes on demand etc; Upset conditions. The resultant error in not determining sound power levels under all possible operating conditions for the purposes of generating annual average levels may not be that great, as long as measurements have been obtained for the typically highest noise output condition (for normal operations at the industrial site) and an estimate made for the period of time when noise levels could be significantly less than this. Occasional plant upset conditions, resulting in temporary higher noise levels, may not necessarily affect yearly average values, although if local knowledge suggests that there is a frequently occurring upset condition, then noise levels from this may need to be included in the long term average values. It should normally be possible, with some background knowledge of the particular industry involved, to plan surveys around typical operating cycles. For example, liquefied natural gas facilities operate in three distinct seasonal modes: gas liquefaction (during summer and off-peak gas demand periods), gas export (during winter and high gas demand periods) and minimum operations. Likewise, certain food processing plants etc may operate seasonally depending upon seasonal food supplies etc. 10.3 Meteorological Conditions It will be necessary to conduct measurements under suitable weather conditions. Measurements should normally be conducted under light wind speeds (average of 3 ms-1 or less) to minimise windinduced noise in the microphone and vegetation, as well as errors due to refraction of sound in one particular direction. Where there is restricted access to one side of the site and there is a light wind blowing during the survey then, ideally, there should be a downwind (or a crosswind) component of the wind in the direction that measurements can be taken (i.e. the wind blowing from a northerly direction). For example, if there is no access to the north side of a site for measurement, then a light northerly wind would be appropriate for purpose. However the significance of the wind direction on the measured noise levels will depend on the size of the site and the distance of the measurement point from the noise sources. As a general rule, measurements of industrial noise will start to be
72
Acoustic Technology
affected upwind of a noise source at a distance of 50 m or more under light wind.
However,
temperature gradients also affect sound propagation and, for industrial noise spectra, useful measurements at distances further upwind of the source may be viable if temperature inversion conditions prevail (these occur typically under a clear sky at night). There should be no precipitation during the measurement period, although a light passing shower may be acceptable. 10.4 Background Noise Measurements should be conducted, where possible, at a time when the contribution from other noise sources (e.g. road traffic, railways, aircraft etc) is at a minimum. This would normally be late at night or early morning (but avoiding the effects of dawn chorus, for example). However, where a site either does not operate during these times, or operates at a significantly reduced capacity, then measurements would need to be taken at another time. Where the residual noise due to other sources is thought to be affecting the measurement of noise from the industrial site, then correction factors will need to be applied as described in Section 10.6. 10.5 Equipment The following equipment specification is recommended as a minimum for measuring sound pressure levels to calculate the sound power level of industrial premises: An integrating-averaging sound level meter complying with the requirements of IEC 804 for a type 1 instrument should be used. As a minimum the meter should be capable of measuring overall (Aweighted) Leq and L90 sound pressure levels although noise levels for other statistical indices (particularly Lmax) will often be found useful when analysing the data. The measurement microphone should be fitted with a windshield to minimise the effects of windinduced noise. It has been assumed for the recommended measurement method that an omni-directional microphone will normally be used. During each series of measurements, an acoustic calibrator in accordance with IEC 942 class 1 should be applied to the microphone to verify the entire measuring system. Furthermore, the entire measurement system should be electrically and acoustically calibrated over the entire measurement frequency range at least within the previous 2 years.
73
Acoustic Technology
10.6
Measurement Procedure
10.6.1 Close-Proximity (Site Boundary) Method a) General The close-proximity measurement method is preferred for measuring industrial noise sources in residential areas, or where there are other potential noise sources nearby (e.g. roads and other industry etc.). It is particularly suitable where it is not possible to measure noise levels at distances further away from the site of interest. Reasons for this may be: Lack of publicly accessible measurement positions with direct line of sight to the site of interest (e.g. obstructed by houses / barriers / bunds etc) High background noise levels or other major noise sources prevent the source of interest being audible from further away. The measurement technique is based on the Stber method, as implemented by ISO 8297, but has been simplified in order to be more practicable to conduct. b) Measurement Locations and Definition of Source Measurements of sound pressure level should be conducted at various points on as much of a closed contour around the plant as possible. Where measurements cannot be measured around the complete boundary of the site, there is the potential for errors. Measurements should be conducted at a height of at least 4 m above grade. Where practicable, and particularly where local screening etc prevents a direct line of sight from the microphone to the site, such as next to high walls / buildings etc. this height should be increased. at a height of more than 5 m above the ground. Figure 27 shows the preferred measurement positions on a measurement contour around a plant, where full access is available. In practice, and for a portable measurement system, it is unlikely that measurements could easily be made with the microphone
74
Acoustic Technology
Measurement distance, d
Largest dimension of plant area
Measurement Area, Sm Plant Area, Sp
Measurement position, m
FIGURE 27: Measurement Positions For Close Proximity Method The plant area, Sp, is defined as the smallest possible area containing the noise generating plant or factory building. This will usually be less than the overall site area. Where full access is available, measurements should be made at a minimum of 8 positions around the plant and, where possible, evenly spaced. Where the difference in sound pressure level between neighbouring measurement positions exceeds 6 dB(A)7, the number of positions should be increased, if this is practicable. The contour may be based on an elliptical, circular or a rectangular shape depending on access. Reversals of curvature on the contour should be avoided, where possible. Where this is not practicable, due to access restrictions etc, the number of measuring positions should be increased. The mean radius of the contour (i.e. the average distance from the centre of the site to
Guidance from Reference 5
75
Acoustic Technology
the measurement locations) should be less than 1 times the largest source dimension of the plant. Otherwise, the distant measurement method should be used for the calculations (see below). Measuring positions should only be used when noise from the industrial site is audibly dominant. In some instances significant lengths of the contour may have to be eliminated and this will affect the reliability of the determination. Care must be taken if there are nearby reflecting surfaces (outside of the measurement contour) as these could distort the results. In addition, a further measurement position(s) may be defined in order to measure, or allow an estimate of, the residual noise. For this, it will be necessary to define a measurement position where the ambient noise environment is presumed to be equivalent to the area around the site in the absence of the site operating. This is similar to the approach taken in BS 4142 (Reference 15), where it is not possible to measure background noise at the assessment location. Alternatively, it may be possible to measure residual noise levels directly, for instance if the source operates intermittently etc. c) Measurement of Sound Pressure Levels Sound pressure levels should be measured in terms of LAeq. However, there may be some occasions where there is a benefit to measuring noise from a site in terms of LA90, rather than LAeq. Such a situation may be encountered, for example, where noise from the site is very steady in nature, and where there is some time varying or intermittent residual noise. Where use is made of the LA90 parameter for the approximation of the LAeq value of the steady industrial sound in the presence of other time varying non-industrial noise sources, then a small correction factor may be necessary to the measured LA90 value to represent the LAeq value of the industrial source. In most cases this correction will be 1 2 dBA, and can be best determined from short-term measurements when other noise sources can be ignored. Where LA90 measurements are made in lieu of LAeq measurements, then corrections for residual noise should still be made as, in this case, the LA90 parameter is an approximation of the specific8 or residual noise level. The measurement time chosen will depend on local conditions and the noise source(s) of interest. Where the noise is steady, it will be possible to take very short measurements (say around 1 - 2 minutes, using the pause facility on the sound level meter, if it contains this feature). This can
As defined in Reference 15
76
Acoustic Technology
help reduce interference from other noise sources such as intermittent traffic noise, aircraft and local activity as measurements can easily be fitted in between events. For time varying, cyclic or intermittent noise, however, it will be necessary to measure for longer time periods. possible, noise measurements should be made over at least two cycles of operation. Where mobile noise sources (e.g. moving vehicles, excavators, etc) are present on site, the measurement period should be extended to allow an averaging out of noise from the source. In some cases, this will be similar to the treatment of cyclic sources and simply require a measurement over one or two journeys. However, where the moving source travels randomly around the site, judgement should be made, based on local conditions, as to the required measurement length. For example, it may be that the effects due to mobile sources are cancelled out due by increasing the number of measurement positions around the site. Alternatively, utilising the far-field measurement technique below can reduce the effect of a mobile source. d) Calculation of Sound Power Level Where an assessment has been made of residual noise, each sound pressure measurement should first be corrected for this, using the formula: Where
L*p = 10 log 10 0 . 1 p1 10 0 . 1 p 2
*
where L p is the corrected sound pressure level, p1 is the sound pressure of the industrial noise plus residual noise, and p2 is the residual sound pressure (in the absence of the industrial noise). Calculate the average boundary sound pressure level, L p , using the following formula, where L*p,i is the sound pressure level at the ith measurement position, corrected for residual noise:
1 L p = 10 log n
10
i =1
0 . 1 L*p ,i
( )

Next, calculate an area term, LS , using the following formula:
2S + hl LS = 10 log m S0
Sm = measurement area, m2 h = characteristic height of plant, m
77
Acoustic Technology
l = measurement contour length, m S0 = reference area equal to 1 m2 The next step is to calculated a correction term for atmospheric absorption, L , using the following formula:
L = 0.5 Sm 1000
where = atmospheric absorption coefficient at 500 Hz, as defined in ISO 9613-2, to be taken as ~2 dBkm-1 for normal conditions. The proximity correction term, LF , can be calculated using the formula:
d LF = log 4 Sp
where Sp = the plant area in m2 and d = the average measurement distance in m (see Figure 27). Finally, the sound power level, Lw, is calculated from the following equation:
Lw = L p + LS + LF + L
In many cases, the term hl in the equation for Ls can be ignored. For example, for an
industrial plant with typical measurement dimensions of 200 m by 100 m and a mean noise source height of 5 m, the error in omitting the term hl is less than 1 dB. As the plant size becomes smaller and the source height increases, then the error becomes greater if this term is deleted. For a plant with dimensions 40 m by 40 m and a mean source height of 10 m, the potential error is 3 dB if this term is omitted. Worked Example: Figure 28, below, shows a simple site layout, with 10 measurement points on a contour. In this case, the plant area dimensions are 100 x 60 m, and the measurements were taken at a distance of 5 m from the boundary of the plant area. The measurements were approximately 30 m apart and the average sound pressure level ( L p ) was 50 dB(A).
78
Acoustic Technology
10 Plant 9
FIGURE 28: Worked Example Close Proximity Method Based on the above scenario, Sm = 7,700 m2 and Sp = 6,000 m2, and for h = 4m:
LS = 42.3, L = 0.1, LF = -1.0

Hence, Lw = 50.0 + 42.3 + 0.1 - 1.0 = 91.3 dB(A) If the height term, hl, is ignored in the above calculation, then LS = 41.9 Hence, Lw = 50.0 + 41.9 + 0.10 - 1.0 = 91.0 dB(A) The error in this case is 0.4 dB(A) (rounded from 2 decimal places). If the average source height is 10 m then the error becomes 1 dB(A). 10.6.2 Distant Measurement Method a) General The distant measurement method is suitable for measuring industrial noise sources in open areas where there is direct line of sight to the site in several directions for distances greater than one times the largest source dimension from the geometric centre of the site. However, noise from other sources should be insignificant compared with noise from the site for this method to be valid (typically 10 dB less), or be corrected for, if an estimate of residual noise can be made. The measurement technique is based on hemispherical sound propagation and can be modified for soft ground etc if required.
79
Acoustic Technology
b) Measurement Location Measurements of sound pressure level should be conducted at a distance of at least one times the largest source dimension from the geometrical centre of the site. Normally, four directions will suffice, although this may be increased if the source is thought to be highly directional in one particular direction. Measurements should be conducted at a height of at least 4 m above grade. Measurement locations should be chosen such that there is a direct line of sight to the site. Figure 29, below, shows the measurement positions on a measurement contour around a plant. Measuring positions should be eliminated where there is interference from other noise sources, such as other industrial premises or roads etc. Where possible, an additional set of measurements should be taken at an even further distance, m, back from the plant, in each general direction. Typically, four measurements (north, south, east and west) should be conducted, although this may depend on access. These measurements should preferably be taken at a distance of more than 1.5 times the largest source dimension from the centre of the plant. The purpose of these measurements is to identify the acoustic centre of the site and to help define true directivity (see 10.6.3).
Measurement position, m
Largest source dimension
Geometric centre of plant Plant Area
FIGURE 29: Measurement Positions For Distant Measurement Method
80
Acoustic Technology
In addition, further measurement positions may be defined in order to measure residual noise. For this, it will be necessary to define measurement positions where residual noise is presumed to be equivalent to that in the vicinity of the site. This is similar to the approach taken in BS 4142, where it is not possible to measure background noise at the assessment location. Alternatively, it may be possible to measure residual noise levels directly, for instance if the source operates intermittently etc. c) Measurement of Sound Pressure Levels Sound pressure levels should be measured in terms of LAeq. However, there may be some occasions where there is a benefit to measuring noise from a site in terms of LA90, rather than LAeq. Such a situation may be encountered, for example, where noise from the site is very steady in nature, and where there is some time varying or intermittent ambient noise. As for the close proximity measurements, a simple correction to the measured LA90 level may be applied to represent the LAeq value due to the industrial source. This will usually be an increase of 1 - 2 dB. The measurement time chosen will depend on local conditions and the noise source(s) of interest, as defined for the close proximity measurements, above. variations due to meteorological conditions etc. d) Calculation of Sound Power Level Where an assessment has been made of residual noise, each sound pressure measurement should first be corrected for this, using the formula: However, it is likely that a longer measurement time will be more appropriate for far-field measurements in order to account for any
L*p = 10 log 10 0 . 1 p 1 10 0 . 1 p 2
*
where L p is the corrected sound pressure level, p1 is the sound pressure of the industrial noise plus residual noise, and p2 is the residual sound pressure (in the absence of the industrial noise) If it was only possible to measure at one distance from the source in each direction, then the following procedure should be applied. below, should be followed. The apparent sound power level in the ith direction can be calculated using the formula: Otherwise, the procedure defined in Section 10.6.3,
81
Acoustic Technology
L'W , i = L*p , i + 10 log 2 d i2 +
d i
1000
+ A gr
where di = source to measurement distance and = atmospheric absorption coefficient at 500 Hz, as defined in ISO 9613-2, to be taken as ~2 dBkm-1 for normal conditions. Where the ground cover between the source and measurement position is mostly soft ground, an appropriate correction (Agr) should be made for this using the formula:
2h 300 Agr = 7.8 m 17 + 0 d d

where hm is the mean height of the propagation path above ground, in meters. Where the formula for Agr gives a negative value, this should be normalised to 0.
The average apparent sound power level LW can be worked out using the following equation:
1 L w = 10 log n
10
i =1
0 . 1 L 'w , i
From this, it is possible to work out the apparent directivity of the source in a particular direction (DIi) by using:
DI i = LW ,i LW
10.6.3 Refined Distant Measurement Method In order to calculate the true directivity of the source, it is first of all important to differentiate between true directivity and errors due to source proximity effects (i.e. being closer to a major source at one measurement point than at another). The reason for this is because directivity effects may well affect distant receiver points, although source proximity effects reduce with distance from the source. The first step is therefore to define the acoustic centre of the source in each direction. Normally, four directions will suffice (although this may be increased if the source is thought to be highly directional in one particular direction). To do this, four additional measurements will need to be carried out, one each in the north, south, east and west axes. These second set of measurements should be conducted at a distance of at least one and a half times the typical source dimension from the
82
Acoustic Technology
geometrical centre of the site. The distance to the acoustic centre of the site, Dcentre can then be worked out according to the following equation:
Lp
D centre =
d 10
Lp
20
10
20
where d = distance between measurement points and L p = difference between sound pressure levels. No correction has been made for atmospheric absorption or ground effects in this equation. Atmospheric absorption effects are not likely to be significant, and over hard ground, no correction is required for ground effects. However, over soft ground a correction factor is required to L p ,
although the magnitude of this depends on the mean propagation path and the absolute distance of the measurement point from the noise source. For typical industrial noise spectra, and for a mean propagation height of 2m, no correction factor is necessary if both measurement distances are 500m or more from the assumed location of the noise source. For measurements closer to the noise source then a correction factor for ground effects needs to be applied to the L p parameter, based on the difference in ground effect values according to ISO 9313-2. Worked Example: Figure 30 shows two measurements to the east of a site, along with distances to the centre of site and the measured sound pressure level at each location.
d2 = 100 m ACOUSTIC CENTRE 50 dB(A) GEOMETRIC CENTRE d1 = 50 m
45 dB(A)
Dcentre
FIGURE 30: Worked Example Refined Distant Method From the figure, d = 50 m and L p = 5 dB(A).
5
Therefore, D centre =
50 10 20 10
5 20
= 114 m
83
Acoustic Technology
Once the distance to the acoustic centre has been calculated, it is possible to calculate the apparent sound power level in each direction by using hemispherical propagation plus atmospheric absorption using the following equation (where LW,i is the apparent sound power level in the ith direction):
2 L'W , i = L p + 10 log 2 D centre +
D centre
1000
where = atmospheric absorption coefficient at 500 Hz, as defined in ISO 9613-2, to be taken as ~2 dBkm-1 for normal conditions. formula: Where the ground cover between the source and measurement position is mostly soft ground, an appropriate correction (Agr) should be made for this using the
2h Agr = 7.8 m d
300 17 + 0 d
where hm is the mean height of the propagation path above ground, in meters, and d is the source to receiver distance, in meters. normalised to 0. Where the formula for Agr gives a negative value, this should be
The average apparent sound power level LW can be worked out using the following equation:
1 L w = 10 log n
10
i =1
0 . 1 Lw , i
From this, it is possible to work out the true directivity of the source in a particular direction (DIi) by using:
DI i = LW LW , i
It should be noted that in an upwind direction from the noise source, and even in very light winds, the sound pressure level close to the ground can decrease rapidly due to upwards sound diffraction effects. This may skew the results obtained and lead to errors. If there is any doubt, more reliance on determining the acoustic centre of the industrial plant should be placed on the downwind noise measurements.
84
Acoustic Technology
11. 11.1
APPLICATION OF DATA General Industrial noise mapping will be carried out using the ISO 9613 propagation model. It is not in the scope of this project to investigate this method or to comment on its suitability. Therefore, the only aspects of mapping to be considered are restricted to the distribution of the sound power data, since the propagation thereafter is in the hands of ISO 9613. When modelling, it is recommended that the industrial noise source of concern be represented by distributing the measured sound power in a manner as similar as possible to the real situation. Therefore, if the original source is known to be an elevated point source (e.g. a stack) then the sound power should be distributed in the computer model as such. Likewise, for large factory buildings etc. the sound power should be distributed over the faades, with a correction for directivity. A more comprehensive list is given in Table 14:
Type of Industry Site Large Factory Open Site Stacks Mobile Source (Site traffic or moving excavator) TABLE 14:
Probable Method of Representing Source Smeared over faades and roof of building 2D Area Source Elevated Point Source (Or elevated area source for multiple stacks) Line or Area Source
Suggested Methods of Representing Different Types of Industrial Source for Noise Mapping
Where it is not possible to determine the distribution of the noise source, the sound power should be distributed as a 2D area source. The height of the source will need to be judged by the surveyor. When representing the source as a point source, the preferred location of the source is the acoustic centre, rather than the geometric centre of the source. However, the geometric centre may be used if the distant measurement method was used to determine the sound power level of the source. Where the close-proximity method was used to determine the source strength, then the source should be represented by a 2D area source. Alternatively if it were represented as a point source, than an estimate needs to be made of the location of the acoustic centre. Directivity should also be assigned to the source wherever practicable. index, DIi should then be applied to each direction (i). Typically, the average
apparent sound power level would be assigned to either the point or area source(s). The directivity
85
Acoustic Technology
11.2
Intermittent operation of industrial noise sources Consideration has been given as to how to account for industrial noise sources which do not operate continuously during each time period i.e. day, evening and night. In terms of how this needs to be accounted for mathematically, it is considered that a BS 5228 (Reference 16) percentage on-time type correction would be appropriate. This is a simple time factor correction. For example, if a source were to operate for half of the relevant time period, then a 3dB correction would be applied. Some thought has been given to how appropriate measurements can be conducted to account for sources that do not operate continuously. It is anticipated that this may pose a difficulty as it relies either on a reasonable level of local knowledge as to when sources are operational (for example an Environmental Health Officer may be able to provide this information). industry. Alternatively it may be necessary to contact the site to discuss operating conditions, which relies on the co-operation of the It may be necessary to conduct measurements for a number of operating conditions, although this would be minimised by good local knowledge.
12.
CONCLUSIONS A method has been developed to allow modelling of noise from industrial sources for the purposes of strategic noise mapping. The method was developed based on the results of extensive noise modelling carried out to investigate the errors inherent in determining and distributing source strengths and the subsequent modelling of the propagation of sound. The modelling investigated the influence of: Measurement location relative to plant (distance and height); Number of measurement locations; Spatial distribution of plant noise sources; Spectral content of plant noise; Topography and ground cover; The effects of relative humidity and temperature. The views of Local Authorities in England have also been canvassed for their subjective impressions about industrial noise sources in their area. The local authority responses identified some 300 industrial sites across England that the Local Authorities considered to be affecting their areas. Of those 300 sites, approximately half were considered to be significant sources of noise in that area. The research showed that 78% of these sites were associated with tonal, impulsive or low frequency
86
Acoustic Technology
characteristics.
It has therefore been concluded that it is important to take account of these
characteristics for industrial noise to be assessed fully. Research has also been conducted to investigate non-acoustic means of source strength determination, including a review of European work on this subject. At present, it is not considered a viable proposition in England to use non-acoustic means to determine noise source strengths. It is, however, possible that such a method might be developed in due time in the light of more extensive experience of determining and averaging site source strengths. The results of the modelling show that, in general, a single band approximation of the propagation of sound offers a relatively accurate approximation for industrial noise. It is therefore recommended that the mapping of industrial noise for strategic purposes be conducted using overall dB(A) values with attenuation terms for the 500 Hz octave band used to estimate the resulting attenuation. It must be stressed that this relatively simplistic approach should only be used for this application. More detailed measurements will almost always be necessary to investigate a particular noise issue. As part of the project, different methods of source strength determination were researched. Investigations consisted of computer based modelling as well as measurement exercises. The results of the modelling and site exercises illustrate that source determination can be carried out utilising both close-proximity (i.e. site boundary) and distant measurements. However, a correction for ground effects is necessary when using distant measurements over soft ground. In terms of the subsequent distribution of the source sound power for the purposes of noise mapping, the research established that the most accurate way of modelling a noise source is by distributing the sound energy in a manner as similar as possible to the real situation. However, where this is either not practicable, or the true sound power distribution is not known, a reasonable degree of accuracy can be obtained by modelling the sound power as either a 2 dimensional area source or a point source. The results of the modelling indicated that the directivity of the source can significantly influence the accuracy of the calculated values of the noise contours. For this reason, the proposed method includes provision for determining the acoustic centre and directivity of the source. It is concluded that the proposed methodology allows consistent and reasonably accurate representation of industrial noise sources for noise mapping. This will provide the necessary firm basis for assessing the effects of industrial noise and mitigation where this is considered necessary.
87
Acoustic Technology
GLOSSARY
Abreviation Aatm Adiv d Dcentre DIi G h H hm l L90 LAeq Lp Lw Lw Sm Sp SPM LF Ls L Definition Atmospheric attenuation Attenuation due to geometric divergence Measurement distance Distance to acoustic centre of site Directivity index in ith direction Ground factor Measurement height Average height of plants noise emitting equipment Mean height of sound propagation Measurement contour length Sound pressure level exceeded for 90% of the time (i.e. background level) Equivalent sound pressure level Sound pressure level Sound power level Sound power level per unit area Measurement area Plant area Sound power per square meter Proximity correction term Area correction term Atmospheric absorption term Atmospheric absorption coefficient Unit dB dB m m dB m m m m dB dB dB dB dBm-2 m2 m2 dBm-2 dB dB dB dBkm-1
Acoustic Technology
REFERENCES
Reference No. 1 2 3 4
Author / Standard No. END Defra ISO 9613-2 ISO 8297
Title European Noise Directive 2002/49/EC Towards a National Ambient Noise Strategy Acoustics -- Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors -- Part 2: General method of calculation Acoustics -- Determination of sound power levels of multisource industrial plants for evaluation of sound pressure levels in the environment -- Engineering method Noise Procedure Specification Publication No. 140 Report No. 2/76 - Determination of Sound Power Levels of Industrial Equipment, Particularly Oil Industry Plant Acoustics -- Determination of sound power levels of noise sources using sound pressure -- Engineering method in an essentially free field over a reflecting plane Acoustics -- Determination of sound power levels of noise sources using sound pressure -- Survey method using an enveloping measurement surface over a reflecting plane Sources of Magnitude of Uncertainty Arising in the Practical Measurement of Environmental Noise Noise Climate Assessment: A review of National and European Practices Report No. 105 - Noise Immision from Industry Measurement and Prediction of Environmental Noise from Industrial Plants. Energy its impact on the environment and society UK Energy Sector Indicators 2003 A supplement to the Energy White Paper, Our energy future. Creating a low carbon economy Gerusche bei Rohrleitungen Method for rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrial areas Noise and vibration control on construction and open sites. Description and measurement of environmental noise. Guide to quantities and procedures Concerning integrated pollution prevention and control 96/61/EC A report on the production of noise maps of the City of Birmingham.
Date 2002 2001 1996 1994
5 6 7
EEMUA CONCAWE ISO 3744
1985 1976 1994
ISO 3746
1995
9 10 11
Salford Defra Danish Acoustical Institute
2001 1999 1982
12 13
DTI DTI
2003 2003
14 15 16 17 18 19
VDI 3733 BS 4142 BS 5228 BS 7445-1 IPPC de Bakom
1996 1997 1997 1991 1996 2000
Acoustic Technology
Reference No. 20 21
Author / Standard No. Environment Agency ISO 9613-1
Title Horizontal Guidance for Noise (IPPC H3) Acoustics -- Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors -- Part 1: Calculation of the absorption of sound by the atmosphere
Date 2002 1993
22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
Technical Research Centre A Measurement Procedure Proposal For Emission of of Finland External Noise From Large Industrial Sources Stber Measurement Methods for Determining the Acoustic Capacity of Extensive Sound Sources Crocker, Malcom J. Identification of Noise From Machinery, Review of Novel Methods - Internoise 77 Witte, R and Ouwerkerk, M Comments on ISO 9613-2 - Internoise 96 Defra Noise Mapping: Experience in Germany and its Relevance to the UK Richards, J. Measurement of Sound Power of Large Industrial Noise Sources Wolde, T. On the Measurement od Source Strength of Large Industrial Sources, Internoise 78 Nordforsk Noise From Industrial Plants Danish Acoustical Institute Report No. 32 - Environmental Noise from Industrial Plants General Prediction Method Witte, R Controlling Noise Immission for Large Industrial Areas, Internoise 97 DELTA Nordic Environmental Noise Prediction Methods, Nord200 Summary Report
1981 1972 1977 1996 1999
1978 1984 1982 1997 2001
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 1 Local Authority Questionnaire
Acoustic Technology
Acoustic Technology
Our ref: AT5414/BCP/23652 24th March 2003 Authority Address For the attention of the Principal Environmental Health Officer
Re: DEFRA Research Contract on Industrial Noise Mapping Techniques

