ML20112K013
| ML20112K013 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 04/05/1985 |
| From: | Bassiouni M ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC., CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20112J975 | List: |
| References | |
| OL, NUDOCS 8504090299 | |
| Download: ML20112K013 (175) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:c: - April 5, 1985 0 . E TED L CX'.
^
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
'65 APR-8 4147 GFFIC Or SECRETAR BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD gkU hjIEPVIC g .
In the Matter of )
)
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) -- and NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ) Docket No. 50-400 OL MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY )
)
(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power ) Plant) ) SUPPLEMENTAL AFFIDAVIT OF M. READA BASSIOUNI ON EDDLEMAN 213 County of Suffolk )
) ss.
Commonwealth of Massachusetts ) M. READA BASSIOUNI, being duly sworn, deposes and says:
- 1. I am the founder and Principal Technical Consultant of Acoustic Technology, Inc. ("ATI"). My area of speciali-zation is the design and implementation of prompt alert and no-tification' warning systems in accordance with NUREG-0654/
FEMA-REP-1, Appendix 3 and FEMA-43. Under my direction, ATI has provided technical services to more than 20 nuclear utilities. A current statement of my professional qualifica-i tions and experience is attached hereto. My business ad3ress I is ATI, 22 Union Wharf, Boston, Massachusetts 02109. I have i s personal knowledge of the matters stated herein and believe l fop 0M fgo PH Q \
. =
them to be true and correct. I make this Supplemental Affida-vit in response to Eddleman Contention 213.
- 2. As indicated in the January 14, 1985 " Affidavit of M. Reada Bassiouni on Eddleman 213," Carolina Power & Light c
Company contracted with ATI to analyze and evaluate the alerting of swimmers, boaters, and waterskiers on Harris Lake, and to prepare a report documenting the analysis of the warning system design for alerting such populations. ATI's report,
" Analysis and Evaluation of Siren Notification For Boaters, Wa-terskiers, and Swimmers On Harris Lake" (March 1985), is atta-ched hereto and incorporated herein.by reference.
- 3. Based on the methodology outlined in the January 14, 1985 Affidavit, and described in greater detail in the attached report, ATI developed a proposal to enhance the existing system of sirens installed throughout the Harris plume Emergency Plan-ning Zone, to assure siren notification of swimmers, boaters, and waterskiers on Harris Lake. As documented in the attached report, ATI's proposed siren configuration of ten additional sirens (activated for a total of 10
- - , - -.,n e.,e------ -- , , - , , , , , -
MEROx TELECOPIER 495; 5- 4-65;12:46PM : 617 227 2598- 0099M2 2 617 227 2598 ATI BOSTON 02 minutes) would provide essentially 100 percent notification to people on Harris Lake within 15 minutes.
,W h ( "'
M. Reada Bassiouni Sworn to and subscribed to before me thisIM day of April, 1985. t1>1r fru l0F r Artt. 6 101 Notary Public l My Commission expires M/Lu 11 l@/O - d I s
.t 4
- i. l 1
I Resume of: W . M. Reaca Bassiouni Principal Consultant Ecucation Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York - Ph.D. in Mechanical Engineering, Major: Accustics (1976) Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York - Selectec courses in Business Acministration Carte:cn Univeasity, C awa, Ontario, Canaca - M.E. in Meenanical Engineering (1972) Alexancria University, Alexancria, Egypt - 9.S. in Meenanical Engineering (1,969)
. e:nni:st So:ieties National Forensi: Center -
cnosen as an ex=er: in acoustics, noise and vibration
- ente:L
*rstitute of Ncise Centrol Engineering (INCE) - memcer American Society Of Testing Materials CASTM) -
member Ameri:an So:iety of Me:nanical Engineers (ASME) - memcer A::vs:1:at 30 ie:f Of Ameri:a 'ASA) - mem=er te:3 4 '. e: Exce 4 en:e 2e: r:
, 19BC- ACCUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, ;NC.
P r e s e.a. *: BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS l Founded A:custi: Te:hnology, :nc. (AT!) and is re principal te:nnical consul:an: in acoustics, vibratica, an: noise control for u:itities, manufacturers, and agencies. His area of specialization has ceen design and i nc lem e r-tation of promet notification warning systems recuirec y NUREG-0654/ FEMA REP-1, Accencix 3. As an accusti: expert, he has witnessed and conducted various siren perf orman:e tests in conjunction with determining the actual sirem acoustic capabilities for utilities and siren manufactur-ers. Under his direction ATI developed a computer moce, for prediction of siren acoustic coverage for varyteg meteorological and ground conditions. Also, he nas had an active role in field testing instai;e: warning systems including documentation and testi*y' ; results for the NRC. Uncer his technical direction ATI nas provicec censulting services to the f ollowing nu: Lea-utilities: AccusTic TECHNcLOGY INC 9 . m - , - - - .
, , - . --.,y - _ _ , . _ - - _ , - _ . , ,...y . -
1 Arizona Putlic Service C=moeny Palo Verce 1, 2, 3, Nuclear Generating Stations
- 2. Cincinnati Gas & Electric C= meany Wm. H. Zimmer Nuclear Power Station
- 3. Florica Power & Light C moany Turkey Point Power Plant St. Lucie Power Plant 4 GPU Nuclear Cor ora!ica Three Mite Islanc Nuclear Power 5:ation
- 5. Jersey Central Power & Lignt Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Station
- 6. Louisiana Power & Light
'aterforo-3
= Nuclear Station 7 Mississicci Power & Light Grano Gulf Nuclear Station
- 3. Omaha Public Power Distric For Calnoun Nuclear Power Station
- 9. 8 uelic Service Electric & Gas Comoany Salem Nuclear Generating Station
'C. acenestea Gas anc E'.ectric Corpora:ica R.E. Ginna Nuclear Power Station
. Sacramen:o "unicical utiLi:y Distrie:
Ranene Secc Nuclear Generating Station ( *I. Scutn Carolina Electric & Gas Comoany V.C. Summer Nuclear Power Station
- 13. Toledo Edison Comoany Davis-Sesse Nuclear Power Station 14 Virginia Electric & Power comoany Surry Station North Anna Station
- 15. Gulf States utilities Co.
River Bend Station
- 16. Public Service Indiana Maccle Hill Nuclear Generating Station
- 17. Ducuesne Light Comoany Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station Acoustic TECHNCL.OGY INO l
l l l
- 18. Philaoelchia Electric Comoany Limerick Generating Station
- 19. Duke Power comoany Catawba Nuclear Station
- 20. Indiana & Michigan Electric Comoany Donald C. Cook Nuclear Station
- 21. ItLinois Power comoany Clinton Power Station
- 22. Carolina Power & Light Comoany
. H. 8. Robinson Plant Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Shearon Marris Nuclear Power Plant Additionally, Dr. Bassiouni has been caltec upon as an expert witness by many legal firms. He has hac extensive experience in analyzing hearing camage claims and OSHA violations which recuire testing and measurements of high ! noise levels and oetermination of their ef f ects on humans. He has also conducted acoustic analyses of tace recordings to identify recorced voices and tace tamcering. Dr. Bassiouni has preca.eo anc reviewee environmental noise imcaet statements. His activities incluce comouter analysis and aovanced field measurements. He has cerformec evaluations of aircor: noise impacts cue to changes in air traffic volume. 1976-1980 STONE & WEBSTER ENGINEERING CORPORATION (S&W) 80STON, MASSACHUSETTS
- a. Acoustic Specialis: for tre Promo: No:ifica icn System recuired by NUREG-0654/ FEMA RE=-1 Accenet: 3.
) Responsible for commuter mocelling and ameient ncise surveying and suoport of siren system cesign.
- b. Noise control engineering for nuclear and fossit-futtec power projects to meet tne Occucational Safety anc Health Act (OSHA) criteria, procerty line sound Levet regulations imposed by local regulatory agencies or individual plant criteria selected to preven ncise complaints from the community.
I
- c. Acting as a consultant to diagnostic vibrations ame noise measurements to evaluate ecuipment performance deviation for existing plants.
- d. Precaring noise control specifications for "tw equipment, limiting the noise to allowable levels s.:-
that the resultant sound level in :he plant area cces not exceed the OSHA regulations. Acoustic TECHNCLOGY IN l I
- ~ . . .- - - - . , - , . - . , ,- , . - . - - , ,_ ,- ,.,,,,.,a -
n - - - - - . - , - - , , . . , , - . . .
9 l e. Designing and developing noise control devices for dominan: noise sources wi:nin :ne stant.
- f. Selecting the acoustical materials to controt in_,t,ng anc exterior sounc levels.
- g. Measurements, credictions, anc evaluation of noise control data.
Dr. Bassiouni cerformee wort for :he following clients:
- 1. Cincinnati Gas & Electric W.H. Zimmer Nuclear Power S:ation
- 2. Baltimore Gas & Electric Calvert Cliffs Nuclear Power Station
- 3. Occidental Petroleum Geotnermal Power Plant L. Great Northern Pactr Company Millinocket, Maine
- 5. A:Lantic Ci:y Electric Company
, Deep water Station - Return to Coal Firing
- 6. Store & Weoster E.mgineering :orocration Reference Nuclear Dower Atant (RNPP) 7 Texaco, Inc.
'.1 g n : Olefins Unit, Por: Ar:nue, Texas
- 8. Sacramento Municioal utiLi:y Distrie: (SMud)
Geothermal Power Plant
- 9. Virginia Electric & Power Company North Anna Unit Nos. 3 and 4
- 10. Duouesne Light comoany 8eaver Valley Power Station - Unit No. 2
- 11. Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation Nine Mile Unit 2
- 12. Power Authority of the State of New York Greene County Projects l M@ Acoustic TECHN t
1975-1976 AVC0 EVERETT RESEARCH LA80RATORY, INC. EVERETT, MASSACHUSETTS Senior Acoustic Scientist Duties consisted of the following:
- 1. Experimental acoustic design for Laser systems.
Acoustic elements design and material Comoatibility and acoustic properties testing.
- 2. Design and analysis of special oesign acoustic mufflers ano silencers.
1975 TERRY CORPORATION, a subsidiary of INGERSOLL-RAND COMPANY WINDSOR, CONNECTICUT Noise Consultant Duties consistec of the following:
. Develcoed noise data for use by marketing in c'esenting r
anc guaranteeing noise levels to customers.
- 2. Develooed practical acoustic enclosure systems for use on taroine and gears.
- 3. Analyzed existing products (single and multistage turoines ano gear units) to determine compliance witn the national noise stancards.
- a. Easured :n.: OSHA noise stancards were met in the 9e=
oroouc cesign.
- 5. Reviewed new incus: rial noise stancarcs acolied to :9e comoany procuc*s.
- 6. D e t e rmined the impact of existing and proposeo noise control legislation and regulations on corocrate activities.
1972-1975 SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY SYRACUSE, NEW YORK Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Department Duties consisted of the following:
- 1. Conducted extensive acoustic seasurements using various techniques.
- 2. 8erformed succorting diagnostic technicues for :9e associated flow field.
4 Acoustic TECHNCLOGY INC
- 3. Acoustic cata recuction methocs, cata analysis, anc results recorting.
4 Investigated and evaluated noise reouction setnocs. 1971 CARLETON UNIYERSITT OTTAWA, ONTARIO, CANADA CAER0 THERMODYNAMICS DIVISION) Research Assistant - Engineering Decartment Fields: Fan anc comoressor accus:ic cesign ano tes:ec acoustic Liners Instructor of Mechanical Engineering Full and cart-time Consulting Engineer in air conditioning anc refrigeration systems, Alexancria, Egyct. Puolications Au:norec:
- i. " Outdoor Sound Propagation over Grounc with Several Impecance Discontinuities"; acoustical Society of America Pacer; cresentec Novemoer 1982; Orlanco, FLorica "o-autnored the following:
. "* rome: Siren Notifica: ion Sys:ee Design" 80WER ENGINEERING, Maren 1933 4
- 2. " Prediction and Experimenta6 verifica: ion of Far-field sounc orcoagation over varying Grovt c Surfaces" Internoise "83" cacer.
- 3. "Accustic and Flow Characteristics of Cole Hign-Sevec Coaxial Jets," AIAA Pacer No. 73-241, January 1973 4 " Supersonic Jet Noise Suoeression oy Ocaxiat Cold / Heated Jet Flows," AIAA Pacer No. 76-507, J u i, y 1976
- 5. "Some Recent Develcoments in Suceesonic Jet Noise Reduction," AIAA Pacer No. 75-503, Maren 1975
- 6. " Potential, of Coaxial Multi-Noz:Le Configurations for Reduction of Noise from Nigh Velocity Jets," Second Interagency Symposium of University Research in Transportation Noise, North Carolina University,1974
- 7. " Reduction of Noise from Sucersonic Jets by Coaxial Multi-No:Le Schemes," Eignth International Congress on Acoustics, London, 1974 AccusTic TecHNcLOGY INC p .
- .- . - - - . . - . - , _ ~
8 " Quarterly Desgress Reports, N3s. 3, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, and i ', suemitted to office of Meise Abatement, DeDir ment of Transcortation, Washington, D.C. 9 "A High-$0eed High-Temoerature Flow Facility" Final report unoer Grant SSF (70)-25, sucaittec to New Yort State Science and Technology Founcation e e e Acoustic TECHNCt.CGY INC
_ 1. _ _ ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF SIREN NOTIFICATION FOR BOATERS, WATERSKIERS, AND SWIMMERS , ON HARRIS LAKE 4 t MARCH 1985 l PREPARED FOR: CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA ATI h Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC. BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
, - . , . _ . . , , ,_- , _ _ . - . . - . . . _ . - _ , . . ___ . , . . . . _ _ _ . . . . _ _ - _ . , _ _ _ , . _ _ _ . , , , . _ , , _ . - - . . , ,,,,.-,_.~n.__..- _
I 1 t ANALYSIS AND EVALUATION OF SIREN NOTIFICATION FOR BOATERS, WATERSKIERS, AND SWIMMERS ON HARRIS LAKE
. s ,
MARCH 1985 PREPARED FOR: CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA PREPARED BY: ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS
#.4:) Accusric Tac:n:ctcca 9:c.
I TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE
SUMMARY
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2 2.0 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM 4 2.1 ALERT COVERAGE FROM EXISTING SIREN SYSTEMS 5 3.0 NOISE OF RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES 6 3.1 NOISE FREQUENCY CHARACTERISTICS 6 3.2 NOISE VARIATION WITH TIME 7 3.3 INSTRUMENTATION PROCEDURES 9 3.4 DATA REDUCTION AND ANALYSIS 10 3.4.1 SWIMMING NOISE 11 3.4.2 WATERSKIING NOISE 12 3.4.3 MOTOR 80ATING NOISE 14 4.0 SIREN SOUND PROPAGATION ON HARRIS LAKE 18 4.1 TEST SET-UP 18 , 4.2 DATA REDUCTION AND ANALYSIS 19 4.3 SIREN SOUND LEVEL CONTOURS 22 5.0 SIREN SYSTEM DESIGN COVERAGE FOR HARRIS LAKE 24 5.1 DEMOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION 24 5.2 ATI COMPUTER MODELING FOR SIREN PLACEMENT 25 5.3 DESIGN CRITERIA 27 5.4 SYSTEM CONFIGURATION 28
6.0 CONCLUSION
S & REMARKS 31 TABLES FIGURES APPENDIX 1: DISTRIBUTION HISTOGRAMS OF NOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS ACTIVITIES APPENDIX 1A: SWIMMING APPENDIX 18: WATERSKIING APPENDIX *C: MOTOR 60ATING APPENDIX 2: TABLES FOR NOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS ACTIVITIES APPENDIX 2A: SWIMMING APPENDIX 28: WATERSKIING APPENDIX 2C: MOTORBOATING
- h. ACCU 3TlC I2CHMCLCGY INC
[~ TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont'd) APPENDIX 3: NARROW BAND SPECTRA FOR SIREN SIGNAL PROPAGATION APPENDIX 3A: SIREN SIGNAL WITH 800 HZ FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY APPENDIX 38: SIREN SIGNAL WITH 460 HZ FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY APPENDIX 3C: SIREN SIGNAL WITH 1020 HZ FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY MAP 1: SIREN' COVERAGE FOR THE HARRIS LAKE USING SUMMER AVERAGE CONDITION l ggpecost:cnc:mcucyme.
l l
SUMMARY
This report describes a systematic program of noise measurement and computer analysis to evaluate and design an adequate system for siren notification for boaters, waterskiers, and swimmers on Harris Lake. Harris Lake is a recreational area within the plume exposure emergency planning zone (EPZ) of the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. Acoustic measurements were performed to document the background noise levels for the Lake recreational activities of boating, waterskiing, and swimming. Also, the noise Levels received by the population involved in these activities were evaluated considering varying conditions. To determine the actual siren sound propagation characteristics for Harris Lake, acoustic field testing was parformed at the site. Based on the field data obtained, a configuration for siren design coverage for siren notification for the recreational activities of boating, waterskiing, and swimming on Harris Lake was evaluated with sirens placed at optimized locations along the lake shore. This demonstrated that a configuration of 10 sirens (activated for a total of 10 minutes duration) would provide an adequate means of notification for boaters, watersklers, and swimmers on Harris Lake within the time requirement of 15 minutes.
@.j AccusT:c TicanctcGy :Mc.
