sssz
\
UJ
O
EPA 550/9-76-011
1976 REASSESSMENT OF NOISE CONCERNS
OF OTHER NATIONS
VOLUME I
SUMMARY AND SELECTED TOPICS
AUGUST 1976
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D.C. 20460
-------
TECHNICAL REPORT DATA
(Please read Instructions on the reverse before completing)
1. REPORT NO.
2.
3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSIOI»NO.
4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE
1976 REASSESSMENT OF NOISE CONCERNS OF
OTHER NATIONS.
VOL. 1 -- SUMMARY AND SELECTED TOPICS
5. REPORT DATE
August 1975
6. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION CODE
7. AUTHORTS)
Carl Modig, Ghalib Khouri, John Stepanchuk, George
Cerny.
8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION REPORT NO
9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND ADDRESS
10. PROGRAM ELEMENT NO.
Informatics Inc.
6000 Executive Blvd.
Rockville, MD 20852
11. CONTRACT/GRANT NO.
68-01-3115
12. SPONSORING AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, DC 20460
13. TYPE OF REPORT AND PERIOD COVERED
14. SPONSORING AGENCY CODE
Supplements: "An Assessment of Noise Concerns of Other Nations" 1971.
NTIS Nos: PB-206721, PB-206722.
16. ABSTRACT
A review of the noise abatement programs of countries around the world (except the
U.S. ) including laws, reguations, guidelines, criteria, research, governmental
organization, plans, etc., with bibliography and contact addresses to facilitate
further inquiry. Also includes international organizations involved in noise control.
Both environmental and occupational noise are covered. Topics: Community noise,
airport, aircraft, surface transportation, construction noise, occupational noise,
noise from factories, noise in buildings. A summary finds that compared to a
similar 1971 review, the U.S. has "caught up", information has increased geomet-
rically, many nations now compensate citizens for noise from airports or roads,
and noise limits in industry are becoming stricter. Vol. II contains country-by-
country reviews.
17.
KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS
DESCRIPTORS
b.lDENTIFIERS/OPEN ENDED TERMS
c. cos AT I Field/Group
Noise Reduction, Aircraft Noise, Environ-
mental surveys, pollution, foreign gover-
nment, public administration, international
government, noise pollution, foreign
countries, noise abatement.
I.C. A. Q. , L.S. O. ,
W.H.O., E.E.C. ,
Common Market,
I. L.O.
20A
or
5D
18. DISTRIBUTION STATEMENT
Unlimited
19. SECURITY CLASS (ThisReport)
unclassified
21. NO. OF PAGES
265
20. SECURITY CLASS (Thispage)
unclassified
22. PRICE
EPA Form 2220-1 (9-73)
-------
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
November 10, 1976
ERRATA SHEET TO VOLUME I, 1976 REASSESSMENT OF NOISE CONCERNS OF OTHER
NATIONS - SUMMARY AND,SELECTED TOPICS (EPA 550/9-76-011) , DATED AUGUST 1976
8-2 — In Table 8-1 in the next to bottom line, it is erroneously stated
that for the U.S. the Proposed limit "For later" is "85 dBA" and
"For when" is "5 years". The "85 dBA" and the "5 years" should
be deleted.
-------
EPA 550/9-76-011
1976 REASSESSMENT OF NOISE CONCERNS
OF OTHER NATIONS
VOLUME I
SUMMARY AND SELECTED TOPICS
AUGUST 1976
Prepared for:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Noise Abatement and Control
Washington, D.C. 20460
Under Contract 68-01-3115
This report has been approved for general availability. The contents of this
report reflect the views of the contractor, who is responsible for the facts
and the accuracy of the data presented herein, and do not necessarily
reflect the official views or policy of EPA. This report does not constitute
a standard, specification, or regulation.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VOLUME I: SUMMARY AND SELECTED TOPICS
Table of Contents
Page
List of Tables
VI
List of Figures
Fore ward
XI1
XV
How to Use This Report
CHAPTER 1. SUMMARY
CHAPTER 2.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
2.7
2.8
INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
XVI
1-1
2-1
Int'l Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) 2-1
Int'l Organization for Standardization (ISO) 2-15
World Health Organization (WHO) 2-28
Economic Commission for Europe (ECE) 2-31
Association of French Speaking Acousticians
"Groupement des Acousticiens
Langue Francaise" "GALF" 2-37
Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD) 2-40
International Labour Organization (ILO) 2-49
The European Community (Common
Market, EEC) 2-53
CHAPTER 3.
3.1
3.2
3.2.1
3.2.2
3.2.2.1
3. 2.2.2
3.2.2.3
3.3
3.3.1
3.4
3.4. 1
COMMUNITY NOISE
What Is Community Noise?
Decision Criteria
Health Criteria
Survey Results
Comp'aints and Annoyance
Noise Surveys
Noise Standards
Direct Regulations
National
Other Government Actions
National
3-1
3-1
3-2
3-6
3-10
3-10
3-12
3-12
3-15
3-15
3-19
3-19
-------
Table of Contents continued
CHAPTER 4.
4. 1
4. 1. 1
4. 1.2
4. 1.3
4.2
4.2. 1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.3
4.3. 1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.4
AIR CRAFT/AIRPORT NOISE
Evaluation (Decision Criteria)
Criteria For Evaluating The Effect Of
Noise Around Airports
Noise Monitoring Systems
Estimates Of People Exposed To Aircraft
Noise
Regulations
Operational Patterns (takeoff and pro-
cedures)
Curfews
Banning or Limiting Certain Types of
Airplanes
Other Measures
Noise Taxes Incorporated In Landing Fees
Zoning Near Airports
Purchase of Houses to -Create Buffer Zones
and/or Subsidizing of "Soundproofing1' of
Homes
Helicopters
4-2
4-2
4-5
4-8
4-9
4-9
4-11
4-12
4-13
4-13
4-13
4-18
4-20
CHAPTER 5.
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION NOISE
5-1
5. 1
5. 1.
5. 1.
5. 1.
5. 1.
5. 1.
5. 1.
5. 1.
1
1. 1
1.2
1.3
2
2. 1
2.2
5.2
5.2.
5.2.
5.2.
1
1. 1
1.2
Decision Criteria 5-1
Road Traffic 5-1
Assessing Noise Levels 5-2
Assessing Effects of Noise On People 5-12
Assessing Economic Impact 5-19
Railroad and Rapid Transit 5-20
Assessing Noise Levels 5-20
Subjective Effects of Noise Levels On
People 5-23
Road Traffic--N6ise Control Actions 5-32
Regulatory Activity' 5-32
Direct Regulations 5-32
Guidelines and Proposals 5-39
11
-------
Table of Contents - Continued
CHAPTER 5. (continued)
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
5.
CHAPTER 6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
6.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
3
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
1
2
3
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
3.
4
2
2.
2.
2.
2.
2.
1
1.
1.
1.
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
Other Actions Beside Regulatory Actions 5-44
Vehicle Noise Reduction 5-44
Tire/Road Noise 5-48
Noise Screening .5-53
Building Insulation Against Traffic Noise '5-57
Planning and Zoning 5-58
Railroad and Rapid Transit--Noise Control 5-61
Railroad 5-61
Regulations 5-61
Guidelines .5-61
Non-Regulatory Actions 5-62
Rapid Transit 5-64
NOISE INSIDE BUILDINGS 6-1
Introduction 6-1
Decision Criteria For Noise 6-2
Regulations and Guidelines 6-4
General 6-4
Australia 6-5
Netherlands 6-6
Belgium 6-8
Sweden 6-8
Denmark 6-8
West Germany 6-9
United Kingdom 6-11
Japan 6-13
Building Insulation Against Traffic Noise 6-18
111
-------
Table of Contents - continued
CHAPTER 7.
7.1
7.2
7.2.1
7.2.2
7.3
7.3. 1
7.3.2
Page
INDUSTRIAL, AND CONSTRUCTION NOISE
EFFECTS ON THE COMMUNITY 7-1
Introduction 7-1
Noise from Factories 7-1
Decision Criteria 7-1
Industrial Noise - Regulations 7-6
Noise from Construction Sites 7-19
Decision Criteria for Construction 7-19
-Direct Regulations 7-21
CHAPTER 8. OCCUPATIONAL, NOISE
8. 1 Introduction
8. 2 Direct Regulations
8. 2. 1 Overview
8.2.2 Notes On Countries
8-1
8-1
8-1
8-1
8-4
CHAPTER 9.
INFORMATION CENTERS ON NOISE
9-1
VOLUME II: COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY REVIEWS
CHAPTER 10.
10. 1
10.2
10
10
10
10.6
10.7
10.8
10.9
10.10
10.11
10.12
10.13
10.14
COUNTRY-BY-COUNTRY REVIEWS
Australia
Austria
Belgium
Sweden
Canada
Czechoslovakia
Denmark
Finland
France
Switzerland
Federal Republic of Germany
Netherlands
United Kingdom
Israel
10-1
10-1
10-10
10-16
10-19
10-26
10-38
10-45
10-49
10-53
10-67
10-86
10-112
10-116
10-126
IV
-------
Table of Contents - continued
CHAPTER 10. (continued)
10.15 Italy 10-133
10.16 Japan 10-135
10.17 Norway 10rl52
10.18 Poland 10-158
10.19 Soviet Union 10-175
10.20 Latin American Countries 10-198
10.21 South Africa 10-204
10.22 Spain 10-207
v
-------
LIST OF TABLES
VOLUME I
Table
Page
2-1 International Organizations Participating in ICAO
Noise Activities 2-14
2-2 Permissible Sound Emission Level 2-56
3-1 Division of Noise Control Activities between
Government Levels 3-2
3-2 Percentage of Population Exposed to a Noise Level
Equal to or in Excess of a Given Value 3-8
3-3 Sources of Noise Annoyance in England 3-10
3-4 Sources of Noise Annoyance in Norway 3-11
3-5 Noise Levels Identified by the U.S. EPA as Requisite
to Protect Public Health and Welfare 3-13
3-6 Comparative Table of Noise Emission Standard
Values in Federal Republic of Germany and Selected
European and Non-European Countries 3-16
4-1 Some National Aircraft Noise Exposure Indices 4-4
4-2 Noise Levels Time-zones at Osaka
International Airport 4-7
4-3 People Exposed to High Environmental Noise Levels 4-9
4-4 Environmental Quality Standards for Aircraft Noise 4-16
4-5 Actual Results of Noise Insulation and Compensation
for Noises in the Vicinity of Aerodromes in Japan 4-19
5-1 Results of Noise Measurements Carried Out on
Stationary Vehicles 5-8
5_2 Comparison of the Nuisance Due to Road Traffic Noise
Found in a Danish Study 5-17
5-3 Perceived Effects of Traffic Noise 5-18
5_4 Estimation of Costs of Noise Barriers and Building
Insulation in the Federal Republic of Germany 5-19
VI
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page
5-5 Typical External Railway Noise Levels 5-21
5-6 Noise Level (avg. ) in Railway Stock 5-22
5-7 Relationship between Proportion of Positive Response
to Each Item and Peak Level of Train Noise 5-24
5-8 Comparison between Community Response to Aircraft
Noise (Survey in UK) and to Train Noise in NNI 5-25
5-9 Directive Approved by the Council of the European
Community on Motor Vehicles and Adopted by
Member States 5-33
5-10 Vehicle Emission Regulations 5-36
5-11 Maximum Allowable Limit for Automobile Noise
Article 16-1, Noise Regulation Law (Japan) 5-35
5-12 Environmental Quality Standards for Noise 5-38
5-13 Recommended Noise Immission Limits in the
Netherlands 5-39
5-14 Criteria for Road Traffic Noise 5-40
5-15 Immission Standards Proposed in 1974 5-41
5-16 Noise Emission Standards Proposed in 1974 5-42
5-17 Proposed Swedish Limits for Stationary Vehicles 5-43
5-18 Noise Barriers in Some European Countries 5-54
5-19 Reduction in Noise Level in dBA Caused by a Railway
Cutting at Two Distances from the Track 5-63
5-20 Summary of Reduction in Noise Levels Due to Houses 5-63
5-21 Noise Levels in the Moscow Subway 5-65
5-22 Low-frequency-vibration Level's Measured with
Passing Train for Different Track Support Systems 5-66
vu
-------
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table Page
6-1 German Interior Noise1 Criteria (Guideline) -6-10
6-2 West German Norms Related to Noise in Residences 6-10
6-3 Minimum Transmission Losses of 'Sound Insulation'
Wall According to Japanese Law 6-14
6-4' Boundary Values for-Airborne Noise and Impact
Noise Insulation Applicable in Switzerland 6-15
7-1 Land Use in Special Industrial Zone, Chiba
Prefecture Project 7-19
7-2 Financing of Chiba Anti-Pollution Projects 7-10
7-3 Enforcement Standards for Industrial Noise Emission: •,
Article 4-1, Noise Regulation Law 7-13
7-4 Limits of Noise of Working Hours and Days and Criteria
for the Specified Construction Operation 7-22
7-5 Measured Sound Reduction Given by Types of
Partial Enclosure 7-23
8-1 Overview of Occupational Noise Laws 8-2
9-1 Information Centers on Noise 9-2
-------
LIST OF TABLES
VOLUME II
Table Page
10-1 Daily Noise Dose Circulation Chart 10-3
10-2 Maximum Permitted Noise Exposure at a Work Site 10-27
10-3 Maximum Permitted Noise Exposure at Worksite 10-28
10-4 New Vehicle Limits in Czechoslovakia 10-40
10-5 Maximum Permissible Noise Limits Per Maximum
Weekly Duration 10-57
10-6 Recommended Outdoor Noise Exposure Limits
(Immission Standards) in DBA 10-76
10-7 Existing and Proposed Limit Values for Motor
Vehicle Noise (New Vehicles) 10-78
10-8 Proposed Limits for Residential Areas near Highways 10-80
10-9 West German Noise Zone Guidelines 10-94
10-10 West German 1968 Planning Noise Zonal Limits 10-94
10-11 Estimate of Noise Abatement Costs in Road Design
and Construction in the Federal Republic of Germany
from 1971 to 1985 10-102
10-12 Investments for Environmental Protection in the Federal
Republic of Germany, 1970 - 1979 10-108
10-13 Israeli Community Noise Law (Other than Aircraft
or Traffic Noise) 10-130
10-14 Target Schedule for Abating Noise from New and
existing Shinkansen Express Railroad Lines 10-136
10-15 Noise standards for New Motor Vehicles 10-137
10-16 Measures to be taken at Specific Airports in Japan 10-138
10-17 Environmental Quality Criteria fcr Noise 10-139
10-18 Special Environmental Quality Criteria for Noise
(Roadside Areas) 10-140
10-19 Restrictive Standards for bpecilic Factories 10-140
LX
-------
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Table Page
10-20 Enforcement Standards for Construction Noise Article 10-141
14-1 & Article 15-1, Noise Regulation Law
10-21 Permissible Indoor Noise Levels in Residential Areas 10-164
10-22 Permissible Noise Levels in Worksites 10-165
10-23 Polish Corrections to Noise Limits for Various Zones 10-166
10-24 Percentage of Polish Workers Exposed to Noise and
Vibration 10-167"
10-25 Polish Occupational Hearing Damage by Industry 10-168
10-26a Noise Measurement on Worksites in Textile Plants 10-169
10-26b Noise Measurement on Worksites in Mines 10-169
10-26c Noise Measurements on Worksites in Thermal Power
Plants 10-170
10-26d Noise Measurement on Worksites in Iron and Steel Work
Works 10-170
10-26e Noise Measurement on Worksite of Selected
Engineering Plants 10-171
10-27 Work-Related Soviet Norms on Noise 10-176
10-28 I. S. O. Curve NR 75 10-177
10-29 Adjustments to Regulation 1004-73 in Respect to Noise
Exposures Less Than an Eight Hour Shift 10-179
10-30 Noise Control on Trains per Sanitary Norms 877-71 10-181
10-31 Maximum Allowable Noise Levels on Board Soviet Ships 10-182
10-32 Soviet Norms on Noise in Residences 10-184
10-33 Maximum Industrial Noise Emissions to Neighboring
Areas 10-185
x
-------
LIST OF TABLES
(Continued)
Tables Page
10-34 Basic Norms of SN 535-65 (Before Adjustment) 10-188
10-35 SN 535-65: Table of Adjustments for Determining the
Norms for a Particular Residential Situation 10-189
10-36 City Council Act (Municipal Law) for Cordoba,
Argentina: Maximum Vehicle Sound Levels 10-202
10-37 Community Noise Limits Inside Buildings for
Cordoba City, Argentina 10-202
XL
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure VOLUME I page
3-1 Community Reaction to Intrusive Noises of Many Types 3-4
3-2 Community Reaction to Intensive Noises of Many Types
as a Function of the Normalized Outdoor Day/Night
Sound Level of the Intruding Noise, L, in dB(A) 3-5
3-3 Intercomparison of Various Measures of Individual
Annoyance and Community Reaction as a Function of
the Day/Night Average Noise Level and Equivalent
Energy Level 3-5
3-4 Percentage of Population Exposed to an Outdoor
Daytime Sound Level of or Above a Specified Value 3-9
4-1 Proposed and Existing Monitoring at Heathrow
Airport, London 4-8
4-2 Noise Zones in the Bucharest-Optopeni Airport,
Romania 4-15
5-1 Measuring Positions for Measurement with
Stationary Vehicles 5-3
5-2 Percentage Distribution of Noise Levels for Service
Buses in the Greater Stockholm Area 5-5
5-3 Sound Levels for Cars, Measured During Design
Inspections in 1972 5-6
5-4 Sound Levels of Motorcycles, Measured as per ISO R362
During Design Inspection 5-7
5-5 Sound Levels of Mopeds, Measured During Design
Inspection 5-7
5-6 Relative Frequency of Seriously Disturbed
Interview Subjects 5-14
5-7 "Acceptable" and "Intolerable" Responses vs
Equivalent Noise Level, with Np Corrections
for Exposure or Attitude 5-26
5-8 Total Vehicle Noise and Coasting Noise 5-49
5-9 Relationships Between Texture Depth of Various
Surfaces and Noise from Light Vehicles 5-51
xn
-------
LIST OF FIGURES
(Continued)
Figure Page
5-10 Relationship Between Estimated BFC of Various
Surfaces and Noise from Light Vehicles 5-52
5-11 Effect of Sound Absorption to Reduce Airborne
Noise in the Station • 5-67
6-1 Cumulative Frequency Curves of Noise Level in 15
Large-capacity Office Rooms 6-3
6-2 Integral Window Glazing - Ventilation Unit Being
Investigated in Germany 6-21
7-1 Plan of a Refuse-Treatment Plant 7-18
7-2 Social Survey Annoyance Rating 7-19
7-3 Acoustic Shed 7-23
Xlll
-------
LIST" OF FIGURES
VOLUME II
Figure Page
10-1 Dusseldorf Noise Zones 10-93
10-2 Procedures and Remedies for Noise Problems
under Common Law and Statutory Law in the United
Kingdom 10-125
10-3 Basic Provisions of Soviet Regulation 1004-73
Concerning Maximum Levels of Noise in Occupational
Settings 10-178
xiv
-------
FOREWARD
Five years ago the United States Environmental Protection
Agency published the 1971 "Assessment of Noise Concerns of Other
Nations, " describing laws and noise control activities in many countries.
The present report updates and revises the old report, with the addition
of information on Occupational Noise and Noise Information Centers.
The information was gathered from foreign contacts by
letter, by a review of the world literature, and by direct contact with
persons at the International Conference of Noise Control Engineering
in Washington, D. C. in April 1976.
It is contemplated that this survey report will be periodically
revised and updated. Therefore,, readers are encouraged to send
corrections and new data to:
Noise Control Requirements & Technology Staff
Office of Noise Abatement & Control
U. S. Environmental Protection Agency
Washington, D. C. 20460
The Informatics Inc. team performing the work of compiling
this report devoted many long hours to the task. Principle contributors
were: C. Modig, Project leader; G. Khouri, G. Cerny, I. Meyer, and
J. Stepanchuk. S. Ballon and L. Jones provided much-appreciated help
with editing and the French language. Special credit is due to Mrs. Terri
Miller and Agaes Furilla, who provided energetic and patient typing and
clerical support and to Mrs. Ruth Ness, Technical Director of Information
Analysis, who provided extra production resources when they were needed.
Credit is due to the EPA task monitor, John Schettino, for providing
prompt feedback and guidance at times when they were needed and in the
interim, providing the latitude and time for the project to be completed
systematically. Finally, the comments of Harvey Nozick are -acknowledged
for their part in improving the section on Japan.
xv
-------
HOW TO USE THIS REPORT
o Readers interested in an overview of a country,
see Chapter 10 (Vol. II).
o Readers interested in an International Organization,
see Chapter 2.
o Readers interested in a particular subject,
see Chapters 3-8.
o Readers interested in obtaining more detailed
information, see Chapter 9 and the lists of
addresses at the back of each Section of
Chapters 2 or 10.
Noise Specialists -- This report has been designed to be
of use to the general reader and to the noise specialist as well. However,
the noise specialist •will find that it has frequently not been possible to
present all of the details in which he is interested. It has not been
considered desirable to do so both in the interest of space, and because
such details are likely to become out of date rapidly. Therefore we hope
that the Specialist will use the report as a means of undiscovering
developments or programs related to his particular interest, and will
contact the referenced authorities directly to get more information.
xvi
-------
1. SUMMARY
General Impressions
Let us look at some of the main conclusions of the 1971
Assessment of Noise Concerns of Other Nations.
o In noise control activities the U.S. was behind other
countries of the world, particularly the European
countries, Japan and the USSR.
o There was already a considerable volume of world
literature on noise, but the literature showed more
research than recommendations and more recommen-
dations than regulations.
o A trend toward establishing unified ministries of the
environment was underway in many countries, and
it was assumed that this would have a positive effect
on the development of better noise control.
o The role of international .organizations was minimal
and in fact was not specifically emphasized in the
1971 Report Summary.
By 1976, the U.S. is no longer "behind" other countries in
noise control, although it still has a long way to go.
Whatever degree of noise abatement has been accomplished
by 1976, there has been no abatement in the production of literature on
noise. In fact, it has more than doubled. A series of important inter-
national conferences from 1972 to 1975 ha« helped increase the folow of
information.
1-1
-------
By 1976, the newly-formed unified environmental ministries
are already several years old, but their initial regulatory achievements
have been less than spectacular. It remains to be seen what salutary
effects may eventually result. Possibly it takes several years for new
ministries to become productive in the regulatory field, and still more
time for the impact of the regulations to be felt.
Impressions By Chapter
CHAPTER
2. International
Organizations
International Organizations were not discussed
in the 1971 main summary and not emphasized in
the report itself. Except for ICAO activity and
isolated studies by OECD and WHO, there was
little activity.
By 1976 the international organizations had become
important forums for exchanging technical infor-
mation. And the EEC (Common Market), in its
role as a customs union, has an important influence
in developing and harmonizing the new product noise
emissions regulations of its member countries.
3. Community
Noise
In 1971 the A-weighted decibel had been picked
independently in many places as the best metric of
environmental noise levels.
By 1976, this trend has reached near-consensus,
and the Leq is on the verge of becoming the best
accepted single-number evaluator of complex1
time patterns of exposure to environmental noise.
The additional social surveys which have been
done have largely substantiated earlier findings
about human reaction to noise.
More noise surveys have been done, but there is not
yet enough comparative data published to indicate
whether worldwide noise levels are still rising, and
whether the size of noise-impacted areas is still
1-2
-------
increasing. However, based on the fact that most
noise control measures are only beginning to be
implemented, and the fact that the number of noise
producing mechanisms continues to rise with the
world population, we conclude that in general, the
impact of noise pollution continues to worsen almost
everywhere. In order to establish measurement
baselines, most countries are doing more noise
surveys, especially in cities and around airports.
Denmark is taking a comprehensive noise survey
of the entire country.
4. Aircraft Noise In 1971, aircraft noise had become a major factor
limiting the expansion of airport facilities. ICAO
had taken action on noise certification limits for
new aircraft types but had not acted on retrofitting
existing transport aircraft to quiet them. Retrofit
was considered by many national ICAO representatives
to be too expensive. In 1971, local authorities were
attempting to find other approaches that would work
around the lack of basically quiet aircraft.
By 1976 some new airport sites have been chosen
after great difficulty (Healthrow, Third Paris), while
others are still being stalled or enjoined (3rd Tokyo).
Programs on the ground to alleviate the effects of the
noise are in full swing, including landing taxes,
curfews, and quotas on numbers of operations at a
airport. Countries like West Germany, Japan,
France, and the United Kingdom have started programs
for subsidizing the noise abatement treatment of houses
in high-noise zones near airports. Their decision
to undertake such a relatively expensive measure
emphasizes the severity of the problem and the need
for better use of other options such as reduction of
noise at the source and increased acceptance of
flight operational techniques for noise abatement.
Although ICAO continues to work on extension of the
noise certification concept to other types of new
aircraft, it has avoided an active role in resolving
the retrofit question. Only Japan has ordered retrofit
kits for some of the transport aircraft in its national
airline fleet.
1-3
-------
5. Surface Transpor-
tation Noise
In 1971 noise from motor vehicles had been identified
everywhere as a key culprit, and most countries had
some laws dealing with it. By 1976 laws have become
stricter and more sophisticated. Road traffic noise
is still the number one problem, and still is the area
of greatest noise control activity.
Many countries are tending to adopt the same new-
vehicle limits as those mandatory in the Common
Market (EEC). Both EEC and ECE panels of experts
are preparing new reduced noise limits for new
vehicles that will go into force in the 1980's. The
idea of requiring noise-regulated vehicles to maintain
their quiet performance for some length of time after
sale (e.g., for the "useful life" of the vehicle) is
still an idea for the future. Only Czechoslovakia has
such a requirement. There existing vehicles may
exceed new vehicle noise levels by 2 dBA.
Computerized prediction of models and noise barrier
technology are two technologies that have seen rapid
development.
6. Noise Control in
Buildings
The problem of noise inside buildings concerns both
noise coming from outside and noise generated within
the building.
In 1971 isolated measures for dealing with both
problems had been initiated, including work on
developing better measurement methodologies.
By 1976, work has continued not only on the noise-
specific measures, but also on the braader front
of increased general standardization and harmonization
of building codes in general, both within countries and
internationally. Future noise abatement activity -will
take place increasingly in this context.
One of the main features of the last few years has been
increased use of national programs to protect the
exterior shell of buildings from traffic and/or aircraft
noise.
1-4
-------
One innovation of note was seen in France.
Exceptionally well built French housing is
eligible for the appellation "acoustic comfort
level, " which may be used in marketing the new
units.
7. Noise from Factories In 1971 the problem was being approached with a
and Construction Sites combination of solutions ranging from individual
source control to master planning and zoning.
By 1976 there has been no innovation in solutions,
although the number of countries having national
noise zoning guidelines (including construction sites
and industry) had increased.
A major change has been the increase in regulations
limiting noise from individual pieces of construction
equipment. W. Germany, France, Austria, and
Switzerland are among the many countries with
such limits. Some countries also are bearing
down hard on all existing construction equipment
noise. For example, Austrian provinces have such
regulations, and in Switzerland a noise permit
must be applied for each time it is desired to use
an older, more noisy piece of equipment,
West Germany has developed a means of rewarding
quieter construction equipment by permitting
equipment 5 dBA or more quieter than the legal
limits to bear the label, "Superior Construction
Machinery. "
The ISO Draft Recommendation 1996, a method of
assessment of likelihood of community disturbance
from industrial noise, progressed to full-fleged
Recommendation status.
8. Occupational Noise
Since 1971 it has become increasingly recognized
that occupational and environmental noise must be
considered together in evaluating total exposure to
noise.
In the 1973-74 period an especially large number of
countries converted voluntary or "guideline" noise
limits to legally binding limits. Most countries in
principle require engineering controls to be applied
as technically feasible, with hearing protectors as a
second line of defence.
-------
However, some countries in practice tend to rely
on hearing protectors as a panacea.
In a potentially significant development, W. Germany
has adopted the long-standing Soviet practice of
requiring much quieter environments for offices
than those allowed in factory work areas.
A few countries (Israel, Sweden, W. Germany) have
used work place noise signs as a low-cost measure
to reduce noise-induced hearing loss. The signs
posted at noisy work stations, give the noise levels
and remind the worker of the precautions he should
be taking.
9. Information
Since 1971 several documentation centers have arisen
to help handle the "explosion" in noise literature.
However, regularly published statistics on funding,
enforcement activities, and measured reduction of
noise are as hard to come by as ever. It is to
be hoped that the contribution of the international
organizations will be to stimulate the creation and
distribution of such information.
10. Regulatory Trends
Many of the new environmental agencies which were
founded in the early 1970's have taken several years
to develop recommendations. Only then is some sort
of comprehensive act passed (like the West Germany
Act of 1974), which authorizes a series of regulations
to be developed and promulgated. Whether the
environmental agency is cast in the role of coordinator
among ministries (e. g. , Switzerland, W. Germany) or
is mandated to issue and enforce regulations like
the U. S. E. P. A. , (e.g., Japan, France), it has the key
role of developing and recommending a comprehensive
regulatory approach. Where such a basic comprehensive
act is missing, as appears to be the case in the U.K. ,
its absence is felt.
In any case, the influence of the environmental agency
is typically felt only gradually, because it does not
have the unlimited resource to carry out all the
mandated actions immediately. For the Common
Market Countries, which must consult together, the
pace may be further slowed.
1-6
-------
Thus it would be a mistake to conclude from the lack
of dramatic results over the last four years that
important progress has not been made in the fight
against noise.
The next logical step everywhere in the world is
increased programs of measurement of the
effect of the-noise control measures already taken,
in terms of reduced community noise levels. Increased
efforts like that in Austria (where the reduction ih
noise from construction sites was measured) are to
be expected in all countries in the years ahead.
Hopefully, more information -will also become available
on the number of government personnel and costs
required to implement the various noise control
programs. From the present reporting, only '
intriguing glimpses have been obtained on this
topic -- for example, the fact that on the national
level France now has 58 vehicle noise inspection
crews.
1-7
-------
2. INTERNATIONAL, ORGANIZATIONS
2.1 International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
Since the late 1960's, ICAO, a Montreal-based affiliate of the
United Nations, whose main purpose is to serve as a forum for matters con-
cerning international civil aviation, has also been active in promoting unified
action by all nations in standardizing measurement of aircraft noise
levels and impact and setting corresponding noise limits.
2.1.1 Organizational Summary
ICAO interprets its mandate to include being the forum
for discussion of the impact of aviation on the environment. At the
working level, a committee of specialist advisors (CAN -• Committee on
Aircraft Noise) presents recommendations to the ICAO Council for
adoption as Recommended Practices, Standards, Procedures for Air
Navigation Services, or Guidance material. 'The Council members
are representatives from agencies of the various member governments.
Comments on CAN recommendations are made by member
governments and by the ICAO Air Navigation Commission before
action is taken. After a recommendation becomes an ICAO Standard,
it must still be incorporated in various national legislation before it
goes into force for that particular nation. However, the process of
incorporation -maybe complex and ICAO member countries are
obliged by treaty to notify ICAO when an ICAO Standard will not be
put into effect or a different standard fs used. ICAO Recommended
Practices are also often incorporated into national legislation.
2-1
-------
CAN participants are either members or advisors. One
member is nominated by each entity (country or international organ-
ization). The entity may also appoint several advisors, who may be
either from government or industry. CAN meets approximately every
other year. Ad-hoc working groups continue to be active between
CAN sessions, working on various agenda items. Sixteen nations and
four international organizations participated in the latest
(1975).
All noise related ICAO Guidelines, Standards, Recommended
Practices, etc. are incorporated into Annex 16 of the "Chicago
Convention", which is the treaty instrument binding ICAO members.
(The formal title of the Chicago Convention is the "Convention on
International Civil Aviation. ")
Z.I.2 Background (ICAO work in the 1969-71 period)
Measurement, monitoring, abatement, and evaluation of noisy
were the subjects of a month-long meeting of the ICAO in November and
December 1969. The signatories, including all major air nations
except the USSR*, began to develop standard procedures for (1)
measuring noise for aircraft design; (Z) monitoring noise on and
near airports; (3) expressing the total noise exposure level produced
by a succession of aircraft; and (4) reducing noise through a variety
of aircraft operating procedures (2-4).
Aircraft
A procedure for noise certification of aircraft was also
passed over the strong objections of the Federal Republic of Germany,
Ireland, and the Netherlands,
The USSR is now a signatory.
Z-2
-------
who contended that certain allowances for very heavy aircraft under-
mined the purpose of noise certification. (2-4) On April 2, 1971,
ICAO published standards (2-3) for aircraft noise certification based
upon a scheme of three noise measuring points (lateral, flyover, and
approach) where the noise levels are dependent upon aircraft weight.
The worldwide concern over aircraft noise, particularly
that from jets, came at a time when it was estimated that the present
generation of aircraft would probably be in use for at least 3 or 10
more years.* Accordingly, attention was directed to retrofitting
existing jet engines to make them quieter. The principal impetus
came from the United States. ICAO sponsored a retrofit meeting
in November 1971, but there was no rapid progress. CAN members
asserted that the estimated retrofit cost (then $125, 000 to $250, 000
per engine or a minimum of $800,000 for a four engine transport)
was beyond the capability of most nations.
Now, five years later, the estimate is still over 8-10 years from 19751
2-3
-------
Airports
Although accord was reached on a means of expressing
the total exposure to aircraft noise suffered by persons on the ground
in the vicinity of airports, the discussion about development of
criteria and guidance related to the control of land use around airports
resulted only in a statement that a minimum of three zones
should be established for areas where development is prohibited,
restricted, and permitted. There were two basic problems to be
overcome in this respect: 1) some countries have recommended
that a five-zone, land-use protocol be employed, to give greater
flexibility to planners; and 2) there was disagreement over the
maximum permissible levels within residential areas. (2-1) The measures
that can be imposed by any national state are restricted to some extent
by the economic effects of a given action or standard. The ICAO
recommendations at the Montreal meeting were adopted as attainable
norms; individual states can always adopt more stringent ones.
However, some traffic diversion can be anticipated if certain aircraft
or certain traffic densities are forbidden at a given airport or within
a given nation.
Action on abatement of run-up noise was limited to an
exchange of views. The only recommendation emerging from
this exchange was that the member states submit results of studies
on new or improved methods of reduction.
-------
2.1.3 Recent Work
2.1.3.1 Last Several Years
The following descriptions are derived from the results
of CAN's most recent meeting in January-February, 1975 ("CAN/4") (2-2).
V/STOL
The CAN goals are to formulate a noise certification
system for all short takeoff or landing (STOL) aircraft. The immediate
goal is to draft a Recommended Practice for propellor-driven STOL
airplanes (take-off distance less than 600 meters or 2000 feet). As for
vertical take-off or landing (VTOL) aircraft, it was considered not yet
feasible to set a date for completion of a final specification.
A brief summary of current CAN thinking on STOL was
presented. The V/STOL concept would include aircraft capable at flying
in patterns similar to helicopters on the one hand or like Conventional
Take-Off and Landing (CTOL) aircraft on the other hand. Therefore,
any Y/STOL requirements must be compatible with planned or existing
helicopter and conventional light plane requirements. The current
CTOL scheme of three measurement points (flyover, approach and lateral)
should be used for STOL also, but the points should be closet in to the
runway.
2-5
-------
The Working Group for V/STOL was considering a
noise level limit in terms of effective perceived noise level (lEPNLi)
in units of EPNdB. Also, to facilitate town planning, measurement data should
be provided in terms of the A-weighted level in units of AdB as well
as EPNdB. Operating characteristics of the STOL, have also been
specified and the total package has been adopted as "Guidelines
for Noise Certification". After more experience the Guidelines may be
ready to be upgraded to an ICAO Standard or Recommended Practice.
A VTOL noise certification scheme is far from corrp letion.
Principally affecting heLicopters, this scheme still must solve problems
such as agreeing on a noise unit that will take low frequency noise
and blade slap into account, and finding a flight profile for noise measure-
ment that is meaningful in terms of actual VTOL. flight practices.
Propeller Driven Airplanes
There is an existing noise certification scheme, adopted as
a Recommended Practice, which was developed at a previous CAN
meeting. It only pertains to light aircraft (not exceeding 5,, 700 kg.)
and became effective August 1974. It specifies limits on flyovers
in level flight at an altitude of 300 m (1000 ft).
2-6
-------
Some nations have already incorporated this ixecommended Practice
into their national legislation. There are still problems concerning the
rigor with which certain operating characteristics are specified during
the test:
o A difference in power setting of 25 rpm can cause a
difference of up to 1 dB in measured noise.
o Propell er diameter ( 1 dB per 1. 5% variation).
o Temperature variations (1 dB per 10°C).
Nevertheless, the present Recommended Practice is under consideration
for upgrading to a Standard.
In regard to heavy propeller-driven airplanes (over 7, 500
kg), CAN has decided to recommend the same measuring scheme and
noise limits as it would for subsonic turbojet aircraft of the same
weight. Data on existing turbine-powered propellor-driven aircraft
designed since 1950 indicate that almost all designs could have met
these requirements, with two contemporary designs below the require-
ment by 10-15 EPNdB.
2-7
-------
Tightening the Existing Noise Limits for New
Subsonic Turbojet Aircraft
The 1975 CAN/4 recommendations for reductions
are now under consideration (2-3).
The certification scheme--a continuation of the existing
scheme—was adopted after discussion of alternatives that would
have made new permissible noise limits dependent on other factors
besides aircraft weight, such as on take off distance or aircraft
range.
Auxiliary Power Units (APU's)
Based on information submitted at an earlier CAN meeting
the Recommended Practices have been proposed by CAN to apply to
existing units. The scheme would apply noise limits at cargo and
passenger door locations and a specified distance from the aircraft
center line. Since these limits might restrict use of some existing
APU's, it is desirable that furure APU's, embody substantial noise
reductions.
SST's
The CAN position on existing SST's (Concorde &'TU-144)
is to emphasize that more data on actual noise levels for subsonic
flight should be supplied to CAN.
In regard to future SST's, there was a concern that future
SST's might not be able to meet more stringent limits proposed
for subsonic aircraft., even though they might be designed to meet the
limits now existing in Annex 16. Therefore, CAN recommended in
1975 that the presently existing limits for subsonic jet airplanes be
used as guidelines for maximum noise from future SST's. Guidelines
would be printed in Annex 16 but have less force than Standards or
Recommended Practices.
