2012
DOI: 10.3397/1.3701047
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Nonlinear uncertainty of the long term average level calculated from short term average sound levels

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
3
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 6 publications
(3 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
3
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The reduced time length may represent a good compromise between the need of sample accuracy and costs of monitoring. However, the estimated values are affected by uncertainty, whose amount depends on the ratio between the measurement time and the medium long-term time, as well as on the variability of the noise immission at the measurement point; on this issue for instance, see Makarewicz and Gałuszkab ( 2012 ), Can et al ( 2011 ), and Brocolini et al ( 2013 ).…”
Section: Estimate Of Daytime L Aeqd Fromentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The reduced time length may represent a good compromise between the need of sample accuracy and costs of monitoring. However, the estimated values are affected by uncertainty, whose amount depends on the ratio between the measurement time and the medium long-term time, as well as on the variability of the noise immission at the measurement point; on this issue for instance, see Makarewicz and Gałuszkab ( 2012 ), Can et al ( 2011 ), and Brocolini et al ( 2013 ).…”
Section: Estimate Of Daytime L Aeqd Fromentioning
confidence: 99%
“…affected by road traffic or other environmental noise sources. Theoretical approaches by Makarewicz et al [6] proposed that the long-term average sound level L AeqT can be approximated by a few, m, short-term, τ, average sound levels, L Aeqτ , so that mτ << T, and the uncertainty of such approximation should be calculated by nonlinear uncertainty of L Aeqτ for m<10. The analysis of 5 years of continuous noise measurements carried out at one site in Valencia yielded Gaja et al [7] to conclude that a random day strategy gives a more accurate estimate of the annual equivalent level from the 24-h noise level than a consecutive day's strategy.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Comparison between experimental data and values from equation(6) of probability that ε t is within k= ± 0.5 dB for the L Aeqh estimate from the five measurement times regardless the cluster membership Comparison of probability that ε t is within the E range for the L Aeqh estimate for the five measurement times.L Aeqd -L Aeqn =7.4 [dB] Aeqd -7.4=63.0 -7.4=55.6 [dB(A)]…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%