You may be aware that, following the Defra Consultation Paper Towards a National Ambient Noise Strategy published in November 2001, the Government has announced its intention to move forward in developing a national ambient noise strategy in England. Phase 1 of the strategy includes the mapping of the main sources and areas of noise in order to establish the ambient noise climate in this country, and determine the number of people affected by different levels of noise, the source of that noise (road, rail, airports and industry) and the location of the people affected. Whilst established methods exist in this country with regard to noise from roads, railways and aircraft, there is no similar standardised method to determine noise of an industrial origin. Defra has therefore awarded a research contract to Bureau Veritas to investigate the feasibility of representing industrial noise sources in a strategic noise map that is simple, reproducible and robust. Our contacts at Defra are John Stealey (tel 020 7944 6307) and Stephen Turner (tel 020 7902 6176). We are seeking help from Local Authorities, industry and other stakeholders, to define what are perceived to be the major sources of industrial noise in this country, and to identify any relevant noise data that are already available, and the methods by which the data were obtained. We would be grateful, therefore, if you could spend a few minutes completing the attached questionnaire, indicating what you consider to be the major industrial noise sources affecting your authoritys area, and return it to us in the supplied envelope. Where you have any noise data readily available relating to the sound power levels of the major industrial plant affecting your area, then we would be pleased if you could attach a copy of it (maintaining confidentiality as appropriate). We are interested, in particular, in octave band spectra for the noise radiation characteristics of different types of industrial plant and the spatial distribution of the noise sources on the site. If you do not hold any such noise data yourself, but you are aware that other (third parties) may do so (e.g. technical consultants or the industry itself) perhaps you could indicate this so we could make contact directly with the relevant party. Thank you for any assistance you can give us. Yours sincerely BV ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY
Bernard Postlethwaite Principal Consultant
DEFRA Research Contract on Industrial Noise Mapping Techniques, Questionnaire, Page 1 of 2

Local Authority: Date of Completion: Contact Name: E-mail Address: Telephone No: Fax No:
What do you consider to be the top three major noise emitting industrial sites affecting your authoritys area? In completing this questionnaire, please place the emphasis on the larger industrial sources e.g. power stations, manufacturing plant (which are potentially audible over a wider area and may possibly affect a large number of people, although may not necessarily be a source of frequent complaint) as compared to industrial noise sources that may give rise to frequent complaints from one or two individuals e.g. a small scrap metal yard. In completing the questionnaire, please include all types of industrial sources including ports, manufacturing plant, process plant, mineral extraction and waste disposal sites etc. Where the site includes more than one operator, please indicate this, giving the prime operator, if possible. If your area is not affected by any major industrial noise sources, we would still like to hear from you, with what you consider to be the most significant industrial noise in your area. Where appropriate, please circle or tick the relevant response. Thanks for your help. Industrial Site 1 1. Name of site or plant: 2. Type of industry: 3. Is there more than one operator involved? If so please specify prime operator, if known: 4. Operating periods: 5. Does this industrial site have any distinguishing acoustical features? 6. Do you have any noise data relating to this site? 7. What form does this data take? YES Major Operator: Day Evening Night NO YES Major Operator: Day Evening Night NO YES Major Operator: Day Evening Night NO Industrial Site 2 Industrial Site 3
Tonal / Impulsive / Low Frequency Other (please specify):
YES NO If NO, skip to Question 12. dBA levels at community point; octave band levels at community point; dBA sound power levels of plant; octave band sound power levels of plant; not sure at present; other (please specify):
AT5414/BCP//Questionnaire/Rev1
DEFRA Research Contract on Industrial Noise Mapping Techniques, Questionnaire, Page 2 of 2

8. If sound power level data is available, do you know how this was obtained? 9. Are you prepared to make this data available as part of the Defra research contract? 10. Do you think it would be necessary to keep the identity of the plant anonymous? 11. Have you attached any data with this response? 12. Are you aware of other available noise data for this site? If YES, please specify the sources with contact names and tel. nos. 13. Do you consider the chosen industrial site to be a significant source of environmental noise concern? 14. How frequently do you receive complaints about noise from this site? 15. Is this plant, or site, in your authoritys area? 16. Would you be willing for us to telephone or E-mail you to discuss these issues further? YES NO YES NO YES NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
YES YES Other Contact: Tel No: YES
NO NO
YES YES Other Contact: Tel No:
NO NO
YES YES Other Contact: Tel No:
NO NO
NO
YES
NO
YES
NO
Frequently / Sometimes / Rarely / Never
YES YES
NO NO
YES YES
NO NO
YES YES
NO NO
AT5414/BCP//Questionnaire/Rev1
APPENDIX 2 Stakeholder Contact Letters
Acoustic Technology
Acoustic Technology
Our ref: AT5414/AMR/23651 21st March 2003 Title FirstName LastName Company Address1 Address2 City PostalCode Dear Title LastName
Re: DEFRA Research Project on Industrial Noise Mapping Techniques

You may be aware that, following the Defra Consultation Paper Towards a National Ambient Noise Strategy published in November 2001, the Government has announced its intention to move forward in developing a national ambient noise strategy in England. Phase 1 of the strategy includes the mapping of the main sources and areas of noise in order to establish the ambient noise climate in this country, and determine the number of people affected by different levels of noise, the source of that noise (road, rail, airports and industry) and the location of the people affected. Whilst established methods exist in this country with regard to noise from roads, railways and aircraft, there is no similar standardised method to determine noise of an industrial origin. Defra has therefore requested Bureau Veritas to investigate the feasibility of representing industrial noise sources in a strategic noise map that is simple, reproducible and robust. Our contacts at Defra are John Stealey (tel 020 7944 6307) and Stephen Turner (tel 020 7902 6176). During the course of the research project we will be keeping relevant stakeholders, including your organisation informed, of our progress and will welcome comments regarding our proposed approach to industrial noise mapping. If you consider there is another individual in your organisation who should be contacted as well as or instead of yourself, then please pass on this letter or send their contact details to one of the following email addresses: Bernard.postlethwaite@uk.bureauveritas.com or aileen.reed@uk.bureauveritas.com. Thank you for your interest. Yours sincerely BV ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY
Bernard Postlethwaite Principal Consultant
APPENDIX 3 European Government Departments Contact Letters
Acoustic Technology
Acoustic Technology
Vor ref: AT5414/AMR/23664 1st April 2003 Danish Environmental Protection Agency Transport & Air Quality Division 29 Strandgade DK-1401 Copenhagen K Denmark Att.: Hugo Lyse Nielsen Kre Hugo Lyse Nielsen
Vedr.: DEFRA forskningsprojekt vedrrende kortlgningsteknikker for virksomhedsstj

I England har Defra, (Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs), ministeriet for milj, fdevarer og landbrug, ansvaret for at beskytte og forbedre miljet og integrere politik vedrrende disse problemer med andre p tvrs i regeringen og internationalt. Efter Defras hringsoplg "P vej mod en national strategi for baggrundsstj", som blev publiceret i november 2001, har regeringen offentliggjort sin hensigt om at g videre med udviklingen af en national strategi for baggrundsstj i England. Strategiens fase 1 omfatter kortlgning af de vigtigste kilder til og omrder for stj for at etablere et klima for baggrundsstj i England. Den vil fastsl antallet af mennesker, som berres af forskellige stjniveauer, stjens kilde (vej, jernbane, lufthavne og industri) og de berrte menneskers placering. Arbejdet skal ogs tjene det forml at opfylde de indledende krav i det europiske stjdirektiv, 2002/49/EC. Selv om der findes etablerede metoder i England med hensyn til stj fra veje, jernbaner og fly, findes der ingen lignende standardiseret metode til at fastsl stj af industrimssig oprindelse. Defra har derfor anmodet Bureau Veritas Acoustic Technology om at undersge muligheden for at afbilde industrimssige stjkilder i et strategisk stjkort med anvendelse af en metodik, som er enkel, reproducerbar og robust. Som en del af dette projekt kontakter vi de relevante ministerier i en rkke andre europiske lande for at afgre, hvilket lignende arbejde, der er udfrt eller i jeblikket er undervejs. Vi vil derfor vre taknemlige, hvis De kunne forsyne os med oplysninger om eventuelle metodikker, der anvendes i Deres land til at bestemme lydeffektniveuet for industrielle stjkilder i forbindelse med strategisk stjkortlgning. Vi er interesserede i teknikker, der er baseret p mling eller ikke-akustiske metoder (dvs. procesinformation, energiforbrug, osv.). Vi vil desuden vre taknemlige for at f kendskab til eventuel strmforskning vedrrende lydeffektniveaumling af industrielle stjkilder til kortlgning af stj. Projektteamet kan kontaktes pr. telefon, Bernard.postlethwaite@uk.bureauveritas.com, simon.Stephenson@uk.bureauveritas.com. fax eller brev og p flgende e-mail-adresser: aileen.reed@uk.bureauveritas.com,
-2Vor ref: AT5414/AMR/23664 1st April 2003 Hvis De mener, at der er en person i Deres organisation, som ogs skal kontaktes, eller som skal kontaktes i stedet for Dem selv, beder vi Dem videregive dette brev eller sende os kontaktoplysninger om vedkommende. Vi takker for Deres interesse og samarbejde. Venlig hilsen BV ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY
Bernard Postlethwaite Ledende konsulent
Acoustic Technology
Notre rf: AT5414/AMR/23662 31st March 2003 Ministry of County Planning and Environment Ministere de l'Ecologie et du Developpement Durable, 20 Avenue de Segur, 75302 Paris 07 SP, France l'attention de David Delcampe
Monsieur/Madame
Rf : Projet de recherche DEFRA sur les techniques de cartographie du bruit industriel

Defra, le ministre britannique de l'Environnement, de l'Alimentation et des Affaires rurales, est charg en Angleterre d'assurer la protection et l'assainissement de l'environnement, ainsi que l'intgration des programmes relatifs ces questions avec d'autres organismes l'chelon gouvernemental et international. la suite du document de consultation intitul Vers une stratgie nationale concernant le bruit ambiant publi en novembre 2001, le gouvernement britannique a annonc son intention de se mobiliser pour dvelopper une stratgie nationale concernant le bruit ambiant en Angleterre. La premire phase de cette stratgie porte sur la cartographie des principales sources de bruit et des zones de bruit afin d'tablir le climat de bruit ambiant en Angleterre. Elle permettra de prciser le nombre d'habitants affects par diffrents niveaux de bruit, les sources de ce bruit (infrastructures routires, ferroviaires, aroports et industrie) et l'emplacement des personnes affectes. Ces travaux serviront galement satisfaire aux conditions initiales de la Directive europenne 2002/49/CE relative la gestion du bruit. Bien qu'il existe en Angleterre des mthodes bien tablies concernant la gestion du bruit provenant des infrastructures routires, ferroviaires et des aronefs, il n'y a aucune mthode standardise similaire permettant d'tablir les niveaux de bruit d'origine industrielle. Defra a donc demand Bureau Veritas Acoustic Technology d'explorer la faisabilit de reprsenter les sources de bruit industriel sur une carte stratgique du bruit selon une mthodologie qui soit simple, rptable et robuste. Dans le cadre de ce projet, nous nous mettons en contact avec les ministres appropris de divers autres pays europens afin d'tablir quels travaux d'ordre similaire ont t entrepris ou sont en cours. Nous vous serions donc reconnaissants de bien vouloir nous fournir des renseignements dtaills sur toutes mthodologies utilises dans votre pays permettant d'tablir le niveau de puissance acoustique des sources de bruit industriel par rapport une cartographie stratgique du bruit. Nous nous intressons aux techniques bases sur des mesures ou des moyens non acoustiques (ex. informations sur les procds, consommation lectrique, etc.). Et de mme, nous vous prions de bien vouloir nous indiquer toutes les recherches actuelles relatives l'tablissement des niveaux de puissance sonore des sources de bruit industriel en vue d'tablir une cartographie du bruit. Vous pouvez contacter les membres de l'quipe de ce projet au tlphone, par fax ou par la poste, et aux adresses email suivantes : Bernard.postlethwaite@uk.bureauveritas.com, aileen.reed@uk.bureauveritas.com, simon.Stephenson@uk.bureauveritas.com.
-2AT5414/AMR/23662 31st March 2003 Si vous pensez qu'il nous serait utile de contacter par ailleurs une autre personne appartenant votre organisme, veuillez lui transmettre cette lettre ou nous envoyer ses coordonnes. Nous vous remercions de votre attention et de votre coopration. Nous vous prions d'agrer, Monsieur/Madame, l'expression de nos sentiments distingus BV ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY
Bernard Postlethwaite Consultant Principal
Acoustic Technology
Ons kenmerk: AT5414/AMR/23663 1st April 2003 Dutch Ministry of Housing Spatial Planning and the Environment PO Box 20951 2500 EZ Den Haag Netherlands Ter attentie van Martin Van den Berg Geachte Martin Van den Berg
Betreft: DEFRA Researchproject naar technieken voor het opstellen van industrile geluisbelastingkaarten
In Engeland is het Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, Defra, verantwoordelijk voor de bescherming en verbetering van het milieu en het integreren van het beleid ten aanzien van deze kwestie met andere beleidslijnen van de Britse regering en de regeringen van andere landen. Naar aanleiding van het document Towards a National Ambient Noise Strategy van Defra, dat in november 2001 gepubliceerd werd, heeft de regering bekendgemaakt dat zij van plan is een nationale omgevingslawaaistrategie in Engeland te ontwikkelen. Fase 1 van de strategie omvat onder meer het in kaart brengen van de belangrijkste lawaaibronnen en de regios waar het hoogste lawaainiveau gemeld is, om het omgevingslawaaiklimaat in Engeland te identificeren. Aan de hand van deze gegevens kan worden vastgesteld hoeveel mensen worden blootgesteld aan de verschillende lawaainiveaus, wat de bron van het lawaai is (wegen, spoorwegen, luchthavens en industrie) en waar deze mensen wonen. Het werk zal tevens helpen te voldoen aan de eerste bepalingen van de Europese richtlijn Omgevingslawaai: 2002/49/EG. Hoewel er in Engeland reeds gevestigde methoden bestaan met betrekking tot lawaai veroorzaakt door weg-, trein- en luchtvervoer, bestaat er geen equivalente, gestandaardiseerde methode voor het evalueren van het lawaainiveau uit industrile bronnen. Derhalve heeft Defra Bureau Veritas Acoustic Technology gevraagd de haalbaarheid te onderzoeken van een evaluatiemethode aan de hand waarvan industrile lawaaibronnen in een strategische geluidsbelastingkaart vastgelegd kunnen worden middels een methode die eenvoudig, herhaalbaar en robuust is. Als onderdeel van dit project nemen wij contact op met de relevante regeringsinstanties van een aantal andere Europese landen teneinde vast te stellen welke soortgelijke projecten zijn of worden uitgevoerd. Wij zouden het derhalve ten zeerste op prijs stellen indien u ons informatie wilt verstrekken over enige methoden die in uw land aangewend worden voor het evalueren van het geluidsbelastingniveau ten behoeve van het opstellen van strategische geluidsbelastingkaarten. We zijn genteresseerd in technieken op basis van metingen of nietakoestische middelen (bijv. procesinformatie, energieverbruik, enz.). Verder zouden wij ook graag informatie ontvangen over enig onderzoek met betrekking tot de evaluatie van het geluidsbelastingniveau ten behoeve van strategische geluidsbelastingkaarten. Het projectteam is telefonisch, per fax, schriftelijk of op de volgende e-mailadressen te bereiken: Bernard.postlethwaite@uk.bureauveritas.com, aileen.reed@uk.bureauveritas.com, simon.Stephenson@uk.bureauveritas.com.
2 Ons kenmerk: AT5414/AMR/23663 1st April 2003 Mochten er in uw organisatie nog andere personen zijn met wie wij, naast of in plaats van uzelf, ook contact zouden moeten opnemen, geeft u deze brief dan aan hen door of stuur ons hun contactgegevens. Vriendelijk dank voor uw interesse en medewerking. Hoogachtend BV ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY
Bernard Postlethwaite Hoofdconsulent
Acoustic Technology
Unsere Ref: AT5414/AMR/23665 1st April 2003 Federal Environment Agency Umweltbundesamt Postfach 33 00 22 14191 Berlin Germany Zu Hnden von Volker Imer Sehr geehrte(r) Volker Imer
Re: DEFRA Forschungsprojekt ber Festlegungstechniken fr Industriegerusche

In England ist Defra, das Ministerium fr Umwelt, Nahrungsmittel und Landesaffairen fr den Schutz und die Verbesserung der Umwelt und die Integration dieser Themen mit anderen der Regierung und auch international verantwortlich. In Folge des Defra Konsultationsreferats Fr eine Nationale Umgebungsgeruschstrategie, das im November 2001 verffentlicht wurde, hat die Regierung ihre Absicht bekanntgegeben, bei der Entwicklung einer nationalen Umgebungsgeruschstrategie in England Fortschritte zu machen. Phase 1 der Strategie ist das Festlegen der Hauptquellen und -geruschbereiche, um das Umgebungsgeruschklima in England festzustellen. Dies wird die Anzahl der Personen, die von verschiedenen Geruschstufen betroffen sind, die Quelle dieses Geruschs (Strassen, Zugschienen, Flughfen und Industrie) und den Standort der betroffenen Personen feststellen. Diese Arbeit dient auch dazu, die anfnglichen Anforderungen der Europischen Geruschdirektive 2002/49/EC zu erfllen. Obwohl es in England festgelegte Methoden im Bezug auf Strassen-, Schienen- und Flugzeuggerusche gibt, gibt es im Gegensatz dazu keine hnlichen standardisierten Methoden zur Feststellung von Geruschen mit Ursprung in der Industrie. Defra hat daher Bureau Veritas Accoustic Technology damit beauftragt, die Rentabilitt einer Darstellung der industriellen Geruschquellen mit einer strategischen Geruschfestlegung unter Verwendung einer Methodologie, die einfach, nachvollziehbar und robust ist, zu untersuchen. Aufgrund dieses Projekts kontaktieren wir die relevanten Regierungsabteilungen von ausgewhlten anderen europischen Lndern, um festzustellen, welche hnliche Arbeiten unternommen worden sind oder gegenwrtig ausgefhrt werden. Wir wren Ihnen daher dankbar, wenn Sie uns die Einzelheiten der Methodologien zur Feststellung der Geruschstrkenstufe der industriellen Geruschquellen im Bezug auf strategische Geruschauslegung, die in Ihrem Land angewendet werden, mitteilen knnten. Wir sind an Techniken, die auf Messungen oder nicht-akustischen Methoden (z.B. Prozessinformation, Stromverbrauch, etc.) beruhen, interessiert. Gleichermassen wren wir Ihnen dankbar, wenn Sie uns ber alle aktuellen Forschungen, die sich auf die Bestimmung der Geruschstrkenstufen von industriellen Geruschquellen zur Geruschauslegung beziehen, informieren knnten. Sie knnen das Projektteam telefonisch, mit Fax oder Brief und unter den folgenden Email-Adressen kontaktieren: Bernard.postlethwaite@uk.bureauveritas.com, aileen.reed@uk.bureauveritas.com, simon.Stephenson@uk.bureauveritas.com.
-2Unsere Ref: AT5414/AMR/23665 1st April 2003 Wenn Sie der Meinung sind, dass es in Ihrer Abteilung eine weitere Person gibt, die zustzlich oder anstelle von Ihnen kontaktiert werden sollte, dann geben Sie diesen Brief bitte weiter oder schicken Sie uns deren Kontaktdetails zu. Vielen Dank fr Ihr Interesse und Zusammenarbeit. Mit freundlichen Grssen BV ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY
Bernard Postlethwaite Hauptberater
APPENDIX 4 List of Local Authorities who Responded to Questionnaire
Acoustic Technology
Local Authority Respondents