2Q
-o
-------
Retrofit
Retrofit as used by CAN refers to existing subsonic jet
airplanes still not "noise-certificated," i.e., not meeting the
existing Limits in Annex 16. The third CAN meeting in 1973 made
retrofit recommendations to the ICAO Council which the Council
did not accept. Instead, the Council adopted recommendations
calling for more information from aircraft manufacturing nations
on technical feasibility and cost data, at the same time urging
that no state take unilateral action* on retrofit until an international
agreement applicable to all ICAO members had been reached through
ICAO. In March 1974 the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration
proposed just such a retrofit requirement on all planes operating
within or into the U. S. , whether domestic or foreign flag, to become
operative in July 1978.
Information submitted by CAN members at the 1975 meeting
showed that most countries considered that (1) retrofit solely by sound
absorption materials (SAM) rather then "Rafan" was the only practical
potential policy; and that (2) the costs of retrofit were high and the
benefits minimal. This position was expressed In one form or
another by Italy, the U.K., France, Netherlands, and Sweden.
Japan was In the process of retrofitting seven B-797's, 2- B-727's
and 16 B-737's but was reserving judgement on DC-8's. The USSR
said that "Sam" retrofit would enable several of Its current production
aircraft types to meet the existing noise limits but that the USSR
did not plan to make a decision to Implement retro/lt until tests
were completed by the end of 1975. 'Others warned that ICAO
failure to adopt a policy requiring retrofit would lead to multilateral
Unilateral action here means the imposition of retrofit requirements
by a State on foreign registered aeroplanes operating into its territory.
2-9
-------
or bilateral agreements outside of ICAO, unilateral decisions by States
and /or a further increase in the growing number of night flight restric
restrictions at international airports. IATA said it was not opposed to the
concept of retrofit but in fact opposed all existing retrofit proposals*
CAN's recommendations (approved later in 1975 by the
ICAO Council) were designed to avoid requiring all states to retrofit
all non-certificated aircraft but to urge states to adopt retrofit on
a case by case basis, when modifications for a type
"„ o o are regarded by the State of manufacture to be
technically feasible and by the State of Registry to
be sufficiently effective and economically reasonable."
(Recommendation 1)
Under the second recommendation, States were requested to make
such assessments for each type and state their retrofit intentions
by January 1976.
Implementation of these recommendations may fail to
prevent incompatible requirements from arising between members
and thus is likely to satisfy no one.
2.1.3.2 Present and Future
ICAO plans the next meeting of CAN ("CAN/5") for the
late fall of 1976 in Montreal. The program and agenda
contain further work on all of the areas discussed above, with
decisive action perhaps furthes t, away on thrust reversers.
Compatibility of the noise certification schemes already
2-10
-------
underway will certainly be discussed. The CAN actions on
retrofit and future SST's will be influenced by any actions taken by
the U.S. in the first part of 1976. ICAO presently finds itself in
a position where it is constrained by its members' reluctance
to undertake expensive programs in a time of recession on one
hand, and fear that unilateral or multilateral actions will
increasingly occur outside of the ICAO forum on the other hand,
unless progress under ICAO is more rapid.
2. 1.. 4 Useful Data
2. 1.. 4. 1 Secretariat address and contacts
ICAO, Committee on Aircraft Noise
1000 Sherbrook Street W.
Montreal, Canada
H3A 2pl
Officers and Secretariat of 1975 CAN meeting (Jan. 27 -
Feb. 14, 1975).
Mr- A. A. Maurits was elected Chairman and Mr.
M. D. Dunn was elected Vice-Chairman of the meeting.
The Secretary of the meeting was Mr. H. J. Gursahaney,
Technical Officer of the Operations/Airworthiness Section, who
was assisted by:
2-11
-------
Mr. S.O. Fritsch Chief, Accident Investigation
and Prevention Section
Mr. R. Heitmeyer Chief, Economics Section
Mr. C. Devasenapathy Technical Officer, Aerodromes,
Routes and Ground Aids
Section
Mr. G. Finnsson Economist, Economics Section
Mr. J. C. Rigaud Technical Officer, Accident
Investigation and Prevention
Section
Mr. J.S. Shephard Technical Officer, Operations/
Airworthiness Section
List of CAN Working Groups
WGA.
WGB. VTOL/STOL, aircraft
WGC. Propeller driven airplanes
WGD. Subsonic jet airplanes - revision of existing requirements
for new designs.
2.1.4.Z Documentation
ICAO discussions are conducted in English, French and
Russian. All Working Papers and Reports are issued in English,
French and Russian. There is one final report published for each
CAN meeting. Views expressed in CAN Reports should be taken
as advice of a body of experts to the Council but not as representing
the views of ICAO itself. A later supplement to a Report indicates
the action taken on the Report by the Council of ICAO.
2-12
-------
Other ICAO publications include:
International Standards and Recommended Practices
adopted by the Council in accordance with Articles
54, 37 and 90 of the Convention on International
Civil Aviation and are designated, for convenience,
as Annexes to the Convention. The uniform application
by Contracting States of the specifications contained
in the International Standards is recognized as
necessary for the safety or regularity of international
air navigation while the uniform application of the
specifications in the Recommended Practices is
regarded as desirable in the interest of safety,
regularity or efficiency of international air navigation.
In the event of non-compliance with an International
Standard, a State has an obligation under Article 38
of the Convention, to notify the Council of any
differences .
Procedures for Air Navigation Services (PANS) are
approved by the Council for world-wide application.
They contain, for the most part, operating procedures
regarded as not yet having attained a sufficient degree
of maturity for adoption as International Standards
and Recommended Practices.
There are also technical manuals and ICAO Circulars,
prepared by authority of the Secretary General in
accordance with the principles and policies approved
by the Council.
2.1.4.3 Relations with Other International Organizations
The following other organizations designated people to
the CAN IV meeting in the capacity of observers, as listed in
Table 2-1.
2-13
-------
Acronym
ISO Int'l Organization F. Ingerslev
for Standardization
IATA Int'l Air Transport G.N. Goodman
Association
IFALPA* Int'l Federation of R. N. Rockwell
Airline Pilots
Association
Table 2-1. International Organizations Participating
in ICAO Noise Activities.
Designated but did not participate in meeting.
2.-14
-------
2. 2 International Organization for Standardization (ISO)*
The ISO is another important international organ-
ization doing work on measurement standards related to noise abatement
and control. Through its Technical Committee TC-43 and that committee's
two sub-committees, ISO International Standards are issued for definition
of terms, damage-risk criteria, and measurement of traffic noise,
aircraft noise, noise from electrical machines, sound insulation in,
housing, etc.
2. 2. I Organizational Summary
The International Organization for Standards (ISO) was
founded in 1948. The founders and the member bodies of ISO are the
national standards organizations. The ISO Central Secretariat is responsible foi
the day-to-day planning and coordination of technical work of ISO.
ISO technical work is undertaken by Technical Committees (TC) and
their Sub-Committees (SC) and Working Groups (WG). Technical
Committees are numbered in sequence in the order in which they are
established. The members of Technical Committees are the Member
Bodies who have expressed their willingness to participate actively
(P-members), or their desire to be kept informed of the progress of
work (0-members). Each Member Body has the right to become a
member of any Technical Committee or Sub-Committee. Each
Technical Committee and Sub-Committee has a Secretariat appointed
among the P-Member Bodies of that Committee, and chairmen of
Technical Committees may be appointed either for the duration
Information included in this report about ISO has mainly been
taken from the article "Acoustics and International Standardization
Current and Future Activities of TC 43" by Dr. Fritz Ingerslev of the
Technical University of Denmark published in the Inter Noise 76
Proceedings page 399-404.
2-15
-------
of one meeting by decision of participants at that meeting, or for several
years by decision of the ISO Council. A Technical Committee may
establish Sub-Committees charged with the study of one or more items
included in the Programme of Work of the Technical Committee. The
structure of a Sub-Committee is similar to the structure of a Technical
Committee. Technical Committees and Subi-Committees may set up
Working Groups, comprising a restricted number of individual specialists
appointed by the parent Technical Committee or Sub^-Committee in the
nomination of parent members, to prepare a particular part of the
Programme of Work of the parent Committee.
Technical Committee 43 on acoustics has been dealing
with noise problems since its establishment in the early fifties. Due to
the increasing public awareness to environmental problems in the mid-
sixties, this committee was reorganized . Two Sub-Committees - SCI
for Noise and SC2 for Building Acoustics were established in 1968.
Most countries of the world, including the USSR, are
members of the ISO and as such are entitled to vote for or against
accepting the proposal of a technical committee as an official ISO
Recommendation.
2.2.2 Background
The International Standards prepared by ISO Technical
Committee No. 43 on Acoustics, during the first fifteen years of its
existence were of great interest to specialists in acoustics and to the
public. These standards are included in annex A of this ISO section.
Dj/euCi 01 International Standards are included in annex B of this ISO
section.
2-16
-------
2.2.3 Present and Future
The object of ISO is to promote the development of
standards in the world with a view to facilitating international exchange
of goods and services, and to developing mutual cooperation in the
spheres of intellectual, scientific, technological and economic activity.
In this respect the scope of the Technical Committee^S and
its two Subcommittees involves standardization in the field of acoustics
and noise in all aspects. This scope includes, in particular, methods of
measurements of noise and evaluation of its effect on man and environment.
The ISO endeavors to meet this challenge by providing
international standards related to noise. At the present time, for
instance, TC 43/SC 1 Noise is in the process of preparing and drafting
the following series of basic documents for the measurement of noise from
various types of machinery.
Work on the following items has reached an advanced stage:
ISO/DP 4870: Acoustics Recommended methods for the
construction and calibration of speech intelligibility
intelligibility tests.
ISO/DP 4871: Acoustics Noise classification and labelling of
equipment and machinery.
See also Annex B.
2-17
-------
Also, TC43/SC2 is preparing a document on "Laboratory
tests on noise emission by appliances and equipment in water supply
installations".
2.2.4 Useful Data
2.2.4.1 Secretariat Address ; Contact Person
Central Secretariat of
International Organization for Standardization (ISO)
1 rue de Varembe
CH-1211 Geneva 20, Switzerland
Secretariat of ISO/TC 43 and ISO/TC 43/SC 1
Dansk Standardiseringsrad
Aurehojvej 12
DK-2900, Hellerup
Denmark
Secretariat of ISO/TC 43/SC 2
Fachnormenaus schuss Materialprufung
Unter den Eichen 87
D-1000 Berlin 45
Germany
2.2.4.2 Information about Documentation Published by the Organization
The following provides information about different ISO
documentation and standards.
2-18
-------
1. ISO 2204: Guide to the measurement of airborne acoustical
noise and evaluation of its effects on man. (1973).
This International Standard described the general procedures
for the measurement of noise and evaluation of its effects
on man. It is intended as an introduction to the more
specialized intructions contained in acoustical test codes
and interpretation procedures published by national and
international standardization bodies. This document defines
three types of measuring methods, viz. :
a) The survey method. This method requires the
least amount of time and equipment.
b) The engineering method. In this method, the
measurements of sound level or sound pressure
are supplemented by measurement of band
pressure levels.
c) The precision method. This method gives as
thorough a description of the noise problem as
possible.
2. ISO 1999: Assessment of occupational noise exposure
for hearing conservation purposes. (1975).
This International Standard gives a practical relation
between occupational noise exposure, expressed in
terms of A-weighted sound pressure level in dB, and duration
within a normal working week and the percentage of
the workers that may be expected to exhibit an increased
threshold of hearing amounting to 25 dB or more
averaged over the three frequencies 500, 1000, and
2000 Hz solely as a result of noise exposure.
A revision to the International Standard ISO 1999 was
proposed by the United Kingdom on April 14, 1976 at
the International Standards Organization meeting at the
National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, Md. The
proposal, which would change ISO 1999 to conform to
the new British standard, will be discussed in a Study
Group which will report at the next ISO/TC 43/SC 1-
meeting.
2-19
-------
3. R 1996: Assessment of noise with respect to community
response. (1971).
This ISO Recommendation is intended as a guide to the '
measurement of the acceptability of noise in communities.
It specifies a method for the measurement of noise, the
application of corrections to the measured levels (according
to duration, spectrum character and peak factor), and
a comparison of the corrected levels with a noise criterion
which takes account of various environmental factors.
The two last mentioned documents are widely used by
national authorities as a basis for establishment of npise
criteria or limits.
4. ISO 3740 - 3741 3742 3743 3744 - 3745 3746
This series of documents - partly published, partly
under preparation is a particularly significant series
which establish the methods to be used to determine the
sound power level of a noise source. ISO has decided
that sound power Level - rather than somnd pressure
level - should be the primary measure of noise emission
from stationary sound sources. All the documents have
the principal title: "Determination of sound power level
of noise sources".
5. Noise test codes
An important object of TC 43/SC 1 is to develop test
codes for measurement of the noise emitted by various
noise sources. In order to make it possible to compare
the noise emitted by various noise sources this must be
done on the basis of some common basic principles. .
The task must be accomplished through collaboration
with other Technical Committees within ISO or other
organizations. A test code includes two main parts, one
part describing the technique for carrying out the
acoustical measurement, another part describing the
conditions of operations of operation of the machine or
the equipment. As examples of such documents the
following can be mentioned:
2-20
-------
R 362: Measurement of noise emitted by
vehicles. (1964$
ISO 3095: Measurement of noise emitted by
railbound vehicles. (1964)
DIS 3381: Measurement of noise inside railbound
vehicles.
DIS 3481: Measurement of airborne noise emitted
by pneumatic tools and machines.
Engineering method for determination
of sound power levels.
6. Building Acoustics
In the fifties, TC 43 elaborated ISO Recommendation R
140: "Field and laboratory measurements of airborne
and impact sound transmission". This important document
is under revision, and TC 43/SC 2 has prepared a revised
Draft International Standard: "Measurement of sound
insulation in buildings and of building elements" which
has been circulated in 8 parts to the ISO Member Bodies
for approval.
ISO/R 717: "Rating of sound insulation for dwellings" is
another important document under the jurisdiction of
TC 43/SC 2.
ISO 3382: "Measurement of reverberation time in auditoria'
has recently been adopted. TC 43/SC 2 is preparing a
document on "Laboratory tests on noise emission by
appliances and equipment in water supply installations".
2-21
-------
7. Aircraft Noise
TC 43/SC 1 has developed the following documents
related to aircraft noise:
3891: Procedure for describing aircraft
noise heard on the ground (revision
of R 507 and R 1761).
ISO 2249: Description and measurement of
physical properties of sonic booms.
(1973).
2.2.4.3 Relations with other International Organizations
The ISO through tne Technical Committee. 43
has established a close cooperation with many international organizations
such as:
International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC)
Economic Commission for Europe, Transport Division
(ECE/TRANS)
International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO)
Commission of the European Communities (CCE)
International Labor Organization (IL.O)
World Health Organization (WHO)
and also with other pertinent Technical Committees with ISO.
It is possible through a proper collaboration to ensure that
all cooperating organizations use the same test methods and thus avoid
technical barriers to trade due to different test methods. An example
of such a close collaboration may be illustrative.
In 1973 the Commission of the European Communities made
a request to the Secretariat of TC 43 to try to prepare documents which
the Communities could use under the principle "reference-to-standard" if
that would be possible. As at that time the Communities started a
work on the measurement of noise within this field. Civil engineering
equipment is material which is imported and exported all over the world
2-22
-------
and therefore it is in the interest of international trade that different test
methods are not made legal in various parts of the world which e.g. could
have the effect that the manufacturers have to prepare their equipment in
different ways for the different regions of the world. Naturally, it was not the
intention that TC 43 should work for the Commission, but rather it should work
in the interest of international standardization and in the interest of inter-
national trade, and therefore the request from the Commission was discussed
at a meeting of Sub-Committee 1 in Paris in the autumn of 1974, and the
following resolution •was passed:
"The delegates present, informed of the wish of the
Commission of the European Communities to use the
principle of strict reference to International Standards
whenever possible, so as to avoid creation of technical
barriers to trade, have authorized the Secretariat to
respond to requests from the Commission in the quickest
possible way within ISO procedures. "
TC 43 is prepared to establish cooperation along the same lines with
other organizations.
2-23
-------
ANNEX A
ISO/TC t+3 "ACOUSTICS"
Survey of International ^tandards_and_ISO_Recoraraendations^
ISO 16 - Acoustics - Standard tuning frequency (Standard musical pitch).
ISO/R 131 - Expression of the physical and subjective magnitudes of sound or noise.
ISO/R 140 - Field and laboratory measurements of airborne and impact sound trans-
mission.
ISO/R 226 - Normal equal-loudness contours for pure tones and normal threshold of
hearing under free field listening conditions.
Acoustics - Preferred frequencies for measurements.
Measurement of absorption coefficients in a reverberation room.
Expression of the power and intensity levels of sound or noise.
Measurement of noise emitted by vehicles.
ISO 266
ISO/R 354
ISO/R 357
ISO/R 362
ISO 389
Acoustics - Standard reference zero for the calibration of pure-tone
audiometers.
ISO 454 - Acoustics - Relation between sound pressure levels of narrow bands of
noise in a diffuse field and in a frontally-incident free field for
equal loudness.
ISO/R 495 - General requirements for the preparation of test codes for measuring
the noise emitted by machines.
ISO/R 507 - Procedure for describing aircraft noise around an airport.
ISO 532 - Acoustics - Method for calculating loudness level.
ISO/R 717 - Rating of sound insulation for dwellings.
ISO/R 1680 - Test code for the measurement of the airborne noise emitted by rotat-
ing electrical machinery.
ISO/R 1761 - Monitoring aircraft noise around an airport.
ISO/R 1996 - Acoustics - Assessment of noise with respect to community response.
ISO 1999 - Acoustics - Assessment of occupational noise exposure for hearing
conservation purposes.
ISO 2204 - Acoustics - Guide to the measurement of airborne acoustical noise, and
evaluation of its effects on man.
ISO 2249 - Acoustics - Description and measurement of physical properties of
sonic booms.
2-24
-------
ISO 2922 -
ISO 2923 -
ISO 3095 -
ISO/TR3352 -
ISO 3381 -
ISO 3382 -
ISO 3741 -
ISO 3742 -
Acoustics - Measurement of noise emitted by vessels on inland water-
ways and harbours.
Acoustics - Measurement of noise on board vessels.
Acoustics - Measurement of noise emitted by railbound vehicles.
Acoustics - Assessment of noise with respect to its effect on the
intelligibility of speech..
Acoustics - Measurement of noise inside railbound vehicles.
Acoustics - Measurement of reverberation time in auditoria.
Acoustics - Determination of sound power levels of noise sources -
Precision methods for broad-band sources in reverberation rooms.
Acoustics - Determination of sound power levels of noise sources -
Precision methods for discrete-frequency and narrow-band sources in
reverberation rooms.
ANNEX B
ISO/TC m "ACOUSTICS"
Survey of Draft l2ternational_Standards£
DRS 140.1 -
DRS 140.2 -
DRS 140.3 -
DRS 140.4 -
DRS 140.5 -
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings 36
and of building elements - Part 1: Requirements for labora-
tories.
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings 36
and of building elements - Part 2: Statement of precision
requirements.
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings 36
and of building elements - Part 3: Laboratory measurements
of airborne sound insulation of building elements.
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings .36
and of building elements - Part 4: Field measurements of
airborne sound insulation between rooms.
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings 36
and of building elements - Part- 5: Field measurements of
airborne sound insulation of facade elements and facades.
2-25
-------
Stage;
DRS 140.6 -
DRS 140.7 -
DRS 140.8 -
DRS 362
DIS 1683
DIS 3481
DIS 3740
DIS 3743
DIS 3744
DIS 3745
DIS 3746
DIS 3822.1 -
DIS 3891
DIS 3989
DIS 4869
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings 36
and of building elements - Part 6: Laboratory measurements
of impact sound insulation of floors.
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings 36
and of building elements - Part 7: Field measurements of
impact sound insulation of floors.
Acoustics - Measurement of sound insulation in buildings 36
and of building elements - Part 8: Laboratory measurements
of the reduction of transmitted impact noise by floor
coverings on a standard floor.
Acoustics - Measurement of noise emitted by road vehicles. 31
Acoustics - Preferred reference quantities for acoustic 31
levels.
Acoustics - Measurement of airborne noise emitted by pneu- 43
matic tools and machines - Engineering method for determin-
ation of sound power levels.
Acoustics - Determination of sound power levels of noise 31
sources - Guidelines for the use of basic standards and
for the preparation of noise test codes.
Acoustics - Determination of sound power levels of noise 41
sources - Engineering methods for special reverberation
test rooms.
Acoustics - Determination of sound power levels of noise 43
sources - Engineering methods for free-field conditions
over a reflecting plane.
Acoustics - Determination of sound power levels of noise 41
sources - Precision methods for anechoic and ^emi-anechoic
rooms.
Acoustics - Determination of sound power levels of noise 31
sources - Survey method.
Acoustics - Laboratory tests on noise emission by appli- 36
ances and equipment used in water supply installations -
Part 1: Method of measurement.
Acoustics - Procedure for describing aircraft noise heard 41
on the ground (Revision of ISO/R 507-1966 and ISO/R 1761-
1970).
Acoustics - Measurement of airborne noise emitted by 35
compressor units including primemovers - Engineering
method for determination of sound power levels.
Acoustics - Measurement of sound attenuation of hear- 31
ing protectors - Subjective method.
2-26
-------
Stage
DIS 4872 - Acoustics - Measurement of airborne noise emitted by 31
construction equipment intended for outdoor use -
Method for checking compliance with noise limits.
DIS 5128 - Acoustics - Method of measurement of noise inside motor 31
vehicles.
DIS 5129 - Acoustics - Measurement of noise inside aircraft. 31
DIS 5130 - Acoustics - Survey method for the measurement of noise emit- 31
ted by stationary "motor vehicles.
DIS 5131 - Acoustics - Noise level measurement at the operator's 31
workplace on agricultural tractors and field machinery.
DIS 5132 - Acoustics - Noise from earth moving machinery - Meas- 31
urement at operator's workplace.
DIS 5133 - Acoustics - Determination of airborne noise emitted by 31
earth moving machinery to the surroundings - Survey
method.
DIS 5136 - Acoustics - In-duct sound power measurement procedure for 31
fans.
Advancement stage codes:
31 - DIS being processed for submission to Member Bodies.
35 - DIS submitted to P-members and Member Bodies for combined voting.
36 - DIS submitted to Member Bodies for voting.
41 - DIS the revised text of which will be prepared within a maximum of 3 months.
43 - DIS for which the preparation of the revised text depends on further study
of Member Bodies ' comments.
2-27
-------
2. 3 World Health Organization (WHO)
WHO is a United Nations Agency. With respect to noise, WHO
is concerned with the effects of noise on people's health and well-being.
WHO defines health not only in terms of "absence of disease or infirmity"
bat includes a general state of physical, mental and social well-being.
Therefore, whenever noise interferes with the above criteria, WHO
seeks vays to suppress or lower its harmful effects. Noise is consequently
studied not only as an occupational hazard but also as a public nuisance.
2.3.1 Organizational Summary
The long-term program of WHO on noise control is intended:
to support appropriate institutions in conducting studies on psychosomatic
effects of noise; to promote the necessary health guides and tolerance
criteria; and to assist in developing training in noise abatement.
2.3.2 Background
A major activity on noise, undertaken by WHO/Geneva
was to invite the Director of the Division of Occupational Health, New
South Wales Department of Public Health, Sydney, Australia to study
noise as an occupational hazard and a public nuisance. The summary
of this study was published in the WHO Public Health Papers Series in
1966. (2-7) The WHO Regional Office for Europe prepared its first
program on noise control at its 19th session in 1969. A report was
issued in its final form in 1970. (2-8)
2.3.3 Recent Work
2.3.3.1 Last Several Years
A special working group was established whose report on
noise control program was published in October 1971 and a set of
2-28
-------
recommendations was issued. (2-9) Another draft document, prepared
by the Study Group on Public Health Aspects of Community Noise,
was published (in English) under the title "Environmental Health Criteria
for Noise", November 1973. (2-10)
2. 3. 3. 2 Present and Future
Headquarters
The workplan of the WHO environmental health criteria
developed program indicates that a task force on noise will be convened
in the last quarter of 1976 to consider the draft document prepared last
year. Publication of a final noise criteria document is planned for the
last quarter of 1977. (2-11)
It is important to mention that the U.S. Enviro-nmental
Protection Agency has been designated as the first WHO Collaborating
Center for Environmental Pollution Control. This new Center will
advise and assist WHO in planning, developing and implementing projects
in different areas one of which is assessment and control of community
noise. (2-12)
In the area of traffic noise it has been agreed, under the
coordination of the European office, to undertake several studies on urban
traffic noise in modern big cities by the use of unified methodology. (2-13)
Copenhagen - Regional Office for Europe
At present the Regional Office for Europe is finalizing a
chapter on noise control in building code's. Other activities aiming at
assisting member countries in noise control management and particularly
those aiming at improving noise control legislation are in progress.
2-29
-------
2.3.4.1 Address and Contact Persons (2-14)
Headquarters
World Health Organization (WHO)
Division of Environmental Health
20 Ave. Appia
CH-1211 Geneva 27, Switzerland
Contact: Mr. G. Ozolins
Mr. Henk W. De Koning
Regional Office of Europe
World Health Organization (WHO)
Regional Office for Europe
8, Scherfigsvij
DK 2100 Copenhagen $ - Denmark
Contact: Dr. V. Krichagin
2.3.4.2 Information About Documentation Published By The
Organization
See References. These documents are not for sale but are
distributed through the Regional Office in Copenhagen or the Headquarters
in Geneva.
2.3.4.3 Relations With Other International Organizations
WHO officials maintain active liaison with the OECD and
ECE Noise Task Forces.
2-30
-------
2. 4 Economic Commission for Europe (ECE)
ECE is a regional UN organization. At its second
session, the Senior Advisors to ECE established a Special Task Force
on Noise (April 1974). In October 1974, the following countries agreed
on participating in the ECE Task Force: Federal Republic of Germany,
Italy, Poland, Sweden, United Kingdom, United States of America,
and the Soviet Union. The United States agreed to assume respon-
sibilities of the "lead country" on the project.
2.4.1 Organization and Objectives
The first meeting of the ECE Task Force on noise
was held in June 1975 at the Palais des Nations, Geneva, to finalize
the noise program and to develop a schedule and calendar of events
for implementing the program.
The purpose of the Task Force is to establish a viable
means of exchange among the participating countries on various
information and data in the areas of noise measurement, economic
and cost-benefit studies and any other aspect of better understanding
of environmental noise problems and methods for their control (2.4. 1).
The major objective of the Task Force noise program
is a two year study effort on community noise, defined as follows:
a. Environmental, or outside noise, including that
generated by industry will be given the major
emphasis. Excluded from consideration is indoor
and/or •workplace noise.
b. Emphasis will be placed on assembling information
on the non-physiological annoyance effects of noise
and development of effects criteria. Noise-induced
hearing loss and other physiological effects will
not be considered.
2-31
-------
The product of the two-phase program will be a
report on the status of current knowledge concerning
environmental noise effects and control measures.
Each participating country will develop a report based
upon the environmental noise-related publications
and activities in their country. These reports are
scheduled for submission to the lead country (U.S.A. )
in March 1976. They will be integrated by the
United States into a draft report which will become
the basis for the Phase I final report. The target
date for producing a final report on the Phase I
activities of the program will be early 1977
(2.4.2).
2.4.2 Background
The idea of the Task Force on Noise was developed in
January 1974. During the fourth session of the ECE Working Party
on Air Pollution Problems held in Geneva from January 7-11, 1974,
the proposal was made for the Noise Task Force to be formed and to
function under the Senior Advisors to ECE Governments on Environ-
mental Problems.
2.4.3 Scope of Work
Since the main objectives of the Task Force is to
identify the current problems and then elaborate on possible measures,
the scope of work for the Task Force is divided into two phases.
Phase I will concentrate on the identification and collection of infor-
mation in specified noise related areas from'participating nations.
Phase II will consist of an analysis of the information obtained from
Phase I and will address the goals of the Task Force directly.
2-32
-------
2.4.3.1 Last Two Years (74-75)
The proposed (in 1974) scope of work for Phase I is to
be completed by the end of 1976. Each participating country shall
describe its noise program in the following:
1) Assemble information and/or criteria describing
the impact of environmental noise on people,
structures, etc.
2) Assemble information and methods for identifying
major sources of environmental noise. Included
will be the following:
a) Descriptions of methodologies and prediction
models used to identify and classify environ-
mental noise sources.
b) Classification of major environmental noise
sources, characteristics and noise levels
into the categories of area and individual
noise sources.
3) Description of commercially available noise control
technology including costs for application by major
sources identified.
4) Description of noise control standards, regulations,
laws, land use planning, prevention techniques,
source substitution, building codes, etc. Also to
be included in this task are descriptions of cost
benefit evaluation methods and analysis.
5) Description of measurement instrumentation,
methodologies, and monitoring systems for
characterizing noise pollution problems.
a) Standard methods and/or methodologies of
noise measurements.
b) Monitoring systems.
c) Commercially available measurement equipment.
2-33
-------
6) Description of noise research, development, and
demonstration activities in areas identified in Tasks
1 through 5.
a) Resource allocations 1971 through 1976.
b) Products expected and timetable.
c) Performing organizations and country.
d) Prominent noise specialists and experts.
e) Scientific and technical publications.
2. 4. 3. 2 Present and Future
Phase II
1) Determine the magnitude and character of the
environmental noise pollution problem.
2) Identify the major problem areas in the character-
ization and/or control of environmental noise.
3) Develop recommended practices and methods for
identification and control of environmental noise.
4) Recommend areas of needed research on environ-
mental noise.
The first meeting of the Task Force was held in Geneva
in June 1975. The program was finalized and Phase I of the program
was initiated. The second and third meetings of the Noise Task Force
are scheduled for September 1976. The purposes of the meeting have
been tentatively established. They are to develop a detailed Phase II
program including recommended plans for--an international symposium
and to update the calendar of events for implementing the noise
program.
2-34
-------
The plans for 1976-78 are tentatively set as follows:
3/76 Task Force member reports on status of current
knowledge of environmental noise submitted to
lead country.
6/76 Lead country circulates first draft of Task Force
Report on Phase I for comment.
9/76 Second meeting of ECE Noise Task Force held
to finalize Phase II program.
11/76 Lead country finalized Phase I report for distribution.
6/77 Third meeting of ECE Noise Task Force held
to review status of Phase II activities and td
develop preliminary plan for international
sympos ium.
4/78 International symposium on Environmental Noise
held by ECE Noise Task Force.
9/78 Lead country finalizes report on the ECE Noise
Task Force Program including transactions from
the international symposium.
2. 4.4 Useful Data
2.4.4.1 Contact Persons
From November 1, 1975 on Mr. R. M. Marrazzo (EPA/USA)
has replaced Mr. E..E. Berkhau (EPA/USA) as Chairman of the Noise
Task Force.
Economic Commission for Europe (ECE)
Noise Task Force
Palais des Nations
1211 Geneva 10, Switzerland
Amasa Bishop; Jaek Janczak; Mr. Louznetsov
(Chairman: Rudolph M. Marazzo)
2-35
-------
2.4.4.2 Documentation
. 4. 1) UN Economic and Social Council.
Economic Commission for Europe.
Task Force on Noise, Geneva, December 10, 1975.
2-36
-------
2. 5 Association of French Speaking Acousticians "Groupement
Des Acousticiens De Langue Francaise" "GALF"
Founded in 1948, this non-profit association is set up to
facilitate the exchange of scientific and technical information among
different groups involved in all the disciplines of acoustical sciences. (2-15)
2. 5. 1 Organizational Summary
This association has a membership of a_bout 800 specialists in
the physical and social sciences. The following academic fields are
represented:
Architecture Electricity
Physiology Construction
Physics Commerce
Biplpgy Industry
Linguistics Transportation
Music Mining
Law Government
Medicine Universities
Engineering
Mechanics
Organization and structure of this association includes special
task groups to further its objectives. These special groups as of 1974
were assigned to the following areas:
Acoustic music
Physiology and
Spoken communication
Architectural acoustics
Acoustics of aerodynamics
Electro-acoustics
Environmental and industrial acoustics.
2-37
-------
2.5.2 Background
2.5.3 Recent Work
2.5.3.1 Last Several Years
GALF participated in organizing the "FASE colloquium No. 1:
"Acoustics in Telecommunications" and "FASE 75 collequium
No. 2: Machinery noise and environment" held in Paris from
29th of September to the 4th of October 1975. (2-15)
2.5.3.2 Present and Future
This association functions mainly in the following areas:
1) Publishing a tri-monthly magazine since 1968: "La Revue
d'Acous tique"
2) Arranging for conferences on noise, Thus, between
1970 and 1974 this association convened thirty conferences
3) Teaching, advanced professional courses in coordination
with the French Ministry of Education. In 1°73, for
instance, this association conducted fourteen courses
with an enrollment of 850 students.
4) Granting medals and research rewards to persons
involved in noise activities.
2. 5.4 Useful Data
2.5.4,1 Secretariat's address
Department "Etudes et Techniques d"Acoustique"
C.N.E.T. route de Tregastel 22301 LANNION
France
Address of the journal of this associatioa:
Revue d'Acoustique
Editions 1. P. F. , 12, rue des Fosses - Saint Marcel
75005 Paris, France
2-38
-------
2.5.4.2 Information About Documentation Published By The
Organization
Since 1969, a tri-monthly journal is published by this
organization. This journal "La Revue d1 Acous tique" deals with current
research, activities of various colloquia and specialized associations
as well as bibliographies of current literature about acoustics. In
additon to this journal GALF has produced the six noise monographs
related to the courses of instruction sponsored by this organization.
2.5.4.3 -Relations With Other International Organizations
GALF has established contact with acoustical societies
in different countries such as Belgium, Italy, Great Britain, Germany,
Switzerland, Spain, Poland, United States, and Latin American countries.
International activities of GALF include organizing joint
colloquia, exchanging articles from national publications and inviting
foreign noise-specialists to present lectures. In this manner also
GALF participated in organizing the scientific activities of the European
Federation of Acoustical Societies. Close cooperation exists in the same
manner with ICA (International Commission on Acoustics).
2-39
-------
2. 6 Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
(OECD)*
An intergovernmental organization mainly to formulate
policies in matters related to economics and development was established
in I960 with its headquarters located in Paris. OECD membership includes
the following countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Canada, Denmark.,
Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan,
Luxembourg, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, Turkey, United Kingdom, United States.
2. 6. 1 Organizational Summary
The establishment of the Environment Committee by OECD
in 1970 marked the first significant step of this organization's involvement
in noise problems. This position is reflected in the scope of the task of
this committee. One of its tasks is to help member governments in their
formulation and harmonization of noise abatement policies. (2-17)
2.6.2 Background
The Organization's Member countries having expresed their
increasing concern and the need for a more comprehensive approach to
environmental problems, OECD's Council responded with this mandate
for the new Environment Committee:
to investigate the problems of preserving or improving
man's environment with particular reference to their
economic and trade implications;
to review and confront actions taken or proposed in
Member countries in the field of environment together
with their economic and trade implications;
* This report about OECD has been largely based on the generous
contribution of Dr. Ariel Alexander, his memorandum OECD "Inter-
national Organization", Paris: OECD, 22 April 1976 (Ref. 1).
2-40
-------
to propose solutions for environmental problems that
would as far as possible take account of all relevant
factors, including cost effectiveness;
- to ensure that the results of environmental investigations
can be effectively utilized in the wider framework of the
Organization's work on economic policy and social
development.
The twenty-four Member countries of OECD produce more
than 60 per cent of the world's wealth and enjoy the highest incomes per
person of the world. Its Members have the economic and scientific,
technological and technical capacity required to master the problems to
which production gives rise. OEVD's goal of qualitative grwoth for the Seventies
Seventies economic development coupled with and defined by an improved
quality of life is to be achieved through the cooperation of its Members.
In early response to the need of Member countries for
mutually acceptable basic concepts for their environmental policies, the
Environment Committee (in close consultation with OECD's Industry and
Trade Committees) formulated a set of Guiding Principles, which have
been adopted by OECD's Council. These comprise:
The Polluter Pays Principle. As previously mentioned,
this is a principle of economic efficiency establishing that the costs
resulting from the impQasmentation of anti-pollution measures should be
allocated in such a way that rational use of scarce environmental resources
is encouraged and distortions in international trade and investment are
avoided. It means that these costs should be borne by the polluter, i.e.
by the producer in most cases, who may in turn modify his prices
accordingly, passing on the costs to the consumer. Thus the cost of
anti-pollution measures should be reflected in the cost of goods and
services whose production or consumption causes the pollution. Sub-
sidies for such measures should therefore be avoided by public authorities.
2-41
-------
Environmental Standards. While acknowledging differences
in environmental policies according to varying national conditions and
goals, governments should seek more stringent anti-pollution measures,
together with a high degree of international harmonization on both their
scope and their timing. Measures to protect the environment should be
framed as far as possible so as to avoid the creation of non-tariff barriers
to trade. In cases where products which may cause pollution enter into
international trade, governments should seek common product standards.
- Other Guiding Principles. In conformity with the provisions
of the GATT, these principles aim at avoiding discrimination stemming from
environmental considerations against imported products, and to exclude the
introduction of compensating import levies, export rebates or other equivalent
measures designed to offset the cost effects of differing environment policies.
As stated in the Recommendation of OECD's Council: "Effective implementation
of the Guiding Principles. . .will make it unnecessary and undesirable to
report to such measures".
OECD's Environment Committee will continue to survey the
effective implementation of these Principles, proposing appropriate notification
and consultation mechanisms to this end. The practical, as well as the ideal,
solution lies in international agreements reached, as in the past, in the
forum of the Committee most concerned.
2-6.3 Recent Work
2.6.3.1 Last Several Years
A first report on noise was issued in 1971, entitled "Urban
Traffic Noise Strategy for an Improved Environment". This report
contains a technical review of the problem, a detailed description of
national Legislative practices in the field of noise abatement and eight
recommendations to governments which were endorsed by the OECD
Council.
2-42
-------
In 1971 72, an Ad Hoc Group on Motor Vehicles created
by the Environment Committee undertook an extensive study of the
economic, social, and environmental implications of abating air pollution
and noise caused by motor vehicles. The part of the study dealing with
noise included a forecast of urban noise until 1985 and an assessment
of the costs of reducing motor vehicle noise emissions at source.
In 1973-1974, the Group on the Urban Environment (a sub-
group of the Environment Committee) undertook a broad assessment of
existing policies and practices concerning urban noise abatement in
OEGD countries. Twelve case studies were presented. A synthesis
was published in 1975, which included for the first time proposals to
adopt economic incentives for improving the efficiency of noise abatement
policies, namely noise charges and compensation for noise exposure.
