A quantification model of overall dissatisfaction with indoor noise environment in residential buildings

A quantification model concerning overall dissatisfaction from multiple noise sources in residential buildings and underlying assumptions were presented. The model was constructed by two steps; a survey and an auditory experiment. The relation between dissatisfaction with the indoor noise environment and dissatisfaction with individual noises such as floor impact, airborne, drainage, and traffic noises was first found in the survey. The annoyance from individual noises was obtained as a function of the noise level from the laboratory experiment. Then, annoyance ratings were translated into the percentage of dissatisfaction based on the relation between annoyance and dissatisfaction obtained from the survey. Finally, equations were derived for predicting the degree of dissatisfaction with the overall indoor noise environment using individual noise levels, and a classification method for the noise environment with multiple noise sources were proposed. The procedure and the quantification model can be used for the assessment of the associated overall dissatisfaction of the indoor noise environment on the basis of the level of individual sources.     

Nocturnal road traffic noise assessment and sleep research: The usefulness of different timeframes and in- and outdoor noise measurements

In this paper, we investigated the procedure of noise assessment in the study of nocturnal noise exposure during sleep in the home situation. The use of two different timeframes (fixed from 11 PM to 07 AM versus personal “Time in Bed” period) was explored as well as the relation between indoor and outdoor noise levels and between the actual and estimated noise levels. Noise recordings were performed inside and outside the bedroom of 24 subjects living in high density road traffic noise areas in the Brussels’ Capital Region during seven consecutive days. Indoor and outdoor noise indicators L_Aeq, L_Amax and individual noise events were analysed. Subjects completed a daily sleep log in which the Time in Bed period was assessed. The results indicate that, for outdoor noise assessment, the use of an average L_Aeq might not be sufficient to reflect well the noise levels during the sleep period. For indoor measurements, significant differences were found in the comparison between both timeframes (L_Aeq: T = 16; p < .001). Considering the relation between indoor and outdoor measurements, low correlations (r = .49; p < .001) were found even when the location of the bedroom as a mediating factor was accounted for (street side; r = .52; p < .001). Therefore, from our study, caution is needed when relying on outdoor noise measurements for the evaluation of sleep disturbances. Furthermore, one needs to be aware of the weak correspondence between indoor and outdoor noise levels in the discussion of what a harmonized noise indicator for the evaluation of noise exposure and sleep disturbances should consist of.     

Aircraft noise annoyance modeling: Consideration of noise sensitivity and of different annoying acoustical characteristics

Noise annoyance due to aircraft flyover noise was assessed under laboratory conditions. The main objectives of the study were: (i) to identify influential acoustical features of noise annoyance, (ii) to propose noise indices to characterize these acoustical features and (iii) to enhance annoyance models including influential acoustical and non-acoustical variables. Therefore, a verbalization task was performed by the participants of the experiment to collect their whole impression concerning the aircraft flyover noises for which they rated annoyance. This verbalization task highlights that noise annoyance was influenced by three main acoustical features: (i) the spectral content, (ii) the temporal variation and (iii) the perceived sound intensity. Four combinations of noise indices were used to propose multilevel annoyance models, in combination with the individual noise sensitivity. Noise sensitivity was found to highly contribute to annoyance models and should therefore be considered in future studies dealing with noise annoyance due to aircraft noise. Different combinations of noise indices coupled with noise sensitivity were found to be promising for future studies that aim to enhance current annoyance models.     

Laboratory annoyance and different traffic noise sources

The acute annoyance reaction to different noise sources (lorries, aircraft, mopeds and trains) was investigated in a laboratory experiment. Students were exposed to different noise climates at noise levels 70 and 80 dB(A) for 25 minutes, and their reactions were subsequently assessed by using a questionnaire. Their general sensitivity to noise was also evaluated. The results demonstrated that L_eq gave the best correlation with annoyance. However, lorry noise was found to be less disturbing than aircraft noise at the same L_eq value. This was more pronounced if the different noises were compared at equal peak dB(A) levels. The results suggest that other factors such as the irregularity of the noise or the individual experience of the noise are of importance for the annoyance reaction. A relationship was found between the general annoyance score and annoyance reactions in the laboratory. Questionnaires could thus be a suitable tool for identifying noise sensitive persons.     