Authority Adur District Council Allerdale Borough Council (Incl. Workington PHA) Alnwick D.C. Amber Valley Arun DC Babergh Barnsley Basildon Basingstoke & Deane Bath & North East Somerset Berwick-upon-Tweed Birmingham City Council Boston Borough Council Bournemouth Borough Council Bracknell Forest Borough Council Braintree Brentwood Brighton & Hove Bristol City UA Broadland Bromsgrove Broxbourne Broxtowe Borough Council Bury Cambridge City Council Cannock Chase Canterbury Carlisle City Council Castle Point Borough Council Charnwood Chelmsford Borough Council Chester City Council Chesterfield Chichester Christchurch City of Salford Congleton Borough Council Copeland Corby Borough Council Coventry Croydon Darlington
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Authority Dartford Borough Council Derbyshire Dales Dudley MBC Easington East Cambridgeshire D.C. East Hampshire East Hertfordshire East Northamptonshire Council East Staffordshire Borough Council Eastleigh Borough Council Elmbridge Enfield Epsom & Ewell Borough Council Exeter Falmouth & Truro PHA Fareham Borough Council Fowey PHA Gateshead Council Guildford Halton Borough Council Harrogate Hart D.C. Hartlepool B.C. Hertsmere B.C. Hinckley & Bosworth B.C. Hull & Goole PHA Ipswich Isle of Wight / Medina Kennet Kensington & Chelsea Kirklees L.B. Brent L.B. of Sutton Lancaster City Council Leicester City Council Lincoln City Council Liverpool City Council London Borough of Ealing London Borough of Southwark London Borough of Waltham Forest London PHA Maldon D.C. Malvern Hills Manchester Mid Devon
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Authority Mid Suffolk D.C. Mid Sussex District Council Newcastle upon Tyne Newham North Devon North Dorset D.C. North East Lincolnshire North Herts D.C. North Lincolnshire Council North Norfolk District Council Nottingham City Nuneaton & Bedworth BC Oadby & Wigston B.C. Oldham Oxford City Pendle Penwith Peterborough City Council Portsmouth City Council Reading D.C. Reigate & Banstead Restormel Ribble Valley River Blyth PHA River Tees PHA Rotherham Ryedale Sandwell Scarborough Sedgefield Borough Council Sevenoaks District Council Sheffield Slough Borough Council Solihull South Bucks South Derbyshire South Gloucestershire Council South Kesteven South Lakeland South Norfolk Council South Northamptonshire South Oxfordshire District Council South Ribble B.C. South Shropshire Southampton
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Authority St Edmundsbury Stafford Stockport MBC Stroud Swansea Bay Port Health Authority Tameside M.B.C. Tandridge District Council Teesdale D.C. Tendring Tonbridge & Malling Borough Council Torbay Trafford MBC Tynedale DC Uttlesford Vale of White Horse District Council Vale Royal Borough Council Wansbeck Warrington Warwick Watford Council Waveney Wellingborough West Berkshire Council West Devon West Oxfordshire West Somerset Weymouth & Portland Borough Council Wigan Winchester Windsor & Maidenhead Wirral Worthing BC Wychavon York City UA
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
APPENDIX 5 Review of National Databases
Acoustic Technology
REVIEW OF NATIONAL DATABASES 1. Introduction A review of national databases has been undertaken for this project. The types of database that have been reviewed are GIS databases, building height databases, population density and housing databases. The inclusion of industrial noise within the national noise-mapping programme will rely on the use of appropriate datasets. These datasets will need to meet certain criteria and have known characteristics to effectively integrate into any consistent process or procedure. The integration of industrial sector noise levels will essentially require similar geo-referenced and attributed datasets for input into the key noise modelling packages. In the Birmingham noise-mapping programme the integration of industrial noise was handled very simply. The results of the Birmingham study are now, however, largely outdated (at least in terms of geospatial base datasets). In particular, the Ordnance Survey National Topographic Database has replaced what was described in the Birmingham study and fulfils the gaps identified within the study. Other datasets now allow a greater level of attribution and classification of the geospatial data, which helps use the spatial data in a more intelligent fashion. However, the datasets to be used for noise mapping have rarely been specifically created for this process. This suggests that some pre-processing may be required to bring these datasets to an appropriate scale, resolution or level of generalisation and format suitable for noise modelling applications. It is also evident that a number of datasets may be essentially local or regional rather than nationally consistent geospatial data. modelling process. 2. Data Specification The specification for datasets is described below. The key data characteristics are: Location (geographical position); Classification (industrial, manufacturing or infrastructure); Configuration (spatial arrangement, extent and height). The approach to sourcing industrial layers within the mapping may therefore need to be flexible in order to integrate data of varying formats into the
Acoustic Technology
Taking these divisions further the datasets will ideally need to: Identify industrial locations; Classify the locations by industrial sector; Identify the extent of the industrial sites as opposed to just the buildings at a site (for example with quarry sites where the registered office may be remote from noise source); Identify building (or noise source) configuration within a site; Identify the building heights within the industrial location. Whilst it may be simple to consider industrial site noise as something that can be described as a point source this may not always be the case. Large industrial sites can have many processes, varying levels of sound output from different parts of a site and multiple buildings with varied configurations. 3. 3.1 Description of Datasets General The description of the datasets is divided into two sections, namely: those that describe location and classification; those that describe height. 3.2 Location and classification Identifying the site of industrial processes and activities is a primary requirement. This involves three separate elements; namely geographic position, extent and some way of classifying the industrial activity. It is also realised that a single industrial site may encompass many sub-categories of building including office space as well as processing plant with different noise output characteristics. A number of potential sources of information have been identified that provide the location and classification of industrial sectors. Base data (OS Land-Line / OS MasterMap) Points of Interest (PointX datasets) Valuation office data IPPC register data Local Plan information mineral and waste sites
Acoustic Technology
Ordnance Survey Topographic Data: Topographic data are used within the commercial residential, road, airport noise mapping to provide feature data but can also be used to provide a source of industrial locations information. Generally, the sites of industrial classes will have an addressable point file (building) and a boundary file for both buildings on a site and any fenced or bounded area. There are two National Topographic Database (NTD) derived datasets from Ordnance Survey that fulfil part of this requirement, OS Land-LineTM and OS MasterMapTM. Both products are derived from the National Topographic Database, the highest resolution standard database from the Ordnance Survey. Land-Line is a vector-based product that represents mapped features by a series of lines. These lines are not joined to create an area file that describes the land parcels. OS MasterMap is an object-oriented database that records the attributes and the spatial data within a database. The OS MasterMap information is referenced to a unique TOID (Topographic Identifier) that uniquely identifies mapped features. From a data processing standpoint the area based MasterMap provides a useful data source as the areas can be selected and attributed based on the TOID reference, making addition of attributes of the sites straightforward. MasterMap records land cover classes against each polygon within the dataset. These attributes are recorded in the Real World Object catalogue. Although industrial sectors are not themselves recorded, a number of object classes are relevant. All individual buildings or groups of buildings within a single property boundary have separate TOIDs and separate attributes for buildings over 50 m2. Advantages of MasterMap are that it is a nationally consistent dataset, provided in polygon format, and with a series of relevant attributes that will contribute to the mapping process for both industrial and other noise sources. The area based TOID reference for all polygons allows the buildings and land adjoining an industrial site to be separately recorded and associated with the same industrial classification information. It provides the basis for attributing with other information - such as building height information. MasterMap inherently includes descriptive groups (Buildings) that include a number of separate descriptive (distinctive) names, including a number of industrial features and groups such as industrial estates. Land-Line does not treat the attribution of features in the same way, although the textual descriptions (part of the dataset) may be present (and have been used to build PointX see below). Within MasterMap the description of a site should be included once, whereas in Land-Line the
Acoustic Technology
descriptive text may be recorded more than once across boundaries and map tile sheets, necessitating data cleaning. Despite their advantages both the MasterMap and Land-Line datasets are very large and may affect processing times. These may prove unacceptable for the noise mapping software processing and would need to be evaluated. Given that only a few of the features are needed from the OS datasets it would be possible to extract only those layers needed in the processing and even to generalise the dataset to enhance processing speeds. Pre-processing to attribute height data to building areas may need to be accomplished prior to any generalisation. PointX Datasets: PointX datasets appear to offer the best options for the identification of geo-referenced digital locations of industrial and manufacturing centres. PointX collates, georeferences and quality assures datasets from a wide range of sources. Many of the datasets from which the information is drawn are from addressable locations with validation and update based on telephone interviews used to provide updates. Point X adds the geocoding, typically with the grid reference falling within the boundary of the addressable building. The two main sources of information for PointX industrial and manufacturing sites are from Thompson Directories and from data extractions from OS Land-Line textual data, as follows: Thompson Directories locations of categories of industrial and manufacturing centres broken down into 6 categories with 153 classes. Other categories may also be relevant, such as public infrastructure including refuse disposal, sewage disposal, etc. Land-Line certain datasets are extracted by reference to the text data within the site (e.g. quarries). PointX currently do not use OS MasterMap, but rather use Land-Line to collect other information on locations and categories. Often this is based on the selection of the OS Land-Line text attributes to provide a location. However, text in OS Land-Line may repeat and these duplicates are removed to provide a single reference location. However, Point X has generally included the TOID reference within the point files so that the features can link direct to OS MasterMap. The choice of spatial referencing system will depend on the availability of the basemapping data to the consultants undertaking the noise mapping. The industrial and manufacturing sector is divided into 153 classes covering 6 categories. The six categories are:
Acoustic Technology
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6.
Consumer products Extractive industry Farming Foodstuffs Industrial features Industrial products
Key limitations of PointX appear to be: The PointX data is a point georeference file (the point falls within the topographic feature outline it describes). In order to utilise this information within noise mapping it is anticipated that the feature area data would need to be attributed with the PointX class descriptors. This is a relatively straightforward geoprocessing step but may need validation. Only processing those relevant classes can reduce the processing requirements. The point may in a few cases reference to the site office rather than the feature. Further evaluation of how to represent the whole of an industrial site may therefore be required. The point may not effectively represent the location of the noise source being based on the addressable feature rather than the full site boundary. However, there is no specific dataset that will address this issue without major validation and hence this is not an easily resolvable issue that another data source could improve. Other Industrial / Land Use Sector Data: Other datasets identified that include industrial categories include: Valuation Office rateable values IPPC Public Registers Both these datasets include industrial sector information. The Valuation Office records information on the rateable value of all non-domestic property in England and Wales of which there are around 1.7 million records (hereditaments). There are four broad classes of record, of which factory is the relevant class for industrial categories, which range from small workshops to manufacturing units. These rateable values are based primarily on floor space, but may include land without buildings. For industrial units where the rateable value is not based on floor space (e.g. iron and steel plants, chemical works, refineries) are classed as non-bulk. Both the bulk and non-bulk classes are categorised with primary descriptions. The non-bulk classes comprise some 400,000 records.
Acoustic Technology
The limitation of the Valuation Office rates data is the lack of georeferencing and attribution of the areas covered by the hereditaments. Georeferencing of the information would be needed to attribute the addressable object using a dataset such as OS AddressPoint to provide a point reference, which might then be attributed to the feature (site) outline. Integrated Pollution Prevention Control data is maintained by the Environment Agency under section 20 of the Environment Protection Act 1990. This register records information of prescribed industrial processes. Information is maintained as a Public Register. This information only includes those industries that discharge to water or air. It may indicate the registered office or principle place of business rather than the details of the relevant site/s. Despite the limitations of the data comprehensiveness, the register may be able to add further details to the PointX datasets. As with the Valuation Office data there is no implicit georeference, which would need to be added to the datasets. Other local information may be available for industrial areas or for specific industrial sectors, such as the mineral extraction industry through Local Mineral Plans. These plans are generally in paper format and indicate the status of mineral extraction sites and their boundaries. This data may be useful in adding specific dimensions to sites. Other Local Plan data will also usually indicate key industrial land use and land use development zones in paper proposal map formats, although this information may not be in digital format. Environment Agency landfill sites are also maintained as a digital spatial dataset. This records the status of the site and its licence conditions, although more details are held in paper records than in the basic digital files. T he dataset covers England and Wales. Datasets are being generated all the time and new datasets are planned that may change the perspective of the value of the above datasets or introduce new datasets or data attributes that are useful in the industrial and other noise mapping. For example, Ordnance Survey has announced its intention to create a building height dataset (see below). Other potentially important datasets plans of relevance (but not yet available) include the National Land Use Database (NLUD) Baseline data. This development programme aims to produce a full attribution of OS MasterMap data from a range of sources. Depending on the levels of attribution (categories and classes) of land use this dataset could remove some of the implied processing steps suggested in combining OSMasterMap and PointX codes.
Acoustic Technology
3.3
Height Data Building height data is generally more difficult to source, as was found within the Birmingham study. Although datasets do exist they are often irregular and very localised in spatial coverage, or are commercially or strategically confidential. The issue of industrial site building heights is the same as for other buildings height information and thus the same datasets are generally more widely applicable to noise mapping. the industrial description. There are two broad approaches to mapping height. direct measurement, or estimation of building height from local ground level terrain mapping where the buildings are included within the terrain surface (digital surface models or digital elevation model). In terms of processing there are also two main approaches: little or no processing where the height data is directly attributed to the building location (as an attribute of a point or area feature) geoprocessing of surface terrain data to attribute the building seed point with the height. Processing with this type of data source will require averaging (or some other descriptive statistic) of height values within a building footprint. The processing could be achieved with MasterMap and a surface model and would subtract the general surface level to derive local building heights. A number potential datasets are available and are summarised in the table overleaf. As with the spatial extent datasets, any single industrial site may comprise many terrain features and buildings of varying heights and hence the data are not specific to
Acoustic Technology
Dataset General height data (OS 1:10 k terrain) Lidar (general terrain heights or surface terrain) coverage
Description 1:10,000 OS LandForm Profile information. Light Detection and Ranging. Principle suppliers in UK are Environment Agency and Infoterra / Merrett Survey Partnership. Airborne laser scanning system NextMap is a national terrain data capture programme based on airborne Synthetic Aperture Radar. A number of products will be available including the first Digital Surface Model and a Digital Terrain dataset. Local datasets describing building heights
Relevance to Industrial Noise Mapping Maps surface terrain to MOD. Does not create a surface model of the imposed features and therefore does not provide the basis for mapping building heights, only landform. Variable dataset based on flying heights that determine resolution. The data are georeferenced and provide a full surface model. Datasets are sporadic and EA coverage tends to focus around floodplain and coastal areas. High-resolution datasets between 0.5 - 1m resolution and 2.5m horizontal accuracy. Not yet covering the UK (see map in appendix). Products provide ground model and surface height models from which building heights can be obtained. Although building footprints can also be derived through processing of these high-resolution data this is not required due to availability of accurate OS topographic maps. Little information exists on these sources, and may have been derived in a number of ways. Often this is through stereo aerial photo measurements or through automated satellite image processing techniques. The resolution of these data is high especially from aerial photographic images. Datasets such as a CR City Heights provide vector dataset comprising of building footprint, building height, road centreline, and road centreline height data and is accurate to within 0.5 metres (vertical). The data is derived from aerial photographs using photogrammetric techniques and is supplied in DXF format. Currently the only city available is 160sqkm of Central London but other cities are planned. This dataset would provide the basis for direct attribution of building areas. OS have released a PIN to identify potential data suppliers for building height data for parts of three cities (Bristol, Christchurch, Plymouth) to +/- 10cm. No further processing would be needed of this dataset. Remote sensing and photogrammetric techniques can be used to derive terrain datasets. Accuracy is to +/- 1m RMSE. These products generally include ground heights and heights of other surface features. These products are often bespoke to customers requirements, or specific locations.
NextMap (coverage)
Building specific heights sources
Building specific heights sources
A number of suppliers offer a range of products with attributed building heights often derived from image processing. CR World Cities Revealed, Infoterra, GeoSense etc Ordnance Survey has announced that an enhancement to MasterMap will be the inclusion of building height data within a Prior Indicative Notice. Image processing companies (e.g. Infoterra, Geosense)
Ordnance Survey layer in MasterMap Prior Indicative Notice (PIN)
Deriving data from satellite images /aerial photos
Summary of Building Height Data Sources
Acoustic Technology
3.4
Population Data The key source of population data is the decennial Census. The most recent census was undertaken in 2001. The major difference of the 2001 census over previous censuses is that the information will be largely freely available for download from the ONS website. The development of noise mapping from industrial sources will need two specific elements for geographical population estimates. i) ii) The local area statistics (the highest spatial resolution available); and The geographic boundaries in digital format for integration into the GIS modelling environment. Digital Census Boundary Data Although collected at the house level Census data is aggregated to larger geographic regions to maintain anonymity of the respondents. It is this small spatial scale data that will be required for noise mapping. In the 1991 Census the smallest geographic area for which statistics were made available was the Enumeration District (ED). area. A new approach has been adopted for the output of the Census 2001 creating a new small area statistics output that does not relate to the enumerator effort area. The procedure / geographical framework for these Output Areas (OA) is as follows: postcode based building bricks, nesting within up to date '2003' ward and parish boundaries created in an automatic process, using 1 metre co-ordinate referenced Census records and other boundary and map information, in which polygons are created around every address these are grouped to form unit postcode polygons the postcodes are zoned into Output Areas using objective and systematic statistical criteria The ED was essentially the area of equal workload for enumerators and was developed by hand and these same areas provided the smallest data output
Acoustic Technology
the process delivers consistently sized areas boundaries for GIS and electronic media look up tables for postcode links to non-Census data population weighted centroids and area measurements
The 2001 census has used automatically generated OAs based on a set of consistently applied criteria that enable better matching to postcode geography and to a more consistent population estimate. Thus, the Output Area for the 2001 census replaces the ED. The vector boundaries for the 175,434 Output Areas in England and Wales are available without charge from Census Customer Services. Data is available in the following formats: Boundaries for the whole of England and Wales, available as a shape file on two CDs and in MID/MIF format on a DVD. Whole of England and Wales, arranged for those who wish to extract and set up the boundaries for a single local authority or a few authorities, available as a shape file on a DVD or in MID/MIF format on a DVD. All files contain vector boundaries, unique identifiers for OAs, population weighted and geometric centroids for OAs, and area measurements for OAs, together with a look-up table of OAs by unit postcodes. Dwelling numbers Within the scope of the industrial noise mapping is the requirement to intersect the noise contours with the number of dwellings affected. This requires a spatial dataset of dwellings. The key sources of property boundaries data are from the Ordnance Survey topographic database, although there are a number of other potential sources as point datasets. This data comes in a number of formats at the highest resolution. Ordnance Survey Land Line Ordnance Survey MasterMap AddressPoint.
Acoustic Technology
These data sources are regularly updated with semi-continuous update of the OS topographic database. The Census also asks questions about the household as a whole relating to the dwelling, rooms, tenure, amenities and the nature of the accommodation and sharing. This data also covers mobile and temporary structures that often the OS datasets will not cover. However highest resolution data for these results of these data are reported at the ED or OA level. Key issues in establishing the dwelling numbers within a zone of influence are that not all building locations or addressable objects represent a single dwelling and that not all accommodation is reported or recorded with geographic co-ordinates. Blocks of flats and more recently divided houses imply a greater population or larger number of individuals or groups living independently. Land-Line is a vector based dataset that describes the boundary of the building footprint. However, unlike MasterMap, the line-work is not polygonised and does not form a discrete object with a single reference. In the case of MasterMap the Building outline is uniquely identified feature with a topographic identifier, a TOID. Neither Land-Line nor MasterMap distinguish part of buildings or dwellings; e.g. it would not distinguish a ground floor shop from an upstairs dwelling or a set of flats from a single house. In order to get this level of detail it is necessary to source additional address datasets. Whilst there are some issues with the classification of items within OS AddressPoint data, it fulfils most of the requirements of identifying independently addressable items. The profile of the product is summarised in the table below. There are some items that are addressable but which are not dwellings and these would need to be filtered before analysis of dwellings.
Acoustic Technology
Specification Data source Addresses in series Standard delivery units Availability Coordinate resolution Data structure Transfer format Storage volumes Supply media Update interval
ADDRESS-POINT Ordnance Survey database and Royal Mails Postcode Address File (PAF) Approx 26 million Government office region (eleven regions constitute national cover). National coverage (Great Britain) Normally 0.1m Attributed point Comma separated values (CSV) Average record length per address: 150 bytes CD-ROM 3 months
AddressPoint data consists of the Royal Mail's Postcode Address Files (PAF) with the addition of Ordnance Survey national grid information, AddressPoint unique reference point (OSAPR) and a status flag to define the quality and accuracy of each address, AddressPoint also covers businesses and these would need to be excluded from any assessment of dwellings although they may still be considered receiving environments in their own right. OS is also creating and maintaining a National Buildings Data Set. This data set is an index of all buildings. It consists of a core referencing module containing: a unique topographic identifier for each building with associated referencing into the existing Ordnance Survey product ADDRESS-POINT via the OS Address Point Reference number; which can be made available with: national grid co-ordinates, and postal addresses (where they are available) The definition of a building is roofed constructions, usually walled. This includes permanent roofed constructions that exceed 8.0 m2 in area (12 m2 in private gardens). Exceptions are made for smaller buildings in such a detached position that they form relatively important topographical features. Mobile homes, residential caravans and so on are not captured. Storage tanks may be classified as buildings. There are other commercial products that can be used to identify postal addresses with additional features and attributes, e.g. QuickAddress Business Pro, which reports at postcode level. This product combines the functionality of QuickAddress Pro with business data from D&B. This enables identification of business address and a unique D-U-N-S Number. The stated inputs to Quick Address are 95% of the GDP for businesses and is updated quarterly.
Acoustic Technology
D-U-N-S Numbers - The D-U-N-S Number is a nine-digit number that uniquely identifies each business record within the UK Marketing File. The numbering structure links parent and subsidiary companies, as well as head offices and branches. In addition the SIC codes can be supplied with the datasets (SIC codes). Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) codes - These codes are used to classify businesses by the activity they are involved in, and the type of products and services they offer. The codes can be used to profile a database of customers or prospects. This has potential both to identify the industrial sector but also as a way of filtering business properties from other properties. Other commercial products that go some way to classifying buildings include Cities Revealed Building Class datasets. These assign building classes to residential buildings based on age and structural types and are output as GIS tables (MapInfo/ ESRI). Data is currently only available for London. The Office of National Statistics (through the ODPM) is also developing data on empty homes at ward level as part of the neighbourhood Statistics Service. Although currently planned at ward level it is anticipated that this will be at a higher resolution later (ODPM Working Group on Local Government Financial Statistics). This data is not currently available and data is drawn from national datasets wherever possible. A dwelling stock database is being developed by the Valuation Office Agency, but is not currently available. The principle is to develop approaches to integrating dispersed databases to generate this information, which indicates the distributed nature of current information describing dwellings. Local Council Tax records provide a source of information on occupancy and provide further information on the valuation and whether the property is only partly used as a dwelling. The Valuation Office maintains a consolidated central database of ratings. The national access to this database would require negotiation with the Valuation Office. A number of classes of property and occupancies are exempt from Council Tax but this is applied at local authority level so the national data hold all rated properties and update this data for new buildings and modifications. These data are referenced to the address and, in order to spatially sample beyond the postcode level, would require linking to a product such as OS AddressPoint to allow intersection with the noise output levels.
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 6 Results of Relative Humidity and Temperature Review Calculations
Acoustic Technology
2 m Receiver Height Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Flat Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 35 2000 Soft 35 2000 Soft 35 Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Industrial Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 50 500 Hard -10 70 500 Hard -10 100 500 Hard 0 50 500 Hard 0 70 500 Hard 0 100 500 Hard 10 50 500 Hard 10 70 500 Hard 10 100 500 Hard 20 50 500 Hard 20 70 500 Hard 20 100 500 Hard 35 50 500 Hard 35 70 500 Hard 35 100 500 Soft -10 50 500 Soft -10 70 500 Soft -10 100 500 Soft 0 50 500 Soft 0 70 500 Soft 0 100 500 Soft 10 50 500 Soft 10 70 500 Soft 10 100 500 Soft 20 50 500 Soft 20 70 500 Soft 20 100 500 Soft 35 50 500 Soft 35 70 500 Soft 35 100 1000 Hard -10 50 1000 Hard -10 70 1000 Hard -10 100 1000 Hard 0 50 1000 Hard 0 70 1000 Hard 0 100 1000 Hard 10 50 1000 Hard 10 70 1000 Hard 10 100 1000 Hard 20 50 1000 Hard 20 70 1000 Hard 20 100 1000 Hard 35 50 1000 Hard 35 70 1000 Hard 35 100 1000 Soft -10 50 1000 Soft -10 70 1000 Soft -10 100 1000 Soft 0 50 1000 Soft 0 70 1000 Soft 0 100 1000 Soft 10 50 1000 Soft 10 70 1000 Soft 10 100 1000 Soft 20 50 1000 Soft 20 70 1000 Soft 20 100 1000 Soft 35 50 1000 Soft 35 70 1000 Soft 35 100 2000 Hard -10 50 2000 Hard -10 70 2000 Hard -10 100 2000 Hard 0 50 2000 Hard 0 70 2000 Hard 0 100 2000 Hard 10 50 2000 Hard 10 70 2000 Hard 10 100 2000 Hard 20 50 2000 Hard 20 70 2000 Hard 20 100 2000 Hard 35 50 2000 Hard 35 70 2000 Hard 35 100 2000 Soft -10 50 2000 Soft -10 70 2000 Soft -10 100 2000 Soft 0 50 2000 Soft 0 70 2000 Soft 0 100 2000 Soft 10 50 2000 Soft 10 70 2000 Soft 10 100 2000 Soft 20 50 2000 Soft 20 70 2000 Soft 20 100 2000 Soft 35 50 2000 Soft 35 70 2000 Soft 35 100 Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Humped Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 35 2000 Soft 35 2000 Soft 35
50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100
51.9 52.9 54.1 53.6 54.6 55.5 54.9 55.5 55.9 55.2 55.4 55.4 54.0 53.9 54.1 44.0 45.3 46.9 46.4 47.7 48.8 48.2 48.9 49.5 48.7 48.9 49.0 47.1 46.9 47.0 43.4 44.9 46.3 45.9 47.0 47.9 47.1 47.7 48.1 47.0 47.1 47.0 44.9 45.2 45.8 33.4 35.7 38.0 37.2 39.0 40.4 39.4 40.3 40.9 39.6 39.6 39.4 36.5 36.6 37.1 34.3 36.2 38.0 37.2 38.6 39.6 38.4 38.9 39.1 37.5 37.4 37.4 35.2 35.9 37.0 22.6 25.3 28.1 27.0 29.4 31.0 29.6 30.5 30.9 28.8 28.6 28.2 24.6 25.3 26.6
-3.5 -2.6 -1.4 -1.9 -0.9 0.0 -0.6 0.4 -0.3 -0.1 -0.1 -1.5 -1.6 -1.4 -4.9 -3.6 -2.1 -2.6 -1.2 -0.1 -0.8 0.5 -0.3 0.0 0.0 -1.8 -2.0 -1.9 -4.4 -2.9 -1.4 -1.9 -0.8 0.2 -0.6 0.3 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 -2.8 -2.5 -2.0 -6.9 -4.7 -2.3 -3.1 -1.4 0.1 -0.9 0.5 -0.8 -0.7 -0.9 -3.8 -3.8 -3.2 -4.6 -2.7 -0.9 -1.7 -0.3 0.7 -0.5 0.2 -1.4 -1.5 -1.5 -3.7 -3.0 -1.9 -7.8 -5.2 -2.4 -3.4 -1.1 0.6 -0.9 0.4 -1.7 -1.9 -2.2 -5.9 -5.2 -3.9
56.6 57.3 57.9 57.6 58.1 58.5 58.2 58.4 58.6 58.1 58.2 58.1 57.4 57.5 57.7 49.7 50.3 51.0 50.7 51.4 51.8 51.5 51.8 51.9 51.5 51.6 51.5 50.7 50.6 50.8 49.4 50.2 51.1 50.8 51.4 51.8 51.3 51.6 51.7 51.0 51.0 51.0 50.0 50.3 50.7 42.3 42.9 43.8 43.4 44.1 44.7 44.3 44.6 44.7 44.2 44.1 44.0 43.0 43.1 43.4 41.8 42.8 43.7 43.2 43.9 44.4 43.6 43.9 44.0 43.0 43.0 43.2 42.2 42.7 43.3 35.5 35.9 36.5 36.2 36.8 37.4 36.8 37.1 37.2 36.5 36.5 36.4 35.8 36.0 36.3
-1.8 -1.2 -0.5 -0.8 -0.3 0.1 -0.2 0.1 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -1.0 -0.9 -0.7 -2.1 -1.5 -0.8 -1.0 -0.4 0.0 -0.3 0.1 -0.3 -0.2 -0.3 -1.1 -1.2 -1.0 -2.2 -1.3 -0.5 -0.8 -0.2 0.3 -0.3 0.1 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -1.6 -1.3 -0.9 -2.3 -1.7 -0.8 -1.2 -0.5 0.1 -0.4 0.1 -0.5 -0.5 -0.6 -1.6 -1.5 -1.2 -2.1 -1.1 -0.2 -0.7 0.0 0.5 -0.3 0.1 -0.9 -0.9 -0.7 -1.7 -1.2 -0.6 -1.6 -1.2 -0.6 -0.9 -0.3 0.3 -0.3 0.1 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -1.3 -1.1 -0.8
50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100
55.3 56.2 57.1 56.8 57.4 58.0 57.6 57.9 58.0 57.5 57.5 57.5 56.4 56.5 56.9 46.8 48.0 49.2 48.9 49.9 50.6 50.1 50.6 50.8 50.2 50.2 50.2 48.7 48.7 49.0 47.1 48.6 49.8 49.4 50.3 51.0 50.3 50.6 50.7 49.8 49.8 49.8 48.1 48.6 49.2 37.0 39.0 41.0 40.3 41.8 42.8 42.0 42.5 42.8 41.7 41.6 41.4 39.1 39.4 40.1 37.6 39.9 41.8 41.0 42.2 43.0 41.9 42.2 42.2 40.7 40.5 40.7 38.5 39.5 40.7 26.1 29.1 31.6 30.7 32.7 34.0 32.6 33.2 33.4 31.5 31.3 31.0 27.8 28.8 30.2
-2.6 -1.6 -0.7 -1.1 -0.4 0.1 -0.3 0.2 -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 -1.4 -1.3 -1.0 -3.8 -2.5 -1.3 -1.7 -0.7 0.0 -0.4 0.3 -0.4 -0.3 -0.4 -1.8 -1.8 -1.6 -3.6 -2.1 -0.8 -1.2 -0.3 0.3 -0.3 0.1 -0.8 -0.8 -0.9 -2.5 -2.0 -1.4 -5.6 -3.5 -1.5 -2.2 -0.8 0.2 -0.6 0.3 -0.8 -0.9 -1.1 -3.5 -3.1 -2.4 -4.6 -2.3 -0.5 -1.2 0.0 0.8 -0.3 0.0 -1.5 -1.7 -1.6 -3.8 -2.8 -1.6 -7.1 -4.1 -1.6 -2.5 -0.6 0.7 -0.6 0.2 -1.7 -2.0 -2.2 -5.5 -4.4 -3.0 Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
TABLE A6.1
Distance Rec Height Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m m Type oC % dB(A) dB Sloped UP Spectrum Shape 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Hard 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 500 2 Soft 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Hard 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 1000 2 Soft 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Hard 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft 2000 2 Soft
Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Sloped DOWN Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 50 500 Hard -10 70 500 Hard -10 100 500 Hard 0 50 500 Hard 0 70 500 Hard 0 100 500 Hard 10 50 500 Hard 10 70 500 Hard 10 100 500 Hard 20 50 500 Hard 20 70 500 Hard 20 100 500 Hard 35 50 500 Hard 35 70 500 Hard 35 100 500 Soft -10 50 500 Soft -10 70 500 Soft -10 100 500 Soft 0 50 500 Soft 0 70 500 Soft 0 100 500 Soft 10 50 500 Soft 10 70 500 Soft 10 100 500 Soft 20 50 500 Soft 20 70 500 Soft 20 100 500 Soft 35 50 500 Soft 35 70 500 Soft 35 100 1000 Hard -10 50 1000 Hard -10 70 1000 Hard -10 100 1000 Hard 0 50 1000 Hard 0 70 1000 Hard 0 100 1000 Hard 10 50 1000 Hard 10 70 1000 Hard 10 100 1000 Hard 20 50 1000 Hard 20 70 1000 Hard 20 100 1000 Hard 35 50 1000 Hard 35 70 1000 Hard 35 100 1000 Soft -10 50 1000 Soft -10 70 1000 Soft -10 100 1000 Soft 0 50 1000 Soft 0 70 1000 Soft 0 100 1000 Soft 10 50 1000 Soft 10 70 1000 Soft 10 100 1000 Soft 20 50 1000 Soft 20 70 1000 Soft 20 100 1000 Soft 35 50 1000 Soft 35 70 1000 Soft 35 100 2000 Hard -10 50 2000 Hard -10 70 2000 Hard -10 100 2000 Hard 0 50 2000 Hard 0 70 2000 Hard 0 100 2000 Hard 10 50 2000 Hard 10 70 2000 Hard 10 100 2000 Hard 20 50 2000 Hard 20 70 2000 Hard 20 100 2000 Hard 35 50 2000 Hard 35 70 2000 Hard 35 100 2000 Soft -10 50 2000 Soft -10 70 2000 Soft -10 100 2000 Soft 0 50 2000 Soft 0 70 2000 Soft 0 100 2000 Soft 10 50 2000 Soft 10 70 2000 Soft 10 100 2000 Soft 20 50 2000 Soft 20 70 2000 Soft 20 100 2000 Soft 35 50 2000 Soft 35 70 2000 Soft 35 100
-10 -10 -10 0 0 0 10 10 10 20 20 20 35 35 35 -10 -10 -10 0 0 0 10 10 10 20 20 20 35 35 35 -10 -10 -10 0 0 0 10 10 10 20 20 20 35 35 35 -10 -10 -10 0 0 0 10 10 10 20 20 20 35 35 35 -10 -10 -10 0 0 0 10 10 10 20 20 20 35 35 35 -10 -10 -10 0 0 0 10 10 10 20 20 20 35 35 35
50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100
45.8 46.8 48.5 47.8 49.4 50.9 50.0 51.2 52.1 51.0 51.6 51.9 49.8 49.5 49.3 39.1 40.3 42.2 41.5 43.4 45.0 44.2 45.4 46.4 45.3 46.0 46.3 43.9 43.6 43.3 35.4 37.5 39.7 39.0 40.7 42.3 41.2 42.4 43.2 41.7 42.0 42.0 38.7 38.7 39.1 26.7 29.5 32.4 31.4 33.7 35.7 34.5 35.9 36.9 35.3 35.6 35.5 31.8 31.5 31.8 25.0 27.6 30.2 29.2 31.3 32.9 31.4 32.4 32.9 30.8 30.7 30.4 26.7 27.5 28.7 13.8 17.5 21.4 20.1 23.2 25.5 23.7 25.1 25.9 23.4 23.3 22.8 17.4 18.0 19.4
-5.4 -4.4 -2.7 -3.4 -1.7 -0.3 -1.1 0.9 -0.1 0.4 0.7 -1.4 -1.7 -1.9 -6.3 -5.1 -3.2 -3.9 -2.0 -0.4 -1.2 1.0 -0.1 0.6 0.9 -1.5 -1.8 -2.1 -7.0 -4.9 -2.7 -3.4 -1.7 0.0 -1.1 0.8 -0.7 -0.4 -0.4 -3.7 -3.7 -3.3 -9.2 -6.4 -3.5 -4.5 -2.2 -0.2 -1.4 0.9 -0.6 -0.3 -0.4 -4.2 -4.5 -4.2 -7.4 -4.8 -2.2 -3.2 -1.1 0.5 -1.0 0.6 -1.6 -1.7 -1.9 -5.7 -4.9 -3.6 -11.2 -7.5 -3.6 -4.9 -1.8 0.4 -1.4 0.8 -1.7 -1.7 -2.3 -7.6 -7.1 -5.6
56.4 57.1 57.8 57.5 58.0 58.4 58.0 58.3 58.4 58.0 58.0 58.0 57.2 57.3 57.6 47.6 48.5 49.5 49.2 50.0 50.6 50.2 50.5 50.8 50.2 50.3 50.2 49.1 49.1 49.3 49.1 50.0 50.9 50.6 51.2 51.6 51.1 51.4 51.4 50.7 50.8 50.8 49.7 50.1 50.5 39.1 40.3 41.7 41.2 42.2 43.0 42.4 42.8 43.0 42.2 42.1 42.0 40.4 40.6 41.1 41.2 42.4 43.5 43.0 43.7 44.2 43.3 43.6 43.6 42.5 42.6 42.8 41.6 42.2 43.0 31.2 32.2 33.5 32.9 34.0 34.9 34.0 34.4 34.6 33.4 33.3 33.2 31.8 32.2 32.9
-1.8 -1.2 -0.5 -0.8 -0.3 0.1 -0.2 0.1 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -1.0 -0.9 -0.7 -2.9 -2.0 -1.1 -1.4 -0.6 0.0 -0.4 0.2 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -1.5 -1.5 -1.3 -2.2 -1.3 -0.5 -0.8 -0.2 0.3 -0.2 0.1 -0.6 -0.6 -0.6 -1.6 -1.3 -0.8 -3.7 -2.5 -1.2 -1.7 -0.6 0.2 -0.5 0.2 -0.7 -0.7 -0.8 -2.5 -2.2 -1.8 -2.4 -1.1 -0.1 -0.6 0.1 0.6 -0.2 0.1 -1.0 -1.0 -0.8 -1.9 -1.3 -0.6 -3.3 -2.2 -0.9 -1.5 -0.4 0.5 -0.4 0.1 -1.1 -1.1 -1.2 -2.6 -2.2 -1.6
AT5414/2 Rev 1
TABLE A6.1
4 m Receiver Height Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Flat Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 35 2000 Soft 35 Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Industrial Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 50 500 Hard -10 70 500 Hard -10 100 500 Hard 0 50 500 Hard 0 70 500 Hard 0 100 500 Hard 10 50 500 Hard 10 70 500 Hard 10 100 500 Hard 20 50 500 Hard 20 70 500 Hard 20 100 500 Hard 35 50 500 Hard 35 70 500 Hard 35 100 500 Soft -10 50 500 Soft -10 70 500 Soft -10 100 500 Soft 0 50 500 Soft 0 70 500 Soft 0 100 500 Soft 10 50 500 Soft 10 70 500 Soft 10 100 500 Soft 20 50 500 Soft 20 70 500 Soft 20 100 500 Soft 35 50 500 Soft 35 70 500 Soft 35 100 1000 Hard -10 50 1000 Hard -10 70 1000 Hard -10 100 1000 Hard 0 50 1000 Hard 0 70 1000 Hard 0 100 1000 Hard 10 50 1000 Hard 10 70 1000 Hard 10 100 1000 Hard 20 50 1000 Hard 20 70 1000 Hard 20 100 1000 Hard 35 50 1000 Hard 35 70 1000 Hard 35 100 1000 Soft -10 50 1000 Soft -10 70 1000 Soft -10 100 1000 Soft 0 50 1000 Soft 0 70 1000 Soft 0 100 1000 Soft 10 50 1000 Soft 10 70 1000 Soft 10 100 1000 Soft 20 50 1000 Soft 20 70 1000 Soft 20 100 1000 Soft 35 50 1000 Soft 35 70 1000 Soft 35 100 2000 Hard -10 50 2000 Hard -10 70 2000 Hard -10 100 2000 Hard 0 50 2000 Hard 0 70 2000 Hard 0 100 2000 Hard 10 50 2000 Hard 10 70 2000 Hard 10 100 2000 Hard 20 50 2000 Hard 20 70 2000 Hard 20 100 2000 Hard 35 50 2000 Hard 35 70 2000 Hard 35 100 2000 Soft -10 50 2000 Soft -10 70 2000 Soft -10 100 2000 Soft 0 50 2000 Soft 0 70 2000 Soft 0 100 2000 Soft 10 50 2000 Soft 10 70 2000 Soft 10 100 2000 Soft 20 50 2000 Soft 20 70 2000 Soft 20 100 2000 Soft 35 50 2000 Soft 35 70 Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Humped Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard -10 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 0 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 10 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 20 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Hard 35 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft -10 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 0 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 10 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 20 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 500 Soft 35 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard -10 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 0 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 10 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 20 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Hard 35 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft -10 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 0 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 10 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 20 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 1000 Soft 35 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard -10 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 0 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 10 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 20 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Hard 35 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft -10 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 0 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 10 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 20 2000 Soft 35 2000 Soft 35
50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70
51.6 52.6 53.7 53.3 54.3 55.1 54.5 55.1 55.5 54.8 55.0 55.1 53.6 53.6 53.7 44.9 46.1 47.6 47.0 48.3 49.3 48.7 49.4 49.8 49.1 49.3 49.3 47.6 47.5 47.6 43.2 44.7 46.2 45.7 46.8 47.7 46.9 47.5 47.9 46.8 46.9 46.8 44.8 45.0 45.6 34.9 37.0 39.0 38.3 39.8 41.0 40.1 40.9 41.4 40.2 40.2 40.1 37.4 37.6 38.2 34.2 36.1 37.9 37.1 38.5 39.5 38.3 38.8 39.0 37.4 37.3 37.3 35.1 35.8 36.9 24.5 27.1 29.6 28.6 30.6 32.0 30.6 31.4 31.7 29.7 29.5 29.3 26.1 26.9
-3.6 -2.5 -1.4 -1.8 -0.8 0.0 -0.6 0.4 -0.3 -0.1 0.0 -1.5 -1.6 -1.4 -4.4 -3.2 -1.8 -2.3 -1.1 -0.1 -0.7 0.5 -0.3 -0.1 0.0 -1.8 -1.9 -1.8 -4.4 -2.8 -1.3 -1.9 -0.7 0.2 -0.6 0.4 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 -2.8 -2.5 -2.0 -6.0 -3.9 -2.0 -2.6 -1.1 0.1 -0.8 0.5 -0.8 -0.7 -0.8 -3.5 -3.3 -2.8 -4.6 -2.7 -0.9 -1.7 -0.3 0.7 -0.5 0.2 -1.4 -1.5 -1.5 -3.7 -3.0 -1.9 -6.8 -4.3 -1.8 -2.8 -0.8 0.6 -0.7 0.3 -1.6 -1.8 -2.1 -5.3 -4.4
56.2 56.9 57.5 57.3 57.8 58.2 57.8 58.1 58.2 57.8 57.8 57.8 57.0 57.1 57.4 50.1 50.8 51.5 51.3 51.8 52.2 52.0 52.2 52.3 51.9 51.9 51.9 51.0 51.1 51.3 49.2 50.1 50.9 50.6 51.2 51.6 51.1 51.4 51.5 50.8 50.8 50.9 49.8 50.1 50.5 42.8 43.5 44.4 44.0 44.7 45.3 44.8 45.1 45.2 44.6 44.5 44.5 43.5 43.6 44.0 41.7 42.7 43.6 43.1 43.8 44.3 43.6 43.8 43.9 42.9 43.0 43.1 42.1 42.6 43.2 35.8 36.3 37.1 36.7 37.3 37.9 37.3 37.6 37.7 36.9 36.9 36.9 36.1 36.4
-1.8 -1.1 -0.5 -0.8 -0.3 0.1 -0.3 0.1 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -1.1 -0.9 -0.7 -2.1 -1.4 -0.7 -1.0 -0.4 0.0 -0.3 0.1 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -1.2 -1.1 -0.9 -2.2 -1.3 -0.5 -0.8 -0.2 0.2 -0.3 0.1 -0.6 -0.6 -0.5 -1.6 -1.3 -0.9 -2.3 -1.6 -0.7 -1.1 -0.4 0.2 -0.3 0.1 -0.5 -0.5 -0.6 -1.6 -1.4 -1.1 -2.1 -1.1 -0.2 -0.7 0.0 0.5 -0.2 0.1 -0.9 -0.8 -0.7 -1.7 -1.2 -0.6 -1.8 -1.2 -0.5 -0.9 -0.2 0.4 -0.3 0.1 -0.7 -0.7 -0.7 -1.4 -1.2
50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70 100 50 70
54.9 55.9 56.7 56.4 57.1 57.6 57.2 57.5 57.7 57.1 57.2 57.2 56.1 56.2 56.5 48.1 49.2 50.3 49.9 50.8 51.4 51.0 51.3 51.5 51.0 51.0 50.9 49.7 49.7 50.0 46.9 48.4 49.7 49.2 50.2 50.8 50.1 50.4 50.6 49.7 49.6 49.6 48.0 48.4 49.0 38.8 40.7 42.3 41.7 43.0 43.8 43.0 43.5 43.7 42.7 42.6 42.5 40.4 40.8 41.5 37.5 39.9 41.7 40.9 42.1 42.9 41.8 42.1 42.1 40.6 40.5 40.6 38.4 39.4 40.6 28.3 31.2 33.4 32.6 34.2 35.3 34.1 34.5 34.6 32.8 32.6 32.5 29.7 30.8
-2.6 -1.6 -0.8 -1.1 -0.4 0.1 -0.3 0.2 -0.4 -0.3 -0.3 -1.4 -1.3 -1.0 -3.3 -2.2 -1.0 -1.4 -0.6 0.0 -0.4 0.2 -0.4 -0.4 -0.4 -1.7 -1.6 -1.3 -3.6 -2.0 -0.7 -1.2 -0.3 0.3 -0.3 0.1 -0.8 -0.8 -0.8 -2.5 -2.0 -1.4 -4.7 -2.8 -1.2 -1.7 -0.5 0.3 -0.5 0.2 -0.8 -0.9 -1.0 -3.1 -2.7 -2.0 -4.6 -2.3 -0.5 -1.2 0.0 0.8 -0.3 0.0 -1.5 -1.6 -1.5 -3.8 -2.8 -1.5 -6.2 -3.3 -1.1 -1.9 -0.3 0.8 -0.4 0.1 -1.7 -1.9 -2.0 -4.8 -3.7
AT5414/2 Rev 1
TABLE A6.2
2000
Soft
35
100 28.2
-3.2
2000
Soft
35
100 36.8
-0.8
2000
Soft
35
100 32.1
-2.4 Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
TABLE A6.2
Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Sloped UP Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 50 500 Hard -10 70 500 Hard -10 100 500 Hard 0 50 500 Hard 0 70 500 Hard 0 100 500 Hard 10 50 500 Hard 10 70 500 Hard 10 100 500 Hard 20 50 500 Hard 20 70 500 Hard 20 100 500 Hard 35 50 500 Hard 35 70 500 Hard 35 100 500 Soft -10 50 500 Soft -10 70 500 Soft -10 100 500 Soft 0 50 500 Soft 0 70 500 Soft 0 100 500 Soft 10 50 500 Soft 10 70 500 Soft 10 100 500 Soft 20 50 500 Soft 20 70 500 Soft 20 100 500 Soft 35 50 500 Soft 35 70 500 Soft 35 100 1000 Hard -10 50 1000 Hard -10 70 1000 Hard -10 100 1000 Hard 0 50 1000 Hard 0 70 1000 Hard 0 100 1000 Hard 10 50 1000 Hard 10 70 1000 Hard 10 100 1000 Hard 20 50 1000 Hard 20 70 1000 Hard 20 100 1000 Hard 35 50 1000 Hard 35 70 1000 Hard 35 100 1000 Soft -10 50 1000 Soft -10 70 1000 Soft -10 100 1000 Soft 0 50 1000 Soft 0 70 1000 Soft 0 100 1000 Soft 10 50 1000 Soft 10 70 1000 Soft 10 100 1000 Soft 20 50 1000 Soft 20 70 1000 Soft 20 100 1000 Soft 35 50 1000 Soft 35 70 1000 Soft 35 100 2000 Hard -10 50 2000 Hard -10 70 2000 Hard -10 100 2000 Hard 0 50 2000 Hard 0 70 2000 Hard 0 100 2000 Hard 10 50 2000 Hard 10 70 2000 Hard 10 100 2000 Hard 20 50 2000 Hard 20 70 2000 Hard 20 100 2000 Hard 35 50 2000 Hard 35 70 2000 Hard 35 100 2000 Soft -10 50 2000 Soft -10 70 2000 Soft -10 100 2000 Soft 0 50 2000 Soft 0 70 2000 Soft 0 100 2000 Soft 10 50 2000 Soft 10 70 2000 Soft 10 100 2000 Soft 20 50 2000 Soft 20 70 2000 Soft 20 100 2000 Soft 35 50 2000 Soft 35 70
Distance Ground Temp RH SPL Deviation m Type oC % dB(A) dB Sloped DOWN Spectrum Shape 500 Hard -10 50 500 Hard -10 70 500 Hard -10 100 500 Hard 0 50 500 Hard 0 70 500 Hard 0 100 500 Hard 10 50 500 Hard 10 70 500 Hard 10 100 500 Hard 20 50 500 Hard 20 70 500 Hard 20 100 500 Hard 35 50 500 Hard 35 70 500 Hard 35 100 500 Soft -10 50 500 Soft -10 70 500 Soft -10 100 500 Soft 0 50 500 Soft 0 70 500 Soft 0 100 500 Soft 10 50 500 Soft 10 70 500 Soft 10 100 500 Soft 20 50 500 Soft 20 70 500 Soft 20 100 500 Soft 35 50 500 Soft 35 70 500 Soft 35 100 1000 Hard -10 50 1000 Hard -10 70 1000 Hard -10 100 1000 Hard 0 50 1000 Hard 0 70 1000 Hard 0 100 1000 Hard 10 50 1000 Hard 10 70 1000 Hard 10 100 1000 Hard 20 50 1000 Hard 20 70 1000 Hard 20 100 1000 Hard 35 50 1000 Hard 35 70 1000 Hard 35 100 1000 Soft -10 50 1000 Soft -10 70 1000 Soft -10 100 1000 Soft 0 50 1000 Soft 0 70 1000 Soft 0 100 1000 Soft 10 50 1000 Soft 10 70 1000 Soft 10 100 1000 Soft 20 50 1000 Soft 20 70 1000 Soft 20 100 1000 Soft 35 50 1000 Soft 35 70 1000 Soft 35 100 2000 Hard -10 50 2000 Hard -10 70 2000 Hard -10 100 2000 Hard 0 50 2000 Hard 0 70 2000 Hard 0 100 2000 Hard 10 50 2000 Hard 10 70 2000 Hard 10 100 2000 Hard 20 50 2000 Hard 20 70 2000 Hard 20 100 2000 Hard 35 50 2000 Hard 35 70 2000 Hard 35 100 2000 Soft -10 50 2000 Soft -10 70 2000 Soft -10 100 2000 Soft 0 50 2000 Soft 0 70 2000 Soft 0 100 2000 Soft 10 50 2000 Soft 10 70 2000 Soft 10 100 2000 Soft 20 50 2000 Soft 20 70 2000 Soft 20 100 2000 Soft 35 50 2000 Soft 35 70
45.4 46.5 48.1 47.5 49.1 50.5 49.7 50.8 51.7 50.7 51.3 51.6 49.4 49.1 48.9 39.7 40.7 42.6 41.9 43.7 45.2 44.4 45.6 46.5 45.4 46.1 46.4 44.1 43.8 43.5 35.2 37.4 39.5 38.8 40.6 42.1 41.0 42.2 43.0 41.5 41.8 41.8 38.6 38.5 38.9 27.9 30.4 33.0 32.2 34.3 36.1 34.9 36.2 37.1 35.6 35.9 35.8 32.3 32.0 32.4 24.9 27.5 30.1 29.1 31.2 32.8 31.3 32.3 32.8 30.7 30.6 30.3 26.6 27.4 28.7 15.9 19.2 22.6 21.4 24.1 26.1 24.4 25.6 26.3 23.9 23.8 23.4 18.7 19.4
-5.4 -4.3 -2.7 -3.3 -1.7 -0.3 -1.1 0.9 -0.1 0.5 0.8 -1.4 -1.7 -1.9 -5.9 -4.8 -2.9 -3.7 -1.9 -0.3 -1.2 1.0 -0.1 0.5 0.8 -1.5 -1.8 -2.0 -7.0 -4.8 -2.7 -3.4 -1.6 -0.1 -1.2 0.8 -0.7 -0.4 -0.4 -3.6 -3.7 -3.3 -8.4 -5.8 -3.2 -4.1 -1.9 -0.1 -1.3 0.9 -0.7 -0.4 -0.4 -4.0 -4.2 -3.9 -7.4 -4.7 -2.2 -3.2 -1.1 0.5 -0.9 0.6 -1.6 -1.6 -1.9 -5.7 -4.9 -3.6 -9.8 -6.4 -3.1 -4.3 -1.6 0.4 -1.2 0.7 -1.7 -1.8 -2.2 -7.0 -6.3
56.1 56.8 57.4 57.1 57.7 58.0 57.7 57.9 58.0 57.6 57.6 57.7 56.8 57.0 57.2 48.6 49.5 50.4 50.1 50.8 51.3 50.9 51.3 51.4 50.9 50.9 50.9 49.9 49.9 50.2 48.9 49.9 50.8 50.4 51.0 51.4 50.9 51.2 51.3 50.6 50.6 50.6 49.6 49.9 50.3 40.4 41.6 42.8 42.3 43.3 43.9 43.3 43.7 43.8 43.0 43.0 42.9 41.4 41.7 42.2 41.1 42.3 43.4 42.9 43.6 44.1 43.3 43.5 43.5 42.4 42.5 42.7 41.5 42.1 42.9 32.2 33.4 34.8 34.2 35.2 36.0 35.1 35.4 35.5 34.3 34.2 34.2 32.8 33.3
-1.9 -1.1 -0.5 -0.8 -0.3 0.1 -0.3 0.1 -0.3 -0.3 -0.2 -1.1 -0.9 -0.7 -2.6 -1.8 -0.9 -1.2 -0.5 0.0 -0.3 0.2 -0.3 -0.3 -0.3 -1.4 -1.3 -1.1 -2.3 -1.3 -0.4 -0.8 -0.2 0.3 -0.3 0.1 -0.6 -0.6 -0.5 -1.6 -1.3 -0.8 -3.3 -2.1 -0.9 -1.3 -0.4 0.2 -0.4 0.2 -0.7 -0.7 -0.8 -2.3 -2.0 -1.5 -2.4 -1.1 0.0 -0.6 0.1 0.6 -0.2 0.1 -1.0 -0.9 -0.7 -1.9 -1.3 -0.6 -3.2 -2.0 -0.6 -1.2 -0.2 0.6 -0.3 0.1 -1.1 -1.2 -1.2 -2.6 -2.1
AT5414/2 Rev 1
TABLE A6.2
2000
Soft
35
100 20.8
-4.9
2000
Soft
35
100 34.1
-1.3
AT5414/2 Rev 1
TABLE A6.2
APPENDIX 7: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source
Acoustic Technology
Octave Band Centre Frequency, Hz Source Source - Rec Receiver Dist, m Height, m Height, m Overall dB(A) 31.5 120 77 77 77 70 70 70 64 63 63 56 55 54 73 74 74 67 67 67 59 60 60 49 49 49 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k
Resultant Lw, dB(A) Corrected for 500Hz ground effects
Ground
FLAT SOUND POWER LEVEL SPECTRUM Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10
113 113 113 113 113 113 113 113 113 Sound Pressure Level: 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 69 65 71 71 71 71 71 71 71 69 65 71 71 71 71 71 71 70 69 65 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 62 53 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 62 53 65 65 65 65 65 65 64 62 53 60 60 60 60 60 59 58 54 37 59 59 59 59 59 59 57 53 36 59 59 59 59 59 58 57 52 36 53 53 53 53 52 52 49 37 -5 53 53 53 52 52 51 48 37 -6 52 52 52 51 51 50 47 36 -7 71 71 67 60 65 68 68 66 62 71 71 66 63 67 68 68 66 62 71 71 67 64 66 68 67 66 62 65 65 60 52 58 61 61 59 50 65 65 59 55 60 62 61 59 50 65 65 61 57 60 62 61 59 50 60 60 53 44 51 55 54 49 33 59 59 52 48 53 55 54 49 33 59 59 54 50 53 55 54 49 33 53 53 42 36 43 46 43 32 -10 53 53 42 40 45 46 43 32 -10 52 52 45 42 45 46 43 32 -10
119 119 119 118 118 118 118 117 117 117 117 116 115 116 116 114 115 115 113 114 114 111 111 111
121 120 120 121 120 120 122 119 119 121 119 117 cont/
TABLE A7.1: Results of Noise Model for Point Source
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Octave Band Centre Frequency, Hz Source Source - Rec Receiver Height, m Dist, m Height, m Overall dB(A) 31.5 120 77 77 77 70 70 70 63 63 63 55 55 54 74 74 74 67 67 67 60 60 60 49 50 50 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k
Ground
119 119 119 118 118 118 117 117 117 117 117 115 116 116 116 115 115 115 114 114 114 111 112 112
120 119 119 120 118 118 119 117 117 118 116 115 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
119 119 119 118 118 118 117 117 117 116 116 115 116 116 116 115 115 115 114 114 114 111 112 112
120 119 119 120 118 118 119 117 117 117 115 115 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
119 119 119 118 118 118 117 117 117 115 115 115 115 116 116 115 115 115 114 114 114 111 112 112
120 119 119 120 118 118 119 117 117 117 115 115
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
MEAN INDUSTRY SOUND POWER LEVEL SP Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10
120 120 120 119 119 119 120 119 119 120 120 119 116 116 116 115 115 116 115 115 115 114 114 114
121 120 121 122 120 121 123 120 120 123 121 120 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 120 119 118 116 116 117 116 116 116 115 116 116 114 115 115
120 119 120 120 119 119 120 119 119 121 119 118 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 116 117 117 116 116 117 115 116 116 114 115 115
121 120 120 121 119 120 120 119 119 120 118 118 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 118 118 116 117 117 116 116 117 115 116 116 114 115 115
121 120 120 121 119 120 120 119 119 119 118 118
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
HUMPED SOUND POWER LEVEL SPECTRUM Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10
120 120 120 119 119 119 120 119 119 120 119 118 116 116 116 115 115 115 114 115 115 112 113 113
121 120 120 122 120 120 123 120 120 122 120 119 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 116 116 117 115 116 116 115 116 116 113 114 114
120 119 120 120 119 119 120 119 119 120 119 118 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 118 118 116 117 117 115 116 116 115 116 116 113 114 115
120 120 120 120 119 119 120 119 119 119 118 118 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 118 118 116 116 117 115 116 116 115 116 116 113 114 115
120 119 120 120 119 119 120 119 119 119 117 118
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Octave Band Centre Frequency, Hz Source Source - Rec Receiver Dist, m Height, m Height, m Overall dB(A) 31.5 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k
Resultant Lw, dB(A) No Corrected for 500Hz correction ground effects
Ground
SLOPED DOWN SOUND POWER LEVEL SPEC 120 Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 78 78 78 71 71 71 66 65 65 58 58 57 73 74 74 67 67 67 60 60 61 50 51 51
120 120 120 119 119 119 120 119 119 120 120 119 115 116 116 115 115 115 114 114 115 112 113 113
121 120 120 121 120 120 122 120 120 122 120 119 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 120 119 118 116 116 117 115 116 116 114 115 116 113 114 115
120 119 120 120 119 119 120 118 119 120 119 118 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 118 116 116 117 115 116 116 115 116 116 113 114 115
120 119 120 120 119 119 120 119 119 119 118 118 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
120 120 120 119 119 119 119 119 119 118 118 118 116 116 117 115 116 116 115 116 116 113 114 115
120 119 120 120 119 119 120 119 119 119 118 118
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Octave Band Centre Frequency, Hz Source Source - Rec Receiver Dist, m Height, m Height, m Overall dB(A) 31.5 120 76 76 75 68 68 68 61 60 60 51 51 50 72 72 72 65 65 65 57 57 57 45 46 46 93 51 51 51 45 45 45 40 40 39 34 33 32 51 51 51 45 45 45 40 40 39 34 33 32 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k
Ground
SLOPED UP SOUND POWER LEVEL SPECTR Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Hard Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft Soft 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 50 50 50 100 100 100 200 200 200 500 500 500 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10 2 4 10
96 99 102 105 108 111 114 117 Sound Pressure Level: 54 57 60 63 66 69 71 69 54 57 60 63 66 69 71 69 54 57 60 63 66 69 71 69 48 51 54 57 60 62 63 58 48 51 54 57 60 62 63 58 48 51 54 57 60 62 63 57 43 46 49 52 55 56 55 41 43 45 48 51 54 56 54 40 42 45 48 51 53 55 54 40 36 39 42 45 47 47 38 -1 36 39 42 44 46 46 38 -1 35 38 41 43 45 45 37 -2 54 53 50 57 63 66 68 66 54 52 52 59 63 66 68 66 54 53 53 59 63 66 68 66 48 46 41 50 57 59 60 55 48 45 44 52 57 59 60 55 48 47 46 52 57 59 60 54 43 39 33 43 50 52 51 37 43 38 37 46 50 52 51 37 42 41 39 46 50 52 51 37 36 28 25 35 41 41 33 -6 36 28 29 37 41 41 33 -6 35 31 31 37 41 41 33 -6
118 118 118 116 116 116 115 114 114 113 113 112 114 114 114 113 113 113 111 111 111 107 108 108
120 119 119 120 118 118 119 116 116 117 115 114 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
118 118 117 116 116 116 114 114 114 113 112 111 114 115 114 113 113 113 111 111 111 108 108 108
119 118 117 118 116 116 116 114 114 115 112 111 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
118 118 118 116 116 116 114 114 114 112 111 111 114 115 115 113 113 113 111 111 111 108 108 108
119 118 118 118 116 116 116 114 114 114 111 111 cont/
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
Ground
117 117 118 116 116 116 114 114 114 111 111 111 114 114 115 113 113 113 111 111 111 107 108 108
119 117 118 118 116 116 116 114 114 113 111 111
AT 5414/2 Rev 1
KEY: How to View the Calculation Summary Sheets