At the same time, the Group on the Urban Environment
studied the environmental, urban, and economic implications of airport
siting or expansion. The Group concluded that various options were
available to governments, and that the creation of huge airports was no
longer the best solution. It suggested four alternative strategies to
expensive new investments: expanding the capacity of existing airports,
improving the efficiency of existing facilities, developing a regional
airport network, or even a standstill policy.
The Group also discussed in detail the social cost of
aircraft noise expressed in monetary terms and made a comprehensive
survey of all technical, administrative and economic instruments which
are or could be made available for abating aircraft noise exposure.
2-43
-------
The results of the Group's study are contained in an
OECD publication issued in 1975 entitled "Airports and the Environment".
In 1974, the Ministers of the Environment of OECD member
countries met in Paris for the first time. At the meeting, the OECD
Council adopted ten recommendations among which a very important one
concerning noise abatement. The text of this recommendation is as
follows:
1. That member governments strengthen their noise
prevention and abatement efforts through advance
planning and through the application of the best avail
able technology, taking into account the cost of
implementation.
2. That these efforts include the following elements:
a) The promulgation of noise emission standards
for products which are major sources of noise,
and in particular, transportation equipment,
•construction equipment, and internal combustion
engines of all kinds.
b) The requirement to consider the impact of noise
and the desirability of reducing existing noise
levels and of avoiding the creation of new noise
conditions in the planning, design, approval,
construction and operation of all major facilities
including housing, highways, public transportation
systems, airports, industrial developments, etc.
c) Adequate education programs and information
campaigns designed to make the public more aware
of the need to behave in such a manner as to avoid
producing unnecessary noise.
2-44
-------
2. 6. 3. 2 Present and Future
As a result of this recommendation, a two-year Ad Hoc
Group on Noise Abatement Policies was set up at the end of 1975.
The mandate of this new group is as follows:
1. On the basis of available evidence regarding the
impact of noise on populations, the Ad Hoc Group
shall undertake a systematic study of instruments
and policies for preventing and abating noise with
particular reference to the instructions of the Council
Recommendation on Noise Prevention and Abatement'.
Taking into account the administrative structure of
countries, such a study shall in particular concentrate
on an analysis of the various instruments, their
respective advantages and drawbacks, possible useful
combinations, an evaluation of the cost and effectiveness
of the different alternatives, as well as the conditions
for implementing them in the framework of policies
for improving the environment. '
This study shall be based both on case studies and a
systematic analysis of possible strategies, and it shall
attempt to identify the essential components of an
integrated and effective policy for noise prevention
and abatement, including those which can be implemented
at low cost.
2. The Ad Hoc Group shall identify priorities and essential
steps for gradually strengthening the emission standards
applicable to the principal noise sources, taking into
consideration technical and economic constraints.
3. In order to avoid non-tariff barriers to trade, as well
as trans-frontier pollution problems associated with
noise, and to reinforce international cooperation, the
Ad Hoc Group shall, in consultation with appropriate
international organizations:
2-45
-------
i) establish the basis for harmonizing standards
applicable to products which are sources of
noise disturbance, in particular those which
form a significant part of inter national, trade;
ii) establish the basis for harmonizing technical
and economic criteria necessary to introduce
noise control incentives - such as economic
instruments and noise labelling of products;
iii) study various methods and indices for noise
measurements.
4. In carrying out this mandate, the Ad Hoc Group will
focus its attention on major noise problems such as
transportation and construction of noise.
5. The Ad Hoc Group shall develop a procedure in order
to report to the Environment Committee on the action
taken by member governments pursuant to the Council
Recommendation on Noise Prevention and Abatement.
6. If necessary, the Ad Hoc Group shall present proposals
for international cooperation with regard to specific
problems likely to necessitate concerted policy and
action.
7- The Ad Hoc Group shall submit its conclusions to the
Environment Committee within a maximum period of
two years.
This Ad Hoc Group, chaired by Mr. J. Schettino (U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency), decided to carry out its work in
three separate panels: panel 1 on decision criteria, panel 2 on economic
instruments and land use, panel 3 on direct regulations and low-cost
improvements of the ambient noise levels. Fifteen countries and three
international organizations are participating in this program., 'the
results of which should be completed by the end of 1977.
2-46
-------
2. 6.4 Useful Data
2.6.4.1 Secretariat Address ; Contact Per sons
o Dr. Ariel Alexandre
o Dr. Jean-Philippe Barde
o Mme Francoise Feypell
OECD Environment Directorate
2, rue Andre-Pascal
75016 Paris, France
This international organization maintains a branch office
in the United States located at the following address:
OECD
1750 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.
Suite 1207
Washington, D. C. Z0006
2.6.4.2 Information about Documentation Published by the Organization.
OECD produced the following reports, documents and
publications:
- "Urban Traffic Noise", publication, 1971.
"Airports and the Environment", publication, 1975.
"Environmental Implications of Options in Urban Mobility",
report, 1973.
"Social Cost of Noise", document, 1975.
"Strategies for Urban Noise Abatement", report, 1975.
"Evaluation of Aircraft Noise Annoyance", document, 1975.
"Tentative Assessment of the Number of People Exposed
to varying Noise Levels in Seven OECD Countries",
document, 1975.
"Charging for Noise", document, 1976.
2-47
-------
I!
"Noise Reduction and Energy SavingPolicies, document,
1976.
"Decision Criteria for Noise Abatement Policies",
document, 1976.
2.6.4.3 Relationship With Other International Organizations.
Relationships are established with the European Community
(Brussels), with the UN Economic Commission for Europe (Geneva),
with WHO, with ICAO, with IATA, with the Council of Europe, with
UNEP. All these organizations send observers to the meetings of the
OECD Ad Hoc Group on noise. (2-18)
2-48
-------
2. 7 International Labour Organization (IL.P)
The ILiO» a United Nations organization, deals with the
general problems of labour and of the working conditions and environment
in particular. It aims at promoting improvements with regard to
protecting the worker against physical injuries, atmospheric pollutants,
noise and vibration, etc. and to working out appropriate standards.
(2-19)
2. 7. 1 Organizational Summary
At the 191st (November 1973) session of the governing body,
the employers' group and workers' group agreed that the agenda of the
6lst (1976) session of the conference should include an item concerning
the "working environment: (i) atmospheric pollution; and (ii) noise,and
vibration". At its 193rd (May-June 1974) session, the governing body
placed the item concerning working environment on the agenda of the
61st session of the conference; it subsequently confirmed, at its 194th
(November 1974) session,that discussion of the item would be confined to
the two aspects referred to above, namely: (a) atmospheric pollution,
and (b) noise and vibration.
The governing body of the International Labour Office (of
the International Labour Organization) decides on agendas and arranges
meetings of experts on particular subjects. As far as noise and vibrations
are concerned, the first meeting of experts took place in December 1974.
2.7.2 Background
The protection of workers against hazards caused by exposure
to harmful factors in the working environment has been the subject of
numerous studies and publications by the office, which may be said to
2-49
-------
have been dealing with this question, in different forms, since its
foundation. The subject has also been raised on many occasions by
various ILO industrial committees.
Several ILO Conventions and Recommendations contain
general provisions concerning Noise and Vibration, such as Convention
and Recommendation No. 120 (1964) concerning hygiene in commerce
and offices and Recommendation No. 97 concerning the protection of
health of workers in place of employment.
More specific provisions on noise are contained in the
ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Building and Civil Engineering
Work, the Code of Practice on Safety and Health in Shipbuilding and Ship
Repairing and the Code of Practice on Safe Construction and Use of
Tractors.
2. 7. 3 Recent Work
At the meeting of experts on Noise and Vibration which took
place on 2-10 December 1974 in Turin and which was attended by represent-
atives of eleven countries (plus official delegates of the ILO), it was
agreed that noise and vibration in the working environment constituted a
serious human, social, and economic problem.
The experts emphasized the need for noise assessment and
for exposure standards following the health criteria of WHO and the
international standards issued by the ISO (R-1999 and others) and the
IEC.
2-50
-------
The experts considered it appropriate to establish detailed
recommendations in a code of practice including noise limit levels.
This code should not be compulsory, but should provide guidance on
noise and vibration control. They stated that for prevention purposes,
correction information and training are of prime importance.
2. 7. 3. 1 Last Several Years
The International Occupational Safety and Health Information
Center (CIS) systematically collects and analyzes scientific and technical
literature from all over the world and the results of this work have been
made available to users in the form of index cards and data sheets
(including an information sheet on noise in industry). From 1974 on,
the CIS issues a single computer-produced abstract bulletin - CIS
Abstracts - where literature relating to noise and vibration is selectively
abstracted.
The International Labour Review has articles concerning
noise and vibration: "Protecting Workers Against Noise and Vibration"
(Vol. 105, No. 2, February 1972; and "Occupational Noise and Vibration
Protection in the Federal Republic of Germany" (Vol. 105, No. 2, May
1972).
Information on noise and vibration is contained in several
ILO publications relating to occupational safety and health, especially:
(i) the ILO Encyclopaedia on Occupational Health and Safety; (ii) various
publications of the Occupational Safety and Health Series, such as:
"Ergonomics in Machine Design" (OSH No. 14); and "Ergonomics and
Physical Environmental Factors" (OSH No. 21).
2-51
-------
2. 7. 3. 2 Present and Future
The committee on Working Environment of the International
Labour Conference (1976, 6lst session) had a first discussion on a
proposed international convention and supplementary recommendation
on the working environment: air pollution, noise and vibration.
Reports VI(1) and VI(2) to the 6lst session of the ILC contain infor-
mation on law and practices concerning the prevention of air pollution,
noise and vibration.
The ILO Code of Practice on the Protection of Workers
Against Noise and Vibration will be published by the end of 1976 as well
as another publication in the Occupational Safety and Health Series,
which will contain the report and the working papers of the meeting ofr
experts on Noise and Vibration (Turin, 2-10 December ^974).
2. i. 4. 1 Addresses and Contact Persons
International Labour Organization (ILO)
CH 1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland
Mr. E. Hellen, Chief, Occupational Safety and
Health Branch, Working Conditions and Environment
Department.
2. 7- 4. 2 Documentation
ILO "Working Environment", Report VI for the International
Labour Conference, 6lst Session, 1976.
ILO "Report on the Meeting of Experts on Noise and
Vibration in the Working Environment", at Turin, 10 December 1974,
21 pages.
2-52
-------
2.8. .The European Community "Common Market"
"EEC"
The European Community is an association of nine West
European countries working together to improve their peoples' Living
and working conditions by eliminating as many national barriers as
possible The founding members were Belgium, France, Germany,
Italy, Luxemberg, and the Netherlands. The United Kingdom, Ireland,
and Denmark became members on January 1, 1973. (2-20)
2.8.1. Organizational Summary
The role that the EEC is playing in the problem of reducing
and suppressing certain categories of noise can best be understood by brie
briefly studying certain provisions of the Treaty of Rome . Article 100
of this treaty states that the Council, acting by means ot an unanimous
vote on a proposal of the, Commis sion, shall issue directives for the
approximation of such legislative and administrative provisions of the
member states as have a directive incidence on the establishment on
functioning of the Common Market. (2-21) Continuing further in this
vein, Article 189 states that directives shall bind any member state to
which they are addressed, as to the result to be achieved, while leaving
to domestic agencies a competence as to form and means. It is in this
legal framework that preparation of certain noise-related directives has
been started. (2-22)
2.8.2 Background
2.8.3 Recent Work
2-53
-------
2. 8. 3. 1 Last Several Years
In the coarse of the Last few years the Commission proposed
a series of directives concerning noise nuisances. Only the directive of
February 6, 1970 relating to motor vehicles, published in the Official
Journal L-42 (2-23-1970), has been approved by the Council. This
directive applies to all motor vehicles intended for use on the road,
having at least four wheels, with the exception of agricultural tractors
and machinery and civil engineering equipment. This directive, however,
is presently under revision. (2-23)
2. 8. 3. 2 Present and Future
The EEC is in the process of determining environmental
noise criteria as required by the Community's environment program
approved by the Council on November 22, 1973. The objective to be
achieved in this regard is determing at what levels of noise various
psychological and physiological effects become apparent. The principal
concern is with such areas as interference with sleep, speech inter-
ference and annoyance.
On the basis of this program, various activities have
been undertaken in the following areas: (2-24)
determination of noise nuisance criteria;
action on sources;
research into noise nuisance.
2-54
-------
1. Determination of Noise Nuisance Criteria
A resolution is being drafted, the aim of which is to
determine the relationship between the exposure of a target to a noise
nuisance and the risk and extent of the resulting adverse effect.
2. Action On Sources
Directives presented to the Council.
a) Driver perceived noise level of agricultural tractors.
The proposal is for a limit of 90 dB(A) measured
by the OECD method.
b) Revision of Directive 70/157/EEC of February 6,
1970 on the noise emitted by motor vehicles.
The proposal calls for a reduction of 2 to 4 dB(A),
depending on the vehicle category, on the levels
laid down in the Directive of February 6, 1970.
The measurement remains the same.
c) Civil engineering equipment
Method for the measurement of noise emitted by
civil engineering equipment. The aim of the method
is to classify such equipment according to their
sound power and directivity under typical working
conditions and on an acoustically defined site.
d) Jackhamrners
This Directive lays down sound power emission levels.
It also contains the method of measurement which
specifies where and how the jackhammer is to be
set up and used as well as the method for calculating
the sound power level.
e) Tower cranes and power generators
The main source of noise on building sites are from
tower cranes and power generators. The Commission
has presented a proposal to the Council for a two-
stage reduction in permissible sound emission levels.
The levels proposed for the first state (ending on
June 30, 1980) reflect the best existing technology.
(2-25) Those proposed for the first stage are
2-55
-------
on laboratory trials and hence call for considerable
progress in this area. If the European Commission's
proposal is adopted, noise from building site
equipment will have to be kept within the following
limits contained in table (2-2).
Table 2-2. Permissible Sound Emission Level
Tower cranes
Current" generators
for welding:
200 A or less
more than 200 A
Current generators
for power supply:
8 kW or less
8 kW to 60 kW
60 kW to 240 kH
more than 240 kW
up to 30 June 1980
108
107
103
103
103
105
107
as from 1 July 1980
103
102
98
95
98
100
102 j
f) Motorcycles
Noise emission limits are presently being proposed to
the Council based on measurement methods. A
directive has been drafted to fix sound emission levels
A method of measurement based on engine speed lays
down the motorcycle's operating conditions during
the test. Measurements are carried out under static
conditions.
g) Measurement of airborne noises emitted in open
area upon a reflective area.
A general directive specifying in particular the
method for measurement of airborne noises emitted
in open area upon a reflective area, has been
proposed.
2-56
-------
2. Directives being drafted by the Commission
a) Four-wheeled vehicles
A panel of experts has been given the task of devising
a method of measuring the noise emitted by motor
vehicles as a function of the nuisance caused.
The panel has not progressed sufficiently for any
conclusions to be drawn. Several member states
are at present studying this problem.
b) Domestic appliances
The Commission hopes that it will soon be in a
position to draw up, -with the help of national
experts, outline criteria for the measurement of
noise from these appliances with the aim of
producing a test code.
c) Labelling
This is planned for various equipment, especially
jackhammers and pneumatic drills. The level
shown on the label •will be the one guaranteed by
the manufacturer.
3. Research
Preparations are in hand for an epidemiological survey
of the effects of noise on sleep.
2. 8.4 Useful Data
2.8.4.1 Address and Contact Persons
Commission Des Communautes Europeenes Service
de I1 environnement et de protection des consommateurs
Rue de la Loi 200, B-1040, Brussels, Belgium.
Contact: Mr. M. Carpentier (Director)
2-57
-------
2.8.4.2 Information About Documentation Published by the Organization
1) Reference (2-16).. This report was produced in response
to a recommendation made by the first meeting of national
experts on noise organized within the framework of the
Commission of the European Communities at Luxembourg
November 28-30, 1973. At that meeting a group of
rapporteurs were requested to prepare a joint report
on the most significant effects of noise on man. Con
Consequently, the group met in Brussels and agreed
to undertake the production of this report. This report
stands as a scientific background and support to document
number V/F/2949/74
2) Reference (2-26) was prepared by the Secretariat in
1974.
2-8.4.3 Relations with International Organizations
In principle the Common Market has agreed that it is desirable
to incorporate1 ISO measurement methods in EEC directives involving
noise. In practice the EEC noise measurement committees and ISO
committees continue to have their differences in recommendations
concerning noise measurement methodology.
2-58
-------
References for 2. 1
2-1 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Assessment
of noise concern in other nations. December 1971.
2-2 ICAO. Report on fourth meeting of the Committee
on Aircraft Noise. ICAO 9133, CAN/4. 1975.
2-3 "Aircraft Noise: Annex 16 to the Convention of
International Civil Aviation", International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO), First Edition, August 1971,
Amendment 1, April 1973, Amendment 2, April 1974,
Amendment 3, June 1976.
2-4 ICAO. Report of the special meeting on aircraft noise
in the vicinity of airports, Nov. 25 - Dec. 17, 1969.
2-5 Ingerslev, G. Acoustics and international standardization
current and future activities of TC 43. In Proceedings;
InterNoise 76, Washington, DC, April 5-7, 1976. p. 399-404.
2-6 Noise Control Report, (51 ):A-14, April 26, 1976.
2-7 Bell, A. Noise. WHO Paper No. 30. Geneva, World
Health Organization, 1966.
2-8 Lang, J. and G. Jansen. The environmental health
aspects of noise research and noise control. EURO 2631.
Copenhagen, World Health Organization, 1970.
2-9 World Health Organization. Longterm programme in
environmental pollution control in Europe, development of
the noise control programme. Report prepared by the
Working Group for the Regional Office for Europe, WHO,
The Hague, October 5-8, 1971.
2-59
-------
2-10 World Health Organization. Environmental health
criteria for noise; draft. Paper prepared for Study-
Group on Public Health Aspects of Community Noise,
WHO, Geneva, November 5-9, 1973.
2-11 Memo. F. Green, U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency to W. K. Talley, R. Strelow, and A. W.
Breidenbach, EPA/ONAC, April 29, 1976.
2-12 Memo. E. A. Cottsworth, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency Office of Intl. Activities, to J.
Schettino and R. Marrazzo, EPA/ONAC,
February 26, 1976.
2-13 Personal communication. World Health Organization,
Regional Office for Europe, Copenhagen, to Informatics
Inc., June. 3, 1976.
2-14 Personal communication. World Health Organization,
Div. of Environmental Health, Geneva, to Informatics
Inc., June 3, 1976.
2-15 Personal communication. Groupement des Acousticiens
de Langue Franeaise (GALF), Department Etudes et
Techniques d'Acoustique, CNET, to Informatics Inc.,
June 9, 1976.
2-16 (Reference 2-16 is placed at the end of the Reference List. )
2_17 Alexandre, A. International organizations; unpublished
memorandum. Paris, OECD, April 22, 1976.
2-60
-------
2-18 Personal communication. OECD, Administrator,
to Informatics Inc., May 24, 1976.
2-19 Personal communication. International Labour Office
(ILO), Occupational Safety and Health Branch, Working
Conditions and Environment Department, to Informatics
Inc., July 21, 1976.
2-20 Manhattan Publishing Company. Questions and answers about
the European community. Washington, European Community
Information Service, 1973. p. 1.
2-21 Hay, B. International legislation on external industrial noise.
Applied Acoustics, 8: 133-140, 1975.
2-22 Noel, E. How the European community's institutions work.
London, Commission of European Communities, April 1973.
12 p.
2-23 Personal communication. Commission of European Communities,
Director of Service de 1'Environnement et de la Protection
des Consommateurs, to Informatics Inc., January 30, 1976.
2-24 Commission of European Communities. Activities of the
Commission of the European Communities concerning noise
nuisance. ENV/338/75-E. 1975.
2-25 Commission of European Communities. Europe day by day.
Eurotorum, 4/76: 5, January 27, 1976.
2-26 Commission of the European Communities. Elements for
inclusion in a document on criteria and guide-levels for
noise. V/F/2949/74. 1974.
2-16 Bastenier, H. , W. Klosterkoetter, and J. B. Large. Damage
and annoyance caused by noise. Luxembourg, Commission
of European Communities, 1974. 83 p.
2-61
-------
3. COMMUNITY NOISE
3. 1 What Is Community Noise?
The environmental noise problem is a complex one
because in any setting, many different sources of noise are interacting.
For example, a family in its living room may be exposed to its own
noise, noise from the next apartment, and many external sources:
road traffic, aircraft overflight, the railroad yard, the air conditioner
on the next building, and so forth. It is the sum of all of these external
sources that we call community noise. Community noise is the noise
in our outside environment, wherever that may be, and of course,
the problem of this noise is usually worse in urban areas where sources
are more densely packed. Many countries have detailed programs for
dealing with the various external sources, and we cover these activities
source by source in the chapters that follow. In this chapter we look
at programs that tie noise control of all of the sources into an integrated
program. This is usually done at the local level. OECD experts believe
it is done best at that level. (3-1, p 30) Historically such action has been
initiated at the community level, usually in highly urbanized areas.
Most of the foreign communities began their campaigns in the late
fifties or early sixties. However, although we focus on situations
on the community level, there has been a growing trend to recognize
that actions at the national level are essential inputs to local success,
and there is a trend for national governments, even in federally
organized countries like the U.S., Switzerland, and Australia,
to accent more noise control responsibility.
3-1
-------
In general, limitations on new products and standard
road designs are best done nationally or even internationally (3-1, p. 10)
But each locality has its own unique noise features and its own wishes
about how much effort it thinks noise control is worth. Specific programs for
community noise can proceed at both the national and local levels
(Table 3-1), in addition to national new product limits and the like.
National Local
National surveys of problem. A noise survey.
National criteria newly developed. Integrated local plan development
National model ordinances for local use. Regulations.
Nationally developed standard community Organizations and funding.
noise survey methods.
Monitoring of results.
Table 3-1. Division of Noise Control Activities between
Government Levels. (Examples)
3. 2 Decision Criteria
In this section, the various factors affecting decisions
on community noise regulations are discussed. These include:
1. ) general health cause and effect criteria; 2.) survey results showing
degree of the local problem; and 3. ) noise standards, which are
authoritative published guidelines on noise limits which may be
either recommendations or mandatory.
3-2
-------
Noise Indices
Implicit in any statement of noise criteria or standards
is an assumption concerning the proper noise metric or unit of
measurement.
For an additional community noise measurement,
excluding the measurement of aircraft noise, use of the A-weighted
decibel has become standard in most countries, although some of
Japan's regulations still use the phon*.
For telescoping a time series of noise level fluctuations
data into a single meaningful indicator for the period, the L, **
(equivalent continuous noise level) incorporates the A-weighted
decibel and is at present the best candidate for a standard unit,
although the L, ("noise pollution level", developed in the United
Kingdom is an alternative. (3-1, p 7) At present there are still other
units being used for special situations or in various countries
(PNdB, NNI, TNI, CNR, L,exp, AI) (3-4). Although it is often
possible to convert one unit to another, such comparisons are
sometimes difficult. Therefore, it has been suggested that from
now on, noise measurements be taken everywhere in Lieq as well
as whatever other metrics are prescribed. (3-1, p 24) The following
graphics have been included in a report issued by the Commission of
the European Communities to indicate the extent of the community reaction
to noise.
Japanese Phon A are usually comparable with dBA for most
environmental noises.
The equivalent noise level, L, , (also called the average sound
level) is the level of a constant sound which, in a given situation
and time period, has the same sound energy as does the square
A-weighted sound pressure, over a time period that must be
stated.
3-3
-------
LO
i
COMMUNITY REACTION
Vigorous community action
Several threats of legal action, or
strong appeols to local officials
to stop noise
Widespread complaints or single
threat of legal action
A-
Sporadic complaints
No reaction, although noise is
generally noticeable
B-
D-
E-
D Day
A Evening
B Night
DATA NORMALIZED TO:
Residential Urban Residual Noise
Some Prior Exposure
Windows Partially Open
No Pure Tone or Impulses
- 1 - 1 - 1 - T - 1 - 1 - 1
45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80
NORMALIZED EQUIVALENT NOISE LEVEL IN dB(A)
85
Figure 3-1. Community Reaction to Intrusive iNoises of Many Types.
Source: (3-4 page 66)
-------
COMMUNITY REACTION
Vigorous community action A-
Several threats of legal action,or
strong appoals to local officials
to stop noise
Widespread complaints or single r
threat of legal action
Sporadic complaints
D-
No reaction, although noise is r
generally noticeable
DATA NORMALIZED TO:
Residential Urban Residual Noise
Some Prior Exposure
Windows Partially Open
No Pure Tone or Impulses
• •
•
a
• •
40 50 60 70 80 90
NORMALIZED OUTDOOR DAY/NIGHT SOUND LEVEL OF INTRUDING NOISE IN dB
Figure 3-2. Community Reaction to Intensive Noises of Many Types
as a Function of the Normalized Outdoor Day/Night
Source:
Sound Level of the Intruding Noise, Ln in dB(A).
dn
(3-4).
80
Q 60-
O
<
I 40-
q
i
a
DC
20-
195% confidence interval
jai Mean
—i—
80
T
-20 ,
m
-15 3
m
-Z.
-10 o
o
-o
-5 i
z
>
~2 5
-1
—T 1 1 1 r
50 60 70 80 90
DAY/NIGHT AVERAGE NOISE LEVEL. Ldn IN dB(A)
COMMUNITY REACTION
- Vigoro js act ion
_ Compi jints of threats
of IGOJ! action
- None
| 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
50 60 70 80
EQUIVALENT ENERGY LEVEL. Leq INdB(A)
Figure 3-3.
Source:
Intercomparison of Various Measures of Individual
Annoyance and Community Reaction as a Function
of the Day/Night Average Noise Level, L , in dB(A)
and Equivalent Energy Level, L indB(A).
eq
(3-4). 3_5
-------
3. 2. 1 Health Criteria
Many countries have nationally-issued positions on the
cause and effect relationships between levels of environmental noise
and adverse effects on people*. One of the better-known ones is
the "Criteria Document" issued by the U.S. EPA in 1973. (3-2)
Other countries have similar works or have incorporated
assumptions into noise standards.
A recent OECD study summarized the environmental
noise effects as follows:
"Effects of Noise
It was said that noise at the levels at which it normally
occurs in the urban environment does not usually lead
to any identifiable (or significant) direct physiological
harm. The current medical evidence is that non-
impulsive noise at levels below 75 dBA (Leq^ probably
causes no lasting direct physiological damage to the
human body. Work by the United States Environmental
Protection Agency suggests there may be some very
slight hearing loss to normal adults in industrial noise
situations after ten years exposure to daily 8-hour
continuous levels of 75 dBA (L,eq), although a British
Government code of practice accepts that exposures
of up to 90 dBA over an 8-hour working day limits the
risk of "significant" hearing loss to a very small
proportion of the exposed persons and some experts
do not regard traffic noise of this level as a risk to
hearing (because traffic noise does not contain very
loud peaks). According to a survey carried out for
the United States Environmental Protection Agency
fewer than 10,000 people in the United States are
exposed in their residential surroundings to outdoor
day/night average sound levels above about 86 dBA
(Ldn), and fewer than 500,000 to levels above 80 dBA
The same holds true for occupational noise, but these criteria
are covered in Chapter 8 on "Occupational Noise".
3-6
-------
). Allowing for the noise attenuation provided by
house structures, it can perhaps be inferred that the risk
that urban dwellers may suffer hearing damage due to
noise exposure outside their occupational surroundings
is probably very small, although complacency in the
present state of knowledge could not be justified.
Apart from direct hearing damage, noise may have
indirect physiological and psychological effects. Inter-
ference with sleep typically begins to occur at levels of
about 35 dBA. It is not clearly established how far this
interference, which need not amount to prevention of or
arousal from sleep, affects the subsequent well-being and
performance of the sleeper. Interference with normal
speech communication is present at about 55 dBA and
this aspect of noise intrusion contributes both to
subjective annoyance and loss of performance. There
is the easily entertained suspicion that feelings of
severe annoyance aroused by noise may contribute to
overall "stress" and so to stress-related conditions
such as heart disease or mental disorders. In this
case direct "sound arousal" effects are less likely
to be more significant than subjective responses to the
source of the noise, e.g. feelings that the noise could
be more efficiently controlled or even, in the case of
aircraft noise, fear of aircraft crashing. "Significant"
noises such as human voices or music may be subject-
ively just as annoying as much louder noises of an
inanimate kind. It is worth noting that, conversely,
actual hearing damage may result from noise to which
people voluntarily expose themselves. Thus, it has
been found that industrial •workers are sometimes
reluctant to take measures to protect themselves
against very severe occupational noise, and one may
also mention the suggestion that some amplified pop
music may perhap's cause hearing damage. " (3-l» P 4)
As to the extent of the noise problem and its intensity on the
people in different countries the same OECD reported in October 1975 the
following figures as contained in table (3-2) and figure (3-4).
3-7
-------
OJ
oo
!Toise T-evel
Ld in dB(A)
50
55
60
65
70
75
Belgium
06
68
39
12
1
0
Federal
Republic
of Germany
87
72
46
18
4
0
Japan
91
80
53
31
10
1
Luxembourg
35
67
37
11
1
0
Spain
83
74
50
23
7
1
Switzerland
84
66
38
12
1
0
United '
States
89
76
52
24
6
1
Seven
Countries
P9
76
49
24
7
1
Table 3-2 . Percentage of Population Exposed to a Noise Level Equal to
or in Excess of a Given Value.
Source: (3-4)
-------
100
, Ader Go/lowoy rl o/ / I/ : USA
i Cal/awa)- ct al (!) . Elotl-Unti
Q1
50 60
Outdoor Dorlime Sound L«vcf • Niwav so
f
-------
3.Z.2
Survey Results
3. 2. 2. 1 Complaints and Annoyance
English General Community Survey (The Wilson Report)
Virtually every survey ranked noise from surface traffic
as the most prominent single factor in the urban noise environment.
However, the figures from a 1968 British survey (Table 3-3) show that
surface traffic is by no means the only source of annoyance:
Description of Noise
Road traffic
Aircraft
Trains
Industry/construction work
1 Dome stic /Light appliances
Neighbors' impact noise
(knocking, walking, etc. )
Children
Adult voices
Radio /TV
Bells /alarms
Pets
Number of People 1
Annoyed Per 100 Questioned j
When at Home
36
9
5
7
4
6
9
10
7
3
3
When Outdoors
20
4
1
3
-
-
3
2
1
1
-
When at Work '
7
1
-.
10
4
-
-
2
1
1
-
Table 3-3. Sources of Noise Annoyance in England.
Source: (3-7)
3-10
-------
While the absolute percentages vary from community
to community, the foregoing list is fairly typical. The same noise
sources appear repeatedly, augmented from time to time by sources
of particular concern in certain localities: river boat whistles on
the Danube, motor boat exhausts on Swiss lakes, radios in Russian
apartment complexes, etc. On the question of urban vs. rural
disturbances, a clue is given by data from a poll of 1600 people
in Norway (Table 3-4).
Type of Noise
A. Noise from motor vehicles
B. Noise from aircraft
C. Noise from railroads
D. Noise from neighbors
Number of People Annoyed
Per 100 Questioned
All Questioned
17
3
4
5
Area
Urban Rural
20 11
4 1
5 1
6 3
Table 3-4. Sources of Noise Annoyance in Norway.
Source: (3-8)
More recent surveys continue to confirm that road
traffic noise is the chief factor in community annoyance (3-1, p. 8).
3-11
-------
The Swedish-Italian study
The percentage of people annoyed by the same noises is
likely to vary as a function of national life style. It is true that the
train noise annoyance studies already described coincided well for
the United Kingdom, Japan and France. On the other hand there is
the now-famous Swedish-Italian study.
This comparative study with a sample population (matched
in terms of age, social, and occupational status) of 200 people in Stockholm
and 166 people in Ferrara, Italy, came up with a statistically significant
difference -- 92% in Stockholm versus 63% in Ferrara spontaneously
mentioned traffic noise, and 61% in Stockholm versus 43% in Ferrara
were disturbed by traffic noise. The conclusion was drawn that
results concerning annoyance reactions to traffic noise in one country
cannot be directly extrapolated to another. (3-9) See also the Japanese
and the French Train Noise Surveys in Chapter 5, "Surface Noise" of
this report.
3.2.2.2 Noise Surveys
3.2.2.3 Noise Standards
Besides investigating criteria, many countries have
gone one step further and issued suggested levels of noise that
should not be exceeded if the public health and welfare (including
freedom from annoyance for most of the population) are to be
preserved. We shall refer to such levels as "environmental noise
standards" whether they are national laws or merely suggested
guidelines.
3-12
-------
Generalized desirable noise levels
One way to express desirable levels is in terms of
total exposure of an observer in various settings. For example,
Table 3- 5 shows desirable levels identified by the U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, where annoyance is assessed on the basis of
speech interference.
Table 3-5. Noise Levels Identified by the U.S. EPA as Requisite
to Protect Public Health and Welfare
Effect
Level
Area
Hearing loss
Outdoor activity
interference and
annoyance
Indoor activity
interference and
annoyance
L (24) 70 dB*
eqv
L , 55 dB
dn
L 55 dB
eq
L , 45 dB
dn
L 45 dB
eq
All areas
Outdoors in residential
areas and other places
where quiet is a basis
for1 use
Outdoor areas where
people spend limited
time, e. g. playgrounds
Indoor residential
Other indoor areas
such as schools
*On the basis of annual energy averages of daily level over
40 years; this level makes allowance for occupational
exposure of up to 75 dB L (8 hours).
3-13
-------
A recent French compilation showed that in general,
long range target standards adopted by other countries did not disagree
with U.S. levels in Table 3-5. At the same time, typical existing
outdoor standards of some countries were now about 10 dBA less
stringent (equivalent to about L,eq - 65 dBA) than the long term goals,
and it was recommended that the various existing, country standards
could and should be "standardized" at L,,>n = 67 dBA outdoors and
eq
47 dBA indoors:
"In the United Kingdom, the following limits are
prescribed: 50 NNI for airplane noise and 68 dBA
for ground traffic noise. The indoor noise shall not
exceed 50 dBA, if construction is forced in a very
noisy zone.
In Japan, the limits are: 65 Leq dBA during the
daytime, evenings and mornings, 60 at night for
ground traffic noise and 70 WECPNL for aerial
traffic.
In France, N = 84 threshold is retained for aerial
traffic and L,eq = 65 dBA ( 8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.)
threshold for ground traffic.
Taking into account the fact that L-eq, LJQ and NNI
are closely related, the cited limits can be assumed
identical within 2 dB error. We propose to retain
67 Leq in dBA as the outdoor noise level limit above
which construction of dwellings can be authorized
only under special safeguards. The indoor noise
level indwellings should not exceed Liea = 47 dBA "
(3-3 p. 26 + 27) 4
3-14
-------
One International Criterion
ISO passed Recommendation 1996 in 1971. R 1996
uses a different decision criterion for identification of noise problems
requiring action, a criterion based on prevention of annoyance and
complaints due to a particular source rather than all of the noise
sources acting together. The R 1996 principle has been incorporated
in some national standards and thus passed on to localities. Although
it suggests a "basic criterion" of 35 to 45 dBA (Leq) outdoors in
residential areas, in essence, its principle is that if a contemplated
new source will not produce noise more than 10 dB greater than the
sum of all the existing sources, widespread complaintR are not to
be expected in spite of what the new level may be. (3-11, p. 8) It is
clear that while this method is useful for complaint prediction, it is
not suitable as a noise standard, for if this principle alone was
used without any absolute limits in addition, there would be nothing
to prohibit community noise levels from increasing indefinitely.
A creeping (gradually increasing) background level would be possible.
3. 3 Direct Regulations
3.3.1 National
Some national land zoning schemes have legal force.
See Table 3-5.
Finally, source emissions regulations imposed at the
national level (or for Common Market countries, potentially the
international level), may be a contribution to community noise
programs on the one hand and a limitation on the other. There
3-15
-------
TABLE 3_6
Comparative Table of Noise Emission Standard Values in Federal Republic of Germany
and Selected European and Non-European Countries
Note: As of now -we have no specific laws for Belgium, Denmark, France, Holland and Norway,
though noise abatement provisions are available in these countries at local levels,
i.e. police regulations)
Country
Existing laws and
regulations, in force since:
Federal Republic (L )
BIm Sch G (formerly
Gewerleordnung) 1974
Industry:
TA noise 1968
VDI 2058 - 1960/73
Construction:
AW constr. noise 1970
(emission like TA noise)
Great Britain (L )
ec^
BS 4142 (1967)
Industry: in preparation,
similar to BS 4142
Austria (L )
OAL directive 3
Bl. 1 - 1972
95% of OAL dlr. 3
Bl. 1 - 1972
Industrial Area
Day
, 70
75
70
60
Night
70
65
70
60
Mixed Area
Day
60
70
60
50
Night
45
60
50
40
Residential Area
Day
50
50
60
50
40
Night
35
40 rural
50 urban
40
30
Criteria for establishing a
standard or issuing a regulation
1. Avoidance and local acceptance
versus noise.
2. Existing level of technology.
3. Exceeding the level up to 20 dBA.
4. No regulation on zoning; traffic
noise and sound propagation are
not taken into account.
1. Consideration for traffic.
2. Older workshops have noise
levels higher by 10 dBA
(85/75 dBA)
1. Consideration for traffic.
2. Indoor values are lower by 5 dBA
with open windows, by 15 dBA
with close windows (3 and 4)
OJ .
I
-------
Table 3-6 (Continued)
Country
Existing laws and
regulations, in force since!
Sweden ( L )
eq'
Environmental Protection
Law 1969
Switzerland (L )
USSR (L )
eq'
Laws (Industry):
SN norm 1956
205-56 ff
SN norm 1965
535-65
USA - New Jersey only (L )
Japan
Noit>e Contrul Law for
Industry & Construction 1968
Note: Japanese limits are nc
and high levels (> 50 d
Industria
Day
1 Area
Night
Mixed Area
Day Night
Reside
Day
;ntial Area
Night
"sanitary safety
zone" : day = fc>0;
night = 50
60
70
70-65
>t exact c(
BA) phon
50 rural
60 urban
day = b 5
05-55
junterpar t
(A) and B
night = 55
o5-t>0 55-50
s tor dBA limitt
A are roughly e^.
45
50
60
50-45
but to
^uivale
35 suburb
60 rural
50 urban
43-40
r mode rale
it).