Annoyance response to mixed transportation noise in Hong Kong

To better understand mixed transportation noise-annoyance response, a study was undertaken in Hong Kong to (1) unravel factors affecting annoyance response to mixed transportation noise; (2) contrast noise-annoyance relationships between road traffic and railway noise dominant situations; and (3) explain the differences, if any, between the two using structural equation modelling from the data collected in a social survey. Results of this study show that annoyance is largely determined by noise disturbance and perceived noisiness. Personal noise sensitivity, attitudes towards different means of transport and perceived quality of the living environment are secondary contributing factors. When road traffic noise dominates, annoyance is primarily determined by noise disturbance caused by the peaks of railway noise events; when railway noise dominates, peaks of train events can induce annoyance response directly without causing disturbance. Policy implications of such results on how to minimize noise-annoyance response are discussed in the paper.     

Activity interference and noise annoyance

Debate continues over differences in the dose-response functions used to predict the annoyance at different sources of transportation noise. This debate reflects the lack of an accepted model of noise annoyance in residential communities. In this paper a model is proposed which is focussed on activity interference as a central component mediating the relationship between noise exposure and annoyance. This model represents a departure from earlier models in two important respects. First, single event noise levels (e.g., maximum levels, sound exposure level) constitute the noise exposure variables in place of long-term energy equivalent measures (e.g., 24-hour L_eq or L_dn). Second, the relationships within the model are expressed as probabilistic rather than deterministic equations. The model has been tested by using acoustical and social survey data collected at 57 sites in the Toronto region exposed to aircraft, road traffic or train noise. Logit analysis was used to estimate two sets of equations. The first predicts the probability of activity interference as a function of event noise level. Four types of interference are included: indoor speech, outdoor speech, difficulty getting to sleep and awakening. The second set predicts the probability of annoyance as a function of the combination of activity interferences. From the first set of equations, it was possible to estimate a function for indoor speech interference only. In this case, the maximum event level was the strongest predictor. The lack of significant results for the other types of interference is explained by the limitations of the data. The same function predicts indoor speech interference for all three sources—road, rail and aircraft noise. The results for the second set of equations show strong relationships between activity interference and the probability of annoyance. Again, the parameters of the logit equations are similar for the three sources. A trial application of the model predicts a higher probability of annoyance for aircraft than for road traffic situations with the same 24-hour L_eq. This result suggests that the model may account for previously reported source differences in annoyance.     

Improvement of Zwicker’s psychoacoustic annoyance model aiming at tonal noises

According to 4 acoustical parameters of noise samples (i.e., loudness, sharpness, fluctuation strength and roughness), Zwicker’s psychoacoustic annoyance model can be used to estimate the relative degree of noise annoyance. However, this model cannot be well applied to compare the annoyance degrees of tonal noises and atonal noises. In order to improve its estimation effect on tonal noises, 3 groups of noise samples were selected randomly, i.e., 27 low-frequency tonal noise samples induced by a 1000 kV transformer with A-weighted equivalent sound pressure levels ranging from 41.2 dBA to 73.0 dBA; 30 low-, mid- or high-frequency tonal/atonal noise samples with loudness levels ranging from 60 phon to 80 phon; and 60 other noise samples with A-weighted equivalent sound pressure levels ranging from 40.7 dBA to 75.0 dBA. Laboratory listening tests were conducted on the above 3 sample groups respectively via an 11-point numerical scale. The Zwicker’s psychoacoustic annoyance model was improved by taking tonality into account, and introducing the evaluation result of the first noise sample group (1000 kV transformer noise samples) to determine the coefficients in the model. The applicability of the improved model was examined by the evaluation results of the other two groups as well as the data in a previous research on annoyance of 220 kV/500 kV transformer noises. Results show that the improved model can estimate the relative annoyance degrees caused by various types of tonal/atonal noises much more accurately.     