Long Model GENERAL SUMMARY
OF THE Short MODEL SET UP AND GRAPHICAL REPRESENTATION OF MODELLING CONCEPT Measurement at 1.5 m height and 50,100,150 m
Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10
Measure Error LpA Calc - LpA True source Back at distances from centre, m, TABULATED VALUES FOR THE distance, m calc Lw Measure- (assume 50% "soft" ground), ment (to side ofCALCULATED ERRORS 4m using receiver height building) 500 Hz points 100 250 500 1000 2000 50 500 1 short 7.9 -2.1 -2 -1.2 -0.9 50 500 1 long 2.7 -7.4 -7.3 -6.5 -6.2 50 500 Average 6.0 -3.9 -3.9 -3.1 -2.8 50 Full 1 short 1.9 -8.4 -8.4 -7.5 -6.6 50 Full 1 long 2.7 -7.6 -7.6 -6.7 -5.9 50 Full Average 2.3 -7.9 -7.9 -7.1 -6.2 100 500 1 short 5.8 -4.2 -4.1 -3.3 -3 100 500 1 long 6.2 -3.8 -3.7 -2.9 -2.6 -4 -3.9 -3.1 -2.8 100 500 Average 6 100 Full 1 short 5.7 -4.7 -4.8 -4.1 -3.5 100 Full 1 long 6.2 -4.2 -4.3 -3.7 -3.1 100 Full Average 5.9 -4.4 -4.5 -3.9 -3.3 150 500 1 short 7.4 -2.6 -2.5 -1.7 -1.4 150 500 1 long 7.4 -2.6 -2.5 -1.7 -1.4 150 500 Average 7.4 -2.6 -2.5 -1.7 -1.4 150 Full 1 short 7.7 -2.8 -3.1 -2.5 -2.2 150 Full 1 long 7.7 -2.8 -3.1 -2.5 -2.2 150 Full Average 7.7 -2.8 -3.1 -2.5 -2.2
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lw true
Lp GRAPHICAL DEPICTION OFcontours THE (true) CALCULATION PROCEDURE G=0 at 50,100,150m (4m and 1.5m) XL Lp meas (true) Lp contours (calc)
G=0.5
Lw calc G=0.5
Calculation configuration:CALCULATION SUMMARY OF
SET UP buildings 10 m high AND CALCULATION METHODS AND PARAMETERS Model using a falling spectrum USED
Lw = 90 dB for the point source Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5)
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1050
1050
1050
1000
1000
1000
950
950
950
900
900
900
850
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
> -99.0 dB > 22.0 dB > 24.0 dB > 25.0 dB > 25.5 dB > 26.0 dB > 26.5 dB > 27.0 dB > 27.5 dB > 28.0 dB > 29.0 dB > 30.0 dB
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
850
850
800
800
800
750
Acoustic Technology
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1050
CONTOUR PLOT OF THE REAL SITUATION
CONTOUR PLOT OF THE ASSUMED SITUATION
1100
1100
1100
1100
SUMMARY SHEET A7.1: Point Source Modelled as a Point Source