Criteria for establishing a
standard or issuing a regulation
Rules laid down from case to case
(level of technology).
1. Consideration for traffic.
2. Permissible day/night peaks, in
certain cur cums tances, higher
by 10 dBA
1. Mrict zoning.
2. Sanitary zones around industrial
complexes .
3. Following the ISO TC-43.
4. Ruling from case to case (level
of technology).
5. Consideration for traffic.
ii. i'urnussible peaks higher by 25 dBA
Only OIK.' level for 1 lie day and one
for the night time.
1 . Strut zoning .
2. Consideration for traffic.
OO
-J
-------
Table 3-6 (Continued)
Country
Existing laws and
regulations, in force since:
ISO (L, )
eq
ISO R1996
Industrie
Day
70-60
il Area
Night
60-50
55-45
Mixed
Day
60-50
Area
Night
55-45
45-35
Resid
Day
45-35
ential Area
Night
35-25
30-20
Criteria for establishing a
standard or issuing a regulation
1. Consideration for traffic.
2. Departs from basic values of
35 or 45 dBA allowing for traffic
and industrial noise and deducing
10-15 dBA for night time.
3. For noise levels lasting less than
56 percent of the total, lower
limits are proposed.
4. Noise peaks may exceed not more
than 30 dBA.
CO
-------
may be a limitation if they prempt localities who desire to enforce
source noise limits stricter than the national ones.
3.4 Other Government Actions
3. 4. 1 National
One example of non-regulatory contributions from the
national government to community noise programs is the criterion
developed on the national level for local use. This topic has been
covered in a preceding section. There are also other national
non-regulatory actions.
Examples:
Model building codes
Model ordinances
Helping •with measurement methods for enforcement
Environmental Impacts Statement Process.
3-19
-------
References
3-1 OECD, Environment Directorate. Strategies for urban
noise abatement: an overview. Paris, OECD, 1975. 35 p.
3-2 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Public health
and welfare criteria for noise. July 1973.
3-3 Decision criteria. Draft paper prepared by the French
delegation to the Ad Hoc Group on Noise Abatement Policies,
OECD, Paris, February 1976.
3-4 Commins, D. E. and L. J. Schreiber. Tentative assessment
of the number of people exposed to varying noise levels
in seven OECD countries. OECD Environment Committee
Ad Hoc Group on Noise Abatement Policies, Paris, October 1,
1975.
3-5 Dominique, A. Enquete acoustique et sociologique
permettant de definir une echelle de la gene eprouvee
par 1'homme dans son logement du fait des bruits de train
(Acoustic and sociological survey to define a scale of
annoyance felt by people in their homes due to train noise).
BEN/TIE 88. Paris, Centre Scientific et Technique du
Batiment, June 1973.
3-6 Schultz, T. J. Community noise ratings. London,
Applied Science Publishers Ltd. , 1972.
3-7 Wilson, A. , ed. Noise; final report of the Committee on
the Problem of Noise. London, Her Majesty's Stationary
Office, 1963.
3-8 Aftenposten, Oslo, July 22, 1968.
3-20
-------
3-9 Jonsson, E. , A. Kajland, and S. Sorensen. Annoyance
reactions to traffic noise in Italy and Sweden; a comparative
study. Archives of Environmental Health, 19(11): 692-699,
1969.
3-10 U.S. Enviornmental Protection Agency. Information
on levels of environment noise requisite to protect public
health and welfare. March 1974.
3-11 International Standards Organization. ISO recommendation
1996 for assessment of noise with respect to community
response. May 1971.
3-12 Easterner, H. , W. Klosterkoetter, and J. B. Large.
Damage and annoyance caused by noise. Luxembourg,
Commission of European Communities, 1974,, 83 p.
3-21
-------
4. AIR CRAFT/AIRPORT NOISE
This section deals with noise control approaches other than
source reduction of the noise from aircraft itself, which is presently
being addressed chiefly at the international level by ICAO (see Section
2. 1).
This section will cover such abatement topics strategies
as:
4. 1 Evaluation (Decision Criteria)
4. 1. 1 Criteria for evaluating the effect of noise around
airports
4. 1.2 Noise monitoring systems for airports
4.1.3 Estimates of numbers of people exposed
4. 2 Regulations
4.2. 1 Operational patterns (takeoff and landing procedures).
4. 2. 2 Curfews
4.2.3 Banning or limiting certain types
4. 3 Other Measures
4.3. 1 Noise taxes incorporated in landing fees.
4.3.2 Zoning near airports.
4.3.3 Purchase of houses to create
4-1
-------
4. AIRCRAFT/AIRPORT NOISE
Aircraft noise poses a major environmental problem primarily
near major airports. The most impact is felt in residential communities
exposed to aircraft flyovers during takeoff and landing operations. The
implications of this phenomenon are extremely complex especially in
industrial countries with heavy air transport.
In their attempt to control or decrease the effect of aircraft
noise near airports different countries have taken different approaches
and measures ranging from operational to zoning plans. It is the purpose
of this section of the report to examine the extent of this noise problem
and to explore the different measures and plans undertaken by various
countries to deal with this issue.
4. 1 Evaluation (Decision Criteria)
4. 1. 1 Criteria For Evaluating The Effect Of Noise Around Airports
Criteria for evaluating the effect of noise around airports
has been made according to certain circumstances which are consequently
different. To present an overview of various approaches to aircraft
noise assessment, some criteria are presented. In Sweden, for instance,
(4-1) the Swedish criteria for airport noise was presented in 1961 by
a governmental investigation named "Flygbuller som samhallsproblem"
(Aircraft noise as a social problem). The criteria given in this investigation
is called "critical noise limit", CNL.
In the Netherlands (4-2.) the extent of the aircraft noise
problem is assessed by computing the noise contours around all existing
O
airfields for various noise-load values and by subsequently computing the
number of houses, schools, hospitals, etc. within these contours. The
noise-load contours are expressed in so called Kosten-Units (KE);
4-2
-------
these units were developed during a 6-year study in the mid-sixties
and are closely related to the Noise and Number Index, used in the UK.
Input data for the computations are based on the results of monitoring
stations around the main airfields and a recent investigation of the noise
characteristics of the military aircraft in use as well as on the flight
characteristics.
More than 5% of the total land area is subjected to a noise
load of 40 KE or more (corresponding with an Ldn 60 dBA), which is
considered to be the maximum allowable noise load for new housing
developments.
The impact of aircraft noise on people is assessed by using
the results of aircraft noise surveys. The main survey was performed
around Schiphol airport in 1963 but additional surveys and checks are
regularly being made.
In Romania aircraft noise is determined by the effective
perceived noise level (EPNL) in units of EPNdB. In the United Kingdom
noise standards take into account any pure tones and also the length of
time for which the highest noise levels are experienced. Accordingly
they also are expressed in terms of EPNL. Meanwhile social surveys
around Heathrow have shown that the daytime annoyance caused by air
traffic depends on both the maximum perceived noise level (PNL) in units
of PNdB and also the number of aircraft heard during a given period. The
so-called noise and number index (NNI) combines both these quantities.
Where traffic at a particular civil airport is busy enough for the setting
up of an insulation grant-aid scheme covering nearby dwellings, the
entitlement under it corresponds generally with the 55 NNI contour.
In Switzerland, aircraft noise is generally evaluated with
the NNI. NNI curves have been developed for the large civil airports in
the cities of Zurich, Geneva and Basel. About 4, 000 people were inter-
viewed during 1971 and 1972 on the subject of noise annoyance in the
airport regions of Zurich, Basel and Geneva and valuable results were
made out of that survey. South Africa, through the South African Bureau
of Standards (SABS) has developed its own national standard codes of
practice for measurement and assessment of aircraft noise at airports.
4-3
-------
Table 4-1 gives an overview of the different criteria and
assessment measures of aircraft noise at airports in different countries.
TITLE
Noise and number
index
Storindex
Indices de
classification
Annoyance index
Noisiness index
Noise exposure
Aircraft
exposure level
ABBRE-
VIATION
NNI
5
R
AI
NT
L
exp
^
COUNTRY OP
ORIGIN
U.K.
Germany
Prance
Australia
South
Africa
Netherlands
ISO
DEFINITION
Wx* 15 10g N - *
d/«0 log d/T) rT 10" Q(t)-dt
Ep,rm - 16 + 10 log (N/960)
^max + 5 log £
10 log 2 10 L™Da*/1°
10 log £{K2 (t/T)lO A ]
L /15
20 log 2(k.10 ) - 106
10 log SlO^™71^ 10
NOTE
1
2
3
4
Table 4-1. Some National Aircraft Noise Exposure Indices,
Source (4-34)
Notes:
1. The value of °^ and the choice of the measure Q (t) are left free
but in practice the former is take to be 1/13.3 and the latter to be
2. C, is the annual average runway utilization factor.
3. K is a time-of-day factor, 1 from 08.00 to 18.00 hrs.
4. k is a time-of-day factor, the same as K2 in the South African
formula.
4-4
-------
4.1.2 Noise Monitoring Systems
The act of monitoring automatically constrains the aircraft
into some kind of maneuver in order to comply. Microphones are
stationed at certain distances from the end of the runways representative
of community/airport interface regions. The purpose of the microphones
is to monitor the aircraft noise on take-off, since it is considered to be
the main source of noise disturbance. To achieve the noise level standard
most aircraft have to reduce engine thrust over the monitoring positions
which also means thai a re-application of power is necessary some time
later. Of course, variations in the perceived effects of noise levels
exist according to day, evening, and night take-offs. Monitoring was
first used at London and New York.
The second approach, and the one adopted, at most major
European airports, is based upon the estimated performance of a
particular aircraft type or class of airplanes. Noise levels are set
from this performance data, and the monitoring positions measure and
record the actual levels.
The third system, is one just being initiated by the State of
California. This is the most comprehensive, and consequently the
most complex to implement, and includes the concept of single flight
monitoring, and the monitoring of a noise impact boundary- (4-5)
4-5
-------
Presently, there are a number of monitoring systems in
operation around the world. Most systems are automatic and
computerized. When an aircraft exceeds the threshold noise level,
it is identified and data is presented through an automatic print-out
of the results which gives the maximum level of noise. In this respect
besides mentioned cities, a short survey of countries seems necessary.
Aircraft noise monitoring exists at the following airports
in France: Orly, Charles de Gaulle, Nice-Cote d'Azur, Bordeaux-
Merignac and Toulouse-Blagnac.
Swiss airports have noise monitoring systems to assure
that individual aircraft do not make excessive noise. The noise limits
are based upon statistical distribution of typical flyovers. Warnings
are issued to violators, and if an aircraft is repeatedly noisy, the
airport authorities confer with the respective airlines. Geneva and
Zurich use monitoring installations of the Hewlett-Packard type.
(4-6)
In West Germany all the international airports are required
to maintain monitoring systems. Frankfort is the only airpott which
assesses a penalty against the airline that violates the noise standard.
A monitoring system for aircraft noise is working at
Arlanda, Sweden, and a similar system will be installed at Landvetter,
the new airport in Gothenberg, which will be opened in 1977. Regular
monitoring of aircraft noise is also carried out at fixed and mobile
points.
Mobile noise measurement vans are operated in Canada
in the vicinity of the Toronto and Montreal airports. In other regions
inspectors take isolated readings with portable meters. (4-7)
Mobile and fixed monitoring systems are also carried out at major
airports in Australia.
4-6
-------
Japan's experiment with aircraft noise monitoring systems
is rather interesting since it operates according to a time zoning.
With two and five noise' monitoring towers installed in the vicinity of
Tokyo and Osaka International Airport, respectively, aerodrome
officials in charge work at the central observation station at each of
the aerodrome to supervise the enforcement of various sorts of control
measures for noise reduction and also record the data on noises.
At Osaka International Airport, under the above-mentioned
noise supervision system, regulated noise levels of the noise volume
classified by the time zone •were established in February, 1970 on the
basis of noise levels measured at the noise monitoring tower installed
in the Kushiro Primary School located about 2. 4 kilometers northwest
of the airport. The airport authority has taken measures to prohibit such
flights that threaten to cause the noise above the established, regulated
noise levels as shown in Table 4-2.
Time zone 6:30-7:00 7:00-2:00 20:00-22:30 22:30-6:30
Noise intensity 100 107 100 (107 in 75
(phons) the case of
landing)
Table 4-2. Noise Levels time - zones at Osaka International Airport.
Source: (4-8)
As a result of the enforcement of these measures, aircraft
for international service departing from this aerodrome have become
subject to limitations on their "takeoff" weights and so, they have
now been restricted by flying distance (4-8).
4-7
-------
Concerning the noise monitoring system, of the Heathrow
airport in London, the following diagram gives an idea of the present
and the proposed monitoring positions around that airport.
Figure 4-1. Proposed and Existing Monitoring at Heathrow Airport,
London
Existing monitors.
Proposed monftorir
A Alternative at 5 mi les.
* Proposed monitoring positions at 7 miles.
Source: (4-8, p. 15)
4.1.3 Estimates of People Exposed to Aircraft Noise
Although aircraft noise is not the largest source of noise
nuisance, it affects a significant proportion of the population. The
following table 4-3 gives a general estimation of number of people affected
by sources of noise among which aircraft noise-
-------
Mode
Traffic
Aircraft
Industrial
Railways
Numbers
112 million
5 million
74 million
(intermittent exposure)
-not known yet-
Percent Population
45
2
30
4.2
Table 4-3. People Exposed to High Environmental Noise Levels
Note: High Environmental Noise Level is not defined in the source.
Source: (4-10)
Regulations
4. 2. 1 Operational Patterns (takeoff and landing procedures)
An important element in noise control is to reduce the noise
output of an airplane during a takeoff or landing maneuver, particularly
over areas of high population density. In an attempt to minimize the
effect of aircraft noise, a variety of operational procedures, in this
respect, have been introduced around the world. Different measures
and regulations have been made corresponding to certain elements
existing at each particular airport. An overview of the different
approaches some countries have made is presented.
Japan has taken different operational countermeasures to
combat against aircraft noise. At Tokyo International Airport for
instance, a measure was put forth to make all aircraft takeoff and land
on the side of the sea between 10 a.m. and 7 p.m. Additionally,
other countermeasures for improvement of aircraft operation systems
are now in effect. The noise reduction climbing system (the cutback
4-9
-------
system) is designed to make the aircraft restrict its engine
power over densely-populated areas. This system is now in
effect at Osaka International Airport. (4-8, p 7)
Preferential runways for takeoff or landing of aircraft are
specified to make aircraft takeoff or landing in areas less affected by
aircraft noise. This system is presently in effect at Tokyo and Osaka
International Airport and Matsuyama Airport . (4-8, p S)
The Canadian Minister of Transport has specified noise
abatement procedures for the operation of aircraft in the vicinity of
the international airports at Vancouver, Edmonton, Winnipeg, Toronto,
Ottawa, Montreal/Dorval.
London Heathrow has the so-called minimum noise routes
for aircraft taking off. There are also preferential runway systems in
operation in Zurich, Switzerland and Amsterdam (Schiphol), Netherlands.
Canadian Ministry of Transport is considering the possibility of
restriction of specified runways at some airports for usage only by
quieter aircraft. (4-7, p 2-4)
As for Switzerland, a special instruction was issued on
March 27, 1975, concerning "low drag-low power" technique of landing
in order to reduce noise nuisance in the approach zones of airports.
The text reads:
During descent on IFR and VFR approaches an optimum clean
configuration "low drag-low power" should be maintained
as long as possible, i.e., landing gear, flaps, etc. should
be extended as late as possible.
Furthermore, cruising rmp should be maintained as long as
possible in the case of aircraft equipped with variable pitch
propellers .
4-10
-------
Daring ILS approaches the speed should be reduced on
glidepath by extending gear and setting flaps gradually;
however, when passing "Outer Marker" at the latest
(in VMC at 500 FT AGL at the latest), landing configuration
and proper approach speed should be established.
During visual approaches the final approach should be
carried out at an angle of not less than 3° . (4-6 p 2)
This "low drag-low power" policy was introduced for the
Swiss airports in compliance with the International Civil Aviation
Organization (ICAO) recommendations (AN 1/54.3 - 73/2ZO) of January
11, 1974, (4-15)
The Swiss government intends to re-examine the existing
regulations on noise abatement for piston-engine aircraft with a takeoff
weight of up to 5, 700 kg For aircraft with a heavier take-
off weight, the standards established by the ICAO have been applied
since 1972 . (4-9, p 2)
4. 2. 2 Curfews
Countermeasures against civil aircraft noise in some airports
are in the form of curfews aimed at prohibiting the takeoff and landing of
airplanes during certain hours (usually at night).
The Japanese government has taken a measure towards
"prohibiting takeoff and landing of jet aircraft betweeen 11 p.m. and
6 a.m." at Tokyo International Airport in effect from December of
1962, and at Osaka International Airport in effect from November of
1965. Concerning Osaka International Airport the government took
action to prohibit takeoff and landing of all aircraft, except for
propeller-driven "midnight" mail planes between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m.
(4-8, p 6)
4-11
-------
In Germany, the airports have a partial curfew generally
between 10 or 11 p.m. and 6 a.m. Swiss airports maintain restrictions
from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. When granting authorization for takeoff and
landings of power-driven aircraft between 10 p.m. and 6 a.m. , utmost
restraint will be exercised regardless of the number of movements.
Non-schedule commercial flights are restricted for movement at
Zurich between the hours of 10 p.m. and 12:30, and for landings between
10 p.m. and 12 midnight. (4-6, p 3)
4. 2. 3 Banning or Limiting Certain Types of Airplanes
Certain types of airplanes are either banned completely from
operation or are operated only on a limited basis determined by time,
zones, or other factors. Due mainly to the noise effect on the environ-
ment many countries enacted regulations to prohibit planes flying sonic
or supersonic flights.
Jet aircraft has been prohibited from landing or taking off
between 11 p.m.. and 6 a.m. at Tokyo International Airport since
December 1962, and at Osaka International Airport since November
1965. (4-6, p. 6)
Supersonic flights are forbidden over Swiss air space,
pursuant to Paragraph 14 of the Federal Law On Air Navigation, as
of January 1, 1974. Federal regulation also forbids flying the SST
in Switzerland and it is not certain that SST aircraft would ever be
permitted to land in Switzerland even at subsonic speed.
In Canada pursuant to regulations issued on September 13
and October 1972, no person can operate a civil aircraft in sonic or
supersonic flight unless authorization has been received from the
Minister of Transport. (4-7, p. 2-4)
4-12
-------
Swedish authorities, for noise consideration, do not allow
certain airplane models to land at Swedish airports. Also, for the
same reason SST's are not allowed to fly at supersonic speed over
Swedish territory. (4-11). The same negative attitude against
supersonic flights also prevails in the Netherlands.
4. 3 Other Measures
4. 3. 1 Noise Taxes Incorporated In Landing Fees
Some countries impose taxes on aircraft taking certain
routes in landing or taking off. An example of this measure presently
exists at Charles de Gaulle and Orly Airports in France. According to
the Decree of February 13, 1973, a tax was imposed on air transport
companies which was passed over to travellers using these routes. It
was easier to collect taxes this way than to tax companies in direct
proportion to the decibel level produced by their planes. Taxation by
decibel level per company is being studied. (4-12)
4.3.2 Zoning Near Airports
Noise zones have been established in the vicinity of airports
in many countries. In each zone, the land use is specifically prescribed
in certain regulations and the noise level to each zone is usually
determined by different surveys. The following survey of some countries
will give an overview to what is being done in the area of noise zoning
around airports.
4-13
-------
Switzerland
Based on the NNI-Curves, noise zones have been established
in the vicinity of the national airports. In each zone, the land use is
specifically prescribed in a federal regulation. The respective NNI
limits were confirmed by a large-scale sociological survey undertaken
in Switzerland . (4-9)
Federal Republic of Germany
In order to protect the public against the effects of jet-
aircraft noise, the Gesetz zum Schutz gegen Fluglaerm (Air Traffic
Noise Control Act) has been enacted in April 1971. As a result, two
zones of noise around jet airports (civil as well as military ones) have
been specified. In zone 1 the equivalent noise level (L ) is higher than 75 dBA
while in zone 2 the noise level is between 75 dBA and 67 dBA. Noise at
night is judged more serious than during the day. The zones are being.
calculated using complex procedures which include, among other factors, the
types of aircraft using the airport and the routes. The zoning is based
upon the estimated traffic result in 1981. There are several regulations
as to these zones: no homes or apartment buildings can be built in
zone 1. People who already live there can get up to 100 DM per m^
(approximately 3. 5 $/ft ) of their home for measures to protect them
against noise (improved windows, doors, etc. ). In zone 2 all newly
constructed buildings have to be specially modified to protect against
noise. No hospitals, schools, homes for the elderly, or the like are
allowed to be built there. So far about half of the jet airports have
officially been assigned noise zones of this nature . (4-13)
4-14
-------
Romania
1) The Bucharest-Optopeni Airport region was zoned
as a function of the value of the weighted equivalent continuous perceived
noise level (WECPNL) in the following manner:
-- zone I WEPNL > 90
-- zone II 80 < WECPNL < 90
-- zone III WECPNL < 80
2) All inhabited regions in the vicinity of Bucharest-Otopeni
Airport are located in acoustic protection zone III . (Figure 4-2)
Figure 4-2. Noise zones in the Bucharest-Optopeni
Airport, Romania.
Source: (4-14)
4-15
-------
France
The Prime Minister's circular from July 30, 1973 establishes
the principles of housing development in the area of airports. The idea
is to restrict the construction of dwellings in zones which are, or will
be in the near future, exposed to excessive noise levels. Of particular
concern are wayside and riverside communities near Charles de Gaulle and
Orly Airports. (4-12)
Japan
Pursuant to Article 9 of the Basic Law for Environmental
Pollution Control Measures, Environment Agency Notification of December
27, 1973 was issued establishing the following measures to control noise
around Japanese airports according to the following standards and within
this time schedule contained i-i the following Table (4-4).
Table 4-4. Environmental Quality Standards for Aircraft
Noise
Based on Article 9, Basic Law for Environmental
Pollution Control Measures.
Environment Agency Notification, December 27,
1973
Category of Area
I
II
Standard Value (in WECPNL)
70 or less dB
75 or less
I. J_|. I I - - IT ~- ' -- • •• -•• I — -n. . -... — .. ' ~~ . --,--_
Note; Prefectural governor shall designate the category of area
Area category I stands for the area for exclusively
residential use and area category II for other area where
normal living conditions should be reserved.
WECPNL = dB(A) + 10 log •
i o
- 27
Note: dB(A) stands for energy means of all peak level of
any one day, and K stands for a value calculated by the
following equation: N KZ + 3X3 + 10(Ni + XL), where Nj
is the number of aircraft between 0:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m.,
N3 the number between 7:00 p.m. and 10:00 p.m., and Ni, Che
number between 10:00 p.m. and 12:00 p.m..
"N~ is the number between 7:00 am and 7:00 pm"
4-16
-------
Target for performance of standards
Airport Categories
Target Dates^
Inprovement Goals
Airport to be built
in future
Existing Airports
Third clo.»» and
equivalent airport
Second calss airports
except Fukuoka Airport (A)
d.o. (B)
New Tokyo International
Airport
First c|«»5 airports
(excepting New Tokyo
International Airport)
and Fukuoka Airport
Immediately
Immediately
Within five years
Within yen years
d.o.
As soon as possible
within ten years or
more
Within five years to attain
less than 85 WECPNL (or 65
WECPNL or less indoors in areas
exceeding 85 SECPNL)
d.o.
Within five years to attain
less 85 WECPNL (or 65 WECPNL
or less indoors in areas
exceeding 85 WECPNL)
Within ten years to attain
less than 75 WECPNL (or 60
WECPNL or less indoors in
areas exceeding 75 WECPNL)
1. "Existing'1 airports are those existing on the date of establishment of the en-
vironmental quality standards.
2. Airports of category B of second class are those where there are regular corcner-
cial landings and take-offs of aircrafts equiped with turbo-jet engines, and
category A mean the other.
3. The dates indicated in Table 2 are to be counted from the date of establishment
of the environmental quality standards.
Source: (4-15)
Canada
The Minister of Transport has calculated NEF contours for
Canadian airports. These are used by the Central Mortgage and Housing
Corporation to determine whether or not proposed dwellings near airports
may be financed under the National Housing Act . (4-7)
4-17
-------
4.3.3 Purchase of Houses to Create Buffer Zones and/or
Subsidizing of "Soundproofing" of Homes
Countermeasures against civil aircraft noise were first taken
in the form of measures to regulate aircraft operation such as the
prohibition of midnight takeoff and landing. However, with the heavy
increase in aircraft transportation and with the introduction of new
aircraft such types of jets, it became necessary to take further measures
to install soundproofing to homes in the vicinity of an airport or even to
purchase them.
In Japan (4-8, p 9) pursuant to the Aircraft Noise Prevention
Law, the Minister of Transport embarked on legislation regarding measures
to compensate for troubles caused by the aircraft noise and in August,
1967, the Aircraft Noise Prevention Law was established and put in force.
Actual results of these compensation measures and the
budget is included in Table (4-5)
In the Netherlands a pilot-soundproofing project involving
some 500 houses is now being carried out in the Schiphol Airport area
in connection with social surveys before and after the installation of an
additional sound insulation (4-lu) User changes are forseen to finance
soundproofing and rehabilitations.
4-11
-------
~
1>
£
4)
O
0
V
>.,
•O
4J
•d
>
o
JH
P<
CD
V
fi
o
•d
0
M
V
U
"o
V
p
to
4J
o
a,
M
1
o
id
K
V
£
£,
0
H
jf
V
•y
A
n
1)
I-
0
r
E
O
n
j-
r-
0
l>
K
0
S
a
S
o
a
u
aJ
>^_ Fiscal
_ ,- year
Type of ^^-^_'
tarect ^ ~-^
(l) Noise insulation
work
School, number
Hospital, number
Public utilization
facility
Private houses
(2)Measures for TV
reception, number
of households
[3) Compensation for
removal
Land, ha.
.Structure, number
Budget,
¥100 million
l)Noise insulation
work
School, number
Hospital, number
Public utilization
facility
Private house,
number
2) Compensation for
removal
Land, ha.
Structure, number
Budget,
¥100 million
1967 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 1973"' Total
•*!,'
v •
14 17 29 51 57 91 117 376
(7) (14) (26) (40) (49) (70) (84) (290)
1 12 4
(1) ( 1) ( 2) ( 4)
2 2 5 11 13 20 31 84
(2) (2) (5) (11) (13) (19) ( 27) ( 79)
400 400
(300) (300)
- 107,300139,300246,600
(85, 000X85,000) (170,000) .
- 0.59 1-3 4.53 5.59 12-01
(0.59) (1.3) (4. 53) (2. 84) ( 9-26)
- 6 70 2 110 188
( 6) (70) ( 2) (100) (178 )
3.0 5.3 10.0 18.0 30.8 58.1 110.3 235.5
(2.4) (4.1) ( 7.5)(14.4) (27.8) (50.8) (88.1) (195.1)
3 9 6 10 28
1 1
4 6 10
76 252 380 708
42.7 49-4 50.6 32.7 50 225.4
1 - 37 44 61 48 50 240
7.1 11.1 17.5 14.0 27.7 77.4
Notes: (1)* 1983's figures arc estimated ones
(2) Figures in paranthcsco for specific aerodromes provided by the
Government are those for environs of Osaka International Airport.
(3) One million Yen (¥) is approximately equal to $3333 U.S.
Table 4-5
Actual Results of Noise Insulation and Compensation
For Noises in the Vicinity of Aerodromes in Japan
Source: (4-8, p. 23)
4-19
-------
4.4 Helicopters
Helicopter aircraft noise has received attention in some
countries while others have already taken measures to control it.
Thus, in Switzerland, since September 19, 1975, a special
working group has been studying the problem of noise emission standard-
ization for helicopters, following the policies of an overall reduction of
aircraft noise for every type of aircraft. Although helicopter noise has
presented no specific noise problem, Switzerland already has strict
rules on helicopter traffic in residential zones. These permit landings
only for emergency delivery of patients to hospitals.
In the Netherlands, no specific rules for helicopter noise
exist. However, helicopter noise is a growing concern, especially in
view of the rapid industrial development in the North Sea area where
helicopters perform an important transport and communication role.
(4-16).
\
In South Africa, helicopter operations are
tentatively controlled and restricted where necessary pending the
development of accurate techniques for noise zoning. (4-4)
4-ZO
-------
References
4-1 Blomberg, G. Arlanda Airport, noise situation now and in
the future. Bromma, Aeronautical Research Institute of Sweden,
October 1972.
4-2 Personal communication. Ministerie Volksgezonheid en
Milieuhygiene, Netherlands, to Informatics Inc., December 30,
1975. Response to questionnaire.
4-3 United Kingdom contribution. Paper prepared by the United
Kingdom delegation to the Ad Hoc Group on Noise Abatement
Policies, OECD, Paris, Nov. 3, 1975. 8 p.
4-4 Personal communication. National Mechanical Engineering
Research Institute of South African Council for Scientific
Industrial Research, to Informatics Inc., January 28, 1976.
4-5 Large, J. B. Ground monitoring of aircraft noise. Southampton,
Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, Univ. of Southampton.
4-6 Office Federal de 1'Air. Noise abatement by means of a special
approach procedure. Aeronautical Information Circular,
March 27, 1975.
4-7 Canada Ministry of the Environment, Environmental Protection
Service. Canadian environmental noise control. Ottawa,
Ontario, Oct. 1975.
4-8 Report on countermeasures against civil aircraft noises.
Ministry of Transport, Noise Abatement Division, Civil
Aviation Bureau, Japan, September 1973. p. 6-7.
4-9 Personal communication. Eidgenoessisch.es Luftamt, Bern,
to Informatics Inc., February 13, 1976.
4-21
-------
4-10 Large, J. B. Aircraft Noise Generation and Seduction.
In_ Lecture Series No. 77, Institute of Sound and Vibration
Research, Univ. of Southampton.
4-11 Personal communication. Swedish Environmental Protection
Agency, to Informatics Inc., February 1976.
4-12 Noise abatement policies in France. Paper prepared by
French delegation to the Ad Hoc Group on Noise Abatement
Policies, OECD, Paris, November 4, 1975. 14 p.
4-13 Noise abatement policy in Federal Republic of Germany.
Paper prepared by the German delegation to the Ad Hoc Group
on Noise Abatement Policies, OECD, Paris, November 5,
1975. 11 p.
4-14 Costescu, M. , C. Gherghel, and A. Curtoglu. Aircraft noise
in the region of the Bucharest-Ogopeni Airport. Bucharest,
ICSPM and Tarom.
4-15 Hasimoto, M. Present status of noise regulations and control
in Japan. In_ Proceedings; InterNoise 75, Sendai, Japan,
August 27-29, 1975. p. 10.
4-16 Personal communication. Ministry Van Volksgezonheid en
Milieuhygiene, to Informatics Inc., February 1976.
4-17 Easterner, H. , W. Klosterkoetter and J. B. Large. Damage
and annoyance caused by noise. Luxembourg, Commission
of the European Communities, 1975. p. 59. '
4-22
-------
5. SURFACE TRANSPORTATION NOISE
The disturbing effects of transportation noise have become
a major environmental problem. The intensity of the problem is more
noticeable in urbanized areas where the rapid growth of different types
of transportation has resulted in traffic noise as a social problem.
Man, in his struggle against this problem, has used different
ways and means to assess the extent of its detrimental effects on human
health and also has utilized different measures in an attempt to reduce,
abate or control noise and its consequences on the human environment.
The purpose of this chapter is to explore the methodologies used by other
countries to develop criteria for the noise problem and to assess various
technical measures, actions, remedies, laws, or regulations undertaken
to bring noise limits to a reasonable level.
5. 1 Decision Criteria
5. 1. 1 Decision Criteria - Road Traffic
As the foundation of any regulatory action, it is critical that
legislative bodies of governments be provided with information regarding
the quantitative basis of traffic noise regulation, required noise standards,
noise reduction levels and technical and economical feasibility of such
noise control actions.
5-1
-------
5.1.1.1 Assessing Noise Levels
Assessing Single Vehicles - Measurement
To assess noise levels of single vehicles, a number of
countries have used different means to develop several scales for assessing
noise emitted by motor vehicles. In the process, many elements have
been taken into consideration such as environmental, technological and
economical feasibility. Other factors relating to the size, weight, speed,
structure, and type of vehicle are also weighed. Together with surveys,
research and tests, correlations have been established to assess and
determine the extent and limit of noise from single motor vehicles.
The ISO standard for measurement of noise has been widely
adopted by many countries. With the exception of one Swiss stationary
test, virtually all foreign regulations use the ISO reference test ISO R-362,
adopted in February 1964, as a measurement standard. This method
is designed to measure noise from all types of motor vehicles. The
acceleration test, at full throttle from a stated running condition, is designed
"*'C
to measure the "highest noise level consistent with normal driving".
The principle difference between ISO-362 and the U.S. SAE standards is
that the SAE measuring distance is double that of the ISO distance.
(R-362 is 7.5 m or about 25 ft. and SAE is 50 ft. from the center line
of travel of the vehicle).
Among the other differences, the most important is the
way the running condition is stated: A condition of SAE J-366 is speed
at the end point of the measurement area, whereas the ISO R-362 method
limits the initial speed before acceleration to a maximum of 50 km/hr.
(31 mph), but sets no explicit limit on speed at the end point of the
measurement area. However, in practice, the selection of an intermediate
There is also a stationary test. See next page.
—) ~~ L-i
-------
gear speed makes it unlikely that the final speed would ever be in the
range where tire noise would become significant.
Another difference is that whereas J-366 specifically is
designed to produce maximum noise by insuring that acceleration while
the vehicle is in the measurement area proceeds to maximum rated
engine rpm, the ISO method will not get the engine to maximum rated
rpm in every case. ISO R-362 is due to be revised soon. However, the
basic procedure will not be changed; only the wording of various sections
will be clarified.
ISO Stationary Test. -- Appendix Al of ISO R-362 contains
a stationary test method which is not presently used in any national regulations.
Noise is measured at four points each located diagonally 7 m away from
a corner of the vehicle.
Test area
perimeter
Figure 5-1 Measuring Positions for Measurement wit?,. Stationary Vehicles.
5-3
-------
The engine is run either 1) at three quarters of its maximum hp rpm,
if it has no speed governor; or Z) at maximum governed speed, if it
has a speed governor.
There doesn't appear to be good correlation" between ISO
Reference Test results and ISO Stationary Test results.
The Swiss have been using a similar stationary test. This
test also does not exactly correlate with results of the ISO Reference
Test.
Some European countries feel that there exists sufficient
correlation between the two tests so that the Stationary Test could be
made an alternative to the Reference Test. However, the general view
is that the Stationary Test should only be used for preliminary screening
of vehicles in use.
Single Vehicles Data Sample - Sweden
Vehicle noise is measured individually in Sweden in connection
with the approval of new designs but not as yet in connection with the
inspection required of every single vehicle as part of the registration
procedure. Consequently, no thorough review is made of the sound
levels of new trucks, the overwhelming majority of which are inspected
according to the latter procedure. Noise from trucks and cars in the
urban environment has been determined, however, in a number of field
surveys. In one study the difference between the maximum sound level
of trucks and that of cars was found to be 8-10 dBA. The truck is the
individual noise source for which silencing measures are most urgently
needed.
5-4
-------
Buses of earlier models are about as noisy as trucks,
Figure 5-2 shows the results of measurements carried out on buses in
regular service in the Stockholm area. Modern town buses are often
far more silent running. For example, there is a Swedish built "silent1
bus which does not emit sound levels higher than 77 dBB, measured
as per ISO R362.
45-
40-
35-
30-
25-
20-
15-
10-
5-
%
, . r
—
in r
82 83 84 85 86 87 83 89 90 91 92 93 94 dB !A)
Figure 5-2 Percentage Distribution of Noise Levels for
Service Buses in the Greater Stockholm Area (200 DIN HP)
Measured as per ISO R362 for Moving Vehicles.
Source: (5-1, p. 18)
The sound levels of new cars are checked during the
inspection of new models and designs. Figure 5-3 shows the result of
measurements carried out on about 300 vehicles in 1972 by the National
Road Safety Board, which is responsible for the inspection of vehicle
designs .
5-5
-------
6O-
60-
40-
30-
20-
11
No. cars
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 60 81 82 83 84 dB (A)
Figure 5-3. Sound Levels for Cars, Measured During Design
Inspections in 1972.
Note: Noise was measured as per ISO R362 with the
vehicles in motion. It should be noted that 84 dB(A)
the maximum permissible noise level for the approval
of the silencing arrangements of the vehicles inspected.
Source: (5-1, p. 18)
The majority of motorcycles are submitted to registration inspection,
which means that at present their noise emission is not measured though
the law stipulates that they must be provided with efficient silencing
arrangements.
Figure 5-4 shows the sound levels of 52 motorcycles
undergoing design inspection. Corresponding data for mopeds are given
in Figure 5-5.
5-6
-------
No.
20-
16-
10-
s-
77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 65 85 87 88 89 90 dB'A)
Figure 5-4. Sound Levels of Motorcycles, Measured as
per ISO R362 During Design Inspection.
Note: It should be observed that the applied maximum
limit is 86 dBA.
Source: (5-1)
No.
10-
6-
L- T
67
66
—
69
70
—
71
72
— |
• 1
73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 dB(A)
Figure 5-5. Sound Levels of Mopeds, Measured During
Design Inspection.
Note: The mopeds were driven in top gear and at top
speed, i. e. 30km per hour.
Source: (5-1)
5-7
-------
Measurements of stationary vehicles were undertaken in
Sweden. Table 5-1 shows the results of these measurements, which
included both new and second-hand vehicles.
Type of vsMcic
Motorcyc i es
Cars
Front 'engine
Rear engine
Lorries
^ 200 DiN HP
> 200 DIN HP
Sat isf story exhaust syst
No.
44
170
28
60
39
M i n .
78
73
73
85
93
Max .
101
94
95
99
106
Me an
93
82
89
92
97
Defect i ve
No.
7
37
5
M i n .
94
82
92
exh . syst .
Max .
114
99
101
Mean
104
90
95
Table 5-1. Results of Noise Measurements Carried Out on
Stationary Vehicles.
Note: The method of measurement involved placing the
microphone 50 cm. from the end of the exhaust pipe,
whereupon the engine speed was raised from idling to
a certain constant speed.
Source: (5-1)
5-1
-------
Assessing Traffic Noise
Surveys, research studies and experiments have been
initiated by many countries for assessing and predicting traffic noise
along roads and highways. In determining traffic noise levels, various
approaches and formulas have been developed. In this section traffic
noise estimation and prediction in some countries are discussed.
