Evaluation of frequency-weighted sound level measurements for prediction of low-frequency noise annoyance

Kjellberg, Anders; Tesarz, Maria; Holmberg, Kjell; Landström, Ulf

doi:10.1016/s0160-4120(97)00054-8

Cited by 41 publications

(30 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our results show that during nights where activity exists the dB(C)-dB(A) value is 13.6 dB; the corresponding value for nights with no activity is 12.6 dB. While the difference between dB(C)-dB(A) is greater during nights of activity, it does not exceed the 15dB threshold suggested by Kjellberg et al (1997). The difference is depicted graphically in Figure 5 for Leq,15mins values and highlights the inconclusive nature of the difference between the dB(C)-dB(A) values with and without activity.…”

Section: Low-frequency Noisecontrasting

confidence: 55%

“…As mentioned already, Kjellberg et al (1997) have suggested that if the difference between A and Cweighted values exceeds 15dB then a low frequency noise problem may exist. Our results show that during nights where activity exists the dB(C)-dB(A) value is 13.6 dB; the corresponding value for nights with no activity is 12.6 dB.…”

Section: Low-frequency Noisementioning

confidence: 91%

“…One of those focuses on the difference between C and A-weighted noise levels due to the difference being an indicator of the amount of low frequency energy in the noise as well as a useful predictor of annoyance (Holmburg el al, 1997;Kjellberg et al, 1997). Kellberg et al's work (1997) suggests that if the difference between the noise values for the two weightings -dB(C)-dB(A) -is greater than 15 dB, there is potential for a low frequency noise problem.…”

Section: Detecting Low Frequency Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

An assessment of residential exposure to environmental noise at a shipping port

Murphy

King

2014

Environment International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Publication information Environment International, 63 (February 2014): 207-215Publisher Elsevier Item record/more information http://hdl.handle.net/10197/5692 Publisher's statementThis is the author's version of a work that was accepted for publication in Environment International. Changes resulting from the publishing process, such as peer review, editing, corrections, structural formatting, and other quality control mechanisms may not be reflected in this document. Changes may have been made to this work since it was submitted for publication. A definitive version was subsequently published in Environment International (VOL 63, ISSUE February 2014 , (2014) DOI:10.1016/j.envint.2013.11.001Publisher's version (DOI) http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.envint.2013.11.001An assessment of residential exposure to environmental noise at a shipping port Abstract. The World Health Organisation has recently acknowledged that contrary to the trend for other environmental stressors, noise exposure is increasing in Europe. However, little research has been conducted on environmental noise exposure to handling activity at shipping ports. This paper reports on research examining the extent of noise exposure for residents within the vicinity of Dublin Port, Ireland using the nation's largest port terminal as a proxy for port noise. In order to assess the level of exposure in the area, long-term measurements were undertaken at the most exposed residential façade for a period of 45 days to determine the extent of night-time exposure was above levels recommended by the World Health Organisation. The indicators L90, Leq and LMax were used to determine exposure levels. The results show that exposure is above night-time guideline limits set down by the WHO and is above Irish levels for triggering a mitigation response and highlight the extent to which port noise can be a significant environmental stressor. The research also investigated the extent of low-frequency noise (which is associated with greater health issues) from night-time port handling activity and found a significant low-frequency component indicating the negative health issues that might arise from port noise exposure more generally. We also undertook semi-structured interviews with residents to qualitatively assess the self-reported impact of prolonged night-time noise exposure for local residents.

show abstract

Section: Low-frequency Noisecontrasting

confidence: 55%

Section: Low-frequency Noisementioning

confidence: 91%

Section: Detecting Low Frequency Noisementioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

An assessment of residential exposure to environmental noise at a shipping port

Murphy

King

2014

Environment International

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Furthermore, dBC-dBA-analysis (Table 1) revealed strong low frequency components: all sites showed differences larger than 15 dB, which is the recommended criterion when the prediction of annoyance is the main aim [53]. Three sites even met the stricter DIN 45680 criteria of 20 dB, which would clearly indicate the inappropriateness of the use of the dBA-weighting in such a case [54].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Analysis of Psychoacoustic and Vibration-Related Parameters to Track the Reasons for Health Complaints after the Introduction of New Tramways

Cik

Lienhart

2016

Applied Sciences

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract:Background: A change to new tramways in Graz (Austria) led to severe complaints in residential areas. To understand the underlying reasons for these complaints, a systematic measurement campaign was designed. Methods: Six locations in Graz and two locations in a comparably sized city were selected. Parallel indoor recordings of sound and vibrations were conducted from 8:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m. (due to sleep problems) at all locations. Results: Vibration levels remained below the limits of the Austrian standard (Wm-weighting) although variability was observed among sites, tram types and pass-bys. A complex characteristic of the acoustic feature space was found with A-weighting (differences between A-and C-weighting of more than 15 dB were observed). C-weighted background to peak noise ratios clearly distinguished "old" from "new" trams. Psychoacoustic indices indicated a high variability between locations and tram types. Roughness and loudness was higher in "new" versus "old" trams at most locations. "New" trams exhibited high sharpness values and variability, especially at higher speeds-when compared with trams from a control city. Conclusions: Standard indicators of sound and vibration were not sensitive enough to uncover the reasons for the complaints. Only the integrated analysis of the ambient soundscape (high signal-to-noise-ratio), the more noticeable sound (in psychoacoustic terms) and the observed high variance of the immissions provided guidance to implement appropriate technical solutions.

show abstract

“…This finding indicates that hearing sensation plays an important role in perceiving unpleasantness or annoyance of persons exposed to lowfrequency noise, despite the low audibility of the noise. However, there have been many studies reporting that considering the A-weighted sound pressure level, which is standardized on the basis of the human equal-loudness level contours, is insufficient for evaluating annoyance caused by low-frequency noise or noise with strong low-frequency content 11,12,[14][15][16][17] . These studies imply that some other factors, in addition to the loudness, contribute to inducing unpleasantness or annoyance caused by low-frequency noise.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Study on the Relationship between Subjective Unpleasantness and Body Surface Vibrations Induced by High-level Low-frequency Pure Tones

et al. 2005

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human body surface vibrations induced by high-level low-frequency pure tones were measured at the chest and the abdomen. At the same time, the subject rated the unpleasantness that he had just perceived during the exposure to low-frequency noise stimulus. Examining the relationship between the measured vibration and the rating score of the unpleasantness revealed that the unpleasantness was in close correlation with the vibration acceleration level (VAL) of the vibration measured. Taking previous results into account, this finding suggests that noise-induced vibrations primarily induce vibratory sensations and through the vibratory sensation or together with some other factors, secondarily contribute to the unpleasantness. The present results suggest that in evaluating high-level low-frequency noise, the effect of vibration should be taken into account.

show abstract

Evaluation of frequency-weighted sound level measurements for prediction of low-frequency noise annoyance

Cited by 41 publications

References 8 publications

An assessment of residential exposure to environmental noise at a shipping port

An assessment of residential exposure to environmental noise at a shipping port

Analysis of Psychoacoustic and Vibration-Related Parameters to Track the Reasons for Health Complaints after the Introduction of New Tramways

A Study on the Relationship between Subjective Unpleasantness and Body Surface Vibrations Induced by High-level Low-frequency Pure Tones

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About