Annoyance with aircraft noise in local recreational areas and the recreationists' noise situation at home

Few socioacoustic studies have examined the effect of noise on outdoor recreationists. Most studies concentrate on one setting of the everyday life of a noise-exposed population, which mainly has been the residential setting. This article relates annoyance with aircraft noise in outdoor recreational areas to the recreationists' noise situation at home. In conjunction with the relocation of the main airport of Norway in 1998, field studies were conducted before and after the change in one area near the old airport (1930 survey respondents), and one area near the new airport (1001 survey respondents). Multivariate linear regression analyses of the relationship between annoyance and aircraft noise exposure (LAeq for the aircraft events) in the recreational areas were conducted, controlled for noise annoyance at home, or aircraft noise exposure at home, the situation (before/ after the change), context- and demographic variables. People more highly annoyed at home tended to be more annoyed than others while in the recreational areas. A significant effect of aircraft noise exposure at home on annoyance in the recreational setting was not found. More research is warranted regarding the relationship between noise exposure at home and outdoor recreational demands.     

Acoustical, sensory, and psychological research data and procedures for their use in predicting effects of environmental noises

A demonstration field-research study reveals that aircraft noise measured at two one-story houses is approximately 9 dB less attenuated from measured outdoor levels than is street traffic noise, and, found in other studies, approximately 14 dB less than railway noise. Comparable differences are found between these noises from the application of basic acoustical formulas for quantifying attenuations that occur on site of one- and two-story houses. Reasonably consistent with those findings are results from attitude surveys showing that daily exposure levels of aircraft must be approximately 8 dB less than levels of street traffic noise, and approximately 13 dB less than levels of railway noise to be perceived as an equal cause of annoyance and related adverse effects. However, USA government guidelines recommend that equal exposure levels of noise measured outdoors from vehicles of transportation should be considered as being equally annoying. Changes in present USA noise-measurement procedures and noise-control guidelines are proposed that provide more accurate predictions of annoyance, related adverse effects, and criteria for setting "tolerable" limits of noise exposure in residential areas. Key acoustical and psycho-acoustical principles and data pertaining to predicting correlations between dosages of environmental noises and its effects on people and land noise zoning in residential communities are examined.     

A comparison between exposure-response relationships for wind turbine annoyance and annoyance due to other noise sources

Surveys have shown that noise from wind turbines is perceived as annoying by a proportion of residents living in their vicinity, apparently at much lower noise levels than those inducing annoyance due to other environmental sources. The aim of the present study was to derive the exposure-response relationship between wind turbine noise exposure in L(den) and the expected percentage annoyed residents and to compare it to previously established relationships for industrial noise and transportation noise. In addition, the influence of several individual and situational factors was assessed. On the basis of available data from two surveys in Sweden (N=341, N=754) and one survey in the Netherlands (N=725), a relationship was derived for annoyance indoors and for annoyance outdoors at the dwelling. In comparison to other sources of environmental noise, annoyance due to wind turbine noise was found at relatively low noise exposure levels. Furthermore, annoyance was lower among residents who received economical benefit from wind turbines and higher among residents for whom the wind turbine was visible from the dwelling. Age and noise sensitivity had similar effects on annoyance to those found in research on annoyance by other sources.     