In Japan road traffic noise is assessed by the following
methods:
In March 1975, the Technical Committee of the Acoustical
Society of Japan published a report on the method for estimation of
road traffic noise. This method is applied to free flowing traffic, for
example the case of a free motorway or equal road. Here, starting
from the equal interval traffic model, a calculating formula was derived
for sound level L, • In Japan, Lr_ is now used for the evaluation of.
50 bU
road traffic noise in environmental standards and other regulations.
A-weighted sound power level and its relation with vehicle velocity
were determined by the field investigations. Vehicles were divided into
three kinds: heavy vehicles, light vehicles and passenger cars. Effects
of the road constructions on the traffic noise propagation were also
included in this method by considering the diffraction at the edge of
the road. Excess attenuations due to the ground surface absorption and
air absorption were not included explicitly, but correction terms due
to these and other factors were applied in a lump, by comparing the
results of this calculation with those of field investigations. (5-3)
5-9
-------
In order to improve the accuracy of estimation, many
basic research works have been carried oat in Japan. As to the
calculating formula, other traffic models were introduced, for example,
exponential distribution of Vehicle intervals and pound power level of
each vehicle. In these studies, the calculating formula was derived
not only for L but for other evaluation values such as L, , L.
y 50 eq 10
Scale model experiments have been widely used for the
evaluation of road traffic noise, especially in cases of complicated
road constructions, roadside geographical positions and urban streets.
Incoherent line sources or moving point sources are used for the sound
source in these experiments. Hybrid simulation methods (combining
the scale model experiments and computer calculations) were also
applied to these investigations. Also, the effect of meteorological
conditions on the sound propagation are now being investigated by the
scale model experiments and field investigations. (5-3)
In the Netherlands the following formula has been developed,
based on previous investigations, from which the traffic noise produced by
motorways can be approximately calculated: (5-5)
5-10
-------
L = L^ 5 + 10 log N - 10 log V - 10 log A - 7,5 - D
in which
L = the equivalent sound level in dB(A)
eq
!)„ g. s= the sound level of motor-vehicles measured at a distance of
7»5 tn from the source, in dB(A)
N = the number of vehicles per hour
V 8 the speed of vehicles in ksi/hour
A = the distance to the road in m
D = a term in which the local conditions influencing anon5 .other
things sound absorption and proofing, are taken into account
From this investigation it has further appeared that on an average for
passenger cars L9e- = ^3 + 0,16 V
trucks £ = 72 + 0,16 V
trucks with trailers L_ ^ = 7^,5 + Otl6 v .
In Denmark traffic noise is measured and calculated on
the basis of L , dBA , 24 hours average.
eq
Norway has developed one graphical and one computerized
method for the calculation of noise levels. These methods also take
into consideration the effect of structural devices to reduce noise.
A simple method by which noise levels in streets can be calculated
is being developed. (5-6)
5-11
-------
In Sweden several studies have been carried out to determine
the disturbing effect of traffic noise. A government report on measurement
of traffic noise has proposed a combination between several
different measuring actions which comprises noise origin and diffusion c
conditions (5-7)
A prediction model for traffic noise has been established
for local conditions in South Africa for annoyance and impact of traffic
noise, Lir) is being used to qualify complaints and to establish guide-
lines for new roads. The South African Bureau of Standards document
SABS 097-1975 "The Measurement of Noise Emitted by Motor Vehicles"
(5-8) is the method used to assess noise emissions from individual
vehicles and is based on ECE practice.
5.1.1.2 Assessing Effects of Noise On People
Because of the rapidly increasing number of motor vehicles
on roads and streets, more than ever people are subject to the effects of noise
exposure. Repeated daily exposure to traffic noise over many years
may cause various adverse effects ranging from permanent hearing loss,
to sleep disturbance, and other health problems to interference with
conversation. To assess the extent of problems associated with various
noise levels, studies, research, and surveys have been undertaken by
many countries. This section will present sample results of some
studies.
In Sweden, two recent studies were conducted as follows:
5-12
-------
1. Study of the Impact of Traffic Noise in the Municipality
of Stockholm, 1975.
This study was carried out in eight housing areas with various
traffic volumes (800-2, 800 vehicles per day) and various proportions of
heavy traffic (3-17%). Some 85 persons were interviewed in each area.
Disturbances were evaluated by calculating the mean reaction in each
area as the percentage of persons who were "seriously disturbed
Exposure was measured by the equivalent sound level, L, , the level
eq
in dB(A) exceeded for 1% of the time (L. ), and the average maximum
noise level in dBA from individual passing vehicles.
Analysis of the relation between exposure and disturbance
showed that there was a relatively good correlation between the L,
eq
value and disturbances (r = 0.77). The covariance between the
xy
disturbances and L was of the same order of magnitude (r = 0.78).
01 xy
Closer analysis revealed, however, that disturbances were mainly
determined by the frequency of heavy traffic. Thus it could be established
a growing proportion of heavy traffic produced a wider diffusion of
disturbance up to 1,200 heavy vehicles per day. On the other hand
a further increase of heavy vehicular traffic up to 2, 800 per day
did not lead to a corresponding increase in disturbances. (Figure 5-6)
5-13
-------
% seriously disturbed
20 -
10-
1000
2000
3000
^T lorries per day
Figure 5-6. Relative Frequency of Seriously Disturbed
I nterview Subjects as a Function of Exposure Expressed
in Terms of the Number of Trucks Emitting a Maximum
of 80 dBA approx.
Source: (5-1)
So far this study has covered a relatively limited selection
of experimental areas, and additional areas with different types of noise
exposure will have to be investigated before any general conclusions
can be drawn. These further investigations were carried out during
1976-77.
2. The Effect of Traffic Noise on Sleep, 1976.
In this study, EEC, EOG, EMG and EGG recordings
were used to investigate the effect of traffic noise on sleep disturbance.
Introductory pilot experiments, which have been
conducted in laboratory conditions, have shown that the disturbance
of sleep tends to vary depending on whether the subject is exposed to
noise from randomized truck passages with a peak level of 55 dBA
or to steady traffic noise of the same equivalent level. The total of
5-14
-------
waking periods was found to rise by 7 per cent during nights with
passing trucks, compared with reference nights characterized by
"silent" conditions (27 dBA), but exposure to steady traffic noise at
the same equivalent level (5 dB difference between minimum and
maximum levels) resulted in an increase of only 3 percent.
Light orthosomnia increased by 5% in relation
to the reference night during nights when there were lorries passing
by. This occurred at the expense of deep orthosomnia
and REM or parasomnia, each of which declined by 3%.
During nights of 40 truck passages, waking effects of
various kinds were obtained in up to 70 percent of all passages; these
effects varied from brief ECG and EMG changes to transitions between
depths of sleep. Up to 18% of the passages caused the subjects to become
completely awake.
The project is being continued in 1976 with a field study
of an experimental group living in an environment where there is
nocturnal traffic noise. The aim of the project is to determine the
long-term effects of traffic noise on sleep.
In Denmark, the following results concerning nuisance
due to traffic noise in Copenhagen were reported. (5-10)
Nine hundred sixty persons living in 28 different residential
areas were interviewed. Half of the areas have an energy-equivalent,
constant, A-weighted sound pressure level L (24) determined on a 24
hour-a-day-basis which is within the range 0f 46-58 dBA. For
other half have a level which is within the range of 46-58 dBA. For
reasons of simplicity these two groups will be described as areas
with high noise exposure and areas with moderate noise exposure
respectively. In the former group the noise exposure was determined
5-15
-------
by road traffic noise, whereas the road traffic noise was only a more
or less determining factor for the noise exposure in the latter group.
The areas were paired in such a manner that one area.
with a high noise exposure and one area with a moderate noise exposure
were as equal as possible in other respects, i. e. :
a) For the buildings: age, general look, size, and if
relevant - the flats, price level, etc.
b) For the residents: age, matrimonial status, school
education, social status, number of children living
at home, etc.
(only women were interviewed) who indicated that they were disturbed
by traffic noise was 83% in the areas with a high noise exposure, whereas
the percentage in the areas with moderate noise exposure was 13%
only.
5-16
-------
A detailed analysis of the situation in two corresponding
(paired) areas, one in the group with a high noise exposure and the
other in the group with a moderate noise exposure, is shown in
Table 5-2.
Percentage of interviewed
persons
who indicated nuisance
due to road traffic noise
having a high degree of
physic well-being
who used sedatives
who consulted a doctor
due to psychic problems
having interference problems
when using the telephone
having interference problems
when reading
who did not open windows
(often or occasionally) due
to road traffic noise
72dBA
977.
30Z
432
30Z
80Z
70Z
93Z
56 dBA
37Z
63Z
23%
3Z
3Z
10Z
17Z
Table 5-2. Comparison of the Nuisance Due to Rc-ad
Traffic Noise Found in a Danish Study, : "^
Source: (5-10)
In England a pilot study was carried out at three of the
Greater London Council housing estates to see what remedial measures
can be undertaken regarding environmental conditions for residents
when motorways or new major roads are constructed nearby.
Table 5-3 shows the answers to a specific series of questions about
perceived effects of traffic noise. (5-11) It should be noted that the
answers give no indication of either frequency or degree of annoyance
experienced, but they do illustrate clearly the effect of proximity to the
road.
5-17
-------
Percental,
Perceived effect of noise
Startle you/make you
jump
Keep you from going to
sleep
Wake you up
Stop ycur children from
going to sleep •
Interfere with listening to
TV, radio or records
Interfere with
conversation
Make TV pictures flicker
Make the house vibrate
or shake
Make you close doors
or windows
Bother, annoy or disturb
you in any other way
Total number of
respondents
Study area
Area A
(next
to
ramp)
57
54
54
W
86
62
86
89
86
11
37
Area B
(further
from
ramp)
10
27
27
(2)
33
10
40
27
• 27
7
30
Area
A -r B
36
42
42
(6)
63
39
66
61
60
9
67
Control areas >
Area C
(next
Area O
_
to j (quiet
road)
24
29
20
(2)
49
22
57
63
63
8
51
area)
10
5
5'
(1)
5
0
13
15
5
3
40
•This question was asked only of housewives with children under
the age of 16. There were so few in this category m each area that
the answers are not sigmficsnt. However, os with otner el'-jcts th
-------
5.1. 1.3
Assess ing Economic Impact
Information relating to costs of noise abatement and control
in foreign countries has been limited and in most instances not available.
Information regarding these costs is not precise. However; the following
gives an overview of some aspects of noise control costs in foreign
countries.
In the Federal Republic of Germany, the Federal Ministry of
of Transport prepared the following cost estimates for noise barrier
construction and sound insulation along newly proposed Federal aid
highways. (5-12)
(a)
Noise Impact
LST
LST
LST
Threshold V
Day E^vening
70
65
65
65
60
55
alues
Night
GO
55
50
dB(A)
dB(A)
dB(A)
Estimated Costs (1975)
3 Billion DM (I . '2 Billion dollars)
S Billion DM |3.4 Billion dollars)
IS Billion DM (7. li Billion dollars)
(b)
Noise Tiovol Reduction
Ix;T 10 dBA
I^T - 20 dBA
LJ..J. :!0 dBA
Cost/Kilometer of New Mtrr Highways
1.7 Million DM/kilonu-ti-r (1.2 Million dollary/milc)
5.0 Million DM/kilomrt(-[- (:). 1 Million dollars/mile)
20 Million DM/kilonu-tcr (12.3 Million dollars/mile)
Table 5-4. Estimation of Costs of Noise Barriers and
Building Insulation in the Federal Republic of Germany.
(a) Total costs for various degrees of quieting
(b) Costs per kilometer of new highway
Source: (5-12, p. 640)
5-19
-------
In Sweden, the State Committee on traffic noise estimated
the costs of implementing the Committee proposals (5-13) during the
first 10-year period, up to 1985, at Sw. Cr. 500-700 million per year
(about $111-$117 million per year) of which approximately half comprises
costs for noise reduction measures to vehicles, and half the cost for
abatement measures in zones between noise sources and auditors
(barriers, replacement of windows, etc.). It is anticipated that the
costs for the latter measures will be incurred from 1976 onwards,
while the costs for emission limiting measures will first be felt at the
end of the 1970's. On the basis of information received from the motor
industry, the implementation of the first stage of the emission norms,
covering vehicle models dating from 1979 onwards, has been calculated
to increase the price of a private car by an average of Sw. Cr. 1. 000
(about $222) and the price of a truck approximately Sw. Cr. 4, 000
(about $866) with unchanged performance in other respects.
In the United Kingdom, the cost of implementation of
British legislation for highway noise compensation has been high. The
sum involved for 4.4 million homes subject to excessive noise would
be currently some L3, 300 million (6. 6 billion dollars)
5.1.2 Railroad and Rapid Transit
5. 1. 2. 1 Assessing Noise Levels
In order to reach acceptable noise levels emitted by trains
and rapid transit systems, many countries have conducted surveys and
initiated studies. These surveys and studies have been mainly concerned
with the impact of such noise on exposed_population living in areas
affected by these means of transportation. This section attempts to
5-20
-------
provide a representative sample of this Information.
Federal Republic of Germany
The Following sample data was obtained for external and
Internal railway noise.
to
\
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Type 01 rail-
way vehicle
Gernan reaeraj.
Railway
Passenger and
Freight trains
Rapid transit
system
underground, on '
open air lirie
Elevated rail-
way
Tramway
Tramway
Tramway
Type of track
C2.__as~c oea, wooc.en s^.ee-
pers
ballast bed, concrete
sleepers
ballast-free , concrete slabs
ballast-free, metal bridge
ballast bed, metal bridge
ballast-free ,truos bridge
ballast-free, reinforced
concrete bridge
ballast bed, reinforced
concrete bridge
ballast bed, wooden slee-
ners
ballast bed, wooden slee-
pers
ballast-free, concrete
track
ballast bed, wooden slee-
pers
asphalt street
ballast bed, reinforced
concrete bridre
60
flo
78
84
97
85
91
82
79
72
72
78
77
82
78
ioee
120
- $,J ' '
88
94
-
-
(101)
(92)
_
79
_
_
-
.
-
_
a UW
~oo
9c
(96)
;io2)
-
-
-
_
_
_
_
_
-
-
_
M '
"40
1 CO
(93
(10^
-
-
-
_
_
_
w
_
-
-
_
Table 5-5. Typical External Railway Noise Levels
Noise level of railway vehicles at a distance of 25 m
from the centre of the track, measuring height 3,5m
above the top of rail. Free propagation of sound.
Faultless rail surface and wheel tread.
Source: (5-2)
5-21
-------
Sample Internal Railway NoLse Data
Railway vehicle
Noise Level dBA
opeea ^Kiu/
60 I 120 £00
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
n
Semi-fast, slow train, 2nd class
Fast train, 1st/2nd class
Inter-city train, open saloon, 1st class
Inter-city train, compartments, 1st class
Inter-city train, dining car
Fast train, couchette coach, 2nd class
Fast train, sleeping car, 1st class
Rapid transit system, 2nd class, in the open air
Underground railway in the open air
Rapid transit system, underground inside tunnel
Tramway
Diesel locomotive, inside driving csb
Electric locomotive, inside driving cab
61
59
59
56
59
58
51
65
69
74
79
72
68
70
68
68
65
68
67
60
73
77-85
77
74
71
75
Table 5-6. Noise Level (avg. ) in Railway Stock.
Ballast track. Faultless Rail Surface and Wheel
Tread.
Source: (5-2)
5-22
-------
5.1.2.2 Subjective Effects of Noise Levels on People
Japanese Train Noise Survey
A Japanese survey was made in 1971 to determine the
effects of high-speed train noise on people living between 10 and 200
meters from the tracks. Noise measurements and interviews were
conducted along both the Tokaido Line and the new Sanyo Line. At
a maximum noise level of 70 dBA near the Tokaido Line, about 13
percent were disturbed in conversation and on the telephone, but 55
percent were disturbed listening to television or radio. Near the Sanyo
Line, more than twice as many were distrubed in conversation and
listening on the telephone but the interference with television and radio
was about the same as on the Tokaido Line. At the maximum level
of 70 dBA, 40 percent of the people near the Tokaido Line and 52 percent
near the Sanyo Line rated train noise above the middle of the seven-
point noisiness scale. Other results are shown on Tables 5-7 and 5-8.
French Train Noise Survey
A combination of social survey and physical noise
measurement survey was done near Paris in 1973 (5-15). A questionnaire
was designed and administered to 350 subjects living in different
locations where the train noise was prevalent. Noise data included rate
of increase of noise level, maximum noise level during train passage,
(L ), duration of audible train noise; duration of the maximum
max
level "L , Fate of decrease of noise level, ambient noise level,
max
and equivalent noise level L over 24 hours.
^ eq
The best prediction of annoyance, tested on noise alone
was L whose value increased when either the number of trains or
eq
the noise of the train increased (correlation coefficient = 0.33).
5-23
-------
Item
A w vu*
Interferonca with sleep
(30,31)
Disturbance of hearing
(32,33,36)
Disturbance of chil-
dren's life (43,44)
Startle (35)
Disturbanco of falling
in sloop (30)
Atreking froa oleop
(3D
Interference vith tolo-
phone (32)
Interference vrith lis-
tening to TV or radio
(33)
Interference* with con-
versation (36)
Bothering children (43)'
Dioturbance of chil- .
dren's study (44)
Lino
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
N.S.L.
N.T.L.
Positive Response! in %
60 50 40 30 20 10
dB(A)
80 78 75 72 69 66
87 84 82 79 76 74
75 72 69 66 63 60
78 76 73 70 68 65
82 80 77 74 7T 69
89 87 84 82 79 76
84 81 77 74 71 68
88 85 83 80 77 75
82 78 75 71 67 —
87 84 82 80 77 75
80 77 74 71 69 66
87 85 82 79 76 73
79 76 73 70 69 64
81 79 77 74 72 69
71 67 64 61 — —
72 68 65 62 — —
77 74 72 70 67 65
80 77 75 73 71 69
79 75 71 69 62 58
87 84 81 79 75 72
82 79 76 74 71 68
88 86 84 81 79 77
PC -i nt of
Scalo
dB(A)
7o
85
73
76
77
85
81
86
78
85
77
85
78
78
68
69
74
t T
77
77
85
82
85
Table 5-7. Relationship between Proportion of Positive
Response to Each Item and Peak Level of Train Noise
(N.S.L. : New Sanyo Line)
(N.T.L.: New Tokaido Line)
Source: (5-21)
5-24
-------
Item
Disturbance of
falling in sleep
Awaiting from sleep
Interference with
liotening to TV
Interference with
conversation
Startle
NNI 30
A ~S T
% % %
23 24 0
41 20 0
43 53 34
36 26 0
43 10 0 |
NNI 35
AST
% % %
27 38 0
47 39 0
51 70 49
45 49 7
48 28 0
NNI 45
AST
% % %
33 66 28
60 76 30
72 TOO 81
68 94 56
58 64 25
I mn 50
A S ,T
% % %
47 80 43
65 95 43
75 100 83
73 100 80
59 81 44
irr.'i 55 ^
AST
% % %
57 — 72
70 — 67
79 — 92
78 — ICO
61 — 64
* Values in Table 5-8 were obtained after comparing community
responses to train and aircraft noise in NNI (Noise and Number
Index).
Table 5-8. Comparison between Community
Response to Aircraft Noise (Survey in UK) and
to Train Noise in NNI
(A: Aircraft Noise, S: Sanyo Line, T: Tokaido Line)
Source: (5-21)
5-25
-------
The criteria according to L is shown in this figure
eq
and interpreted as follows:
"It is seen that the proportion of favorable responses
drops sharply and the proportion of unfavorable
responses rises sharply as the value of Leq increases
above 72-75 dBA. At this exposure, 36. 5% of the
people responded with annoyance above the middle
of the scale of overall annoyance. Accordingly, it
was concluded by the French researchers that Leq
of 72 dBA represents a maximum acceptable exposure
to train noise"
TOO
TO
m
(L
Vt
\U
»0
w
g
w
10
•RESPONSES I. 2, AND 3
« 'ACCEPTABLE"
RESPONSES 5 TO 7
* INTOLERABLE
\
\
70
EQUIVALENT NOISE LEVEL [d8(A>]
Figure 5-7. "Acceptable" and "Intolerable"
Responses vs Equivalent Noise Level, with No
Corrections for Exposure or Attitude.
Source: (5-16)
90
5-26
-------
A predictive model was built that included non-
noise variables like the number of rooms of the dwelling facing the
track, attitude toward noise in general, attitude toward trains in general,
and attitude toward the neighborhood. Use of these non-noise variables
as well as the L, nearly doubled the ability to predict annoyance
(correlation coefficient = 0.64).
The results of the French, Japanese, and also an English
study suggest that the life styles of the countries agree sufficiently to
allow conclusions drawn for one country to be applied to another, insofar
as scaling of annoyance is concerned. (5-16)
Another result was that train noise does not produce as
much annoyance as other equally intense environmental noise sources,
possibly because of habituation to train noise, the fact that the railroads
were often there before the adjacent occupants, and a positive
attitude toward trains.
Japanese Laboratory Study
A laboratory study of the noisiness of trains was conducted
in Japan parallell with the Japanese social survey. The purpose of
the study was to define how the perceived noisiness (as opposed to
expressed annoyance though presumably there must be some
relation between noisiness and annoyance) depends on various parameters
of the noise pattern during train passage (5-18). The study as reported
by Schultz included tests carried out by presenting to trained observers
a series of simulated and recorded train noises, having a variety of
different peak levels, peak durations, rise and decay times, etc.
These signals were alternated with a "Comparison Noise" whose level
could be adjusted until the test noise and the comparison noise sounded
5-27
-------
equally loud.
It turned out that a satisfactory rating for the noisiness
of train passages depends only on the maximum A-level during the
train passage and the duration of the passage, thus lending support to
the results of the survey. (However, despite the authors' claim that
the noisiness is best predicted by the total energy in the noise of the
passage, it is not; indeed, this claim is somewhat difficult to under-
stand, since they state: "The rate of noisiness change, however,
differs according as (sic) the energy change is caused by a change of
peak level of noise or by a change of its duration, even if the energy
changes are equal in both cases.
The formula that successfully predicted the judged noisiness
was:
N - r i \ max
where L. is the maximum A-weighted sound level during the train
max
pass age and T is the time during which the noise level is within 10 dB
a
of its maximum value. The duration dependence thus depends on the
peak level, a relationship that hardly supports the claim that the
noisiness of the train passage corresponds to the total sound energy
in the event.
There is enough scatter in all survey results that this
rather subtle dependence would likely be impossible to discover
outside the laboratory". (5-16)
5-Z8
-------
The general conclusion from these studies as far as the
train noise is concerned and as stated by Shultz ". . . the best correlation
with expressed annoyance is achieved when both the maximum noise
level during train passages as well as the train traffic volume are
taken into account; this can be done either explicitly, with separate
terms for each variable (the NNI is an example, but not the best!),
or bv the use of L , which embodies both variables. The prediction
y eq
of annoyance is equally good either way". (5-1 6)
5-29
-------
Swedish Survey
In Sweden, a study of the impact of train noise on exposed
population groups is now in progress. So far two test studies have been
carried out in order to formulate and test a questionnaire concerning
train noise. During the spring of 1976, in an initial phase of the real
study, interviews were conducted on some 400 persons living in four
areas close to railways. These areas were selected in such a way
that all respondents are exposed to the noise of about 100 passing trains
per day, while the maximum sound level varies. The housing areas
to be investigated are of relatively recent vintage. In a second phase,
studies of areas are planned where traffic intensity is different and
where the buildings are older, the aim being to investigate the occurance
of or habituation effects related to train noise.
The first test study showed that the respondents did not
experience specific noise characteristics. Instead annoyance seemed
to result from the general noise emitted by the trains. Vibrations
were a relatively common cause of annoyance. In the second investigation,
50 persons living next to a railway line were interviewed. Exposure
varied between 62 to 80 dBA expressed as peak sound level, giving
an equivalent sound level of 44-62 dBA. Twenty-five percent stated
that they were greatly disturbed. These results correspond to those
obtained in studies of the annoyance caused by aircraft noise» (5-1)
5-30
-------
English Survey
A *tudy was conducted in 1968 in England to evaluate
annoyance to surrounding residents caused by the noise of the high-speed
electric trains. The preliminary results as reported byShultz
suggested (to no one's surprise!) that people's annoyance decreases
as their distance from the tracks increases, though the dependence
was neither strong nor consistent. (As an example of this
inconsistency, people living at 70 m distance expressed more
annoyance than those at 45 m, according to one set of interviews.)
There was a suggestion that people living in high background noise from
other sources (children, dogs, etc.) are more sensitive to the railway
noise than people in quieter Locales, contrary to our usual expectations !
This implies, perhaps, that in conditions of persistent noisiness,
people experience an increased, rather than reduced, sensitivity to
the occasional extra noise of the railroad. A similar trend was found
in a French survey.
The British study very tenatatively concluded that the
external noise level must exceed 95 dB(A) during train passages before
serious annoyance becomes evident: this implies houses within 30
meters of the track. (5-16)
5-31
-------
5.2 Noise Control Actions
5.Z.I Regulatory Activity
5.Z.1.1 Direct Regulations
Proposed emission standards or norms do not have true
practical value until they are established by legislation that can be
enforced. Legislation has been enacted in various countries pre-
scribing maximum levels of noise and methodology for monitoring
these limits.
Source Emission Limits for New Vehicles
Members of The European community (Belgium, Germany,
Italy, Luxemburg, France, The United Kingdom, Ireland and Denmark)
have adopted emission limits in the Directive approved by the Council of
the European Community of February 6, 1970. Limits are shown in
Table 5-9-
Since 1966 all new types of motor vehicles in the Federal
Republic of Germany have had to be tested by licensed institutions for
their noise emission and whether they meet certain noise specifications.
There are many technical details for measurements, depending upon the
type of vehicle. Technical details are similar to the ones of ISO R 362 .
(5-24)
Noise level standards for motor vehicals have been established
in the Netherlands. Every new type of motor vehical intended for use on
the public highway must satisfy the required noise levels. Measurement
methodology and instrumentation are established by law. The method of
measurement was originally established by means of ISO Recommendation
R 362-1964. Later, in 1971, EEC Directive No. 70/157 on the permissible
noise level of motor vehicles was introduced into Dutch Law. (5-25)
5-32
-------
Value
Vehicle category expressed
1.1.1 Vehicles intended for the carriage of 82
passengers and comprising not more than
nine seats including the driver's seat
1.1.2 Vehicles intended for the carriage of 84
passengers, comprising more than nine
seats including the driver's seat, and having
a permissible maximum weight not exceeding
3. 5 metric tons
1.1.3 Vehicles intended for the carriage of goods and 84
having a permissible maximum weight not
exceeding 3. 5 metric tons
1.1.4 Vehicles intended for the carriage of 89
passengers, comprising more than nine seats
including the driver's seat, and having a
permissible maximum weight exceeding 315
metric tons
1.1.5 Vehicles intended for the carriage of goods, 89
and having a permissible maximum weight
exceeding 3.5 metric tons
1.1.6 Vehicles intended for the carriage of 91
passengers, comprising more than nine seat
including the driver's seat, and having an
engine power equal to or exceeding
-------
Noise emission from individual vehicles in the United Kingdom
was controlled through the 1973 Motor Vehicles (Construction and Use)
Regulations. These regulations specified an acceleration test, with the
maximum allowable level being 89 dBA for trucks and 84 dBA for auto-
mobiles, both measurements being made at 715 meters. The same
Regulations provided also for roadside testing of in-use vehicles.
Maximum levels for the roadside test, measured at no less than 5.2m.
from the curb, are 89 dBA for automobiles and 92 dBA for trucks. (5-12 )
The present maximum noise limits for new vehicles are the EEC limits:
and 84 dBA for trucks up to 3. 5 metric tons, 89 dBA for trucks 3. 5-12
metric tons, 91 dBA for trucks greater than 12 metric tons and 200 HP,
etc. , all at 7. 5 meters. Manufacturers are required to certify that pro-
duction models are similar to the prototype submitted for the type approval
test. For in-use vehicle noise control through policing actions, stationary
vehicle noise tests have been legally adopted. The law provides that the
noise level of the vehicle being tested must be no more than 5 dBA over
the maximum value allowed in its type approval test. (5-12)
The Federal Ministry of Transport of Canada has regulations
limiting the noise emission properties at the time of importation or manu-
facture of new motor vehicles. Noise limits are specified in terms of the
U.S. Society of Automotive Engineers recommended practices and standards
and in terms of procedures of the United Nations Economic Commission for
Europe (ECE). Accordingly, the permissible noise levels, measured at
15. 2 meters are 86 dBA for light vehicles and 88 dBA and 83 dBA for
light and heavy vehicles respectively. (5-28)
In Norway, regulations in connection with the Road Traffic
Act for permissible noise levels are effective for motor vehicles certified
for the first time after January 1, 1972. Norway participates in ECE's
work in this field and the regulations are in accordance with ECE recom-
mendations . (5-'6 ) However, there are no emmission limits for road
5-34
-------
traffic noise in Norway, and no decision has so far been made to introduce
legally binding regulations. As alternative to the latter is the introduction
of guidelines for various areas and situations.
Other nations with source emission regulation based on the
ECE or Common Market (EEC) recommendations are listed in Table 5-10.
Japanese maximum allowable limits for automobile noise has been laid
down in Article 16-1, Noise Regulation Law as presented in the following
Table 5-11.
dBA
Timing
Always
Certifi-
cation
test
Classes of Motor Vehicle
Medium, small and mini cars, and motor bicycles
Medium, small and mini cars (except motor
bicycles and passenger cars with a. capacity of
less than 10 persons) :
3.5 tons or more and 200 HP or more
3.5 tons or more and 200 HP or less
3.5 tons or less
Passenger cars with a capacity of less than 10
persons
Two-wheeled small cars
Two-wheeled mini cars
Class 1 motor bicycles
Class 2 motor bicycles
Maximum
Allowable Limits
Normal
H5
80
78
74
70
74
74
70
70
Accel e-
rat ion
92
89
85
84
86
84
80
82
Table 5-11 Maximum Allowable Limit for Automobile
Noise0 Article 16-1, Noise Regulation Law (Japan).
Source: (5-29)
Table 5-10 "Follows on next page"
5-35
-------
-------
(Continuation of Table 5-10)
."'.: thc.-ir./Xjivc
' Sweden
i
Date Passed
i
Czech. 1971
i
i
Spain
Yugoslavia
Norway
Australia
/Design rule
28
11 Mar.
1970
Data :o be, in
Fo-.-ce
MU.-.S. Sin.
SIS
025131
CSN
300512
1973 ISO
R-362
ii
i
1972 "
i
July
1972
Gas -power
7/1974
Diesel:
7/1975
I
Australia
(Tasmania)
i
now
fed
like
R-362
BS 3425
:1966
1 Jan
1975
it
I ;
Comments
Adopting E. C. E. Reg. 9. SIS025131
equivalent to R-362.
CSN 300512 equivalent to ISO
R-362. Adopting the old E. C. E.
Reg. 9.
Adopting the old E. C. E. Reg. 9.
Will change to new Reg. 9.
E. C. E. Reg. 9
Voluntarily adopted by
all states except Tasmania
I
OJ
-------
Zone-Type Regulations on Road Traffic Noise
The Japanese environmental quality standard relating to
noise level was established on the basis of the Basic Law for Environ
mental Pollution Control and was approved by the Cabinet (May 25,
1971).
(a) General Area
dBA
Category of Area
A A
A
B
Division of Hours
Daytime
Not more than
45
50
60
Morning &
Evening
Not more than
40
45
55
Night Time
Not more than
35
40
50
Note: AA - Areas which require particular quite. For instance, areas
where medical ficilities are concentrated.
A- Primarily residential areas.
B - Areas in which a substantial number of residences are located
among shops and factories.
(b) Areas Bordering on Roads
dBA
Categories of Areas
Type A areas bordering on
a two-lane road
Type A areas bordering on
a more-than-two-lane road
Type B areas bordering on
a not-more-than-two-lane road
Type B areas bordering on
a more-than-two-lane road
Division of Hours
Daytime
Not more than
55
60
65
65
Morning &
Evening
Not more than
50
55
60
65
Night Time
Not more than
45
50
65
60
Note: Standard values vary depending on the area type. There-
fore, classification of areas is left to the discretion of
prefectural governors.
Table 5-12 Environmental Quality'Standards for Noise
Cabinet Decision on 25 May, Based on Article 9, Basic
Law for Environmental Pollution Control Measures,
Source: 5-29
5-38
-------
5.2.1.2
GUIDELINES AND PROPOSALS
(1) In the Netherlands, in anticipation of the realization of the Noise
Act and the standards to be incorporated in due course, provision-
al limit values have been applied for some time. Thus, the immis-
sion recommendations for dwelling areas along motorways to be
applied for the time being were set up in interdepartmental consul-
tation in 1973. (5-31)
\^ Limits
Situation \.
\
"new situations"
"transitional
situations"
Basic limit values to be applied provisionally
to dwelling areas alongside motorv:ays
L in dB A
eq
Outdoors
Day
55
60
60
65
Night
^5
50
50
55
Indoors
partly opened
v/indow
Day
^
50
• 50
55
Night .
35
<*0
to
45
extra front
insulation and
closed window
Day
-
-
ko
^
Night
-
-
30
35
Table 5-13. Recommended Noise Immis sion Limits
in the Netherlands
Source: (5-31)
In this table, a distinction is made between "new" and "transitional"
situations. Besides there are "existing" situations. In "new"
situations, the design, construction and the planning of the motorway,
5-39
-------
the residential quarter or both can reasonably still be modified
in such a way that without extraordinary measures the recom-
mended limit values can be met (e. g. a new development plan
in which a residential quarter is projected close to a motorway).
In "transitional" situations the motorway or the residential
quarter is already present and the design, construction or
planning of the residential quarter along the motorway are al-
ready in such an advanced state that it cannot reasonably be
expected that the modifications or provisions, necessary from
an acoustic point of view, be fully met at short notice (e. g. a
residential quarter under construction close to an existing motor-
way).
In "existing" situations both the motorway and the residential
quarter are present.
Widening of existing motorways in the middle of residential areas
is considered to be a "transitional" situation.
(2) In Denmark, limits of Danish guidelines with respect to evaluation
of road traffic noise are shown in the following Table 5-14.
1
Urban area
or
Buildings
Rural residential and recreatio-
nal areas
Suburban residential areas. Re-
creational areas in urban and
suburban zones. Hospital zones
City areas with business, admi-
nistration, etc.
Industrial areas for trade and
lighter industry
Industrial areas for heavy
industry
2
Satisfactory
environment
in case
LA,eq(24) *
40 dB
45 dB
50 dB
55 dB
70 dB
3
Unsatisfactory
environment
in case
LA,eq(24) ~
50 dB
55 dB
60 dB
65 dB
80 dB
Table 5-14. Criteria for Road Traffic Noise.
Note: The table states when the environment can be
considered satisfactory or unsatisfactory using L
on a 24 hours-a-day basis as a. measure of the quarity
of the environment.
Source: (5-10)
5-40
-------
(3) The Swedish Traffic Noise Committee proposed in August 1974
specific emission standards as well as immission standards.
The immission limits are given in the following table. (5-15).
As this table makes clear, the standards give one general, long
term goal: desirable limits of 30 dBA indoors and 45 dBA to
55 dBA outside windows and in other outdoor areas.
The norms and standards proposed by the Committee can be
considered as a specification of future legislation, and should as
such facilitate the practical application of such legislation con-
siderably. The Committee believes that this link can best be
established by issuing the norms as recommendations and direc-
tives pertaining to the legislation. In this way, the rigidity
desired in their application will be achieved, without the admini-
strative procedures involved in considering exemptions and so on,
which would result from legally binding norms issued as injunctions
to the legislation (5-13).
Desirable
Standard
Locality Limits
Indoor premises Indoors Outude
windows
Dwelling. 30 55
Health and
educational
premises 30 55
Educational
premises type
mdiiorium 25 —
•Working
premises for
}uict activities 40 65
Outdoor areas Outdoor lad
Recreational
facilities near all
categories of
^remises in urban
ircas. e.g. pai ks
and plajgi omuls 55
Areas and JOMCS
or recreational
activities 45
Exception I
New area near
major routes
tridihirs Outside
u'indou's
30 65(55)*
30 65
25 —
40 —
Outdoor level
55
45
Exception II Exception III Exception IV Exception for
New route in Upgrading of Rede\ clopment i Existing
existing area exi^tinij route of existing area
Indnur* OulMdr Indoor* Oiil'i'li- lnl Ji IIMM lull "I'tlu- M«.niv in ;i clhnt;
Table 5-15- Immission Standards Proposed in 1974
Immission Limits in Equivalent 24-hour Sound Levels (dBA)
Source: (5-13)
5-41
-------
Proposed Swedish Emission Limits for Moving Vehicles
The Swedish Committee proposes that vehicles tested by the
proposed method of measurement for moving vehicles should
not be allowed to emit noise exceeding the following levels:
Measuring distance 7.5 m
Private car
Truck or bus with gross weight
not exceeding 3500 kg
Truck with gross u eight
exceeding 3500 kg
=£200 DIN hp
> 200 DIN lip
Bus not covered below with
fross weight exceeding
500kg
=£200 DIN hp
> 200 DIN hp
Bus with gross weight
exceeding 3500 kg used for
scheduled sen ices on routes
; passing mainly through
urban areas
;Two-whcel motorcycle
with engine capacity:
not exceeding 50 cc
greater than 50 cc
but not exceeding 125 cc
greater than 125 cc
but not exceeding 490 cc
greater than 490 cc
Three-wheel motor cycle
Cross-country scooter
Cross-country vehicle
—
., „
Moped
Tractor
Vehicle of
model dating
from 1978 or
earlier
dB(A)
82
84
88
91
86
89
85
78
86
88
90
89
87
91
Vehicle
brought into
operation
following
inspection
made before
1 July 1978
dB(A)
72
88
Vehicle of
model dating
from 1979 or
later
dB(A)
76
77
83
85
80
81
77
74
81
82
83
83
81
85
Vehicle
brought into
operation
following
inspection
made 1 July
1978 or later
dB(A)
72
84
"Second
singe"—
a proposed
further det rease
ol allouc
dl!(A)
73
"
75
80
80
77
77
75
72
77
79
80
79
78
79
69
81
d levels
dB(C)
81
83
88 •
88
85
85
83
—
—
—
88
87
86
87
—
89
Table 5-16 Noise Emission Standards
Proposed in 1974
Source: (5-13)
5-42
-------
As can be seen from the table, the norms have been differentiated
by category of vehicle. The division is motivated first and fore-
most by the fact that the technical and economic feasibility of re-
ducing noise varies considerably for different types of vehicles.