~
T
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Harris Lake is a recreational area managed by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission. The Lake area is a reservoir that was constructed by Carolina Power & Light Company (CP&L) to support the operation of the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. CP&L has agreed with the appropriate state agencies to provide public access for recreational activities such as boating, waterskiing, and swimming at Harris Lake. The total surface area of the Lake is approximately 4000 acres, with over 50 miles of shoreline. Two public boat ramps are provided for access to the Lake. Figure 1 is a map of Harris Lake which shows the location of the boat ramps and public roads that provide access to the Lake shore. As shown in Figure 1, areas near the Harris plant site are restricted f rom public access. The design of an effective siren notification system for boaters, waterskiers, and swimmers at Harris Lake necessitated consideration of the complex physical configuration of the Lake, with its several branches of f the main reservoir and the irregular shoreline. The warning system was required to meet the design criteria of Appendix 3 to NUREG-0654. Therefore, the design for notification of boaters, waterskiers, and swimmers on Harris Lake took into consideration the followings a) Capability for providing an alert signal to the population on an area wide basis throughout the 10 mile EPZ, within 15 minutes. h ] ACOU 57!C TiCHNCl.CGY INC.
b) The initial notification system wiLL assure direct coverage of essentially 100% of the population within 5 miles of the , site. c) Special arrangements wiLL be made to assure 100% coverage within 45 minutes of the population who may not have received the initial notification within the entire plume exposure EPZ. As wiLL be discussed in Section 2.1 recreational activities on Harris Lake generate background noise levels that require a higher siren acoustic coverage level than the existing siren prompt notification system installed within the Harris EPZ provides. CP&L contracted ATI to document the background noise levels for the recreational activities of boating, waterskiing and swimming. Based on these levels, ATI designed a prompt notification system that would meet the alert criteria of NUREG-0654 for people on the take. Section 3.0 of this report presents a comprehensive analysis of the background noise levels for boating, waterskiing, and swimming. Included are sound spectra and sound level variation with time for each activity. In addition, histograms were developed to evaluate the probability of dif ferent levels occurring. Section 4.0 describes the field testing that was performed by ATI to achieve accurate modeling of the siren sound propagation on Harris Lake. Section 5.0 describes the design of the siren warning system for boaters, waterskiers, and swimmers on Harris Lake.
~3~
ACCUSTIC IdCMCLCC/ IMC.
. - - - .- - - . - . .- --- -. . - - - ._ .. .~-
4 i 1 J. 2.0 STATEMENT OF PROBLEM - , l j . .
. i Background noise Levels on a recreational take such as Harris Lake vary Largely according to factors such as people's activities and Locations, and ;
according to the time of day, weekday or weekend, and the season of the year. Relatively high background noise levels on the take may be generated t by the recreational a-tivities of swimming, boating, and waterskiing. ) People on board boats wiLL Likely perceive more than a 60 de background i i noise level. Therefore a siren signal that is 10 de higher would be j necessary to alert those people. To design an adequate siren warning l system, an accurate simulation and evaluation of background noise levels l t I within Harris Lake was performed. J A l ! An experimental program was set up by ATI to record and analyze noise ' J i levels for boaters, swimmers, and skiers. ALL measurements were performed I i in accordance.with applicable ANSI standards. The objective of the program I was to determine the background noise Level to be used in the design of the ) Lake siren warning system. 1 Actual siren signal propagation characteristics for Harris Lake were l
)
experimentally determined. A test was set up at Harris Lake to evaluate i the directivity and distances for siren signal propagation. From this [ , program, the sound level contours required for the noise levels of the Lake I t recreational activities were generated. To develop the optimal siren l i system design, a siren layout configuration was analyzed. i i.
,_N'.
4~ Ifd AccusT:c TECHNCL.CGY blC.
- w
2.1 ALERT' COVERAGE FROM EXISTING SIREN SYSTEM A siren prompt notification system has been designed and installed for the 10-mile EPZ around the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. The siren system for the EPZ uses 68 rotating Federal Signal Corporation Thunderbolt sirens rated at 125 dBC at 100 feet. The siren system has been designed to 4 meet the criteria of NUREG-0654 and FEMA 43. A detailed description of this system can be found in ATI's report " Evaluation and Analysis of the Siren Prompt Notification System for the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant", January 1985. Figure 2 illustrates the locations of the sirens in 1 the vicinity of the Lake and the extent of the 60 dBC and 70 dBC coverage within the Harris Lake region. It is apparent that during the warmer . seasons of the year, the coverage f rom existing installed sirens may be inadequate to overcome noise generated by boats, waterskiing, and swimming. r l i i I p, %J.tecusr:c Taan.ct. cay :nc
l l
3.0 BACKGROUND
NOISE LEVELS OF RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES L Three Lake recreational activities of swimming, waterskiing, and boating were investigated to evaluate their background noise levels. Recordings of .j the no.ise generated by each activity were made and the typical background noise level that would be received by persons performing each activity was calculated. i 3.1 NOISE FREQUENCY CHARACTERISTICS To better understand the nature of the background noise on the Harris Lake, it is necessary to consider noise f requency characteristics. These characteristics can be described in terms of standard weighting and filtering schemes, such as C-and A-weighting, and one-third octave band filtering. The usefulness of each weighting scheme (dBC, d8A) depends upon i the f requencies of interest, as each scheme places emphasis upon certain frequencies and de-emphasizes others. i l 4 The overaLL sound pressure Level (SPL) at a given point is the Logarithmic i ! addition of SPLs at all frequencies. A-weighting serves to de-emphasize the l ! extreme low (<50 HZ) and high (>5000 Hz) frequencies slightly while retaining the equal emphasis on middle f requencies, as shown in Figure 3. The A-weighting scheme was developed to approximate the frequency response of the human ear, which cannot perceive low or high f.aequency noise as weLL as it does noise in the middle frequencies.
- g. ACCUGT!C IIChNCLOGY !t;C.
. - . . . - -..- -. - . - - - -- - ~. - - . - - - -
. 0ne-third octave band measurements consider only those frequencies which
~
are within a one-third octave bandwidth around a certain center frequen,cy. Therefore, the 800 Hz one-third octave band considers only that sound with 1 The 500 Hz one-third octave band I
' frequencies between 712 and 899 Hz.
i :
- considers the frequencies between 447 and 562 Hz. One-third octave band l-j filtering is useful when only certain frequencies are of interest, such as those near the siren signal frequency. Since the one-third octave band is f l
] only a small portion of the entire sound spectrum, its SPL is typically
+
i j tower than the overall dBC Level. This can be seen from Figure 4. ; L i 3.2 NOISE VARIATION WITH TIME l I l Sackground noise levels vary with time. In the case of a steady noise i source, this variation may be slight, but of ten the noise conditions are changing during an activity. A varying noise level for an activity may [ l
- rise above and f all below the siren signal level. If at some time the t
i background noise level is too loud for a siren signal to be detected, a ; moment later it may decrease so that the siren can be heard. In the case of boating, the siren signal would increase as the boat approached the , . siren. Since it is very dif ficult to know what the background noise level i 1 ) 4 may be at any particular time during siren activation, it is necessary to l Look at statistical probability distributions of noise levels. One way to. do this is to describe the sound in terms of Levels exceeded for a certain i percentage of the time. An L * **
- n" ' " *"*'#
exceeded n percent of the time. Thus L is the noise level exceeded only l 10 10 percent of the time (almost the highest level), L 50 is the noise level l exceeded 50 percent of the time (the median level), and L 90 is the noise j i
@e@ AccusT:c TacHNetcGl
.. - - = -. . . - - ~~ -.
Level exceeded 90 percent of the time (almost the lowest level). L and 10 L are imp rtant because most of the, varying noise Level ' remains between, 90 these values. For a given activity with a varying background noise level, a steady siren i signal wiLL be audible during those times when the background noise Level I
- f alls below the siren signal threshold (which is 10 de below the siren j signal level). Alternatively, if a statistical description of a background ,.
noise Level such as L 90 is known for a particular activity, and a constant ] a siren signal is 10 de above the L noise level, the varying background 90 noise level wiLL cause the siren signal to be audible. The criterion used 4
; in this report, therefore, is that the measured sound level is defined as the L 90 value of the 800 Hz one-third octave band, the predominant tone of the sirens that will be used on Harris Lake. This criterion is based upon FEMA-43 guidelines.
l , i A graphic level representation of background noise level variation at a location, measured for approximately three minutes with A-weighting is shown in Figure 5. During the measurement, a noise level analyzer was used l
! to sample the varying noise Level 10-times per second, each sample consisting of the noise level (in dea) at that instant. This is done j because it is necessary to break up the background noise level measurement, :
i a continuous function, into many discrete values to apply stat'istical l methods of analysis. On the basis of total samples of the continously j varying noise level, the levels of the statistical descriptors L,q, L10' ! I' L and L were computed. They are shown in Figure 5. 50 90 i l.'.C.
]JCOUSflC IdCHtlCLCG/
f
I I To depict the range of background noise level variation which exists for a person participating in each activity, ATI prepared probability histograms. A typical probability histogram is shown in Figure 6. This histogram corresponds to the noise variation illustrated in Figure 5, and shows the percentage of the samples that fall within certain 2 de intervals. Thus, 10 percent of the total samples f aLL in the range 42 dBA to 44 dBA, 15 percent f all in the range 44 dBA to 46 dBA, etc. A histogram with a narrow spike would suggest a very steady noise level, while one which is very broad would represent a widely-varying ambient sound Level. 3.3 INSTRUMENTATION AND PROCEDURES 4 ALL instruments used for the sound measuring, recording, and analysis of noise levels of Lake recreational activities and the siren propagation i testing comply with the standards Jet forth by ANSI. The instruments were battery-operated and portable. The sound level meters used in the field were Bruel & Kjaer (B&K) 2215 and 2230 meters, which are Type 1 meters and comply with ANSI S1.4-1983 (Specifications for Sound Level Meters). ALL sound filters used (octave, and one-third octave filter sets) comply with ANSI $1.11-1966 specifications. High precision instrumentation tape recorders, Nagra IV-SJ and Nagra SN models, were used to collect and store the sound pressure Levels of various I activities and the siren signal testing for Later detailed Laboratory analysis and evaluation. The recorders comply with ANS!/SAE J184a (Qualifying a Sound Data Acquisition System). This procedure was useful in d' v 1 <
) Ac0UCT:c Tecmetcc/r : c.
the verification of siren tone frequencies and directivity in the l far-field sound propagation, and the documentation of ' background noi,se ' Levels. At the beginning of each test, aLL sound Level meters were battery checked and calibrated with a B&K 4230 calibrator (accuracy + .2 dB). A calibration tone was recorded at the beginning and the end of each recorded tape. ALL recording adjustments made during each test were noted on the tape. At the end of the testing, all sound level meters were checked and calibrated again. Any variance from proper calibration was noted and the appropriate corrections were made to the data. This procedure was followed in compliance with ANSI S1.10-1966 (Calibration of Microphones). 3.4 DATA REDUCTION AND ANALYSIS To compute the statistical description of the variation of background noiso level, a B&K 4426 Noise Level Analyzer was used to sample the sound level 10-times per second for the duration of each recorded measurement. By using Linear response recorded tapes, it was possible to filter for C-weighted, A-weighted, or various one-third octave bands and derive the statistical information. Since the signal f requency for the sirens that wiLL be used for the take falls within the range of 712 Hz to 899 Hz, this sampling procedure was performed for the 800 Hz one-third octave band frequency and with A-weighting to reveal overall levels. Results of these analyses were obtained through a B&K Type 2312 Alphanumeric Printer. Aggg37;g 73cpp,g g gy 9;g, (,
I To facilitate better understanding of background noise levels for the three mentioned activities, a B&K 2031 Narrow Band Spectrum Analyzer was used. The analyzer produces a narrow band f requency- spect rum, with frequency plotted vs. amplitude. Knowledge of the ambient sound frequency spectra can ensure the dominance of the siren discrete tone over the noise at the siren signal frequency. 3.4.1 SWIMMERS NOISE i l A. TEST SET-UP I Measurement of the noise generated by a swimmer was done at an indoor pool. An indoor setting was used to simulate swimming on a lake because of adverse outdoor weather conditions during the test period. These measured noise levels are conservative since the noise inside of a pool building is greater than an outdoor swimming facility or a Lake due to sound 4 reverberation effect. A 88K 1/2 inch model 4156 microphone attached to a 10 foot cable was used a with a 84K 2215 sound level meter. A Nagra SN recorded the noise. The microphone was covered with thin plastic to keep moisture out of the microphone. Measurements were needed in-line with the swimmer's ear in order to provide an accurate simulation of the noise level received by a swimmer. To accomplish this, the microphone and cable were attached to a 6 foot pole. The microphone was held 10 to 12 inches away from the swimmer's "11~ k ACCUSTlC 75CHt!Ct.CGY k:C.
ear by the ATI engineer at the side of the pool. This distance away from the ear was used to avoid interference by the measurement equipment,with the swimmer's stroke.
- 8. ANALYSIS Three swimming styles were evaluated for the noise levels generated. Noise level measurements were obtained for free style, breast stroke, and butterfly strokes. The average L va es for au swimming styles are 90 shown in Table 1. In the 800 Hz band, measured levels (L90) ranged from 59 to 64 dB with average of 61 dB as shown in Table 1.
The statistical distribution histograms of the noise levels for free style swimming is presented in Figure 7. From this figure, it _can be seen that background noise for the free style swimming varies from 54 dB to 68 dB in the 800 Hz 1/3 octave bandwidth. The histograms for the other two swimming styles are shown in the Appendix 1A. These histograms show that there is a variation of at least 10 de for the A-weighted value and the 500 Hz and 800 Hz one-third octave bands values. Narrow band analysis did not reveal any significant spikes in the spectrum as shown in Figure 8. This was expected 1 since there is no high speed cyclic action involved with this particular activity. Therefore, there exists no pure tone noise. It can be seen from l Appendix 2A that the butterfly style swimming produced the highest noise levels (L90 l l [Ed ACCUST:C TiO;410 LOGY MC.
'J I
3.4.2 WATERSKIING NOISE A. TEST SET-UP Measurements for the noise generated by a waterskier were conducted en the Tickfaw River-just outside of New Orleans, Louisiana. This site was chosen because of the warmer climate during the measurement time (February) and because of the physical similarity to Harris Lake. Figure 9 shows the microphone set-up for the waterskier measurements. A B&K 1/2 inch microphone model 4165 with a windscreen protector was positioned near the skier's ear and attached to his harness. A 100 ft. cable connected the 2 microphone to the NAGRA recorder that was on board the skier's boat. The cable was attached to the tow rope for support. A 17 ft. boat with an 4 inboard Mercruiser 140 (140 hp) engine towed the skier. Figure 10 shows the test set-up for these measurements. B. ANALYSIS The noise produced was studied by varying the cruising speed and the tow rops length. The following summarizes the results. The water skier's noise increased as the tow rope was shortened from 75 ft. to 57 ft. and as his speed was increased. The maximum level occurred when the skier was using the shortest rope and was skiing at the highest speed tested. l ! c,.
,' $ AccusT:c TscimcLcen 'sc.
The A-weighted and 500 Hz and 800 Hz one-third octave band noise Levels at , the water skier's ear are summarited in Table 2. These values are the average L levels of various water skiing speeds. The standard deviations 90 4 and the maximum and minimum are also given. From Table 2, the background noise levels vary from 69 dB to 71 dB at 800 Hz 1/3 octave band. The typical variation of the background noise level for the waterskiing l activity is presented in Figure 11. This indicates that a waterskier 1 perceives noise levels which vary from 68 dB as L 99 to 80 dB as L3 .at the 800 Hz .1/3 octave band. Complete histograms for the waterskiing activity are included in Appendix 18. , The typical narrow band spectrum of the noise at a waterskier's ear, shown in Figure 12, shows that in the 500 Hz and 800 Hz range spectral lines can be related to the engine rpm and firing f requency harmonics, although they are not as prominant as they are on the boat. The noise is dominated by l the wind in the 0-100 Hz f requency range. Water splash due to the skis hitting the water also contributes to the broad band noise in the 500 Hz and 800 Hz range. 3.4.3 MOTOR BOATING NOISE A. TEST SET-UP i Three dif ferent motor boats were used in the study: a Mercruiser 140 i inboard motor on a 17 ft boat, a Suzuki-85 outboard motor on a 16 ft boat, j and a Suzuki 75 outboard motor on a 16 ft boat. The operator position for all.three boats is away from the engine in roughly the center of the boat. m ACCUST:C IECHNCLCG'/ !NC.
Measurements were made near the engine and near the operator. Microphones were fitted with a windscreen to minimize wind noise errdr (See Figure 13). B. ANALYSIS l l Motor boats produced the loudest noise of the Lake activities investigated. l Of the two positions, the engine position was louder than the operator position. The motor boat noise results showed that the noise increases with both the horsepower and the rpm of the motor. Proximity to the motor also increases the noise level. ' Figure.14 shows typical distribution of noise level for motorboat activity using a Suzuki 75. From this figure, it can be seen that the motorboat noise stays relatively constant. This means that the L 10 and L 90 eve s are within 6 dB difference. ALL histograms for all motorboat noise measurements are included in Appendix 1C. Table 3 presents average of L n ise levels for the Mercruiser 140. The 90 L levels at the operator position vary f rom 77 to 80 dB at 800 Hz 1/3 90 octave band. Similar results for the Suzuki-85 and Suzuki-75 motorboats are shown in Table 4 and 5. Measured L n ise levels with various speeds 90 for three different boats are included in Appendix 2C. The maximum Level occurred for the highest horsepower motor (140 hp) traveling at the highest speed (30 mph, 4000 rpm). The average of all ACOUST:C IECMCLOC' D:C. e
three motorboat sound pressure levels (L90) during various cruising speeds are as follows: L OPERATOR MOTOR 90 dBA 83 dBA 92 dBA 500 Hz 1/3 Oct. Level 72 dB 81 dB 800 Hz 1/3 Oct. Level 72 dB 85 dB These numbers were calculated by first averaging for each individual" boat the L Levels at the operator position for all speeds and then averaging 90 these levels for all three boats. The typical narrow band spectrum for the operator position is presented in Figure 15. This indicates that the f requency in the 500 Hz and 800 Hz regions can be harmonically related to the motor rpm and engine firing frequency. C. MOTOR NOISE EMPIRICAL MODEL An empirical model relating motorboat noise at the operator position -to motor horsepower (hp) at cruising speeds was derived f rom the statistical analysis of the measured data of the three boats. Noise levels at a backseat' near a motor were - found to be greater than ones at an operator position. However, for the purpose of warning system design, once the operator of a boat hears a siren signal, notification to the people on the as jf*j;; AccusT;c TEcHe:ctcGy inc. 4L
boat will be accomplished. Therefore, an empirical model of motorboat 2 noise at the operator position was derived. This mo' del was used to project l the ambient noise level in the boat for a given horsepower motor. In order to relate the sound produced to horsepower and rpm, a reference quantity l must be used. From the three motors measured, the SUZUKI 75 (75 hp) was used as the reference motor. The SPL and rpm for the cruising speeds j occurring at 3000 and 3500 rpm were averaged together and used as the reference values' in the model. The horsepower for these runs was assumed to be at maximum rated horsepower. L n e eve s were usd in the 90 derivation. The average SPL a/1d rpm mentioned above the rated horsepower were used as the reference values in the empirical mode. SPLp =30 log1 0(HPi /HPref)+20 log 10(rpm./rpmref)+SPLref i (1) Note that (ref) subscript denotes a reference value, a 'p' subscript denotes a predicted value and an 'i' subscript denotes an input. If the assumption is made that the maximum horsepower would occur at approximately 4000 rpm for most motors, the ratio of rpm's can be kept constant. The rpm term above can then be combined with the reference SPL value to form a new constant C. Rewriting Eq. 1 to reflect this new constant we get Eq. 2 below. SPL =30 log .8 (2) p 10 H /H ref)+S ref + 1 I Equation 2 is used to project operator position sound levels at a cruising speed of 4000 rpm for various horse power motors, the results of which are !
