ML20137L968
| ML20137L968 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Harris  |
| Issue date: | 11/26/1985 |
| From: | Eddleman W EDDLEMAN, W. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20137L975 | List: |
| References | |
| CON-#485-370 82-468-01-OL, 82-468-1-OL, OL, NUDOCS 8512030570 | |
| Download: ML20137L968 (100) | |
Text
,, e
~
n UNITED STATES OF AMERICA gy NUCLEAR BEGULATORY COMMISSION
'85 my 29 P2:49 BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD rr"... m i-Glenn O. Bright occhEQh3 m bt ' /"
Dr. James H. Carpenter James L. Kelley, Chairman In the Matter of CAROLINA POWER AND LIGHT CO. et al.
)
(Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1)
ASLBP No. 82-1468-01
)
E Wells Eddlenan's Letter re Exhibit Numbers on Contentien 57-C-3
Dear Administrative Judges:
As instructed, I an nroviding this letter identifying the various exhibits which counsel for Anolicants and for Nuc and FEMA Staff have agreed nay be adnitted to the record, and tho se they.have not agreed to admit (which I want narked for identification in the record) concerning Eddlenan Contention 57-C-3 The June 25 1985 transcript indicates Eddienan 68 is the next Exhibit number.
Eddlenan Exhibit 68 is the firs page of iten (a) identified in O
Applicants ' counsel Ridgeway 's le tter to ne oc 10-22-85 (a cony of which
.o v o is enclosed for your convenience and because it is referred to in the 88 5700-3 hearing transcrints of Novenber h and 5,1985), the Data Sheets 0%
tgg captioned "Measurenant of Acoustic Properties of Homes in the Shearon OQ Harris EPZ".
CJh Eddlenan Exhibit 69 is the 2 July tables contained in iten (c) of the 10-22-85 letter," JULY Monthly Average Meteorological Paraneters" Eddleman Exhibit 69-B is the attached 8 nage table also in ite-1 (c) b0b j
1 i
- s -,
C cntitled Carolina P;w;r & Light C:monny, Shccron Harris Nuc103r Pcw;r Plant on31ta Matcorolegical Data For ths Pcriod 1973 through 6/30/85, 1 AM through AM (sic), Months of June, July and August" which is NOT stipulated in, though I believe I did cross-examine on it.
Eddleman Exhibit 70 is item (e) of the 10/22/85 letter, pp 471-h83 of Dr. Karl Kryter's The Effects of Noise on Man (sic)
Eddleman Exhibit 71 is item (h) of the 10/22/85 letter, Driscoll, Dulin and Keast, " Attenuation of Northern Dwellings to a Linear Source of Noise".
Eddlenan Exhibit 72 considts of the rest of the information referred to in the 10/22/85 letter (excent iten (d) which is A Board l
Exnibit, see Transcrint Nov k or 5) and is NOT stipulated in by Applicathts or NRC Staff or FEMA Staff, consisting of the last 12 data sheets of 10/22/85 letter iten (a ), and itens b, f,g,1, j,k,and 1 as identified in that letter, attached.
It is my understandin6 that Eddleman Exhibits 68, 69, 70 and 71 are to be adnitted to the record on contention 57-c-3 under the stipula tion, while Eddlenan Exhibits 69-B and 72 will be marked for idsitification only fbr the record.
I have sun, lied conies so narked for the Board, and three to N9C Docketing and Service.
Since the Anolicants and Staff have these docunents, I ask that they sinnly navk then as described herein.
' dells Eddleman ec w/o enclosure: Servic e List cc w/
Enclosure:
NRC Docketing and Service (for record) (3%)
t
1 m
.)
8.
SHAw. PITTMAN. PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE
..Co - sr...r.
w.s ia.GTQas. O. C. 20036 i
-- yngc.,.,,
je go;;;f.ppp..
. g y.s m.!v,yg.
-,f.e ur p... 9..
re.ar
- - ::.r.%m.
eg.a:+n.
,,. x i&,;e,g,d, ;3,.,.1.,
-.. ~..
N~f!!@"~~
EEi'.OA *."'"
g,.
ta, s u
a-.u. ww-.
.. c.
==rch...".*-
" 3*
%, fj':t l
r-9'.c s.igi :
mq..~.T3.
g<_a_a,, ~.:Jy l..-
in.
.ieyp.gw.y.,..
.p
- .q, an.
- n. m a.
t
..n..~...,
_~r2,..
.... ~.-
,g..
.m..: _e.i.._. x....
w.s:tym.
_3 t
p..u c_y.,.
c
- ny,.
3._.s m.-
.u.w.,e s w g*.;v: g -. g u 28 g#L. 3 p"4"< "2c.
ae ws gl.w%@h....
L ym-.
c-bu41"
...,b W
.IS42.5. - '!I".252 **.P
- b. E9"c'..?.t.1cf '."".**
g?w?!."
c>.
- Di'.f." #T"."."
W.T."..?v"0"4.* *
- &.:frJ
...=....
1
....u.
1
\\
...,.e.-
October 22, 1985 (202) 822-1227 Mr. Wells Eddleman e
806 Parker Street Durham, North Carolina 27701 In the Matter of Carolina Power & Light Company and North Carolina Eastern Municipal Power Agency (Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant)
Docket No. 50-400 By Express Mail
Dear Wells:
Enclosed please find copies of:
(a) 13 Data sheets, captioned " Measurement of Acoustic Properties of Homes In The Sliearon Harris EPZ" (b) 4 Data sheets, captioned " Noise Measurement of Window Air Conditioner in Bedrooms" (c)
Meteorological data (comprised of 2 tables, captioned
" July Monthly Average Meteorological Parameters" for 1:00 a.m. and 4:00 a.m.,
and 1 table (8 pages) cap-tioned " Carolina Power & Light Company, Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant Onsite Meteorological Data For The Period 1973 Through 6/30/85, 1 AM Through AM, Months of June, July & August")
(d)
EPA-600/1-77-010 (U.S. Environmental Protection Agen-cy, February 1977)
i O
Mr. Eddleman October 22, 1985 Page 2 (e)
- Kryter, K., The Effects of Noise On Man (Academic Press, New York, 1970), pages 471-83 (f)
Anon, " Noise Environment in Urban and Suburban Areas," Report FT/TS-26 (Federal Housing Administra-tion, Department of Housing and Urban Development, March 1968)
(g)
Anon, " House Noise Reduction Measurements For Use in Studies of Aircraft Flyover Noise," SAE Aerospace In-formation Report AIR 1081, (Society of Automotive En-gineers, New York, October 1971)
(h)
- Driscoll, D.A.,
J.P.
Dulin, Jr., and D.N. Keast, "At-tenuation of Northern Dwellings to a Linear Source of Noise," (presented at 95th Congress of The Acoustical Society of America, Providence, R.I., May 1978)
(i) 3 tables, captioned " Housing Units Within Shearon Harris EPZ With Storm Windows," " Distribution of Housing Units' By Age and By Window Area Requirements, Shearon Harris EPZ," and " Exterior Material of Year-round Housing Units, 1982, Shearon Harris EPZ" (j)
- Carter, T.M.,
S. Kendall, and J.P. Clark, " Household Response to Warnings," International Journal of Mass Emergencies and Disasters, 1, 1:95-104 (1983)
(k)
- Mileti, D., T.E. Drabek, and J.E. Haas, Human Systems in Extreme Environments (Boulder:
Institute of Be-l havioral Science, University of Colorado, 1975),
pages 44-45 l
(1)
Lindell, M.K. et al., Planning Concepts and Decision j
Criteria For Sheltering and Evacuation In A Nuclear Power Plant Emergency, AIF/NESP-031 (Washington, D.C.
1985), pages 5-15 through 5-17 The enclosed documents relate to the analyses described in the " Testimony of David N. Kaast, Alvin H. Joyner and Dennis S.
Mileti on Eddleman 57-C-3 (Night-time Notification)."
l l
Sincerely, i
bp. fu, ry pp Delissa A. Ridgway Counsel for Applicants Enclosures EkI/(%Poencl.)
Attached Service List
/
I
(
0bt 0N D'
Old C
j r
Page 1 of %
MEASURD4ENT OF ACOUSTIC By: Ct;K f. JHF PROI ERTIES OF HCHES IN THE SN/. ARON HARRIS EPZ
(- 13 44 house e l
oATE TIME:
ADDRESS: kimD 76\\
C41(
STRUCTURE: Frame Masonry Other (describe) :
Stories:
l Age: 40 -50 years Cossents tA3 t h jaw U A$ ws f % S t.A -
iMus V
Q BEDROO4 NO.1 - Locations bk [OfM O Area:
lb4 sq. ft.
Window Typen dnu@bO Storms
.)
Window Areas l$. [ sq. ft.
Operable Window Areas
}
sq. ft.,
Absorbtion: Hard Soft Meditan Air Conditioning Central Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.B.
Outside 4 Md ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(ds)
(ds)
Y
- 77 b
125 Hz
!1 250 Hz
$4 77
~l
~
500 Hz W
7 IC 1
1000 Hz
!S 2000 Hz
@O 75 II 550 Hz 1/3 0.B_
r m
hm
~
M M M ASSOCI ATES. INC. M e
)
.\\.
7 FPage 2 of 4 MEASURIMENT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN WE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE 9 l
%e Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
0.B.
Outside e 40 f t.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz N#I'/
b/
7 250 Hz bb 9[
O'O 500 Hz 8b N
17 1000 Hz 9'l
[(4 38 2000 Hz bl 8
3b 550 Hz 1/3 @.B.
bb 3 l-Background Noise at pillow with operating,
?
/
and windoive closed:
kb dBA O/
500 Hz O.B.
.87 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCMMENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CCMMENTS:
k *
[f 1 I */ *\\ '
/ ' l' e
'd V M t 1
\\
y I
l m
hm t
M uu Assoc ATas, inc.d e
O hj)- h f
0%0k MONTHLY AVERAGE METEOROLOGICAL PARAMETERS l
de )
f' f C 1 A.M. - RDU Wet Dew Resultant Sky Station Air Bulb P t.
R.H.
WUU Wind (1/10)
Press (OF)
MPH (Dir)
(MPH) 1984 7
29.575 69 68 67 -
92 5.9 20 3.3 1983 4
29.57 72 68 65 80 6.4 20 0.3 1982 6
29.58 73 70 68 87 4.4 16 1.5 1981 6
29.56 75 72 70 84 3.9 13 1.5 1980 4
29.54 72 70 70 93 5.4 18 1.9 1979 6
29.59 68 67 67 94 4.4 21 0.8 1978 5
29.57 71 69 68 91 4.8 16 1.9 1977 3'
29.61 73 69 68 85 4.6 20 2.1 1976 4
29.53 71 68 66 84 4.1 1.9 2.1 1975 7
29.56 69 66 65 87 3.6 17 2.0 1974 4
29.57 70 67 66 88 5.6 19 2.7 1973 5
29.56 70 68 68 93 5.2 18 1.8 12 Year Average 5
29.58 71.1 71.1 67.3 88.2 4.9 o
(3181BDM/krs) 1
w Sbico Obkbab W Y) d ot)
}
MONTHLY AVERAGE METEOROLOGICAL PARAMETERS 4 A.M. - RDU Wet Dew Resultant Sky Station Air Bulb P t.
R.H.
WUU Wind (1/10)
Press (OF)
MM (Dir)
(MPH) 1984 8
29.57 68 67 67 94 5.7 20 2.4 1983 5
29.57 69 67 65 88 3.7 20 0.8 19P't 7
29.57 71 69 68 89 3.5 19 1.4 1981 6
29.55 74 70 69 86 3.5 34 0.3 1960,
4 29.53 70 70 69 97 4.7 19 1.4 1979 6
29.58 67 66 66 96 4.6 23 0.8 1978-5 29.55 69 68 67 95 4.4 17 1.5 1977 3
29.60 69 68 67 94 3.2 19 1.6 1976 5
29.b3 69 66 65 88 4.4 24 1.9 1975 7
29.55 68 66 65 90 3.6 18 1.1 1974 5
29.57 68 67 66 92 5.6 19 1.4 1973 5
29.55 68 67 67 97 4.5 16 0.9 12 Year Average 6
29.56 69.2 67.6 66.8 92.2 4.3 1
(3181BDM/krs)
h Y
s nmOnene e
no.Onnnn n. m e c.,- o l
n et w e n e m e
m e n e n n,m a
e
-O-moco se v n.n e w n e e
engeo
.mmm-sco o n e. n n n.
e a
K e
e e
e e
mecocem s
o pec e e n e e
e* O m m e e m e
e eemerwo e
a me-.ece l
CenMnce is o w.n - g ee m o
Om-seca
-e e
e c o.r= - O w -
.e m e m.e - m e
c e
eemmM-*
m ci e
ena*eewn e
- n.m e r= w n
-eO e
ecec ee e n,m o v.-
e e
eneO-ee e
e n..~
e - m.m a
<anO~-mm e
e-e m ee O g = mie nn.of-pg m
enec-
-e e.
-w-e en-w-e e
me---
=
.n--n e
n
.n n e
i n - N ce e
n-nn i
e n - es n e
e
.e i
=
e e
e e
e e
e a
e es i
t a
e imonOcwM ee C2 Oeem e
emO-O@en a e m Qin o e ein e
mO=
10.o Ocwn a2 O. O =.. O. O. O O.,.. 0 O. ' O.
c e
e e
. O O== - O. O. O.
O. O.
.. O. C. io.
e e
-OOO g
e e
e
,e e
e aw e
-Q C O 0:0 0 0
- e' C 010 0 0 010
>OOOOOOO e
O C.O O O Oio e
iOOOOOOO e
w.1 e
e e
l e
e e
ee e
og ow e
e a
e
-C s
e a
e e
e e
e
.e e
a e
e e
(
=
s e
a e
5 c
s e
e I,
e m m O O
- e r=
.e r=
iO W e c'w e
a
- e e
-mOv e
- Oro o - Nic e
in ce o e.m e w se m n o.'s v -..e
- n. O.im. e.= min 3
g'.w n m. w. v.'e n e.
. O. @ W m. v.
w e
s e
- e. n =r
.m o. n, e. e c a
=
e e
seee@mme e
nCme>mn e
= m m e.@ >
e
= 0 n o
- me
, tooeoon-eninm--n as e e
en>r=---
e e M*O e - -**
e s e n > m -== -
e 4>
a e
e e
semoo---
O.
3 e
i e
e I1' i
e e
J 6
t e
e e
j e
e e
e
.e e
e e
y I
e e
ie I
lo e
.-Owonca e
C O.- O w eio e
iO. m o o.ic,e o
.e O mi,O n e o i e'O m, 8, c c. n in. n v e e n. 5 no
.e n o.ir. w e n.!O.
w e
0 e
. e.. *,
e
- e. osc. o. n v.io.
... c.
5
.e e
o e.
ge e
ag g
e m m es m * - O e
em>=e=-O e
in m C o.- - O
.e
- miO e - -10 e
toeOr+-0
=.
2 as e
eg n T m e e
e v ce v n e a!
e 19 N w M.e e
'e vngne ei e
sg n gy n e o e
'e e
e 3
e e
e e
e e
e i
.e e
e e
f e
e e
e e
e e
s e
e e
e e
i e
e e
i e
4 e
2 e
.N M @ c e w ee e
O n.c - r= mim e
immeene-
.e
- mio e > new e
nemO eeC e=
c oC e
' @ - n ti - fi r=
e m in 9 fi fi:W e
im== n v 'f's n W ee m -'m o n new e
se-ncnn@
2 e Q==
e e
e e
8
> <a N
<=
c 0 W W*n n -
e cOowwnn-e
@ O e W'fi n ~
s e Osw w n n'~
e em o @ e'n n -
2.J O
= ce s
e e
s e
t eken e 2==
e e
e e
e
=%
ag >
e e
i e
e e
34@
W-' tte e
e e
e e
see o -
eo l
e e
e e
v3 s
C.d 0 ee e
i e
e e
' e.
I e- & at D ' S.a e
s e
e e
uOe e
i,
e e
s e
e h $ aus e
e
. ** e > *
- v @ @
'e m Pean ce W T e e
f ra r* @ f9 + m em @
le m em erm fi * @ ig e
.9e*em@$
= 4,, e,g i
.e ic. e. m. o.i m. e n.
r= w.im. r=. m. e.
- O w w v.@. r*
w w n. e. e=.i. 8.m. e n m e r=. 0 ag g.
==
ce cg g
so g-aw is <
O e e m e. n n ee. o.
e @ @ n n a,n O.
em m e n.n n n no n eee n n n,n mennnu se on w3 m'e 4wnew e n.w w i
ee n e w
.- o n.
- ienee am Cm
'g a.
.a m
k w
qw 5
g e
t w
ne-e n
=
=
g =o g,, o
=
g 4 m a O.R e
e e
e Cs
= au w e
ie i
e i
e
.e e g
e e as w e - o e
e i
e e
e 22=w 2
e '- fi e - n a en a
m -.@
c eien e
10 n m * @ O w
's O nin e e = se.
e se e e e-c n e
=
=4 e
e
- M 9== m e @
e m fi> O e m'e e
'T M O O > a e
.e e men O e tv@
e tm a m o r= 0 e
.J 2 e Z
e
.N - e e f a ce ie a a= re mgn e
.en = n mim w re e
n--m@9n a
'N - n m m v re OC*
em6w
==
e
=r i N m m fi =r e
v vefi m (=s fi v e
- g g ti miti n v e
w wifi n f=3new e
av v n M f's M v e
e e
e g as e=
e e
e e
e ug i
e e
l i
e e
a e
e e
to 3
o, e
e e
.e e
l e
nn..
i es..t. w e
a w w wl e
a es...w w Ie a
es. m te.e e
a
- n. in w a
w
.e 3.6 a
36 34 e e el' b") in e
a e
e.e e e
u e e e.
e
, y ere e ea u
e
- eee e
.a e w one nas e
see w w tea e
4 g e wiesa in,
!' a mie w w w, e
e-S e nas one w e
g ins w tas nas e
gew tas w tas' e
j e
w w tee ied' e
g tas teman w l g w tas w w l
3'38 m 3 w w in, i:
-8 m 3 w.8 3.'
