• Volume/Page
  • Keyword
  • DOI
  • Citation
  • Advanced
   
 
 
 

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

SECTION LISTING

BROWSE VOLUMES

Year Range: 
Search Issue | RSS Feeds RSS
Previous Issue Next Issue

Nov 1979

Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S1-S89

Return to All Sections
back to top
RSS Feeds
back to top Session P. Noise III: Community Noise
Contributed Papers
FREE

Statistical independence of a series of ambient noise measurements (A)

D. A. Driscoll and W. J. Webster

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S31-S31 (1979); (1 page)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
The autocorrelation of a series of noise parameters (Leq, L10, L50, or L90) was examined. The noise parameters were derived from 15‐min records of ambient noise collected at the same hour (0000, 0600, or 1800 h) on each of 100 (predominantly consecutive) days at a rural site. The same analysis was also performed for a suburban and a quiet, urban, residential site. The first zero crossing (indicating statistical independence) occurs at 9–13 days for the rural site. A run test for randomness (0.05 level of significance) was also used. The random hypothesis consistently failed for the rural site, showing that consecutive days do not produce a random string of data. It is shown that for an efficient ambient survey, samples should be separated by at least three days for rural sites, but that consecutive day samples are normally satisfactory for urban and suburban sites.
FREE

Compatibility in federal community noise policies (A)

Mones E. Hawley and Richard J. Peppin

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S31-S31 (1979); (1 page)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
Several federal agencies have community noise policies. These agencies include the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Aviation Administration, the Federal Highway Administration, the Department of Defense. the Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the General Services Administration. In most cases, the policies are consistent, compatible. and complete. In some cases, they are inconsistent and, in other cases, the coverage is incomplete. This paper describes and compares these policies, their implications for enforcing agencies, and their effects upon citizens.
FREE

Community noise ordinance drafting by a city ad‐hoc noise committee (A)

Angelo J. Campanella and P. Gary Brown

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S31-S31 (1979); (1 page)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
Through motivation by a city councilman, Charles Petree, an ad‐hoc committee was formed to review existing city noise‐related codes. Representation included city council staff, the health, zoning, and police departments, an acoustical consultant, the industrial commission and building association, the society of professional engineers, the electric company, and a private citizen. This body met many times over one year to review codes and ordinances. Recommendations included consolidating all noise related codes and ordinances into one addendum to the City Code. Additions against squealing tires, limits on motorboat noise, and the replacement of octave‐band limits for manufacturing districts with Leq limits along common residential/institutional/commercial/manufacturing property lines were made. The police department concluded that the existing muffler ordinance requiring “a muffler in good working condition with baffle plates …” was satisfactory for enforcement. These recommendations—to be detailed in the presentation—are being submitted to the City Council for action. Airport noise, as it affects land use and zoning actions, will be treated during calender year 1980.
FREE

An airport community noise‐impact assessment model (A)

Richard DeLoach

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S31-S32 (1979); (2 pages)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
A computer model has been developed to assess the noise impact of an airport on the community which it serves. Assessments are made using the Fractional Impact Method by which a single number describes the community aircraft noise environment in terms of exposed population and multiple‐event noise level. The model is comprised of three elements: a conventional noise footprint model, a site‐specific population distribution model, and a dose‐response transfer function. The footprint model provides the noise distribution for a given aircraft operating scenario. This information is combined with a site‐specific population distribution obtained from a national census data base to yield the number of residents exposed to a given level of noise. The dose‐response relationship relates noise exposure levels to the percentage of individuals who would describe themselves as “highly annoyed” by those levels. This information is used to compute a single‐number descriptor of the airport noise environment. In addition to providing a quantitative assessment of the noise environment in the community at large, the model generates a report which lists several demographic variables as a function of noise level which are of interest to community planners and others. These variables include population density, growth rate, average age, average home value, percent homeowners, percent renters, and others. This paper describes the structure and operation of the community response model and presents the results of initial noise impact assessment studies.
FREE

Cumulative annoyance due to multiple aircraft flyovers with differing peak noise levels (A)

K. P. Shepherd

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S32-S32 (1979); (1 page)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
A laboratory experiment was conducted in which 160 subjects made annoyance judgments of half‐hour sessions of aircraft flyover sounds. Each often test sessions contained nine flyovers with various peak noise levels such that the session Leq values had a range of 20 dB. After each session, the subjects assessed their annoyance in the laboratory and also estimated their annoyance to such a noise environment occurring in their homes during the day, evening, and night. The laboratory annoyance judgments were examined in terms of their relationship with various proposed noise rating scales, from which it was concluded the energy summation scales such as Leq and Noise Exposure Forecast were superior to the peak dB(A) concept [R. Rylander, J. Sound Vib. 36(3), 399–406 (1974)] and to Noise Pollution Level [D. W. Robinson, Nat. Phys. Lab. Aero Rep. Ac. 38 (1969)]. The subjects' responses to the projected annoyance questions (time of day weighting) were compared with aircraft noise social survey results. [Work supported by NASA Langley Research Center.]
FREE

Effect of unit load and fan speed on induced‐draft fan noise at electric generation stations (A)

A. R. Thompson and J. P. Buechler

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S32-S32 (1979); (1 page)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
Induced‐draft fan noise has been recognized as a major source of community noise in the electric power industry. Typically, the dominant path of ID fan noise is from the top of the stack with the noise being both tonal and broadband when centrifugal fans are used. Depending upon site‐specific factors, the noise can be a problem at full‐load operating conditions. At low‐load conditions, the problem can become more severe as airflow is reduced by closing the inlet dampers. This results in higher levels of the tones and the broadband noise. A series of measurements, taken at three units at various load conditions, indicate that the levels of the tones, particularly the second harmonic, increase as the load is decreased. At low loads, when the dampers are relatively closed, significant reductions in the tone levels can be achieved by switching to a lower fan speed. A lower fan speed results in reduction of the tip speed and opening of the dampers for a given load condition.
FREE

Construction noise control for a major urban rapid transit line extension (A)

W. J. Cavanaugh, G. C. Tocci, and T. A. Muldoon

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S32-S32 (1979); (1 page)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
The northwest extension of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Red Line Rapid Transit System involves the demolition and reconstruction of the current terminus station—Harvard Square Station, Cambridge—and the construction of three new stations, and associated subway tunnel and track work. This major construction program, scheduled to extend over a five year period, recognizes the potential noise impacts on the densely populated and highly developed communities in which the new construction is to take place. Cambridge, the most significantly affected community, currently has a noise ordinance limiting property line L10 and maximum A‐weighted sound levels due to construction operations. The MBTA has incorporated the Cambridge limits into construction contract documents and has also included limits on noise produced by individual pieces of construction equipment. The construction noise specifications and implementation procedures are described along with the experience to date in actual contract applications. [This work is partially supported by the US Urban Mass Transit Administration and the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.]
FREE

The effect of stoplights on traffic noise (A)

R. E. Halliwell

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. Volume 66, Issue S1, pp. S32-S32 (1979); (1 page)

Online Publication Date: 11 Aug 2005

Full Text: | Download PDF

Show Abstract
A study was undertaken to determine how the noise level due to free‐flowing traffic is affected by the insertion of a traffic light. Field measurements were taken at eight different traffic light locations, representing two configurations; that of two intersecting straight roads and tee junctions. A reference level, measured at a point where traffic noise was unaffected by the intersection, was used in conjunction with the NRC traffic noise prediction model to assess the change in noise level in the region about the traffic light.
Return to All Sections
Close

Home Publications Meetings Contact ASA Site Map Back to Top

Copyright © Acoustical Society of America

close