Model + Point Source Lw true G=0.5 G=0 or G=1 calc at 100m Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true) Lp contours (calc)
+ Point Source
Point Source at 2 m height Measurements at 1.5 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between the source and the measurements has been set at 100 m.
XL Lw calc G=0.5
Summary of Results Calculation configuration

Back calc Lw using full True ground octave or 500 Hz cover Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Spectrum type Fall Fall Fall Fall Hump Hump Hump Hump Rising Rising Rising Rising Industrial Industrial Industrial Industrial
-60 1060 -40 1040
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 50 0.1 0.2 4.4 4.0 0.4 -0.1 4.2 3.6 1.9 0.2 5.0 3.2 0.3 -0.1 4.2 3.3
140 160
Models using different types of spectrum Back-calculation done with XL for hard ground (G = 0) Assumed Ground Cover for a single frequency (500 Hz) and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) True Ground Cover
100 0.1 0.2 4.4 4.0 0.5 0.0 4.3 3.6 0.9 0.2 4.0 3.3 0.3 -0.2 4.2 3.2
180
250 0.6 0.2 4.9 4.0 0.9 -0.1 4.7 3.6 -0.4 0.2 2.7 3.3 1.0 -0.1 4.9 3.2
200 220
500 0.7 0.2 5.0 4.1 0.9 0.0 4.7 3.8 -2.0 0.2 1.1 3.4 1.1 -0.2 5.0 3.0
240 260
1000 2000 1.1 2.0 0.2 0.2 5.4 6.3 4.2 4.3 1.1 1.4 0.0 0.0 4.9 5.2 4.0 4.3 -3.3 -4.7 0.2 0.2 -0.2 -1.6 3.5 3.7 1.8 3.0 -0.1 -0.1 5.7 6.9 2.9 2.5
280 1060
1060 -60 -40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280 1060
1040
1040
1020
1020
1020
1000
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
True model Point Source (reality)
820
Assume Point Source (calculated)
Acoustic Technology
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1020
1040

Model + Point Source + Point Source G=0 or G=1 calc at 50m Lw true G=0.5 Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true) Lp contours (calc)
Point Source at 2 m height Measurements at 1.5 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between the source and the measurements has been set at 50 m. Summary of Results
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, (assume Back calc Lw 50% "soft" ground), receiver using True height 4m ground full octave or 500 Hz cover 50 100 250 500 1000 2000 Hard 500 -0.4 -0.5 -0.1 0.0 0.3 1.1 Hard Full 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Soft 500 3.6 3.5 3.9 4.0 4.3 5.1 Soft Full 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.8 3.8 3.8 Hard 500 -0.2 -0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 Hard Full -0.1 0.0 -0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 Soft 500 3.4 3.4 3.7 3.7 3.8 4.0 Soft Full 3.3 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.8 Hard 500 0.1 -1.0 -2.4 -4.0 -5.4 -6.9 Hard Full 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 Soft 500 3.2 2.1 0.7 -0.9 -2.3 -3.8 Soft Full 3.2 3.3 3.3 3.3 3.4 3.5 Hard 500 -0.2 -0.3 0.3 0.4 1.0 2.1 Hard Full -0.1 -0.2 -0.1 -0.2 -0.1 -0.1 Soft 500 3.5 3.4 4.0 4.1 4.7 5.8 Soft Full 3.2 3.1 3.1 2.9 2.8 2.5
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 1060 1040
XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration Models using different types of spectrum Back-calculation done with XL for hard ground (G = 0) Assumed Ground Cover for a single frequency (500 Hz) and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G=0.5) True Ground Cover
-60 1060 -40 1040
-60 1060
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280 1060
1040
1020
1020
1020
1000
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
Acoustic Technology
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1020
1040

Point Source at 2 m height Measurements at 4 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between the source and the measurements has been set at 100 m. Summary of Results
Back calc Lw True using ground full octave or cover 500 Hz 50 Hard 500 0.3 Hard Full 0.2 Soft 500 5.4 Soft Full 4.6 Hard 500 0.4 Hard Full -0.1 Soft 500 5.3 Soft Full 4.6 Hard 500 1.9 Hard Full 0.2 Soft 500 5.1 Soft Full 3.3 Hard 500 0.3 Hard Full -0.1 Soft 500 5.0 Soft Full 4.1
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140
XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration Models using different types of spectrum Back-calculation done with XL for hard ground (G = 0) Assumed Ground Cover for a single frequency (500 Hz) and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) True Ground Cover
-60 1060 -40 1040
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 100 0.2 0.2 5.4 4.6 0.5 0.0 5.4 4.8 0.9 0.2 4.1 3.5 0.3 -0.2 5.0 4.1
160 180
250 -0.3 0.2 5.9 4.6 0.9 -0.1 5.8 4.9 -0.4 0.2 2.8 3.6 1.0 -0.1 5.7 4.1
200 220
500 -0.7 0.2 6.0 4.9 0.9 0.0 5.8 5.3 -2.0 0.2 1.2 3.9 1.1 -0.2 5.8 3.9
240 260
1000 -1.3 0.2 6.4 5.1 1.1 0.0 6.0 5.8 -3.3 0.2 -0.1 4.3 1.8 -0.1 6.5 3.8
280 1060 1040
2000 -1.6 0.2 7.3 5.3 1.4 0.0 6.3 6.5 -4.7 0.2 -1.5 5.0 3.0 -0.1 7.7 3.3
-60 1060 -40 1040
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
1020
1020
1000
1000
980
960
940
920
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
900
900
920
920
940
940
960
960
980
980
1000
1020
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
> -99.0 d > 35.0 d > 40.0 d > 45.0 d > 50.0 d > 55.0 d > 60.0 d > 65.0 d > 70.0 d > 75.0 d > 80.0 d > 85.0 d
880
860
840
820
820
820
840
840
860
860
880
880
Acoustic Technology

Point Source at 2 m height Measurements at 4 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between the source and the measurements has been set at 50 m. Summary of Results
XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration
-60 1060 -40 -20 1040
Back calc Lw using True ground full octave or cover 500 Hz Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 50 0.1 0.2 4.4 4.3 -0.2 -0.1 4.3 4.5 0.1 0.2 3.3 3.2 -0.2 -0.1 4.2 4.0
140 160
Models using different types of spectrum Back-calculation done with XL for hard ground (G = 0) Assumed Ground Cover for a single frequency (500 Hz) and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) True Ground Cover
100 0.0 0.2 4.3 4.3 -0.2 0.0 4.3 4.6 -1.0 0.2 2.2 3.3 -0.3 -0.2 4.1 3.9
180
250 -0.5 0.2 4.7 4.3 0.1 -0.1 4.6 4.7 -2.4 0.2 0.8 3.4 0.3 -0.1 4.7 3.9
200 220
500 -0.9 0.2 4.8 4.5 0.1 0.0 4.6 5.1 -4.0 0.2 -0.8 3.4 0.4 -0.2 4.8 3.7
240 260
1000 2000 -1.5 -1.8 0.2 0.2 5.1 5.9 4.7 4.8 0.2 0.4 0.0 0.0 4.7 4.9 5.5 6.1 -5.4 -6.9 0.2 0.2 -2.2 -3.7 3.7 4.0 1.0 2.1 -0.1 -0.1 5.4 6.5 3.6 3.1
280 1060 1060 -60 -40 1040 1040
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280 1060
1020
1020
1020
1000
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
Acoustic Technology
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1020
1040

Point Source at 4 m height Measurements at 1.5 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between the source and measurements has been set at 100 m. Summary of Results
Back calc Lw using True ground full octave or 500 Hz cover Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
-60 1060 -40 1040
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 50 -0.1 0.2 4.9 4.6 0.2 0.0 4.7 4.5 1.5 0.2 4.7 3.3 0.0 -0.2 4.5 4.1
140 160
100 -0.4 0.2 4.6 4.6 -0.1 -0.1 4.4 4.6 0.0 0.2 3.2 3.3 -0.2 -0.1 4.3 4.2
180
250 -0.8 0.2 4.2 4.8 -0.5 0.0 4.0 4.9 -2.3 0.2 0.9 3.4 -0.6 -0.2 3.9 4.2
200 220
500 -1.2 0.2 3.8 4.9 -1.1 -0.1 3.4 5.0 -4.3 0.2 -1.1 3.6 -0.8 -0.1 3.7 4.2
240 260
1000 2000 -1.6 -1.8 0.2 0.2 3.4 3.2 5.2 5.4 -1.7 -2.4 0.0 0.0 2.8 2.1 5.5 6.0 -6.6 -8.9 0.2 0.2 -3.4 -5.7 3.7 4.3 -1.1 -1.0 -0.1 -0.1 3.4 3.5 4.1 3.6
280 1060 1060 -60 -40 1040 1040
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
1020
1020
1000
1000
980
960
940
920
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
900
900
920
920
940
940
960
960
980
980
1000
1020
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
880
860
840
820
820
820
840
840
860
860
880
880
Acoustic Technology

Model + Point Source + Point Source G=0 or G=1 calc at 50m XL Lw calc G=0.5 Summary of Results
Back calc Lw True using ground full octave or cover 500 Hz Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full Hard 500 Hard Full Soft 500 Soft Full
-20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Lw true
G=0.5
Point Source at 4 m height Measurements at 1.5 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between the source and measurements has been set at 50 m.
-60 1060 -40 1040
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 50 -0.3 0.2 4.2 4.3 -0.1 0.0 4.1 3.9 0.0 0.2 3.1 3.3 -0.2 -0.2 3.9 3.9
140
Calculation configuration Models using different types of spectrum Back-calculation done with XL for hard ground (G = 0) Assumed Ground Cover for a single frequency (500 Hz) and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) True Ground Cover
100 -0.6 0.2 3.9 4.3 -0.4 -0.1 3.8 3.9 -1.5 0.2 1.6 3.3 -0.4 -0.1 3.7 4.0
160 180
250 -1.0 0.2 3.5 4.5 -0.8 0.0 3.4 4.1 -3.8 0.2 -0.7 3.3 -0.8 -0.2 3.3 4.0
200 220
500 -1.4 0.2 3.1 4.5 -1.4 -0.1 2.8 4.2 -5.8 0.2 -2.7 3.5 -1.0 -0.1 3.1 4.0
240
1000 2000 -1.8 -2.0 0.2 0.2 2.7 2.5 4.8 4.9 -2.0 -2.7 0.0 0.0 2.2 1.5 4.6 5.0 -8.1 -10.4 0.2 0.2 -5.0 -7.3 3.6 4.1 -1.3 -1.2 -0.1 -0.1 2.8 2.9 3.8 3.3
260 280 1060 1060 -60 -40 1040 1040
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280 1060
1020
1020
1020
1000
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
Acoustic Technology
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1020
1040

Point Source at 4 m height Measurements at 4 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between source and measure has been set at 100 m. Summary of Results
Back calc Lw True using Spectrum ground full octave or cover type 500 Hz Fall Hard 500 Fall Hard Full Fall Soft 500 Fall Soft Full Hump Hard 500 Hump Hard Full Hump Soft 500 Hump Soft Full Rising Hard 500 Rising Hard Full Rising Soft 500 Rising Soft Full Industrial Hard 500 Industrial Hard Full Industrial Soft 500 Industrial Soft Full
-60 1060 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1040
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4 m 50 -0.1 0.2 3.5 3.5 0.2 0.0 3.3 3.1 1.5 0.2 4.5 3.2 0.0 -0.2 3.3 2.8
140
100 -0.4 0.2 3.2 3.4 -0.1 -0.1 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.2 3.0 3.2 -0.2 -0.1 3.1 2.8
160 180
250 -0.8 0.2 2.8 3.5 -0.5 0.0 2.6 3.1 -2.3 0.2 0.7 3.2 -0.6 -0.2 2.7 2.8
200 220
500 -1.2 0.2 2.4 3.5 -1.1 -0.1 2.0 3.1 -4.3 0.2 -1.3 3.3 -0.8 -0.1 2.5 2.7
240
1000 2000 -1.6 -1.8 0.2 0.2 2.0 1.8 3.5 3.5 -1.7 -2.4 0.0 0.0 1.4 0.7 3.2 3.2 -6.6 -8.9 0.2 0.2 -3.6 -5.9 3.2 3.3 -1.1 -1.0 -0.1 -0.1 2.2 2.3 2.6 2.3
260 280 1060 1060 -60 -40 1040 1040
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280 1060
1020
1020
1020
1000
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
Acoustic Technology
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1020
1040

Point Source at 4 m height Measurements at 4 m height Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m For back calculation, the distance between source and measure has been set at 50 m. Summary of Results
Back calc Lw True using Spectrum ground full octave or cover type 500 Hz Fall Hard 500 Fall Hard Full Fall Soft 500 Fall Soft Full Hump Hard 500 Hump Hard Full Hump Soft 500 Hump Soft Full Rising Hard 500 Rising Hard Full Rising Soft 500 Rising Soft Full Industrial Hard 500 Industrial Hard Full Industrial Soft 500 Industrial Soft Full
-60 1060 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 1040
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 50 -0.3 0.2 3.1 3.4 -0.1 0.0 3.0 3.0 0.0 0.2 3.0 3.2 -0.2 -0.2 3.0 2.7
140
100 -0.6 0.2 2.8 3.4 -0.4 -0.1 2.7 3.0 -1.5 0.2 1.5 3.2 -0.4 -0.1 2.8 2.8
160 180
250 -1.0 0.2 2.4 3.4 -0.8 0.0 2.3 3.1 -3.8 0.2 -0.8 3.2 -0.8 -0.2 2.4 2.7
200 220
500 -1.4 0.2 2.0 3.3 -1.4 -0.1 1.7 3.0 -5.8 0.2 -2.8 3.2 -1.0 -0.1 2.2 2.6
240
1000 2000 -1.8 -2.0 0.2 0.2 1.6 1.4 3.4 3.3 -2.0 -2.7 0.0 0.0 1.1 0.4 3.1 3.2 -8.1 -10.4 0.2 0.2 -5.1 -7.4 3.2 3.3 -1.3 -1.2 -0.1 -0.1 1.9 2.0 2.5 2.2
260 280 1060 1060 -60 -40 1040 1040
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280 1060
1020
1020
1020
1000
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
Acoustic Technology
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1020
1040
APPENDIX 8: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Building With Even Radiation
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A8.1: Building Modelled by a Building