-l7~ b ACCUST;C IICM! CLOG'l IMC. j m
i plotted in Figures 16. Figure 16 plots the 800 Hz one-third octave band Levels versus horsepower. Statistical results show that the predicted noise levels fit the measured levels. In Table 6 a comparison of the predicted and measured levels is presented. It should be noted that eq. (2) would estimate the conservative noise levels for the design purpose of a warning system. , 9 ( a
~
~ ~
.(,f.h.dh a ACCUSTIC IECHt1CLCG'I INC
+
- r. . - .
4.0 SIREN SOUND PROPAGATION ON HARRIS LAKE In order to design the siren system for adequate coverage of the lake area, the propagation equations for the siren signal over the water surf ace were needed. Siren sound propagation over water was tested at Harris Lake. Empirical equations were derived to describe the sound levels. 4.1 TEST SET-UP From February 13 through Febr'uary 15, 1985, ATI engineers, CP&L personnel, and a surveying crew measured sound propagation on Harris Lake using an electronic siren rated at 124 dBC at 100 ft. in-line with the siren (Wheten WS-3000), which is shown in Figures 17 and 18. Due to the rural nature of the Harris Lake area, no power lines were available. Therefore, a portable siren, mounted on a special trailer, was used for field sound measurements. The siren was positioned at the public boat ramp in Transect Q. ATI engineers were stationed in boats at specified intervals ranging from 100 feet to 6000 feet from the siren. The boats' distances f rom the siren and their azimuth angles relative to the center line of the siren were measured with an AGA-Geodimeter 112 mounted on a transit. This instrument can measure distances with an accuracy of 0.01 feet per 1000 feet. Instrumentation and test procedures are similar to those described in sections 3.3. Therefore, only a brief description is given in this section. e
~19~
h .j?jj ACCUST:C IICECLCGY 2C. cm
At each measurement location, all sound level meters were positioned to face in the direction of the siren being tested. Sound level meters were held at least four feet above the water. Each microphone was fitted with a windscreen to minimize error caused by wind noise. The measurement procedure followed by the test engineers was in compliance with ANSI S1.13-1971 (Method for Measurement of Sound Pressure Level) standards. 4.2 DATA REDUCTION AND ANALYSIS The main objectives of these tests were to obtain both the propagation equations and the directivity over water of an 800 Hz tone f rom a siren. Therefore, the boats were stationed at positions from 100 feet out to 6000 feet to determine sound pressure level relationships with distance. Note that when comparing the rated output with measured values the 100 f t. measurement is on the water, not in line with the siren. For the directivity, the boats were anchored and the siren was rotated in 22.5 increments from 0 to 90 relative to the boats. In addition to these measurements, the frequencies of 1020 Hz and 465 Hz were tested to determine their propagation equations over water. Data from the morning of 14 February was chosen for determining the models for propagation and directivity to minimize wind error. During the analysis, narrow band frequency spectra were cbtained from the siren signal at each measurement location. These spectra, presented in Appendix 3, provide information about the harmonics of the siren tone and the sound pressure - Level. Figures 19 and 20 show typical narrow band spectra of l l
- m. ,
,'1 3,3 ACCUSTIC IECHt!CLCG'l k!C.
s
siren signal. Using these narrow band spectra, the attenuation of the i fundamental and the first harmonic can be compa' red for various distances. FUNDAMENTAL & FIRST HARMONIC PROPAGATION DISTANCE (FT) 100 300 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 FUNDAMENTAL 800Hz 114 108 104 94 91 86 86 85 1ST HARMONIC 1600Hz 98 102 92 82 73 62 61 55 DIFFERENCE 16 6 12 12 18 24 25 30 The initial drop in the difference between the fundamental and first harmonic from 100 to 300 feet is attributable to the increased directivity of the siren at higher frequencies. From 300 to 6000 feet the difference between the fundamental and the first harmonic increases. This is expected since the high f requency sound is attenuated more than lower frequency sound. The directivity of the siren sound level can be seen in the spectra in Figures 21 and 22. As the angle referenced to the center line of the siren I is increased, both the fundamental and the first harmonic are reduced. The higher frequency of the first harmonic causes it to be attenuated more'than the fundamental. l l i \
)
Y [)j,ACCUS~1C TECH?iCLCGY htC.
The sound pressure level for each measured point was placed on the chart in Figures 23 and.24. Two equations for sound propagation were found to model the sound propagation directly in-line with the siren, four to six feet above the water's surface: SPL p = 114 - 11.5 tog 10 (r/100), r < 1000 feet (3) SPLp = 104 - 29.5 tog 10 (r/1000), r > 1000 feet W These equations determine the sound level, SPL , at a particular radius, r, from the siren. For the directivity, the attenuation from the on azimuth value for each angle and radius was calculated. An arithmetic average of aLL attenuation for each angle was computed. These values are Listed in below. These values may be used for azimuth angles on either side of the centerline of the siren since the sound propagation is symmetrical around that axis. DIRECTIVITY Azimuth Attenuation Angle dB 0 0 22 1/2 -8
.45 ' 67 1/2 -16 90 -22 m
," J j ACCUSTiC TECHMCLOCf iNC.
n;
Equations 3 .& 4 and the directivity table can be used to determine the sound Level at any point in front of the siren. For a point 4000 feet from the siren, 45 degrees from the center line of the siren, the sound pressure level in Line with siren at 4000 feet is calculated. Then 13 dB is subtracted from this to account for the of f axis position. The values predicted using equations 3 & 4 and the directivity attenuation in the above table were compared with the measured values in Table 7. A histogram in Figure 25 also compares the predicted and measured values. Signal propagation for two other siren frequencies was tested: 465 Hz and 1020 Hz. From the narrow band spectra, in Appendix 3, the following sound pressure levels were found. 1 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL AT 100 FEET FREQUENCY dB 465 Hz 112 800 Hz 114 1020 Hz 111 At these f requencies,- the siren output is reduced as is seen in the 100 feet measurements. {w)j ACCUST C D. WiCLCCY ';
4.3 SIREN SOUND LEVEL CONTOURS The 75, 85, and 95 dBC contours for the test conditions were found using equations 3 & 4 and the directivity from the previous section. As shown in Figure 26a, the 85 dBC contour for the test conditions extends up to 4600 feet from the siren. For use in the design of the warning system, the test condition contours ~ were corrected to summer average conditions using the ATI computer model for siren sound propagation. The following is a comparison of the test and summer average conditions: TEST SUMMER Average Temp (Fahrenheit) 40 degrees 87.8 degrees Relative Humidity 20 percent 61.0 percent Wind Speed 3 mph 4.6 mph Wind Direction (from North) 243 degrees 230 degrees t Figure 26b shows the summer average contours. The summer 85 dBC & 75 dBC contours are smaller than the test condition contours, since sound is attenuated more by the humid, summer air.
- ~
AccusTic TccasctcG'/ hic. a
5.0. SIREN SYSTEM DESIGN COVERAGE FOR HARRIS LAKE For the design of the siren warning system for Harris Lake, several factors were considered. The demographics for Lake use were examined and are discussed in Section 5.1. A computer analysis was used to compare different siren system configurations. This analysis is discussed in Section 5.2. The design criteria used in determining the siren placement are summarized , in Section 5.3. The design process, as well as, final optimized configuration is presented in Section 5.4. 5.1 DEMOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION The siren warning system design process took into consideration the recreational usage demographics for Harris Lake. Recreational usage data had been collected by CP&L biologists at Harris Lake for the period from January 1984 through September 1984. People performing the survey collected data at four principal public access points identified for Harris Lake (Labelled Transects E, Q, S, and I on Figure 1). The CP&L study identified that 49.5 percent of Harris Lake recreational usage is shore users, and 50.5 percent of the usage is boaters. Shore usage such as fishing, walking, and picnicing does not generate high background noise levels for the purpose of designing a Lake siren warning system. Therefore, ATI evaluated the data for boat usage in greater depth. l
- 9 Accusric T2csctccc/ ;;;c.
g
The survey identified eight types of boat users on Harris Lake. Figure 27 summarizes the percentage of each boat type on the lake. The most common boat usage is for fishing (44.5 percent). Boats used for skiing / swimming amounted to 29.8 percent of the total. Very few sailboats (2.7 percent) or other nonmotorized boats (3.0 percent) were reported. Also, the survey identified that the majority of recreational boaters use the deeper open area of the lake. Fishermen on boats generally fish within 100 feet of the shore. 5.2 ATI COMPUTER MODELING This section illustrates the approach used for siren placement. Due to the nature of the problem a method was implemented that used graphical techniques combined with a high degree of human interaction. The major tool used was a graphics editor. Just like a text editor allows
.one to manipulate words, a graphics editor allows one to manipulate graphic structures. The shore line for Harris Lake was digitized providing the initial' data base for the graphics editor. Siren propagation contours for 95 dBC,.85 dBC, and 75 dBC Levels were also digitized and kept in a shape library to be accessed by the graphics editor. The graphics editor allowed the sound contours to be to placed, moved, rotated and edited while super-imposed over the Harris Lake outline. For analyzing a particular siren placement, the graphics editor provided the ability to determine l
areas and distances. l l l
~20- O ACCUSTIC IECN;CCGY !MO.
i
To ' optimize a siren configuration, sirens were placed in positions which seemed appropriate. Unprotected areas of 95 dBC, 85 dBC and 75 dBC Levels and expected straight-line distances between these levels were calculated. Using this information as feedback, the process was iterated until the system was optimized. As a source for digitizing, the Lake U.S. Geological Survey maps of scale 1:24,000 were used. A 6 mile x 6 mile square surrounding the inhabited portion of Harris Lake was isolated and digitized on a Hewlett-Packard 7221C plotter / graphics tablet. The 6 X 6 square was divided into 15,778 rows and 15,778 columns to give us a maximum possible resolution of 4.02 ft. Sample points were taken in a vector-like f ashion. That is, instead of taking sample points every unit distance, more points were taken at places where the contour greatly varied. In places where the Lake contour changed very slowly, fewer points were taken. A resolution of approximately 65 feet is achieved with this method. 1 Some statistics are summarized in the following table: Total number of points defining Harris Lake: 2,266 points i Estimated perimeter distance: 379,665 feet (71 miles) Mean distance between any two points: 168 feet , Standard deviation: 80 feet
. Estimated area 146,220,000 feet 2(3400 acres) h4 ACCUSTIC TECHiiCLCC/ DiC-
- 1. s 4
A similar process was used to enter the siren propagation sound contours. , Summer average contours were used to provide a conservative design consistent with FEMA 43. In addition the graphics editor does not add overlapping sound levels. This makes the modeling even more conservative. The program has three forms of output. Siren positions are tabulated. Here, position is represented by an (x,y) coordinate pair with respect to an origin (0,0). Position (0,0) is the left Lower corner of our 6 x 6 mile square capturing the Lake. Direction is indicated in degrees away from North. A clockwise deviation represents a positive angle and vice versa. A second form of output is the coverage areas for each sound level. Third, siren contours on the Lake can be printed. 5.3 DESIGN CRITERIA As described in Section 5.1, transects Q and E are more heavily used than other areas. This is due to the public boat ramps located at each of these transects. Special attention was given to these areas for siren placement. Shallow water areas are defined as 10 feet or less in depth. In these areas boaters would be expected to reduce their speed to avoid damaging their boat or running aground. Therefore maximum coverage is unnecessary in these areas. The noise level chosen for design purposes is that found at the operator's position of a speeding boat. This activity (boating) is the noisiest of the three activities. ~ l [ [jACCUST:c TscsnctcGY hic.
For most boats that. would be expected on the Lake, the engine size would not be much greater than 200 hp. Therefore, as a design criteria, the siren signal greater than 95 dB wiLL notify the boat operator, even when the motorboat cruises at near maximum capacity, i.e. approximately 4000 rpm. 5.4 SYSTEM DESIGN CONFIGURATION
- In this section, the siren system design is discussed based upon data i
described in the' previous sections in this report. The main consideration for this design is to ensure the effective notification of the people on the Harris Lake. This design configuration uses 10 sirens placed on the shore. This system will sound for 10 minutes. This 10 minute activation can be broken down, e. g., to five 2 minute siren a:tivations with 1 minute f rest periods. Map 1 shows the general locations of the 10 fixed sirens. The output of each siren produces areas of coverage which are separated by the 95 dBC, 85 4 dBC and 75 d8C contours. Based upon FEMA-43 guidelines, summer average weather conditions were used for the siren propagation displayed in Map 1. Based upon the design criteria discussed in Section 5.3, an operator of a typical motorboat will be notified when the boat is in areas where a minimum of 95 d8C siren signal is expected. Note that as a boater travels I further into the 95 de area, the siren signal increases, increasing the i expectation that the boater would be notified. In addition, using the total duration of a 10 minute siren activation, the effectiveness of notification further increases. ph ACCUSTIC IECMMCLCG" 3: C. u
, , . - - - - n - . - - - - - - , , . - - - , - - - ,- n-,---
Table 9 shows that 74 percent of the Lake will not be covered by a siren signal of at least 85 dSC. This is allowable since the design assumed a moving boat which wiLL rapidly reach an 85 dBC area. From Table 10, it can be seen that more than 80 percent of the entire take is covered by the siren signals of at least 75 dBC. By comparing Map 1 and Figure 2 which shows the coverage of the installed rotational siren, it should be noted that essentially the entire Harris Lake will be covered with at least 75 dBC. This 75 dBC coverage ensures notification to the people who are swimming on the Lake, and boaters idling on the Lake. Map 1 also includes 3 typical motorboat paths, A, B and C, to evaluate the ef fectiveness of a boater's notification. When a boat cruises at 30 mph, it takes 10 minutes to complete path A. During this path, the boat crosses 5 areas where at least 95 dBC siren signals are provided. The boat operator wiLL be notified with at least 100 seconds of siren signal. For path B, it takes 8 minutes to complete with a 30 mph speed. Along this path, a boat crosses 3 areas with a minimum of 95 dBC siren signal. For the path C, only 7 minutes are needed to complete this path, and a boat crosses 2 areas of 95 dBC or greater siren signals. Table 8 summarizes various parameters for these three paths. Even for path C, a boater,will still be notified for approximately 50 seconds with adequate siren signals. Furthermore, for paths B and C, boaters would slow down or stop due to shallow water at the bridge. Once a boat engine rpm is reduced its background noise wiLL be reduced. Therefore, the boat operator l i wiLL be effectively notified with adequate siren signals. ! ACCUST C IECMtlCLCCf lFC. l
6.0 CONCLUSION
S AND REMARKS Recreational usage of the Harris Lake was studied by CP&L and three major noise sources were identified. ATI examined these noise producing activities--boating, swimming, and waterskiing. The sound pressure levels of waterskiing and swimming were documented through extensive field testing and measurements. Boating was found to produce the most noise of these activities. An empirical model was developed which related an engine horsepower rating and its RPM to its sound pressure level. Field measurements 'of the siren propagation on Harris Lake were made and 1 empirical models of the siren sound propagation and directivity were derived. 4 i Using this measured data, a siren notification system was developed. Using 10 sirens and total duration of 10 minutes siren activation, this siren configuration was shown to provide essentially 100 percent notification to people on the Harris Lake within the 15 minute period. i
-31 ~
(b
'y' [) AccusT:c T5canctcc.' bc.
e o TABLES AND FIGURES
- r. , x .
.,MC.
l t';-
....) ;^
ACOUSTIC i EC:CICLCGY
l HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS 4 TABLE 1:
SUMMARY
OF AVERAGE LgoNOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS SWIMMING STYLES
~ ~
SWIMMING ~ VERAGE STD MAX MIN dBA , , 68 1.41 70 67
,,500HZ ,1/3 OC,TAVE, BAND ,' 59, 1.24 61 . 58 8ddH l/3 OCTAVE BAND ,,
61.,,1 2.06 , , 64 59 , STD: Standard Deviation MAX: Maximum Value MIN: Minimum Value 9 4 j:) Ac0Us7c Tsc:s;ctcG/ h:c.
HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS TABLE 2:
SUMMARY
OF AVERAGE LgoNOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS SKilNG SPEEDS ( AT SKIER'S E AR) l WATER SKIER RPM, AVERAGE STD MAX MIN dBA 81.4 2.2 83 77 800HZ l/3 OCTAVE BAND 70.2 0.7 71 69 STD: Standard Deviation MAX: Maximum Value MIN: Minimum Value i i 1
= l l
$NI '!} ACCUST:C I2CHMCLCGY ! :C.
us
HASRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS TABLE 3 :
SUMMARY
OF AVER AGE Lgo NOISE LEVELS FOR V ARIOUS BO AT SPEED MERCRUISER 140 OPERdTOR POSITION AVERAGE STD MAX MIN dBA 88.5 1.7 91.3 86.8 500HZ ,1/3 OCTAVE BAND 78.25 2.3 82 76 8,00HZ 1/3 OCTAVE BANb 79 1.3 79.3 77.3, , BY MOTOR , , dBA 95 95 95 500iiZ l/3 OCTAVE BAND 83 83 . 53 800HZ l/3 OCTAVE BAND 87.3 87.3 , 87.3 STD: Standard Deviation i MAX: Maximum Value MIN: Minimum Value O I-:: ;'y) ACCUSTIC 120;;NCLCG'/ iMC. J
HARRIS LAKE T1EASUREt1ENT RESULTS TABLE 4:
SUMMARY
OF AVERAGE Lgo NOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS BO AT SPEEDS SUZUKI-85 OPERATOR POSITION '
. . . . .. STD. t1AX tilN
,dBA ,
85 , 0 85 , 85 50dHZ l/3 OCTAVE BAND 71.5 1.5 73 70 800HZ ,1/3 OCTAVE BAND 73.5 1.5 75 , 7N BY NOTOR AVERAGE SPL - i dBA , 89 0 89 89 500HZ l/3 OCTAVE BAND 79 0 79 79 800HZ l/3 OCTAVE BAND 83 0 83 83 STD: Standard Deviation MAX: Maximum Value MIN: Minimum Value i 730' NCf CGY INC. _ ,..e) ACCUST.C I
HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS TABLES:
SUMMARY
OF AVERAGE LgoNOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS BOAT SPEEDS I SU ZU K i-7 5 AVERAGE dP5RATOR POSITION ',, , , ,, e e STD MAX MIN
'6-dBA 76.3 3.9 80 71 500HZ 1/3 OCTAYE BAND ,66 2.8 68 62 800HZ i/,3 OCTAVE B ND 65.1 3.i 65.8 61.3 STD: Standard Deviation MAX: Maximum Value MIN: Minimum Value l
Ibd) y; AccusTic Tscanctco't i,':c.
TABLE 6: STATISTICAL COMPARISON OF EMPIRICAL MODEL AND FIELD MEASURED VALUES. (PREDICTED SPL - MEASURED SPL) IN BOAT
. A .WElGHTED . ' .. ... .. .
, . . .. . MEAN STD. . . M. AX .. . MIN .
.. . .. . .0 . 8 . . . . ..
1.5 2 -2.4 500.HZ 1/3 0C.T ,
-0.2 -
l.5 1.6 -3.7
- 800HZ 1./3 0CT . . .. .
. . . . . .. ... . 1. 8 ,
. 1.5 .
1.1 . -3.7
- tv N
a >B) AccusTic T2ca.Netect !xc.
- s v
TABLE 7: COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND MEASURED SPL SPL. .(. .d8C. .). . , SPL. .(. .dBC. .). .
.DISTdh'CN.[..F.EET.5...' ME.A.SU.R.ED DEGREE. Si P.R.EDICTED PREDibTED - MkASURED .. .. . . . .. . . 22.5 " IdO 101 I 45 94. .
96 2 . - 93 93 0
. . . . . . ... . . . . .' . 67. 5 . .. .
90 88 , 87 -1 0 - 104.. ... 104 0
... 1000 .. .
22.5 . 9 5. . . 96 . I.
....-3
. .. . . . 4 5... ..: 94. . . . 91. . ..
. ... . . .... 67. 5 . ..: ,
..87....... 88.. . . 1..... .
22.5 .. . 87
. 8. 7. . . . . . . . . . . ... 0... .. ..
45 81 82 .. .i 67.5 79 79 , 0 90 ' 73 73 ' ' 0
.. 3d.00 .
0
- 92 .
90 . . -2 . 83 82 -1
' 22.5 45
. '.. 80
-3
. . 77 . . . .
67.5 . ..73..... 74 . ... 1
.. . 90. . . . 71 . . . 68.. . ..
-3 22.5 :
82 . 79 .
-3 45 . 74 . .
74 0 .
. .67.5 , . . . . 72 . . . . 71 .. .-1
,,5000 0 . 86 ,
84 -2 22.5 . 77 . 76 . -1 . 45 : 69 . 71 .. 2... . ...
. .. .. ... .... ....... ... 67. 5. . . . .. 69 .. .
68 . . .
-l
. . . . . . . .: . 90. . . . . , . . . . 62 . . . . . . . . . . 6 2
.. ....... 0 ... . . . .
. . . . . . . .. .. .22.5... ......72 '
- 73. . . . . '
. I. .
45 67 68 . I. .
. . . .. 67. 5 . . 68 . 65 ... .
-3 ..
90 58 - 59 I hw@ AccusT:c Tsamet:c.' 1::c.
f TABLE 8: TYPICAL PATHS. TIME EXPOSURE TO MINIMUM 95 DOC SIGNAL (BOAT SPEED 30 MPH) EXPOSURE TIME TO A MINIMUM OF PATH TOTAL LENGTH TIME 95 d8C i i A 5 miles 10 minutes 100 seconds 1 B 4 miles 8 minutes 60 seconds C 3 1/2 miles 7 minutes 50 seconds '4 l i J R@ AccusTic Tsca:ctcGy iMc. (g?
i l ^ l i TABLE 9 ! AREA COVEhED BY AT LEAST 85 dBC SIREN SIGNAL Siren Number (s) Area (Square feet) 1 3.6 X 10 6 6 2 3.2 X 10 6 3 3.4 X 10 4 4.3 X 10 6 6 l 5,6 7.7 X 10 6 i 7 4.4 X 10 6
' 8,9 7.8 X 10 10 4.7 X 10 i
TOTAL 3.9 X 10 ft2 1 i TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF-LAKE COVERED BY AT LEAST 85 d8C 0F SIREN SIGNAL: 26% TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF LAKE NOT COVERED 4 BY 85 dBC SIREN SIGNAL: 74% i i 2 4 i f i AccusTic TECHt;CI.CGY !NC.
- - - - , . . , - - - mm -
e- r-- --- , . , , , ---r w ------,g, , - - ~ - - - ~ + - ~ ,r- - - --m .
1 l TA.BLE 10 . AREA COVERED BY AT LEAST 75 dBC SIREN SIGNAL Siren Number (s) Area (Square Feet) . 7 1 1.7 X 10 7 2,3,4 3.5 X 10 5,6,7,8,9 5.9 X 10 10 1.1 X 10 ' 2 TOTAL 1.2 X 10 ft TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF LAKE COVERED BY AT LEAST 75 d8C SIREN SIGNAL: 80% i e L I l l i j (hif( Accusnc Tscanctccv la I t
l 4 ---
~ ~ '
,- s .- c s -
, k;$
e n'"< , .
'*s ,,
- g. .. 2.-
;n e x/
The .. ~
=N.===.4_
r s
= #. =" ... .
( ~ = ~.ar i - llamb r -z u l "/ z { .
$ M 2
- p. L6'
_ ~:, Cy .- -:'l, ,+. 1' ' . . J f
. ' * ?. l f;.f.' ~~. ' ~';,. , een . s; c.u- & (
'f;g*
m ->,
~ ,
^
' . . 7 8*"***
9y ,
.e- ,
==
~ ..
~
. ..,k .v,, . ., '
E e.,.. t g, ,. ' '
.+ .
k.YtM;u(e , (\/ \g g
\ ))f s ;;* .
g "
.'st suov utv 0+ *
' * = * = =
8 .,, O e,idge s.,n [/ C Underwat,' Hazard Huoy ai* NEEP OUT SUOT yTRANSECT FIG U R E 1: MAP OF HARRIS LAKE lfj,ACCUSTic Tic:aNCLcGy 'nc. m
< g- - 3 - -
Q y,, .s e Q
. i .a..
j
^l. ^'
s%. , c'.9.%.g. Q n /.ai V. f:.
k y% lM.. (,.... , _
. I
} . c. ; 3) -:
S i
-y. . '_ . -
, c! n
, ,/ , - , , ..
4 , - y s / - v
- , t i'
. . ,' ~
i ~~ Oss( p '.
\ '
y i \
- s. '>
( t
-. t-- ^~'s-5
~ -
s t v. i i+-,,;;. N ..g. .r.f s. .rg '-
., . j. s
-)
er
. . . ) %(.w , 3 .
- -/s, , p. t-
.s -
y/ g s- y
..a 's # . t 3; ..pxa ~ - -.,
v ,
,. t,
.u (1
ff 6 At/ d i ^ ,... .. _ M. ,. M / n Y 'u-;,m; T '/. A'
- - d ', ,' N[ \-
\' M-b-i-z J'Ej W N y. 7 %- ..K.,,\ % f3 .'..}i nO. 77 ?.
~ q>' 2 ')
, ~
H ,~ > b - o -t r (g-p - f, ::1 6 4, y/ q ~ &y )~1 c -- - t%40 L- ' qh,
~ _ Y _ &, ie '-.^
K -r E : g O, (~ k / % i. ' - ) j ' f, v. ;V 'f 'i]. b ie--n & y );
@W l4% .n, R, . . R.h.Z,hif .
, -"f 3~
U_ _. s%~M.. p~. .,}.4%c ;q _ R,\ W _y(_,-a ,4 y 1 %
~ . ' ?y-J'l7,+l V
r ,,m.T*j .-
-y.. .i t.
; r.. ./ s.x- 2,. ,
- y. ,.
'~
-; . W-) . ,*, . '> tk ' \ U )~' ' ~,-! .?
W ., r- < s.- s f y-
.c 4
t,- - ,M,
..f , .(
e- -. j ,-
' , >7. <. s / .. -
x.s_
%y 3,
., 3 t. ,
g .n' 51O ; m.1.7~ w' a O - O. - s s:
--w - G, 51.,', A k, , s .
,. m
, y '. ~y)..'3y -y'r -p],. .,f, y
, M . ') . ..-
c
' y"* * ,. ' a n Lis ,. s , .
3, .;'; js N
. , , .. ..}.y. >e. ; ~ -
~ ..
- i. *> _ g l+i., ,%, .'.'Q ,' \~,._ u .
.).}f QVid';y QQ Yfl.bkih} /
.g, :14[
?<.?s
.~ jA:: ,,
.. J .
(;'"-$x- . ' , , , n y. ...A Uf . } I',
..)
, ,/ ;, (~~- 'R., - , :. %Q ;- -Q
)
. c T " Ki
- - x -
p, ,v f .u, .- {3 :.4 { q[.t-;s _ x, , v y. ,
,. . x,s ;
.. ~ -
t
.,e s1.
.- , . . .- - - - - ,p ..> . .-
- s. ,-
.'__ .- - s .ys. . .,, s . n, W ,0 m; -r .- q 4
.w'.-
P ,,, e ~ . .C. . ... tp.. J N.s ;Cc-' .,
- // . .. ', %(c'48Ah
/ v,,s ^
e ~c : . . a j~ .
.s s+ a (
, y- --O
.: .s,
- s. -/ , .-
.c . J .
- . c ~.,..s s .,_ ,
jg i 49 c,f%-4 Q., n y ];
.} 'S 75 '~[ h a _.
a {Y e.:
+'[!.
er ?[.
^
c ., A 'ic
; "e .
. y,y,j(W-}p)?f'M
; L, if
.- ~> *n. %-4 . A*
^
^J\. - M< ...s
- ? m~- f f N . <',-rQ . M i'. '% . ; p',
.";'.:'k.#:j.nv\.. :M 3 .. .,
y 6x 7 k l j sc 4 j f f ? g N. ] h ' A G,(. 'f,,y.qRQ'{ . k .c ,% ~ ? .,
+
f -., . .
;- g -3,*m.'/>$ N , x _
i-p~ 9: i ' s.- s , . . ,. . , 3..;,z .7.y. .,> -[%g,y, 4 s., .j 4 g1w q.,.y j ( 4.gK ,, N w
%g. ? , . m
.e.
.p. .
,c
. f-il. ,
a7 ; . 4.4-( .,.-4 g>v x 7 pgv e-e
\ .s
- a. .
-. , ~ * ' , - ~.
'v,
~ 1 ,5 4
,-Q u
t f, n .) . -Q. , W.
.~.
; . ~ -
/ i, .\ /e . }s+ \ . N < ,r"'y. . :
< g. ~ ,: >.. D.
_.)
,- y .
q' . - c
..' . t - ', , _ .
t. { j- / -- ..y
- .. 3
. .,.1',._, . , .
_ _ .k ,-
- l. . . . . >~-.~ _ - ' ' ' . _.a . !1 1/2 0 1 MILE l'* ,f
; 4.'y;. ,. '.. : . . i.,
,./;' -
~~_ 7
~
,. [I,,,,I,.,,,I I t y ,(_
3, ' */ 3', . p'i ' M s, } sN 1 ,
. . . .W'. .,
. _~. ., r * -- ( ,
s ,. v..g . A h,. . .>' , - l FIGURE 2: I l COVERAGE OF INSTALLED SIRENS AROUND THE HARRI.S LAKE I KEY 60 dB contour O Installed siren location n
- - 7 0 d'B c o n t o u r @'t 1) Accusnc TscHNctcs! lMc.
~
l i i cn
- v. '
~ lin l I l l la !
=
z _jo g [i / / e .. a ! O j / ; b -20 /B / racancsu m s T~ row sw wecurinc c ianctams , w -- -- .j g I w -30 - g 7 , H -40 +- '
< /
' ' I m -50 E o o o o o x x x x x N m o o o " N m o o e N m v- N FREQUENCY (HZ) s l
FIGURE 3: FREQUENCY-RESPONSE CH AR ACTERISTICS IN THE AMERICAN N ATION AL STANDARDS SPECIFIC A TION i FOR SOUND-LEVEL METERS, A N SI-S t .4 - 19 8 3 r*
.h (ir{}!jAccusric TacaNcLccy !sc.
, c
----C-weighted A-w eigh t e d
_. . 800 Hz one-third octave band 90 m CD / -
,--s
\
D / \ lg W 70 x' f'~! p, \ ',_ Q ,
) ; , , , v_ , r '
s_- ._-
]- (
- v
@ 60 lg x -
/ -
x / Y.~sM\ n / w ~ .J
~Mf en '*% /% ./~ - r ,%w* ^
- j N '." \"'&
.r g 50 s w .- '%l Z
40 .i i i i i _i i i i i 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 Q TIME (Seconds) C d cr ,; l
-4 m .
(}. .- 1
@ FIGURE 4: COMPARISON OF NOISE LEVEL VARIATIONS OF C-WEIGHTED, A-WEIGHTED.
o AND OCTAVE B AND MEASUREMENTS o: W
\
2 to 90 - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - ~ - ~ ~ - - - - - -
13 . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . . . _
- 80 . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .
' ~ ~ ~ ~ - - ~ ~- - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - ~
> 70 m " ~h . _ _ JZ - :_ ._4A.__. .___,._______L_l=.._,,_.._______.._ ____.__.._____n.__,,_
60 _ <<g __.___ _ .___ _ f, . v_p__s _..P___.__u --g---------- ., - .h.- i - - - -- - - ,f - - .s r g --- - - - a . f _._ q j_ ) ____,i u r _ q . y._g-_e q _ _ q ; g__ f 3 z 3 50 r+ n ,1-- V %L3o , __g
._ g
_f 4 f _g_., o u ___ Lee (_ g ____g . tg __u. v
- 40
~~' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' '
.% 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 hb;h)
Qp TIME (S e c o n d s) o o c Number of Samples: 1800 O
.-l FIGURE 5 : TYPIC AL AMBIENT SOUND LEVEL V ARI ATION AS A FUNCTION OF TIME g AND COMP ARISON WITH ST ATISTIC AL VALUES Ln AND Le q 5
5 o 1 E 9
18 , 4 16 -
% of total samples m
14 - which f all
# within each
12 -
2 dB interval e a 10 - ce
~
c 8 -
- e O 6 -
G O. 4 _ i . i i i i i I i I
- kh'T2% o i i i R 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 8
$ Ambient Sound Level (dB A) 5 .
l ni 9 i 5 FIGURE 6 : ST ATISTIC AL DISTRIBUTION HISTOGR AM OF 5
; Q AMBIENT S'OUND LEVEL V ALUES 4 2 i f) 1
25 - A-WEIGHTING 15 X PRO 8 ABILITY ,, 10
- Jl l l hm _ _
58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 30 - 25 - 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 20 - X PROSABILITY 15 - 10 - 5-0 55 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 35 - 30 800Hz 1/3 OCT AVE BAND 25 X PROBABillTY 15 10 YG - fc0 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) FIGURE 7 : TYPIC AL DISTRIBUTION OF NOISE LEVEL FOR SWIMMING ACTIVITY (FREE STYLE) ( AccusTic Tscarictcoy 1Nc.
4 l AT SWIMMER'S E AR 100 _ , C A R O L1,N A 'P O W E R & L IG H T Gb M P A N Y N H ARRIS L AKE NO TIFIC AllON SYSTEM
" ' ^ "
z 90 - - - - + - - - - -- a o o O 80 - - - - - -- - --- -- - - ^ - ~ - 70 m 7tkJ,p
- 60 4% ~ ' - ~ ~ ~^
a ~%. q
$ 'h %
W 50 ----- -- M"W% ;- ~~ - - ' w ~^%- % ~__, 3
@ 40 -- - -- -- -. - - - - - - - - - -
w t [ i O 30 Z TESTED DY h ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. ' 20 O 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10C(0 FREQUENCY (Hz) FIGURE 8: T'r PIC AL N ARROW B AND SPECTRUM FOR NOISE PRODUCED BY SWIMMING ACTIVITY (FREE STYLE) i
% i htggAccusTic TECHMCLCGY }HC.
w
',t.-~
I/'
,s- ) z.Vb l" .
il d; , l [I 9t = > E, , . ME A9985 MENT SET =UP FOR W ATERSKIER f
-Q b T .