3 3 ;3 3 L w wiw w
- e. e:
- 333 ei n 8.3 3 3 e
u.3wwwe, e
se m w e
ww e
o nas o.o o e
o' nae o o c
- . onas oio o
!e o.w o o ci I
@Qwooo s
e o. e e e
we e e ei e
ew e eae e e
we e a e,
e
.w e e e e e s e
.o e
se o e
e o e
o 5
e ow e e
e e
.w w e
.e wye e
sw y e... n 1
a ww e e
.w w e
.,w
.e c: =
- n'e e
.a I
==n m.,== = n e
in
.e c:
--n
'O
.e 0u-2 e
sia u a= 222=ww e
w 2. 2== w w e
iG u,,= 2.w w e
- o. u = 22.2== w w -
e
.e
.uu-2 8
e s w 2 2==
ee w22=ww e
t o== = C a g
- e e
- e c== Q g gi e
lo== = O'O 2
.I o = =O 4 3 3'3 0ms e
o==C2m o&33
'I i
e e
og&to 4 3 e=.2 3
e e
O433*
e e
Ca33*
e e
.e eA i= > $
3 4 as $ l e e
e g
a le e&
e
=
e sig 3 4 g:g
- = =
a le
= ='a s
344I
.e 3eea e
I e
e ew w 3 insa m
<e l'ies w 3, w a a a
e e
3 as e w w.3,w a a e
a#
w w.3 w a a e
sww3wae i
I e
im w o,w w e
.e a
inn o nas ine e e
is a in owwe e
a w o w wie e
.egwow= #
t
{
e
.3 o aa ee 3 eo e&
33o a&
6e e
e e,'o w&&o 3
33o b4 e
e p=
w;E E o
.e
=
w I Elo e
le= e w.E a O 6e a Ri
-e waao
=
e e se e w o ins w w ie e e.w o winow e
e4 e e
I m w Q - e= s. w
.e a wid== > e=.ena e la w o..+.w= w= w ie w a w w.w a
seewowww tas ee a w Qa=== wuns e
em== Q = = a= ens i
e
.waoa c.
ea weOa et e
inne a a 4
e w a.c a 4
e
.waoa A
e i t c. = c.4.J e
.e a ae= 0.J. die e
e4 & - O s.a e
- 8
& en - Q J J e e
4 4 = 0.4.s e 3 m e
3 i 44 e
e ew u. e f.as as3 v.=. = c w u.s
'I e
g4
.e E
85 e
.E E g e as sw u e.g - - O wusf=44=ic e
iw u g a,. = = c e
to
= ic e
e e== 2 se e
in.
s = 2 e
e===. 3 e
e ip== 5 u.*2 2 =
e-Z :e a===. 5 u ** ** a 2 e
e== "* a u a - 2 e
ag ' 2 2== ea 4
22=
a m'u 3 w w 3 ag er e 2 2'=
e i
e
== v m w w 3 le im a u 3 =2 2
ae I
e tw e. y 3 w w 3 e
e
> meu 3 winsi3 e
w3 e'
l e
.2 3 m er ae 2
3 er a e
2 5aa se 2
3ma e
.2 3ma i
.A e
e ine t== ens ees 2 ie nas
'E = w ins &
e s tas
&==.tne na.s E
'e w & *= ins wik e
ew
- 4. =I = w w ins ens G wI s
==.
I es e i==
w e
+ = =
i s a 3 a=. = = ine Z e. e ens ie
==
Z w i..
e
=
3 e
m
> n as..w in e
e w.3 e
le m w.is m 9 ie ga > an i.,
e tg a 3 = i. = 3
- I g o. =. =. c e
e
.e 3 gi
==== = c e l3 e
...O e
a4 m = ='
e :a as o = = = c i
s.
e
. < e. s c o.s e
4 e,s s o c.,
e eg e s:c o w ee g eis s o aIs l< m s w o o.4 e
e.
.e e
ee e
t e i e
eI I
l e
e le e
'e e
e l
e e
I e&
a ie eig io e
. O&
a n.#
e - e o
s Mia o
e 4'E G
.' e & w.o
=Na e
w
- na
\\
a e
s lg w o.* e
- a 33., a a v.J.
a.s A gwo
- M e
4wa a n.*=
w &,g.J > a=.4 e
et e
.J n= ** e es, a e.d e=== e a
e gg. 4 le aa e
e la a G.d>
= e e
ie 4 5 v as e e
as e
.w th y e as
- e
.e. O g me. 4. em a u as e a
w G, a u e e
==
- e= Q at e.. am om ie em Q 4 ** e= e=
e a=0,4***=m' e
- O 4 ** *
- so e
l er' e
is a u a s a
.e g a V.a.a a e
rg a v.a..J a ee e e.0 & w w'.,
u.s.d.4 e
isau.
5.gO,%wwo as -
e ee a sic & w w o e
Ee s
- E*O&==c iseO%iwwo e
e cos e
4e coes e
i
.. e s oca s
.escoo e
<ewaccw
~ ""'*****2:::!ss:222ERO 22:223 gggsx;2ss;;;3ss;t:3;;;;;3;;;3
- *,- Q n
e e O n @ c ate r-ce nmen=en e
C O O n e - =r e
a i
8 O c o.n v e. n w e.n n e e c e..Cecco e
E e
,e s
3 e
i@OOenee ie n
- O e c -r @
mcmc-r-e e
snwowoc se ow.rn-no a
o c c-e - e e e
e
- wcc=w-c
.e ewcne-e e
e n n --@ n n i
--N&cwwe c
e
.e n O e't-e e
.e eace*-m noce e
e non-w ee ence e -
e c=
e -
e
'n
- N nj ee N
.h N e
O*Nn l
l l
tl e
i s
e e
o e
'e O - O!c c m es eO=enmm e
r-O-0--m
=
- 2 e
to. 0 -. O. O O
. O. O.
.iO. O O.
- e o, o.== 0 0. O.' O e
ag e
,g e
3 av e
10 O O O.0 O O le 0 0 0 O O O.0 e
40000000 Q
ted; E e
e e
a e
le i
=
o,*
i
.e e
- C e
e i
e e
.e e
e e
i e
e e
c e
e e
e e
+e m C -.e - O : s
-w.Omwc0 e
- r w 0 O e
. O..e.'e e o
's o e.
i en. 0.
. O.r o, W e.
- o. O.e. O. r* w.
e 5
w w
e e
a i
.=
3 e
.e
.e s
e-O r= c'T w n
=s e Or- @ e e'm e
ese o e @.@ n m e
l we e
se n r-r - - -
e e e e e-e e m e-r-
+
l 6 2>
e e
s e
i e,
e.
e e
e e
e e
e a
0 e
e iO
- w l
e Ii.ei e to p corOO is 0 -tO O=r o'O e
le. n. e.orm e O I
6 im.. r. Cr e, e O.
. e.
n n. e. 6. w. w. O.
e w'r r. 0 l
e g
e e
.ic e o * *- - O
'e c e - O n n'O e
s'o n g w'N n o weOO e
- 24..a wnw.* e e
wnwwe e e
e e e
= = >
e e
e I
e e
e e
i e
e e
l e
e e
a e
e e
e e
- 2 e
n n e-O'm e w
.e e m e n - e.e e
- w e m oir o w CC e
n W * = n.i e. e. @
- e..e. e. c v's s e.==. n..c. c. 0 e
e e
2 e a=
e e
>4 e=
e
.cOWwnn- **
- Occ---
e w 0 W Wlo O n i
e 2s o > c4 e
's e
e i
as C. 43 f'l e
2=
e e
e 4 >
e e
('l 4 W
= an, e
.e Q
ec e
e e
y e
e se e
s e
no e
- = 4 t)
I se e
e e
l f
l ba=U ie - r nie n k 4
e to e
e sn e e n.n - e to woenene e
=4oE > 2 ir. e. =. w..e e n.
w e. w o. n n..
ie. r. e. e. - n a esa O e g,
s r.
g
. O, O e @ c C O.m o ineec**v i
ss 4
O 8,= e o e *
- N GWCM w.-
s e
i@ n W W.
r-n W W e e a
er-n @ W e e i
3 i
e i
c2En e
.eg-e g
{
g w
5e= 9 =5
- c. a f = e w E
e i
e m =
e e
e I
e 44wm-Q e
- e e
lm e c e'.n. w n 22*w 2:
e enn$nn,m i r e 8 r='.m. e *r e
e 6
i in n - e r Oe e,
n n.8 e e-r- e e,n -n--o,r8c
=a gi i
e r
e r-s2e e
,n-nee n
e n n-wn e
OC2i
=
m e O.gs
's e swwMMmmm.i wwemMmw e
'twnnnnw I
e i
44 I
e e
u pf e
e e
=
w 3 w,.ru
- w in. v e
.3...i
.e 5w e
e i
4 e
i i
e u eee ee u eeW e
u eee l
t e
a e wiw in.
e areinsw w e I a e w'm w l
i i
e ee w w ins tas e
e.
e
! g w inesias w i
i gww.ww e
eu 8" 4 t8'33 ll
- 333 t,w u.5.
- .3., w 3
~
i i
is 3 w w.
3 e
e e
OwGCC e
C ia* C C O e
C OCO I
e iw e e e e Ie e, e c i
e te o
e ie o
ee is e e e.
e iw e ee e e
ee and og e e
ein eg e lw ig e w-n a
=+n a.
>-n.
e e
.a.
e e d u, =2 ee Ou=2 e
u u s. 2 4
.. 22a e
ins 2.2== w ina e
sw 2 2 =.tna nas e
.Q = = 0'w w e
Q=-Oaa e
Q==Oma Q e. g $ 3 a
e e O G5 332
'O 4. 2. =3 2 ee e
.a. = g
- e. e
--k e ie.
4 e ee e c. 3'8 4 a e
e e e.
e e
Die 4 m e
3 4 at :3 e
l Ie w w'3 w as a.
e
.w w 3 was a sw ina 3,is,it a e
im te O tes ans a
'e a
eie# Q nas tas-e e
em ins Oihed w a e
e.3 ins.3 3 O ee
=
w E E'O e
ew w's E O l
- o sa t is 3 o
.3 o 4s e
e ee e eiw c w w w e se e citas to w 4 e w c..w. one is, e
sawo-e-w
.e awo====
e in w
=**w e
e iI n = $ s s e.
sw a C
8 ese m'Q E.J.J o ien e
.I a, E.s s e e
.tes a Q a
e to a g =. =.
I.a u. =
a e
e i
a e
.a e e.
e swueI.====c e
ae i
s== = o e
E G..
c e
.w u e 3 u.w.- 2 z
,e e= = 3 e- =. 2 e
e.
e p.
e 2 2 =.
8 a4 2Z=
0 e of 4
.2 Z u l
8 l>. e atU R ane and 3ee
> e=.u E and one 3 e
ik e= u E 'tas tae 3 l
e e
e 3 es l
. 2,a Sie a
- e 2 ' a.3. e a -
e
- 2 a =..=ns w a e
g i
i se a==.nas ese a
.I w
tas wim o
sw
.J.
e i
tes 2 in h ited e
es.e ned 2 is. b tad e
2 te. 2..te. ti, eef a
tad e
e s=
3e h em 3 e
g a 3siem hi3 0
lg a 3e..w b 3 S
e e
ig at Q e e
a4Q===Q e
434 Qw.==Q l
7.
We s
l e
.3 e s.m..e - Q
.c o s is e m.- s o c.
s.= m sic o s i
t g
s, e
es i
j e
ee a
4 i
e.
e I
e e e e
m i
e o
e es e
e.
ee o
,Iw%. n o.
s o, I w e, - a c.
iI w
e
- n o, i me e
mm e-. e e
ns so- - e 3 s s
e e-e
= =--
e.-. ~.- -
l E
5 u e e, e
sw u'as 4 4-e iw a.u. g a te
- e. e w
e,
= e.
.Em.8.8,ww
.8sas e
ass e
- a..
,f.
8as.
e e
l
%ww.eoa i
.i s % 'd w
.e i
e 6
e acs mi e
os e.
-aa'* * * *
- 2 :::s t:2:2:2 2 AK 2 2 2 2 E 2 2 E 2:2 2 8;0 3 3 $ 3;3:3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
\\
(
/
s CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT COlePANY 17:53 000NDAV, AUGUST 5, 1985 1
3 SHEARON HARRIS NUCEEAR POWFR PLANT 3
ONSI TE ME TEORDE OGIC AL DAT A 4
FOR Tite PERIDO 1973 THROUGit 6/30/85 t
MONill OF AUGUSI 7
C VARIA8LE LASEL N
MEAN STANDARD MINIBIUM MArtMUM STD ERROR SUM C
DEVIATION VALUE VALUE OF MEAN te
...........................................................-- IIOUR=Of --------------------------------------------------------------
92
- ~
33 5~eetffaeP AMBIENT ~iEEPIRITURETDEGREES F'
~
'tN4'~~
70.65 5.00 38.20 83 Of O. 14 94958 83 la 8AROPRES BAROceETRIC PRESSURE - INCHE S OF ME RCUR V 1228 29.69 0.13 29.36 29.99 0.00 364b6.06 as LOCAseBDP LOWER CAMBRIDGE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 830 67.99 5.33 46.70 78.40 0.19 SG428.95 se DPLICL, LITHIUse CHLORID (_ D(W POINT - DEGREES F __
1152._
._, 65 60 5.37
,,, 42.G0 _ _ _
75.84 _
___,O.16 __,75576.83 37 DELTATt DIFFERENTIAL T ElePE R A TURE 1 - DEGREES F 1267 2.64 3.07
-1.27 19,47 0.09 3343.37 se DELTAT2 DIFFERENTI AL TEsePERATURE 2 - DEGREES F 1837 2 25 2.80
-1.26 f2.90 0.08 2556.IG ts LOWreSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - tePH 1352 2.16 1.G8 0.00 13.14 0.05 2913.96 2
---------------------------------------------- ---- 6100R=O2 --------------------------------------------------------------
33 23 AasBTEteP AIESIENT TEasPERATURE - DEGREES F 1346 69.90 4.98 48.80 82.17 0 tI 94083.43 24 8AROPRES 84RoseETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF 8eERCURV 9230 29.68 O.13 29.37 29.98
- 0. mt 36508.43 25 LOCAMBDP LOWER CAamRIDGE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 990 67.54 5.53 45.60 103.50 0.18 66864.80 2e DPLICL LITHIUM CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1852 65.25 5.43 42.60 75.66 0.16 75169.00 27 DELTAft DIFFERENTIAL TElePERATURE t - DEGREES F 1273 2.68 2.95
-3.35 15.43 0.08 3413.26 2e DELTAT2 DIFFERENTIAL TEtePERATURE 2 - DEGREES F 9144 2.36 0 08 2G96.04 2s LOWPeSP6 LOUER EflED'SPIE6 -'sePA
~ ~^
~~~'i352 ~ ~ 2.'06 ~
~~ 2.82
-1.35
' ' ' -12.70 '
O.Of 2778.69
~
~
t. 59 '
" ~ d.'dO 12'.14 3a 31
*------------------------ DIOUR
- 03 --------------------------------------------------------------
33 33 AaRITE sep AeIS IE NT TEtePERATURE - DEGRiES F 1348- ~69I29 ~ ' ~ ' '5. ~6 t ~'- 5i~i6' -'
~ 5 tI51 - ' 7. h
'93id7.'5 f 34 8AROPRES BARO 8eETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF teERCURV 1232 29.68 0.13 29.37 29.98 0.00 3GSGS.58 as LOCAasSOP LOWER CAaSRIDGE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 991 67.23 5.39 45.50 77.20 0,17 66629.32 Jo DPLICL LITHIUse CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1954 64.94 5.50 42.40 76.04 O 16 74937.49 37 DELTAft DIFFERENTIAL TElePERATURE t - DEGREES F 1269 2.66 2.88
-1.45 13.69 0.08 3352.44 as DELTAT2 DIFFERENTIAL TEbePERATURE 2 - DEGREES F 1943 2.36 2.81
-1.44 12.40 0.08 2693.15 3e LOWNDSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - 8ePH 1352 2.06 1.5t 0.00 t t.4i O.04 2789.08 de es
HOUR =O4 --------------------------------------------------------------
C2 C3 Ase8TEteP Ats8IENT TEtePERATURE - DECREES F 1348 68.70 5.14 48.10 81.21 0.14 92613.57 44 84ROPRES SAROneETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF seERCURV 1232 29.68 O.13 29.36 29.98 0.00 36568.65 es LOCAasSDP LOWER Case 8 RIDGE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 960 66.83 6.00 45.23 123.30 O.19 64152.63 4e OPLICL LITHIUse CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F t155 64.69 5.62 42.68 75.85 O.17 74626.82 C7 DELTATt O!FFERENTIAL TEsePERATURE
- DEGREES F 12G8 2.63 2.99
-1.32 13.25 0.08 3332.09 de DELTAT2 DIFFERENTIAL TEtePERATURE 2 - DEGREES F 1940 2.36 2.85
-1.48 12.97 0.08 2694.87 as LOWNDSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - 80PH 1352 2.02 f.68 0.00 12.20 0.04 2735.8G Se St
IIOUR=OS--------------------------------------------------------------
S3
~
Ati3[INf TEIGPlRATURi OfGNEES F 1344 G8.25 5.18 47.60 80.73 0.11 98732.73 53 A8eB T E MP S4 Cf.pOPRES BAROMETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF MERCURY 9232 29.69 O.13 29.36 30.00 0.00 36579 25 Ss EOCAMBDP LOWER Cape 8 RIDGE DEW POINT - DEGRE E S F 1018 66.6G 5.58 42.88 76.20 0 18 G7391 79 Se DPLICL LITHIUM CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1952 64.35 5.69 40.97 75.48 O.97 -
74134.93 57 DEETAT1 DIFFERENTIAL T E tePE R A T URE t - DEGRE E S F 1254 2.61 2.93
-t.52 13.15 0.08 3272.29 Se DELTAT2 DIFFERENTIAL TEMPERATURE 2 - DEGREE 5 F 9134 2.33 2.88
-t.50 13 12 0.09 2G41 82 St LOW 9eSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - MPtt 1352 t.96 f.53 0.00 10.61 0.04 2650.18 60
t CAROLINA POwf3 0 LIQlf COMPANY 97.53 MONDOV. AUGIS T 5 1985 2
2 SHEARON HARRI5 NUCLEAR POWEQ PLANT 3
ONSITE METEOROLOCIC"L DATO o
.FOR_TF1 PERIOD 1273 THROUGt p/30/C5 C
LAM litROUGH AM C
MONTH Of AUGUST 2
C VARIASLE LASEL N
MEAN STANDARD MINIMUM MAXIDEUM SID ERROR.