Model Long Short Measurements at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150*80*10
Measure source distance (to side of building) 50 50 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 150 150
-140 -120 -100 1040
Long Short
Back calc MeasureLw using ment full octave points or 500 Hz? 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20
1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average
40 60 80 100 120 140
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, Calculation configuration: (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 10 m high building 100 250 500 1000 2000 -1.0 -1.6 -1.7 -2.3 -2.3 Assume 10 m high building 0.8 0.2 0.1 -0.5 -0.5 -0.2 -0.8 -0.9 -1.5 -1.5 Model using a Falling Spectrum -1.1 -0.8 -0.4 -0.6 -0.5 Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.5 0.5 -0.5 -0.2 0.1 -0.1 0.0 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), 0.3 -0.3 -0.4 -1.0 -1.0 without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full 1.0 0.4 0.3 -0.3 -0.3 spectrum 0.6 0.0 -0.1 -0.7 -0.7 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm 0.3 0.4 0.7 0.5 0.5 Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect 0.9 0.3 0.2 -0.4 -0.4 1.2 0.6 0.5 -0.1 -0.1 1.0 0.4 0.3 -0.3 -0.3 0.2 0.3 0.7 0.5 0.5 0.6 0.7 1.0 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.6 0.6
160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040 1040 1040 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360
1020
1000
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
800
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
Building Sources on each faade (reality)
Assume Building (calculated)
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000
1020
1020
1020
SUMMARY SHEET A8.2: Building Modelled by One Point Source

-140 -120 -100 1040
Back calc MeasureLw using ment full octave points or 500 Hz 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full
-80 -60 -40 -20 0 20
40 60 80 100 120 140
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, Calculation configuration: (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 10 m high building 100 250 500 1000 2000 1.5 -2.2 -3.0 -3.6 -3.5 Assume Point Source at 5 m height 3.5 -0.2 -1.0 -1.6 -1.5 2.4 -1.3 -2.1 -2.7 -2.6 Model using a Falling Spectrum 1.3 -1.8 -2.3 -2.5 -2.2 Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade 3.4 0.2 -0.3 -0.5 -0.2 2.2 -0.9 -1.4 -1.6 -1.3 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), 2.8 -0.9 -1.7 -2.3 -2.2 without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full 3.5 -0.2 -1.0 -1.6 -1.5 spectrum 3.1 -0.6 -1.4 -2.0 -1.9 2.4 -0.8 -1.3 -1.4 -1.2 Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm 3.4 0.2 -0.3 -0.5 -0.2 Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed 2.9 -0.3 -0.8 -1.0 -0.7 ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect 3.3 -0.4 -1.2 -1.8 -1.7 3.6 -0.1 -0.9 -1.5 -1.4 3.5 -0.2 -1.0 -1.6 -1.5 3.3 0.2 -0.3 -0.5 -0.2 3.4 0.2 -0.3 -0.5 -0.2 3.3 0.2 -0.3 -0.5 -0.2
160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 1000 1020 1040 1000 1020 1040 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040 1000 1020
1000
1020
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980

Measure Back calc Measure- source Lw using ment distance full points (to side of octave or building) 500 Hz 50 50 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 150 150
-140 -120 -100 -80 1040
500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full
-60 -40 -20 0
20 40 60 80 100 120
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, Calculation configuration: (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver 5 m high building height 4m 100 250 500 1000 2000 Assume Point Source at 2.5 m height 1.5 -2.1 -2.8 -3.2 -3.3 3.1 -0.5 -1.2 -1.6 -1.7 Model using a Falling Spectrum 2.2 -1.4 -2.1 -2.5 -2.6 1.8 -1.3 -1.6 -1.5 -1.3 Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade 3.8 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.7 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), 2.7 -0.4 -0.7 -0.6 -0.4 without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full 2.6 -1.0 -1.7 -2.1 -2.2 spectrum 3.4 -0.2 -0.9 -1.3 -1.4 3.0 -0.6 -1.3 -1.7 -1.8 Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm 2.8 -0.3 -0.6 -0.5 -0.3 3.9 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.7 Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect 3.3 0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.2 3.1 -0.5 -1.2 -1.6 -1.7 3.4 -0.2 -0.9 -1.3 -1.4 3.3 -0.3 -1.0 -1.4 -1.5 2.9 -0.3 -0.6 -0.5 -0.3 3.9 0.7 0.4 0.5 0.7 3.4 0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.2
140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 380 1000 1020 1040 1000 1020 1040 -140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040 1000 1020
1000
1020
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980

Measure Back calc MeasureError LpA true - LpA calc - source Lw using ment at distances from centre, m, distance (assume 50% "soft" ground), full points (to side of octave or receiver height 4m building) 500 Hz 100 250 500 1000 2000 50 500 1 short 1.6 -2.2 -3.2 -4.0 -4.5 50 500 1 long 3.4 -0.4 -1.4 -2.2 -2.7 50 500 Average 2.4 -1.4 -2.4 -3.2 -3.7 50 Full 1 short 1.8 -1.3 -1.8 -1.7 -1.5 50 Full 1 long 3.2 0.0 -0.6 -0.7 -0.5 50 Full Average 2.4 -0.7 -1.2 -1.2 -1.0 100 500 1 short 2.9 -0.9 -1.9 -2.7 -3.2 100 500 1 long 3.7 -0.1 -1.1 -1.9 -2.4 100 500 Average 3.3 -0.5 -1.5 -2.3 -2.8 100 Full 1 short 2.9 -0.3 -0.8 -0.7 -0.5 100 Full 1 long 3.2 0.0 -0.6 -0.7 -0.5 100 Full Average 3.0 -0.2 -0.7 -0.7 -0.5 150 500 1 short 3.6 -0.2 -1.2 -2.0 -2.5 150 500 1 long 3.9 0.1 -0.9 -1.7 -2.2 150 500 Average 3.8 0.0 -1.0 -1.8 -2.3 150 Full 1 short 3.1 -0.1 -0.6 -0.7 -0.5 150 Full 1 long 3.2 0.0 -0.6 -0.7 -0.5 150 Full Average 3.1 -0.1 -0.6 -0.7 -0.5
-140 -120 -100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040 1040
Calculation configuration: 10 m high building Assume Point Source at 5 m height Model using a Humped Spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
1000 1020 1040
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000 1020 1040
1020
1020

-140 -120 -100 -80 1040
Back calc Lw using full octave or 500 Hz 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full
-60 -40 -20 0 20
Measurement points 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average
40 60 80 100 120 140
Error LpA true - LpA calc at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 100 250 500 1000 2000 1.7 -2.0 -2.9 -3.5 -4.2 3.4 -0.3 -1.2 -1.8 -2.5 2.5 -1.2 -2.1 -2.7 -3.4 1.5 -1.7 -2.0 -1.9 -1.8 3.6 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 2.4 -0.8 -1.1 -1.0 -0.9 2.9 -0.8 -1.7 -2.3 -3.0 3.7 0.0 -0.9 -1.5 -2.2 3.3 -0.4 -1.3 -1.9 -2.6 2.5 -0.7 -1.0 -0.9 -0.8 3.6 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 3.0 -0.2 -0.5 -0.4 -0.3 3.5 -0.2 -1.1 -1.7 -2.4 3.8 0.1 -0.8 -1.4 -2.1 3.7 0.0 -0.9 -1.5 -2.2 3.3 0.1 -0.1 0.0 0.2 3.6 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.2 3.4 0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.2
160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040
Calculation configuration: 5 m high building Assume Point Source at 2.5 m height Model using a Humped Spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
1000 1020 1040
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000 1020 1040
1020
1020

-140 -120 -100 -80 1040
Back calc MeasureError LpA true - LpA calc Lw using at distances from centre, m, ment full octave points (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4 m or 500 Hz 100 250 500 1000 2000 500 1 short 1.4 -2.2 -2.9 -3.4 -3.0 500 1 long 3.2 -0.4 -1.1 -1.6 -1.2 500 Average 2.2 -1.4 -2.1 -2.6 -2.2 Full 1 short 1.8 -1.3 -1.8 -2.0 -1.8 Full 1 long 3.5 0.3 -0.2 -0.3 0.0 Full Average 2.6 -0.6 -1.1 -1.2 -1.0 500 1 short 2.8 -0.8 -1.5 -2.0 -1.6 500 1 long 3.5 -0.1 -0.8 -1.3 -0.9 500 Average 3.1 -0.5 -1.2 -1.7 -1.3 Full 1 short 2.8 -0.3 -0.8 -1.0 -0.8 Full 1 long 3.5 0.3 -0.2 -0.3 0.0 Full Average 3.1 0.0 -0.5 -0.7 -0.4 500 1 short 3.3 -0.3 -1.0 -1.5 -1.1 500 1 long 3.6 0.0 -0.7 -1.2 -0.8 500 Average 3.5 -0.1 -0.8 -1.3 -0.9 Full 1 short 3.0 -0.2 -0.7 -0.8 -0.6 Full 1 long 3.5 0.3 -0.2 -0.3 0.0 Full Average 3.2 0.0 -0.5 -0.6 -0.3
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040
Calculation configuration: 10 m high building Assume Point Source at 5 m height Model using a Industrial Spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
1000 1020 1040
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000 1020 1040
1020
1020

Model Long Short Measurements at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m , 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150*80*5
-140 -120 -100 -80 1040
Back calc MeasureError LpA true - LpA calc Lw using at distances from centre, m, ment full octave points (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4 m or 500 Hz 100 250 500 1000 2000 500 1 short 1.5 -2.0 -2.6 -2.8 -2.7 500 1 long 3.2 -0.3 -0.9 -1.1 -1.0 500 Average 2.3 -1.2 -1.8 -2.0 -1.9 Full 1 short 1.4 -1.8 -2.0 -1.9 -1.8 Full 1 long 3.3 0.1 -0.2 0.0 0.0 Full Average 2.2 -1.0 -1.2 -1.1 -1.0 500 1 short 2.7 -0.8 -1.4 -1.6 -1.5 500 1 long 3.4 -0.1 -0.7 -0.9 -0.8 500 Average 3.0 -0.5 -1.1 -1.3 -1.2 Full 1 short 2.4 -0.8 -1.0 -0.9 -0.8 Full 1 long 3.3 0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 Full Average 2.8 -0.3 -0.6 -0.5 -0.4 500 1 short 3.2 -0.3 -0.9 -1.1 -1.0 500 1 long 3.5 0.0 -0.6 -0.8 -0.7 500 Average 3.4 -0.1 -0.7 -0.9 -0.8 Full 1 short 3.2 0.1 -0.2 0.0 0.0 Full 1 long 3.3 0.2 -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 Full Average 3.2 0.1 -0.2 0.0
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040
Calculation configuration: 5 m high building Assume Point Source at 2.5 m height Model using a Industrial Spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
1000 1020 1040
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000 1020 1040
1020
1020

-140 -120 -100 -80 1040
Back calc MeasureError LpA true - LpA calc Lw using at distances from centre, m, ment full octave points (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4 m or 500 Hz 100 250 500 1000 2000 500 1 short 2.5 -4.1 -6.8 -9.2 -11.4 500 1 long 4.3 -2.3 -5.0 -7.4 -9.6 500 Average 3.3 -3.3 -6.0 -8.4 -10.6 Full 1 short 1.7 -1.8 -2.4 -2.4 -2.3 Full 1 long 4.6 0.4 -0.3 -0.4 -0.3 Full Average 2.9 -0.8 -1.5 -1.5 -1.4 500 1 short 4.9 -1.7 -4.4 -6.8 -9.0 500 1 long 5.5 -1.1 -3.8 -6.2 -8.4 500 Average 5.2 -1.4 -4.1 -6.5 -8.7 Full 1 short 4.9 -1.7 -4.4 -6.8 -9.0 Full 1 long 4.6 0.4 -0.3 -0.4 -0.3 Full Average 4.7 -0.8 -2.8 -4.7 -6.5 500 1 short 6.2 -0.4 -3.1 -5.5 -7.7 500 1 long 6.3 -0.3 -3.0 -5.4 -7.6 500 Average 6.3 -0.3 -3.0 -5.4 -7.6 Full 1 short 3.9 0.2 -0.4 -0.4 -0.3 Full 1 long 4.6 0.4 -0.3 -0.4 -0.3 Full Average 4.2 0.3 -0.4 -0.4 -0.3
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040
Calculation configuration: 10 m high building Assume Point Source at 5 m height Model using a Rising Spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
1000 1020 1040
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000 1020 1040
1020
1020

-140 -120 -100 -80 1040
Back calc MeasureError LpA true - LpA calc Lw using at distances from centre, m, ment full octave points (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m or 500 Hz 100 250 500 1000 2000 500 1 short 2.6 -3.9 -6.4 -8.6 -10.9 500 1 long 4.2 -2.3 -4.8 -7.0 -9.3 500 Average 3.3 -3.2 -5.7 -7.9 -10.2 Full 1 short 1.8 -1.7 -1.9 -1.8 -1.6 Full 1 long 4.2 0.3 0.1 0.2 0.4 Full Average 2.8 -0.8 -1.0 -0.9 -0.7 500 1 short 6.1 -0.4 -2.9 -5.1 -7.4 500 1 long 6.2 -0.3 -2.8 -5.0 -7.3 500 Average 6.2 -0.3 -2.8 -5.0 -7.3 Full 1 short 2.8 -0.7 -0.9 -0.8 -0.6 Full 1 long 4.7 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 Full Average 3.6 -0.1 -0.4 -0.3 -0.1 500 1 short 4.8 -1.7 -4.2 -6.4 -8.7 500 1 long 5.4 -1.1 -3.6 -5.8 -8.1 500 Average 5.1 -1.4 -3.9 -6.1 -8.4 Full 1 short 3.4 -0.5 -0.8 -0.8 -0.6 Full 1 long 4.7 0.5 0.2 0.2 0.4 Full Average 4.0 0.0 -0.3 -0.3 -0.1
-60 -40 -20 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 220 240 260 280 300 320 340 360 1040
Calculation configuration: 5 m high building Assume Point Source at 2.5 m height Model using a Rising Spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
1000 1020 1040
1000
1000
980
980
980
960
960
960
940
940
940
920
920
920
900
900
900
880
880
880
860
860
860
840
840
840
820
820
820
800
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
-140
-120
-100
-80
-60
-40
-20
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
220
240
260
280
300
320
340
360
380
800
800
780
780
780
760
760
760
740
740
740
720
720
720
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
720
740
760
780
800
820
840
860
880
900
920
940
960
980
1000 1020 1040
1020
1020
SUMMARY SHEET A8.10: Building Modelled by 2D Area Source

Model Long Short smeared sources Dimensions (150m x 80m x 10m) 2D Area Source (150m x 80m) Lw calc G=0.5 Lw true G=0.5 G=0 at 50,100,150m XL Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true)
Measurement at 4 m height at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Summary of results
Measure - Back calc Lw using source distance, m 500 Hz (to side of building) 50 500 50 500 50 500 50 Full 50 Full 50 Full 100 500 100 500 100 500 100 Full 100 Full 100 Full 150 500 150 500 150 500 150 Full 150 Full 150 Full
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 1150
Error LpA Calc - LpA True Measure -ment at distances from centre, m, points (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 100 250 500 1000 2000 1 short 1.3 2.7 3.6 3.9 3.8 1 long -0.5 0.9 1.8 2.1 2.0 3.0 Average 0.5 1.9 2.8 3.1 1 short 1.5 2.2 2.7 2.6 2.3 1 long -0.6 0.2 0.7 0.6 0.3 1.4 Average 0.6 1.3 1.8 1.7 1 short 0.0 1.4 2.3 2.6 2.5 1 long -0.7 0.7 1.6 1.9 1.8 2.2 Average -0.3 1.1 2.0 2.3 1 short 0.5 1.2 1.7 1.6 1.3 1 long -0.6 0.2 0.7 0.6 0.3 0.8 Average 0.0 0.7 1.2 1.1 1 short -0.6 0.8 1.7 2.0 1.9 1 long -0.9 0.5 1.4 1.7 1.6 1.8 Average -0.7 0.7 1.6 1.9 1 short -0.9 0.5 1.4 1.7 1.6 1 long -0.6 0.2 0.7 0.6 0.3 1.0 Average -0.7 0.4 1.1 1.2
300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000 1150
Calculation configuration: 10 m high building Assume 2D Area Source at 5 m high Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for each Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1150
1100
1100
1100
1050
1050
1050
1000
1000
1000
950
950
950
900
900
900
850
850
850
800
800
800
750
750
750
700
700
700
650
650
650
500
500
500
450
450
450
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
450
500
Building with smeared sources on each faade (reality)
> -99.0 dB > 40.0 dB > 45.0 dB > 50.0 dB > 55.0 dB > 60.0 dB > 65.0 dB > 70.0 dB > 75.0 dB > 80.0 dB > 85.0 dB
550
550
550
550
Assume 2D Area Source (calculated)
600
600
600
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
APPENDIX 9: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Building With Directional Radiation
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A9.1: Building Radiating From One facade Modelled by a Point Source
Model W S N E one faade point source G=0 at 50,100,150 m XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration: 10 m high building Model using an industrial spectrum Lw=90 dB/m for South Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) Lp contours (calc) Lw true G=0.5 Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true)
Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results
Measure source distance, m (to side of building) 50 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 150
-100 -50 0 50 1150
Measurement points South North East West Average South North East West Average South North East West Average
100 150 200 250 300
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 100 250 500 1000 2000 21.6 17.2 14.2 20.2 17.0 -9.7 -14.1 -17.1 -11.1 -14.3 0.5 -3.9 -6.9 -0.9 -4.1 0.5 -3.9 -6.9 -0.9 -4.1 15.6 11.2 8.2 14.2 11.0 20.5 16.1 13.1 19.1 15.9 -8.0 -12.4 -15.4 -9.4 -12.6 2.9 -1.5 -4.5 1.5 -1.7 2.9 -1.5 -4.5 1.5 -1.7 14.6 10.2 7.2 13.2 10.0 19.9 15.5 12.5 18.5 15.3 -7.1 -11.5 -14.5 -8.5 -11.7 3.9 -0.5 -3.5 2.5 -0.7 3.9 -0.5 -3.5 2.5 -0.7 14.1 9.7 6.7 12.7 9.5
350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1100
1050
1000
950
900
850
800
750
700
650
550
500
450
400
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
400
450
500
550
Building with one source faade (South)
> -99.0 > 35.0 > 40.0 > 45.0 > 50.0 > 55.0 > 60.0 > 65.0 > 70.0 > 75.0 > 80.0 > 85.0
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
Point Source (50m, South)
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
600
600
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A9.2: Building Radiating From One facade Modelled by a Building With Equal Radiation
Model N one faade smeared sources S Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m): 150 x 80 x 10 W E Lw true G=0.5 Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true) Lp contours (calc)
G=0
at 50,100,150m XL
Lw calc G=0.5
Summary of results
Measure source Measuredistance, m ment (to side of points building) 50 South 50 North 50 East 50 West 50 Average 100 South 100 North 100 East 100 West 100 Average 150 South 150 North 150 East 150 West 150 Average
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 1150
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4 m 100 250 500 1000 2000 19.2 11.6 7.6 12.9 9.6 -12.1 -19.7 -23.7 -18.4 -21.7 -1.9 -9.5 -13.5 -8.2 -11.5 -1.9 -9.5 -13.5 -8.2 -11.5 13.2 5.6 1.6 6.9 3.6 18.1 10.5 6.5 11.8 8.5 -10.4 -18.0 -22.0 -16.7 -20.0 0.5 -7.1 -11.1 -5.8 -9.1 0.5 -7.1 -11.1 -5.8 -9.1 12.2 4.6 0.6 5.9 2.6 17.5 9.9 5.9 11.2 7.9 -9.5 -17.1 -21.1 -15.8 -19.1 1.5 -6.1 -10.1 -4.8 -8.1 1.5 -6.1 -10.1 -4.8 -8.1 11.7 4.1 0.1 5.4 2.1
300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950 1000
Calculation configuration: 10 m high building Model using an industrial spectrum Lw=90 dB/m for South Faade Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5)
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1100
1050
1000
950
900
850
800
750
700
650
500
450
400
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
400
450
500
550
Building with one source faade (South)
600
650
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
Assume Building with smeared sources on each facade