#j f]
eUt. W I W _ g Ll j ljt 1
~ _ _
a- o f 1 m,CeOwmOme pr . m. p*
= y_rA_O_
flMMW_
'3
@f
[I *E j u- _ = g
.a,.,,
*l -
.m
. w;
- w. ==g4: := =e - m F__- _m a -2,.13h M
'ts lie'rEFEM AWq
_ ~ . . - - - n--=~-__-- .= = . r - w ? ; . r - m + _ =
-~--
- .=
se-. s
-,wg Laem $ u pg - =
g 4.ggg f.3 . b
'#gj -
, ' ~
HARpJS LAKE STUDY FOR NOTIFICATION OF ..'>Y'.f eOgens. swiuuens. AND wArensxiens
,s3 - *g . i 4
,,/ .y cy 1
~.a.
ACOySTIC TECHNOLOGY i
. . . . .. . . . l
' N
! !! s
!. 34'9hpp,<j 7 4
e ay lI . h }!!s&'.L': l{ Jpf U g 3.u..' p. s; ig .4 . IO - hI i {, j 1 q. 4,. (
; I .;
L [ g
;I !
ei5
. h ,
'ca L.
j 5. Ib ~Bo
)' f,
+
i l: s! q bj !:! jf ); 1 E5 f h [f kd d d 5 o
,y %;7 d"J t .' i !p!:kP J l l.jk$$:2 h
l g diMkk. w . K, 1 E"
1 WATER SKilNG 90 - 80 - , A-WEIGHTING X PROBABILITY , 30 - 20 0 74 76 78 60 62 84 66 88 90 92 94 % 45 40 35 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 30 - X PROBASILITY 15 10
- ' ~
0 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 64 40 35 800 1/3 OCTAVE DAND 39 25
% PRO 6 ABILITY 20 15 10 5 -
0 64 66 60 70 72 74 76 70 00 02 64 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) L FIGURE 11: TYPIC AL DISTRIBUTION OF NOISE LEVEL AT SKIER S EAR FOR WATER SKilNG ACTIVITY ( AT 3400 RPM WITH l 57 FT. TOW ROPE)
) ACCUST c TECHNCLCG'l !NC
AT SKlER POSITION
- C AROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N H ARRIS L AKE NOTIFIC ATION SYSTEM
" ' ^ " "I 100 - - - - - - - - --
n WIND NOISE 0 90 - - - - - - - O RANGE OF 500 HZ 1/3 OCTAVE D AND U I a: so . _ . - . . . _ _ _ . _ _ _. m i I
" l RANGEt OF 800 HZ 1/3 OCTAVE DAND z l 70 .. .. .1 7 , ,
a i i 60 - - ~ ~ - - ~ ~ - - - - - - 50 --- - - -
', V4W .04,J>"'s e
E a. O 40 [ TESTED DY b ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. 30 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1000 1800 2000 FREQUENCY (Hz) FIGURE 12: TYPICAL NARROW BAND SPECTRUM FOR NOISE PRODUCED BY WATER SKilNG ACTIVITY ( 4100 RPM WITH 57 FT. TOW ROPE)
~?
w - ([+ ) AccusTic TschMctcGy !,:c.
*L.
j------- -- _ _- 9 e I ME ASUREMENT SET-UP .
' 4s
. .- t , FOR BOATER NOISE . , .
, .A
'-m v.3 [' 1 t y_ . W' :s . -
u
'y'
_\y .
- y. ', ..
u $ s.w n: .
- s
& Y.lc,
~
}
N m .c
. .C"f 6- .s*:': -
s ;- s . . s: ...m..- . h ,. Y' ,f ., . . 3 . L<
. (. . ;Q/. . f'.
- ~
_.~-.-_.. az . , I y- .
.',h- , .
[Q'g. J .- .e5 ' ' I- y-r --q - w.* *- - . [ 19 "')c'=:,A h.5 ,d, ~--r.- ,,y.;'h* d k~ 1;~d' - 2"I' - 9
- 1 _, w _,
~ x-$C%7 q
-y .. = - ' . ' - . .s,
. . - . wp
~~ ' j- '.
MICROPHONE {,,[;iJ,4.-g l
, A$4 ^
.@{ify 4 ;(i.{A-l } {-j j .c/' /q=f \
V ,.4 l w At
<,.,, m _ .:.4%%[ . :y;].. 5.;3. z-r z. + , .n % * . C
! .. . .,;- <c .
; K .4 % .-
-4:?G" y:Q. f:._, E
' 5,, ;
- .; * < ; A C Jg4 y e...g4,w,y, g, g g ?y. ..
- .=~ : v.
}
- qv-.- * -m y] g ,g% - L
,....g.
;g i
.p . .
. . . . _. : .++ ;3. ;, yy 4' 9 ;g.
A. , l 1 >;
~
- 7 ,4..' . ?. G ' ,Y kjY_' .' "x 4Pyy . 'Y
- I , [ ;p,1
\ M1W., * .
- a. . . ,,
.c .m ,. .~./w. .q. . .p +- i t
- .- . ;
- , t -
,=.w. s g p..s; .. %~. .. 3 , . n a ,, g ;.- g.g y.,-
-- . 1n . p ._ _ ,. ,
v x y. ; s
,. y . p _.
oy l
, N .; I . ;-~L <;AR . . ; $ lJ
~ *
.c i c y, ,,: - Lt- ori
}
-. e j d. 9.. , _; . . - .:
i
- . 3. yt4 . , .s.. , r. s. .
, ; -p.. . .:- 36 . . $. w.. * &p , yg -
g,
.n u, - ' ,eg
.w - *- '3.' .' _' . y
...3 .
n p[' . ,.
- DM c.,
- y. . . :.. y }< .- t ;;;.-' ,; -
. * .- , ^34g. pe engr *@ he'4s' [>h'[ 3y ;.. h s
'*-9 ..:i ..t-- . -- ..
g
, . , A , ;- -
.'s . - J]-.* . ; . < _ . ' .
.-g- g.
s . ; q s.a , ' 3pyy , i I
. .- . Y N'- /
k.]l?-
- n. y..
.e)
_ ,,, %. %~
--
- L'.'
-ng s.
- tr r- ,
sj.
.s:M. y. 'v ,,,w -;
'w r M .
*s' l .. th ~-
..x- : ., ..
- y ,g:. ,u p % * % f.~. jl n' .
e w. : 4. p pg, g_ g ,4
.r,.p g
-;%:.q.;.:. (;, vg ;y
;;, +'
g, _?
~;, .
y.
.. 3 m 5 p_f$.,&. y,, y-s.<rf.g .; s ,y r9 - y .. 4 .
; . , . $ .py pz>ggg j_ 47% . .g.
uf g g Y y, p..O g
- 4 :, , a. . . ..:: . , .. y .
,;p y;,e. 4 x y 5, . . ,
,,..w q - _ t- . . . - . -a . . -
, .;,m 7 . w.,, y Q e.
l h
,[;[. . ' '. - (, (; .. i (hh*p-@3g; .; ' FIGURE 13
= 7; y,' Q( p 'h,;i. Jf~-*s; -;; - -q ; -&@M7
. :. % L :;
l
;,.y.;'rf[.:%
,; --. y v.. ,
s.y Q 4 %}' ,. h A
$ HARRIS LAKE STUDY FOR NOTIFICATION OF
%'[ JD .
- h % j .' ;.1 ,r k. h y > .
- 7. BOATERS, SWIMMERS, AND WATERSKIERS
.' . . ~ - .. t' ,n-l ,,b. -
(- ,,3 ~.. J. w , . _ . -- n3 l y$q+ g '-f- , #( y;j ' .i 2 N d *,Q,.#,-[ % ,,e=.wwb,; Q jj,,,,, . ,,, E ' N f^M OW$% ., .
^
l [ Q'[.lE.a' h k h@ M h ; h d h h ]g ,g '
]${g
SUZUKl 75 OUTBOARD F10 TOR BOAT 70 l 60 A.w E I G H T IN G , 40 - X PROBA8ILITY 30 20 0 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88
~
500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 55 30 25 - X PROBABILITY 20 - 15 10 5 0
' N -
60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 45 - 40 - 35 800Hz1/3 OCTAVE BAND j I 3o . 2 PROBABILITY , 15 ; 10 5 0 " 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 ' 74 76 78 FIGURE 14: TYPICAL DISTRIBUTION OF NOISE LEVEL FOR MOTOR BO ATING ACTIVITY (SUZUKl 75 AT OPER ATOR POSITION WITH 35 00 RPM) [,[j AccusT;C TEc:-irtCLcGY ::C.
AT OPERATOR POSITION I C AROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N H ARRIS L AKE NOTIFIC ATION SYSTEM
^ -- - --
100 y r-N RANOE OF 500 HZ 1/3 OCTAVE DAND 90 -. AANGE OF.80 0. HZ .1/3.. OCTAVE .D AND. . . . _ _ o. C l f llln l l '
~
i di E 80 l - ---,f - l}' l li f
! --.--L-I
. ..-4-------------~
= l 1,
I, 4 i j ll l l l l 2 70 i ~ 1.-gg _ _ _ . .. _.._-. -. - I d 0 1
> 4 *J+- ds)V i 1 ; ,
j 60 ;! k --- f\ - - - - 50 - -' ~-- --' d r 1 t/f ly
=
o 40 i- t-- 1-- I-- - I
* , l - 'l TESTED DY O l ! ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
l 30 0 200 400 600 000 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 FREQUENCY (Hz) i FIGURE 15: TYPICAL NARROW BAND SPECTRUM FOR NOISE PRODUCED BY
- MOTOR BOATING ACTIVITY (MERCRUISER 140 WITH 4100 RPM )
i [ IJ AccusTic Tscattet.cc'/ b:c.
OPERATOR POSITION - CRUISING SPEEDS IIO 100 4 SPL(d6) 600HZ ! 1/3 OCTAVE BE 7o ._ Lgo g . . . - . . 50 -- 40 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 HORSE PCWER (hp) 1 l l FIG U R E 16: PROJECTED SOUND LEVEL IN THE ONE-THIRD OCTAVE B AND VERSUS HORSEPOWER THROUGH EMPIRICAL MODEL (OPER ATOR POSITION) , I f.* i:., Accusric TEcarict.cov !.'ic. O
f
" ,.,9 f "
l FIGURE 17 4 y g q ; yh'i I l 0
- i. S t R E N S E T - U P , .
!. ONSHORE AT H ARRIS L AKE 1 ri
. 7
- DIRECTED SIREN HORN
(;, I$ "*d L,.p ,.
- sm . . (p
< l- f If y .
{[ ,
\
1,}b JYh,?/'f [}',,.;, g h:4 i :
" t.jhmD fp,..d,' f [ j3 ?
L
" 1 j
V M,.j ;.yg #) ";
]'
, ^
,9i,- -f,i ,
$! ~
q 4 - 1 p l ' l l i ig, l m .mm -
'i. r ,, ,,
J,URVEYO $ ---[1, G Q ..a vM c f.; _s yMgh ',il' . .
~
p.au... ,
, i=:.:;51MLWC2
. it. < '9_.mWar '
d' -
,, , f t '
~
l.**? ~ f ! ". ~ HARRIS l.AKE STUDY FOR NOTIFICATION OF c-- 00ATERS, SWIMMERS, AND WATERSKIERS ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
~
?- .
j FIGURE 18 E,,, ~' l SET-UP FOR ME ASUREMENTS
"% 2 ' " ' '
** j . . .W OF SIREN SIGN AL PROP AG ATION ,
7g , I ~- .
. ... g _ - :
.. 3 h ,
L --
< { .;
i , '*h s~~ . g .-*' "p%f- , n,*'y , ,. i g?:.;%wv 4 - 4 f \ -
"%2Mi x2 i z q
;,9q,y.gggf l ,
~#
~~
=
M
~ _. 3g ..J
, 2Mydy.yggddAgg$ggp,(gygg h
- y '
.'f 3
2, j , g 1-
- Dh/? =/ ~ J
' ' ~
-di k__ [- ; s*44 7' ;
M' 1-M.i ... 4g ENGINEER WITH SOUND g$ey v SURVEYOR RECORDING EQUIPMENT !" bA < we - _~ . YNY, M
^
l
^
% ; "^ #
, k3ryigllgh -- ~
m
^
1,,.4 _-q- ----m -- _ J: W ~ Q= MOTORBOAT t
- - - -- -- ; nwY_ [^
~-
g, 1 mg% _;__ =+ * ..g -:-9~~s:y i = ~^ = . g@ n-4- N - ,* ,
* ^ *
-% = _
n g 3(. Mr8E
# : m __ .
- 2, _
f - 'I' - ~b Y l ~ i i l l HARRIS LAKE STUDY FOR NOTIFICATION OF BOATERS, SWIMMERS, AND WATERSKIERS I
~
i . d$kg&}( hh$h hh 'h M 6 - -
%2 g4 ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY. INC.
c
%w u..2La...r, - ... w % .. m $ N I? S h S $ ? ? Y
110 C AROLIN A POWER & LIGHT COMP ANY H ARRIS LAKE NOTIFIC ATION SYSTEM 3@@ FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING - - - ' - - - - - -
- - - 1 100 - - - - + - - - ; j O DEGREE !
90 " ---
-k -
1 i
, j 80 ;
1 l _ _ . _
,0 - .,
,l l N 60 - - - - - -
-- - ~ ~ ~
3 b' i, '. , N j l' l ' e i o 50 W f kh
- 40 - - - - - -- ' 1- -- - L . . _ .. l - _ __
W
- TESTED BY s
g , ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. u 30 5 3 00 ;
, i , i W
2500 FEET r i i FUNDAuf9FAL TON , __ . . . . . . . _ ,
- i m = ,
I ,
,m,, .
W 80 - E ! , ,,,,,a..c.m
! ,0 ,
O ,
" i i '
j ' 60 ; I i '. 50 40 (I. a 8' - - I)pf-I{- - - - L. . , i j ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. l O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 FREQUENCY (Hz) FI G U R E 19: N ARROW B AND SPECTR A OF SIREN SIGN AL AT V ARIOUS DISTANCES (O DEGREES) (hy) Accustic TECHNCLCCW k C. l
110 C AROLIN A POWER & LIGHT COMPANY H ARRIS L AKE NOTIFIC ATION SYSTEM 4000 FEET ' ' SIREN FIELD TESTING too -- -
. ODEGREE i '
~
90 i i i i '
- FUNDAMdNIAL T O *( E 80 i e
I 7o ; __ _ . . _ i N "" " " "" " --- E eo - - -- -- 3; h q ! ! I a ' g so / 8{ _ i,f j l o , , o i
.}_.i 4o ! _ t. g .
E ! j @ @ h #%.y p b
@ ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
- l 30 5
if '00 . , y 6000 FEET ' , ! !
! j i E 80 i j ,
3 1 l l F UND AME P9 f AL TON ( ,
$ 80 i O i !
2 . 70 1
$ l -
a . i i so _ _ _
.L .
; ,..o sauonic ,
l 50 g -- - - h , 4o _. p._ : , l
.L._._.
f TESTED BY
,o YU!% kpACyysC 7ECnN9 nouY. sNC.
0 200 400 600 000 10bk120d INN 6 jo.w$800/2,000 , FREQUENCY (Hz) FIGURE 2 0: N ARROW B AND SPECTR A OF SIREN SIGN AL AT V ARIOUS DISTANCES (O DEGREES) e (#$
.w AccusTic TECHUCLCGY IMC l
4 i C AROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY t H ARRIS LAKE NOTIFIC ATION S f STEM 4 , SIREN FiELO TESTING I' I 4
~
ODEGREE , 90 - - - * - - - ~ - - - - - + - ' j ! 6 f F UNfl A MENTAL ONL 6 80 , I 70
, I n ,
E i ' y 60 I
"5'"f""0"'C ,
a ! I j i i f , O i 8 i l
!" h l l !
!- Ec O k L]hi,A w e 30 l f f t
ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. d
> 100 -
W j l 3 ! 22.5 DEGREES l l l E , l ! i
= l l W g E irunuaut s:4t sont , l so I t
o j ' E I -
' ; i i a '
o ___' I e 70 .
' I i ! ; '
1 i 60 { i i , ins Anuonic ' 50 - - - - - . - -- L i . - - ---- - fr- {
\
" ~
j %.g M YEN U h l l ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. 30 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 FREQUENCY (Hz) l FIGURE 21: N ARROW B AND SPECTR A OF THE SIREN SIGN AL AT V ARIOUS ANGLES (4000 FEET) A
?%
g Acoustic TECHNOLOGY INC.
1 110 - l CARCLINA POWER & LIGHT CCMPANY HARRIS LAKE NCTIFICATION SYSTEM 4000 FEET i l SIREN FIELD TESTING 100 ' l -l l 45 DEGREES i 1
- i. !
l i l
- - - - - + -
90 , l l ! i 8 ; ! !
. FUNDAM NIAL 10 E 7 . ! i i i i
~
, l I E
80 l I - l l 3 50 , ? , o r $ 4
' ' inst M4nuoNic I o
I d v/3 - -
, j .L l l
_ ._ _ i . _ ._ 4o . _w - . _ E W CW l MPJL m% M i ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. w
* ' {
so 2 O e d 100 ,
> : I i i I w 90 DEGREES ; l E 90 j i , i !
en i W i l 1 a0 ; l , a - ' i ' 2 ! I .! '
$ 70 i ,'
(n FUNDAW( IAL TON , l l 1 80 7 i j i
, i .
50 i - - -* - M - - - - - - - l ,o ._ . lk.._ _ . . . . ,
. _ _ _ __ _u . .. .J _ . - _ _L . _ l .
TESTED BY l M[4 g ;L ACOUSTIC TECHNOpOGY, INC. 0 200 400 Y5do 80 d PD Q AQ.,g)LQpQ 44ptM d 40 Js opc3000 FREQUENCY (Hz)' FIGURE 2 2: N ARROW B AND SPECTR A OF THE SIREN SIGN AL AT V ARIOUS ANGLES (4000 FEET) em (Ms w AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC.
SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) 500HZ h 4 SIREN - CENTER , LINE - 0,* 22.5* 1000 - h 45' 800-rt[T 60c --
, 67 5'
] 400 - - 87 b iOO 94 200 -- ! 93
; 0, ; ; :
@. : 90*
200 400 600 800 1000 FEET f FIGURE 23: MEASURED DIRECTIVITY 0-1000 FEET i .. (i,-l) AccusTic Tscar:ctco'/ lt:c.
SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) 800HZ h ! ) . SIREN' .
, CENTER LINE 6000 0@-
@ 22.5' 5000 -
67 45' 4000 - h 69 FEET 3000 - h 2000 - - h 69 67.5'
@ ,7
.g ., @
73 83 1000 - 9
@p 87 83 90' 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 FEET FIGURE 24: MEASURED DIRECTIVITY 1000-6000 FEET (q AccusTic Tccmact.cov It:c.
NUMBER ATI COMPUTER ANALYSIS OF OBSERVATIONS . 15-10- '
~
l a 5-i
~
I l l l i i . . . . . , , , , ' 4 2 -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 ! PREDICTED SPL - MEASURED SPL (dB) l AVERAGE = -0.48 dB STANDARD DEVIATION = 1.83 dB FIOURE 25 : COMPARISON OF PREDICTED AND ME ASURED SPL (f )AccusTic Tecanotocy Inc.
I
; . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15. d oC
,..6... ., ..,,
. i
#~ '
% % 85 dBC
~g .
/ s '.,
. / N 95 deC
[ . _ , I i.
. *N /
/ *
\ s ....
=. % -~ ~ .
. t a) TEST CONDITIONS I I O 2000 feet 7
,,,,....................,,,,,5..d0C.......
--% 85 dDC .,,
/ l s
/ /,
, 5 dBC N N
[ * :
, . . _._ g .
- s e .
. s s s .
- s. N -.
~ / ....
b) SUMMER AVERAGE CONDITIONS
/
FIGUHE26: EQUAL SOUND CONT,OURS y. [ -7).r AccusTic Tecaractcov itic. ,,
% 0F00ATS .
50 - 40 - PERCENT OF % BOATS 20 - 10 - l\\\\1 ImxN mw ..... FISHING SKilNG/SVI FtEASURE CHECK N0flMOTOR S ALifl0 HUNTif4G SCUBA MMif4G B0ATlNG B0AT/VORK B0AT (C) (A) (B) (D) TYPE OF DOAT USES SOURCE: CP&L RECREATIONAL AND CREEL SURVEY JAN SEPTEMBER 1984
'!0 T E _S :.
(A) " Pleasure boating" includes individuals riding around and does not include skiers and swimmers (boats stopping to let people out/In). (B) " Check boat / work" includes individuals checking boats / motors and CP&L employees workinn on the reservoir. Individuals compillna recreational / creel data are not counted. (C) " Scuba" was one occurrence of two boats. One boat included a spotter for those diving. (D) "flonmo t o r i z e d boat" includes boats other than sailboats. 4 FIQURE 27: DEMOGR APHIC D ATA BREAKDOWN OF BOAT USAGE FOR VARIOUS BO A T RELATED ACTIVITIES (J A N U A R Y-S E PTE M B E R, 19 8 4 )
/
(%) Accusric Tec: met.cov hic. M
APPENDIX 1: DISTRIBUTION HISTOGRAMS OF NOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS ACTIVITIES I i R (eep AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC.
s 9 APPENDIX 1A: SWIMMING s S
#'.5 's 9
$s.J#)
c.a AccusTic TECHflCLOGY lt
25 - A-W E IG H T IN G 15 , 2 PROBABILITY 10 5 q 0 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 60 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 % 98 25 - 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 15 - X PROBABILITY 10 - 5-N" 0' - 56 55 60 62 64 66 66 70 72 74 76 75 00 02 64 06 SO 90 25 - 800Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 20 - 15
% PROBABILITY 10 5 5 0 -
O " 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70.72 74 76 78 80 82 84 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) AT SWIMMER'S E AR WITH BUTTERFLY Y AccusTic TECHNCLOG'l iMC.
30 - A-WLiGHTING 20
% PR06 ABILITY 15 10 5
" ~
0 56 58 60 62 64 65 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 96 98 30 25 - 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 20
% PROBABILITY 15 \
10 5 _ 0 W 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 25 - 20 800Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 15
% PROBABILITY 10 5
l n N k ' 50 52 54 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 77 74 76 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) ! s AT ' SWIMMER'S E AR WITH BREAST STROKES Acoustic TECHNOLOGY !riC.
4 f s APPENDIX 18: WATERSKIING hEh wy Acoustic TECHMOLOGY !NC.
WATER SKilNG 40 - 35 - A - W E I G H T I fJ G 25
% PR06 ABILITY 20 -
15 10 s . \ m 70 72 74 76 78 60 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 35 - 30 g 800 H z 1/3 OCTAVE D A t4 D 20 -
% PROBABILITY ,
15 - 10 - N-- 64 66 65 70 72 74 76 70 60 82 64 66 60 l SOUND PRE SSURE LEVEL (dB) l AT SKIER'S E AR WITH 34 00 RPM AND 75 FT. TOW ROPE () Accusric TECHNOWG
l l
~
30 - i 25 l A-WEIGHTtNG
% PROBABILITY 15 10
. A 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 40 -
800 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 30 A PROBABILITY 20 - ( 10 0 64 66 68 70 l' 72 74 .76 78 60 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) AT SKIER'S E AR WITH 3500 RPM AND 75 FT. TOW ROPE fp AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC
I WATER SKilNG l 35 A-W EIG H T IN G 30 ; 25 20 - X PROBABILITY 10 0
\
74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 30 - 25 - 800 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE DAND 20
% PROBABILITY 15 10 -
5 0 64 66 60 70 72 74 76 70 00 62 64 66 88 90 92 94 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) AT SKIER'S E AR WITH 38 00 RPM AND 75 FT. TOW ROPE 1 l AccuSTic TECHNCLOGY !NC.
WATER SKilNG ! 25 ~ A-WEIGHTING 20 is
% PROBABILITY 10 5
0 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 100 102 25 - 20 800 H z 1/3 OCTAVE BAND
% PROBABILITY 10 5
0 " " = ~ 64 66 70 72 74 76 76 60 62 64 66 66 90 92 94 % 96 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) AT SKIER'S E AR WITH 4100 RPM AND 75 FT. TOW ROPE (gAccusTic TECHMCLOGY !iC
WATER SKilNG l
. 50 -
45 -
*' A-WEICHTING 35 -
30 - X PROBABILITY 25 ; 20 - 15 - 10 g N b m 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 % 98 40 -
. 35 -
30 - 800 H z 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 25 - R PROBABILITY 20 - 15 - 10 o
- em -
64 66 65 70 72 74 76 78 60 52 84 66 68 90 l SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) 1 AT SKIER'S E AR WITH 4200 RPM AND 75 FT. TOW ROPE AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC.
WATER SKilNG g. 45 - 40 - 35 A-WEIGHTING 30 X PROBASILITY 25 - 20 15 10 - 5-0 74 76 76 60 62 84 66 SS 90 92 94 50 - 45 40 800 H 2 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 35 30 X PROBABILITY 25 20 15 10 - o I533 . M 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) AT SKIER'S E AR WITH 4200 RPM. AND 57 FT. TOW ROPE ) l l r AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC. 1
+
APPENDIX 1C: MOTORBOATING l f I ) AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC.
~
l
1 NERCRt!!SER 140 INBOARD NOTOR BOAT 100-90 80 , 70 A-WEIGHTING 60 X PROBABILITY 50 40 30 i 20 ! m 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 % 98 70 - 50 - 500 H2 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 40 X PROBABILITY 30 , 20 - i 0 70 72 A L 74 76 78 80 82 80 70 - 800Hz 1/3 OCTAVE GAND X PROBABILITY 40 30 20 l 10 0 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) ( AT OPER ATOR POSITION WI.TH 34 00 RPM) f{!}f Accusric TECHNOLOGY
MERCRUISER 140 INBOARD MOTOR BOAT 60 -
- g. A-WEIGHTING 40
% PROBABILITY 30 20 -
10 0 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 % 70 - 60 - 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 50 - 40
% PROBABILITY ,
30
. 20 -
10 - 0 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 60 - 50 g sooHz i/3 OCTAVE BAND . X PROBASILITY 30 20 10 0 70 72 74 70 78 80 82 84 86 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) ( AT OPER ATOR POSITION WITH 3500 RPM)
) Acoustic TECHNOLOGY
HERCRUISER 140 INBOARD MOTOR BOAT 80 - 70 - 60 A-WEIGHTING 50
% PROBABILITY 40 30 20 -
10 0 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 60 - 50 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 40 - X PROBABILITY 30 20 - m 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) l AT B ACK SE AT WITH 28 00 RPM l AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC. l (
l NERCRUISER 140 INBOARD MOTOR BOAT A-WEIGHTING 50 40 X PROBABILITY 30 20 - 10 0 86 88 90 92 ' 94 % 98 100 102 g, 500 H2 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 40 30
% PROBABILITY 20 10 0 --
70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 800 H21/3 OCTAVE BAND 30 i X PR06ABillTY 20 10 0 00 O2 54 66 OS 90 92 94 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) AT B ACK S'i AT WITH 4 000 RPM ( i !) AccusTic TECHNOLOGY IN 9
SUZUKl 85 OUTBOARD MOTOR BOAT 80 - 70 A-WEIGHTING 60 50 2 PROBA8ILITY 40 M-20 10 m \ 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 60 - 50 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 2 PROBASILITY 30 20 10 . 0 - - - - 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 88 800Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 70 - 60 50 40 2 PROBASILITY j 30 20 10 0 60 -62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 1 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) l AT OPER ATOR POSITION WITH 4 000 RPM) ) ( AccusTic TECHNCLOGY INC.
I SUZUKl 85 0UTBOARD MOTOR BOAT 70 - 60 A-WEIGHTING 50 40
% PROBABILITY 30 -
20 10 0 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 % 98 100 50 - 45 40 sooHz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 35 - 30 -
% PROBABILITY 25 20 15 -
10 5 0 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 % i SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) AT BACK SEAT WITH 4000 RPM hih;$)AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC. vu
SUZUKl 75 OUTBOARD F10 TOR BOAT l 6o ' 50 l AWEIGHTING X PROBABillTY 30 20
- 56 58
$ 60 62 E64 66 68 70 -
60 50 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 40 - X PROBABILITY 30 10 0 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 50 -
~
8 0 0 H z 1/ 3 OCTAVE BAND 55 30 l X PROBABILITY 25 20 15 10 , e 36 38 40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 l SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) ( AT OPER ATOR POSITION .WITH IDLING RPM)
) AccuSTic TECHNCLOGY !
SUZUKl 75 0UTBOARD MOTOR DOAT 60 50 j A - W E 1*G H T I N G g
% PROBABILITY 30 20 10 0
64 66 68 70 72 74 76 78 70 - 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE BAND g. 50 - 40 - 2 PROBABILITY 30 - 20 , o
\
56 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 70 - 60 so0Hz1/3 OCTAVE BAND i 40 - ! 2 PROBABILITY 30 20 10 - 0 l 56 58 60 62 64 66 68 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) ( AT OPERATOR POSITION WITH 2000 RPM) e
) AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC I __
SUZUKl 75 OUTBOARD f10 TOR BOAT , 50 - A - W E I G H T I fJ G X PROBABILITY 30 20 10 - 0
, 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 86 6
N' 500 Hz 1/3 OCTAVE U A f4 D 50 - 40 2 PROBABILITY 30 20 - 10 0 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 76 50 - 4 8 0 0 H Z 1/ 3 OCTAVE BAND 30 l X PROBABILITY 20 - 10 0 58 60 62 64 66 68 70 72 74 SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB) ( AT' OPER ATOR POSITION WITH 3000 RPM) ( l} AccusTic TECHNOLOGY IN
l I l l APPENDIX 2: TABLES FOR NOISE LEVELS FOR VARIOUS ACTIVITIES
$+g AccusTic T=caricLcGY Inc.
l
I APPENDIX 2A: SWIMMING i l (Ifht!)Accusric vs TECHNCLCGY l
HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS 4 4
~
. . .... . . SW I.M. M I.N.G . . .. ,
. . F.REE ...'. BR. EAST . ,
i ... . . .. . .. ... . . .. . . .
.. . . . . . . . . .d. .BA . . .... . : . . . . 67 .. . ..67 . ..,
. .. . 70. . .
. 5dOHZ l./5 dCiA..d. .BA.Nb "' . ' '.". ". $8 .. " ~ ~ ~58. . .
. . .. . ... . 65. '. .
i -
. . . 800. k.Z .1./3. dCT .VE B ND6d.'.'5.I"' . . .. ..
'5d" .
64 P i I (,. 3 (r pAccusTic TEcHNotocy Inc.
*GA r
APPENDIX 28: WATERSKIING C (q?ytit;; ACCusTic TECHNCLCGY !!1C
i l l l HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS i i a
}
i b
; NOISE LEVELS MEASURED AT WATER SKlER'S EAR 1
! WATER SKIER -
' ~ '
l RPM , 3400 3500 . 3800 4000 4200 dBA , 77 , , 82 ,, 83 82 . 83 81 ' } 800HZ 1/3 OCTAVE BAND 69 , , 75 7d ' 71 71 i 69 - l l I i l i j h.ijj,IccusTic Tscarictcov lt;c. 4
-,,,-~,r- ----------------,-r - - - - - - - - - , - - , - - -
1
, i
. I I
r i
/
r l' APPENDIX 2C: MOTORBOATING
/
f
/
o ( , f t / /
/ /
t f
,r ' e 7
' rz:r.
s Qs@. ACousric TECHNCLCGY I
/
e HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS r I f 9 e NOISE LEVELS MEAS'URED FOR MOTOR BOAT (SUZUKI 85)
< f
. . . . SUZUKl 85. .. . . .... .. .. . . .. . .
. OP.E.RATOR POSITION. . .. . . . . ..
. .. .... RPM. .. ...,.. . .
4000 . . . . . . .
. .. d. B A. . . . . . . .. . ..
85 .. . . 500HZ l/3 OCT. AVE BAND 73. . . . . . 70 . . . 800HZ l/3 OCTAVE. BAND 75.. 72 . .... 4000 . dBA 89 l 79 500HZ .1/3 O.CTAVE BAND. . . . . 50dHZ l/3 dCTAVE BAND 83 - I I t l l sR2 (W@ng) Acousnc TECHNCLOGY ' IiiC. t
HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS NOISE LEVELS MEASURED FOR MOTOR BO AT (MERCRUISER 140 )
.. ME.RCR..UISER.140 . . .i .. . . . .
~ ' " ~ ' "
OPE R. .T.b. R. P.b. 5'I.T.i.b... . . " . . ' ".'" " . "..'
. .. .. ..dBA . . . . .' . . . . . . 86. 8.. . :.87.. 5.. .:.. 86. 8 . , 88. 3 91.3 500HZ 1/.3 OCTAVE BAND . ... . 75.5.., 77 ..~ 76 - 78 82 800.H.Z 1/.3. OCTAVE BAND . 78.5 .: 79. 3 . 78. 5 .
- 77.3 , . 81 .
.. . . . . B.Y. M. . OTO. .R. . . . . ... .. .. .... ... . .'
.. . . dBA . ..
. 85.3 . . . . . 95 .-
. . 5. 00H. Z. 1/3. O. C. TA. Y. E .BA.ND. . . . 78. 5 . . . i. . .83.
.. . . . . .. .. .... . . . . . . . . . . . ~ . .
. 800HZ. 1./.3.. O. C..T.A...V.E...B.A..N. .. . D.. . 74.
. ...3.. .. ....., . .. .. . 87. 3 . .
1 F~f)f) me n AccusTic TECHNOLOG'/ INC. 1
HARRIS LAKE MEASUREMENT RESULTS d 4' NOISE LEVELS MEASURED FOR MOTOR BOAT (S ZUKl 75)
. . . . . . . . . . . . S.U Z UK l. 7 5 . . . . . . . . . : . . . .
OPERATOR POSITION
. .. Rb..'.'.'..... IDLE .. . 2bd'0 ; 3dbO. ..5500
. . .. .. .. dBA . . .: . . . 61. .. . . 71. . . . . . ~ . 7 8. . .
80
* ~
500HZ..l./3..OCTAYE. BAND... ,: .51 .., .. 62 68 . 68 800. H.Z .1/.3.O.C.TAYE. BAND.. ..... e 4 5 ... . . . 61. 3. . 65. 3. . . . : . 68. 8 . . h)) Acoustic TECHNOLOGY
APPENDIX 3: NARROW BAND SPECTRA FOR SIREN SIGNAL PROPAGATION i i ti$[i]@j AccusTic TECHNOLOGY INC.
% e
?
h TYPIC AL ME ASURMENT LOC ATIO N 3500 f t O degrees d 45 degrees
/
TYPIC AL MEASURMENT 3500 f t LOC ATION 2500 f t 45 degrees 2500 f t l v 7
,r SIREN NOMENCLATURE FOR MEASURMENT LOCATIONS OF SPECTRA IN APPENDIX hAccusTic TECHNOLOGY I
i APPENDIX 3A: SIREN SIGNAL WITH 800 HZ FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY (9n,sh) AccOSTic TECHNOLOGY I
i 130 m _ . . . _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM 100 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING h120 O O DEGREE FUNDAME N T A 1.' T O llE o 110 ' O I O
.. I' W
E 100 i F IR S T' li A R MONin
.m i' j E 90 i ,
a ' , W t W 80 ' m E 3 M 70 g, o C W g l
!Q n. .
i i t 5 ; I 1 I i 1
" t i k b Mg e M'
{0 5 50 ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. Q O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
- z i O l FREQUENCY (Hz)
_ l I CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 300 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING i S 100 . l O ODEGREE t j O i : F J N D A M E t,
!r AL TONEf FIR ST' II AR M O NIC
@ 90 l 1 i d !
di E 80 , . O m t E 70 1
- a .
W
> 1I t i W 60 !
.2 .