This division was based, among other things, on surveys and on
emission norms in other countries.
Regarding these norms, it is proposed that the first stage should
apply to vehicle models dating from 1979. The norms for this
stage should become obligatory by statutory processes and give
limiting values which are approximately 5 dBA lower than those
currently applicable in the EEC countries.
Proposed Swedish Emission Limits for Stationary Vehicles
The Swedish Committee proposed that the noise level from
stationary vehicles, measured according to the methods proposed
by the Committee, should not exceed the following values:
Vehicle of model
dating from 1978
or earlier
dB(A)
'rivate car Front-engined
Rear-engined
Truck or bus with gross
veight nol exceeding
) 500 kg
Truck with gross weight
ixceeding 3 500 kg
<200 DIN h.p.
>200DIN p.h.
Two-wheel motor cycle
Three-wheel motor cycle
Cross-country scooter
•loped
91
93
93
97
104
99
93
99
Vehicle brought
into operation
following inspec-
tion made before
1st July 1978
dB(A)
99
Vehicle of model
dating from 1979
or later
For models jJ.iting from
1979 onward1;, and vehic-
les not classifiable as
any annual model, brought
into operation following
an inspi tion made
1 st July 197S or later, a
normal value in dli(A)
shall be set in conjunc-
tion with the type, re-
gistration or moped
approval.
The value should not be
set at a level which
exceeds by more than
2 dB(A) the value
measured at Ihe approval.
For a vehicle to be
approved, in the annual
.safely inspection or
any other subsequent
inspection, the noise
level may not exceexl
the normal value thus
set by--more than
2dB(A).
The normal value shall
be stamped on a plate
which slull be moun-
ted on a readily-
observable p':iCC.
Table 5-17 Proposed Swedish Limits for Stationary
Vehicles
5-43
Source: (5-13)
-------
5.2.2 Other Actions Beside Regulatory Actions
5.2.2.1 Vehicle Noise Reduction
Noise control technology aiming at reducing noise emission
at the source has recently received more attention by motor vehicle manu-
facturers. A great deal of effort, research and funds are assigned for.
technical measures that would bring about more noise reduction as illu-
strated by the following examples from two representative countries.
Sweden
The Swedish motor manufacturers Volvo and SAAB have
furnished particulars concerning the level to which noise emission can be
reduced without altering the basic design of the various vehicles, and
also concerning the costs involved in reductions to certain levels.
Cars
SAAB believes a reduction to 79 dBA measured as per
ISO R 362 is possible. This will require the fitting of new, improved
intake and exhaust silencers as well as screening off the noise generated
in the engine compartment (encapsulation, sound-absorbent material).
Volvo believes that a reduction to 78 dBA is attainable, which, given the
variation occurring in mass production, means that the mean value for
production will have to be reduced below 77 dBA. In addition to the above
measures, Volvo refers to reduction of engine noise emission by stuffer-
ing the oil sump and the cam-shaft - transmission cover.
The Volvo and SAAB estimate that it will cost an additional
Sw. cr. 200-250 (about $44-55) to bring the noise level of mass produced
cars down to 80 dBA assuming that the same limit is applied in most
other European countries. To this figure must be added increased service
costs when replacing the exhaust system, as well as a marginal rise in
fuel costs. (5-13 )
5-44
-------
The two motor manufacturing firms believe that the sound
level of lorries can be reduced to 86 and 84 , measured as per
ISO R 362, for heavy lorries (3, 500 kg) with engine ratings of more than
200 HP and less than 200 HP respectively, without any laterations to
the existing basic designs. To accomplish this, the following measures
are necessary:
o introduction of a thermostatically cooled radiator fan
o screening devices along both sides of the engine
compartment, with special extensions forwards and
backwards
o sound-absorbent material together with oil protection
and mechanical protection in the greater part of the
engine compartment
o a tight-fitting and soundproof but easily fitted cover
beneath the engine and radiator fan and parts of the
clutch housing
o more efficient and much larger or double exhaust silencers
o more efficient intake silencers
o far more efficient water and oil cooling systems.
SAAB and Volvo state that if these measures were taken for
the Swedish market only, the price of each vehicle would increase by about
$881 (Sw. cr. 4,000). This increase will be halved if the same restric-
tions are introduced in their other markets.
Buses
Reference has already been made to a "silent bus, " the CR HIM,
manufacture red by SAAB. This model can keep within a maximum noise emi-
ssion of 77 dBA. The requisite adjustments add about $1,444 (Sw. cr. 6, 500)
to the price of the vehicle and 350 kg to its weight.
Engines
Work is currently in progress in Sweden on the
development of the Stirling engine . This project is being conducted by a
specially formed company, United Stirling (Sweden) AB, under license from
5-45
-------
Philips of Holland. One of the advantages of the Stirling engine is its low
sound level. A 150 kW engine is estimated to have a sound level of 80 dB(A)
or more. In a vehicle fitted with a Stirling engine, the engine itself becomes
a subordinate noise factor. Instead most of the noise that is generated
comes from the radiator fan and tires. A particular problem in this respect
is posed by the fan compartment, since the Stirling engine transfers more
heat to the cooling water than a dies el engine operating with the same out-
put. United Stirling AB expects to have solved the problems connected
with the Stirling engine by 1978, when mass production is planned to begin,,
(5-13 )
United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom the Transport and Road Research Labora-
tory (TRRL) is currently involved in a 5-year quiet vehicle program designed
to demonstrate the technical and commercial feasibility of quiet heavy traffic.
The objective of the program is to produce two demonstration trucks, one 250
BHP and one 350 BHP, with noise levels of 80 dBA or less. The program
is progressing in two stages. The first stage involves a coordinated effort
among the TRRL, the Institute of Sound and Vibration Research, and the
Motor Industry Research Association.
The Institute of Sound and Vibration Research has been investi-
gating methods to reduce engine noise ( to 77 dBA, gearbox noise (to
77 dBA and intake noise (to 69 dBA . Engine noise reduction is being
pursued along two lines: increasing structural stiffness and damping.
Methods being evaluated to increase structural stiffness include using
stiff vertical crankshaft supports and incorporating an internal bearing
beam in the crankcase frame. Increased structural damping is being in-
vestigated through the use of dampened cylinder block wall panels and a
dampened sump fixed to the lower deck of the cylinder block.
5-46
-------
The Motor Industry Research Association has been conducting
research to reduce exhaust system noise ( to 69 dBA) and internal truck
cab noise ( to 75 dBA in order to reduce user exposure.
Stage two of this 5-year program, to be carried out by industry
consists of the actual development and testing of commercially viable
vehicles. (5-12)
5-47
-------
5.2.2.2 Tire/Road Noise
Rolling noise has been indentified as a major source of annoyance
to people living in the vicinity of high-speed roads. In an attempt to deal
with this problem the extent and nature of rolling noise as a component of
vehicle noise is being explored and studied in many countries.
The National Swedish Road and Traffic Research Institute has
been engaged in this area of traffic noise problem through several
projects: "Tire Noise Screening;" "Tire Noise--Influence of Tire and
Road Surface;" "Tire Noise Recommendation Regarding a Measurement
Method, " and "Analysis of Vehicle Noise from Coarse Texture Pavements".
(5-9 ) Another project presently in progress in Sweden is regarding tire
noise measurement methods. The objective of this project is to obtain
reporducible measurements of tire noise, to study the influence of different
parameters on sound generation and to develop vehicle screens to prevent
the diffusion of tire noise. The project is located in Stockholm and is
being financed by the National Board for Technical Development. (5- 1 )
The Federal Institute of Road Affairs in West Germany has
been active in tire noise generation research. Their research has
revealed that car radial and bias-ply tire noise has a dependency on the
fourth power of vehicle speed while truck tires fall in the range between the
third and fourth power of vehicle speed. Additionally, the empirical
studies indicate that noise levels are related to tire footprint width, noise
spectra are independent of speed, worn tires without profile tend to be
2-3 dBA quieter, and rayon is quieter than nylon when used in tire
construction. (5-12)
The Transport and Road Research Laboratory of the Department
of the Environment of the United Kingdom has been concerned with research
on tire noise and road surface effects on noise generation. The Laboratory
reported the following results in the area of rolling noise. (Figure 5-8)
5-48
-------
• Urban shopping slrttts
Motorway - stow Ian*
•0
eo so
^
in
r~
?
1 70
i
(0
— Heavy vehicles total noise
Heavy vehicles coasting
X
-Light vehklts total noise
Light vehicles coasting
to
30 40 SO 60 70 80 90 100
Vehicle speed (km/h)
Figure 5-tf. Total Vehicle iNoise ana Coasting Noise
Source: (5-17)
Figure 5-8 shows for an average light vehicle, up to 1.5 t, and
an average heavy vehicle, over 1.5 t, how rolling noise and total noise
V vary under motorway conditions and in urban streets. For heavy vehicles
in urban streets rolling noise is so much quieter than the total vehicle
noise that it is unlikely to be noticeable. For light vehicles in urban streets
and heavy vehicles on motorways rolling noise is about 7 dBA below total
vehicle noise. This difference suggests that although rolling noise may not
be the predominant source of vehicle noise, its contribution is not insignifi-
cant and changes of rolling noise will cause similar but smaller changes in
total noise. For light vehicles running on motorways, rolling noise is only
2 dBA less than total noise and is clearly predominant. For this combina-
tion of vehicle and road any small change in rolling noise will cause an almost
identical change in total vehicle noise.
5-49
-------
In the U.K. , annoyance from rolling noise is assessed by
determining the level of LIQ (18 hours). The derivation of levels on this
scale from a knowledge of vehicle level and speed is not simple but the
necessary computation has been accomplished using the Laboratory's com-
puter model of traffic noise. The provision of a complete specification of
L}Q (18 hours) will require the derivation of predictive relations for the
range of road surfaces typically encountered in the United Kingdom. An
investigation to measure the basic vehicle noise data and to assess the
safety as well as other aspects of road surfaces is presently part of a
joint program with the Materials Division.
In the area of effects of road surface texture on noise the
Transport and Road Research Laboratory has reported their findings. A
coarse texture is incorporated into the surface of roads to provide drain-
age paths or channels which allow the dispersal of water in much the same
•way as the tread pattern on a tire. Provision of sufficient texture enables the
skidding resistance of a surface to be maintained at high speed at a level
similar to that available to low-speed traffic.
In the search for improved levels of high-speed skid-resistance
it has become increasingly necessary also to consider the noise produced
by traffic using the textured surfaces. A survey was therefore initiated in
1974, and subsequently extended, to provide information on the relation
between noise and the effectiveness of surface texture in sustaining skidding
resistance at high speeds.
Initial results have established that the noise from light vehicles
increases with increasing texture both on bituminous and concrete surfaces
although the relationship is different for the two types of construction (Fig. 5-,9).
With heavy vehicles, the tire/road noise is masked by the higher engine and
transmission noise; they are not therefore discussed in this leaflet.
5-50
-------
f-
c
"-1
£
^
"5 CD
Ij
J£
d
n"
84
83
82
81
80
79
78
77
76
75
/ *J
74
n ••
X
0 X
O -y'
O Plastic-grooved concrete
0 Sawn- grooved concrete
D Flail- grooved concrete
A Brushed concrete
• Rolled asphalt
• Asphaltic concrete
A Surface dressing
T Open textured macadam
• O
A / ^
— ^r A ^
'/ ^__— ' -
X ° • • ^~~-"~"^
- A X" A -^-^*" T
/v'* ^- -^^ " * A
- ,/J, -"""•
-X* • T
- A A
A
A
1 1 1 1 1 1 1
0
0-5
1-0
2-5
30
3-5
1-5 2-0
Texture depth ( mm )
Figure 5-V. Kelationships .between Texture Jjeptn
of Various Surfaces and Noise From Light Vehicles
Source : (5-17)
The effectiveness of texture in sustaining skidding resistance
as speed increases has been found to differ according to whether the surface
is concrete or bituminous. This is because texture on concrete is basically
provided in a transverse manner whereas, on bituminous surfaces, texture
is more random due to the distribution of chippings. By utilising established
relationships the noise levels have been related to the effectiveness of the
various surface textures in providing high-speed skid-resistance as defined
by "the percentage change in BFC from 50 to 130 km/h. " The resulting
relationship (Fig. 5-10 demonstrates that, for light vechicles, the noise emanat-
ing from a road surface, of whatever type, is proportional to the effective-
ness of that surface in maintaining the skidding resistance properties at
higher speeds.
Further studies are being made to evaluate alternative forms of
coarse texture in concrete surfaces and to distinguish between tire/road
noise and mechanical noise from heavy vehicles- (5-19)
5-51
-------
-60
-40 -20 0 +20 +40 +60 +80 +100
Estimated percentage change in B FC from 50 to 130 km/h
Figure 5-10. Relationship Between Zstimatec B±j C of Various
Surfaces and Noise From Light Vehicles
Source: (5-17)
5-52
-------
5.2.2.3 Noise Screening
Noise screening is an effective measure in traffic
noise abatement. Noise barriers have been constructed by many countries
as a means of protecting inhabitants from noise. These barriers have
different types of designs and are used for different noise abatement pur-
poses. In their function they may be experimental, noise-absorbing or
noise-reflecting. Their substance may include different materials such
as wood, steel, plastics, concrete, earth or a combination of these and other
materials. Performance of noise barriers reportedly varies.
Japan seems to be one of the most advanced countries in using
noise barriers as a means of fighting traffic noise along highways. Presently
in Japan, acoustic barriers are most widely applied to the road construction
itself as noise control procedures. Many types of wall constructions have
been developed and applied. Most of them are the panel type having neces-
sary sound insulation characteristics and also having sound absorption on one
side of the panel. Until the end of March 1976, the total length of barrier walls
applied to the road bythe Japan Highway Corporation amounbed to about 85
kilometers. Many types of barriers have been used resulting in some prob-
lems in the maintenance of the wall. So, Japan Highway Corporation is now
preparing a standard type of barrier wall construction. In the case of import-
ant areas, acoustic shelters were applied to the road. In this case, of
course, noise problems are solved except for noise radiation from the opening
of the shelter as in the case of a. tunnel. Here, the sound absorption treat-
ments of the inner surface of the shelter or tunnel would play an important
role for the control of noise radiated from the opening- (5- 3 )
The following table provides a general overview of traffic noise
barriers and their performance in reducing noise along traffic routes in
European countries. (Table 5-18)
5-53
-------
Country
United Kingdom
(Samples)
Switzerland
France
Noise Barrier Site
Noise Barrier-
Site (HE
Noise Barrier-
Site HIE
Noise Barrier-
Site #131
Noise Barrier-
Site #2SI
Noise Barrier-
Site #3SI
Noise Shelter-
Site #IF
Noise Barrier-
Site H2F
Location
al Huston
(near London)
near
Birmingham
South of Bern
South of Bern
South of Bern
South of Paris
^aris Beltway
-South of Pans
Construction
Materials
V my 1 supported
in a rneLal frame-
work with sealed
joints
Wood supported
by concrete
footings
Concrete
Earth
Combination of
materials
Prestressed
Corten steel
shells separated
by thick layer of
glass wool
Concrete 8t steel
framework
Length
300
meters
about
1000
700 m
no m
Height
Varies from
2-7 meters
lo 3-3
meter 8
average 3
meters
2.4m
(8 feet)
3-3. 6 m
(1D-1Z ft)
1.8-2.. 4 m
(6-8 ft)
4-5 meter t
Noise Attenuation
Estimation
Noise reductions 3 dB(A)
at first floor; 4 dB(A) at
ground floor. House
located at a distance of
20 meters from motorway
Between 5-8 dU(A) aver-
aged over an 18-hour
pe riod
Not available
Not available
Not available
10 dB(A) during the day
15 dB(A) during the night
Other Relevant Information
This is an experimental noise barrier
erected in 1970 on a road tarrying
about 73,000 vehicles (30% heavy
vehicles) in an 18 hour period.
This type of barrier construction is
claimed to be very practical, esthet-
ically acceptable, durable and
appeared to require little maintenance
effort.
Constructed to protect single family
residences. This barrier, it has beer.
claimed, very effectively attenuated
traffic noise, particularly since it
would be designed for low, horizontal
truck exhaust system.
This noise shelter design covers the
highway and achieved very satisfactor ,
noise abatement results.
Lxiicrii,Tv,!-ii ,-\' >,•-,<• Jnrriir (>r oji-i. '. ; !
lias given the French valuaolo Held
information. Another noise barrier is
being constructed in the same area and
would be about 900 meters long. 9
meters high; estimated cost: 10.000
francs/meter (i, 500$7yaru).
Table 5-18. Noise Barriers in Some European Countries
-------
Table 5-18 (continued)
Country
Sweden.
Samples)
Federal Republic of
Germany
(Samples )
oiac Barrier Site
Noise Barrier-
Site #2SE
Noise Barrier-
Site #3SE
Noise Barrier-
Site #4SE
Noise Barrier-
Site #1G
Noise Barrier-
Site #2G
Noise Barrier-
Site #3G
Location
outheast
tockholm
outheast of
tockholm
outheast of
tockholm
ieumar, east
of Koln
Southwest
Duisburg
near Duieburg
Construction
Materials
Combination of
%vood and earth
mound
Wood
Wood and earth
mound
A series of:
earth barriers,
earth & wood,
and absorbing
plastic barriers.
Gclvanized
steel
Painted steel
Length
1,100 m
about
1000 m
1,000 m
Height
2-3 m
2 meters
8-9 meters
average 4
meters
2-5 meters
Noise Attenuation
Estimation
10-20 db(A)
Other Relevant Information
This barrier is constructed by the
city on top of an access controlled
highway cut section. It is meant to
protect lower level and outside area
of adjacent apartment buildings. It
represents a combination of a highway
cut, a barrier, and noise insulation.
This barrier is also a combination of
a highway cut, earth mound and wood
noise barrier constructed mainly to
protect apartment building from noise
Experimental project; constructed
between 1970-79 to field test effective-
ness, durability, esthetic qualities,
weathering properties and other
features of interest.
This wall barrier combination will
mainly attenuate ramp noise from
trucks accelerating up the ramp grade
to enter highway. It was constructed
to protect apartment houses from
traffic noise and vehicle headlight
glare.
This barrier was constructed along
one side of the highway 10 protect
adjacent single fdrnily homes.
I
un
Noise Barriers in Some European Countries
-------
Table 5-18 (continued)
Country
Federal Republic
of Gerhiany
( Continued)
Noise Barrier Site
Noise Barrier-
Site #7G
Location
East of
Mechenheim
Construction
Materials
Steel
Length
about
1, 650 m
Height
1.8-3.6 m
(6-12 ft)
Noise Attenuation
Estimation
Other Relevant Information
Finished in 1975; constructed along
one aide of the highway on cut and
fill sections and vacant land planned
for noise sensitive development. The
front faces of the steel barrier panels
were perforated with holes and the
absorbing interior was filled with
shredded rubber held in by a wire
mesh and the back is solid.
(Jl
I
Source: Information in this table has been based mainly on a report by Behrens, F. A. and Burry, T. M. ,
"European Experiences in Highway Noise, " Report No. FHWA-RD-123, November 1975, pp. 657-667.
Note: 1. In column 6 (Noise Attenuation Estimation) the distance from/to highway is not specified.
However, we assume that it is of the order of 100 meters and at ground level.
2. The attenuation at ground floor was less than that at first floor because ground
floor had already been partially shielded by the roadway elevation.
Noise Barriers in Some European Countries
-------
5.2.Z.4 Building Insulation Against Traffic Noise
The U. K. is the only country now actively com-
pensating residents near highways for damage
from road traffic noise. The payments are useable
by the householder to partially pay for installing
acoustic materials in the exterior shell of affected
hours to alternate road traffic noise.
For further information on other aspects of this
problem, see Chapter 6, "Noise in Buildings."
5-57
-------
5.Z.Z.5 Planning and Zoning
In planning new roads in Japan, noise control procedures
are now included as a design factor. Thus, in designing new roads,
estimationsof noise around roadside areas are derived from
the traffic volume, mixture of heavy vehicles, average velocity and other
factors, and the results of the estimation are compared with the EnvironmEntal
Standards adopted for that area. If the estimated value is above the stand-
ard, several noise control procedures are applied in the design, such as
alteration of road constructions, application of acoustic barriers ,
and institution of neutral green zones along the road. (5- 3)
In the Federal Republic of Germany where traffic noise is the
most widely distributed source of noise, 18 cities have so far worked out
the distribution of noise within their municipality, in the form of more or
less complete noise mapping. This has been done on a purely voluntary
basis. The maps usually indicate the various levels of noise using a
bandwidth of 4 to 5 dBA. However, procedures for the technicalities
have not yet been standardized. The purpose of these noise maps is to
supply data for city planning. The Federal Government intends to make
regulations for traffic noise similar to those for aircraft noise.
The noise level along streets and highways yet to be constructed will
be calculated based upon the estimated traffic result. (5-Z4)
In dealing with noise emitted by trucks, certain routes and
time restrictions were designated for these type of vehicles.
In this regard the city of Stockholm, Sweden implemented the following
regulations specifically to reduce traffic noise:
1. No heavy trucks (3^ tons or over) were allowed at night
(10 p.m. to 6 a.m.).
2. Long trucks (1Z meters in length or greater) were
restricted to use only designated highways and streets.
5-58
-------
3. Heavy trucks were restricted to use designated truck
routes.
Two specific cases are worthy of mention concerning the use of
truck restriction to control highway noise in West Germany. All trucks
over 7. 5 tons are restricted from using a main highway between
Bonn and Koblenz during the hours of 10:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m.
Secondly, trucks are restricted from using a Local trunk road
to bypass steep grades on a section of autobahn near Alsfeld in the State
of Hessen.
In England, the British government, all counties, and the
Greater London Council are working on plans for a national and local
system of truck routes. In connection with this overall plan, the GLC
is working on establishing designated heavy truck routes in the London
area in an attempt to regulate the traffic of heavy trucks on London
streets by channeling them off of the most unsuitable streets and onto a net-
work of main roads. At the same time, local areas needing special relief
can be protected by banning trucks from entering unless they are
needed to collect or to deliver goods. (5-12 )
In some new French towns, Cergy-Pontoise about fifteen miles
outside Paris is a case in point, a system of zoning is applied. Along-
side motorways no housing is allowed on a belt 30 meters wide from the
edge of the carriageway and apartments between 30m and 80m
from the edge of the carriageway have to be soundproofed. Along other
roads housing construction is not permitted within thirteen meters from
the edge of the carriageway.
But the most noteworthy examples of protection against
traffic noise in new towns are in Great Britain. In Stevenage, for example,
a new town of some 100, 000 inhabitants, road traffic, cyclists and pedest-
rians are entirely segregated. Transit traffic has to take a circular route
5-59
-------
and traffic to the town itself ends up in parking lots outside the housing
estates. Cycle and footpaths are the only routes passing through the
residential areas. Thus, apart from increased safety and a better
environment for play and for walking, traffic noise is considerably
reduced. Motor traffic is being prohibited on an increasing scale in
some of the older quarters of towns throughout Europe. In Rouen, France,
two streets in the center have been closed to vehicles and a broad pedest-
rian precinct is planned. Vehicle-free zones have been set up in Norwich
in Great Britain, Copenhagen in Denmark, Essen in Germany, Bern in
Switzerland, Vienna in Austria, and elsewhere. Other towns will be
introducing the same restrictions. (5--20)
In Switzerland, a dozen streets in Zurich are closed to mopeds
and motorcycles between 10:00 p. m.and 7:00 a.m. in order to
protect the local hospitals and residential areas from noise, and since
1959 vehicles passing through Lausanne have had to go around the city
during the night-time. It is important to mention here that heavy vehicles
are not allowed to run anywhere in the country during the night with the
exception of buses, fire engines and trucks carrying certain perishable
goods. Also, in the Federal Capital of Switzerland, the public decided
not to spend money on buses but to extend the trolley-bus routes which
cause less pollution and noise. This has influenced other Swiss cities to
do the same thing. Bern thus provides a perfect example of a combination
of traffic noise abatement--a ban on trucks, vehicle-free zones and near-
silent public transport. (5-20)
5-60
-------
5. 3 Railroad and Rapid Transit
5. 3.1 Railroad
Railways were originally supposed to involve far less of a
noise problem than roads and airports. However, this view is beginning
to change, especially with the introduction of high speed trains. More
countries are paying attention to this problem. Some countries have
already introduced legal measures to control noise from trains.
5.3.1.1 Regulations
Environmental quality standards concerning noise from the
Shinkansen Railway in Japan have been established. Noise standards for
this type of super-express train were issued by the Environmental Agency
of Japan on 29 July 1975. According to the Ministerial order, the regulation
level for Area 1 (mainly residential areas) is 70 dBA and for Area II
(commercial and industrial areas) 75 dBA , It also shows the target
fulfillment period. These levels have been established from the results
of a survey on community response to noise. As for ordinary train
noise, there is at present no statutory control in Japan. (5-Z2) (5-23)
5.3.1.2 Guidelines
The Japanese train noise standards have been set at 70 dBA
or below in areas used primarily for residential purposes and at 75 dBA
or below in other areas which should be still similarly protected from
noise pollution in the residents' daily lives. These standards must be
attained as soon as new railroads have been constructed and put into
service. In the case of existing railroads they must be achieved with the
least practical delay. (5-22) These standards have been adopted by the
Tokyo Metropolitan Government 1974 Plan to Protect Citizens of Tokyo
from Environmental Pollution.
5-61
-------
Compliance with these standards is determined as
follows: "Train noise shall be measured at points one meter
from each residential structure and this should be done with respect to
trains that pass through the spot in one hour. The maximum noise level
is recorded for each train, then the arithmetic mean taken from the higher
half of the maximum noise levels thus recorded shall be the representative
value for checking the compliance. The measuring device to be used shall
be either the sound level meter specified in JIS C1502 of Japan Industrial
Standards or the precision level meter in International Electrotechnical
Commission (IEC) publication 179" (5-22)
5.3.1.3 Non-Regulatory Actions
Noise from railroads is being attacked in various ways in
the Federal Republic of Germany. The first project is to design cars
and engines which do not produce much noise. Additionally, there is a
trend towards concrete bridges rather than steel bridges, and there
is a nationwide program to polish the rails of the main connections at
a rate of 5000 km per year (approximately 3100 miles/year), in order
to get rid of the micro-ripples. The latter procedure reduces
noise emission by an average of 5 dBA. The rail segments of the main
connections are already welded together in order to reduce noise
and vibration- (5-^3)
In the United Kingdom, the following tables relating to
reduction in noise level caused by a railway cutting and reduction in noise
levels due to houses have been provided by a recent investigation.
5-62
-------
Table 5-19 Reduction in Noise Level in dBA Caused by a
Railway Cutting at Two Distances from the Track.
Cut depth
difference (m)
(re: 1m)
Distance (m)
25
40
Mean
(S^D.)
Mean
(S.D.)
Reduction in Noise level (dB(A))
2
Near
Track
2.67
(0.52)
3.00
C0.89)
Far
Track
2.33
(0.82)
1.3
(-)
3
"ear
Track
3.67
(0.82)
3.67
(0.82)
Far
Track
2.83
(0.75)
1.3
(-)
5
Near
Track
5.67
(1.75)
A. 67
(1.86)
Far
Track
5.33
(1.21)
3.0
(-)
Source (5-26)
Taole 5-20 auriij.j-xo.ry of Reduction in Noise
L^evels Due to Houses
Type of House
Number of rows
Number of sites
Number of trains
Excess attenu-
ation dB(A)
Standard Devi-
ation (dB1!
Det/S.D.
I
3
12
8.3
1.84
Terraces approx.
150m long
>2
7 (6)*
30 (24)
11.9 (12.9)
3.06 (1.69)
Terraces approx.
300m long
1
11
28
14.7
2.7
52
7
16
17.1
2.2
*0rr.its data for reduction at one site that was much less than
expected compared to the other sites.
Note: (1) Gap in terrace can reduce effect by 3dB(A) in region of
gap (2) High banks reduce effect considerably (by about 4 or
5dB(A))and can effectively reduce the number of rows of houses
(3) All train types appear to be affected in the same way.
Source: (5-26)
5-63
-------
5.3.2 Rapid Transit
Subways constitute a critical element in the urban transportation
system, while streetcars are vanishing from the scene. A section on
surface traffic noise would not be complete without at least a brief review
of noise control measures or activities aimed at reducing noise from
subways.
Foreign subways, such as Toronto, Hamburg or Berlin, are
reputed to be quieter than those in the United States. A brief review of
examples of subway noise reduction may be of interest.
In Japan, a noise measurement survey was conducted through
a test run of a subway train over a straight section of the Ginza line, and
an acoustical treatment on the side walls and ceiling of the tunnel was
employed for noise reduction purposes. The sound-absorbing material
consisted of flannel, asbestos spray and mineral wool spray. It was found
that the noise level in the car could be reduced by 5-8 dB over the entire
frequency spectrum from 100-4000 HZ. (5-27)
In the design of the Toronto subway, noise control was an
important consideration. The source of the subway noise, broadly speaking,
is the subway car itself. In modern cars with properly designed suspen-
sions, couplings and drive mechanisms, the principle remaining noise is
that produced by the rolling contact of metal wheels on rails. The vibra-
tions thus set up in wheels and rails are radiated directly as airborne
noise within the subway enclosure and are greatly accentuated by tunnel
reverberation. (5-30)
One of the factors contributing to noise on older subway lines
is the series of impacts produced by open rail joints. The modern prac-
tice of welding rail joints has eliminated this problem. Experiments
were undertaken on the Paris Metro to eliminate the metal-to-metal con-
tact by using rubber tires. Airborne noise in the subway enclosure may
be controlled by applying sound-absorbing material as close to the sound
5-64
-------
source as possible. In the Toronto subway, a 4-foot-wide strip of highly
absorbent material was mounted along the tunnel walls at wheel level.
Noise at various stations in the Moscow subway network was measured
over a frequency range of 25 to 1600 Hz. Table 5-21 shows high and low
readings for each octave band.
Center Frequency, Hz
100
200
400
800
1600
Sound pressure level, dB
Low: 78
79
88
79
82
High: 94
101
105
102
98
Table 5-21 Noise Levels in the Moscow Subway. Source: (5-55)
Typical escalator and train operating compartment readings
were 84 dB and 90 dBA. (5-33)
The construction of the Vienna subway, a twenty year project
begun in 1969 and expected to open in 1980, will run through a vicinity of
noise-sensitive areas where concert halls, the State Opera Building,
hotels and residential buildings are located. Judith Lang, in a paper
given during the Inter-Noise '76 Conference, described the noise control
measures and their effectiveness in dealing with noise problems >
associated with the Vienna subway:
"From sound level measurements carried out in
buildings near the Viennese municipal rail system
and from the results of measurements in different
European cities as reported in the literature, it
can be seen that the noise from underground trains
passing by can usually be detected inside buildings
as far as 20 m from the tunnels. The sound levels
range from 50-70 dBA near the tunnel to 20-40 dBA
at greater distances.
5-65
-------
Noise control measures, therefore, had to be found.
In order to design these in a most effective and economic
manner we had to gather the following data:
the vibration levels of the subway structure
the influence of different track support systems on it
the attenuation in the ground
a possible attenuation from the tunnel into the
ground and from the ground into the building
the propagation of the sound within the building.
The work on the design of sound insulation measures
started in 1968 by order of the Viennese Transport
and Municipal Legal Authorities." (5-32)
Data on vibration and the effect-of sound absorption of airborne
noise on the Vienna subway is provided in the following table and graphs.
track support system
wooden sleeners on 20 cm ballast
wooden sleepers on 90 cz^ b.illast
polvur ethane sleepers in concrete
polv-Lrethane sleepers in concrete
on T-iober mat
polrvre thine sleeoers encased in rubber
enve.ooe in concrete
pol-.-irethane sleeoers encased in rubber
envelooe in concrete on rubber mat
polv-irethane sleepers encased in rubber
envelooe in concrete on aineral wool slab
wooden sleeoers encased in rubber
enve.aoe in concrete
wooden siegers encased in rubber
envelope in" concrete on mineral wool slab
Biun of octaveband vibration levels
31,5, 63, 125 Hz
concrete ground-plate
a"'
Mlti
W-(l
58
51
5T
St
«l
43
jr
V:
dB
tl-St
81
S3
i4
HI
55"
7J
81
n
b"
dBMI
«
SS
60
16
«
as
f1
83
8V
20
H
pile 7,5 m
distance
a
alSW
W-'iS
Hj
16
44
4f
40
31
IS
36
dB
V-tS
16
16
14
n
„
„
11
61
b
dBM
,,
?r
1J After construction; Stadtbahn-train, speed 40 km/h.
2) Subway-train, speed 80 lun/h.
BUbsidence
mm
a
nim
1,0 - 2.2
1,4
os
't'f
0,6
-(7
2.2
0,7
2.3
b
m/n
2,<
1,1
4,1
^.S
»
Table 5-22 Low-frequency-vibration Levels Measured with
Passing Train for Different Track Support Systems - Vienna Subway.
Source (5-32)
5-66
-------
(T... 50/n sound
absorbing ceiling in the tunnel
a) reverberation time
d>
7000 2000 4000
frequency Hz
b) reduction of
maximum level of
the outgoing train
63
125
250
3dBiA)
3d3(Al
WOO 2000 iOOO ~ tdBIA)
frequency Hz —T-S SdBIM
c) 70 dBlAl down-time of the incoming
tram
15: 1 ' '
tec 100
dBCAJ
effective noise level of the
outgoing train
sound absorbing measure
(D
sound absorbing measure
— platform near tunnel platform. 50m from tunnel
— platform, 20m from tunnel near end of platform
Figure 5-11. Effect of Sound Absorption to
Reduce Airborne Noise in the Station.
Source: (5-32)
5-67
-------
REFERENCES
5-1 National Swedish Environment Protection Board.
ECE noise task force, phase I - national Swedish
report. May 21, 1975. p. 17-21.
5-2 Stuber, C. Airborne and structure-borne noise in
railways.
5-3 Personal communication. Kobayasi Institute of
Physical Research, to Informatics Inc. ,
February 5, 1976.
5-4 Modig, C. A survey of foreign regulation on noise
from new trucks. Washington, U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency, July 23, 1974.
5-5 Survey of Noise Immission Recommendations (1973/74).
Netherlands Ministerie Van Volksgezondheid en
Milieuhygiene. Unpublished paper. December 30, 1975.
5-6 Personal communication. Statens Forurensningstilsyn,
to Informatics Inc. , January 27, 1976. Response to
questionnaire.
5-7 Personal communication. Swedish Employer's
Confederation, Stockholm, to Informatics Inc. ,
January 22, 1976.
5-8 South African Bureau of Standards. Code'of practice
for the measurement of noise emitted by motor vehicles.
SAB 097-1975.
5-9 Personal communication. National Swedish Road and
Traffic Research Institute, Information Scientist, to
Informaitcs Inc. , February 1976.
5-68
-------
5-10 Ingerslev, F. Fight the noise--an insidious poison.
In_ Proceedings; InterNolse 75, Sendai, August 27-29,
1975, p. 731-739.
5-11 Parker, J. , M. Meyers, R. Satnsbury, and G. Vulkan.
Motorways environmental reinstatement: a pilot study.
Great London Intelligence Quarterly, (27): 25-30,
June 1974.
5-12 Behrens, F. A. and T. M. Barry. European experiences
in highway noise. Report No. FHWA-75-123. Washington,
Federal Highway Administration, November 1975.
5-13 Swedish State Committee On Traffic Noise. Summary
of the committee's proposal for road-traffic noise
standards. SOU 1975:60. 1975. p. 357.
5-14 Allen, W. , J. Charles, P. Dickinson, and L. Ginsburg.
The operation of brltish legislation for highway noise
compensation. _In_ Proceedings; InterNolse 76,
Washington, DC, April 5-7, 1976. p. 344.
5-15 Aubree, D. Enquete acoustlque et sociologique per
mettant de definir une echelle de la gene eprouvee par
1'homme dans son logement du fait des bruits de train
(Acoustical and sociological survey to define a scale of
annoyance felt by people In their homes due to the noise
of railroad trains). BBN/TIR 88. Centre Scientlflque
et Technique du Batiment, Paris, June 1973.
5-16 Schultz, T. Development of an acoustic rating scale
for assessing annoyance caused by wheel/rail noise
In urban mass transit. Report No. UMTA-MA-C6-0025-
74-2. Springfield, Va, NTIS, 1974.
5-69
-------
5-17 United Kingdom Department of the Environment,
Transport and Road Research Laboratory. Road
surface and traffic noise. Leaflet 542. Crowthorne,
Berkshire, United Kingdom, April 1975.
5-18 Shunichi, K. , T. Sone and T. Nimura. A study on
noisiness of train noise. Journal of the Acoustic
Society of Japan, 29(4): 225^ April 1973.
5-19 United Kindgom Department of the Environment,
Transport and Road Research Lab. Road Surface
Texture and Noise. Leaflet 577. Crowthrone,
Berkshire, United Kingdom, May 1975.
5-20 Alexandre, A. European efforts to reduce the impact
of traffic noise. In Proceedings; InterNoise 72,
Washington, DC October 4-6, 1972. p. 208.
5-21 Kono, S., T. Nimura, T. Sone. Effects of a rapid
transit train noise on the community along a railway.
Tohoku University, Japan, 1973.
5-22 Mochizuki, T. , K. Kanno, and Kobayashi. Effects
of train noise on residents and train noise standards.
In Annual Report of the Tokyo Metropolitan Research
Institute For Environmental Protection, 1976. p. 71-85.
5-23 Nimura, T., M. Ebata, and T. Takahishi. Estimation
and consideration of the shinkansen noise for a newly-
newly-established line. Ln_ Proceedings; InterNoise
76, Washington, DC, April 5-7, 1976. p. 197.
5-70
-------
5-24 Umweltbundesamt, Larmbereich. On the situation
of noise, noise abatement, and noise control in the
Federal Republic of Germany. Berlin, January 1976.
p. 5-6.
5-25 Working paper prepared by the Netherlands delegation
ro rhwAd Hoc Group on Noise Abatement Policies,
OECD. Paris, January 8, 1976.
5-26 Fields, J. M. , J. G. Walker, and J. B. Lange.
Designing a national study of railway noise in
Great Britain. _Ln Proceedings; InterNoise 76,
Washington, DC, April 5-7, 1976. p. 206.