-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 550 600 650 700 750 800 850 900 950
1000
550
600
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 10: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Two Buildings With Directional Radiation
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A10.1: Two Buildings With One Building Radiating Noise From One Facade Modelled as One Building Radiating Noise From Each Facade
Model N
W
Lw true E (150 x 170 x 10) smeared sources
G=0.5
one faade
G=0
at 50,100,150m XL
Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results in the East direction
-600 -500
Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration: 10 m high buildings 10 m gap between the two buildings Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for South Faade
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, Measure(assume 50% "soft" ground), ment receiver height 4m points 100 250 500 1000 2000 South -25.6 -22.3 -22.5 -22.7 -23.0 North -25.7 -22.4 -22.6 -22.8 -23.1 East -6.1 -2.8 -3.0 -3.2 -3.5 West -6.1 -2.8 -3.0 -3.2 -3.5 Average -9.1 -5.8 -6.0 -6.2 -6.5 South -22.5 -19.2 -19.4 -19.6 -19.9 North -22.8 -19.5 -19.7 -19.9 -20.2 East -7.5 -4.2 -4.4 -4.6 -4.9 West -7.5 -4.2 -4.4 -4.6 -4.9 Average -10.4 -7.1 -7.3 -7.5 -7.8 South -20.8 -17.5 -17.7 -17.9 -18.2 North -20.8 -17.5 -17.7 -17.9 -18.2 East -7.9 -4.6 -4.8 -5.0 -5.3 West -7.9 -4.6 -4.8 -5.0 -5.3 Average -10.7 -7.4 -7.6 -7.8 -8.1
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700
Brick Absorption coefficient = 0.05 for the building Max order of reflection = 5 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with CADNA for a mixed ground (G=0.5) with barrier effect
-500
1400
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1400
1300
1300
1200
1200
1100
1100
1000
1000
900
900
800
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
700
700
600
500
500
600
One source faade between 2 buildings
Building with smeared source on each faade
500
600
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Model N W S E one faade (150 x 170 x 10) smeared sources G=0 at 50,100,150m XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration: 10 m high buildings 10 m gap between the two buildings Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for South Faade Brick Absorption coefficient = 0.05 for the building Max order of reflection = 5 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with CADNA for a mixed ground (G=0.5) with barrier effect
700
Lw true
G=0.5
Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results in the North direction
-600 -500
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), Measurement receiver height 4 m points 100 250 500 1000 2000 South 0.0 -12.0 -15.4 -17.1 -4.3 North -0.1 -12.1 -15.5 -17.2 -4.4 East 19.5 7.5 4.1 2.4 15.2 West 19.5 7.5 4.1 2.4 15.2 1.1 -0.6 12.2 Average 16.5 4.5 South 3.1 -8.9 -12.3 -14.0 -1.2 North 2.8 -9.2 -12.6 -14.3 -1.5 East 18.1 6.1 2.7 1.0 13.8 West 18.1 6.1 2.7 1.0 13.8 -0.2 -1.9 10.9 Average 15.2 3.2 South 4.8 -7.2 -10.6 -12.3 0.5 North 4.8 -7.2 -10.6 -12.3 0.5 East 17.7 5.7 2.3 0.6 13.4 West 17.7 5.7 2.3 0.6 13.4 -0.5 -2.2 10.6 Average 14.9 2.9
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-500
1400
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1400
1300
1300
1200
1200
1100
1100
1000
1000
900
900
800
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
700
700
600
500
500
600
500
600
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
700
Lw true
G=0.5
Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results in the South direction
-600 -500
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, Measure(assume 50% "soft" ground), ment receiver height 4 m points 100 250 500 1000 2000 South 0.6 -11.9 -14.8 -11.0 -13.0 North 0.5 -12.0 -14.9 -11.1 -13.1 East 20.1 7.6 4.7 8.5 6.5 West 20.1 7.6 4.7 8.5 6.5 1.7 5.5 3.5 Average 17.1 4.6 South 3.7 -8.8 -11.7 -7.9 -9.9 North 3.4 -9.1 -12.0 -8.2 -10.2 East 18.7 6.2 3.3 7.1 5.1 West 18.7 6.2 3.3 7.1 5.1 0.4 4.2 2.2 Average 15.8 3.3 South 5.4 -7.1 -10.0 -6.2 -8.2 North 5.4 -7.1 -10.0 -6.2 -8.2 East 18.3 5.8 2.9 6.7 4.7 West 18.3 5.8 2.9 6.7 4.7 0.1 3.9 1.9 Average 15.5 3.0
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-500
1400
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1400
1300
1300
1200
1200
1100
1100
1000
1000
900
900
800
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
700
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
600
700
500
500
500
600
600
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 11: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Four Buildings With Directional Radiation
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A11.1: Four Buildings With One Building Radiating Noise From One Facade Modelled as One Building Radiating Noise From Each Facade
Model N W S E one faade (310*170*10) smeared sources G=0 at 50,100,150m XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration:
-700 1400 -600 -500
Lw true
G=0.5
Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results in the East direction
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, Measure- (assume 50% "soft" ground), ment receiver height 4m points 250 500 1000 2000 South -17.7 -20.5 -21.6 -22.5 North -17.6 -20.4 -21.5 -22.4 East -0.9 -3.7 -4.8 -5.7 West 5.7 2.9 1.8 0.9 0.6 -2.2 -3.3 -4.2 Average South -15.5 -18.3 -19.4 -20.3 North -15.2 -18.0 -19.1 -20.0 East -2.8 -5.6 -6.7 -7.6 West 3.3 0.5 -0.6 -1.5 -6.5 Average -1.7 -4.5 -5.6 South -13.8 -16.6 -17.7 -18.6 North -13.3 -16.1 -17.2 -18.1 East -2.7 -5.5 -6.6 -7.5 West 2.2 -0.6 -1.7 -2.6 -7.2 Average -2.4 -5.2 -6.3
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1400
10 m high buildings 10 m gap between the four buildings Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for South Faade Brick Absorption coefficient = 0.05 for the building Max order of reflection = 5 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with CADNA for a mixed ground (G=0.5) with barrier effect
-600 14 00 13 00 12 00 11 00 10 00 90 0 80 0 70 0 60 0 50 0 40 0 30 0 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 14 00 13 00 12 00 11 00 10 00 90 0 80 0 70 0 60 0 -99.0 dB 35.0 dB 40.0 dB50 45.0 dB0 50.0 dB 55.0 dB40 60.0 dB0 65.0 dB 70.0 dB30 75.0 dB0 80.0 dB 85.0 dB
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
-700
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1300
> > > > > > > > > > > >
500
400
300
One source faade between four buildings
300
400
500
Smeared sources on each facade
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Model N W S E one faade (310 x 170 x 10) smeared sources G=0 at 50,100,150m XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration:
-700 1400 -600 -500
Lw true
G=0.5
Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results in the North direction
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, Measure- (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m ment points 250 500 1000 2000 South -17.5 -18.4 -21.8 -24.4 North -17.4 -18.3 -21.7 -24.3 East -0.7 -1.6 -5.0 -7.6 West 5.9 5.0 1.6 -1.0 0.8 -0.1 -3.5 -6.1 Average South -15.3 -16.2 -19.6 -22.2 North -15.0 -15.9 -19.3 -21.9 East -2.6 -3.5 -6.9 -9.5 West 3.5 2.6 -0.8 -3.4 -8.4 Average -1.5 -2.4 -5.8 South -13.6 -14.5 -17.9 -20.5 North -13.1 -14.0 -17.4 -20.0 East -2.5 -3.4 -6.8 -9.4 West 2.4 1.5 -1.9 -4.5 -9.1 Average -2.2 -3.1 -6.5
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1400
10 m high buildings 10 m gap between the four buildings Model using an industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB/m for South Faade Brick Absorption coefficient = 0.05 for the building Max order of reflection = 5 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with CADNA for a mixed ground (G=0.5) with barrier effect
-600 14 00 13 00 12 00 11 00 10 00 90 0 80 0 70 0 60 0 50 0 40 0 30 0 -600 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 -500 -400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1100 14 00 13 00 12 00 11 00 10 00 90 0 80 0 70 0 60 0 -99.0 dB 35.0 dB 40.0 dB50 45.0 dB0 50.0 dB 55.0 dB40 60.0 dB0 65.0 dB 70.0 dB30 75.0 dB0 80.0 dB 85.0 dB
1200
1100
1000
900
800
700
600
-700
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
600
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
1300
> > > > > > > > > > > >
500
400
300
One source faade between four buildings
300
400
500
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
700
Lw true
G=0.5
Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results in the South direction
-600 -500
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), Measurereceiver height 4 m ment points 100 250 500 1000 2000 South 0.6 -11.9 -14.8 -11.0 -13.0 North 0.5 -12.0 -14.9 -11.1 -13.1 East 20.1 7.6 4.7 8.5 6.5 West 20.1 7.6 4.7 8.5 6.5 1.7 5.5 3.5 Average 17.1 4.6 South 3.7 -8.8 -11.7 -7.9 -9.9 North 3.4 -9.1 -12.0 -8.2 -10.2 East 18.7 6.2 3.3 7.1 5.1 West 18.7 6.2 3.3 7.1 5.1 0.4 4.2 2.2 Average 15.8 3.3 South 5.4 -7.1 -10.0 -6.2 -8.2 North 5.4 -7.1 -10.0 -6.2 -8.2 East 18.3 5.8 2.9 6.7 4.7 West 18.3 5.8 2.9 6.7 4.7 0.1 3.9 1.9 Average 15.5 3.0
-400 -300 -200 -100 0 100 200 300 400 500 600
-500
1400
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
1400
1300
1300
1200
1200
1100
1100
1000
1000
900
900
800
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
700
700
800
900
1000
1100
1200
1300
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
600
700
500
500
500
600
600
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 12: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source Between Buildings
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A12.1: Point Source Between Two Buildings Modelled as One Building Radiating Noise From Each Facade
Model Lw true G=0.5 Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true) Lp contours (calc)
G=0 (310 x 80 x 10) Measurement at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10 Summary of results
at 50,100,150m
XL Lw calc G=0.5
Calculation configuration: Measure Error LpA Calc - LpA True source at distances from centre, m, distance, m Back calc Measure- (assume 50% "soft" ground), 10 m high buildings ment (to side of Lw using receiver height 4 m 500 Hz points building) 250 500 1000 2000 10 m gap between the two buildings 50 500 1 short -5.7 -12.7 -1.1 -5.1 50 500 1 long 9.4 2.5 14.1 10.1 Point Source at 5 m high between two buildings 7.2 50 500 Average 6.5 -0.4 11.2 Model using an industrial spectrum 50 Full 1 short -5.8 -12.8 -1.3 -4.7 50 Full 1 long 9.6 2.3 13.4 9.5 Lw = 90 dB for the point source 6.7 50 Full Average 6.7 -0.6 10.5 100 500 1 short -3.9 -10.9 0.7 -3.3 Brick Absorption coefficient = 0.05 for the 100 500 1 long 9.2 2.3 13.9 9.9 buildings 7.1 100 500 Average 6.4 -0.5 11.1 100 Full 1 short -3.9 -10.9 0.7 -3.3 Max order of reflection = 2 100 Full 1 long 9.6 2.3 13.4 9.5 Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), 6.7 100 Full Average 6.8 -0.5 10.6 without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full 150 500 1 short -2.8 -9.8 1.8 -2.2 spectrum 150 500 1 long 9.2 2.3 13.9 9.9 7.1 150 500 Average 6.5 -0.5 11.1 Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm 150 Full 1 short -2.8 -9.8 1.8 -2.2 150 Full 1 long 9.6 2.3 13.4 9.5 Contours are calculated with CADNA for a mixed ground (G = 0.5) 6.8 150 Full Average 6.8 -0.5 10.7
1200
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350
1000 1050 1100 1150 1200 1250 1300 1350
1150
1100
1050
1000
950
950
950
900
900
850
850
900
850
800
800
800
-450
-400
-350
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
550
550
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
750
750
750
700
650
650
700
700
600
500
Point Source between Two Buildings
500
600
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
700
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
1150
1200
-450
-400
-350
-300
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
550
600
650
700
750
800
-250
-200
-150
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
500
APPENDIX 13: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source on Roof of Building
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A13.1: Point Source on the Roof of a Building Modelled as a Building Radiating Noise From Each Facade
Model Long Short G=0 at 50,100,150m (4m and 1.5m) Measurement at 1.5 m height and 50,100,150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10
Measure source distance, m (to side of building) 50 50 50 50 50 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 150 150 150 150 150 150
-100 -50
Lw true
G=0.5
XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration: 10 m high buildings Model using a falling spectrum Lw = 90 dB for the point source Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5)
Back calc Lw using 500 Hz 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full 500 500 500 Full Full Full
0
Measurement points 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average 1 short 1 long Average
50 100
Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4m 100 250 500 1000 2000 7.9 -2.1 -2 -1.2 -0.9 2.7 -7.4 -7.3 -6.5 -6.2 6.0 -3.9 -3.9 -3.1 -2.8 1.9 -8.4 -8.4 -7.5 -6.6 2.7 -7.6 -7.6 -6.7 -5.9 2.3 -7.9 -7.9 -7.1 -6.2 5.8 -4.2 -4.1 -3.3 -3 6.2 -3.8 -3.7 -2.9 -2.6 6 -4 -3.9 -3.1 -2.8 5.7 -4.7 -4.8 -4.1 -3.5 6.2 -4.2 -4.3 -3.7 -3.1 5.9 -4.4 -4.5 -3.9 -3.3 7.4 -2.6 -2.5 -1.7 -1.4 7.4 -2.6 -2.5 -1.7 -1.4 7.4 -2.6 -2.5 -1.7 -1.4 7.7 -2.8 -3.1 -2.5 -2.2 7.7 -2.8 -3.1 -2.5 -2.2 7.7 -2.8 -3.1 -2.5 -2.2
150 200 250 300 350 400
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
1100
1100
1100
1050
1050
1050
1000
1000
1000
950
950
950
900
900
900
850
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
850
850
800
800
800
750
Point Source on the Roof of the Building
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
750
800
850
900
950
1000
1050
1100
SUMMARY SHEET A13.1: Point Source on the Roof of a Building Modelled as a Building Radiating Noise From Each Facade
Model Long Short G=0 at 50,100,150m (4m and 1.5m) Measurement at 4 m height and 50,100,150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Dimensions (m) : 150 x 80 x 10
Measure Error LpA Calc - LpA True Back source at distances from centre, m, distance, m calc Lw Measure- (assume 50% "soft" ground), (to side of using receiver height 4 m ment building) 500 Hz points 100 250 500 1000 2000 50 500 1 short 4.3 -5.7 -5.6 -4.8 -4.5 50 500 1 long 4.6 -5.4 -5.3 -4.5 -4.2 50 500 Average 4.5 -5.5 -5.4 -4.6 -4.3 50 Full 1 short 4.3 -6.0 -6.0 -5.2 -4.5 50 Full 1 long 4.4 -5.9 -6.0 -5.2 -4.5 50 Full Average 4.4 -5.9 -6.0 -5.2 -4.5 100 500 1 short 7.2 -2.8 -2.7 -1.9 -1.6 100 500 1 long 7.3 -2.7 -2.6 -1.8 -1.5 100 500 Average 7.3 -2.7 -2.6 -1.8 -1.5 100 Full 1 short 7.2 -3.3 -3.5 -2.9 -2.5 100 Full 1 long 7.2 -3.3 -3.5 -2.9 -2.5 100 Full Average 7.2 -3.3 -3.5 -2.9 -2.5 150 500 1 short 7.9 -2.1 -2.0 -1.2 -0.9 150 500 1 long 7.9 -2.1 -2.0 -1.2 -0.9 150 500 Average 7.9 -2.1 -2.0 -1.2 -0.9 150 Full 1 short 7.9 -2.1 -2.0 -1.2 -0.9 150 Full 1 long 8.3 -2.4 -2.7 -2.3 -2.0 150 Full Average 8.3 -2.4 -2.7 -2.3 -2.0
-100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
Lw true
G=0.5
XL Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration: 10 m high buildings Model using a Falling spectrum Lw = 90 dB for the point source Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500Hz and full spectrum Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Contours are calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5)
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
11 00
11 00
11 00
11 00
10 50
10 50
10 50
10 50
10 00
10 00
10 00
10 00
95 0
95 0
95 0
95 0
90 0
90 0
90 0
90 0
85 0
80 0
-100
-50
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
> > > > > > > > > > > >
-99.0 dB 85 22.0 dB 0 24.0 dB 25.0 dB 25.5 dB 26.0 dB 80 26.5 dB 0 27.0 dB 27.5 dB 28.0 dB 29.0 dB 30.0 dB
85 0
80 0
75 0 -100 -50 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
> > > > > > > > > > > >
85 -99.0 dB 0 22.0 dB 24.0 dB 25.0 dB 25.5 dB 80 26.0 dB 0 26.5 dB 27.0 dB 27.5 dB 28.0 dB 75 29.0 dB 0 30.0 dB
Point Source on the Roof of the Building
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 14: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Point Source on Stack
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A14.1: Stack with a Point Source on the Top Modelled as a Stack With a Point Source at 4m
Stack height, diameter: h=50m, =3m h=100m, =6m + Point Source on the top + Point source at 4 m high Measurements at 4 m height and at 50 m, 100 m, 150 m Contours at 50 m, 100 m, 250 m, 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Summary of results
Measure - Back calc Source source Lw using height, m distance, 500 Hz m 50 50 500 50 50 Full 50 100 500 50 100 Full 50 150 500 50 150 Full 100 50 500 100 50 Full 100 100 500 100 100 Full 100 150 500 100 150 Full Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, (assume 50% "soft" ground), receiver height 4 m 100 250 500 1000 2000 -4.7 -9.7 -11.0 -12.2 -14.2 -4.9 -9.9 -10.9 -11.6 -12.4 0.2 -4.8 -6.1 -7.3 -9.3 -0.2 -5.4 -6.6 -7.6 -8.7 2.9 -2.1 -3.4 -4.6 -6.6 2.7 -2.6 -3.9 -5.0 -6.4 -3.5 -9.8 -12.9 -15.1 -17.3 -3.7 -10 -12.7 -14.4 -15.4 0.1 -6.2 -9.3 -11.5 -13.7 -0.2 -6.5 -9.2 -10.9 -11.9 2.9 -3.4 -6.5 -8.7 -10.9 2.6 -3.8 -6.6 -8.5 -9.6
Lw true
G=0.5
Top
G=0
Top at 50,100,150m XL
Lw calc G=0.5 Calculation configuration Models using Industrial spectrum Lw = 90 dB for the Point source No reflection 4m
Back-calculation done for hard ground (G = 0), without barrier effect, for 500 Hz and full spectrum Contours calculated with CADNA for mixed ground (G = 0.5) without barrier effect Directivity: Automatic direction Chimney, exhaust Gas Temp (200 C), exit velocity (30 m/s), wind velocity (3 m/s)
Source on the top (reality)
Source at stack centre location at 4m (calculated)
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 15: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Industrial Zone
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A15.1: Industrial Zone Model Set-up

The Industrial Zone Cadna model is summarised below. Industrial Zone CADNA Model - Layout
Point Source Product stock Lw = 110 dBA
Sources on each faade Control Room Lw = 90.7 dBA
Vertical Area Source Main Warehouse Lw = 85.1 dBA
Point Source Chimney Lw = 125 dBA
Point Source Generator Lw = 108 dBA
sources on each faade Assembly Lw = 88.2 dBA
Point Source Roof Design Office Lw = 50 dBA
Point Source Conveyor Lw = 106 dBA
Point Source Power Station Lw = 122 dBA
Sources on each faade Main Factory Lw = 91.4 dBA
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Sound Power Level (Lw) Setup
Point Source Generator Conveyor Power station source Chimney source Design Office source Finished product stock Total Area Source Main Factory Assembly Control Room Total Vertical Area Source Main Factory Assembly Control Room Main Warehouse Total TOTAL Point Sources Area Sources Vertical Area Sources TOTAL Lw Lw 108 106 122 125 90 110 127 Lw'' 91 88 91 95 Lw 91 88 91 85 96 Lw 126 126 126 130 Lw 123 122 124 108 128
127 130 128 134 dB(A)
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A15.2: Industrial Zone Modelled by One Point Source Using Hemispherical Method for Sound Power Determination
industrial zone Measurement at 4 m height and at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Contours at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Method used for the calculations G=0.5 Lw true G=0 at 500,1000,2000m Lp meas (true) XL Lw calc G=0.5 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true)
Point source
Back calculation with XL using the Hemispherical method (ISO 9613-2) Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Where Adiv = 10log(2r2) : Attenuation due to geometrical divergence Aatm = (f .r) /1000 : attenuation due to atmospheric absorption r is the distance from the source to the receiver, in metres f is the atmospheric attenuation coefficient, in decibels per kilometre Calculation configuration: Lp measurement are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside and outside the plant area with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area and mixed ground outside the plant area (G = 0.5) a single band (500 Hz) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Receivers at 500m, 1000m and 2000m from the centre for the calculations of the contours
North
Model with CADNA
Point Source
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a Point Source model using the Hemispherical method Contours Measurement Measurement distance from distance from point centre, m centre, m location 500 500 North 500 500 South 500 500 East 500 500 West 500 1000 North 500 1000 South 500 1000 East 500 1000 West 500 2000 North 500 2000 South 500 2000 East 500 2000 West 1000 500 North 1000 500 South 1000 500 East 1000 500 West 1000 1000 North 1000 1000 South 1000 1000 East 1000 1000 West 1000 2000 North 1000 2000 South 1000 2000 East 1000 2000 West 2000 500 North 2000 500 South 2000 500 East 2000 500 West 2000 1000 North 2000 1000 South 2000 1000 East 2000 1000 West 2000 2000 North 2000 2000 South 2000 2000 East 2000 2000 West Error LpA Calc - LpA True (receiver height 4 m) North South East West -0.9 -0.9 0 1.5 1.3 1.3 2.2 3.7 0.2 0.2 1.1 2.6 -4.6 -4.6 -3.7 -2.2 -1.9 -1.9 -1.0 0.5 1.5 1.5 2.4 3.9 0.0 0.0 0.9 2.4 -4.4 -4.4 -3.5 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 -1.6 -0.1 1.4 1.4 2.3 3.8 -0.7 -0.7 0.2 1.7 -3.9 -3.9 -3.0 -1.5 -0.1 -0.3 0.9 1.6 2.1 1.9 3.1 3.8 1.0 0.8 2.0 2.7 -3.8 -4.0 -2.8 -2.1 -1.1 -1.3 -0.1 0.6 2.3 2.1 3.3 4.0 0.8 0.6 1.8 2.5 -3.6 -3.8 -2.6 -1.9 -1.7 -1.9 -0.7 0.0 2.2 2.0 3.2 3.9 0.1 -0.1 1.1 1.8 -3.1 -3.3 -2.1 -1.4 0.3 0 1.6 1.1 2.5 2.2 3.8 3.3 1.4 1.1 2.7 2.2 -3.4 -3.7 -2.1 -2.6 -0.7 -1.0 0.6 0.1 2.7 2.4 4.0 3.5 1.2 0.9 2.5 2.0 -3.2 -3.5 -1.9 -2.4 -1.3 -1.6 0.0 -0.5 2.6 2.3 3.9 3.4 0.5 0.2 1.8 1.3 -2.7 -3.0 -1.4 -1.9
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A15.3: Industrial Zone Modelled by One Point Source Using Stuber Method for Sound Power Determination
industrial zone Measurement all around the plant area at 4 m height Contours at 528 m from the centre Method used for the calculations G=0.5 Lw true Lp contours (true) G=0, receivers all around the plant area
Point source
XL Lw calc G=0.5
Lp meas (true)
Lp contours (calc)
Back calculation with XL using the Stber method using the standard BS ISO 8297 : 1994 Lw = Lpaverage + Ls + L + Lf Where Ls = 10log((2Sm+h.l)/S0) : area term L = 0.5*Sm : atmospheric absorption Lf = log (d/(4 Sp) : proximity correction Sm is the measurement area in squares metres h is the microphone height, in metres l is the length of the measurement contour, metres is the sound attenuation coefficient through air, in decibels per metre d is the Measurement distance, in metres Calculation configuration: Lp measurement are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside and outside the plant area with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area and mixed ground outside the plant area (G = 0.5) a single band (500 Hz) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Dimensions: L (m) Sm (m2) l (m) Sp (m2) d (m) Dm "d" condition 1.5*L H 352 80242 1140 53050 25 40.71 28.00 11.5 < d < 35 528 13.2 Largest Dimension of Plant area Measurement Area 2D length Plant Area Average measurement distance Distance between measurement position (Dm<2d) Measurement Points Contours Distance Height of the plant
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Receivers at 528m from the centre for the calculations of Contours
North
Model with CADNA
Point Source
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a Point Source model using the Stber method with receivers set at 528m from the centre Contours Error LpA Calc - LpA True Back calc Lw distance receiver height 4 m using full octave from or 500 Hz North South East West centre, m 528 full -0.6 -0.7 -2 -3.9 528 500 1.9 2 3.3 5.2
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A15.4: Industrial Zone Modelled by 2D Area Source Using Hemispherical Method for Sound Power Determination
industrial zone Measurement at 4 m height and at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Contours at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Method used for the calculations G=0.5 Lw true G=0 at 500,1000,2000m Lp meas (true)
XL
2D area source
Lp contours (true)
Lw calc G=0.5
Lp contours (calc)
Back calculation with XL using the Hemispherical method (ISO 9613-2) Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Where Adiv = 10log(2r2) : Attenuation due to geometrical divergence Aatm = (f .r) /1000 : attenuation due to atmospheric absorption r is the distance from the source to the receiver, in metres f is the atmospheric attenuation coefficient, in decibels per kilometre Calculation configuration: Lp measurement are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside and outside the plant area with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area and mixed ground outside the plant area (G = 0.5) a single band (500 Hz) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Receivers at 500m, 1000m and 2000m from the centre for the calculations of the contours
North
Model with CADNA
2D area source
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a 2D area Source model using the Hemispherical method Contours Measurement Measurement distance from distance from point centre, m centre, m location 500 500 North 500 500 South 500 500 East 500 500 West 500 1000 North 500 1000 South 500 1000 East 500 1000 West 500 2000 North 500 2000 South 500 2000 East 500 2000 West 1000 500 North 1000 500 South 1000 500 East 1000 500 West 1000 1000 North 1000 1000 South 1000 1000 East 1000 1000 West 1000 2000 North 1000 2000 South 1000 2000 East 1000 2000 West 2000 500 North 2000 500 South 2000 500 East 2000 500 West 2000 1000 North 2000 1000 South 2000 1000 East 2000 1000 West 2000 500 North 2000 500 South 2000 1000 East 2000 1000 West Error LpA Calc - LpA True (receiver height 4 m) North South East West -3.1 -2 -2.8 0.9 -0.9 0.2 -0.6 3.1 -2.0 -0.9 -1.7 2.0 -6.8 -5.7 -6.5 -2.8 -4.1 -3.0 -3.8 -0.1 -0.7 0.4 -0.4 3.3 -2.2 -1.1 -1.9 1.8 -6.6 -5.5 -6.3 -2.6 -6.6 -5.5 -6.3 -2.6 -0.8 0.3 -0.5 3.2 -2.9 -1.8 -2.6 1.1 -6.1 -5.0 -5.8 -2.1 -2.2 -1.1 -1.6 0.9 0.0 1.1 0.6 3.1 -1.1 0.0 -0.5 2.0 -5.9 -4.8 -5.3 -2.8 -3.2 -2.1 -2.6 -0.1 0.2 1.3 0.8 3.3 -1.3 -0.2 -0.7 1.8 -5.7 -4.6 -5.1 -2.6 -5.7 -4.6 -5.1 -2.6 0.1 1.2 0.7 3.2 -2.0 -0.9 -1.4 1.1 -5.2 -4.1 -4.6 -2.1 -1.4 -0.5 -0.6 0.3 0.8 1.7 1.6 2.5 -0.3 0.6 0.5 1.4 -5.1 -4.2 -4.3 -3.4 -2.4 -1.5 -1.6 -0.7 1.0 1.9 1.8 2.7 -0.5 0.4 0.3 1.2 -4.9 -4.0 -4.1 -3.2 -0.3 0.6 0.5 1.4 -5.1 -4.2 -4.3 -3.4 -2.4 -1.5 -1.6 -0.7 1.0 1.9 1.8 2.7
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET A15.5: Industrial Zone Modelled by 2D Area Source Using Stber Method for Sound Power Determination
industrial zone Measurement all around the plant area at 4 m height Contours at 528 m from the centre Method used for the calculations G=0.5 Lw true Lp contours (true) G=0, receivers all around the plant area Lp meas (true) Lp contours (calc)
2D area source
XL Lw calc G=0.5
Back calculation with XL using the Stber method using the standard BS ISO 8297 : 1994 Lw = Lpaverage + Ls + L + Lf Where Ls = 10log((2Sm+h.l)/S0) : area term L = 0.5*Sm : atmospheric absorption Lf = log (d/(4 Sp) : proximity correction Sm is the measurement area in squares metres h is the microphone height, in metres l is the length of the measurement contour, metres is the sound attenuation coefficient through air, in decibels per metre d is the Measurement distance, in metres Calculation configuration: Lp measurements are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside and outside the plant area with barrier effect (C1 = 3) and 5 order of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area and mixed ground outside the plant area (G = 0.5) a single band (500 Hz) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Dimensions: L (m) Sm (m2) 352 80242 Largest Dimension of Plant area Measurement Area Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
l (m) Sp (m2) d (m) Dm "d" condition 1.5*L H
1140 53050 25 40.71 28.00 11.5 < d < 35 528 13.2
2D length Plant Area Average measurement distance Distance between measurement position (Dm<2d) Measurement Points Contours Distance Height of the plant
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Receivers at 528m from the centre for the calculations of the contours
North
Model with CADNA
2D area source
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a 2D area Source model using the Stber method with receivers set at 528m from the centre
Contours Back calc Lw distance from using full octave centre, m or 500 Hz 528 full 528 500
Error LpA Calc - LpA True receiver height 4 m North South East West -1.6 -0.4 -0.7 3.6 -0.7 0.9 0.5 4.6
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
APPENDIX 16: Noise Modelling Summary Sheets Open Site
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET 16.1: Open Site - Model Set-up