.._ SUM,,,
C DEVIATION VALUE VALUE OF MEAN se gg
...............--......................................----- HOUR =OG --------------------------------------------------------------
s2
~~G8.35
'85.20 ~~ 46.90~ ~ ~~ 5070 8- - ~ ' ' - O!tA ~ 91565.6i
'~
13 AMSTEMP AMBIENT TEMPERATURE - DEGREES F 1344 to SAROPRES BAROMETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF MERCURY 1232 29.70 0.13 29.38 30.02 0.00 36594.94 is LOCAMSDP LOWER CAMBRIDGE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1012 66.6S 5.63 42.99 7C.50 0.18 67475.76 te DPLICL LITHIUIs CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1854 64.64 5.63 41.19 75.01 0.17 7459G.14 17 DELTATt DIFFERENTIAL TElePERATURE 1 - DEGREES F 1263 2.14 2.87
-1.62 13.29 0.08 2703.95 se DELTAT2 DIFFERENTIAL TEMPERATURE 2 - DEGREES F 1942 1.94 2.83
-1.60 12.20 0.08 2210.52 is LOWpOSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - sePH 1348 2.06 1.56 0.00 10.47 0.04 2776.75 3e 1
- 3..._.....__,______.._s........____.........____...........--- HOUR 07 -------------------------------------.-----------------.------
22 23 A8eTEleP AsetENT TElePERATURE - DEGREES F 1348 70.64 4.71 52.40
~83.01 0.13 95224.49 24 BAROPRES BAROceETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF teERCURV 1232 29.71 O.13 29.40 30.03 0.00 36607.00 2S LOCA888DP LOWER CAseRIDGE dew POINT - DEGREES F 1007 G7.67 5.35 43.3 76.50 O.17 68147.21 26 DPLICL LITHIUte CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES I ttS4 66.06 5.43 41.40 76.13 0.16 76228.71 27 DELTATt DIFFERENTI AL TEtePER ATURE 1 - DEGREES F 1246 0.07 1.74
-2.44 8.58 0.05 81.30 8.57_ _,
- 0. O?. g
.1 17 28 DELTAT2 DIFFERENTI_AL_TEnePERATURE 2 - DEGREES F
_,1145 _
-0.00 _ _
t.76 _ _ _ -2 dO _ _
. 10.54 0.O$
384G.08 29 LOWNDaPD LOWER WIND SPEED - BePH 1352 2.84 1.79 0.00 30
~~~--------------------------------~~-~~-- HOUR =O8 - - - - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - ~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
2n 32 33 Ate 8TE8eP A888I E NT T ElePER ATURE - DEGREES F 1344 74.06 4.53 58.69 88.17 0.12 99538.05 34 BAROPRES BAROseETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF teERCURY 4230 29.72 O.13 29.39 30.03 0.00 3G555.10 35 LOCAae80P LOWER CAseSRIDGE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 967 68.38 5.33 42.99 76.90 O.17 66054.99 as DPLICL LITHIUte CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1951 67.09 5.49 41.19 76.50 O.16 77225.G3 37 DELTATt DIFFERENTIAL TElePERATURE 1 - DEGREES F 1247
-l.17 0.65
-2.79 2.96 0.02
-1460.77 as DELTAT2 DIFFERENTIAL TElePERATURE 2 - DEGREES F 1865
-1.19 0.66
-2.78 2.5G O.02
-1388.68 as LOWNDSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - MPH 1359 4.04 2.05 0.00 12.01 0.06 5458.53 4e Cl At 43 44 45 es 47 8e es So Cl t2 S3 S4 SS
$5
$7 Se SS 60 e
8 s oans 12teil 7
Ig
8 e
e-e l
t 3
- N M Q-@ M e a
w
,*Ng-nO e n. e' e..m. e. e.
e r-m O
- N ->
e M P- - n c -,n e
o l
v c t-o e. v c c,-Sgep e
e
- e. e.., n.,. e...r e
i:
. r ic. c. n. e.r
'en v. m o.o, *r @
e g
e e
e te
.i i.
e n
e
'n > ar n e r= w 3
e n Oi emO-e r-m O c e o e is n > @ c m ele e
t c e e e., p.
l' Nin m e v e
enio-e e
- o e n W.c - f-ie n o'c e - vio e
i nsemmo e.
e
- e e e. r, c. n e
e e
e mie - r ee e
ic > n o r-e w le to mio n e e,.c
,e.e e. n e o.,
e e
,nceo nn e
e e
o a
@ e e m-en e m. m,n.n ecem,nn s
.o -r e-m
,e m,c m,nn m
e v;r e
im v r-e m vio e e
li r e.
e i
j.
e e
e e
e e
e e
}
l e
e i
I i
e e
i e
8 l
e e
e i
e o
e l,
io n m e..O - c m-e e O.m m o
-r e
e is o m m o O c e
.- O O m O =ic e
wommo-v
.. c..... o.
. o..... *.. C.
w e2,
e
- O..... o.
. oiN.... t.o.
-. O...... o.
e e
e e
a, e
e e
e e
.e.O O O 010 C O e
O 0:0 0 C O O e
aw
,oOOO0OO le ee O Oio O O o O e
ooocoOO u3 e
e a
e r
I e
.e l
l e
l e
4 ow e
l e
le e
e i
-o e
i r
g i e
.e i
e e
t a
Ie i
ie e
e e
4 Ie I
4 i i l
e e
e e
6e i
e I
i w m O O@ O -r ie o e o o e n==
s om-eeOv le o o*n n O mar-e
'to n n n 1 =3
- o. m @ 't. =r. n. n.
ge
- n. m.tr-w n. w.ie.
e
- r. o. o. n..- e o
@ m. n. S.i e. n. =. [e
- v. O. 6. n. e.
.,,e.
e W
a e
e
-meeeen le O mle..
e e
i.s r-nl.c o m is o i O c c,.c e -
c e-
- O e
emen@e-c o-e n
x.
e
. e n,- r - - -
e e
e-n e-c.. - - -
- 3. e e n w r- - l r-r- - - -
e i, n c-r= - - -
- n..
4>
e l
e I
a e
e 8
E e
e e
e
]
m
- s i
.e e
e e
i i
l e
is e
e s
g l
i e
l le e
i e
e I
e e
i
.i e
e Iw e
.- e to O.m c O le O m'* O O v *C e
'O e o o..*- n o w0 e
o m:w Or 560 e
lo O =r 0 *r e
- ~. n. c. O. n n. O n n. v. c. d n. o.
e
- n. n. r. e. o n.io.
e
- o. n. e. r.e e
e
- e. n. c. 0. -. n. io.
a e
i o.
3 e
es e
e
- m!o e - IO e 10 m C ru - - 0 e
=w e
c m N m'* - O Ie w m ~ m = *'O e
n m O e* - O e
24 e
vhvne e es v nig n e et a
g n v nie e e
vnvna e e
v n v nls e siis 'le e
e g
l t
l e
e a,
El e
,i i
e e
j e
e l
l e
a e
e e
e e
e 0
e
[
s l
e e
e e
e i
e i
e e
i e
e e
2 e
'n n O -r - ea O e
e i
o n'r.e O c'w n
e
- n O O't e e
's e n
- N n e:r-e ir n e N r c O c'
o O.
C.
. r. O. m. r=. c e
e
- n. ~..;
. e. r.er=
o g. e. Nir. e. r=
- e. a t e. N. m. P,,r-up. r=.
.,.e. r= r-e a
e 2
er a.>n e
e e
p.
c 6
e e
N g
e
@ o @ t-e= n -
e W Oie r-n n.-
e ps o e ein n -
i w Oi s r n n -
e e o e es n n a 2-o EA l
I' s
I t
,. e l
e
<a4n
=.
s e
i i
e m. s.-
>.2 e
e j
e e
w e
e e
t e
ia e
i is e
e s
6.* Q eQ e
e
.i o a oP u3 e
e i
e e
ie e
e i
i e
is e
l t
I wag 3E a
i e
I le e
e
(
G m =u c e w
!m e-n e w n e le e
g e
.e ena n c e oce e
won e-e
=<o e. e. e. c.. n. o n.
- n. w..ic. o. n.
.in.
w e. n. d.i.. n.B c. e.M. w. w. *n e
o n>
mn e
le o
. in c o w ei lo.w.e.w..n w o n
awok 2,
i.o n
'w e n o,n n.n
=
.m n
a-3
e I
Q-wo e
i l
i.
Q. 2 E O I.
e is a
e
}i e ;
a m
e r
l
.e l
e
.e e
e i
44wa-e e
e e
e 2 I
- w.
2 e lo e O Wie - e
.o m o e O n
.m e
eveOeee a
w wie n - > m e
g, a cirio, O
=
4e e
e n w or P - er n e
= wie r-== niti e
- =rri n o n n s
in en'n p - nte
-w e
i-w e re- - ar
.J 2 e
e cenwwnc c con g g nem o
e e a Tag N @
t
- -.N T w nF@
cc g.
e
--e-
==-*===*
e
- = =
-s*
e 1
e so e N WIT h @
e
- = * *
- t
- = - - - - * *
- I am _
e i
ge e
i i
=< -.
e i
e e
a e
i uw i
e 8e I
te e
e e
mi e
i e
e e
O s
w' re me e
e e
l e
a w is, w le me www e
er w is, w e
a w w is, e
a wine, w g
g e
3w.
e 3w e
pw s
piw e
3w 4
e U
Wee ie us e e el e
u Wee e
us eee e
u Wee e
a e w.w w e
mie w w wl e
a m wiw w a.
siewww e
Qt e wiw w e
t wwwww ee w J" w w w,Iawwinswl
- aiBB a
www,ww 4winsww "Eaa3 e
wwwww "Wa
' uo.33 858 333 i
s i i s wiw ins
_swww is e
ww e
e e
_ e w-1 I
C w Q.Q Q e
CowQQQ e
owQQQ e
0,wQQQ e
Q w Q;Q Q t
s e Q e
to Q
e e Q s
e e
e Q
w elQ w e.i i wee e
e e e e
we e e e e
e e e a
e e e e
we e i e i
i wi i
w e
e w
a w ie i
wwe e
aI eie -N e
a so ** N e
Q*
-N e
m l
$= 9's N e
mZ o= ** N U O e= em21 e
d ik 2 e
d u e-2 )
e d u > 2; e
d e
Q
!e= 2.2. =O g a w 2e =2 =.w w e
e
= w ins e
w 2 2 =iw w e
w 12=ww e
w22-ww w
Qe
=caa e
e e
Q = = Oiet a e
Q==QmG e
Q==Qma O h>3 3 I e
QQ.33%
e Q Q.13 3 I e
O Q. 3 3 Z e
c Q.:3 3 I i
e e e e.
om e-4 e
e e e,
e- > 4 e
e e e.
> > > CL e
e a e 3 e e'a
> o=
e e s C.
- c.
e 3e4I e
3 4 4l e
wena 3 w a m m Die e I e
.3 e
3 4 as E ins nas 3 ina,ot a e
e and ens 3 w a
o w w 3 w a QB e
nas ins 3 w a a j
e a s w o;a w e a
0ww e le a anw o w wie e
e e
asiwOww e
e is = c.w w e e
3 Q qa e
3 3.0 a ti e
. 33Q ge. E e
a a10 gg a
g>a Q 4g i
P-w;n E O e
>W w I EiG e
- een wIEO e
- = e l andI a Q e
wIao e
4 en w ci as ins w e
e Ww Q w w.eas e
4 in w Qiw w w e
4 e w Q w wiens e le e w Q tas nas nas t
e a w O==< > e-w e
a wec = o= e-w e
et w o e> > w e
a ins c s= p ew e
is w 0== - > w a
w a Q m) c.
e ins 810 m a
e ensat Q mi c.
e wa Q er som e
Iw a O al c.
e a c.== Q.J a e e
aw ew== O J J e e
& e.=== OI.J.J e e
et e.== Q.J.D e
a Q. = O f 8 -J in i
nas u e Z ** **le e
I ese4 e
5 J 4 41 e
5 m 44 e
I Gr J 4 4 0
E E
J'4 4 l
w u. e 26= = Q
'e wU Z==
e wue === Q e
u e e=rO e-== 3 u > > lQ e
ins u e === Q I u(> > z e
e e- =
Z e
>== 3 o= > 2 e
2 e
>== 5 U.*
- 2 l
22=
e a 4 2Zw e
a4 22=
6 et 4 22=
e or *
.2 2 -
l e
ae e
> > u g e w ins 3
,e s= > u I w wt3 e
> > U 31w w 3 e
u 3 ins ins l3 e
- u E'w w 3 e
2 a.at a e
2 3 m al e
2 Die a e
2 3 m al e
2w D ict a
.A e
ins a==, ins nas a e
end a ** ins nas a e
ins a==nad ins a e
las a ** ins wie e
nas E a ** tas W m w Z w w inn i==
w e
==
tisa Z w is.itaa e
=
w I;w w w e
==
iw Zis,wsw e
== 0 w I w is, w e
e e a 3 win.
3 e
e B P-w is.
e e a 3 e-tm a 3 e
g ar t 3 m w is.13 e
g at 3 >'m m 3 E 4 O = = =13 e
e I 4 O ai== = 0 e
I e O at= =O.J io e
o e
B 4i0 > = =ic e
a 4 o =*.=== o a
e 4 e.a.J Q Q.J e
4e
.J =J Q Q J e
4eaaQ e
4 e a.J Q Q s e
4 m.s.J Q Q.d e
e e
e e
e e
e e
e e
e e
e e
w e
en G.
O e
e4 Q
e in 46 0
e e aw O
e e ow Q
.4 e
gwQ
= h c.
e gwQ - Ni e
gwQ
- N o.
e awQ w n re.
e gwQ
= N Q.
.a a g.J > M.e a.
e e
a a e. Jim > @
e e4 E et e s >= e-e e
I mig.J k Wie e
a Qt C.J > > e e
e e-O 4 nd 4 ins 4 5 u.> e-6 as
.a u 4 41 e
w 4 I.u.se 4 w 4 5 U 4. p p I
di e
waXu44 en e
e
> t4
==e= k.
e
>c4 e
> Q,4== e a
> c e== ee= e=
m e
e a u w.a.J e
g IV.J.a.4i e
e a u.JI.J.J e
e a iu.J.J.J1 e
g GI u.d t.J.A el e
I g O Ga w ins O e
a 4.0 cm w eas O e
I g Q e,iw w Q s
3 gio c,w w'c e
a e O Q'w w Q 4 e.aQ Q O'ld 3'
e 14 e a O Q Q.e e
a 4 e w O!Q Q.a e
4 00.J Q Q Q.J e
4 to.# c ro o.4
-aa'*****2::
2cs:222:2 A22:222E 2A222223;;;;;t08:333; 23333.
I CAROLINA POWE2 O LIGHT CD*8PANY 10: 22 BeUM3 A V. AUGUST 5.
1985 2
2 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR PohE3 PLANT 3
ONSITE METEOROLOGICil E,tTA c
FOR,,T. HElE RIDO.1973.THROUGl_ $/30/85 C
MONTH OF JUNE 2
C wARIASLE LASEL N
MEAN STANDARD MINIteUM MAXIMUM STD ERROR SUM s
OEVIATIDN VALUE VALUE OF MEAN se is
HOUR =O6 --------------------------------------------------------------
12 1517 40.30_ _ _ _ _. _...., _, _ _ _, _
_ _ _ _ _ _ _. _.99828.42 83 AseTEMP AsetENT TEMPERATURE - DEGREES F 65.81 6.16 88.28 0.16 se 8AROPRES BAROteETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF MERCURY 1545 29.69 O.13 29.30 30.03 0.00 45873.03 15 LOCAse80P LOwfR CAtIBRIDGE dew POINT - DEGREES F 1238 63.30 6.59 40.75 76.00 O.19 78362.56 se DPLICL LITHIUbe_CHLORIPE_ dew PQINT - DEGREES _F 1473 _ ____ 61.65 _,
_,,6.74 38.00_.
73.65..
O.18 _, 90814.24 37 DELTATt DIFFERENTIAL TEtePERATURE 1 - DEGRE E S F 1416 4.86 3.08
-1.48 14.06 0.08 2635.14 se DELTAT2 DIFFERENTI AL TElePERATURE 2 - DEGRE ES F 1208 1.59 2 90
-l.80 13.62 0.08 1917.70 39 LOWNDSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - MPH 154f 2.51 1.73 0.00 P.74 0.04 3863.93 to 28
IIOUR=O7 --------------------------------------------------------------
22 23 AssBTEMP AseSIENT TEtePERATURE - DEGREES F 1515 68.87 5.3t 45.70 82.72 0.14 104339.93 25 LOCAteBDP L WER MA8888ti6G5'DE wlDiNT~ T 6EGREES F' 1543 29.70 0.13 29.31 0.00~
45827.60 24 BAROPRES~BAROteETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF beERCURV t149
'64.24" 6.23' 4130~
30.04 ~
0.18 "~~738t f94 ~
76.5 24 OPLICL LITHIUte CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1471 G2.99 6.45 40.30 74 70 0.17 92656.47 27 DELTATt DIFFERENTIAL TEMPERATURE 1 - DEGREES F 1433
-0.47 8.27
-2.08 9.04 0.01
-609.27 2e DELTAT2 DIFFERENTIAL TEBePERAIURE 2 - DEGREES F 1237
-0.61 I.11
-2.39 7.16 0.01 g
-756.15 2S LOWNOSPD LOwfR WING SPEED - 8ePH 1539 3.47 f.95 0.00 93.40 0.05 5338.82 30 3
HOUR =O8 32 33 AssBT EasP A8181 E NT T E 00PE R A TURE - DEGREES F 1508 72.26 5.17 54.70 8G.92 0.83 108970.62 34 BAROPRES BARO 8eETRIC PRESSURE - INCHES OF MERCURY 1541 29.78 0.13 29.30 30.04 0.00 45775 51 35 LOCAse80P LOWER CAasBRIDGE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1258 64.34 6.66 40.96 76.90 O.19 80935 62 3s DPLICL LITHIUse CHLORIDE DEW POINT - DEGREES F 1465 63.50 6.79 40.60 75.30 O.18 93022.77 37 DELTATt DIFFERENT I AL TEISPERATURE 1 - DEGREES F 1425
-1.12 0.53
-2.79 6.48 0.01
-1600.1t 3e DELTAT2 DIFFERENTI AL TElePERATURE 2 - DEGREES F 1259
-1.24 0.52
-2.53 1.43 0.00
-15G5.80 31 LOWNDSPD LOWER WIND SPEED - 88PH 1539 4.60 2.12 0.00 13.90 O 05 7049.97 4:
C2 43 45 46 47 88 41 Se St S2 S3 54 SS 54 57 sa S3
&n
[
a s ones trait f
C f ll a
I e
g u.
e o n. m a m a*
e m @ m u c O f4 e
cO*recen e-ewmmA00 i
e w n n c se w w re e w
- e..w.c o u c
. @. @. w r. c e.
r U n u @ r. O.
.e
. 01 c. e. e v. =.
e e
m e
e e
e I
e
-, c - n e - n e
O r-c m e c e e
m,cemmwo e
n-mcenn e
e.e - e O % %
y mn@ne-O e
enewmen e
nM@mco-e wneCn e
=wng-ec e
e e-ncemen e
encocc0 e
on>Ocem e
eneewee.
n-e-chn e
y e
moennne e
eowmnne e
cocmmNn a
eOnnnnn e
wO=rnMmn m =r @ e e
m *r C e e
e
@wcs e
C -r @ c e
ence c
e e
e e
e t
i e
e e
e e
e e
a e
e e
e e
i e
MOr=ceOn e
m'O n c O O =r e.
MOO.@@Cw e
t9.O e c m O r m.O n @ m o w a
e
- 0-=O-O e
-O--o-0 e
~10 - - O - 0 e
-On+O-O~
-o--O-O e-c2 e
e ae e
e e
e g
.a w 00COC30 e'
O O Cio C O O e
O'OOOOOO e
OOO.0OOO 000000C e
e 3
e e
e e
a e
e i
e e-Ow e
e i
-O e
e e
e e
e e
e i
e e
e i
4 e
e e
s e
e
{w e
@ @ C O 'r e a e
C - O *r m e v e
Oecchwo a
>=OO-No i
m n o n e-e,m e.'m. o. e n. n. e.
{g n-@ e.@.w.m e r. O. r. ' m - e. o.
e e
. e. n. 'm. - e. o.
e
- m. o n,. r. o e
e e
e e
e
@meceme e
- O @ w e r-O e
Omenere e
Ommmmmm o
m o o m @* ci m
we e
e n r-r- *- - -
e e m e > - - **
.e ent-M--
e ennm--
e r= m e-r= - -
- c..
e>
e g
e e
e e
e e
e e
e e
e e
a e
e e
e e
e
! e e
e e
. e OOOONgO e
O O O:0 e n o e
Cim O O - O O e; O e O'O h @ C.
e CmOOeOO g
e v.' n v. O. c' C.
e.
- n. e. w c e. O.
- e. e. n w O.
e!
O. - m.*. - m. O. e e
e n.- m. r. new C w
e gg e
s e.
e a
e mer
--O e
n w.e * =- O m.m W c
.e O e.
me e
e e @O - - O' e
e'e W 0 -- 0 2<
e onwrr e e
me e w>n s w e e-w n =r w e e e
wnww e
e e
e.