5-27 Ishii, K. Study on noise reduction in the vehicle
ground railway by acoustical treatment on the wall
of tunnel. Paper presented at the 6th International
Congress on Acoustics, Tokyo, 1968.
5-28 Canadian Department of the Environment, Environmental
Protection Service. Canadian environmental noise
control; Draft. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada, October 1975.
p. 3.
5-29 Hashimoto, M. Present status of noise regulations and
control in Japan. _In Proceedings: InterNoise 75, Sendai,
August 27-29, 1975. p. 725.
5-30 Paterson, W. H. and T. D. Northwood. Noise control
in Toronto's new subway. Noise Control, 2(5): 1956.
5-31 Interdepartmental Committee on Noise Nuisance. Survey
of noise immission recommendations 1973/74. Nether-
lands, 1974.
5-71
-------
5-32 Lang, J. Measures against airborne and structure-
borne noise in the Vienna subway. In Proceedings;
InterNoise 76, Washington, DC, April 5-7, 1976.
p. 309-314.
5-33 Matveyev, P. N. Noise levels at sites in the Moscow
subway. Gigiena truda i Professionalnyye Zabolovaniya,
(6): 58-61, 1966.
5-72
-------
6. NOISE INSIDE BUILDINGS
6. 1 Introduction
The design and construction of buildings are governed by
a wide range of laws, regulations and codes to ensure that new buildings
meet basic requirements for safety, health and comfort. In recent
years the responsibility for building regulations has, in most European
countries, been extended to the national level, thus abandoning the
practice of leaving the supervision to local authorities. In ECE countries
attempts have been made to extend such regulations to the international
level.
The first step toward an international building code was
made in 1970. The Committee on Housing, Building and Planning
requested its Working Party to undertake a comprehensive study of
the existing building regulations in force in ECE countries. The
first draft was prepared in January 1973 and has subsequently been
revised and supplemented by additional data submitted by the govern-
ments and international organizations concerned- (6-4 p. 1)
Altogether, twenty two ECE countries participated in the
program, which resulted in the publication of "Building Regulations
in ECE Countries" (New York, 1974). The compilation includes
building regulations, official building authorities and other bodies
concerned with the legislative framework of construction, the means
of control and procedures for approval of buildings and building
projects, and the scientific research pertaining thereto. The
participating countries include Austria, Belgium,-'Bulgaria, Cyprus,
Czechoslovakia, Denmark, Finland, France, FRG, Ireland, Italy,
The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden,
Switzerland, United Kingdom, U.S.A., U.S.S.R., Yugoslavia.
6-1
-------
Among other measures promoting a better cooperation
among ECE countries, one in particular deserved attention. At the
Fourth ECE Seminar on the Building Industry, held in London in
October 1973, agreement was reached on a series of measures to
be taken on the national and international levels to remove technical
obstacles to international trade in the building field . (6-4 p. 4)
6-2 Decision Criteria For Noise
Fifteen large-capacity office rooms in Switzerland were
investigated for noise levels; 591 employees were interviewed, mostly
males between 20 and 40. Noise was measured in several spots more
than once. The noise level prevailing 50 percent of the time and
fluctuating between 47 and 52 dBA was designated as mean level and
set at L.50. At this level, there was no interference with intelligibility
of speech. Noise values that exceeded the acceptable level by 1 percent
of the time were designated as frequent peaks LI. This boundary
value ranged from 57 to 65 dBA . (6-1 p. 274)
Employees interviewed on their reactions to noise in
fifteeen office rooms have generally complained about excessive
noise levels despite the fact that the measurements showed that noise
levels were relatively low. Altogether 35 percent, mainly managers
and college graduates, declared that they felt annoyed by noise.
( 6-1 p 275) Percentage-wise, the sources of annoyance were
pointed out as follows: 45%, conversation; 25%, office machinery*
20%, telephone; 8%, loafers around the office? 2%, outdoor noise.
6-2
-------
rt
T)
C
d
o
0)
OH
O,
(1)
CO
.H
0
c|
CD
d
0)
w
..-I
O
a
i
o
a
O
a
rt
a
'«
rrf
a
0)
cp
O
c
-------
Interviews conducted with the employees of the fifteen
large-capacity offices have proven that large offices have better
acoustic qualities than small offices with the same amount of employees
per specific area (6-1 p 278) since in a larger room the noise
distribution patterns is more uniform than in a smaller room (although
the mean noise level L^Q was found to be almost equal in both types
of offices).
6. 3 Regulations and Guidelines
6.3.1 General
Building regulations in ECE countries are valid for all
types of building activity and all types of buildings and structures.
In most countries, there is a difference between building
regulations and technical standards. Standards usually state dimensions
and properties of material, whereas building regulations refer mainly
to requirements such as structural safety, fire security, indoor
climate, sound insulation, etc. Above all, building regulations state
that a building permit must be obtained before a building is constructed,
the basic aim being to ensure health and safety.
It is possible to discern a certain general structure in
the system of building regulations in most ECE countries. This
structure usually consists of building laws, regulations supplementary
to the law, and finally regulatory documents also comprising technical
specifications.
In the USA, FRG, or Switzerland, there are as yet no
regulations that are mandatory for the whole country, although basic
construction regulations have, as a rule, a nationwide validity.
6-4
-------
At the national conference on noise abatement in Varna,
a paper was delivered on low-noise machinery operating inside
residential buildings in East Germany (6 8) According to the
existing regulations in force in East Germany (Landeskulturgesetz),
the maximum permissible noise in dwellings is set at 40 dB by day
and 30 dB by night. This makes it imperative to limit the noise level
of machinery such as elevators, ventilators, water-pressure raising
facilities, etc. in multi-story residential houses.
6.3.Z Australia
The Australian Environment Council (AEC) recently (1975)
commissioned studies on the noise levels of household appliances
consequently, standards are expected to be issued some time in 1976
following the availability of results from the above studies and tests-
(6-11)
The recently published Australian Draft Standard DR75136
for "Ambient sound levels for areas of occupancy within buildings"
is evidently not yet in force- ( 6 - 18 )
The Department of Environment and Conservation of
South Australia plans to introduce a Noise Control Act (presumably
in 1976) which would establish acceptable noise levels and noise
specifications for domestic noise sources such as air conditioners,
lawn mowers, swimming pool pumps, filters, etc. (6-12)
6-5
-------
6.3.3 Netherlands
In the last two years (1974 and 1975) the Department of
Public Health and Environmental Protection (Volksgezondheid en
Milieuhygiene) of the Netherlands has carried out a preliminary noise
abatement program, which was formulated in 1972, and which included
a section on town building. In 1976 the proposed Noise Abatement Bill
will be debated in the Dutch Parliament, discussing the problem of
new regulations, a better application of existing regulations and the
avoidance of new noise problems when planning and designing industrial
facilties, houses and roads.
In the Netherlands, the design standard for noise insulation
in dwellings (NEN-1070) dates back to 1962. The present study aims
at updating and expanding the text. (Measuring methods employed are
in agreement with ISO/R 140-1960. The assessment-procedures laid
down in NEN-1070, however, are different from those in ISO/R 717-
1968,)
In the Netherlands, the only existing legal regulations
in the field of noise inside buildings are to be found in the municipal
by-law regarding building. They consist of building codes, partially
derived from NEN 1070. However, these codes are hardly supplied
and there is no enforcement or performance testing at all. Thus in
the Netherlands, with its large building programs after World War II,
a large number of houses is known to have insufficient noise insulation
with respect to adjacent houses. The booming developments in hi-fi
and other electro-acoustical equipment have led to a serious noise
problem, the appearance of which was triggered in particular when
the Noise Abatement Bill was presented to Parliament.
6-6
-------
The Bill contains under Section 17 an Amendment of the
Housing Act, which will make it possible for the Ministers of Housing
and of Public Health and Environmental Protection together to set
noise standards for new houses and to introduce a compulsory perfor-
mance testing system for housing designs and finished buildings.
(6-13)
At present some pilot projects are undertaken to apply
existing know-how to new housing projects and to existing houses
(renovation and rehabilitation) in connection with other improvements.
In some Dutch cities, municipal building authorites took
the initiative to set up noise insulation programs in close cooperation
with the building industry (Middelburg) or to use their authority to
get better results from building participants (Eindhoven).
For noise sensitive buildings no legal actions have been
taken so far. However^ these are foreseen in the Noise Abatement
Bill.
In the construction of these types of buildings, usually
attention is being paid to the noise aspects and acoustical consultants
are frequently involved.
For 1976 more insulation projects are foreseen in the
Netherlands and it is expected that with the new NEN-1070 in force,
as well as a new directive of the Minister for Housing with regard
to subsidized housing, the projects will ensure housing will have
better insulation. The implementation problems for the building
industry will necessitate a gradual introduction of the new regulations.
Consumer organizations in the Netherlands have been very
active over the past three years with the noise problems of home
appliances and show test results in their comparative consumer reports
in addition to surveys of traffic noise and building noise problems.
6-7
-------
The Government is preparing public awareness campaigns
with respect to the use of less noisy equipment for household and
hobby purposes. In 1976 a major campaign is foreseen in this field.
The Noise Abatement Bill includes sections on standards and labeling
of such appliances.
6.3.4 Belgium
In Belgium, there is one general noise pollution law,
dated July 18, 1973. This law empowers the King to take the necessary
measures for controlling noise including the prohibition of production
or sale of high-noise machinery and imposition of standards for noise
reduction devices. (6 - 15 p. 9)
6.3.5 Sweden
In Sweden, noise inside buildings is handled by the National
Board of Urban Planning, in cooperation with the National Board of
Health and Welfare, both in Stockholm. Noise from household
appliances and lawn care equipment is handled by the National Board
for Consumer Policies. ( 6 - 16)
6. 3. 6 Denmark
In Denmark, within the last two years (1974 and 1975),
the standard for sound insulation in buildings ISO/R 140 has been
revised. The finalized test should appear in 1976, together with the
revised ISO/R 717. In 1976, work is planned on a standardized
procedure for the measurement of sound insulation of suspended
ceilings. ( 6-17) Noise inside buildings is regulated by the
building regulation (Bygnings-reglement) of 1972, but there are no
programs on household appliances and law care equipment. Such
programs are presently under study by the EEC commission on noise.
6-8
-------
6.3.7 West Germany
There are no national regulations in FRG (as of January 1976)
on noise originating inside the building, but there are guidelines issued
by the DIN and VDI, dealing with noise from the heating system, house-
hold appliances, elevators, air conditioners, etc. (6 - 19 p. 9)
The DIN 4109, the most important guideline, deals with insulation
against noise effects inside the building. These recommendations
have been incorporated in laws of some of the German states (Laender).
As a rule, hospitals and schools must get improved sound insulation
during construction. Some DIN and VDI recommendations refer the
sound insulation of the outer walls of buildings and their windows.
Filter measurements of airborne and impact noise of
structural parts are done according to frequency, as stated in DIN
52210 (Nos. 1, 3 and 4), issued as a draft between January 1971 and
December 1974. They are generally in agreement with the ISO
recommendation ISO/R717 (1968). The finalized version was expected
to be put in force some time after April 30, 1975, the deadline for
comments on the proposed standards.
The Council of Experts for Environment Problems
(Ref. 6.23, p. xi) in FRG recommended a stricter control over
residential construction with respect to noise abatement, as well
as general lowering of noise limits inside dwellings. Table °-l
( 6-23 p 80) lists the mean and maximal noise levels in dBA,
according to the existing VDI guidelines (VDI Richtlinie 2729),
for dwellings.
6-9
-------
Table 6-1
German. Interior Noise Criteria (Guideline)
Type of Room
Mean Level
in dBA
Mean Maximal
Level in dBA
Bedrooms
1) in residential/hospital/
recreational areas
2) in other areas
Living rooms
1) in residential/hospital/
recreational areas
2) in other areas
Z5-30
25-30
30-35
30-35
35-40
35-40
40-45
40-45
40-45
45-50
Source: (6-Z2 p 153)
The guidelines for assessing noise in apartments, according to
the existing West German norms (as of December 1974) are presented
in Table 6-2.
Table 6-2
West German Norms Related to Noise in Residences
Norm* and
VDI 2058 -
VDI 2565 -
VDI 2569 -
VDI 2719 -
DIN 4109 -
TA noise -
ISO R 1996-
Maximum A Noise Mean Level ( a criterion
year Level in dB for assessment) in dB
1973
1971
1972
1973
1962
1968
1971
35
30
40-45
35-40
30
--
—
25
--
30-40
25-30
30
25
* VDI 2058 assessment of working noise; VDI 2565 assessment of
of noise inside apartments; VDI Z569 - assessment of traffic noise;
VDI 2719 noise attenuation by windows; DIN 4109 noise protection
in construction of buildings; TA law (see section on West Germany);
ISO R 1996 - assessment of noise with respect to community reaction.
6-10
-------
A draft of a norm for measuring airborne sound insulation
outer walls and windows, to be commented on until April 30, 1975, is
given in DIN 52210 (Dec. '74).
Certain design characteristics of walls, partitions and
ceilings could reduce the noise level by about 10 dB- (6-20 p. 46)
Walls partitions between apartments should be about 350 to 500 kg/m2
in thickness and should have an additional noise-attenuating skin of 40 mm
thick mineral wool plus a 12. 5 mm gypsium cardboard plastering.
Ceilings between apartments should be 350 to 500 kg/m2 with "floating"
floor finish on a 20 mm fiberboard.
Flanking (facade) outer walls should have a minimum weight
of 350 kg/m with a noise-attenuating skin of 80 mm mineral wool and
12.5 mm gypsium cardboard plaster. Additional modifications are
available. (6-21 p. 129)
As far as household appliances and lawn mowers are concerned,
there are no national noise emission limits in FRG. The EEC commission
on noise is currently (Jan. '76) working on establishing uniform noise
limits for these types of machinery. (6 - 19 p. 9) With respect to
lawn mowers, there is a variety of local regulations, usually calling
for night-time, noon, and Sunday curfews.
6.3.8 United Kingdom
There are a great number of standards in the United
Kingdom relating to the design of structures to achieve various
acoustical properties of transmission loss and absorption.in addition
to specialized recommendations for hospitals and schools. Recently
there has been an increasing usage of ISO practices and no doubt
EEC will produce its own standards, particularly if the recommendations
listed in the following document are accepted (H. Bastenier,
6-11
-------
W. Klosterkoetter and J. B. Large "Damage and annoyance caused
by noise" EEC Eur. 5398e. 1975).
Interior noise in the United Kingdom is usually measured
in terms of peak dBA. But it is usual to specify an exterior environ-
ment with the inference that the indoor noise levels will then be
acceptable. For example, an NNI of 35 is usually considered an
acceptable external environment, whereas an NNI of 55 requires the
application of soundproofing^
The Building Research Establishment in the United
Kingdom carried out research to as certain what acoustic, thermal,
and ventilation specifications were required to insure that proper
interior noise environments could be attained. Much of this work
had previously been completed in solving the Heathrow Airport noise
problem. In their studies, the BRE evaluated structural mass
requirements, enclosure continuity, and optimum wall structures
with special consideration of double leaf constructions. As a result
of this research a noise insulation implementation package was
developed. (6-9)
The specific requirements of the insulation package appear
in the Noise Insulation Regulations. Applying only to eligible buildings,
the insulation package consists of:
1. Replacement or conversion of existing single pane
windows. For a given pane thickness the regulations
specify the air space between the windows. This is to
assure adequate transmission loss. All gaps are
required to be sealed with compressible resiliant
strips. Also, it is required Chat both windows must
be openable for direct ventilation and cleaning.
2. For control of solar heat the insulation package requires
that Venetian blinds be fitted between the panes of the
double windows. The blinds must be white or near white
with a slot width to spacing ratio of between 1. 15:1 and
1.25:1.
6-12
-------
3. For control of ventilation, the package includes a
noise attenuating ventilator incorporating a variable
speed fan. The regulation specifies that the ventilation
rates must range from at least 37 liters per second
(l-/s.) at a back pressure of 10 Newtons/square meter
to 10 1,1 s. at zero back pressure.
At its maximum ventilation rate, the unit must have-
a noise output of less than 40 dBA. At the rate of
31 L/s. with 10 N/m backpressure, the sound level
must be less than 31 dBA. In these determinations
the measured noise levels must be adjusted to account
for room absorption by subtracting a term involving
LiOg,QA, where A is the measured room absorption.
So that transmission of noises from the exterior
through the ventilator unit into the room may be
minimized, the regulations specify minimum 1/3
octave transmission loss figures from 10 Hz (30 dB)
to 3150 Hz (53 dB).
4. The regulations also call for a permanent vent to be
installed in each eligible room. The vent must be of
the sound attenuating type with the same transmission
loss shown in Table III. Minimum and maximum
effective air path areas are also specified.
6. 3. 9 Japan
Japanese,law, article 22-2, item 2, no. 1, states that a
sound-insulating wall should have a planar density of over 110 kg/sq m.
Double-wall structures should be at least 35 mm thick at the inter-
mediate air seam and have more than 60 kg/sq m total planar density.
Table 6-3 shows transmission losses of a sound insulating wall,
according to the new amended standard in force since 197L ( 6-2) and
(6-6)
6-13
-------
Table 6-3
Minimum Transmission Losses of 'Sound Insulation1 Wall according to
Japanese Law
Octave Band (Hz)
Transmission Loss (dB)
125
500
2000
25
40
50
Source: (6-2), (6-6)
The level of transmission loss in windows is found by
measuring the difference between average acoustic levels for two
rooms with an intermediate window- (6-2)
The Level of transmission loss in windows due to the sash
was defined as above 18 dB in 1970 (in Japan) when the KJ-11-type
aluminum sash was authorized. In 1972 a sound-insulating sash
with more than 25 dB level of transmission loss even after 10, 000
times of opening and closing was designed. (6-2)
Modern soundproof walls for traffic and factory noises
(in Japan) are both sound-insulating and sound-absorbing (Ref. 6.2).
Table 6-4 shows the boundary values for airborne
noise and impact noise insulation (A: minimum requirements;
B: desirable requirements) applicable to Switzerland.
6-14
-------
Table 6-4
The Boundary Values for Airborne Noise and Impact Noise
Insulation Applicable in Switzerland
Airborne Noise
Insulation
Index I (dB)
ct
A* B*
School Premises (EMPA guidelines)
1. Partition walls between classrooms 45 55
2. Partition walls between classrooms
and corridors 35 45
3. Ceilings between classrooms 50 55
4. Partition walls and ceilings bet-
ween music rooms (classes in
singing) and adjacent rooms -- 55
5. Partition walls and ceilings
between music training rooms -- 55
Hotel Rooms (EMPA guidelines)
1. Partition walls and ceilings between
guest rooms 50 55
2. Partition walls between guest rooms
and corridors 45 50
3. Partition walls and ceilings between
guest rooms and restaurant, kitchen,
etc. premises 55 60
4. Insulation between guest rooms and
bowling alleys 55 65
Impact Noise
Insulation
Index I; (dB)
A B
_-
65 55
55 45
55 45
65 55
--
55 45
25 25
A: Minimum Requirements
B: Desirable Requirements
6-15
-------
Table 6-4
(Continued)
Airborne Noise
Insulation
Index I (dB)
a.
Dwellings (SIA recommendations)
1. Wall partitions, staircase walls,
ceiling partitions
2. Arcade
50
B
55
3. Partition walls and ceilings between
flats and businesses, such as work-
shops, restaurants, etc. 60 65
4. Apartment and house doors
a) opening inwardly 20 25
b) opening outwardly -- 25
5. Windows and glass doors 20 30
Impact Noise
Insulation
Index I; (dB)
B
65 55
65 55
50 45
Business Premises (EMPA guidelines)
1. Partition walls and ceilings between
various enterprises 45 55
2. Partition walls and ceilings between
premises of the same enterprise 35 45
3. Partition walls and ceilings between
premises with machinery and office
rooms 55 60
4. Partition walls and ceilings of
manager's rooms, conference rooms,
etc. 45 55
65
65
50
65
55
55
45
55
6-16
-------
Table 6-4 (Continued)
Airborne Noise Impact Noise
Insulation Insulation
Index Ia (dB) Index I; (dB)
Hospital Rooms (EMPA guidelines)
B
1. Partition walls and ceilings between
sick rooms 45 55
Z. Partition walls between sick rooms
and corridors 45 50
3. Partition wall' between sick rooms
and rooms su ;h as kitchens, offices,
etc. 55 60
B
65
55
55
45
Source: (6-3)
6-17
-------
6. 4 Building Insulation Against Traffic Noise
The placement of houses and buildings on sites near traffic
routes and highways introduced a major environmental annoyance problem
caused by the continuous flow of traffic. This problem was severely
experienced especially in areas where preplanning or zoning was never
made. To reduce noise levels to compatible limits inside houses and
buildings, some countries took different measures to insulate from traffic
noise. Sound absorbing materials have been used for building noise control
in several ways. Experimental sites have been constructed to develop the
most effective means and guidelines to deal with this problem. However, it
is fair to say that insulation of buildings is considered to be the least
desirable measure in fighting noise due to its costs and also due to the fact
that it has no effect on external noise levels in such areas as private and
public open space.
In the United Kingdom the DOE Building Research Establishment
(BRE), besides achieving the mentioned noise insulation implementation
package, has been engaged in other noise insulation experiments. A pilot
noise insulation project has been carried out on a flat 30 meters from the
edge of a motorway in Douglas House apartments adjacent to the Midland
section of the M6 motorway near Birmingham. Behrens and Barry in their
report "European Experience in the Highway Noise" describe the experiment
and its results as follows:
"This experiment was carried out to study the attenuation
effects of sound insulating a dwelling from heavy traffic
noise 821 dB(A) and to develop and evaluate special ventilation
and solar heat gain control methods. Insulation treatment
on the living room and bedroom consisted of installing
double windows with white Venetian blinds between the window
panges, a double french door leading to a patio, and a sound
insulated mechanical ventilation system. Existing windows
were fitted internally with additional glass panes spaced
20 mm from the existing panes, and white Venetian blinds,
6-18
-------
operable from within the rooms, were fitted within the
sound absorbing, fiber lined cavity to assist m solar heat
control. Means of ventilation were provided by a ventilator
fan unit which drew air into the rooms and a separate
permanent vent which reduced high back pressures,
installed on .external walls.
This experiment was carried out concurrently with England's
preparation of specifications covering sound insulating,
ventilating and solar heat gain control measures to be taken
in dwellings qualifying for treatment under their 1973
(Building and Buildings) Noise Insulation Regulations, and
provided the basis for insulation measures presently being
employed under these regulations.
The overall measured sound reduction, outside to inside,
was 35 dB(A), compared with 10-15 dB(A) for the original
windows partly opened for ventilation. External noise levels
of about 80 dB(A) were reduced to approximately 47 dBA.
(6-24)
When writing about noise insulation in Sweden the authors of
the mentioned report state that:
"Generally local city planning and zoning regulations and
related building codes would require builders of new homes,
apartment buildings, offices, etc. to insulate for traffic
noise as well as for heat if a traffic noise impact existed
or was anticipated. In cases involving traffic noise impacts
on existing buildings, either due to existing or anticipated
traffic as a result of new highway construction, the local
governments were obligated to take the necessary remedial
noise abatement measures which could include noise
insulation work.
Such noise insulation work normally consisted of installing
special openable, window units. One common type of
special window unit used had three window panes; 2 panes
about 3 cm. apart to act as thermopanes for heat insulation
and a third pane 8-10 cm. apart for sound insulation.
Ventilation systems were provided if needed, in multiple
residential buildings (apartments, etc.) and office buildings.
Such systems were certified to meet adopted air circulation
standards.
6-19
-------
To assist in the determination as to whether traffic and
other existing noise warranted special noise insulation
consideration, the City of Stockholm had prepared a map
(completed in 1973) which indicated the noise situation for
the entire Stockholm area. Map preparation involved the
measurement of existing noise at about 250 different sites
around the city between 1968 to 1973. This noise data
was supplemented by noise prediction modeling calculations
to obtain noise information for map areas not measured.
All major streets on the map had been color coded into
the following five daytime noise impact catagories: 75 dBA,
70-75 dBA, 65-70 dBA, 60-65 dBA and 60 dBA.
From this map, which is updated periodically, it is possible
to judge what necessary noise impact precautions wouldr
have to be taken to fulfill interior noise requirements.
Only where noise levels were below 60 dBA would ordinary
window construction and planning of homes be possible.
For levels up to 70 dBA, noise reducing windows would
be necessary along with requirements concerning the orientation
of rooms in the dwelling buildings and the orientation and design
of the buildings themselves. For levels above 70 dBA,
additional precautions would be needed such as exterior abate-
ment measures, traffic or vehicle restrictions etc."
(6-Z5)
No traffic noise insulation has been carried out in France and
there seems to be no immediate plans to do any. Also there has not been
any building insulation carried out.for the specific purpose of reducing
traffic noise impact in Switzerland. Noise insulation measures have been
carried out in at least two places in Germany. Windows above three
meters in residential dwellings 40-50 meters off a highway were insulated
for traffic noise in Hannover and in the city oi Munich. The Noise Group
of the Federal Institute of Road Affairs has been conducting research on
special window units which are claimed to achieve 30 dBA reduction of
outside traffic noise level. This system involved an integral glazing-
ventilation unit. Built into each double window unit is a small ventilator
fan with a sufficient rate to meet room air change requirements. A
6-20
-------
diagram of this window unit appears below.
.Abluftgltter
Randdampfungs-
elemente
Frischluftgltter
schalldampfende
Abluftschleuse
Schluckstoff
Innenflijgel
mit Splegelglas
Schluckstoff
Alu-Lochblech
AuGenflugel
mit Spiegel- oder
Isolierglas
schalldampfende
Frlschluftschleusa
gedampf ter Ventilator
(auf Wunsch mit Helzung)
Figure 6-2
Integral Window Glazing - Ventilation Unit Being Investigated in Germany
Source: (6-24 p 676)
6-21
-------
References
6-1 Nemecek, J. Laermwirkungen in Bueroraeumen (Effects of
noise in offices). Zurich, Institut Fuer Hygiene und Arbeits-
physiologie.
6-2 Koyasu, M. Recent trends in sound-absorbing and insulating
materials. Journal of the Acoustical Society of Japan,
29: 579-584, 1973. (English abstract).
6-3 EMPA (Swiss Federal Materials Testing and Experiment
Station). Table; Grenzwerte Fuer Die Luftschall und Trittschall
Isolation (Boundary values for airborne noise and impact noise
insulation). Switzerland. 1 p.
6-4 Economic Commission for Europe. Building regulations in
ECE countries. New York, 1974. 17 p.
6-5 Traffic Noise and Overheating in Offices. Building Research
Establishment (ERE) Digest, February 1974, 4 p.
6-6 Ishii, K. Review of recent architectural acoustics. Journal
of the Acoustical Society of Japan, 29(9): 559-563, 1973.
(English abstract)
6-7 Sadowski, J. Akustyka w Urbanistyce, Architekturze i
Budownictwie (Acoustics in town building, architecture and
construction industry). Warsaw, Arkady, 1971, 867 p.
6-8 Meltzer, G. Laermarme Installation Haustechnischer Anlagen
(Low noise equipment inside buildings). In_ Proceedings;
Second National Conference on Noise Abatement, Varna
Oct. 30-November 1, 1971. p. 51-57.
6-22
-------
6-9 Behrens, F. A. and T. M. Barry. European experience in
highway noise, June 1975. Washington, Federal Highway
Administration, 1975.
6-10 Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. Laermarm Konstruieren
(Low noise construction). VDI-Berichte No. 239. Dusseldorf,
1975. 247 p.
6-11 Personal communication. Australian Department of Environ-
ment, to Informatics Inc., December 18, 1975.
6-12 Personal communication. South Australian Department of
Public Health, to Informatics Inc., December 5, 1975.
6-13 Personal communication. Ministerie Van Volksgezondheid
en Milieuhygiene, to Informatics Inc., December 1975.
6-14 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Background paper
on Luxemburg. Washington, January 28, 1976. 17 p.
6-15 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Background paper
on Belgium. Washington, February 16, 1976. 21 p.
6-16 Personal communication. Swedish Environmental Protection
Agency, to Informatics Inc. , December 1975.
6-17 Dansk Standardiseringsrad. Information on Noise Control
Activities in Denmark. December 1975.
6-18 Personal communication. Standards Association of Australia,
to Informatics Inc. , January 22, 1976.
6-19 Umweltbundesamt, Laermbereich. On the situation of noise,
noise abatement and noise control in the Federal Republic of
Germany. Berlin, January 1976. 18 p.
6-23
-------
6-20 Schwartz, K. G. Hoher Schallschutz Bei Wohngebaeunden
(A better noise insulation for residential houses). Kampf
Dem Laerm, 21(2): 39-46, 1974.
6-21 Goesele, K. Schallschutz von Wohnungen (Noise protection
of apartments). Kampf Dem Laerm, 21(5): 126-130, 1974.
6-22 Finke, H. O. and E. Martin. Innengeraeusche im
Schallpegelbereich unter 30 dB (Indoor noise within the level
of under 30 dB). Kampf Dem Laerm, 21(6): 149-153, 1974.
6-23 Hansmeyer, K. H. ed. Umweltgutachten 1974 (Expert opinions
on environment). Stuttgart, Verlag W- Kohlhammer GMBH,
March 1974. p. 77-97.
6-24 Behrens, F. A. and T. M. Barry. European experiences in
highway noise. Report No. FHWA-RD-75-123. Federal
Highway Admin. , November 1975. p. 658.
6-24
-------
7. INDUSTRIAL AND CONSTRUCTION NOISE EFFECTS
ON THE COMMUNITY
7. 1 Introduction
Generally, noise from industry (including construction
projects) has not been the most annoying source of nuisance in foreign
experience; that honor is reserved for airports (where the annoyance
experienced by a small number of victims has been more intense) and for
vehicular traffic (a far more pervasive noise source) (7-20). This
continues the ranking that was born out by earlier data such as the
incidence of complaints in Germany (7-1); Japan, where noise around
aircraft has been a particular problem (7-2); and the United Kingdom,
where noise from factories was fourth-ranked (19% of those surveyed)
and construction noise sixth-ranked (5%) in the Wilson Report.
While neither factories nor construction projects are
major sources of annoyance, a given level of construction noise is more
annoying than an equal level of traffic noise, according to recent
studies (7-18).
7.2. Noise from Factories
7.2.1 Decision Criteria
Because industrial noise emissions to the community
is basically a problem of nuisance and a quality-of-life issue, a
fundamental difficulty is the psychological aspects of the problem:
what kind and level of duration of sound from industry should be
considered as undesirable when it intrudes into various kinds of
sur rounding s ?
7-1
-------
It should not be thought that only heavy industry is
responsible; light service industries scattered throughout urban regions
contribute their share of noise annoyance, especially steam laundries,
and reports on light industrial noise problems have been received
from countries as varied as the U.K. , Israel (7-12), and the USSR.
In 1973, the Verein Deutscher Ingeniere proposed
that the rating of industrial noise in the community be determined
from the loudness and duration of the noise. By altering the method
of measurement, account was taken of noise containing bothersome
tones or impulses and/or occurring at certain times of the day (7-3).
Here national differences in culture and life style
become crucial. For example, it is easy to see the impossibility of
determining one measure of industrial disturbance that would be
adequate both for the Scandinavians, whose buildings are usually fitted
with double glazed windows for protection against the severe climate,
and the Israelis, who have an "open window" life style. Or as
another example, one might consider the difference between some
parts of Paris, where a certain amount of evening noise is said to
be considered desirable for the ambiance (7-4), and Zurich, where
quiet is highly valued and municipal ordinances against excessive
noise are strictly enforced. The European Economic Commission
(EEC) is now in the process of proposing noise guidelines dealing
with annoyance, sleep, and speech interference which will be
applicable to all member states. Similar work being carried out
by the World Health Organization may result in a set of internationally
acceptable environmental noise criteria (7-5).
7-2
-------
Several factors are important in preventing noise
annoyance:
a. Prevention of complaints. The British system
based on BS 4142, for example, uses a standard
measurement to predict complaints, which is highly
useful for design and planning and also as a
standard for determining whether a given complaint
is reasonable.
b. Existing land use adjacent to the factory or
construction site. The German concept is
(Ortsublichkeit)--"suitability to the locale".
The British consider that noises 10 dBA above
the local background level are likely to cause
complaints, and if the noise contains unusual
frequency distributions, such as shrill or pure
tones, 5 dBA above background level will suffice
(BS 4142).* The same concept enters the Swiss
system in the assignment of appropriate noise
climates for various zones of land use, to which
is added maximum additional emissions desirable
from sources like industry or construction.
c. Technical feasibility. Of course, what this really
means is the question of how much can be done while
holding costs to a given level, because nearly any
degree of abatement is possible if one is ready to
pay for it. A typical scheme for dealing with this
problem envisages standards that would be reviewed
periodically and were applicable on all units. One
expert has alternatively proposed a standard whose
language would stipulate that the noise level emitted
by X% of a class of machines would constitute the
standard. As more and more of the older existing
equipment is replaced with new "noise-treated"
equipment, the standard would have a built-in
tendency to become stricter (7-7).
7-3
-------
A major economic consideration in international noise
control policies is the development of industrial policies which are
less polluting, but which, at the same time, make full use of present
technology. The integration of new methods of pollution control will
inevitably impose cost burdens on firms and may contribute to slow
rates of increase in Gross National Product. The initial costs of
investment in industrial noise pollution control will be high, but once
prescribed standards have been reached, only additional units of
output will require incremental investment. Among European Economic
Commission (Common Market) countries, only Denmark has referred
to the costs of implementing anti-pollution measures in its noise
legislation, but since 1974 the OECD has undertaken econometric
studies of the impact of pollution control policies (7-8).
A useful tool for planning is a method by which the
noise nuisance of a proposed new industrial installation can be
estimated in terms of probability of complaints. The British have
developed such a tool in British Standard 4142. Two of the men who
have been most active in developing and using this standard, R. J.
Stephenson and G. H. Vulkan, describe the way in which it is used:
"This method calls for the establishment of a criterion
for the area in which the factory is, or will be, situated,
and then determining whether the noise or estimated
noise from the factory will comply with this criterion,
after having been corrected according to the circum-
stances .
"The basic criterion of 50 dBA is first corrected, if
necessary, by the addition of 5 or 10 dBA depending on
the degree to which the particular factory fits into the
character of the surrounding area and whether people
are used to this type of factory. A further correction
is then made for the type of area itself, ranging from
minus 5 dBA for a ruraL area, to plus 20 dBA for a
predominantly industrial area with few dwellings. If
7-4
-------
the factory will operate only on weekdays between 8 a.m.
and 6p.m., a further 5 dBA is added, and if at night-time
5 dBA are subtracted. The estimated noise from the
factory, as heard outside the nearest dwelling or building
where complaints are likely to arise, is also corrected
for its tonal character, its impulsive character, if any,
and for the intermittency and duration for which it will
occur.'
"The two figures, that is, the corrected criterion and
the estimated corrected noise level, are then compared.
If the noise level is greater than the criterion by more
than 10 dBA, complaints can be expected. If the two
levels are within 5 .dBA of each other, the position is
marginal, and if the expected noise is 10 dBA less than
the criterion, complaints would definitely not be expected.
The above summary only gives an indication of the
procedure and if this method of assessment is to be used
it is, of course, necessary to refer to the Standard itself
for the details " (7-8).
The development of this method dates back to the early
1960's and from the beginning was aimed at finding criteria that would
not necessarily be the most desirable levels, but the levels which
forstall complaints. Tests were made in over 60 cases including a
number where complaints had previously been made; the method
"gave a good prediction of the actual happenings in about 90% of the
cases." The reader is referred to ISO Recommendation 1996 for
the latest version of this approach, as the ISO Resolution is closely
patterned on BS 4142. In British practice there are no fixed limits,
but if calculations based on BS 4142 showed that a proposed site
would probably bring noise nuisance complaints, permission to
build would probably not be granted (7-8).
7-5
-------
7- 2. 2 Industrial Noise - Regulations
In actual noise abatement practice, common methods
are used everywhere which reduce themselves to two types: distance
from the source at which abatement is applied, and control over the
time when noise is created.
Distances range from inside the equipment itself
(quieter engines and moving parts); outside but still part of the
machinery (sound insulation layers, exhaust mufflers); near the
machinery (complete enclosures or shields); in the case of factories,
an intermediate distance (factory building construction, siting of
installations inside the factory site); and finally, specifying the total
distance between industrial noise sources and areas to be protected--
the basis of the zoning concept — is another widespread noise control
approach appropriate for factories.
Varying the time dimension of the noise emission, on the
other hand, is a matter of either regulating operating hours or
limiting total duration (for example, the total length of time a construction
project may operate before it is considered a permanent rather than
a "temporary" noise source.)
It may be expected that there will be a trend toward
setting international standards limiting noise from certain machines
like air compressors, blowers, ventilators. One source of impetus
for this trend is similar to the OECD's motivation for setting
standards for another kind of machinery, motor vehicles: the
damage to international trade that would result if manufacturers
were faced with a patchwork quilt of differing national limits that is
likely to grow with time.
7-6
-------
One aspect of factory noise regulation repeatedly
stressed in the literature is the difficulty presented by the backlog
of existing "noisy" factories that are prohibitively expensive to
abate on the one hand, and too closely located to housing and other
noise-sensitive areas on the other. "The most obvious way to
diminish the risk of annoyance to residents by noise, fumes, or
dirt from factories is at the town-planning stage, where residential
and industrial zones can be separated" (7-8). But even if good noise
planning was done on new industrial sites, the backlog of existing
sites would remain. A basic policy of land-use planning worked out
by the Greater London Council for noise nuisance prevention is
concentration of all noisy sites in one area, on the principle that
adding together two equal noise sources only causes a small increase
in total noise level (3 dB), whereas one noisy site in a generally quiet
area can set the noise climate for that entire area. The Soviets
are also using this principle in Moscow by systematically moving
certain noisy factories out of mixed residential areas in Moscow.
The Swedes have published guidelines for external noise
emission on certain types of areas, particularly residential and
recreational areas (7-13).
The subject of industrial noise nuisance prevention
by zoning overlaps the more general subject of town-planning.
Two sub-categories may be distinguished here in foreign practice:
the slow improvement of an existing unsatisfactory pattern, and the
easier case where a new industrial site may be shielded at the outset
by requiring it to have a buffer zone. Working the former situation
is expensive, as the following case study from Japan illustrates.
7-7
-------
In 1969 more than 500 industrial firms were operating
in the Chiba prefecture, and one of its six cities, Ichihara City,
is considered to be the industrial center of the area.