The Open Site Cadna model is summarised below. Open Site CADNA Model - Layout Industrial Site Model with CADNA with receivers all around the plant area for the Stber Method
Dm
Plant Area, G = 0
Measurement area
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Sound Power Level (Lw) Setup Point Sources Name Gas out from separator 2 (valve) Main flare gas KO pot Gas out from separator 1 (valve) Gas turbine B exhaust Gas turbine B ventilation (turbine inlet) Gas turbine B ventilation (turbine extract) Gas turbine B ventilation (alternator inlet) Water injection pump B Dehydration unit Compressor A coolant pipes & pumps Compressor B coolant pipes & pumps Gas pipe valve for pilot flare Vent gas KO pot Flare gas control panel Oil pump B Gas turbine A air filter Gas turbine A fan unit Gas turbine A exhaust Gas turbine A ventilation (turbine inlet) Gas turbine A ventilation (turbine extract) 10-v39 KO pot Gas turbine A ventilation (alternator extract) Gas turbine A ventilation (alternator inlet) Gas turbine B air filter Gas turbine B fan unit Inlet valve from separator 2 Inlet valve from separator 1 Gas turbine A Gas turbine B Centre Point Source Total:
Lw, dB(A) 58.3 62.2 83.4 73.4 79 82.3 74.5 86.8 83.3 89.9 93.7 81.3 61.9 62.9 85.6 82.9 82.3 70.5 79.1 84.2 84.9 82.8 73.9 93.1 80.4 69.7 73.2 87.5 89.2 89.2 100.3
Name LP Heater (top side) HP Heater (top side) Flare (top) dbsum()
Area Sources Lw, dB(A) 68.6 66 79.6 80.1
Lw, dB(A)/m2 53.8 50.8 61
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Line Sources Name Lift gas pipe from compressor house Flare gas pipe from separator 1 Oil pipe from pump to coalesce drum Flare gas pipe from separator 1 HP gas pipe (imported) Produced gas pipe from KO pot to gas turbine generators Flare gas pipe (2nd section to KO pot)) Gas pipe from separator 1 to compressor house Flare gas pipe (3rd section) Flare gas pipe (4th section) Oil pipe from separator 3 to oil pump Gas pipe from separator 1 to compressor house Lift gas pipe export to site C Gas pipe from compressors to KO pot Produced water pipe from separator 1 HP gas pipe from site C to HP heater (first section) HP gas pipe imported from site C Processed oil pipe from oil pump (2nd section) LP gas pipe to LP heater Oil pipe from coalesce drum to oil pump HP gas pipe to HP heater Produced water pipe from separator 2 Flare gas pipe from separator 2 HP gas pipe from site C to HP heater LP gas pipe from site C to LP heater Produced water pipe to produced water tank Produced water pipe from separator 2 Gas pipe from separator 2 to compressor house Processed oil pipe from oil pump (1st section) Produced oil pipe (output) LP gas pipe imported from site C LP gas pipe (imported) Gas injection pipe Gas injection pipe to site C Flare gas pipe from separator 2 LP gas pipe from LP heater to separator 2 (1st section) Flare gas pipe (1st section - along main pipe rack) LP gas pipe from LP heater to separator 2 (2nd section) HP gas pipe from site C to HP heater (2nd section) HP gas pipe from HP heater to separator 1 HP gas pipe from HP heater to separator 1 Total:
Lw, dB(A) Lw, dB(A)/m 90.2 70.7 95.1 86.8 87.6 77.3 90.9 86.8 82.7 69.5 82.6 63.4 82.3 71.2 89.7 75.1 80.7 66.7 79.5 62.2 78 69.8 86.4 75.1 75.1 61.8 75.1 63.4 78.6 68.4 72.3 58 71.9 58.4 71.7 53.7 70.9 54.1 70.3 59.5 72.3 55.1 70.6 62.3 76.3 65.3 68.4 58 68.3 50.5 71 52.7 68.4 62.3 68.8 57 64.8 53.7 64.6 51.1 64.6 51.3 64.3 51.1 63.9 50.5 63.8 50.5 69.3 65.3 66.1 50.4 94.5 75.7 58.6 50.4 64.7 50.7 65.7 50 58.3 50 100.6
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Vertical Area Sources Name Compressor house double doors Compressor house vent 1 Compressor house vent 2 Compressor house vent 3 Compressor house single door (north side) LP heater (west side) LP heater (north side) LP heater (east side) LP heater (south side) HP heater (north side) HP heater (east side) HP heater (south side) HP heater (west side) Flare (east side) Flare (south side) Flare (west side) Flare (north side) Separator 1 (east side) Separator 1 (south side) Separator 2 (east side) Separator 1 (north side) Separator 2 (north side) Separator 2 (south side) Separator 2 (west side) Separator 1 (west side) Separator 3 (north side) Separator 3 (west side) Separator 3 (south side) Separator 3 (east side) Coalesce drum (west side) Coalesce drum (south side) Coalesce drum (east side) Coalesce drum (north side) Compressor house vent 2 Compressor house vent 2 dbsum() Lw, dB(A) 78.4 67.2 66.8 69.7 57.8 75 65.9 86.9 79.2 68.6 69 62.5 71.3 79.6 79.6 79.6 79.6 83.4 83.4 75.6 83.4 75.6 75.6 75.6 83.4 73 73 73 73 78.3 78.3 78.3 78.3 66.8 66.8 93.9 Lw, dB(A)/m2 66.6 67.9 67.6 70.4 55.3 58.5 53.6 70.4 66.9 55.9 52.4 49.8 54.7 67.7 69.3 67.7 69.3 71.5 76.2 63.8 76.2 68.5 68.5 63.8 71.5 65.8 61.1 65.8 61.1 68.7 70.5 68.7 70.5 67.6 67.6
TOTAL Sound Power Level Total Point Sources Total Line Sources Total Area Sources Total Vertical Area Sources TOTAL Lw, dB(A) 100.3 100.6 80.1 93.9 103.9
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET 16.2: Open Industrial Site Modelled as a 2D Area Source Using Hemispherical Method for Sound Power Determination
Industrial Site Measurement at 4 m height and at 300 m from site centre Contours at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Method used for the calculations G=1 Lw true G=0 or G=1 at 300m Lp meas (true) XL Lw calc G=1 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true)
2D Area source
Back calculation with XL using the Hemispherical method (ISO 9613-2) Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Where Adiv = 10log(2r2) : Attenuation due to geometrical divergence Aatm = (f.r) /1000 : attenuation due to atmospheric absorption r is the distance from the source to the receiver, in metres f is the atmospheric attenuation coefficient, in decibels per kilometre Calculation configuration : Lp measurements are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside plant area and G = 0 or 1 outside the plant area - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area - soft ground (G = 1) outside the plant area - single band (500 Hz) - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a 2D Area Source model with the Hemispherical method Real site with contour line, G=1 outside the Measurement Area Error LpA Calc - LpA True Contours at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m distance, Measurement m points North South East West 500 North 300 m -4.5 -7.5 -5.7 -6.9 500 South 300 m -1.4 -4.4 -2.6 -3.8 500 East 300 m 1 -2 -0.2 -1.4 500 West 300 m -4.1 -7.1 -5.3 -6.5 1000 North 300 m -4.3 -2.4 -4.1 -3 1000 South 300 m -1.2 0.7 -1 0.1 1000 East 300 m 1.2 3.1 1.4 2.5 1000 West 300 m -3.9 -2 -3.7 -2.6 2000 North 300 m -4.5 -0.6 -5.6 2.8 2000 South 300 m -1.4 2.5 -2.5 5.9 2000 East 300 m 1 4.9 -0.1 8.3 2000 West 300 m -4.1 -0.2 -5.2 3.2 Real site with contour line, G=0 outside the Measurement Area Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West -1.3 -4.3 -2.5 -3.7 1.5 -1.5 0.3 -0.9 3.7 0.7 2.5 1.3 -1.4 -4.4 -2.6 -3.8 -1.1 0.8 -0.9 0.2 1.7 3.6 1.9 3 3.9 5.8 4.1 5.2 -1.2 0.7 -1 0.1 -1.3 2.6 -2.4 6 1.5 5.4 0.4 8.8 3.7 7.6 2.6 11 -1.4 2.5 -2.5 5.9
Contours distance, m 500 500 500 500 1000 1000 1000 1000 2000 2000 2000 2000
Measurement points North 300 m South 300 m East 300 m West 300 m North 300 m South 300 m East 300 m West 300 m North 300m South 300 m East 300 m West 300 m
Flat area, G=1 outside the measurement area Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West -1.9 -1.4 -3.6 -3.5 -1.6 -1.1 -3.3 -3.2 1.6 2.1 -0.1 0 0.1 0.6 -1.6 -1.5 -1.2 2.1 -2.1 -2.4 -0.9 2.4 -1.8 -2.1 2.3 5.6 1.4 1.1 0.8 4.1 -0.1 -0.4 -0.1 4.6 -2.2 5.8 0.2 4.9 -1.9 6.1 3.4 8.1 1.3 9.3 1.9 6.6 -0.2 7.8
Flat area, G=0 outside the measurement area Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, Measurement receiver height 4 m points North South East West North 300 m 1.4 1.9 -0.3 -0.2 South 300 m 1.4 1.9 -0.3 -0.2 East 300 m 4.5 5 2.8 2.9 West 300 m 2.7 3.2 1 1.1 North 300 m 2.1 5.4 1.2 0.9 South 300 m 2.1 5.4 1.2 0.9 East 300 m 5.2 8.5 4.3 4 West 300 m 3.4 6.7 2.5 2.2 North 300 m 3.2 7.9 1.1 9.1 South 300 m 3.2 7.9 1.1 9.1 East 300 m 6.3 11 4.2 12.2 West 300 m 4.5 9.2 2.4 10.4
Contours distance, Measurement m points 500 North 300 m 500 South 300 m 500 East 300 m 500 West 300 m 1000 North 300 m 1000 South 300 m 1000 East 300 m 1000 West 300 m 2000 North 300 m 2000 South 300 m 2000 East 300 m 2000 West 300 m
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET 16.3: Open Industrial Site Modelled as a 2D Area Source Using Hemispherical Method for Sound Power Determination
Industrial Site
2D Area source
Measurement at 4 m height and at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m from site centre Contours at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Method used for the calculations G=1 Lw true G=0 or G=1 at 500, 1000, 2000 m Lp meas (true) XL Lw calc G=1 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true)
Back calculation with XL using the Hemispherical method (ISO 9613-2) Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Where Adiv = 10log(2r2) : Attenuation due to geometrical divergence Aatm = (f.r) /1000 : attenuation due to atmospheric absorption r is the distance from the source to the receiver, in metres f is the atmospheric attenuation coefficient, in decibels per kilometre Calculation configuration : Lp measurements are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside plant area and G = 0 or 1 outside the plant area - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area - soft ground (G = 1) outside the plant area - single band (500 Hz) - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a 2D Area Source model with the Hemispherical method Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m Contours Measurement distance points North South East West 500 North 500 -7.6 -10.9 -8.9 -10.2 500 South 500 -4.2 -7.5 -5.5 -6.8 500 East 500 -6.2 -9.5 -7.5 -8.8 500 West 500 -4 -7.3 -5.3 -6.6 500 North 1000 -7.9 -11.2 -9.2 -10.5 500 South 1000 -13.8 -17.1 -15.1 -16.4 500 East 1000 -10 -13.3 -11.3 -12.6 500 West 1000 -8.8 -12.1 -10.1 -11.4 500 North 2000 -9.4 -12.7 -10.7 -12 500 South 2000 -17.7 -21 -19 -20.3 500 East 2000 -9 -12.3 -10.3 -11.6 500 West 2000 -17.7 -21 -19 -20.3 1000 North 500 -7.6 -6 -7.4 -6.3 1000 South 500 -4.2 -2.6 -4 -2.9 1000 East 500 -6.2 -4.6 -6 -4.9 1000 West 500 -4 -2.4 -3.8 -2.7 1000 North 1000 -7.9 -6.3 -7.7 -6.6 1000 South 1000 -13.8 -12.2 -13.6 -12.5 1000 East 1000 -10 -8.4 -9.8 -8.7 1000 West 1000 -8.8 -7.2 -8.6 -7.5 1000 North 2000 -9.4 -7.8 -9.2 -8.1 1000 South 2000 -17.7 -16.1 -17.5 -16.4 1000 East 2000 -9 -7.4 -8.8 -7.7 1000 West 2000 -17.7 -16.1 -17.5 -16.4 2000 North 500 -7.4 0.5 -7.2 1.6 2000 South 500 -4 3.9 -3.8 5 2000 East 500 -6 1.9 -5.8 3 2000 West 500 -3.8 4.1 -3.6 5.2 2000 North 1000 -7.7 0.2 -7.5 1.3 2000 South 1000 -13.6 -5.7 -13.4 -4.6 2000 East 1000 -9.8 -1.9 -9.6 -0.8 2000 West 1000 -8.6 -0.7 -8.4 0.4 2000 North 2000 -9.2 -1.3 -9 -0.2 2000 South 2000 -17.5 -9.6 -17.3 -8.5 2000 East 2000 -8.8 -0.9 -8.6 0.2 2000 West 2000 -17.5 -9.6 -17.3 -8.5
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET 16.4: Open Industrial Site Modelled as a 2D Area Source Using Stber Method for Sound Power Determination
Industrial Site Measurement around the plant area at 4 m height Contours at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Method used for the calculations G=1 Lw true G=0, Receivers around the plant area XL Lw calc G=1 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true) Lp meas (true)
2D Area source
Back calculation with XL using the Stber method using the standard BS ISO 8297 : 1994 Lw = Lpaverage + Ls + L + Lf Where Ls = 10log((2Sm+h.l)/S0) : area term L = 0.5*Sm : atmospheric absorption Lf = log (d/(4 Sp) : proximity correction Sm is the measurement area in squares metres h is the microphone height, in metres l is the length of the measurement contour, metres is the sound attenuation coefficient through air, in decibels per metre d is the Measurement distance, in metres Calculation configuration: Lp measurement are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside Sm and G = 0 or 1 outside the plant area (Sm) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area (Sm) soft ground (G = 1) outside the plant area (Sm) a single band (500 Hz) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Dimensions: L (m) Sm (m2) l (m) Sp (m2) d (m) Dm (m) d condition 230 Largest Dimension of Plant area 29227 Measurement Area 700 Length of the measurement contour 23149 Plant Area 10 Average measurement distance 17.50 Distance between measurement position (Dm<2d) 7.6 < d < 35
Results for a 2D Area Source model using the Stuber method for a single band 500 Hz Real site with contour line, G=1 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4 m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West 4.0 1.0 2.8 1.6 4.2 6.1 4.4 5.5 4.0 7.9 2.9 11.3 Real site with contour line, G=0 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4 m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West 4.8 1.8 3.6 2.4 5.0 6.9 5.2 6.3 4.8 8.7 3.7 12.1
Contours distance 500 1000 2000
Flat area, G=1 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4 m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West 4.1 4.6 2.4 2.5 4.8 8.1 3.9 3.6 5.9 10.6 3.8 11.8
Flat area, G=0 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West 4.9 5.4 3.2 3.3 5.6 8.9 4.7 4.4 6.7 11.4 4.6 12.6
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET 16.5: Open Industrial Site Modelled as a Point Source Using Hemispherical Method for Sound Power Determination
Industrial Site Measurement at 4 m height and at 300 m from site centre Contours at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Method used for the calculations G=1 Lw true G=0 or G=1 at 300m Lp meas (true) XL Lw calc G=1 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true)
Point source
Back calculation with XL using the Hemispherical method (ISO 9613-2) Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Where Adiv = 10log(2r2) : Attenuation due to geometrical divergence Aatm = (f.r) /1000 : attenuation due to atmospheric absorption r is the distance from the source to the receiver, in metres f is the atmospheric attenuation coefficient, in decibels per kilometre Calculation configuration : Lp measurements are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside plant area and G = 0 or 1 outside the plant area - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area - soft ground (G = 1) outside the plant area - single band (500 Hz) - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a Point Source model with the Hemispherical method Real site with contour line, G=1 outside the Measurement Area Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, Measurement receiver height 4 m points North South East West North 300m -3.4 -7.5 -5.3 -7.4 South 300m -0.3 -4.4 -2.2 -4.3 East 300m 2.1 -2 0.2 -1.9 West 300m -3 -7.1 -4.9 -7 North 300m -4.3 -3.6 -5.2 -8.1 South 300m -1.2 -0.5 -2.1 -5 East 300m 1.2 1.9 0.3 -2.6 West 300m -3.9 -3.2 -4.8 -7.7 North 300m -4.5 0.1 -5.4 2.8 South 300m -1.4 3.2 -2.3 5.9 East 300m 1 5.6 0.1 8.3 West 300m -4.1 0.5 -5 3.2 Real site with contour line, G=0 outside the Measurement Area Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from centre, m, Contours receiver height 4 m distance, Measurement points m North South East West 500 North 300m -0.2 -4.3 -2.1 -4.2 500 South 300m 2.6 -1.5 0.7 -1.4 500 East 300m 4.8 0.7 2.9 0.8 500 West 300m -0.3 -4.4 -2.2 -4.3 1000 North 300m -1.1 -0.4 -2 -4.9 1000 South 300m 1.7 2.4 0.8 -2.1 1000 East 300m 3.9 4.6 3 0.1 1000 West 300m -1.2 -0.5 -2.1 -5 2000 North 300m -1.3 3.3 -2.2 6 2000 South 300m 1.5 6.1 0.6 8.8 2000 East 300m 3.7 8.3 2.8 11 2000 West 300m -1.4 3.2 -2.3 5.9
Flat area, G=1 outside the measurement area Error LpA Calc - LpA True Contours at distances from acoustic distance, Measurement centre, m, receiver height 4 m m points North South East West 500 North 300m -1.9 -1.4 -3.5 -3.5 500 South 300m -1.6 -1.1 -3.2 -3.2 500 East 300m 1.6 2.1 0 0 500 West 300m 0.1 0.6 -1.5 -1.5 1000 North 300m -1.2 2.1 -2 -2.4 1000 South 300m -0.9 2.4 -1.7 -2.1 1000 East 300m 2.3 5.6 1.5 1.1 1000 West 300m 0.8 4.1 0 -0.4 2000 North 300m -0.1 4.7 -2.1 6.3 2000 South 300m 0.2 5 -1.8 6.6 2000 East 300m 3.4 8.2 1.4 9.8 2000 West 300m 1.9 6.7 -0.1 8.3
Flat area, G=0 outside the measurement area Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from acoustic Contours distance, Measurement centre, m, receiver height 4 m m points North South East West 500 North 300m 1.4 1.9 -0.2 -0.2 500 South 300m 1.4 1.9 -0.2 -0.2 500 East 300m 4.5 5 2.9 2.9 500 West 300m 2.7 3.2 1.1 1.1 1000 North 300m 2.1 5.4 1.3 0.9 1000 South 300m 2.1 5.4 1.3 0.9 1000 East 300m 5.2 8.5 4.4 4 1000 West 300m 3.4 6.7 2.6 2.2 2000 North 300m 3.2 8 1.2 9.6 2000 South 300m 3.2 8 1.2 9.6 2000 East 300m 6.3 11.1 4.3 12.7 2000 West 300m 4.5 9.3 2.5 10.9
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET 16.6: Open Industrial Site Modelled as a Point Source Using Hemispherical Method for Sound Power Determination
Industrial Site
Point source
Measurement at 4 m height and at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m from site centre Contours at 500 m, 1000 m Method used for the calculations G=1 Lw true G=0 or G=1 at 500, 1000, 2000m Lp meas (true) XL Lw calc G=1 Lp contours (calc) Lp contours (true)
Back calculation with XL using the Hemispherical method (ISO 9613-2) Lw = Lp + Adiv + Aatm Where Adiv = 10log(2r2) : Attenuation due to geometrical divergence Aatm = (f.r) /1000 : attenuation due to atmospheric absorption r is the distance from the source to the receiver, in metres f is the atmospheric attenuation coefficient, in decibels per kilometre Calculation configuration : Lp measurements are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside plant area and G = 0 or 1 outside the plant area - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for - hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area - soft ground (G = 1) outside the plant area - single band (500 Hz) - with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection -
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Results for a Point Source model with the Hemispherical method Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from acoustic Contours Measurement centre, m, receiver height 4 m distance points North South East West 500 North 500 -5.7 -10.9 -8.7 -10.6 500 South 500 -2.3 -7.5 -5.3 -7.2 500 East 500 -4.3 -9.5 -7.3 -9.2 500 West 500 -2.1 -7.3 -5.1 -7 500 North 1000 -6 -11.2 -9 -10.9 500 South 1000 -11.9 -17.1 -14.9 -16.8 500 East 1000 -8.1 -13.3 -11.1 -13 500 West 1000 -6.9 -12.1 -9.9 -11.8 500 North 2000 -7.5 -12.7 -10.5 -12.4 500 South 2000 -15.8 -21 -18.8 -20.7 500 East 2000 -7.1 -12.3 -10.1 -12 500 West 2000 -15.8 -21 -18.8 -20.7 1000 North 500 -7.6 -5.9 -7.1 -6.3 1000 South 500 -4.2 -2.5 -3.7 -2.9 1000 East 500 -6.2 -4.5 -5.7 -4.9 1000 West 500 -4 -2.3 -3.5 -2.7 1000 North 1000 -7.9 -6.2 -7.4 -6.6 1000 South 1000 -13.8 -12.1 -13.3 -12.5 1000 East 1000 -10 -8.3 -9.5 -8.7 1000 West 1000 -8.8 -7.1 -8.3 -7.5 1000 North 2000 -9.4 -7.7 -8.9 -8.1 1000 South 2000 -17.7 -16 -17.2 -16.4 1000 East 2000 -9 -7.3 -8.5 -7.7 1000 West 2000 -17.7 -16 -17.2 -16.4
Cont/
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
SUMMARY SHEET 16.7: Open Industrial Site Modelled as a Point Source Using Stber Method for Sound Power Determination
Industrial Site Measurement around the plant area at 4 m height Contours at 500 m, 1000 m, 2000 m Method used for the calculations G=1 Lp contours (true) G=0 or G=1, Receivers around the plant area Lp meas (true) XL Lp contours Lw calc (calc) G=1 Lw true
Point source
Back calculation with XL using the Stber method using the standard BS ISO 8297 : 1994 Lw = Lpaverage + Ls + L + Lf Where Ls = 10log((2Sm+h.l)/S0) : area term L = 0.5*Sm : atmospheric absorption Lf = log (d/(4 Sp) : proximity correction Sm is the measurement area in squares metres h is the microphone height, in metres l is the length of the measurement contour, metres is the sound attenuation coefficient through air, in decibels per metre d is the Measurement distance, in metres Calculation configuration: Lp measurement are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside Sm and G = 0 or 1 outside the plant area (Sm) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection Contours are calculated with CADNA for hard ground (G = 0) inside the plant area (Sm) soft ground (G = 1) outside the plant area (Sm) a single band (500 Hz) with barrier effect and 5 orders of reflection
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology
Dimensions: L (m) Sm (m2) l (m) Sp (m2) d (m) Dm (m) d condition 230 Largest Dimension of Plant area 29227 Measurement Area 700 Length of the measurement contour 23149 Plant Area 10 Average measurement distance 17.50 Distance between measurement position (Dm<2d) 7.6 < d < 35
Results for a Point Source model using the Stber method for a single band 500 Hz
Real site with contour line, G=1 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4 m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from acoustic centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West 5.1 1.0 3.2 1.1 4.2 4.9 3.3 0.4 4.0 8.6 3.1 11.3
Real site with contour line, G=0 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from acoustic centre, Contours m, receiver height 4 m distance, m North South East West 500 5.9 1.8 4.0 1.9 1000 5.0 5.7 4.1 1.2 2000 4.8 9.4 3.9 12.1 Flat area, G=0 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from acoustic centre, m, receiver height 4 m Contours distance, m North South East West 500 4.9 5.4 3.3 3.3 1000 5.6 8.9 4.8 4.4 2000 6.7 11.5 4.7 13.1
Contours distance, m 500 1000 2000
Flat area, G=1 outside the measurement area Source and Receivers at 4 m Error LpA Calc - LpA True at distances from acoustic centre, m, receiver height 4 m North South East West 4.1 4.6 2.5 2.5 4.8 8.1 4.0 3.6 5.9 10.7 3.9 12.3
Contours distance, m 500 1000 2000
AT5414/2 Rev 1
Acoustic Technology

Industry Noise

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Industry Noise

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Acoustic Technology

TECHNICAL REPORT NO: AT 5414/2 REV 1 DATE: 13TH OCTOBER 2003

S J STEPHENSON SENIOR CONSULTING ENGINEER

B C POSTLETHWAITE PRINCIPAL CONSULTANT

B R WOOD PRINCIPAL CONSULTANT

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 Q 0.8 1 1.2

FIGURE 1: Comparison of Geometrical Correction Determined by Stber method and EEMUA

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

368 166 43 83 12 45% 12% 23% 3%

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

Landfill sites / waste to energy schemes Waste incinerators Gas terminals

Coke ovens Cement mills

Oil refineries Sewage works

FIGURE 2: Summary of the Range of Industries Identified in LA Response

Production and processing of metals

FIGURE 3: Weighted Summary of the Range of Industries Identified in LA Response

Food Industry (inc. drink / bottles) Manufacturing industry

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

153 114 111 65 123 81 31

TABLE 2: Number and Percentage of Sites Identified with Various Characteristics

Sites with all three characteristics

Sites with no characteristic

Sites with two characteristics

Sites with only one characteristic

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

As Low As Reasonably Practicable

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

Synthetic Aperture Radar

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

Overall, dB(A) 100 31.5 109 63 106 125 103

Octave Band Centre Frequency 250 100 500 97 1k 94 2k 91 4k 88 8k 85

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

Spectrum Type: Flat Typical Industrial Humped Rising Falling

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

Part of the Brel & Kjr partnership in Holland

AT5414/2 Rev 1 13th October 2003

Standard Deviation, dB 4 4 1 3.5 5 3 3 2 2

Site Container Terminal 1 Container Terminal 2 Container Terminal 3 Standard Deviation

Sound Power, dB(A) 123 130 122

Operational Area, m2 240000 1040000 700000