I i
e i
e e
e i
e i
e e
e e
e e
e
.e s
e s
e Q.g ete e e or== r=
e O m n r n e er e
-meOene e
e-r" e O 8 r= mi e
m'r9 m e e e e-
- c e-nmnne e-nwnne e
e-nw-nw e
e--w
-w e
e-ww-ne 2 e a-e e
e e
>e s
=-
e e o e e m.m -
a wOcicnm-e vio e e m n *-
e er O W e m n ~. e wiO c c n'm -
2a O esem I' =4
'e e
s a
e e
e i
i ae'J
.s
.e e
e e
wo eQ e
v*
e i
e e
e i
6a e
i e
e
- a. = 5 e
e.
e i.
6 e
,6 e.
e e
G e =o e
e mr-OOnwm e
w>WeO-e ei e > e'O e e et e e e e e C.c e q r-e e e.e m g
e
= e 0
- m. W. 'r. m. r* @ m m
N. @. w.
. M. e. -
- c. + W. - # h i m.
- e. W. O. @ W. e. O..
- s. @. r* #9. r=.'s C e
s w c. = g 3
n m
g 8
- o.. e e n.w n n n; O.
Ce ennn e O m e.e n n e C a.
e.m e w n.n n eeewnnn e om
.new s
-new
-new
+new enew s I Ben 3,
5 5
! g-a a-e a
w w-Be-C = =a 8 3 me e
e e
. a. w a -
s,.
=.
e e
e e
e e
2 :.
,.e 2
e
--emen-e
..emen.
e
- .0,ee-.
... ~.0 w..
e ennecwe
==
.m e
- c > e O * *-
e
- c c e O @ P*
e N e r-e O e e-e m e M si e r-i e-e a e O e r-e l e,,,
mmenmOm e
t'i n ein m o n e
a m e n. n o m.
.i s r9 r9 m.n On e
MmenmCm a
e e,
~.
e a a. s :
e e
e.
i e
e e
e uw e
o e.
e a
e i
e e
e O O e
e e.
e e
.Bw m
e.
m
.m
,B w m
B w.,s. -
.Bw w
e e.
e m.m e
aw e
e se e
v er v
.e e
.o
..e e,
u m e, a, saew e ae
.o uw w e
m e
e
.a e a w w e'
.a e.
m. ww e
g w.,
e
,g. w e
e e
h.
.f *'* '5 '5.,! '
m3w 8 m 3.8 8 8.,
iI * '3
r ~' '3 - -
- -85 55
~5 8w 8 3
8w.
m3w e
.e w.
e e
s e
Qi QQQ e
O nes.Q Q Q e
OwQQQ s'
owQQQ e
owcQQ s
e Q e Q s
e C e,
e Q e
e Q e
we e *,
o we.. e e e
we e e e e-we e e e a
we.
e e e e
wye e
wye a
wga e
w y i;- - n.'
e w=
e a,. -
.n e
a i- - n e
a w-n e-a-
e a:
--n c o,,,-
- 2. w w O g e-2. w w e
cu-2 e
a e.
00=2 e
co-E w 2 2.>.
e w.2a e-w 2 2.= w w t I
w22-ww e
w22=ww ee e
C== Cam e-Q=
O e
o e. g m-.5 Q--Cam:
e.
C== Cat - e Q~~Cga o o a.5. g:
ai e e4 o c. 2 s.
e e a, s 3.- - C.
e e.e c.
--E ci e
O6 e
e i
a e
o e a.
a e e a.
--c e
e s=
a 3e45 e.
.3 e e e
3445 e
'3 e
3443 w w Ene,4 4 5-w w 3 w a.er e=
w w 3.w a a a
w w 3 n.# a a o
e ens w 3 w a a.,
e aa e
a wQwwe a.
a w.Q w w e e
m*
wQwwe e,
m a w.c w w e e
e a=wQwi 5 Q ga e
3 e
5aQ
(, 6 6 c.
e 3 O &4 e.
33Q owaEQ e
se & aI5O e
-e waIc w 5.5 Q e-e nas u.m Q ei
-e e
=
e e'd Q in.e w w 6 i.
4 e nas.
- . 8 'O. n is. e 4.0wQwww a-ee ic. ens ins w e
e e n a Q== = =
aw i
s.w w
e aw
. =8aa*. = 8 -. - i.,
- w.
e a w o== - = w
--w e
ee aw (b
-=
m
=8aa*
.=8 a*
ee=
-aca
=
e u
=.8 a a kt e
e.
r e
. = o a.
e e
=#
i 5 er g e.g e
I ea e
a a g e.4 e
a ens o e :.e e=-O e
E or g ge a e 4. O-
=) {
Z==
e eWg
==c wu.e
. O e;
wiu e e
wu e.~Ec
=c e
- e.. 3y E
e
-== I v - - 2 e
- e. - 2 ee -=
u--z e
-==v--2 e
- s. s e 22=
a im e 22=
e a
22-e er 4 22=
7
..e.r e 22=
es e
v5wwa e
. uzwwa et - u E ise w s -
e a-v3w=3 e
v5w-3 e,
e 2
3 er a e-2
- 3 a a e
2 a.3 m.a.s a ei 2 3am. e 2
a.3. e.r er o
e a== t.# e s e e
nas i a
e
- ene, m== ens e.# a e
a== i.s e.s e.
e i.e e ese a te.s Iwt e
=.
=wt ee e#
ise : in in see e
I i., e ee.
.I. en e
- e
=
w w.m nee e
.=
a e
m e
a
- e. i.
e g
-i 3 g 6. w. m. 3 e
e in e e
ger3 mw3 e! e
..-o e
3e 54 g
e
=
e 54
=
4 e es'=J Q Q.e' s
a4Q==~Q e
==
.s e
88 e.d.d Q. Q.d 8
4 e.4.J Q Q.d a
M ae ad.d O Q.d a
e 4'esaQC-g e e e
e e,
) e e
e e
e-g e
e e
se i
o e
e e.
O e
w a
m e, e
o 8 - n a,Q e,
e e
m e, Iw
-af I.aIaw-e i.e lw
- n o.
e wo -.
e s E..a s
.n. o,v... e l
,v s. n.
- a a
e e.
a a--e e
e e
er a--e e
a a.
e w 8. v = = ;;
...v.--
w v==
e
.=.
=
- <=--
e e., % 5 J i.
=
6 a8au %
e a
e E. 8, a a.,. % w w.,
- 8aaa e
.8aas se
.8aa e
sagww og e
gwwQ-g e.,%wwCQa e -
e.
QQ e
QQs e
Ca e
-""'**a**2:2:2cs::: A 20:22:2222: AERARAg;;;3$338533333$33333 L
4.
9 k o,
e 395472 3093735 2
937751 -
201 0866 2535630 t
9 962936G M
227308 6794548 2567093 U
9 S
5529011 4004962 9283538 5
907G308 7064334 4929537
. 8 4042223 8034 - - 4 39041 5
1 9
9468 94G8 0368 - -
1 1
5
~
0741 45 1
841i 5 i.
3075894 t
. 000 1
1 1 000 s 01 T
CN 1
0
~
.... 0.
01 1
1 S
RA OO06000 ~
0 OO060 O0O00O0 U
RE G
EM U
A DF.
I3 S
V
. 3
- D
- N M
590081 0 3006950 0000347 O
UE 491 8465 3068472 201 9300
- M MU I L 99733"42 2076880
~
60862it 9
nA 7'? 771 l 1 8377 1
~
8377 t
5 AV M
6 1
~
~
M O700730 9 9 0521 0 0t 057i0 N$
S8 68G50 2276200
~
2.i. 9 5 4.d. 0 U '
~
I L E986ti 0 799i220 25602i0 INA 4244 - -
524S- -
~
6d45- -
V
~
M 3); 82t 4 9338675 7333459 7.'. 2 3 8'9 6 I
5 D0 s 1 1 9448 1i 1 9558 N
8 Rl YA
/
Ai 4055%ii 4O541 n
1 8
~
4 540O1 NI I
4f :
- o. 'A 1 :
~
c M D 2 e.
UI 6 l'
1 s
( W OLG l PA0M i
C0A GRI R 1 971 837 70641 22 3i069i2 AGH 2600792 9 7 9.J. 3 3 2 4.i. 2 3 1i 2 I
LEO 1
- .e ra 1
a 6
7 8
&C03U E
'0
- 9975li2, O
I l G
976003, O 59879i 4 6266'-
=
7266- -
=
7266 4
UI1D M
E R
gNl 9R U
R:
U
~
L E
E1 H
(
0 O
OI f O.i H
I H
WST t
PD%DM R
I #
?. % ERi
~
NHT E 4
29524d3 2761 402 2544 85 2 I
IP 74679%7 7437997 7486087 I
I NS 33922O3 3392203 33823 3
NE 1 1 1 8 S 1 1 1 5 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 i1 O(I IROst aA I
C. E H
R S
O Y
V F
R FFI R
iFF U
FFI UF UF UF C
SSS C 5SS C
SS5 RSEEI RSiEE 5SEE5 EEEE$
7, EEiEE lEEEI MERRR 7
MERRR i
ERRR I
FFGEEE 7,
FFGEEE FfGEEi RGGG RdGG RGGG OEDDD 7
OE6DD OECDD S
D
- , S D
S D
EE -
EI -
RH T ti 7,
RH I1 2 R l T t 2 l
GCT N GCTN GCT N ENNI EI ENNI EE ENNI EI LI ORR DI I RR DI I ORR l I
OPUUH OPUUH OPUUi
- - P Ti P 7
- - P TI P I P TI P E E W E'd A A M WAAM WAAM RR EEWIRR EIWERR RREDEE -
7, RREDEE -
d UUD " P 7
UUD PP l REDEI -
T S EMMD T S IMMD.
UUD PP 2
Ti EMMD ASEDEEE 7,
ASEbEEE A5EDEiE e.
REGI T 1E 7
REGl TTE REGI Ti E ERDR P
7, ERDR P
ERDR P
PPI OLLS PPI LLS PPI OLLS M
RLAA M
RLAA M
RLAi D
, ECBHI I D ECBHIi D ECBHI I
TI MCTS N 7
TI MCTT N Tl MCT i N RA NNI RA NNI A
NNI i
CMEF W 7
TTCiEEW TI CMEiW T I NE URR NE URR NE URk L
EMRI EER EMRIEER EMRI EiR OEHFFE I
OEHFFE OEHFfE E
I Me I
8 BRWT FF W
, BRWiFFW BRWTFfW 2'
O A
MAOI O
7 MAOl O
M5OI I I I I Ii L
ABLLDDL 7 ABLLDDL A8LLDbL 9
7,
~
S P
E SP D
D 5P D
2P PED ti P L
PED t 2P P E D~
t
?
f0 M
B MRBLi1S
_ MRBLiTS MRBLil S A
EPMCA5D y EPMCAAO EPMCaAD 4
I T OAI TTN TOAI T i. N T
AI Ti N A
MAOPEEO y MAOPEEO M5OPEEO R
BRCLLL W
, SRCLLl W BRCLLtW f
V ABLDDDL A3LDDDL A8LDD6L 2345e7 e9of 2 3 t 9 t 9 t 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 22 2 23 3 3 33 3 3 3 3 3
- 4 4 4 d 4 555 55S 5556 o5 o7 o9 0 9 2 3 4 567 e9 n1 2 1 4 5 e7 e9 2 3 5 e7 8 0 9 2 4 5e7 8 9 n t
t I 1 3
470 The Effects of Noiw on Mese O Recomrnended Units of Sound Measurernent g
C1: apter 11 iD on the basis of the mformaimn devchiped in Tables 74-76 and the results of Ibe varums rewarth Imdmgs reputed earher m the sesI,it is recornmended that:
Proposed Procedures for the Evaluation g
- i. ror estimating the maskmg or speech hy noiw uw As hawd on hand y.
spes-tral. signal-te>nnise raten pencedures or.less accurately, equrvalent Al bawd of Environmental Noises im Sil.,m PNdR or dH(Ds).
r
=
I
- 2. f or estimatmg damne ersk to hesiing of smwe or less continumis or mlermittent awkday mmes over a speciGed number of years.uw CDR hawd mi DRs or.lcss accurately, PNdil os dB(D ).
2
(
.L f or estimalms the percerved nmsmess of and human reactions ta introduction swnnmmfy mcc envinmments or the nmws in varums types of hemg areas and work reinms, uw the unit CNR hawd on 1.PNdR tw,less accurately,I dlWD ).
y It is the purpsw e4 this chapter to describe preciety the procedures to be 4.
For estimating, with practical accuracy and on the basis of the same unit followed to obtain accurate physical umts as appear to he now available for e4 norw messinerrent, either speech maskmg, damage risk to hearmg. or the evaluating the perceived emismess of minimpulsive and impulsive snunds and perceived memess e4 a emiw or nniw envinmment,uw (1 )PNdB or (ITili(DyI sound environments. In addition to she nuwe accurate umes, the unit dH( Alis 4 For sluswmg which parts is a parlocular noiw spectrum contrehute ele induded became of its general wide use and the existence 14 shis A weightmg on i
l most to lhe perceived mmmest or damage rist to hearing, plot the hand spectra standard snamd level meters. It is possible that Dy or stune simdar weighteng wdl l,.
of the meiw nn eraphs that sluiw equal mnsmess or damage risk csmtmus as a he standardired and incorporated mto snund level meters. If one wishes to uw, l
functum nf frequency.
frw the evaluation of the percerved noisiness is a noiw or noise envirrmrnent,a snand bd e M 4 rir A@g @ m em 4 mh
)
6.
Ilw (F )d R( A) as a wrondary,less accurate, substitute for (1 )dlWDy).
r.wse levels, she following materialincimles appenpriate steps and deGnitions. If, f
1 on the other hand, one wishes en take into account additional acoustical snd j!!
temporal factors concerning the noiw, the necessary steps are also given. It may i
appear while reading the following that a wide variety of units are to be
)
calculated. There are, however, but three basic quantities: (a) Percerved Noiw l
level (PNL) based on one-third octave, full octave, or overall frequency.
lh weighted snund levels measured in successive Ohicc intervals of time during the i
occurrence of a samd, and she Max PNI. in any single 05sec interval of time l
during the occurrence of a sound,(h)IPNI, consisting of the integrated,on a 10 log,. antihig basis, PNim of eac h 0 5-sec inlerval of sound divided by a reference 8nne, and (c) Composite Norw Rating. hawd on t.PNI.'s integrated over 24 l
hours.
(
- }
i I
There is same indicatian that the noy hand summation method first uwd for i
loudness level (Stevens) and adopted for PNdB may not he as good a hand summatirm procedure for perceived nnisiness of henadhand noises as a power i
summalmn of hand SPl. adjusted Grst in accordance with the nny contours. To encmnage the evalualian and mssible use of this modined band summation I
p procedure, we have included it as a possible step in the calculation of FNdB. It is i
l
\\
47I e
.e 4
g g
472 The Effects e,f Noise on Maa Evaluation of Env!conmentil Noises d73 suggested that the units from this possible afternative method be designated as the increaw in pressure in the steady masimum pressure level and the dechne in PNdB'. Mas PNdB'.or FPNdB'.
pressure folhewmg the steady manimum pressure level at a rate of 2.5dB per These calculat6nn procedures are derived frnen psychological judgment tests; 0 5.sec. INote: A secondary referente smmd may be substituted for the standard venfication of and changes to these procedures will rest upon additinnal reference sound for certain relative crwnparisems in order to provide a reference pidgment test data. For shes reason, defimeims of terms for judged perceived sound that is more simdar in character than the standard reference is to the runsmess are irxtuded.
nnises with which it is to he compared.)
3 I mally, for noise measurements to be useful. limits of noise expmure must he Siemierd Referener Bar Arnurmf Norre. The standard reference sound and a set with respect to some criteria of human behaving and tolerance; graphs and tables are referred to that can he uwd for this purpme.
comparison sound to be judged shall Imth he prewnted in the presence of a randorn hand of pink noise estendmg from at(mt 50 to 8000111 at a snund pressme level sinh that it is at least 15 dB below, at all frequencies, the level of Definitions of Terms the standard and reference crwnparison stamd.
t Noe. The subjecieve unit nf perceived noisiness is called the Noy. One noy is Svamf I or present purpmes, sound is defined as airborne acoustic energy in the value assigned to the standard reference sound durmg an interval of 0.5 sec the frerpency regmn Innn 4 5 to ll.020 (we Table 29 when the sound is at a levelof 40 dB. Noy values.as the result of pulgment tests Impedir Intme/s of Sorrml when the overall sound pressure level changes, conducted in the latwwatory, have been assigned to the SPt. of hands of during any 0.5-sec interval of lime. 40 rw more dR. the sound during that frequencies present during an enterval of 0.5 we as simwn in Frg. 242 and Table 7g, interval is called imptusive.
c,1,.rdated Perreimi Noise f.evel(PNI.) rn PNJR aral Mavmrune PNI. in Mar N,wermpedstre Intmwls ref Germf. All 0.54ec intervals of sound shat are not PNJR. A means of essimalmg the Jmtged Perceived Nmsiness for a 0.5-sec
- unpuluve, 5,vind Ivessure Icert(SPI /mDernbefi(dBf The sound pressure level re interval of a given sound fnwn the noy vahne for that 0 5 see of the given sound.
l 0 0n02 phar as measured by means of a meter or recewdmg device that meets the lhe sum, as calculated accordmg en presenhed procedures.of the noy values of a speofit almns of a simnd level meter (StM) set on "shm"is called dH when the frequency hand m frequency hands of sound is designated as Perceived Noiw level en PNdB. The higlest value of the PNdBs calculated for each 0.5.ser nat. frequency weightmg es uwd-interval during the occurrence of a srmnd is called the Mas PNdB of the sound.
(Ne third (krare aml (krarr Bamt f.cret The SPt re 00002 uhar a' (Norc: Two alternasive methods of calculating the unie PNdB win be given i i measured on a St M set on " slow" and flat. frequency weighting in conpmction beloO wseh one-thud octave a octave hand filters.
PNI. in dR(D) ami dR(A). aral Maramune PNI. in Max dR(Of emi Max dR(Al 5,wami m 0. 5 ser Intmuts of Tamr. The sound pressure level. hand.or overall hands, as read, or would he read. on a SIM ses on slow and Has weighamg es The level, plus a constant.as read on an SI M with a D. or A. frequency weighting l
taken for purposes of thrs document as the semind preseni durmg a 0 5-sec characteristic and set on "sh=" meter action is designated as the PNLin di4D) mierval.
or DIN A) respectively for each 0 5.sec intervalduring the occurrence of a snund.
f dm/rol /Yrrrerrd Noismets. The as tohnte of a famihar espected enmd that is The highest valued dND) on dH( A) in any 0.5-sec interval is called Mas dR(D) judged as " unwanted" or "unactertable" for everyday Irving eondesums as a or Mas dili A) respectively of a given smind. D. and A. weighting characteresiscs h
standard reference mmruf imlepemlently of any cogentive meaning conveyed by are specified in Table 2. Werghtmg D iS "C'wnmended shove Dg or Dj for this 2
pu Neerr: In order to make the units PNdB, dB(D). and dR( A)
]
the simnd is tatled " Judged Perceived Nminess." The term smfged perterved momencally equal. on the average, to each other, a constant of 6 es added in noisiness is synonymous, for pmposes of this document, wish the term dmDg and 13 to DIN A). The results are designated as dB(D') and of4 A')
I annoyance.