The response to railway noise in residential areas in Great Britain

The effects of railway noise on residents have been measured with a combined social survey (1453 respondents) and noise measurement survey (over 2000 noise measurements) at 403 locations in 75 study areas in Great Britain. In the analysis of the data methods have been used which take into account many typical noise survey problems including noise measurement errors, unique locality effects and the weakness of the noise annoyance relationship. Railway noise bothers 2% of the nation's population. Approximately 170 000 people live where railway noise levels are above 65 dB(A) 24 hour L_eq. Annoyance increases steadily with noise level; thus there is no particular “acceptable” noise level. Railway noise is less annoying than aircraft or road traffic noise of equivalent noise level, at least above 50 to 65L_eq. Noise is rated as the most serious environmental nuisance caused by railways. Maintenance noise is rated as a bigger problem than passing train noise. Vibration is the most important non-noise problem. Reactions to vibrations are related to distance from route, train speed and number of trains. The railway survey's highly stratified, probability sample design with many study areas makes it possible to evaluate the effects of area characteristics on reactions. The 24 h L_eq dB(A) noise index is more closely related to annoyance than are other accepted noise indices examined. There is no support for ambient noise level or night-time corrections. Thirteen railway operation characteristics were examined. One, the type of traction, has a strong effect on reactions after controlling for L_eq (overhead electrified routes are the equivalent of about 10 dB less annoying at high noise levels). Three indicators of railway ancillary noises and non-noise environmental nuisances affect annoyance but most operational characteristics have no effect. The effects of over 35 demographic, attitudinal and neighbourhood characteristics on annoyance are examined. Though most objective characteristics of neighbourhoods and respondents are not correlated with annoyance, three do decrease annoyance (older dwellings, older respondents, and life-time residence). The attitudes which affect annoyance with railway noise are not general ones about railways as transportation sources, but rather ones which are specific to the neighbourhood setting or to railways as environmental intrusions in the neighbourhood. Such attitudes often have less effect on annoyance at low noise levels. In such cases it is the reactions of the more annoyed types of people which are most closely related to noise level.     

Comments on “variational equations for thin elastic shells”

A further study consisting of acoustic and subjective measurements of 552 Chinese firemen at 12 fire stations in Hong Kong has been carried out. Annoyance with aircraft and traffic noise conditions, as expressed by the firemen, was found to correlate well with the acoustic measurements. For aircraft noise the correlation of annoyance with the Number and Noise Index (NNI) was slightly better than with the dB(A) peak value. For traffic noise the similar correlation with the mean sound pressure levels which exceeds 10 % of the sampling period (L₁₀) was slightly better than with the Noise Pollution Level and the Traffic Noise Index. The correlation of the arousal due to the aircraft and traffic noise was similarly found to depend on the NNI and L₁₀ values. However, traffic noise was responsible for more disturbance than aircraft noise. The study demonstrated the desirability of adopting indoor acoustic measurements instead of outdoor measurements for any survey of this kind.     

Total annoyance from an industrial noise source with a main spectral component combined with a background noise

When living close to an industrial plant, people are exposed to a combination of industrial noise sources and a background noise composed of all the other noise sources in the environment. As a first step, noise annoyance indicators in laboratory conditions are proposed for a single exposure to an industrial noise source. The second step detailed in this paper involves determining total annoyance indicators in laboratory conditions for ambient noises composed of an industrial noise source and a background noise. Two types of steady and permanent industrial noise sources are studied: low frequency noises with a main spectral component at 100 Hz, and noises with a main spectral component in middle frequencies. Five background noises are assessed so as to take into account different sound environments which can usually be heard by people living around an industrial plant. One main conclusion of this study is that two different analyses are necessary to determine total annoyance indicators for this type of ambient noise, depending on the industrial noise source composing it. Therefore, two total annoyance indicators adapted to the ambient noises studied are proposed.     

A path model of aircraft noise annoyance

This paper describes the development and testing of a path model of aircraft noise annoyance by using noise and social survey data collected in the vicinity of Toronto International Airport. Path analysis is used to estimate the direct and indirect effects of seventeen independent variables on individual annoyance. The results show that the strongest direct effects are for speech interference, attitudes toward aircraft operations, sleep interruption and personal sensitivity to noise. The strongest indirect effects are for aircraft L_eq(24) and sensitivity. Overall the model explains 41% of the variation in the annoyance reported by the 673 survey respondents. The findings both support and extend existing statements in the literature on the antecedents of annoyance.     