The main industry operating in the area is iron and
steel, electric power (4, 200, 000 kw) and oil refining (460, 000
barrels per day). Pollution (noise, water, air) had been a major
problem for Ichihara City.
To fight the pollution, Ichihara City passed city
zoning laws in 1965 based on Basic Construction Law (National Law,
Article 52). There were three categories of zones: 4,463 acres
of industrial area along the reclaimed land; 5,079 acres of residential
area; and 642 acres of neutral area. To further the zoning goals
of Ichihara City, the Prefecture established in 1966 the "Construction
Codes for the Chiba Prefecture Special Industrial Zone." The
feature of the Codes is that they will prohibit construction of such
public or private noise-sensitive institutions as schools, hospitals,
workhouses, day nurseries, homes for the aged, residences, rooming
houses, and hotels or inns in the area, and will oblige various parties
to help in the financing of the project.
Based on national law, the "Government Work Agency
for Pollution Prevention" (GWA) was set up as an administrative body
designed especially for industrial pollution prevention. Its role is
to achieve liaison between interested government and private
institutions in a particular area to fight pollution. Its staff is
composed almost entirely of government employees temporarily
assigned to work on the local GWA.
The land utilization designated as "Special Industrial
Zone" (SIZ) comprises an area of about 653 acres. A breakdown
of the total area is given in Table 7-1.
7-i
-------
Type of Land
jt Public Land
A. Green Belt
a. Athletic Facilities
b. Seedbed
c. No. 1 Green Belt
d. No. 2 Green Belt
e. Green Belt for river
bank and shore
f. Park
g. Green Belt roads
Total
B. Streets
a. Boulevard
b. Zoning streets
Total
II. Private Land
A. Existing Residential
B. Warehouse
C. Driver's school
D. High voltage
E. Light Industry
F. River sites
Total
Total I. & II.
Area (Acres)
24. 5
8.2
53.9
14.7
6.5
6. 5
21.2
135. 5
33. 5
56.2
89.7
89.8
20.4
4.0
21.2
277.7
14. 5
427. 6
652. 8
Table 7-1. Land Use in Special Industrial Zone,
Chiba Prefecture Project
Source: 7-14
7-9
-------
The budget for the Green Belt and Park in June 1966
was estimated at $6, 722, 222 (Y 2, 186, 000, 000).
It is noteworthy that when polluting industries agreed to
bear one-third of the total costs, they agreed under the condition that
no increase in their burden would occur over a three-year period
(1966-1969). A breakdown of the contributions of industries, Chiba
Prefecture, and Ichihara City is given in Table 7-2.
A.
B.
C.
Source of Financing
1. Electrical power industry
2. Oil refinery
3. Petrochemicals industry
4. Shipbuilding, iron fU steel ind.
5. Others
Prefectural Government
Ichihara City
30%
21%
22%
20%
7%
100%
Amount
$2, 240, 744
$2,240, 744
$2, 240, 744
Table 7-2. Financing of Chiba Anti-Pollution Projects,
Source: (7- 14)
The way each company was allocated their share of the
total industrial one-third of total cost was based on: 1. ) the number of
employees in each firm; 2. ) area of the factory; 3. ) oil consumption;
and 4. ) value of annual production.
7-10
-------
By the time the work started, the total cost had increased
by 1.7 million dollars. Because of the condition caused by polluting
industries, the prefecture and the city each bore a half of the increased
cost, except that a very small amount was borne by new industries which
moved into the area after the work was started.
Land purchase for Light Industrial Zones concerned
land with existing residences located in the SIZ that had to be cleared
and consolidated to make room for light industry. For 277. 7 acres
of Light Industrial Zones, a ten year plan (1966-1976) for acquisition
and clearing has been in operation. The plan has been carried out
by the Chiba Prefecture Development Foundation, totally financed by
the prefectural government, and as of 1968, one third of the estimated
55.0 acres has already been purchased from private land owners by
the Foundation.
Several problems have arisen in the course of the
project. First, the city had a plan for another 20 m wide
green belt between residential and special industrial areas. This
green belt was not the one that the GWA planned. By law, the
national government can only subsidize one-fourth of the total cost
and the city must bear more than one-fourth of the cost in order
for the city to get a national subsidy. The city doesn't have enough funds
to implement this at the present time.
Second, residences existing in the special industrial
zone before the plan was made still are a problem. At the present
time, it is almost impossible to remove them because of the budget
limitations. The governments of all levels and people are making
practical solutions to the problem of existing residences, which are
scattered in an area of about 90 acres.
7-11
-------
Third, the heavy industries assumed their role
reluctantly, and only in the end cooperated. During the initial period
of negotiation, the industries complained about the size of their total
contribution and also about the formula by which the contributions of
individual firms would be calculated, i.e., number of employees,
area occupied by the factory, quantity of oil consumed, and value
of annual production. At that time the industries failed to come up
with an alternative proposal for a formula, and the final compromise
reached between government and industry was that one mentioned
earlier: the industries would pay their share, but nothing toward
any extra unbudgeted costs that might arise. This proved advantageous
to them, as they did not have to pay any of the $1.7 million budget
increase caused by inflation during the first three years of the
project.
Despite all of the problems, Japanese national, pre-
fectural and city governments and Japanese public opinion all praise
the Chiba prefecture plan, which has been the first in Japan to carry
out coordinated pollution prevention measures (7-14). They are
hoping that such an example will inspire other cities, prefectures,
airports, railroads, etc. to carry out similar plans. In fact, two
other cities, Akaho City and Tokuyama City have already started
similar projects for industrial zones with special green belts
surrounding them. Their 1969 annual budgets together totalled about
$690,000 (Y 215, 000, 000).
Efforts for noise abatement in areas where industry
and housing are already mixed, such as the SIZ described in the
Chiba Prefecture projects, are likely to give only partial success
at best. This point can also be illustrated by another case
pertaining to the Ruhr/Rhine area of Germany. Some success
7-12
-------
was achieved, but the conclusion was that noise emanating from
large-scale plants such as iron and steel works "does, however,
present an overall problem which in the long run can only be solved
if all these measures are backed up by proper town and country
planning" (7-1).
Japan and the Soviet Union have adopted strict zoning
laws which specify noise levels for specific categories of districts.
The Japanese enforcement standards for industrial noise emission
in district categories are listed in Table 7. 3. Consideration
is given to noise emissions at three daily "time zones":
Table 7-4. Enforcement Standards for Industrial
Noise Emission: Article 4-1, Noise Regulation
Law.
Time Zone
Daytime
Morning
evening
Night
1st category
district
45 phon to
less than
50 phon
40 phon to
less than
45 phon
40 phon to
less than
45 phon
2nd category
district
50 phon to
less than
60 phon
45 phon to
less than
50 phon
40 phon to
less than
50 phon
3rd category
district
60 phon to
less than
65 phon
55 phon to
less than
65 phon
50 phon to
less than
55 phon
4th category
district
65 phon to
less than
70 phon
60 phon to
less than
70 phon
55 phon to
less than
65 phon
Note; 1; Phon Metric Law, Article 5, No. 44
2; measurement; noise meter, JIS C1502, C1503, IESC Pub.179
instrument Use A feature
3; Measurement method; provisionally, JIS Z 8731
4; 1st category district; good residential area, with special
caln conservation efforts
2nd category district; residential area
3rd category district; residential use with commercial and
industrial use. Noise control efforts
are requested.
4th category district; mainly industrial use, but noise control
efforts are requested.
5; District designation for 4 categories of districts should be
done by prefectural governor.
Source: (7-15)
7-13
-------
The Soviet Union has created "sanitary safety zones"
around rural, suburban and urban areas. Noise levels in rural areas
do not exceed 50 dBA during the day and 40 dBA at night. In urban
areas, noise levels are 60 dBA and 50 dBA respectively, and in
suburban areas the day/night variation is 45 dBA and 35 dBA (7-15).
The Soviet Union's Sanitary Norms of 1956 and 1963
require buffer zones of various widths up to 1000 meters in some
cases, for 'dirty1 industries whose emissions include gases and
particulates . Furthermore, in siting such factories, it is required
to take account of prevailing winds and locate the factory downwind of
populated areas (7-16). These provisions almost automatically
insure that these particular factories will not cause noise nuisance,
and if the real estate is relatively inexpensive, the environmental
protection costs will be relatively inexpensive. Furthermore, noise
nuisance is being increasingly taken into account in deciding which
factories require such zoning.
The Soviets have also begun to move light industrial
enterprises located in Soviet apartment houses to specified industrial
zones. In Riga, 50 enterprises were moved to industrial zones
outside the city. If their industries are not relocated, plant officials
are compelled to maintain strict compliance of noise norms. Public
health officials in Riga have closed enterprises which emit noise
above the norms (7-17).
There are no industrial zoning laws under the Dutch
"Nuisance by-law", but firms are required to obtain permits granted by
municipal authorities in order to begin operation. The authorities
must take into account the potential "danger- damage, or hindrance
to the neighboring community, which Is caused by new industrial
firms." Permission to operate may be withdrawn if the industrial
7-14
-------
establishment does not comply with the noise standards of ISO R1996
(7-5). Similar building permit procedures have been implemented
in the West German "lander" of Boremen, Bader -Wurttemberg,
Bavaria, Lower Saxony, and North Rhine areas (7-3). Article 16
of the Federal Republic of Germany's Industrial Code permits
authorities to modify the premises or change the operating procedures
of new industrial installations in order to enforce noise emission
standards (7-5).
The Belgium noise law of 1973 permits the King to
create protection zones corresponding to residential areas, industrial
zones, recreational areas, and those areas where quiet is particularly
required (7-5). This law has only been applied to the vicinity of
motor racing tracks, but may subsequently be used in regulating
the Location of industrial establishments.
In the United Kingdom, local authorities may designate
noise abatement zones according to registers kept of levels of noise
emitted from premises within the zone (7-5). The control of noise
from Industry In London is the responsibility of the 32 Borough govern-
ments and upon complaint, are handled by public health inspectors.
Inmost cases, action takes the form of "freindly discussions with
offending firms and the giving of advice on methods of reducing noise. " (7-18)
Australian state and regional planners have incorporated
environmental and noise controls with development projects in the
areas of industry and public works (7-5). As in the United Kingdom,
Australian local authorities are empowered to control and regulate
industrial premises for noise pollution'.
7-15
-------
As a final example, it may be possible to improve the
sound insulation of the building if lighter construction techniques
allow the replacement of load-bearing members with components
combining both structural properties and sound-silencing proper ti-es
at no additional cost in weight. For some time VDI guidelines in
Germany (Richtlinie 2058 of I960) had set out desirable goals for
sound-insulation properties of industrial buildings. There was little
problem in meeting desired attenuation of 40 dB (average for all
frequencies) in the walls if they were constructed of heavy brickwork.
But the minimum density of 100 kg per square meter requirement lor
silencing presented real problems in roofing construction, particularly
where wide open spans inside the building were essential. German
specialists therefore devised a roof design using plates of wall
asbestos cement that reduced the density required to a more practical
37 kg per square meter, and even less if the sound insulation
requirements were not so severe. An additional point of interest
in this example is the way the Richtlinie, even though it was only
a guideline, stimulated research toward a standard that might
otherwise not have been achieved.
The Danish Environmental Protection Act of 1973
contains a clause concerning noise transmitted through building
constructions, although it does not make recommendations as to
how to improve the sound insulation of the building. Maximum
levels of 30 dBA by day and early evening and 25 dBA at night are
suggested (7-5).
The Greater London Council will use "zoning"
within the industrial site in its construction of a series of
government-owned industrial plants, including large scale
incinerators, pulverizers, compactors, transfer stations,
7-16
-------
and other similar projects. In the course of its design work on
refuse treatment plant, it has published design guidelines illustrating
how a hypothetical plant might be planned (see Figure 7-1).
A number of abatement techniques are illustrated
here. First, noisy processes are concentrated within a building with
walls as imperforate as possible and with adequate acoustic insulation.
Windows are minimal in area, on the side of the building away from
noise-sensitive areas adjacent to the site only, and sealed. Second,
noisy processes are located within the site in such a way as to
minimize their emissions in a particular direction, in this case,
in the direction of a hospital to the southeast. Other buildings act
as shields, and one retaining wall and earth bank is provided to
shield the :ioise from extensive activity by dump trucks coming and
going.
The London refuse treatment plan (Figure 7-1)
illustrates noise control through proper internal siting and design
rather than abatement at the source, i.e. near-field quieting of
the machinery itself. This is an entirely viable approach where
a new site is developed. But there are far more cases where
abatement efforts must be concentrated on the machinery in existing
buildings.
7-17
-------
c^
-^^^
\ \ } I//X
Retaining Wall
and Earth Ba
ng Apron
Bunkers 95dB(A)
Residuals Building
90dB(A)
ti ii ii
Turbine Hall
38dB(A)
Offices and
Workshops
r, • •r^^ ^
Precipitators
ISOLAT1OI
:-:OSPITAJ
Figure 7-1. Plan of a Refuse-Treatment PLant
Designed In Accor ".ance v/Lth Gi eater London
Ccur.cll Ilclce A 'tater^.ent Guidelines.
Source: (7-23)
7-18
-------
7.3
7.3.1
Noise from Construction Sites
Decision Criteria for Construction
Decision criteria for reducing construction noise varies
according to the standard setting activities of individual nations. The
British approach tests community reaction to construction noise.
A test conducted by the University of Southampton's Institute of Sound
and Vibration Research in North West London proved it necessary
to gather data on exposure and reaction to noise from other sources
as well. It was possible, however, to directly compare reaction in
terms of annoyance and other attitudinal factors due to exposure to
noise from the construction site, road traffic, and other sources
(7-18).
The average reported annoyance for construction noise
turned out to be significantly higher than that recorded for traffic
noise (7-18).
o
z
s
o
f.
SXTRtME
MODERATE
SLIGHT
NOT AT ALL
CONSTRUCTION
SJCISE
TRAFFIC NCI5E
_l I I 1 I JL
45 50 55 60 li -0
4i 10
6J 65 70
NCISE EXPOSURE - Leq dB (A)
Fig. 7-2. Social Survey Annoyance Rating
Source: (7-18)
7-19
-------
The University of Southampton's team suggests that:
"The two most significant results of this study are the
indications concerning the relative degrees of annoyance
caused by given levels of construction and traffic noise
and the apparent lack of dependence of annoyance on
background noise level. It is instructive to examine
construction noise according to some common method-
ologies for rating industrial or community noise such
as ISO 1996, British Standard 4142 and the California
Community Noise Equivalent Level methodology. In
most cases construction noise exposure would be
allowed to exceed a given criterion by 5 dBA because
it is a temporary phenomenon. On the other hand,
most construction noise is, at a given location, a
novel stimulus and it frequently contains impulse
noise. These factors together might result in a
-10 dBA penalty being applied to construction noise.
The resulting penalty of -5 dBA in terms of accept-
ability criteria would generally a.gree with the
results shown in Figure 7-4. If nothing else it is
possible to say that the construction noise appeared
less acceptable than traffic noise" (7-18).
Teams of Danish scientists and technical specialists
have been working since 1970 to develop comprehensive proposals
for environmental protection. A sub-group formed May 28, 1970
to study construction noise had to resolve two controversial
problems: the formation of th« ideal construction noise regulation
and the economic feasibility of strong regulation. Concerning
the kind of regulation needed, they concluded from a survey of
existing laws in neighboring European countries (Table 7^.4)
that one reason existing regulations were not being enforced was
that many of the regulations were complex, with differentiated
noise level limits and adjustment for duration of noise, tonal
aspects of noise, etc. Therefore, the simplest regulation possible
is the best regulation.
7-20
-------
7.3.2 Direct Regulations
The Japanese Noise Control Law (Law No. 135, 1970)
has approached the problem of decision criteria by limiting noise,
working hours and days, as shown in Table 7.4. A unique feature
is that while the regulation does-not limit noise from certain equipment
specifically, the zone limits depend on the type of equipment.
Automatic reductions in new product noise limits
without further negotiation can greatly improve the effectiveness of
the standards. An escape clause which covers a situation in which
it proved to be technically impossible to meet a certain standard
would provide the necessary flexibility to the "dynamic standards".
This concept is an extension of the familiar principle of "lead time".
An example of this approach is provided by the Federal Republic of
Germany's regulations for noise from construction equipment.
Another approach to improving the effectiveness of standards is
foreseen in Switzerland where a dual system of standards is being
devised for construction equipment. A special permit is required
each time use is made of a machine emitting noise in excess of a
lower ("relative") standard, while an upper ("absolute") standard
provides a limit which may never be exceeded (7-20/14).
Besides direct regulatlonsjsome countries have developed
codes of practice for noise control on construction and demolition sites.
The British Standards Institution has produced a detailed code
(BS 5228: 1975) which prescribes different measures and methods to
control noise from construction. An acoustic shed design and
performance characteristics contained In the mentioned code are
presented In Figure 7-3 and Table 7-5.
7-21
-------
Table 7-4 Limits of Noise of Working Hours and Days and Criteria for the
Specified Construction Operation.
~---.^ Sppcified con-'
^--^^ struct,! on
Items ^^--^^ operations
of ^^--^
criteria ~~~-^^_^
Noise level at a point
30m from the boundary of
working site
Period during which noise
is prohibited
Period in a day within
which noise is permitted
Number of days noise is
permitted
Days during which noise
is prohibited
Operations using
pi]e drivers, pile
extractors, etc.
85 dB(A)
7 pm - 7 am
No t mo r e th an
10 hrs/day
Not more than
6 consecutive
dcays
Sundays and
other holidays
Operations using
riveters
80 dB(A)
7 pm - 7 am
Not more than
10 hrs/day
Not more than
6 consecutive
days
Sundays and
other holidays
Operations using
rock drills
75 dB(A)
9 pm - 6 am
Not more than
10 hrs/day
Not more than
6 consecutive
days
Sundays and
other holidays
Operations using
air compressors
75 dB(A)
9 pm - 6 am
Not more than
10 hrs/day
Not more than
1 continuous
month
Sundays and
other holidays
Operations u&inA
concrete plant*
or asphalt plants
installed
75 dB(A)
9 pm - 6 pm
Not more than
10 hrs/day
Not n>ore than
1 continuous
month
Sundays and
other holidays
Source: (7-19)
-------
Acoustic screen
2 m wide
2.7 m high
Acoustic shed
2 in square
2.7 m high
Figure '7-3• Acoustic Shed
Source 7-19
Type of enclosure (see figure 6)
Open-sided shed lined with absorbent:
no screen
Open-sided shed lined with absorbent; with
reflecting screen in front
Open-sided shed lined with absorbent; with
absorbent screen in front
Reduction
Facing the
opcning(s)
dB(A)
1
10
10
Sideways
dB(A)
9
6
10
Facing
rear of
shed
dB(A)
14
8
10
Table 7-5 » Measured Sound Reduction Given by Types
of Partial Enclosure Source (7-9)
7-23
-------
References
7-1 Gorgen, R. A study of conditions and problems in the
metal industry. Paper presented at the ECE Conference
on Problems Relating to the Environment, Prague, 1971.
7-2 Metropolitan Research Institute for Environmental
Protection. Kogai to Tokyo (Pollution in Tokyo). Daiichi
Printing Co., Tokyo, 1970.
7-3 Verein Deutscher Ingenieure. Recommendations for rating
industrial noise in the neighborhood. VDI 2058. June 1973.
26 p.
7-4 Lang, J. and G. Jansen. The Environmental health aspects
of noise research and noise control. EURO 2631. Copenhage
World Health Organization, 1970.
7-5 Hay, B. International legislation on external industrial
noise. Applied Acoustics, 8:133-147, 1975.
7-6 Arvidson, O. , K. Berglund, M. Berlin et al. Building noise
as a social problem. National Swedish Building Research
Summaries, Appendix 10 R21: 2, 1971.
7-7 British Standards Institution. Standard no. 4142; method of
rating industrial noise affecting mixed residential and industrij
areas. London, 1967.
7-8 Stephenson, R. J. and G. H. Vulkan. Noise from industry,
Official Architecture and Planning, July 1971.
7-9 Purkis, H. J. The practical assessment and control of
industrial noise. Sanitarian, 71(3): 211-217, 1962.
7-24
-------
7.10 Lippert, W- K. R. The problem of noise from a mechanical
plant. Ln_ Proceedings; Fourth International Congress on
Acoustics, Copenhagen, 1962.
7-11 Spasite nashi ushi (Save our ears). Izvestiya, September 17,
1971.
7_12 Marvino, U. and J. Gale. ed. The environment in Israel.
Israeli National Committee on Biosphere and Environment,
Jerusalem, March 1971.
7-13 Royal Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Environmental
planning in Sweden. 1973. p. 2.
7-14 Sato, A. and M. Nishihara. Koogai to taisaka (Pollution
and abatement measures). 1969.
7-15 Foreign noise laws. Umwelt 2/75:26, 1975.
7-16 Simons, D. Tekhnika besopastnosti i proizvodctvennaya
Sanitariya (Safety techniques and industrial hygiene).
Moscow, 1964.
7-17 Sadekov, B. As quiet as in Riga. Nedelya 21: 1, 1974.
7-18 Vulkan, G. H. Planning against noise in London. Paper
presented at the Seventh International Conference on
Acoustics, Budapest, 1971.
7-19 British Standards Institute. Code of practice for noise control
on construction and demolition sites. BS 5288: 1975. London.
1975.
7-25
-------
7-20 OECD Economic Directorate. Strategies for urban .noise
abatement: an overview. Paris, OECD, 1975. 35 p.
7-21 Large, J. B. and J. E. Ludlow. Community reaction to
construction noise. In Proceedings; InterNoise 1975, Sendai,
Japan, August 27-29. p. 1-8.
7-22 Mochojuki, T. On noise limits of construction equipment.
Tokyo, Metropolitan Research Institute for Environmental
Protection, 1974. 17 p.
7-23 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. An Assessment of
Noise Concern in Other Nations, Vol. 1, December 31, 197;.
^. 2 ! 0.
7-26
-------
8. OCCUPATIONAL NOISED
g, 1 Introduction
It is now widely realized that exposure to noise has
a negative influence on the health of the exposed, in particular on
persons exposed to high levels of noise on a regular basis, such
as in occupational settings.
The working environment in which the workers spend
a large part of their lives has a decisive influence on their health
and safety, and also on their physical, mental and social well-being.
The working environment is a complex set of interacting factors,
of which noise is one, affecting individuals.
8. 2 Direct Regulations
8. 2. 1 Overview
The national laws and regulations of some countries
contain provisions that afford some degree of protection against the
effects of noise which are dealt with in more detail in Chapter 10
of this report under the individual country sections. In addition,
many codes of practice, guides, and recommendations have been
published by various institutions in many countries either to
illustrate the application of legislative provisions or to set up
standards to prevent hazards not covered by the laws. A summary
of known details is given in Table 8-1.
The scope of these tests an-d whether they are
binding to the employers vary considerably. In some countries,
mainly socialistic countries, standards are prepared by an official
body and are obligatory. In other countries, (e.g. the United States]
-------
00
Ex
Law or
Guideline
Australia G
Austria L (1974)
D elgium
Canada L.
Czechoslovakia
Dinmark G (1974)
Finland L(1974)
Franc* L(1975)
W. Germany L (1970)
Netherlands G
Hungary
Uriel G
Italy L(1956)
Japan G
Norway Nona:
Poland
S. A(ric. L
Spain
Sweden G
Switzerland G
United Kingdom G
USSR L
U.S. L
Y.«o.Uria L(I»7I)
(•ting 8 - h
ir linn
M .1 x .
dbA
115
'A'6
115
115
135
113
T raHmR
Ratio
3 dU
3
5
5
5
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
3
.3
5
S
1'
Kor now
90 dBA
Yei
85 dBA»
In prep.
90
ropotcd lin
For later
85 dBA
80
85
ilB
By w. hen
5 years
In effect
May 1976
5 y«an
Audiometrlc testing
mandatory?
If > 85 dBA, each 3 yr«.
If > 88 dBA. every 3 yr».
If > 100 dBA. every 1 yr.
Yes (details not known)
earing
OS t
ompensable''
Y«s
Yea
Ye«
Y«s
Y«a
.ar protectors
mandatory?
Yes
Yes
If L> 85 dBA
Yes (details not
known)
Yei
U L>85 dBA*
U L>90 dBA
Y«a
Table 8-1. Overview of Occupational Noise Laws»Source: (8-1)
-------
Continuation of Table 8-1
09
1
1
[ AuJlrah*
Austria,
Belgium
Canada
Chechoslovakia
PC nmar^
If inland,
France
J£. Germany
\V- Germany
Netherlands
Hungary
1 Isr»e[
' Italy
(Japan,
Norway
Poland
1 S. Africa
Spain
1 Sweden
S<* Uzerland
United Kingdom
USSR
U.S.
Yugoslavia.
Measurements
ba sed on
R 1999?
Yea
V«
Ye«
Ye.
Ye.
Yea
Y«*
Veg offhAghef* peak + 5 dBAJ
Ye«
Yea
Ye.
Source
Emission
Limits
On
\fachiaea'>
(partial)
Yc»
impulsive noise limits0
Yes - ac|d 10 dB to highest
"""\00 U-ia-dBA peaK^/day
Leq oflhighest peak + 10 dsX1
Leq of[highest peak + 10 d&A
140 dDA pcaklpuideline)
Yci*. b'jill into regular liruu.
Yc».
Notei
All assume 5 day, 40 hour week;
dBA trading ratio 11 the "Equal
Energy Principle"
* 85 dBA. e.g. in Alberta
* New factories (since 1974) only
Warning sign, m work areas >85 dBA
.
* 90 for tough cases. Applies (.0 n«w
factories only.
Law (19-46) - 100 dBC limit.
6 -day week., 40-50 dBA in office*.
* Only requirement is ear protestor* over 35- dBA
» Avi. table ta marker.
SO-t*^ 'Ib A. Ln vArt-tiuS- type* af oliiv.^*.
fr-day
-------
the regulations are based on or refer to standards laid out by
specialized bodies, or by other organizations (e.g. in the Federal
Republic of Germany). Some of the regulations refer to international
standards (e.g. ISO) or to national standards of other countries
which have been widely accepted (8-1 p 15)
Many countries have regulations on the compensation
of occupationally induced hearing loss or deafness. There are also
regulations and/or measures relating to medical, audiometric,
and laboratory tests.
In most cases, the technical measures to be taken
for dealing with noise are only mentioned in national laws and
regulations and are of a general nature. They are confined to
stating the principle that noise should be reduced as low as possible.
8.2.2 Notes On Countries
These notes clarify Table 8-1 and add more than
space permits in Chapter 10.
Australia
This country submitted a draft hearing conservation
regulation approved by the National Health and Medical Research
Council of Australia. It is not known when this draft regulation
will come into effect.
This draft regulation is partly based on an Australian
standard (Standards Association of Australia Document 72084) and
on the ISO Recommendation R 1999.
8-4
-------
Legislation for 90 dBA/8 hours a day maximum
noise exposure with the provision to reduce the maximum to 85 dBA/
8 hours a day in five years time is proposed. This is considered
to provide a time scale for the introduction of a desirable long-
term standard. In addition, industry is supposed to make every
effort to design machinery to meet this lower standard and that
new premises should be designed to meet this standard. The proposed
legislation also contains recommendations that attempts should be
made to monitor achievements in these regards in order to aid
legislation in determining further long-term policies toward a more
ideal situation.
Austria
Occupational noise exposure is regulated within the
Occupational Law: Z:6l. 021/ 10-6/1974, March 13, 1974. This law
regulates the use of workers for certain types of jobs. The workers'
health has to be examined to determine their physical suitability for,
e. g. , jobs with high noise level. If their health allows them to work
in such jobs further periodic health examinations have to be conducted,
e. g. , audiometric testing every three years.
The Guideline No. 3 (part 2) of the Austrian Working
Group for Noise Abatement serves as a basis for the determination
of dangerous noise levels at places of work. Noise levels over 85
dBA are considered dangerous regarding damage to hearing.
The law does not give a definition of the term
"excessive noise level" but only says that workers have to be
tested audiometrically if the noise level at their job exceeds
85 dBA. The employer also has to supply the workers with
"proper" hearing protection and instruct them as to their use.
8-5
-------
The employees have the duty to undergo the health examination and
to contribute to the protection of their hearing. Theoretically,
therefore, a worker's hearing is tested before he would start on
a job having "excessively noisy" (over 85 dBA) conditions. If his
hearing is "normal", he would be allowed to work on that particular
job for three years. If some change in his audiometer test would
show up after that time, he would not be permitted to continue the
job. However, the workers' physician could order an examination
at any time during the three-year period if deemed necessary. Also,
the safety inspectors (employed by the Austrian Department of Labor)
can order examinations at any time if it seems warranted.
Belgium
This country had an occupational safety regulation
including provisions to protect workers against the effects of noise
since 1972. Maximum permitted noise levels are set at 90 dBA.
Canada
There is a Federal Noise Control Regulation which
limits the noise exposure of employees to 90 dBA/8 hours with an
overriding limit of 115 dBA. In addition, state laws are in effect,
which also regulate noise exposure of workers. All states allow
noise exposure of workers up to 90 dBA, with the exception of
Alberta, where the maximum is set at 85 dBA/8 hours. Alberta
also sets the impulse peak at 140 dBA.
The Federal law permits exposure to 90 dBA or
more where hearing protection reduces the level to less than 90 dBA
or where a test establishes no hearing impairment for employees
exposed to 90 to 95 dBA, and regular tests are conducted.
U6
-------
Warning signs are mandatory at entrances to work
sites where there are dangerous sound levels. Hearing loss from
industrial noise is generally recognized in Canada and is usually
compensable relative to the degree of impairment.
Czechoslovakia
The regulations in force at this time (promulgated
in 19^7) give detailed instructions to the producer of machines and
to the employer on how to attempt to meet the maximum permissible
noise limit.
In case these conditions cannot be met due to
technical reasons, the workers have to be supplied with and have
to wear hearing protectors with adequate attenuation. If •workers
have to wear hearing protectors at all times during their shift,
breaks have to be allowed at regular intervals (not specified) in
a quiet environment. Further measures can be ordered by the
government working inspection. Only workers deemed physically
suitable for work in a noisy environment by a medical examination
may be used.
A new regulation for the protection of workers
against the effects of noise will be promulgated in 1976. No
mention was made as to possible changes the new regulation
may bring.
Denmark
The Danish regulation is based on the criteria put
forward in ISO R 1999, and the Danish Ministry of Labor Publication
No. 38, 1972 "Noise in the Workplace." The latter gives basic
information about noise measurement methods, how to reduce noise
in factories, and audiometric testing of workers.
-------
Finland
The Finnish regulation sets a limit of 85 dBA for places
of work. In addition, manufacturers, importers, installers of equipment,
and dealers are held responsible for the purchase and proper installation
of new equipment to fulfill the 85'dBA noise emission limit. New and
existing machines with higher noise emission and equipment generating
vibrations have to be put in separate facilities and be fully enclosed.
In cases where the noise level cannot be reduced to 85 dBA for technical
reasons, personnel has to be supplied with effective and officially
approved ear protectors.
Warning signs have to be posted to designate areas where
the noise level exceeds 85 dBA. In cases of fluctuating noise, warning
devices have to be installed to indicate whenever 85 dBA is exceeded.
This regulation came into effect on October 1, 1974
and is valid for all facilities coming into operation since then. The
authorities will determine transition periods for existing facilities so
that the necessary changes can be executed smoothly.
France
From a secondary source, it is understood that France
has had a regulation since 1970. (8-3)
The standard AFNOR S31-013 of 1969 uses the ISO
R 1999 method for the calculation of the equivalent continuous
noise level using partial noise exposure indices and for the
estimation of the risk of hearing impairment.
8-8
-------
German Federal Republic
On December 1, 1974, the regulation "Accident
Prevention Noise" came into force.
The subject of this regulation is the prevention of
hearing loss or damage and of accidents partly or solely due to
noise. Non-auditory effects of noise are not regulated at this time.
Noise emissions over 85 dBA are considered
dangerous to hearing which takes into consideration (verbatim)
"that the risk of hearing damage due to long-term exposure to
noise in case of sensitive persons commences at 85 dBA, particularly
if the noise is high frequency or impulsive. Otologists are of the
opinion that the danger limit has to be set as low as 80 dBA. "
The use of personal hearing protection is only
considered if it has been proven that no other means could help to
reduce the noise level to 85-90 dBA. The employer has the duty to
designate so-called "noise areas" in the plant and employees have
to be offered the opportunity to use hearing protection in areas of
levels below 85 dBA if they so desire. It is the legal duty of the
employees to wear hearing protectors in designated "noise areas",
regardless of how long they remain in these areas.
Another important aspect of this regulation is the
matter of the prevention of accidents directly attributable to noise.
The conclusion derived from the review of work accident reports
was that in many cases accidents happened owing to unsafe behavior,
erroneous or slow reactions, or human failure directly attributable
to noise. To give examples: masking of warning signals by noise,
startle reactions due to sudden impulses or bursts of noise.
8-9
-------
Part 5 of the law gives methods for the prevention of
these types of accidents. However, experience has to be gamed
since this area is a fairly novel one.
Extensive provisions are also given for audiometric
testing: 1) to determine the suitability of a person for a job under
noisy conditions; 2) to test the hearing of workers after one year on
a noisy job; and 3) repeat audiometric tests every three years there-
after. The employer has to arrange for these examinations and bear
the costs. Results have to be filed by the employer in a so-caUed
health file, which also contains any other information and workers'
anamnestic data.
An extensive description of the law outlined above
is given in a series of articles published in the journal Arbeitsschutz
1:(1975). Discussions of the quality of the law and its impacts are
given.
Another law is in draft stage: "Work Place Ordinance,
draft 684174". It is proposed in this draft that the noise level in
places of work should be kept as low as technically feasible and
should also depend on the nature of the •work performed, e. g. , for
intellectual work 55 dBA, simple office work 70 dBA, and 85 dBA
for all other kinds of work if technically feasible; if not, this level
may be exceeded by 5 dBA.
8-10
-------
Netherlands
The only existing regulation is "The Industrial Safety
Act" (July 1934 Bulletin of Acts, Orders, and Decrees, 35Z). It
gives rules for industrial safety and health. The Act (Sections 7, 9,
11, and 20a) gives powers to draw up rules relating to the prevention
or restriction of harmful and annoying noise and to the time during
which workers are allowed to remain in a location with harmful
noise.
Provisions to support these rules are in preparation
for various individual sectors.
In the "Industrial Safety Decree" for factories and
workshops, there is a regulation concerning the wearing of earplugs
(no description obtained).
Under the "Dangerous Instruments Act", it is possible
to set noise emission standards for certain categories of machines
in the interest of the health of the users.
8-11
-------
References
8-1 Meyer, Ingrid. Occupational noise exposure, the standards
and regulations in major industrial countries; draft. Rockville,
Informatics, June 10, 1975.
8-2 South African Bureau of Standards. Code of practice for the
assessment of noise exposure during work for hearing con-
servation purposes. SABS 083-1970. Pretoria, South Africa.
15 p.
8-3 Hay, B. International legislation on external industrial noise.
Applied Acoustics, 8:133-140, 1975.
8-4 Canada Department of Labour. 1973 industrial noise;
legislation concerning industrial noise in Canada. April 1974.
30 p.
8-5 Australian Department of Labour and Industry. Industrialized
safety code regulations under the industrial safety, health and
welfare act, 1972; regulation 49, noise levels and protection
from noise. Government Gazette, June 26, 1975.
8-12
-------
9. INFORMATION CENTERS ON NOISE
The object of this short section is to identify some of the
organizations that are systematically gathering and processing reports
and documents on noise pollution and its abatement and control (Table 9-1).
These organizations in general do not exist only to serve the general
public, but often may provide outside users some king of access on
a case by case basis. Forms which such access might take include:
receiving periodic publications, use in person of a library facility,
computer literature searches, limited document services, referral
to other sources of documents or information, etc.
For Japan, the reader is referred to a tabulation of Japanese
information sources in Section 16 of Chapter 10 (Vol. II, p. 10-151).
For information on noise measurement standards, the
reader is referred the information on ISO in Chapter 2.
It is to be hoped that as time passes, one or more information
centers may develop more extensive and publicized programs for supplying
documentation and other forms of information to the general public.
9-1
-------
TABLE 9-1. INFORMATION CENTERS ON NOISE
Name
Place
Description
User Terms
Contact for Use
Noise Information
Program, U. S.
EPA
Washington, D. C.
.0 UMPLIS
i
to
Berlin,
W. Germany
Centre de Formation
et de Documentation
sur Les nuisance
(CFDN)
Paris
Largest info center in the
•world dedicated solely
noise documentation.
1) 20, 000+ documents.
2) 6,000+ abstracts in the
"CIS" on-line com-
puterized information
retrieval system.
3) Publishes numerous
directories, etc.
4) Literature search
services.
Umbrella environmental
info system sponsored
by W. German Environ-
mental Ministry (Umwelt-
ant), formerly by Ministry
of the Interior (Bundes-
ministerium des Innen).
Center for industrial
environmental infor-
mation (occupational
health, occupational
noise). Answers queries
by telephone or mail.
By permission of
U.S. EPA
Public users
terms not
known.
Available to
public as well
as official users
Dr. Kurt Askin
Office of Noise Abatement
Control
U.S. EPA
Washington, D. C. 20460
Dr. Wolfgang Kitschler
Dept. of the Interior
Rheindorferstr asse 198
53 Bonn, W. Germany
11 bis, rue Leon Jouhaux
Paris 10e France
Attn: R. Ridre, Information
Specialist.
-------
Name
Place
Description
User Terms
Contact for Use
ISVR
vD
OJ
Bibliographic Refer-
ence System on Noise
Control
VDI
Documentation- steLLe
3
O
rr1
£5
f
Institute of Sound
& Vibration,
Southampton,
England
Ottawa, Canada
Society of
German Engineers
Noise document library.
Vibration abstracts
collection.
Data base consists of
bibliographic references
to noise documents,
stored in computer
and with batch-mode
retrieval.
1) Noise document
library.
2) Monthly bibliography
in German, from
worldwide sources.
Public user terms
not known.
Available to
public.
Public user
terms not
known.
Ms. Mavis Bull, Librarian
ISVR
University of Southampton
England.
Dr. Robert Tackl
Noise Control Environment
Environmental Protection
Service
Environment Canada
Ottawa, Canada
Herr Karl Neumann
Verein Deutscher Inginieure
4 Dusseldorf 1
Postfach 1139
West Germany
------- |