Low frequency noise study.

Details

• Creators:
  Hodgdon, Kathleen K. ; Atchley, Anthony A. ; Bernhard, Robert J.
• Corporate Creators:
  Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction
• Corporate Contributors:
  United States. Federal Aviation Administration. Office of Environment and Energy
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Airport noise
  • Low frequency
  • Human factors
  • Field tests
  • Laboratory tests
  • Sound level
  • Vibration
  • Metrics (Quantitative assessment)
  • Environmental impacts
• Publication/ Report Number:
  PARTNER-COE-2007-001
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  United States
• Corporate Publisher:
  Partnership for Air Transportation Noise and Emissions Reduction
• NTL Classification:
  NTL-AVIATION-AVIATION ; NTL-ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT-ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT
• Abstract:
  This report documents a study to investigate human response to the low-frequency ; content of aviation noise, or low-frequency noise (LFN). The study comprised field ; measurements and laboratory studies. The major findings were: ; 1. Start-of-takeoff-roll, acceleration down the runway, and thrust reversal generate ; high levels of LFN (below 200 Hz) at critical distances from runways (around ; 3000 ft in the study) which can be annoying to people living around airports. ; 2. Hubbard exterior sound level criteria works well as a first level assessment tool ; for vibration/rattle due to LFN. ; 3. A-weighted Sound Pressure Level (LAmax) and C-weighted Sound Pressure ; Level (LCmax) metrics correlate well with laboratory based subjective response ; to indoor aircraft noise when LFN levels are low to moderate. The same holds ; for rattle annoyance (again for low to moderate level LFN). Also, multiple low ; level LFN events may cause rattle (i.e. simultaneous multiple runway ; operations). ; 4. When high levels of LFN are present, Tokita & Nakamura thresholds with CWeighted ; Sound Exposure Level (LCE) metric should be used as an indicator of ; potential for LFN annoyance. The low-frequency noise based metrics did not ; perform as well as LCE. Data lower than 50 Hz is needed to assess ; vibration/rattle annoyance. ; 5. The risk of window rattle is lowered with preload and avoiding resonance ; response in the design. Outdoor-Indoor Transmission Class (OITC) is a better ; rating for rattle prone applications than Sound Transmission Class (STC) ; commonly used in rating windows for transmission loss.
  More +
• Format:
  PDF
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/26137/dot_26137_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 2.52 MB]
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha-512:a499e59b3acccfb031e431e03c39bba70275091531337b621c5ef29db0df66e5388be606c5f992c9b3d0abf3aaf66b687b7fe321e854d1c7a7e601b9bedae292