Road traffic noise - the relationship between noise exposure and noise annoyance in Norway

Exposure-effect relationships between the level of road traffic noise at the most exposed side of a dwelling's façade and the residents' reactions to road traffic noise have been estimated. The relationships are based on five Norwegian socio-acoustic studies featuring 18 study areas from two cities and a total of near 4000 respondents. The survey questionnaires distinguish between noise annoyance experienced right outside the apartment and when indoors. Exposure-effect relationships for all degrees of annoyance are estimated simultaneously from ordinal logit models. These predict road traffic noise annoyance when right outside the apartment and when indoors, respectively, as a function of the road traffic noise level outside the most exposed façade. Separate analyses indicate that Norwegians react stronger to road traffic noise than results from a recent compilation of socio-acoustic surveys would lead one to believe. People having inferior single glazing windows report higher indoor annoyance.     

Community response to aircraft noise in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi

To formulate Vietnamese and global noise policies, social surveys on community response to aircraft noise and combined noise from aircraft and road traffic were carried out in Ho Chi Minh City from August to September 2008 and in Hanoi from August to September 2009. In total, 1562 and 1397 responses were obtained in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi, respectively. The aircraft noise was measured for seven successive days, and the combined noise was measured for 24 h. Aircraft and combined noise exposures ranged from 53 to 71 dB and 73 to 83 dB L_den in Ho Chi Minh City and from 48 to 61 dB and 70 to 82 dB L_den in Hanoi, respectively. The dose–response curve for aircraft noise for Vietnam was established and fitted onto the curve for the European Union. For the same noise exposure, the aircraft noise annoyance in Hanoi was higher than that in Ho Chi Minh City because of the lower background noise level in Hanoi.     

色噪声驱动的非对称双稳系统的平均首次穿越时间

研究了由关联乘性色噪声及加性白噪声驱动的非对称双稳系统中势阱的非对称性及噪声对系统两个方向平均首次穿越时间的影响. 首先利用一致有色噪声近似推导了系统的稳态概率密度的表达式，根据最速下降法推导了平均首次穿越时间的表达式. 数值结果表明：势阱的非对称性对两个方向的平均首次穿越时间的影响是不同的；由于噪声的关联性，即使对于关联乘性色噪声及加性白噪声驱动的对称双稳系统，两个方向的平均首次穿越时间也不再相等；在lnT₊-r和lnT_{-关键词： 平均首次穿越时间 非对称双稳系统 乘性色噪声 加性白噪声}     

Comparison of models to predict annoyance from combined noise in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi

Seven models were compared in terms of the ability to predict the annoyance due to the combination of aircraft and road traffic noises on the basis of data collected around airports in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi, Vietnam. The 24-h average sound levels L_Aeq,24h and unweighted means of annoyance scores for aircraft, road traffic, and combined noise were used to solve the regression equations for the seven models. The results indicate that road traffic noise exposure and annoyance were more than those of aircraft noise at almost all sites in both Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi. Among the considered models, the dominant source model yielded the highest coefficients of determination, with R² values of 0.82 and 0.90 for surveys in Ho Chi Minh City and Hanoi, respectively. These results suggest that the dominant source model is the most useful model in the vicinity of those airports in Vietnam where road traffic noise is more dominant than aircraft noise. This is convenient for situations in which dose-response curves are established separately for different noise sources.     

Comparing the relationships between noise level and annoyance in different surveys: A railway noise vs. aircraft and road traffic comparison

Annoyance expressed in a railway noise survey is compared with that in two road traffic and three aircraft surveys in order to determine whether responses to various environmental noises are similar or are source-specific. Railway noise is less annoying than other noises at any given high noise level. Railway noise annoyance increases less rapidly with increasing noise level. At high noise levels this gap in reactions averages about 10 dB but ranges from 4 dB to more than 20 dB. Comparisons between the findings in the different surveys can be made only after considering differences in noise index calculation procedures, human response measurement procedures and annoyance moderating conditions. The methodology for comparing surveys is examined. It is found that methodological uncertainties lead to imprecise comparisons and that different annoyance scales give different estimates of intersurvey differences.