' l'
@E$
hi: . E k l - 4 l A, N'&Wh&N $%A%nAl ~ l h$ 5 a I NkY
-1 0 40
} j TESTED BY l'
[5 8 ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. S 30 4 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 E" 9 FREQUENCY (Hz)
110 _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 300 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 i a o 22.5 DEGREES , o O 90
. FUNDAME tlT AL TOl3 E' FIR ST' H s, I M O fil C o .
I I di . E 80 '. o t to - 5 - E 70 : J W . e I W 60 l J ! - 1 i ,l ( m j I 1 l 3> $ Is !! . . d _m th 1 i k f ! 5 h Yh[l[N Q%Q M8 YwpJk i gO o j 40 TESTED BY O ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
@ 30
< 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 j z i 9 FREQUENCY (Hz) i L _ ___ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ ___
110 m CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 300 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 a O 45 DEGREES 1 O ', :1RST HA RMONIC
. F UNDAMEl TAL TON E O , l' 15i E 80 o
m 13 Z 70 I W ! "i So (@3 ,
> tt) 9i i lL i 71 A a l { /
c $ h w % h E E O l 4 o 40 : Z l 8 TESTED BY fo @ ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. 8 30
< 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 5
FREQUENCY (Hz)
110 i
- i CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
- E 300 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 I
g 67.5 DEGREES o l l g 90 b - 53 i i
- E 80 .
l l om I i l ! Z _ 70 : m . . i !* W 60 - J o m 50
@
- l W
8m i i ; N
\ \
l O 40 * ' - Ak b - hZ z h N' U Y # II ENES1I [Bh N[ i o ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. i S m b 30 1 2 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 9 . FREQUENCY (Hz)
110
- CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY.
N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 300 FEET , SIREN FIELD TESTING ,
) , ,,
g 90 DEGREES o -
@ 90 i
80
' ' " " " ^ " " ' '^' ' " ~
y , F I R S T' HARMONIC
$ l 3
70 l J ' uJ l
> t W 60 I '
$ 1 -
N# o M 50 i ( I}@ 3 n.E o I J f M[ihf i.
.I f_Ay A 40 - i,-
, _o n
[o m ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. ,
@ 30
< O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 h
FREQUENCY (Hz) J
110 m . CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 1000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING
- y 100 .
' " ODEGREE i o o l FIRST H 4RMONIC i o 90 UUNDAME , m TONE.
O o s'd I l E BO ' o o m 13 1 3
%.sp 70 '
i J i m i W 60 g m M WWW qs # i
- 2>
m 50 i o o m C (E: ,
$ S l
0 0 l 40 l gI ! TESTED BY x o g u) - ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. o 30 Q O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 E i O t FREQUENCY (Hz) t
I I- I CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N 1000 FEET HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E N I I D TESTING z 100 ! ! ! 22.5 DEGREE o O 90
- FL NDAMEN ' A L' T O N E' g
E 80 l FIRST' H AllMONIC l O - i m f
' , I Z 70
- J W !
> i ,
W 60 d,
! r h w M DY WMM W 3 ,
N E 50
- o e c W
$ E 5 *
-1 0 40 2 '
2
}z 3 o
TESTED BY p u) ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
@ 30
< 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
- =
l FREQUENCY (Hz)
s 110 m .. _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY i N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 1000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 a o 67.5 DEGREES f o O 90
- o. FUNDAME N T A L T O t< E o ,
1 di E 80 o s a ' u ; 2 70 w l l FIRST H/. A MONIC
- a m i I
i m 60 J 4, a m ] , J i'h 3
*W !
m rui. ! . I A. R. al - , g p ut i E 1 0 40 i a Z 3 TESTED BY kO F3 m 30 ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. ; l @ O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 i E i FREQUENCY (Hz) I
110 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ! N !!ARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 1000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING < y 100 g 90 DEGREES , j O ' i o go i O j h FUNDAMEI4TAL TONIE i E 80 0 a w ! E 70 l .
.2 !
i ! m i l t W 60 l
'd g g FIRST HA RMONIC W
j (s;JQ E
%iy : ) ,
> @ 50 0 y el n
U
** g\
o l 40
~i'JY ' WVYk' 5 m ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
o 30 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
=
FREQUENCY (Hz)
1 110 m _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
- N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM j E 1000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING 1OO g 45 DEGREES O
O 90 ' O O FUNDAMI. N T A 1. T O NE e E 80 I O , a F I R S T' H ARMONIC E 70
~
I. i a ! W '
- > : i W '
; a 60
[ W ' $E o a 50
, $s -
t
- a m MM V, h
-1 0 40 y j TESTED BY
% 8 ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. ..
! O 30 [ O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
- 5
! FREQUENCY (Hz) 1
i 110 m CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM , E 1500 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING j g 100 i o 22.5 DEGREES i o t ,
! o go !
O, j FUND AME 1T AL TON E l o ! i 5 i I E 80 , ! o l
$ FIRST' HARMONIC ;
l 3
~
70 '
)
a ! nu ~ l y i ' l W 60 J l '
- ! 1
[W$w E 1 e i i p 3 ' k*' ! o # 50 ! ! O w N e YOs w,nxN us ) m j l<c ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. ' P m j ' o 30 i 4 - O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 N , h FREQUENCY (Hz) ,
l 110 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
- e 1500 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING j y 100 ,
e g 45 DEGREES o e ! O 90 ; i O. ! o 5 I E 80 . I O l
- m i t :
3 70 i a ; i w .
> j i W 60 '
s l 679 w D) $ N, m 50 i,j 3 , E w \n G z 'J 1 1 l 5
- R/1' j,, j 3 / /
O W hy__ _Ad_E l 4 _ __ ) fo e ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. - ! O 30 j
" O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 E
! b
! FREQUENCY (Hz)
)
h 11o CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SY.STEM E 1500 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 1oo . a O 67.5 DEGREES o I i O 90 i O W l E So o ! m 13 l 3
~
7o i W i i
> g I
W 6o
- W i .
- m s
! 3 i N# So !
i 8 E am ; i i i -4 0 4o ki j l
~
$j h. f* , TESTED BY
$ O !.
l g= [ tty gg , ACOUSTIC TECHN ) LOGY, INC. 3 o 200 4oo Eoo soo N @ g sqg y p oo L rr i FREQUENCY (Hz) i
i 110 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM s 1500 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 g 90 DEGREES i O
- O 90 O.
i o , '! FUNDAME 4T AL TONii 80 . O I m ! l i - 3 ! 70
~
J . W i W 60 l d : FIRST HARMONIC g m m 50 l i o u ! c m ! ! $ E ,' ! !
'l O "
! "T9 I N )tl 4
._t o 40 ' -
, h
=
0 0
! 'kh (
TESTED BY 0 l u3 i ACOI STIC TECHN Ol.OGY, INC. I o I M. A_ Am . z O 200 400 600' 800 1dOd 120d NM BM%MO i o FREQUENCY (Hz) i i 4
110
^ - -_
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY i i N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM ! E 2000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING ! g 100 a O ODEGREE FUND AME14TAL TONE o O 90 FIRST HAR M O Ni d-m 80 ', I O m . 13 - E 70 a i w j 60 m ' f[**P) > ' W { N e 50 ' O W I
!4 m i 5
- p I yp,! Jj ,, ,g 2 , 4 ) If M
- E O I 1
g . A S C TECHNOL Y), MC
- o 30
< 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800- 2000
' O j FREQUENCY (Hz) i
i 110 CAROLIM A POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIL KE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 2000 FEET - -- - 5 ncN FIELD TESTING
) 100 g 22.5 DEGREES .
o O 90
- FUNDAME N T A l. T O t, E'
- o 5'J E 80 ,
l 0 i j t m ' l , u FIRST H AF MONIC l 3 70 , i J i j m , ' i > - W 60 . I 4 ' .J . i a; g...k.
= 1 j N
- 50 . .
i b l . t 4
$ m g :
5 A y ! I I i I --{ O 40 !'$z ! c , l TESTED B U o I j Q d ACOySTIC TECH' 40 LOGY, INC. k
* ,JI , ,
L y %jQ q O 200 400 700 800 1M 16 00
) 9 FREQUENCY (Hz) i )
~
i 110 d m CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY l N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 2000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING l
} 100 a 45 DEGREES ' +
0 1 O 90 t O-. l , 5 I FUND AMEb TAL TONE: ! E 80 I O l m V , 2 70 i , l ~ l J . ! m :
? > i
! m 60 J . p@g ! FIRST' H AltMONIC g ' b$ p N m ' i o m 50 P i C m glJ' j .
~ $ g I .
4 5 A j
- H O 40 I ,
m g , TESTED BY ! 9 m i l
- ACOUSTIC TECHNO .OGY, INC.
l j 4 [ a O 200 400 600 800 5h 00 FREQUENCY (Hz)
1 i _ l l . CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANI N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 2000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING
; g 100 .
a 67.5 DEGREES -
., O O l l O 90 i O.
O , , b ' E 80 ' g , FUND AMErJT AL TONIE , a l l 5 : Z _ 70 ! i a i W .
; > e l W 60 4 r ! ; .
@ m x 4 l J igf) g [ ; FIRST HARMONIC we ::3 -
l
- > ca 50 ' - # ' !
I " ' h m k ,
$ E +
i i I 5 * ' I t' Z TESTED BY i 5 r-4 ACOUSTIC TECHNCil t R 1*L, ft L. n1 Y, INC.
. o.h t..
Y20V M W3 g O 200 400 600 800 1000 r1;OT NOO b l FREQUENCY (Hz) l
11o , m i l CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM
- E 2000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 1oo a
o 90 DEGREES o : i O 9o O. l o ,
.. l W i E So ,
i O I m ' Y ' FUNDAMEtlT AL TONE l E 70 , a W W 60 a j W k i W,% E D '
> So ~\ '
y
""=
~
FIRST H A RMONIC y - f j n_ _ CL - a l l y o 4o ; , g j j TESTED BY s 3 g ; % , ACOUSTIC TECHNC ' .O GY, IN C.. l a o 200 4o0 soo" ~ son.<qg#%ww%pmo e-P FREQUENCY (Hz) 4 e
, 110 m CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY t N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM l E 2500 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 100 . .
l O DEGREE . i O I O g a l FUND AMEllTAL TONE: I O l l l o j l 6 ! E 80 , 0 - FIRST HARMONIC 3 ' 70 a i I W l.
> ' [!I
- w 60 '
i a {
?
/ <-- ) m m l'
i l 'G' 3 ' l ' O I i N , 50
- J I i 8 m .
. J !
$ g
- F M. I
.G .
}
- n. [ ] :
! O 40
^ b--
- O ' 'I t o -
I M i
.{ p as
_ _ ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. g 30
< 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 E
9
- FREQUENCY (Hz) i
~
~
0 0 0 2 YM C 0 NE N 0 AT I 8 PS CI Y
, 1 .
MY N O G OSG M O 0 CNN I R A L 0 TOT I H O 8 HTS T S N 1 G AE I R H LC T I I F C E 0 0
& FDLI T 4 R T E 1
E OI C I NF T 0 W S 0 OEN U 2 PKE AR O 1 )
- ALI C z N S A H I S 0 (
LI OR : 0 Y R R E N 0 C A A O 1 N CH T E
. L A
T t
, iI
% 0 0
U Q E E 8 M R A F S D N E U o E o s T R E G . E E 0 _ l F D
,l 0
4 - 0 5 0 . 0 l 5 2 I 0 2 2 2 o 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 9 8 7 S 5 3 1 5 ' _N E y a o
- O 0 o $ E gE D E ~ J.W > m J. EE3#eWm 8 A 5 OS 9 S's)Q>aba5
*I i ?' . ?
. 0 0 0 _ 2 . YM C 0
. NE N I
0 AT 8 PS Y 1 MY G G OSN I O 0 C NT L 0 TOS O 6 1 H TE I Y N _ G AT B H I LC C 0 D E 0 . I D E
& F L I TT 4 1
R T E S C E OI E I W OE PK NF A E N % T T S U O 0 0 2 1 ) _. AL R C z N I A H I LI OR R R SS E N O Q-
/
0 0 0 1 ( Y C A A T N CH ~L E A T N E W 0 0 U Q E _ M 8 R A F _ T S E D N U F W 0 0 6 E E E R 0 l F G 0 E 4 0 D l 0 5 2 . 5 4 W 0 0 2 I 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 1 0 9 8 7 6 4 3 1 1
- N EN OOC.* sa 0mD E aJ>3 i:
- L S E:m s n njoe pn @o gg=p84 E9
% f l
i! l1ll' jI1!l iI : - - , ;: 1l ,! f i
,l
' > , l -
0 0 0 e s 2 . YM C o NE N o _ s I sO AT
, 1 PS C Y
=
MY I N G OSG O M o CNN R L o TOT I A H l O s I 1 H T S T N G AE S H I LC T R I C o I F E 0
& FDL I T 4 _
R T E 1 _ C E OI I NF T 0 wA W S 0 OEN U 2 PKE O 1 ALI AR C
)
z N S H I S 0 ( LI 0 OR E 0 Y R R N 1 C A A O N CH T L A T b E l l w o o s U Q E R E M A J F S D l : E E N U
- ~ o o
T s R E G E F E D % 0 0 0 0 5 . ku 4 5 7 0 l 2 6 i 0 2 f o 0 o o 0 o 0 0 0 S S 7 s 5 ' 3 1 _NEy goOo,o iE bl OE E J W > W J. wE WE* i ac N8$5 [56S rP i il l; :! , lij!
110 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICA. TION SYSTEM E 2500 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 100 .i .
" 90 DEGREES O
O O 90 C. w O , i E
- E 80 1 O i m u
FUNDAMErlTAL TONE: i Z. 70 ii a ! m , W 60 -
~3 l ibE N b 50 '
8 a f 4 m -{ i $ m ! m, LJ .. - 40 y.vy q y S j 5 c O ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. O 30 4 1400 1800 2000 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1600
=
! 5 - FREQUENCY (Hz) i
110 m _ _ _ _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 3000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 100 g O DEGREE O FUNDAME NT AL' TONii 90 9 o b l- FIRST H A RMONid a: 80 O I m u Z 70
.J lLi
).
W 60 @i N
- 50 *
!! J Q 40 L 'I O ! A TESTED B . E r O m h g ACO{IC T 10LgGY, INC. " O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 Y400 1600 NOO E' ' P FR EQUENC Y -(Hz)
110
,.,, CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM .
E 3000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING z ,99 g 22.5 DEGREES o .
@ 90 b -
FUNDAMEtlT AL' TONif g E 80 m
=
2 70 W W 60 -
. f nas1 N. 4uoNie
@3 E
1
~
N 50 - O w l J R2 y o 40 L
' l
- l j ,$
} l g TESTED BYj .
[5 $ I l ACOUSTIC TECHj0 .OGY, INC. O 200 400 600 800 16k 00 a. FREQUENCY (Hz) i _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _____________ _ _ _ _ o _ ______i
110 ' _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 3000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 . : : ; g 45 DEGREES O
@ 90 d
4 FUNDAMENT AL' TONE '- O cn 13 70 _3 , O ' W !' W 60 a FIRST H A 1M O NIC. g CI: 3 L
\
y 50 -
! 8 W d O
$ i 0 40 q ) TESTED BY E %, '
j j ACOUSTIC TECHNO .OGY, INC.
-< 0 200 400 6OY 80b 6 4 faS4/$ft>OO i B FREQUENCY (Hz) i
110
- CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 3000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 ..
a O 67.5 DEGREES -
, O g 90 '
d lli E 80 0
- m g FUNDAME t4T A L T O N I Z_ 70
~
.J i
i W l W 60 {
@ =.
=
1. N . 50 g v'# t g g . FIR ST' H A R M O NIC' a a g , N z ~5 TESTED BY 9 = O 8 ACOUSTIC TECHNO LOGY, INC. r O O 200 400 [O F sO h .sb 22. ass e oo FREQUENCY (Hz)
110
,, CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 30'00 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING z
a 90 DEGREES I
@ 90 d
11 } E 80 m Z F UN AMEN T AL TONE 70 W i
> l "i 80 ;
c
@m i
E s i 3
> # 50 FIRST HA R M O N I C'-
)
y Q 40 ! g Z TESTED BY o 8 kQ( i ACOUSTIC TECHNC l .OGY, INC. O O 200 400 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800'2000 1 O 01 ! M FREQUE f i E.___._ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ e, _
di 110
- CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 4000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 100 ODEGREE g
O ' O 90 , O FUNDAME NT'AL tot E 15l E 80 0 m D E 70 ab ILE
$ FinsT: H,(nMoNIC
_J 60 l
> # ' I' 4
E 50
')'
!'if
Y
'l r h 5 /
fl* && %4 &> g 5 O ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. O 30 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 r P FREQUENCY (Hz)
110 m CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM e 4000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 _ _ . . . g 22.5 DEGREES O k O
$ FUNDAME 1T AL TON E E 80 ,
O m V E 70 N LIJ -
"i 80 il.H.
FIRST' H/,RMONIC 2> 50 h i ! a f 8 i , 8 a. . O O 40 $ g e ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. 5 30 Q O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 v O '
~
FREQUENCY (Hz) l
110
- CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 4000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 ; .
g 45 DEGREES O
@ 90 s
til E 80 O y FUN D A Ml NTAL TOl4 E'- E 70 II g l - W 60 W s 2:. 50 !
"3 m
I ! FIRST' H/,RMONIC U o 40 t g' x E o %44M wA%N g u3 ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. , a 30 Q O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
- E O
FREQUENCY (Hz)
110
- CAROLINA POWER ~& LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 4000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 .
o 67.5 DEGREES O O 90 . s di . E 80 m v 70 WNDAMEMAL TONE I
~
E l .
.a w
W So
@i
>m 50 j
g C m W ['Y m E e G i a
- O 40 4 '
Mb 8 o ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. o 30 S o 200 400 soo soo 1000 1200 1400 1800 1800 2000 z O FREQUENCY (Hz)
_ 'l I . CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
" HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM 4000 FEET '
SIREN FIELD TESTING o ' g 90 DEGREES O
,0 90 a '
R$$
. E 80 0
m V , E 70 - w FUNDAMEl4TAL TONil a iu in 60 l ! !E* kg! a - S 6 l d z % TESTED BY g = o
;3 g [ ( ACOUSTIC TECHNOpOGY, INC. .