Standard RefererereSoronf. I he standard reference unmd agaims whit h ot her gespeg g,,ety, r
semnds may he judged with respect to perceived noisiness is as folhiwt a hand of UrrrsholdofferrermfNorsiness. A level measured during the day (the hours random pink rume centered at 1000 lli and with frequency skirts slopmg at the of 7 A M. to 10 P M.) and indoms of 40 PNdB, dB(D*) or dil(A*) or a level rate of 4R dB or more per ottave below 710 lli,and 51 dflor mme per octave measured outdmus of rio PNdR. dH(D'), or dit( A') is specified as the threshold above 1400 lli that has a sleady maumum sound pressure level for 2 sec with of perceived emisiness. Thrs threshold during the night (the hours 10 P.M. to 7 A M.)is 10 PNdB.dB(D).or dB( A) hower than during the day.
s-4 e
e e
~
474 The Effects of Noiw on Man Evahiarina of Environmental Neiiws 475 Prartaal 77terstw41 of IWrrrrnt N,wsmers I or the purpnse of the meamtmeni ew takulation of perteeved meiness e4 occurrentes of indeval. sal w
5,am
\\
N
/
sounds it is hmmt uoffksently atturate to derme, as the threstmklof percened
- 8 N -
emmness, the level that n 151%Ill. ti!MD). or dR( A) behow else highest level s
--'7-when sie highest level is greater during the day than $5145 at nightlPNdn, l
i N
dlND'). or dIW A') when measured indmws, and greater duemp she day than 75 s \\
%\\\\
f-(ri% at nighi) PNdR. dlHiFl. or dl4 A') when measured outdmws. Note: 10 PNdit. illH D). or dly Al behow the highesi (Man) level has generalty been uwd in
're aso-g --
the past as lhe prattkal ihrestn&l of pertenved vuesuness, partly because of the NNN
/
Imuted range of phyucal mme measuremenis. ami partly because typicalnoites
' ' " ~
D N
N
\\b [/
/-
fuma pasung antraf t and highway vehkles tests sin.w this to be a reausnahly no k
"'[
satifattiwy thredniki. Ilowever, with the advent of hefkopter noews or other
- eso mnses havmg a nuwe erratic or dowly thanging !cvel in time,it is behered that f
.o - %
- mg she 15 JR range es a nnere reakstse range to uw if physkal measurements perrnit.
g e
g t
Q W
Ihrrarum of the thrererrme of a &mm/ TI.c time in seconds between the m miene a semnd slasts lo riw above the thredmld or practital thredmid of
.. s
_ q
[_
pretenved notsiness and she nese uitccedmg moment in time it recedes to she l oo f
/
thredmid ew prat tkal theedmid of twuuness 5,,
__N \\%[*]Q
[j _
(hrser lhmrrem. The tune heiween she first 0 54cc interval a nommputnve Y
g
/
smend is at Man PNI and the f.nl pect edmg 0 5 wc meerval the umnd was at the
\\
-s-Nb
[~ ~
PNL of the hatkgemmd nume,in the thredmid of muuness. or the practical E"
' ' ~
\\\\
D threstmid of noisiness, whnhever n higher,is taken as the onwt duralism of a so
.A \\
N
.J
"""""P"I'i ""und.
_e.
N
/
thnet Gerrrrram. The imwt durathm in seconds is uwd to determme a j
! ao
\\-
[~
carectmn (called oi) to he apphed m the taltulainm e4 i PNdH. IdIMD) or l dlM A)(see I eg 17 t) i[
N
/
Impulic 1.crci. The differem e in PNI. in PNdR, dIMD). ew dB(A) of an
~
V impulse from the PNI. of the hathground muse, or the thredmid of perscoved l
/
re
-o rs-w meiness. whichever is 1.c higher, es called she imptuw level.
i, 8
Impedse f.crri C rrer ram The nnpulse level m PNdII, dNirp. en dlM A') is l
.o V-uwd to determine a torret tam (called a i in he apphed in the cattulatum of I PNdH.1 dlHir) or i dl4 A'l as appropriate lwe I-eg 174 ).
plll 1 Cah rdarnt iflecture Pertramt Name f.evel(f PNI.) en i FNJil. I:JR(1)). ami i.
o idR( f / The uun as tak dated by fornmlae of PNdlls, dl4Dk. en dlH Als m f
smtesuve 01sec intervals durmg the rweurretwe is a umnd - 12 plus a b
torretinm hn omet dueala.a or impulw Icvel, as appropriate. The sum of these i
cakulatums is called i PNdll, I d!HDI. or 1.dR( A) respectevely. The vahie -12 I
l ectrati 242. Cnnen n ot percerned nonenegs. Arier K ryter and Peargne t4r4 comes femn she thmcc of uuteen 0.5 we entervals, a lotal of 8 seconds, as a l 9'
slamlard duvatism lo whnh all effettive levels are referred.
{
Gungemre Norse Rarmg (CNR) iner f PNJR. IJRi(Y). or f.dR(A ')
The sum as meauned en aakulated artmdmg to the prescribed formulae, of the i PNLs durmg a 31lume inne tytle at a given location is designated as the Composite Noiw R.elmg for ihat hiratum k
8 Y
g s
e
^ --
'a o
e I
Pm pe 9
ese#
seee es, e see s so, e ee e s, e sees att e eees teet ease e en s e se$e e s=1 t oes g een e sos eue teet ege t e
o,d, e see + tese se e ese es est e see tee t se s ass e-e ewe 4to est e sees ow e esse see s wee we pe e es ese se ko e see en e ee oese e
se se ese to ese4 see e
e ase seet sees emee sees ones ses e sees sees sees tee sees eso_s.
ese.#. #tte te.s. e m,a
,ese ame s ess e ese ee se e os see-t gea ege. e s. ee. t.so, e _es s e es. se s
tee ese a ese e se.e e,,-
-ee en eg o een et gan y one ete7 ese est e ets e ages esee goet wt egge See see ege e see,e see e ed e e e.**
sede spee e ef e se
- e. e e e, i e sees ete e ges es e s
eefe mt etes geef eeer ope t ess e es.
- e. e e-ese e me e a h et eet l esse esse esee esed ete n etee eee t me'e t e ee etee e et eges eget eget gee see go e age e,e se e seg es e sg og, es e seg ese see se on#*t let e
see s ende see8 ete t see too ete See tee ese Se e se e ete1s esse se. e.mae a mode esee se s*e'e he t s Get sees mee t eeJ E see r see i et os e est det see see ee = toe s ee, +
k--
ee se s.
sis -
a aos see see one s
81 sa 49 se*
- pe o.
sa.
es. ee se..g eeg on e miesee.een 44 we es t e set e sees eses eegia oe s s,
e, e
- o. e
- e..
- e.,
es,
- t. e se e am-es e di a a
e se e ste 't e.i s t.
e A
av t 1a.
tt see sees end e es t me eseg esg 5 ess e oese Se e age ese e@e e8 noe see sees eef t eede ton e est e end e es t e tee t se g t,e see See See see es e est seg ese te see pg etot eed S e e*g e se e a,.g s
een e, o e..
see se e da e**'s ee n e
ege ee Se e egg d eg see ese es te Gese ende este sep t sees ese ese es e se e et e es o se e seg est
,, ese see me get te et4*t es t ese see see aan
- * * =mese e.r e s ses em==
es s e. sees A-see e. e ese een
- a. egg - - -set est i
se e ese ese toe s see sma i n cos e G.
e,et too ese see se e se
==i
=== -
- e. -
m-a--
ed to ese'$ te s ee.t
- eg e
--e.* e.s.e 8e.e het a-.tes end
- 't o PE*5 fe e see s see n een m
i tiet see een em sees sees ese ese see e.g e, e e, e es e Se e es e ese see set es t tee est eee e st one te sen*e ef e seg e
g eag seg aeg
= - -a eee eo see es e las
- e. d es s 6 de se see s e'- -
ett see ese ese era ede ete ese See f og ese See ese ese toe ese een pee goe esa es p es p esp one de ese*e ete se est e*e ses
- ese, am.
es.e.
ee
- e ese See es seen ett ese, est see es e eso ese ese ese se e ese Pet es t ee#
m.e. ese ese a-s a.
4-a n.
m m.
a at e sa a man es seg see ee des ese oog een 2
see ese see ese ese see ee age a re m--
a s
ee ses de eas g ete
.e.en es.m s
e an-a4 a t t ee et end e.a
-m ogs no s ese Seee eos ett ese ese ese ese se g te*
- et tot tee ett tee tes and ee# ett a dd esa een age et e e#e s
.e.m.
se see
'a's
*
a s us
,s 6
se ese g ese se g See es e es e es e et t gu Ue one es e #e s cet ete ese set See se e es t one ee#
est see sea d
me d e se e
sg e
ag e et D t'& eis eet ett ett et t
- t ett se t see ese t ot e
een aus se e de ese'f ett ss eed et t see aos se e ees See.
a.s*
est Am.es t de t met os e et te d a.
e ee est e
se Det's #de s
ef ee# es t off ese see eos ese et t es t s
e esa eso
==.
a am-l.e t ee#.
ees sea e48 e.nd,
- e. hd. ett sed'e efe ge en es,#,
Sif i = = =
sed.
.s e.
. one Una e
et, a
ef e, e s e, Se e de se e een ee.
es e 4.s s,.
see. *.
e%# ett one e*
es e es e ese tef ese e6 4 0e7 eed md sai a dd s ee e st s as ses ee +
e es e
- e. I ee es e se a's ee e
ma s.
s e-80 0 eed see fee ese ese det efe es#
e ed nos es e emed eed es#
et t le s see ete et e n#e ese se es et c'e't e se 6et end ede est eat seg set ett 007 eep ese se ese see ese een se eel see se e ese ett et t een ett oo n se se et be*e so eed ett see off ese ese ede see ets es e ato ee-ese eee see ett on,e ee '
fe #
est ett etc ett se eo se e es a -
og i en er seg opt oog est en se e.
et seDt 4 e et ee es e see es e se e.
e, se e U# e We' eii ee#
teF Weg ese e
to gE e.
at af t
to e
et see Des ete eed med ese tef ### est en e are es e et e ese de # end ett eet ege See en see et, ee n est es e ar e ese ese ese se en se's ese a e 'f e
.er art ed. e Ie e-ee ee re es t se e are see ese se se yes 1 yi e,e es se e s sea-a ese
- es See US
- e d ett e%# do g esp ge s se e se a ee er t 64%
so) 115 ett et s
e 44 4 ott Me bee se t to g se se gg es ese e Se og ed t sa ee :
12
- ges ese see se s les see see ese ese ao s et se set es er to et en te e e's e e es Pe's se
- ses,
= i e
-e a
e n.
e e,
I w
go1 g,e e.s c.e h
se ese su ee e-s ut see
.eet
.a..
s s e
o e
e te se e.s.se
.et
,..e
.e.se
,.s e, ele
,ee
,te es ae e.e se oe se e ee
=e
-e se
.e se se se o
en e
ce ee e
)
ene 's
- e
,.e e
.ee,.es s.e
.e ee ee 4,e se om,e tee' es e ees ne ese 6
es.r ee
%e en e.e se e
es oct s
se e
et to
.O e.
e s e.ese ett ee i
=
ou. -
et.
n des e
se e
e - =
.4 se se e.
te h
te e+ e se t (I
ese se e se e
e, ne of se me i as ni me to t to m.
ee e wee see i
e.s se se ce oi e
se to et ce ce et et se t-s
- t. o tE de se eW** t ese j
.t se se en es e See see me se
=
m u
e e Det ee +sa*
- 44..?
e**i e
se se eet se e ee n es e se e e
.es e e
p.
So se ed es se se ee se et se 6t
,e e
, tie w
et ee te
.e w
e se' po,
o 3
ge se see ete ces ee6 es te De dt St dg ag se to
- e to 64 ft er ed of to see*4 es n.
e se
.e et e.
et et et a
e.e e,,
se see o e.o es e
w ao e
et t
s.e e.s u
e.
- e. e a.
e.s.
m,e p
- 9 i
se O
es e ees es se se te en 4-e.
a e.s to.
es e,
m e,,
seu se n
os two, e.t se se te se se me se "t
p" a w I
es et de se to ge se te et to et et et et at
%e
- e es et og te of el es es est 6 fe e
es te er es es se es es e'
s"e
'se' et et et eo og es et et et ce e,
et e6 98 es M
es e#
ed
$9 ed es og te se e*P4 se n
se os as se se* e se Se de ee Se e.
se se to se at de de de et de se Se ed of of e*
se 48 ee $se*e es ce se et to Se to se M
to 44 es so et e4 e6 ee et es ed of et ce og to se see e se Me OWW M's M M Seen E M*# 8888 femm's fear's feet aspee Asese pegg posee sette moed peeg # sees and e e me MM e
geo e ce e posees senes feet de et N
Weene esse M M MM essens een wa me 0
m..
~
e-me o es e ee ese e-se e 'ee e*de e
e se e e.
e se e 'ee os'e e e et o*g4 e te o =-se e e o*
e e.
e 'e#
ae *eee ee e et e se e*ep e et e se e 8 se e e ee e se o se se ese o es o oe e s 54'ee s'e6 0 ee en e ao 5 se e a'te e
9-e e-se e os e se east ee e se e se 4*t e e es e e# e se e se age e me e +e s e-et ee se ye t be ge e ed e ed e ' et e *,s e e et e #e e de t 'or e **d s es e of e se e ' er e -Po e se ease e 't e ee e ef e at e e e se ee o e*e# e*4e e se e see e*go s en g e et grew es e o e*
5 e# s'ed e e e se eg e45 e'o a - en asa e-a e e-se. e se e se e-e-e me Se-n>ed 4 se 4
se pe "$ et e<4d e ed e es ees e o-
= o
=+
a-a na 4 td.
e* $e 8
e,e e se e em s-
- na
- e. 'ee e'ee e e te c'ee ee-e're ee 4
et 14 4 to e a,e e e,.
e se e ee e'ee ew 4 es O
a
=*
-=*n ee 6
ag 3 si oe e
ee eg e ea e es ie e
owe e es e-ee eo e se e ee e se e ee e-se e os oss s ee e se-e se ree tw e*ee e se e*se e'ee e es e se e-es e* e8 3
e e. vu ~
v.u.
0 +o e se sw ag e se e-e-
.e.
ae se e-4 e #
vn we w ve ~
- v. e g en n an e a4 8 esma s->
aw e.M reo we v.,
v.,
e-
.e ge eo e se e es e-se e ee ee at es see o to sw se eer e se we e *ta e el a
w e, c es nwe
.e.
30 e-.e
- e..t-et.
vs.
- -u er aan e,o
= = >
r.n en.c'eC.
a sa
-a n - s>
n*.e e.e w.e e-e e~ c en e e
e.
.S e 4
e es, a-6 se e ee a es e es ee e<o ee es e de ea e ae a es ee4 4s a
g o
eg ne a e e.e m.e..-
e d
e-se e se e te e se e*e# e e# e es e et e e4 e *g a at e'ee e e
- e e.
e 44 e*et e'ee
- e4 e5'e e e ge ca sa eon ee ea e to n-e'a g o e se gene g eg e-se e-se go eo ee eo eg ee e=ee 9 te e os Pee e*ee a
- a-G'e e
- e 'a t a-ae es e se aeo e se
- e ee pe
=-pe
-eo ee seo g4 eo eg eg ea sw g e e op se e* ee e=ep ase e4 e se eo eg eo ee eo e *e eo O *e eo eg ee p*e e 48 g#
es see # ge ewe ce eo e ee e on e ee eo eo 4 *e ee ag ow e +g
.e e se e e"E e-s e e ee to A
y es est # ea one e es e+#e o6 eas e
eo e ee e 'u eo e~ee e en vte e ee ver ce se g o ve we ve oe eo en v'*
e et o
e #'
S e oe e
ee ee oe o eo ee e e
o ee ga ei se e*e e o
=
- - = -
=
etpg e e g
n *e e et ee et e te e
e se e se e'te e ge ease e pe e se 6e eo e=,
ea 6=e eo ee og eag e* e ea gg ee ce oe se
&=0 e se
=
m--
t e, e'en e'e t ee es t =e e e se Pe 4e t*e g'e tae %e yo eg eg e4 f *e eo ta e's e e *e ee es e -e ee e
e o'e 4 4 *e e
eat e eet 0* e e e *e eo eo sw to e e4 ee a
e
=:
e's e n ea e o se ae e'u o 's e
,e a es est'o se e es
.e o eo eo e*g ew e=a e
se' d w
we we e.o e-O t e5 oe op see-e o e a e e e e
a e es
- e. o ve ee s
e a.
e e 's.
vos reo e se wet ce ve vg e.
e.
c.
et. see o se s a.
a, a
es se ve ce e ee e ee eo eo re ow e
e ve es se ce ce ve e'e en e-o se at
.a g
.i e v.e e.t o
e ee ge 9
O u<,s
==
eo Se eo e 's eo 8e e *e t*e t*=
e's ee s e tas t 's e
e et oe so
.es e 6 o se es e.
e*e Se e-eo e-e,
e, e
$'e e's eo e *e e's eo e *e ee ee eo e=e e*e e eern es o-9g 44 7t eo ep ef ee e*e e',,s ee n e e re ce e't 4e oe eo ea g.
gag
-mt*g 60 ce ser e se
%a 4
e e e, pe e4 3
4-t e*e e6 4e vg eo a
l'*
b
= 6 68 ea 6*e ee ed ed
- e
- 4 e
e.s ses*
- e, e *e e**
44 ew tw ge s's 64 eo Ce eo e *e e4 ee m
o e
pg eg eo eg eg e.g e*g pg ep eg ep es ee ee ee 46 o
8e e' t e "4 64 e*s eo
- g eg e-o Fe ed eg e-o ep -eg ee ep Pt e-e ge e5 e*n ge se84 eg
- e e e se e 'a e4 t '$
e*%
s 't e 's eo e's eg 4e ea f *a eo 6
a e-a eg e =g ep ee ee p-e m$ *e, e#
ea ed 9-#
ea e **
8# eI e ee to ese e et e'r 6
se e' g ag e
e gg 64 pee t 66 to e's'8 *6 s
s e4 e4 e **
eo ea e
aa ae e
ns n-a e#
- e e4 4e e'-o e'o es ee ee es P4 e#
eea te e*e ce ep ee es 6e t =ei r
te eas'L Fe g y g,
ey ea ea e
saa 2 na e s1m ae ee 9f eo es eo e*e eo e*e ee e-a ep eae e*e eo e-e 6e ee 4*e te e 't e*e g -3 e#
es 0*#
ea ep e e e-e o* e eg ea eg e3 at a-e*ee*g og eg pg e*g ea eo e 4 4 a ee t*e 4*4
- e
- e e*e se pue o es s
se ces*e og t'o et et
- t a*a
- 2 e-te ses*e et 4e e'
eE 4
$* t I*,f e
e t eE eT Fe I e P'4 Po e$
g e
en s-t
= * *. som es ese*e se esc e es...,ee.
.e,ose* e esas nee.o pen.
,s. set n e.c g es.se,o seo, en mee,=t, e=ce e c mee eau e=e e=. *e=
e se e semeene sem we semie ame "a
1 sos tmead a se pasa si pus gg 9 Mtgi aagusa yy isaumou pwanad I
W Jo uairinares asandwos soj asuai.
3 Jo senosuos av on vontunnandde ut savataidas s4ou Joj (4 amel Jo uonstnuuoj suti
\\
145 30 vespun3 e s' 5AON pue OU145 Jo (0! s','8 ' 80U8vV 84318vi o
e 9
-= -.-
e
..i.e f
i i
l I
i 4
I 4
l
)
I 4
e 4
=,
-L.I " =, =.
5 i
e-z
.- w r' s b
--1 k
y7,
, - - = - =.
