Evaluation of alternatives to sound barrier walls.

Details

• Creators:
  Li, Shuo ; Du, Yingzi ; Guan, Bowen ; Zhou, Zhi ; Beale, Mike P. ; Noureldin, Samy
• Corporate Creators:
  Joint Transportation Research Program (Ind.)
• Corporate Contributors:
  United States. Federal Highway Administration ; Indiana. Dept. of Transportation
• Subject/TRT Terms:
  • Noise barriers
  • Traffic noise
  • Panels
  • Precast concrete
  • Cost effectiveness
  • Noise control
  • Line of sight
  • Field studies
  • Evaluation
• Publication/ Report Number:
  FHWA/IN/JTRP-2013/07
• Resource Type:
  Tech Report
• Geographical Coverage:
  Indiana
• Corporate Publisher:
  Purdue University. Joint Transportation Research Program
• Abstract:
  The existing INDOT’s noise wall specification was developed primarily on the basis of knowledge of the conventional precast concrete ; panel systems. Currently, the constructed cost of conventional noise walls is approximately $2 million per linear mile. The noise wall is ; considered to be cost effective when a 5 dBA reduction can be achieved at a cost of no more than $25,000 per benefited receiver or ; $30,000 per benefited receiver in those cases where a majority of the receivers were in place prior to construction of the highway. In ; many areas, however, the above cost‐effectiveness criteria are exceeded with the result that the areas are not eligible for federal‐aid ; funding for noise abatement. Consequently, the residents in these areas are dissatisfied that no noise reduction measures are provided ; to them. Several alternative options may be considered by INDOT to address the above issues. The first option would be to raise the cost ; per receiver to make more areas eligible for noise walls. The second option would be to do nothing. The third option would be to adopt ; an optional line of sight (LOS) wall policy to improve customer satisfaction at a less expensive cost. ; Critical review was conducted on the current traffic noise policies by state DOTs nationwide, including Type II project participation, ; reasonableness of noise abatement, cost effectiveness of noise abatement, and third party funding. Four different types of noise ; barriers, including one conventional precast concrete wall and three LOS walls were installed in the study areas for field investigation. ; Evaluation was made on the issues relating to the construction, cost and structures of the installed noise walls, particularly the LOS ; walls. Pre‐ and post‐installation noise measurements were made in the field to determine the noise reductions of the installed noise ; walls. Psychoacoustic‐based approach was utilized to further evaluate compare the field acoustic performance of these four noise walls. ; FHWA TNM 2.5 was also employed to predict the noise level in the design year and address the sensitivity issues associated with traffic ; volume, vehicle speed, noise wall height, noise wall length, and noise reduction coefficient of noise wall. Furthermore, community noise ; surveys were conducted before and after the installation of noise walls to identify public perception of the LOS wall performance and ; public involvement in noise abatement. ; Main findings and recommendations were made to modify INDOT traffic noise policy and noise wall specifications.
  More +
• Format:
  PDF
• Funding:
  SPR-3555
• Download URL:
  https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/26572/dot_26572_DS1.pdf
• File Type:
  [PDF - 23.94 MB]
• Collection(s):
  US Transportation Collection
• Main Document Checksum:
  urn:sha256:6cd81e466bbad92252ed98132bbc62cc2c3c3ceeb89596f22db9da9960e595db