! o 200 40o "edo 80&WqAq.,rygs#4eshoveno g.
O
~
i FREQUENCY (Hz)
110 m CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 5000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 O ODEGREE O O 90 C. :UNDAMEFT AL TONE: O b) ' E 80 ' O m F IR S T'; H / RMONIC z yo . C. 1 J - i w '
- "I 80 ;
@l g V)
V) 50 W 2 S w O , --I O 40
$ Z TESTED BY x 3 .
,5_ v3 l ACOUSTIC TECHHi )L OGY, INC.
. o u ., O O 200 I '4th,Ml 800 18 ;00 1400 6 1800 2000 r P I FREQUENCY (Hz) M
11o
- CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY >
N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM e 5000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 1oo g 22.5 DEGREES O O 9o 5 E So y FUNDAME 1T AL TON E
$ 1 2 7o W eo FIRST H AF;MONIC w
@3 E
# So h
y E b q O 4o g 2 g TESTED BY ' sS g ik' [f ACOUSTIC TECHNO .OGY, INC. g 5 o 2oo 4oo ooo soo ,oon 3 VI 44o0 pg 4 oo 200o ( FREQUENCY (Hz) e
110
- CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM l
E 5000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 100 . g 45 DEGREES o O 90 5
$.}
E 80 0 m V . j Z 70 ponogue,,73t 7anc a w j 60 W , g I i s m 50 (f Y k ~ j h $ E
\ f , _
FIRST' H ARMONIC i $ g CL
.-t O 40 i TESTED BY ACOUSTIC TECHNC .O GY, INC. ; po e l o 30 '
O O 200 400 600D80 000 1200 1400 1 d OO 1800 2000 E ,1 1 o
' /
FREQUENCY (Hz 1 [
O _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 5000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING g 100 ~ o 6.7.5 DEGREES o O 90 d di E 80 m 5 . 3 70 F LIN D A M E N 7 A L T O N E' t w W 60 I w E 4 2:>
# 50 \
l g l $ n. ! ' 5 o 40 k= 1 N g z " 4 TESTED BY ^ l ACOUSTIC TECHNO' OGY, INC. o 30 Q O 200 400 600 80 1000 1200 1400 10 30 1800 2000 FREQUE V (Hz h_ -md\- '
j , 0 _ 0 0
. 2 C
0 YM N 0 _ NE I 8 AT , 1 - PS Y MY G OSG O 0 CNN L 0 I O 8 T OT I Y N 1 H T S B H GAE I C 0 LC T I D E E 0
& FDL T 4 I T 1 R T E S C E OI E I T 0 NF .
T W S 0 OEN U 2 PKE O 1 ALI AR C N S A 0 ( I S L I 0 OR Y E 0 . R R N 1 A A O E CH T L U A o Q T N , E E R M F A D N U
. S '
I _ T E _ E E E R j o
}
. F . G i
0
. E 4 0 D 0
0 0 =;Y 0 { 0 l 5 9 - 2
,i o
0 0 0 0 o o 0 9 8 7 S S 4 0 1 m N ey " O@b ldE m. E- W>WJ :* g E n. o j o m 1
@ ,gCh 5 h z g O
l ,\! O 4M y f YM " 6 NE ' AT 'C - PS MY OSG . I N O M W O CNN I R A
- 9 6
TOTI H Y t l HTS 'T B " 2' GAE S t R V I LC T I I F D " b'0 E
& FDL I
T h R T E E OI NF S E T N I 1 O W O OEN PK E % 9 2 1 AR ) z ALI N I LI OR S S ^ n h b (H Y I m 0 C R R N 1 A A O N CH T E L A 0 U T I 0 Q E l t i E 8 R M A F D N U 0 F
, 0 6
T E E E E A 0 F R G A 0 4 0 E 0 D 0 0 l 0 6 O k 2 i:! . ! ,,
'ii 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 1 1 NEg aOOO d E om " E
- t J. W > W 3ywEn.0g 8 c45 1}l
- zP
11o _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E 6000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 . g 22.5 DEGREES O O 9o 5 di E 80 . ,m , FUNDAMEtlT AL. TONE: e lLE N # 50 i 8 0 / a = 5 m
- ~-I m z 40 N
- r FlRST H ARMONIC TESTED BY 9
z m o m jl ACOUSTIC TECHNO LOGY, INC. j , l ;o o 200 400 'soo sobAtoQgMpmooo FREQUENCY (Hz)
110 _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM e 6000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 l g 45 DEGREES l O O 90 . 5 5 E 80 m
=
l Z., 70 l FUNDAMENTAL TO 1E a W t g 60 1
@ W:
II 3 y 50 ;'g g c W 4 a m i 6 b 0
- y 40 -
Z TESTED BY
}
{o 8 Qg g g ACOUS IC TECHNOLOGY, INC. l 0 1 0 200 400 600 80d 10N O M N [l h 2000 9 FREQUENCY (Hz)
110 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N H ARRIS LA'KE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM s 6000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING z 100 N o 67.5 DEGREES o y 90 d 15 } E 80 O E 70 ' ! FUNDAMEMT AL TONil a m . W So ,
- @) E m i i N #
- 50 ,
8 i . a e i a n. H o 40 U h j Q TESTED- BY
,5_ 8 o (. ,.
ACOUdTIC m TECHNOLOGY, INC. 3 o 200 N 4oo M %obAtoo.wdoobr4teme'%tagwwoo 8 FREQUENCY (Hz)
4 _ CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM e 6000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING z 100 - - g 90 DEGREES . O O 90 b E 80
,m 2 70
' w J W W 60 FUNDAMEllTAL TONl: II: l
, i 3
N
- 50 ?
, 8 E e %, a = 5 1
-i o 40 SA
} Z TESTED BY 5 0 g g 1 ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
O 200 400 600 Ud 8 40 W h 000 5 r FREQUENCY (Hz) -
e e 6 l + APPENDIX 38: SIREN SIGNAL WITH 460 HZ FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY l l e (h;) Acoustic TECHNCLCGY INC.
O 130 i CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM i E 100 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING j y 12o i j g O DEGREE - ! o > ! O 110 ! O d i
! i g ;
E 100 FUNDnME 4TAL TONN ' U t m i
- D ! '
E 90 Fifl S T' H s Rh ONIC
-s !
l W ! t W So ! J ! i t ' W
.es fya g i, i
sp :3 i
's:,
O y 70s, , i .1 i 8wm I i 8=0 0 so Wj TGST.E ) BY 9o z en j I P ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, IN C. So ' I , 8 o 2 >o oo soo 800 1300 i 1200 4 00 1800 8 o 200o I 8 h4 @ i QUENCY ( 1 , I t l i J
E o ! i
~ ~~ ^
m CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPA Y l N 1000 FEET HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM E - ' SIREN FIELD TESTING N
- 100 10 J-N f DEGREE .
FIRST H ARI AONIC o ! ! o 1 FUNDA ME llT A L TONF 0 o 90 :
-l 4 i
.. s W l E 80 i i O i m !
l Z 70 3
- -1 )l I l a t '
- W i !
m 60 l b. h Mf%#4V%M+@ wm' %& W g m 50 o m . c i m , i !Q E I ~
; 5 S ;
-1 0 40
; y $
I TESTED BY
; z O j p m ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
I 8 30 ) [ O 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000
- B FREQUENCY (Hz)
ll ; i ,' , <' !l l\l 0 0 0 2 C 0 YM l N 0 NE
- 8 AT - , 1 PS MY l OSG O o CNN L o I
O s T OT I Y N HTS a GAE I 5 LC T p E 0 I E T 4
& FDLI 1
R T E E OI o W NF T S _ OEN U PKE O ) ALI AR C z N S C I H 0 ( I S N L I O 0 OR A Y I ( i 0 C R R R A 1 N A A H E CH T U s 0 Q n i 0 E i F 8 R F
'E N
Vo O o 1 s
'L.
A h, t T l l T E M
,- \!t]
0 0 E' A # 4 - E D N F U F 0 0, 0 0 { ' i : - :I! i} i' h; 2 0 2
,,i j[;
o 0 0 0 0 0 o o 0 1 9 8 7 S S 4
. 0 1 1
- '_ a Ey NO O,o yE Omw E Jw>W c
.es#mWE" Ogou s
- NaCh5ygz ? 8 al{ i: ! l i ; l1
0 0 y. C 0 2 0 YM N 0 NE I 8 AT , 1 PS Y MY G OSG O 0 CNN TOT HTS GAE I I LC T I
& FDL I
pE E L O N H C T 0 6 1 0 0 4 I 1 R T E C E OI I NF T 0 W S 0 OEN U 2 JA PKE O 1 ) ALIAR C z N S C H I S I 0 ( L I H 0 OR 3 Y R R M R N 0 1 C A A A N CH E H
'T S
F I F d 0 0 8 U Q E R n E F N O 0 T 0 T E L A T N
% 6 E E M
' 0 E E 0 F
R A D 1 M 4 Y N 0 G U F E 0 0 Dil I l! 8 l ii'f 0 0 2 3 O i r t A1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5
- 3 1
0 9 8 7 1 1 m N Eg goo s $E m E J.m>g wm3M,w=a. i e
@ N 8 E . h po 8 < E P l.
; ,I ! ;I , ! ij
0 0 0 2
?
t 0 J YM N 0 NE I 8 AT , 1 . PS Y MY G OSG O 0 0 CNN I L O 6 T OT I Y N 1 H T S B H GAE I C 0 LC T I D E l 3 T 4
& FDLI 1
R T E S C E OI E I NF T T 0 W ' C 0 OEN U 2 PKE O 1 ) ALI A R C I C : N A M _ N S O 0 ( I S L I M 0 Y OR 1 A 0 - RR H 1 N AA - CH 'T S R 0 1 7 l 0 E 8 O . E N O O . T L - A T I T N E E E M A
^
I E! E D , M(. F R N U 0 G F - 0, E 0 0 I 0 Di!l l;l1' ! 2 4 4 O O 0 0 0 0 0 , 0 0 0 5 4 3 1 , 9 8 7 6 _ 1 , 2W>WJ g m w E n. O 3 m m a{ z aoOOO.O 5E Um 3 l f l NOCN5 ;;g O ; o[=O. k
!l j ]' I
]. :' ; : :l 1i ' 1
APPENDIX 3C: SIREN SIGNAL WITH 1020 HZ FUNDAMENTAL FREQUENCY dIdih AccusTic TECHNCLCGY lMC.
%g
o _ o l:i .' 1 , o M YM C N 0 NE I 8 AT , 1 PS Y
- MY G OSG O 0 CNN I L o 8
TOTI Y O N 1 HTS l GAE I l l C 0 LC T I D E o E
& FDL I
T T 4 1 R T E S C E OI - E I NF T T 0 W 'E S 0 - OEN N U 2 a PKE O T O ) ALIA R L z N S A A H I LI S T N
"0 (
0 Y OR E 0 R R M A 1 C A A D ~ N CH N E U U F 0 8 E o - o s 4-T E 0 l E E 4 E R F G a E 0 _ 0 D 9 0 1 O I 2t l o 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 3 1 0 9 8 7 s 1 1 1
)
GOO b 5E mu E a.w>W wE3") E . Ojou N
@N8gO3ag3" i
_ { '
_ l l CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY - N HARFilS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM j ,,, 1000 FEET , SIREN FIELD TESTING g ODEGREE l'U N D A M Elu A L. T O N E' . d 5 i
= 80 i o l m -
" t 3 70 ! g, .
4 m ,
> l / 5 m 60 I' II -
W &4rm,%h MMM hm R E
# 50 l -
@ m l p = ,
n-a ! q O 40
@ j , TESTED BY i 3 o 5 m ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC.
o 30 0 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 E P , FREQUENCY (Hz) \ .
110 CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY N HARRIS LAKE NOTIFICATION SYSTEM - E 2000 FEET SIREN FIELD TESTING y 100 . . a O ODEGREE o I o 90 . O, j
- UNDAME NT AL TOl4E.
o , IILi E 80 - , ,m 2 7o ; , i
. i a i i w .
I W So i b l gg c W so i j . i
$ E !
E i 5 WJ l i y 0 40 ' f . m Z -Fjh , TESTED BY l
!O c-4 I
A, ACOUSTIC TECHNOLOGY, INC. .
, ,. a o 20o 1400 1800 18o0 l 3"VooV}1s 2900 1
i FREQUENCY (Hz) L' -
t 0 0 0 2 YM C 0 NE N 0 AT I 8 1 PS hgY MY e G OSG O 0 CNN I L 0 T OT O 6 I 1 H T S N GAE H 0 I LC T C I E 0
& FDL I T 4 R T 1
E C E OI I NF 'E T 0 W N S 0 OEN 3 U 2 PK E T O ALIAR L C 1 ) z N S A H S T A I L I N 0 ( OR E 0 Y R R M 0 C A 1 A A D N CH N U E U F 0 0 Q 8 E R F 0 0 5 6 T E l E E F E R G
< I! ! dl 0 0
4 0 E 0 D 0 0 ._ j 0 O i j\ ! i !i 3 2 iJir
\
ik O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 1 1 Ns g GOO .o 5E Nu 3 Jw>w - wm3** m1 O 3 n e _8. _ i N8$5 -
- p8d
0 0 0 2 C 0 YM N 0 NE I 8 AT , 1 e PS Y MY G . OSG O 0 CNN L 0 I O 6 T OT I Y N 1 H T S B H G A E I C 0 LC T I D E E 0
& FDL T 4 I T 1 R T E S C E OI E I T
NF T 0 W 'E S 0 OEN N U 2 PK E O T O 1 ALIA R 'L C H z N S A A I S T ' LI OR N Y E 0 C R R M f N A A A E CH D N U U Q F E R F h 6 T l E E . E E . [O F R N G 0 E 0 0 D ' I {! : !
' 0 0
2 4 O [ O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 8 7 6 5 4 0 1
^NEy" O @b lk E 0m i E Na > W i"mW$ g=O
@N8$g dgZo o
,< ) , ! ! ,!! i' :'
t 4 i 1 i-i. a 1 1 4 ! t i i MAP 1: SIREN COVERAGE-FOR THE HARRIS LAKE USING SUMMER AVERAGE CONDITION e ., i
+
5 9 e k 4 I-
.i; r i
i t A J i - i' f I f-i h
- j. i
.- ACOUSnc TECHNOLOGY INC.
I
. . _ . _ ~ . . . . . - . _ _ - _ _ , _ -. . . _ - . _ _ - . . ~ - . - . . _ - _ . _ _ . _ - - . . . . _ . _ _ . . . . _ _ . . - - _ _ . . . _ . . . - _ . . . - . _ . _ _ _
e 9 m e . PAGE l L PJ; LED
-A\O.2mmam NO. OF PAGES -
l REASON-l 0 PAGE ILLEGIBLE: l l 0 HARD COPY FILED AT: PDR CF OTHER
/ /
O BETTER COPY REQUESTED ON
. O FAGE TOO LARGE TO FILM:
PDR f HARD COPY RLED AT: OTHER , klFILMED ON APERTURE CARD NO. 8% 90999-O/
.. . .~. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
-rw3:
.t BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
'85 APR ~8 my .47 In the Matter of )
)
CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY ) h&3F hGSECRETARY
& SERvict AND NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN ) Docket No. 50-400 OL 8AANCN
' MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY )
)
(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant) ) CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Supplement to Motion for Summary Disposition of Eddleman 213," " Applicants' Supplemental Statement of Material Facts As To Which There is No Genuine Issue To Be Heard on Eddleman 213," " Supplemental Affidavit of Robert G. Black, Jr. on Eddleman 213," and " Supplemental Affidavit of M. Reada Bassiount on Eddleman 213" were served this 5th day of April,1985 by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid, to the parties on the attached Service List, except for Charles A. Barth, Steven Rochlis and Wells Eddleman to whom the package was sent by Federal Express.
' Dale E. Hollar /
Associate General Counsel Carolina Power & Light Company Post Office Box 1551 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Dated: April 5,1985 (919) 836-8161
SERVICE LIST James L. Kelley, Esquire M. Travis Payne, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Edelstein and Payne U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Post Office Box 12643 Washington, D. C. 20555 Raleigh, North Carolina 27605 Mr. Glenn O. Bright Dr. Richard D. Wilson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 729 Hunter Street U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Apex, North Carolina 27502 Washington, D. C. 20555 Mr. Wells Eddleman Dr. James H. Carpenter 718-A Iredell Street Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Durham, North Carolina 27705 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Thomas A. Baxter, Esquire Delissa A. Ridgway, Esquire Charles A. Barth, Esquire Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge Myron Karman, Esquire 1800 M Street, NW Office of Executive Legal Director Washington, D.C. 20036 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Bradley W. Jones, Esquire U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Docketing and Service Section Region II Office of the Secretary 101 Marietta Street U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta, Georgia 30303 Washington, D. C. 20555 Robert P. Gruber Mr. Daniel F. Read, President Executive Director Chapel Hill Anti-Nuclear Public Staff Group Effort . North Carolina Utilities Commission Post Office Box 2151 Post Office Box 991 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 Raleigh, North Carolina 27602
- Dr. Linda Little Mr. Spence W. Perry Governor's Waste Management Board Federal Emergency Management Agency 513 Albemarle Building 500 C Street, S.W.
325 Salisbury Street Room 840 Raleigh, North Carolina 27611 Washington, D. C. 20740 John D. Runkle, Esquire - Conservation Councilof North Carolina Steven Rochlis 307 Granville Road Federal Emergency Management Agency Chapel Hill, North Carolina ~ 27514 1371 Peachtree Street, N.E. Atlanta, Georgia 30309 i
- . , - _ _ __ _ , . . . , _ _ _ . - .- , _ . - . _ -}}