.-.=.f
-r e.
!==
- e. g s,~,, a -
- S s
r -
z i
r
- $ =-
u m
a
,z,.-
r.
c e-
,==t r~
y=.
g=a
-s t-
-a
_=
u 5
,. s
=
r e-
- s. n l
a
=:
., =, -,
-z w
?
.r.c
=
s -:.7 E7 1
, -,.=.,._7
-5
,= 4 r
s 7 r s :
= *3.:
- *=
r-u
.=- k =
- =.
- =
-u
=
.g g r-
=
? :z' w
- r
.- = =. =
.=- = 4
. - =.= - -
.=
=
I a
_z r
u - =.e u
- =r
=
-=b
.m s :
==x
- - e k
l 4_7 o
7 en
- --z r =-
m -a : -: =
T:
E, 4 2 2 =k u
r
.e =,-,-
6 - : -:. =-
- = -
=
s L
. r
-' f, -
t 8" ~
a l
=
E. ~'r
- u r
s
- - fe: Es. -
r 1
p, :
=,
=,.,.2-
. =... - :.
r
,,- -. s
= - s -
a
- = -
u 3
t 7
- e.E.7.- -
,6 ) -
r
-, z
=
=
=,4 1
I i
=-
3.
=
u - -
1
=
r
- 8
- r: :_, u u,
= -
2 r k
.r.; i !4 x.E
=, y
.L I
2 r
=- =-
_ =. -. a
=
.y
= : -,-.-
s
.=
F3
==2
= -,-
.=
, =.
e x
- -,. - - =.
r-
?
-=.
=
s,. - 7.
y a
a
- =.
- =
- r.
=. =,
~
i
-.--.=
2 r.
- sa =
.a s
r e.
- =
=
r r.
.a s,z
==
r- - " ';
3.
s-5r - I I, 2
=u~
- 7r - ;.. e =-
- s
?
'3
=
, ' i. ~.
?
-= -5 2
u
- 27
~
t
= -
r -. _.,,
s s
=z s
a
.. =
-= -. =
=,
u
- =' ;
u s =
r =,
. - E,r
==
t y
=,
--. = = :
.a s
i
=
= -
- =- - - - -,
=
r t
1
.- a. = -, _-.; s =-
-.-_==-s-s -
= r., - ~. -
r -=
. s a
, r
-t - =.,s,
- = =
2
- : =,.=-
/
. i t 8- : - ~ =
3.
- , 3
= = -..- - s w
i E:
I. - 7. 2.
1
. - y -
s=
7 s
@ ' f. $
.- =,.' *.=-
i 3. ~=~ f
?
-1
- - s,
a -.I :c. ? '=..s z"
i
=,-
.2
- m g-.,- - 2
.- 3
,=..
=
a.=. ~ - = = - = ;. -- 7.'
., :t,
a 1
.-. = = -
x
- - r.--- 3
.= C.
,C.
-u s
.,=
u
~ ~
- V
.2 ** -
.*. =,-
. *, *==,
- E.-.-
l r
=-
b -. 2 g
3 e-r y -
.=
- =
- I
- =
= h
- =
=,
- =-...
=9r's
% - % i. $S - N -.r I
., s L=
- -* t.=.=,
3 a
- 8 E t /
,. - - = -.s
--=ir t - 2 = - - - =.
c.*
7 -,
/ - =
.b
= I 2 7
E *.
r
-,. ' * =,=
- --T. *-=
-*b b
= :-
-, D' g
,?
e.
i
=
- *=
, =
e
=, -
1.= - :
-5.= - csy
~=
- 5
- ?. u e.,.
r s
.. - e s
, = u
.E
- - w ;,.
-. 2, * : -
=,
?
1
- - b
-q.ga z u
g.- - F
- -,. y =
L._,
=
2 l
,- ?, =y *. =-
s.
.s L
g s, *
=:
. g
,7' S
2
- -a
<su e
-7~
l 8- - r g
-4 r
k i
- ,3
.r **
r=~
==- - y
- =-
8"
=
- .=. L
.,<. =
= *.
u :
a
- l=
r
.=.
=
16
- q e ** * -
='
r
=
l 8
g
==..t a.
z -"
t <=
- - r b 7 E :
r-y
'-: 7 a
C
- 7 i = r s'=-
t s i
~~
z
- =.5-
,a g
==b z 2
= = - % -
x3 #
~ -
.=
-,= -
=q q
1 i
i.
I I
3$
E ~
Ek 2
T e
k k =
b i
i?>'5 i 3
- - i 4
-5 i
4 =- '
e 2: = y a
=
_E
=
=,
i 2y :
E,.f
~ =
3
=- -
_r.r a:
- =-
a r
v y
- aC !.,
h yT=
- ,2
=,
.=
.z
= - y;.
- =-
i
=-
1
?
t a-
-=
=
4
=-
-a
- g r
- T
-, g
~;
2 1.
s 5
==
- =-
J-u s
. =. =.
=,
-.- s
= y c
=
= -
1
=..
- - : s.=-
2 w
r
. a, * -
g z
=
5 s-
=
=
,- -- a u r
,r
=
r
= _-
x=-
.==
k
=, -
-
-a
- u r
f,r:
- r
- r
- ; u
- [1==
=: -
0=
G
=
r.
=
=. r - -.-
5 =..:
r r -., -
a -
-7 5,
~
. = -
. = - :
- -=. - s.- -C -
s
,s-
.1.:
I.
s a
r 1 - y e,,,
3.
cg b-
=2
-,- - =. -
,,. < s.-2 s
r s 6 1
Z
[r i _! -! ;
- r.
e t
s a ; -
4
~,
y -
S -
- i.,'.E.
i i 2w-
'i 4 <
~:
4 I I..* '. i =,
-=
.7
- 3
-..: h --
y -
E
.m
.,n.
i 3
=
=
a
. y -
-z
-.= - - -
-s
~
. =- -
=
-, =. =
-L 8
s
=
= -== -5; ua
,n 1 r
-w A.-
- = -
-, -=, _r. 7 - =,
L ~- -
7 2
, e
, =,- <,- 1.
r :.=.
-
s
,3
= 2 2 -
s e-
~2
=
a c
.. - - =. --E-1
== = s
-,-.= =
=
. =
a
- -,=
s
= _ 2 :== :
, _s
=-
=
. r
=
=7 a,,, 6
=-
.! 2 -
.-s
=,
3
= :
(
-i
=
( a.E
- = -
5.
=-
- .- _=
r s.
. r.;
= =.
u 7
y =
u=
- m. - =, -s-
=
c e. i 2-u a s-
=-
i,..r'=.,
y
- =
.=..... sa
. 7
=
-,s.-
.- - =-
=
Ls z.
1
-w
../
a es
~s a
- =
E*.7=
l
= - - -
e.
i= ~
.2 t
2E e =
- /
.=
-a s
a, I
a.
- = -
-.=
z ?.
r.
7-
- 7.. -
a
=.
r, ; -
i r,
1
- s - ;.'.
?
_E - -
~- s
-..,,. - = 5;: - = =,-
- =
.- ~
=
u
- = - =
=
I
=
,. = -
-. 2.=.F r
- w
.-=
r.
r.
w l
J.,,
.y.
m'.
.s
'.E 6 - 3
- r
-.I i, 53 =
s-l
-8 U
s
-s
=,-
s:
r (a i ~-
r
=
2 7
I t
m_-
--m C
I y
'k C.,' ??FC 1 ti
- 1. i. i = 4
- 9 E ~.=. - =
W-v
- k
- = f =3 y
-eo-g'
=. -
=.4 - - 6
-9 e.
. ; /..
= = -
f, b
,-b
. r 4
g3
>*.- $ 'a ).
~$_ E
'w
-* I,C 7 E,
=
<5
.m.
-s g
9 y
~ -
b I
V=
r
.z 4
$EN
-g y y =-
- k y
.. 5,.7' y=J 5.
Q - Ey d2 n
E.
g-
- u s
2 r:
-f 7
r v -
.== _ 4y
, i, ~p' t -Eenie.=
44 -
f 1"
! 3
-t. 7, <j F
e r =;
-fi 7, =E s
- G 7
.==
g t.c <
= t - ;. =-
=
r u
s=
y
- e 6
s-7 nE=
5*
s y*=u-
=
cy
~--
J T
-U
- A. -c:
si-
.c -.
=<
a -
w J
- I.L
=- - F
- 2 z--
t M
r.
z 3"E
~J
- u
,==a.L4
- < 7. ;w
~~ -.; ?"
k g
wk:
_= :
~< -,
-3
= = =- : -,r w
y
=w=e m
.=
r a.= g,
-c
= : r
- g:
r: :
s
- 7, = = 7
- ;._ =-
- .K p
s n.a E < y:
4
= r r
- x ~-
= s e
uj R-T.
>,.3-a M *., ~- ~
r
=, = '
*
h 8
"T 1 ? 4 E * = -.= 5.
-.=' '
=
- 1 y-
= =-
~
, h =f
- 2 4 E='
2 ~5 E A : m. =" h-
~
a.-
2 7[ - = g = -. =- -
a s-
- =._,
3 1
=w.
-/T 2 X #.1 "9
~
J F -. E - -'. 7 4
=
b 7 b
9**=#
C4 E g < ! " ; 7, 2 a
F, c a k=
k 8
e
=
e3 1 337 a-s =<
k ?
,<T
- -- 2
,K - =. : y*#
a~
. gs.
~-
- r s u
- - ? ; - E=
I "E *u-Z 3;37I IE L.
==
f.-,. =.:
g 4
5
.e g33
.d j ~-
s 5_ -
- w [e e
~- ~
- 8 t-: = - = =: 2 7
-E N b '4 I 2 L,f ~.
E C
_atT
- L
=
4 :
Ie4
.;ja r
_E
=
7.:.=:
.r.'-
.=
.5 T*
=
=
s=
M Z
- f
- =
-2 O
s 5
T 7 7
- 9 FT *,-
.k y
f.
- T -* ** 7 -y 2 f,r g E
-.- = - _ = -
s J
-J
- " =
- 7 E b >* <==
l a!'
a,
- g 2
,?
- =- T's
- g
=g
% - 2.,*
w e.
y g
m =
,s
~r /. - y.. ; i=
- ?
.J 3.= -.-
.,-.. - B.v,
-=.
g, p
J a
E
': - g ',, s :
3
'{
C,
. ~ -k x
3.g w.
- - a.
r.
L.
- =. =
= C -T
- y.c
=
s. : 7 er-6
,t m
-~ u. e. =_
T
=
=
z x
,. 5
.==
=
r.
- j =,=
y
,u a
.* I g
- r
.,7:
}g l*I$* kl ! ! $ i. i l-) ! di < $ I I I.
.5 O* $.5 4 e - r.
2' g3 s-r i<s2: E-
~ <
k
@ 3 :$
. s *
=-
- g. u.
f s
-v
-a
-c :.,. c t, a
,. =
=e - r :-
2
=-
..-=
4 c = :e - =.s c
~
e,. =
u,,.,
. <,3 e 3.--
. -,e 2
- =
., =
=e,r
==,c e - e
= s.
a=
-= s
.=
.;o; =r
- 2. e. c = =
o
=
=
=
-.=
- =
=
=. =-
r =, a s c w: _===,= = 2,.
-z-
,z
- - -=. =-
2 e =
=
- - -u =-
.s
=-.r -
=
-=
=< e w v.= =.. =, _ e = r =, _= :.
, a ;=
=. 2 g,,
, =e -, c - = r a
.e 3:
a
- c. =, e.r -
e w
. =-
r w>-
9 we
=
. u r
n g
......w
-te
==
s z" u. t y a.
e e
8 e
a e
q ri"~
t E e s, t
-EE
\\ o\\
i ;r t,i t
- as fi
\\
a-
.s
?"7 i =c
.g a
e
'\\
I(inj 2 I r3 5
!1 I
scEj,3
==
4 2
\\
s.
$ v it,
1e s
g i
g, y
- ; 2 s,
- c. E I
\\
s 3
\\
g f=.s'
\\g
- 2:.. s ['
.u sk
- 2 s
2.
\\
{
j y2 t"
c.
>3 g
- a. J-b.
E<e,,a
\\
L
- t. t g
- 2. i i~
,'f g
.s
=,
s n,[. j e i
3 e4 y t 2 ;, ; r-s-
t O!
3 hi
=-E*g 5,-
i.
- =
h I
I l n }- ["t
\\
A g
_I y
c i
t z
3
.-. y e
s
=
g I
-+
. i, a
s ~e n,
i 22 - ts t.
y t.t s 's.e =. ;I t
s =
6 J
6 g
- 4
.t 1
e g
}'
=.
- en > e s's 1
i s
9 g
e.
5 z
f I
9 se
....e w w e m.
- ..+...
k h
8 h
h b
k g
=
N>e...a's******=>
8 l
l 1
I i
---,,,.----n-w,
i i
J l
k 5 g
ew a
.e s ?
r 6 v 2
k k-ar
=.
,7 :
4 y = :
- z E
_3== =:
rs
=
=a a
=
u =.
w. = - -_
. =.=
=
e2 =-
?
. r r-,
c u
==
y e w s,
1.
m
= -e.
= =-
wy =.
=:
- _=
- 2. =
.a
_u u
- 34 7.
= -
.== n y
s u 2
4 E7
7
- 7 E 4=0
??
h.-
z E
E
'2 ; ;
t
=2;-y e
,1m
_c _-
r.
-, =
=
=
-z,., a __k
=
e s
w y : :.: 3
-=s gg-
,. m
, 7 '/
e<
- 2:
2 - ;
- r -
Jrs
/ :
C r,
t u
....a k.
r.
._- 5 =
, i k
5 s
w
.a a.
-.t
- .. -$., a w
=
- r. _s E-r - ' -
.- y E _,
+
E r.. 2, L i _:. =-
x k
2 1 L ?, :~
.I
-_=
/=Gk-r -
s-
~1-
.g (.'
g
-e; -t 3
-a 7
_m
. - = f z :
a - _:
6
.4
-:.. k.e
..n - = =- - =..,
2,
.- :z -e
.k" F
-' ; =,
s=
s~
.=
- r. c. -
.r
= ;.;
G e
z,
s.
-x
- r: :
f =- -y r
- ..=,_..r-
-L F
o, u
s z
r s e : s
=
=
- 2. :.,3 y i_ L-a 3,>
- 1 c
- c5
=
r J
,,. -.z...,.._.=.,
- s. -..:=
=
=
y,,. _
i
-.,;,._E-
.6 r
-C. -
1 1
, : F 7. =k
- ff
-7
. b- ;a -: 3 *i Y s :E T = 7 2 _ Z.
cL a
r 2s 2 - -
e - =
k-
=.
a
- r
- ;7*;E E
F 4
- =
- - 42 3
- a s
- : - kt:
=
E
=
s E
2
- T,
_2
.s -. h.
- i ; -. =.. =
I.r s.
- a. ;u:
.?
- z. -=
=
-..e
=
s. f.
.a _..r
-7 r
z
=
. =: 5 : - _ r.:r-.
.g
.. - =
=
- = =
r x -
_u E
=
r
.=,
=-
i,
,=
T. -iw z
r-
- 3
- ;' y e 1.' _.==-
- ===
=
- s 5 = - J t.
=:
. =.
=-
- E E.' - e - =. -.s h.- 2 d,
a
- 1) i 7
E 2. =. d '.E 7.
r.
O _k z
~- a
- s.. -
c
=-
- =, - =- - L5 - -_ _...
h=
1 r
i 3
r<
c
., = L.r 5
- e,
= = - ;J 1..
.,.-=
._2
=
- y.,
. =,
, : s z
- c. -
g y
=
5
=
=
3._=-
l e
=
p=-
=_.
r s E/ 8. :
= =: f
=
i E
.: r;=E z v -
=
1 i
- t
[
S?!J-j C=:
=
=
=7 i
.' f i '.. d,
- E
- Es 3
5 % :,
2 ff.
'. a _d O ;
-kl. L. 2 i
5 e-2 5
- CE i
6
- ?
I r
=
e s
- e. F 4 %
e.
- 7 z.
3==
k k
2 3
7 c
y
-5 5,
,, 4 -
2
=
e..:
=
=e.,
E e.=:.=:
3
,.:,s 6,
s, e
=
.=
r
- 2.:
2-4
=
r
-e :T i>v,,.-
i u
2 =:.,:
, E,="
_o
/
c
- 2 f 2.
n-s ;
5 E.
7 s :i i E
C 5
c 5h
_E.
.- ::: se_staI _s _s.s _s e====_=_r = m e n z a_=x_ : n_ e_ n =_ =_ =__
=_ m : = m s_ _ _. -
a s
I F G-
._=_...!.
[
- sacas:
E _s =_ = = =
=. = _ = =_ g
~= s g a = g ag= gag g.a g. g = : gan-=gg _=_gggg=ge 3
~
E
___=_e b.
t 6,
E a,
- == masers
- a _= r z :::ss: g=msag==3g=a i
______ ~~~~
.=
a
c.a.. x e.= s- =,=~g_ gag =g=e z
e f.
-(_
- a
- ssers arge_== _ = _ = _ = =A
- 8 : x~ 3 A813-8
.I'll:. ES s.:I 8_8 : f_ m' E I : ~_
t e
a
____a 4f
- x ?.
}
E
~ LI a t' W3 : 353 58 822:32 2 RR54 v 333 SSRE::
2:2 RR SESSI:
3:3883 33 i
t l
L
--~~--
_-g...
_g...
9-.....
--...e e========an= cams==xs W
C
.____I...__.._._
,t g
.:===.2 n
x an=2,,
s!
I t
, _=,
=,,,,;=,,
i 9
W I
Jr 1
P
j gneaA ATTENUATION OF NORTHERN DWELLINGS TO A LINEAR SOURCE OF NOISE
- D. A. Driscoll, N,Y.S. Department of Public Service, J.P. Dulin, Jr., Rochester Gas and Electric Corp.,
D.N. Keast, Bolt Beranek and Newman Abstract:
Insertion loss in octave bands was measured for 14 residences in upstate New York using a carefully developed Although other dwelling procedure similar to ASTM E336 7g A1.2.7*, none was clearly applicable to attenuation data are available rural aree.s of upstate New York and to sources of noise located near the ground.
The source was simulated by a three speaker array using broadband noise.
Attenuation for a variety of linear noise sources was derived mathematically by applying the measured octave band attenuations to typical octave band spectra and converting to about 16 dB(A) with windows open 2 ft.guation for highway noise is A-weighted sound levels.
Average atte
, and about 26 dB(A) with windows closed.
[The study was conducted by Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation and their consultant Bolt, Beranek and Newman in consultation with the New York State Departments of Public Service and Environmental Conservation.]
l
- Presented at the 95th meeting of the Acoustical Society of America held in Providence, R.I., May 16-19, 1978.
e_
- Introduction During recent public hearings in New York State on the environmental effects of 765 kV transmission lines, " dwelling attenuation emerged as an important issue.
Since transmission line noise has an unusually broad frequency spectrum, and since the lines would pass through predominantly rural areas and would be only 50 to 100 feet above the ground, concern was expressed about using average 3
cold climate attenuations such as are reported by EPA, derived from studies using aircraft flyover noise.1 As pointed out by the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development,4 there was need for a 5
study of dwelling insertion loss measured in terms of ASTM E336 using an artificial, controllable source for comparison with the noise reduction measured during aircraft flyovers.
In response, one of the hearing participants, Rochester Gas and Electric Corporation, undertook a study of dwelling attenuation in the quiet surroundings of Canandaigua in Central New York. State.
Dwelling attenuation (noise reduction or field insertion l
loss) is calculated by " subtracting the sound pressure level at a location, shielded from a noise source by a barrier or an enclosure, from the sound pressure level that would exist at the same location in the absence of the barrier".5 Factors which affect insertion loss include wall construction, window construction, openings through the wall or window and absorption of the room interior.
j l
L
E l
. Design and Scope of the Study Because differences in wall and window construction have an important influence on dwelling attenuation, it was decided that only one or two rooms should be measured in many dwellings rather than many rooms in a few dwellings.
Fourteen occupied homes in Canandaigua, N.Y. were chosen ranging from new ranch style houses with aluminum siding to old frame farmhouses; the selection included a metal house trailer and one home with solid cobblestone walls l
(Table 1).
One bedroom in each of the fourteen homes and one living room in each of two houses were chosen as the sixteen test rooms.
Test houses and test rooms were also selected to avoid problems of reflection from porches, gables, overhangs and other nearby structures and vegetation.
The linear source of noise was simulated by a linear array I
of three loudspeakers (Figure 1) each producing an equal sound power level of (nearly white) broadband noise.
The free field sound pressure level at the test room was determined by subtracting 3 dB from the sound pressure level measured outside the test room at a point 3 feet from the test window with the window closed, (a procedure 6
similar to that recommeneed in FHWA-TS-77-202 ).
Total sound pressure level for the broadband noise was typically 95 dB.
Ambient sound i
pressure levels were also measured inside and outside the test room both before and after the tests to be certain that source sound pressure levels were well above the ambient.
i
.. Four separate tests were made for each test room; atter.-
uation was measured with:
(1) windows fully open (average opening about 8 square feet), (2) windows open 2 square feet, (3) windows closed, and (4) window' closed with storm sashes in place.
3 (According to EPA, the approximate national average " window open" condition corresponds to an opening of 2 square feet.
For each test, measurements were made at two positions in the test room:
geometric center of the room (taking care to avoid direct radiation of the meter) and a typical listener location (e.g., at an armchair or bed head).
Results Octave band attenuations were calculated by subtracting interior measurements from the energy average of two free field sonna pressure level measurements made during the " storms on" and " windows closed" tests.
For each test three sets of octave band attenuations were calculated - one using the measurements at the geometric center
,of the room, a second using the measurements at the listener position, and a third using the energy average of the two interior neasurements (in compliance with the recommendations of ASTM E336-71).
Results of the " average" calculations are plotted in Figures 2 through 6, and l,2 compared with room noise reduction values reported in the literature in Figures 7, 8, and 9.
The spectra in Figure 2 have been extrapolated to the 63 Hertz band based on the comparisons in Figures 7, 8, and 9.
i
-v---
I To determine the expected A-weighted attenuations for various " linear" noise sources, a variety of typical octave band spectra were chosen (Table 2).
The octave band attenuations measured for each dwelling in this study were first subtracted from the typical spectra; the original and attenuated spectra were then converted to A-weighted sound levels and subtracted to obtain A-weighted attenuations.
The results are shown in Table 3.
Because l
of the large volume of data generated, Table 3 only shows mean attenuations (arithmetically averaged over all dwellings).
In Figures 10 and 11 the " average" attenuations of four engine jet noise for the individual dwellings are presented in the form of histograms and compared with similar data found in SAE AIR 1081.
The
" average" attenuations of the individual homes to highway noise are i
shown in Table 1.
I Discussion and Conclusions As can be seen from Figures 7 through 11, the present study l
i (using an artificial source) tends to confirm the data in the earlier studies.
It is interesting to note from Figure 7 however that with windows closed, the dwellings measured in Canandaigua seem to have better high frequency attenuation and poorer low frequency attenuation than those measured in earlier studies.
The mean " average" A-weighted attenuations of 15 and 16 i
dB ( A) for windows open 2 square feet calculated for the turbofan and jet aircraft are significantly different (but marginally so at the 5%
i I
i i
. 3 level) from the 18 dB(A) determined from SAE AIR 1081; (EPA calculated 17 dB(A) from the same report).
SAE AIR 1081 does not specify the window opening used, and a smaller opening could easily account for the difference.
The closed window attenuations for aircraft determined from the present study (24 and 26 dB ( A) ] are also slightly less than the 27 dB(A) found from SAE AIR 1081, but again the average difference (2 dB ( A) ] is only marginally significant.
In this case, the difference should probably be attributed to difference in dwelling construction.
The level of significance was determined from Student's t dis-tribution, using the mean standard deviation of the attenuations for all houses and a sample size of 16.
The mean standard deviation is 3.2 dB ( A) (See Table 3), and the range of attenuations is typically 10 to 15 dB ( A) (See Table 1 and Figures 10 and 11).
A number of additional conclusions can be drawn from the present study:
From Table 3, open window A-weighted attenuation varies
'little with source type while closed window attenuation varies by as much as 10 dB (A).
This trend is explained by Figure 2 which shows that open window attenuation is relatively constant with frequency so c
that as the frequency of the dominant octave band of the source increases, A-weighted attenuation changes by only a small amount.
With windows closed, since high frequency attenuation is much greater than low frequency attenuation, A-weighted attenuation increases approximately as the frequency of the dominant octave band increase
\\
' From Table 3 it can also be seen that the addition of storm windows typically increases attenuation by only about 1 dB(A).
Increasing the window opening from 2 square feet to fully open (an average opening of about 8 square feet) decreases the attenuation by about 3 dB ( A) (less than might be expected from a fo,ur-fold increase in the window opening).
Finally from Table 3 there is a noticeable trend in attenuations depending on measuring position in the test rooms.
With windows open, attenuation at the listerner's position was typically 2 dB(A) more (sound levels were less) than at the geometric center of the room.
This may be due to the fact that even though care was taken to avoid direct radiation by the source, the geometric center was more nearly on a direct path through the open window than was the listener's position.
Also, the greater high frequency content of the sound in the room with windows open would make absorptien of high frequencies in upholstery or bedding near the listener's ear more significant.
With windows closed an opposite trend is evident; attenua-tion at the listener's position was typically 1 dB(A) less (sound levels are greater) than at the geometric center.
Since the sound in the room with windows closed is predominantly low frequency, and since the listener's position was usually within a few feet of a wall, this trend is probably the result of coherent addition of low frequency waves reflected from the wall.
~
. Summary In summary,' based on a study of 16 rooms in 14 dwellings in central New York State, u:ing an artificial controlled source, rural, cold climate dwullings have attenuations which are about 2 dB( A) less than attenuations reported in earlier studies using aircraft flyover or traffic noise.
The addition of storm windows increases attenuation by about 1 dB(A) ; changing from 2 square foot opening to fully open windows decreases attenuation by about 3 dB(A).
With windows open, attenuation at the listener's position is typically 2 dB(A) more than at the geometric center of the room.
5 w
REFERENCES 1)
" House Noise-Reduction Measurements for Use in Studies of Aircraft Flyover Noise," Society of Automative Engineers, AIR 1081; October 1971.
2)
" Noise in Urban and Suburban Areas:
Results of Field Studies,"
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; FT/TS-26; March 1968.
3)
"Information on Levels of Environmental Noise Requisite to Protect Public Health and Welfare with an Adequate Margin of Safety," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 550/9-74-004; March 1974.
4)
" Aircraft Noise Impact-Planning Guidelines for Local Agencies,"
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; TE/NS-472; November 1972.
5)
" Measurement of Airborne Sound Insulation in Buildings; Appendix Al. Measuring Noise Reduction or Field Insertion Loss,"
American Society of Testing and Materials, Standard Recommended Practice; E336-71 (replaces E336-67T) ; September 3
1971.
6)
" Insulation of Buildings Against Highway Noise," FHWA-TS-77-202 ;
prepared for U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration by Wyle Research; 1977.
S 9
l l
i i
\\
l l
..:..,r.,,.,
,3
...g,.
]
Tant "-
Test Window Room Dineseles Dimeesioes Duelliam Attemeeties [d5(A)]
Bene
$14 ten Type (1st dimension to test well)
- Thermopees Storme Closed 2 St. Feet Opee 1
Cedar Bedroes 12' s 8'8" x 7'10" 39" x 69" 26 24 13 8
2 used Living Been 24' s 15' s 7'11" 36" x 40",
26 24 17 11 Bedream 12'9" x 9' s 7'11" 32" x 36" 29 25 15 8
l 3
Freen Livieg Esen 24'9" x 11'10" x 7'11" 110" x 80" 28 27 21 17 Bedrees 11'10" x 10'3" x 7'11" 35" x 35" 31 29 14 12
~4 Al-t-Bedress 11'4" x 17'4" x 8' 36" x 70" 27 27 20 16 5
used Bedream 13'2" x 9'9" x 7'2" 38" x 34" 27 24 14 12 i
6 Stese Bedroomj 15'9" x 15'8" x 8' 39" x 64" 29 26 19 17 7
Weed Bedream 11' x 11'11" x 8' 43" x 62" 28 27 11 9
8 Tieyl Bedreen.
13'6" x 11'5" x 8'2" 34" x 68" 31 29 16 12 9
Aebootes Bedreen 13'5" x 15'3" s 9'6" 39" x 67" 35 29 12 10 10 used Bedroom 9'4" x 14'3" x 7'6" 37" x 62" 32 30 18 14 11 Trailer Bedream 9' s 10' s 7'2" 40" x 29" 21 19 13 9
i 12 Asbestee Bedreda 17'6" x 15'9" x 7'2" 40" x 59" 30 28 19 15 13 Wood Bedreen 10' z 14'2" x 7'9" 40" x 56"a 29 e
14 9
i 14 used nedreen 12'9" x 14'3" x 7'7" 36" x 66"a 28 18 15 MEAN 28 26 16 12 I
t i
TABLE 1 - Test Dwellings and Their Average Attenuations to Highway Noise i
s, 1
1 l
e S
Sources 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 A-Wt.
{.
~
l Typical Ambient 74 69 63 57 52 48 46 65.4 l
Power Plant construction 63 56 53 50 42' 27 11 55.1 j
at 2400' Power Plant Operation at 57
' 49 49
' 43 36' 27 18 49.3
~
l 1000' I
I Turbofan Aircraf t takeoff 72 71 69 64 57 45 23 69.6 with power cutback at j
2200' 4
Four Engine Jet takeoff 93 95 93 92 86 74 57 95.5 with power cutback at 2000' Highway Noise at 100' 78 78 77 76 71 63 52 79.7 i
765 kV Transmission Line 52 43 37 45 47 47 47 53.2
)
at 125' i
\\
TABLE 2 - Octave Band Spectra Used for " Linear" Sources i
I 1
e
i, t
7 s
2 3
3 3
4 4
3 d
i 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
2 e L ne 3
p O r 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
t 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
3 y C l
l 9
u F
g 2
2 2
2 2
2 2
v 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
2 A
l t
a e
r e t 7
e F s 5
5 6
6 7
8 8
i 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
2 ve e L S
ra r
2 u
o q r 4
5 5
5 5
5 6
St 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
3 f
U n
2 o
8 i
n t
e g 4
5 5
5 6
6 6
p v 1
1 1
1 1
1 1
2
.au O A ne tt t
7 A
s 0
2 2
4 6
6 0
i 2
2 2
2 2
2 3
3 g
n L
is le d
lc 7
er e
s r 2
3 3
4 6
6 0
o t 2
2 2
2 2
2 3
2 wu Do l C S
c ded 2
tn g
1 2
3 4
6 6
0 v
2 2
2 2
2 2
3 3
hu go A
iSeW" r
t 7
Aa s
1 2
3 5
8 9
1 e
i 2
2 2
2 2
2 3
3 nn ai L
eL M"
s 4
m r r 2
4 4
6 8
9 2
o t 2
2 2
2 2
2 3
3 3
t C
S EL 3
B g
1 3
3 5
8 8
1 v
2 2
2 2
2 2
3 3
AT A
no n
ti t
e oe nt nn n
is n
ac ao t
i si do C
t lu li nf g
so ri ln Pr Pt aa n
y iN lat O
ae t
a fr E
ae Vm ada ci rs rr oc ws kse cni O
i b en ee br
.t hi nn i av pm wo wp ri ue go 5ai pte yA oC.
oO uA oJ i N 6rL ySD T
P P
T F
H 7T T
i!
l ll!1!
l' l
l n
l
.l speaker l l
25' Test Room 25' meter meter v
-g-
.g
/ ~3' speaker 2 Test Window 25' I
speaker 3 v
SOURCE AND METER LOCATIONS FIGURE I l
- - + -. - - - - - - - - - - -
ROOM NOISE REDUCTION VALUES MEASURED IN 16 ROOMS IN l$ HOUSES So i
l O W/ STORM WINDOWS
- WINDOWS SHUT i
O WINDOWS OPEN 2fl'
~
F m WINDOWS FULLY OPEN
- EXTRAPOLATED
_,/
E 7
i z 30 E
/
8 u
j w to i
~#*
s' to o
63 328 250 Soo 1000 2000 4000 sooo OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREOUENCY (Hz)
FIGURE 2 o
e RANGE IN ROOM NOISE REDUCTION VALUES So
~
N
/
l l
l j
40
=
r l
j
,.Y a s.
/*
e a
-5"
/
/
g
/
W/ STORM WINDOWS
)
/
wu W **
f AVERAGE Q7.g,) RANGE g
<r r
io O
68 ISS 390 Soo 1000 2000 4000 0000 OCTAVE B AND CENTER FREQUENCY (Hs)
FIGURE 3
i RANGE IN ROOM N0lSE REDUCTION VALUES so 40 M) l 5
7-
~
z=
/.
h e
i a
j ens so WINDOWS CLOSED g
C AVERAGE
@ RANGE to r **,
O es tss 2so soo tooo sooo 4000 ao00 OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY (Hz)
FIGURE 4 a
RANGE IN ROOM NOISE REDUCTIOfi VALUES so WINDOWS OPEN 2ft' 0 AVERAGE
@ RANGE s2 l
5 **
g l
E
./
E,
/
2 e
es its too soo 3000 2000 4000 8000 OCTAVE BAND CENTER FRE00ENCY (Ht)
FIGURE 5
l
- ~
1 itANGE IN ROOM NolSE BEDUCTION VALUES So i
l WINDOWS FULLY OPEN 3
0 0 AVERAGE 3
{. L,, D RANGE i
5" U
a 1
e w so l
vt x
.e I
E I
~
_ p so
' - ~
~
I o
l es las aso soo 1000 2000 4000 sooo b4TAVE 8ARD CENTER FREQUENCY (Hz)
FIGURE 6 t
J COMPARISON OF RESULTS WITH PREVIOUS STUDIES so l
I I
I
- PRESENT STUDY-CLOSED WINDOWS o SAE AIR IO61-COLD CLIMATE D HUD FT/TS NY RESIDENCES
" EXTRAPOLATED
/
e Yb 3
k
/
i 8
/
u
/
2 w to g
i e'.. -
to o
43 Its 330 Soo 1000 2000 4000 sooo OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY (Hz)
FIGURE 7
t COMPARISON OF RESULTS WITH PREVIOUS STUDIES so
- PRESENT STUDY - OPEN 2 SQ.FT.
~
o SAE AIR IO81-COLD CLIMATE
- EXTRAPOLATED e3z ao 9
b a
u w 20 n
l P
r 1
o 48 las 2so soo 3000 2000 4000 sooo l
OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY (Hal FIGURE 8 t
i COMPARISON OF RESULTS WITH PREVIOUS STUDfES so i
- PRESENT STUDY - FULLY OPEN
~
o HUD FT/TS-26-NY RESIDENCES (15 50 FT)
... EXTRAPOLATED
.t
_.i nw to e
5a y,
T o
es las Sao soo 3000 3000 4000 8000 OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY (Hz)
FIGURE 9
Present Study - 4 Engine Jet WINDOWS 4-CLOSED 3-any2-Avg.
w l-26 b
$C I.
. Noise w
4 20 30 40 Reduction 2 C
- dB(A) k.
t C
Ag.
I g'
27
- 2 I-3 4
SAE AIR 1061 - Cold Climate COMPARISON dF A Wt RESULTS i
FIGURE 10 i
i I
Present Study - 4 Engin? Jet 4-WINDOWS OPEN 3-i E= 2-4
$l-Avg.
16 I
. N ise sc es 10 20 30 40 Reduction C
- d8(A) 3 a
t f
a l-A4 i.
l
$2 E 3-4-
SAE AIR IOSI-Cold Climate i
COMPARISON OF A WI. RESULTS FIGURE 11 l
g9 QSOh[EFk D1 d'
a
,p
- q93
? mint 4
\\\\v2
. g, s
s L/0t59 Mfa5V(fimfM k iM M f
N 'A b GN bu\\<com MO.
A Atut. :
16 S sa &
AbsorbKori Nard Me.ddum Soft _/
l Loe. eG Air (_endikoner : EwesHaM Asertzo?
Som ervAr..
S e.hc, '.
Lou ; Coo \\
\\
Sednd l_e.vtl McScurtmLM6 Air Condikcar 00unk6
/irCondikomr 000 Di cctreu e.
s cl6A 4q 2.0 zq s
&cclit0.6.
47 JL 36 Eso Hs '/a 03.
4(o l0 e /q' [n ~
...(. g*
I 3
m hm H M M ASSOCl ATE 5. INC.
/..
s
.c veise. AsuomeA AWicde Air (codiHcur ;n Meesms l
\\
bu\\<com Mo. 2
- uocrn 4<m._ :
I80 sa G AbsorbKon Hard Me.A'um Sof r _ /
Tvoc. eC Air (_endikoner :
Ce unk
&kic 58o0 ero s e,hc..
4 igh 4 8 6-lol v
Lond Leve1 1%cunments Mir Condikenr CounKnG
/irCondikomt 00C Dicctrem e.
A SA do zu 34 6coIfz,0.6.
59 2.l 36 65 ohs'/aOS.
54 I6 3co l
l
$D EY r
m hm e
H M M ASSOCI ATES. INC. M l
/,,
ha:ir? ~,
..c L'ciW Nf115V(tvYl/nl d ndM bf (b5bCT'ff n bMrcom6 Bulvoom Mo.3 Wano Ana. :
lug sac +
4bsorbRon Hard Me.dlum
. Sofr _ /
Ivoc. oC Air (._endikoner : th&- uliAnaheuse Mobilzu'r6 S e,thnc..
dow -cool 5odnd l t.vt.I Mt Acuf te(M6 MV Condikone 00erakns MrCondiWomr 00G Dicereme.
cl6A sto 5o 2.v so o h 0.6.
53 24 z4 55o h 'h 0%.
4'7 Zo 27 6 ['t h M 4.\\R r
m hm t
H M M ASSOCI ATES. INC.M
f.,
7 mint 4 r
3 eca Measv<rmeA DJdoth k CcnbHoror in &Arewe, Bulroom Mo. 4
-amu 4<ut:
195.76 sa G r Iz.s AbsorbKon Hard t/
Me_dlum sofr _
Tvoc. o( Air (_endikoner :
Xeamore Cod 'n /4)< -
Se.itinc..
Cod, hC Soond Ltd bcurtmenh Air Condikonc OoteknG HeCondikomr DGG oicceeme.
J BA d6 23 29 6 ftt 0.6.
N ZJ 33 55o Hs Ya 0%.
so I6 34 Pl1% ' hg
,\\?
I l
m hm e
H M M ASSOCI ATES. INC.
K o - Hoo pe J
\\.
C By: ONK G JHF Page 1 of 1 MEASURDtENT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HmES IN THE
[
QD 8
SHEARON HARRIS EPZ o
HOUSE #
M DATE:
h-l3 TIME:
c3 8h O) O#
k1 ADDRESS:
O L, y e 4
STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe) :
Stories b
Ages b years Cossents
.5 frh3.1/fAAJ A
f.Ah I h NS %) *
/
I Q
BEDROQ( NO. 1 - Location Y&
Ps N ' !.% v Area:
IfB sq. ft.
Window Types hk SIL Stoms
-l T
I). G sq. ft.
Operable Window Area:
7 sq.fE.
f Window Areas Absorbtion: Hard Soft
(/
Medium Air Conditioning Central Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.B.
Outside G 34 'ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB)
!l G
125 Hz O
M i
250 Hz Ib I
500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz
@t
/
/3 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
r m
hm H M M ASSOCI ATES. INC. M e
e..
m--
m s
W
7, f.
g
- f F
3 Page 2 of $
HEASURC4ENT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCNES IN THE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
A Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
O.B.
Outside 6 34 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction
)
(dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz T$V
$$ V 43 250 Hz TO JS 500 Hz 9b 8[
37 1000 Hz 94 59 4E 2000 Hz 92.
M7 II
$50 Hz 1/3 Q.B.
9h 8[
39 o
i j
Background Noise at pillow with I's b,
and windoors closed
8h dBA
/b 500 Hz O.B.
[O 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCNMENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CCNMENTS:
VC N Cs h I (A \\
/3&)e,I/-=
l O
l l
l l
r m
hm e
M M M ASSOCI ATES. INC. M
6 r
Page 1 of 3 MEASURE 4ENT OF ACOUST!;
By: CNK G JHF PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN ~EE SHEARCN HAVIS EPZ HOUSE #
3 CATE:
9-J3"I$ TIME: D ' D OM Et ll47 ; Nk)
ADCRESS:
STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe) : bd Stories:
j Age /O " / I years Consent BEDRO(N NO. 1 - Locations uid WM ~ /t44 M sq. ft.
Windcv Types elft/hMM Storms Y Areat Ud
)
+
Window Area
/8 sq. ft.
Operable Window Area:
(o sq.f5.
Absorbtion: Hard Soft Medit:m Air Conditioning: Central
(/
Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open O.B.
Outside 8 _$'7 f t.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB)
InD V
$Y 125 Hz es 53 ro 250 Hz 2.
7T 7
500 Hz 1000 Hz O
77 13 2000 Hz 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
F 7
m hm M M M ASSOCI ATES. INC.
e
.3
(-pega 2 of 3 MEASUPIMDIT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCEES IN "Tir SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
_4 Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
0.B.
Outside 9 3 7 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(ds)
(dB) 125 Hz (oO V 4'7 V 13 250 Hz (o3 40 Z3 500 Hz 82.
83 E$-
1000 Hz 93 MT 44 2000 Hz TO 47 4l 550 Hz 1/3 Q.B.
$l 6l 8l.
Background Noise at pillow with /
- AIA, operating, b) lH d(>t *E I 4 and windoers closed A7 dBA
/
500 Hz O.B.
l7 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCHHENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CChMENTS:
Y O-Vfb 'P1 V '-
'N$
v
)
r m
hm e
H M M ASSOCI ATES. INC.
2 emo
Page 3 of 3 MEASUROiENT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCNES IN U{E SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
3 N
BECROCN NO.
- Locations
,a d id '.Arn.D) /6OM PM I
A,
(
./
Areas sq. ft.
Wihdow Type Storr.s i
Window Areas sq.ft.
Operable Window Areat sq. ft.
Absorbtion: Hard Soft Medium Air Conditioning: Central l Window l Fan l Nonel Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.B.
Outside 9 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 2
1000 Hz 2000 Hz 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
& wind 61d n.tLI M M h ; na. --) e}VU Noise Reduction w/ windows
, if 1y) closed:
l 0.B.
Outside 9 O ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz
&0y v7 y
/2 250 Hz b3 M 7.
7l 500 Hz 3N N
$b O3
[$
'l b f
1000 Hz l
2000 Hz TO 3')
M 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
b 67 Background Noise at pillow with operating, and windows closed:
drA 500 Hz O.B.
550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCHMENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CCHMENTS:
b off w w u Bsui
- b c> P = v
.O 3uvd y e V&\\f f&
hm M M M ASSOCl ATES. INC. M
3
(
Page1ofI MEASURDtENT OF ACOUSTIC By: :2iK & JHF l
PROPERTIES OF HOLES IN DIE i
SHEARON HARRIS EPZ l
HOUSE #
4 CATE:
7 2 5 TIME:
5'&)FH ADDRESS:
bN i b
rj STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe): (0Mb We v
b Age W years [ L,k
'\\
Stories:
f/
,s. ;,3 r.oup %
Comment:
SU
- -OM*
i H e eS 5D.
- I
'.s
%e
.e s 1,4,w s,x c'3 '-
BEDRO(M NO. 1 - Locations ft&tNMI puberne Area:
ff06. I sq. ft.
Window Type: Ou k Storms d Window Area:
3 E. I sq. ft.
Operable Window Areas I. I sq. ft.
Absorbtion: Hard Soft Medium Air Conditioning Central /
Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.B.
Outside 0 /./ / f t.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) b3 V MV
//
125 Hz le T I
/7 250 Hz
[b 500 Hz W'
73 8I 1000 Hz 43 75
.an 2000 Hz
/7 lb
[d 3
550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
F 1
m hm M u u Associ Avas. mc.d e
F Page 2 of f MEASURm 3 T OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN ""HE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
4 Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
0.B.
Outside 6 M/ ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz 83 V I/d Y 13 250 Hz (o7 l/I AS.
500 Hz 86
[i
/(4 1000 Hz N
[T 3I 2000 Hz 96
[JO 35 550 Hz 1/3 9.B.
73 JI
.7 6 -
Background Noise at pillow with /h b h operating, (K OD M d I hI )
and windows closed:
?
A(D
- dBA JO 500 Hz O.B.
/8 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCEMENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S COMMm TS: M dn datu! h M & bk,,
M (
M-U hl$Ob b &bk)b
.W Y td 700 M 1
l y=. re d w av r s.2 h 0
m hm e
H M M ASSOCI ATES, INC. M
F Page1ofk MEASt:RE4ENT OF ACOUSTIC By: ONK & JHF PROPERTIES OF HOiES IN ""HE SHEARCN HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
CATE:
T - P_'M TIME:
$446A%
ADORESS: k d l417 _ ~ Va, ( m 4 1409, % m u d STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe) : kM
[
Stori6s Agas years Ccament BEDRO(M NO.1 - Lr..:ations 29uM4i MMf/L)
Areat IN sq. ft.
Window Type: And k,m e Storms) b1 1
w Window Area:
7.I sq. ft.
Operable Window Area
'f sq. ft..
/
Absorbtion: Hard Soft V
Medium
/
Air Conditioning: Central V
Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.B.
Outside 9 4 d ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB)
NY d5 V N
125 Hz I1 UI S
250 Hz b'
EM I
500 Hz W
10 1000 Hz 93 R3 to 2000 Hz Y"4
$50 Hz 1/3 0.B_
m hm e
M M M ASSOCl ATES. INC. M
3 Fpage2of$
MEASURD4DIT OF ACOUSTIC l
PROPERTIES OF HCHES I:1 ""HE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
E Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
0.B.
Outside $ J4 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz 49 v 36\\/
l2.
250 Hz N
- f6 7_9 500 Hz 33 SI 3 2.
1000 Hz 44 55 39 2000 Hz 93 56 37 550 Hz 1/3 G.B.
79 83 1/s Background Noise at pillow with hd h operating, and windows closed:
3(o dBA 24 500 Hz O.B.
M 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCMMDITS:
EXPERIMDITER'S CCMMDITS: I[ 7 Y/lAI.Mf6 ((ftd A.),-
4 I
l m
hm M u u AssOCI ATES. INC. M e
'f 3
Page1ofh MEASURDtENT OF ACOUSTIC By: 2K f. JHF PROPERTIES OF HOiES IN 3E SHEARCN HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
/_o DATE: 7-1L}- 85 TIME:
/C*Cd dy ADDRESS: b$5 bk bd d h bllu hn g4 k$ 3 Nid SMiyG i
v STRUCT"RE: Frame Masonry Other (describe) :
f" 6V Stories:
1 Aget years Comment:
BEDROO4 NO. 1 - Location AL3h.bMT (AY*n(A)
Areas iL0 sq. fe.
Window Type,hitle W Storms M I
Window Area:
l b sq. ft.
Operable Window Areat b
sq. ft Absorbtion Hard Soft /
Medium Air Conditioning Central / Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.B.
Outside e 45 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB)
- 52. V 4ct V g
125 Hz 250 Hz Is.
55 Io bb E
In 500 Hz 1000 Hz TO l4 0b 71 Ib 2000 Hz W'
4 550 Hz 1/3 0.8.
l r
m hm e
M M M ASSOC. ATES. INC.
[
7 F
Page2cf1 MEASURaici? OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HOiES IN THE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE D (o
Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
0.B.
Outside 9 M ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz I2.d 84
+ 2.
250 Hz (o SI dh l7 500 Hz N
[9 2.Is 1000 Hz AN hh 2000 Hz 9b
[i 33 550 Hz 1/3 Q.B.
N hO 7I Background Noise at pillow sith d
operating, and windotar closed:
h dBA 3b 500 Hz O.B.
37.,.
550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCHMENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CCNMENTS:
Y #htA$(1bf6 T7 AdIO 9
r m
hm M M M ASSOCI ATES. INC. J e
2
-e
v 7
- p Page 1 of 3 MEASUPIMENT OF ACOUSTI By: DNK f. JHF PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN WE SHEARCN HAPJtIS EPZ HOUSE #
7 CATE:
9- /41 SS TIME:
I cr.3 FM Old V $ AM b y if.,
ADCRESS:
STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe) : I/L NM_
0 0
3 -hi41 Skrp Age: 1D - 100. years Stories:
(fhf0MCl)
Comments nin3 Newwemo douMs /Ala Ld tdir120lJS h&Wa 1
BEDROCM NO. 1 - Location souhid (cmpf h
Area 2lC sq. ft.
Wjndow Typen kuhlt hwy 1 Storms
+ p th cTocq; s
, beef
/6 sq. ft.
Operable Window Areat h
sq. ft Window Area 4
Absorbtion Hard
(/
Soft Medium Air Conditioning Central Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.B.
Outside 9 8 1 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dE1 (dB) 54\\/
47 v' to 125 Hz W'
Yb IM 250 Hz D
O 500 Hz N
$b f4 1000 Hz YI l7-2000 Hz 0
/c 550 Hz 1/3 0.3.
i l
l r
m hm H M M ASSOCI ATES. lNC. M e
I
1 3
(
Page 2 of 3 MEASURE:4DT OF ACQUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN THE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
'7 Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
O.B.
Outside 0 83 f t.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(dB)
(da) 125 Hz 54 v' 45 V 9
250 Hz 79 M
Slo 500 Hz 97-(o7-8) 1000 Hz 47 (s0 37 2000 Hz
@3 60 43 550 Hz 1/3 9.8.
hb
[ol c29 Background Noise at pillow with C1A alA; Operating, f
and window closed:
46 dBA 37 500 Hz O.B.
$b 550 Hz 1/3 0.8 OCCUPANT'S CCMMENTS:
/1kObf/, hAdiM EXPERIMENTER'S CCNMDTS:
\\
e l
m hm e
M MM A400CI ATES. INC. M o
y------
.---y
--w-
~.
Page 3 of 3 MEASURD4ENT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN THE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
7
$>.h a > M ch-fw 4,.'n Ld,PM BEDROGt NO.
- Location Areas sq. ft.
Window Types Storms Window Areat sq.ft.
Operable Window Areat sq. ft.
Absorbtion: Hard Soft Medium Air Conditioning Central Window Fan l Nonel Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.8.
Outside 4 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(dB)
(ds) 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz 1000 Hz 2000 Hz 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
[sM h"Ah Opm 3 Q$
)
Noise Reduction w/ windows \\ M l"Aia; :na wwd:::, ' ' ay) clossis O.B.
Outside 4 4 0 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(ds)
(ds) 125 Hz 6d Y 4[ Y b
250 Hz 79 hO I9 500 Hz hT 70 Z Z.
1000 Hz 97 bO 37 2000 Hz 93 65 40 550 Hz 1/3 0.3.
NO N
2)
Background Noise at pillow with operating, and windows closed:
dBA 500 Hz O.5 550 Hz 1/3 0.3 OCCUPANT'S C00ENTS:
EXPERIHDITER'S COOHNTS: b IQ.ANahk IlfidIR.A_
q < m, hm e
H uu Assoc A7as, inc. J 8
3
(
Page1ofh MEASUR.NENT OF ACOUSTIC By: INK & JHF PROPERTIES OF HmES IN ':HE SHEARON HAPAIS EPZ HOUSE #
CATE: k-lh* II TIME: f 'ot)FH AcoRESSi Ana-Warmalle f A (5 Obi 3) ' 4x5 J m\\mac\\
p STRUCTURE:
Fraaie Masonry Other (describe) :
Stories:
l ge:
76 years
%fpr*
v ShT.
Ceseenti h_M MAK Mou4 ottib - Q mthf(k M[J./t. (J4.ll-Sw.,/h
~
N i
g BEDRom NO. 1 - Locations hob /* M M(yvft)
Area:
/h9 sq. ft.
Window Types bO he Storms M a
Window Areas b
sq. ft.
Operable Window Areat h
sq. ft.
Absorbtion: Hard Soft /
Meditan Air Conditioning:
Central /
Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
O.B.
Outside 0 4$l ft.
Inside
!!oise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB)
{#! Y
/
S 125 Hz 250 Hz N
IN i
l bT 7!
IIO 500 Hz 3
N lh 1000 Hz 4O 70 2.0 2000 Hz b
ll I0 550 Hz 1n O.B.
t F
7 m
hm u
M M M A800CI ATES. INC. J
F 7
Page2of4 MEASUP3D37 0F ACOUSTIC
[
PROPERTIE3 OF HCHES IN WE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ
/
HOUSE #
T Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
0.B.
Outside e 4l ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz
[p l V Ib \\/
[
250 Hz lo6 4Y 24 500 Hz 87 M
d6 1000 Hz 43 53 4o 2000 Hz 40 48 ft 550 Hz 1/3 9.8 bi IO 30 Background Noise at pillow with db operating, and windows closed:
37 dBA 30 500 Hz O.B.
2dly 550 Hz 1/3 0.8 OCCUPANT'S CCMMENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CCHMENTS:
\\/' OA1Cl'Cf6 [lhdtdf D
r m
hm M M M ASSOCI ATES, INC. M
I 7
1 g
Page i of 1 MEASURDtENT OF ACOUSTIC By: ONK & JHF PROPERTIES OF HmES IN W E l
SHEARCN HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
CATE: I N i$I TIME: 2146fH lvderSonk)oob Rc\\. -sL WirX MhJe]\\'scrxsiMEuc vor1 \\lan x AccazSS:
J
- /
v s
STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe) :
Stories f
LnOTA) Ages o,, 13 yea,e (CmenA)
Comment: -thennabu +indsub [ double _ abv h 1
GG /
BEDRom NO.1 - Locations hk N N hna $L J
Area:
147 sq. ft.
Window types clovbk handL Storms 'No 9
Window Areas Il sq. ft.
Operable Window Areas ID sq. ft.
Absorbtion: Hard Soft v
Meditan Air Conditioning:
Central V
Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open 0.B.
Outside G42 4 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (da)
(dE)
(dB) 4tV 3G /
F 125 Hz 63 IT 6
2so Hz T7' 74 IS soo Hz 44 16 1000 Hz NA b
2 coo Hz 8b' 1
S5o Hz 1/3 0.5-1 I
l m
hm wam Associaras,inc.J
F A
Page2of$
MEAS"RDiDIT OF ACQUSTIC
{
PROPERTIES OF HCNES IN INE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
4 Noise Reduction w/ windows (including stom windows, if any) closed:
0.B.
Outside 9 4'24 f t.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(ds) 125 Hz g$4 y 34 y fg 250 Hz lo3 4i l4 500 Hz 87 57>
31 1000 Hz Ni
[3 4l 2000 Hz 9 2.-
62.
4o 550 Hz 1/3 9.B.
55 33-Background Noise at pillow with (fahl b operating, and windows closed:
63 dBA 32 500 Hz O.B.
89 550 Hz 1/3 0.8 OCCUPANT'S CCMMDITS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CCNMDITS: Y '
1 N rt'c!L '/((A d.U S,
k F
7 m
hm M MM ASSOCI ATES. INC.
k__
7 r
Page 1 of 3 MEASt3U24ENT OF ACOCSTIC By: ONK G JHF PROPERTIES OF HW ES IN THE SNEARN HARRIS EPZ b /hh TIME: 4 f8 HOUSE 4
/O CATE:
ADDRESS b0)f y
on.ck-STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (deseribe):
Stories: M Aget voars Ccuatent JA L*1 Il d 0-I
{
BEDROCM NO. 1 - Locat!&ts d61 u2Aa[ detAJ1A-k d.4(44f., W % # M fr*,
y Area:
UY.
sq. ft.
Window Types dd hoO Storms Window Area:
2A.7 I sq. ft.
Operable i indow Areas I.7 I sq. ft.
Absorbtion Hard Soft /
Medium Air Conditioning Central
/
Window Fan None Noise Reduction w/ windows open 0.B.
Outside 0 46 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dE)
(dB)
II Y
//
125 Hz Idb 4
250 Hz N
/I 500 Hs 9
U
/Y 1000 M1 90 76
/6 2000 N:
II 78
/Co 550 Hz 1/3 o. -
hk M M M ASSOCI ATES. INC. M 2
4
(
3 Page 2 of 3 MEASURD4ENT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN *HE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
,/O Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) closed:
0.3.
Outside 4 M b ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(ds)
(ds) 125 Hz
$$V A2 Y 13 250 Hz d6 500 Hz I7 61 3II 1000 Hz 9l If7
- d/
2000 Hz 90
($
g7 550 Hz 1/3 9.3 I
[
dh-Background Noise at pillow with (in M d operating, y
and windows closed:
N dBA OI 500 Hz O.8.
JI 550 Hz 1/3 0.8.
OCCUPANT'S CCMMENTS EXPERIMENTER'S CCNMENTS: YS 1Airtdl /t.adiAA
\\
l l
1 l
r h5 M M M A400CI A fil, INC.,
L
s.
(
3 Page 3 of 3 MEASURD4ENT OF ACOUSTIC PROPERTIES OF HQ4ES IN THE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
BEDRON NO.
- Locations /fEt "M
I Areat sq. ft.
Window Types Storms Window Areas sq.ft.
Operable Window Areas sq. ft.
Absorbetons Hard Soft Meditan Nonel Air Conditioning Central Window Fan Noise Reduct.on w/ windows open 0.B.
Outside 4 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(dB)
(ds) 125 Hz 250 Hz 500 Hz e
1000 Hz 2000 Hz 550 Hz 1/3 0.8.
Noise Reduction w/ windows ((including stors windows, if any)
ShP'V Isl N YD M 'D*-
closed:
0.B.
Outside 4 4b ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(ds)
(ds) 125 Hz 86 Y dlV' li 250 Hz
(# '3 43 30 500 Hz I7 I$
28 1000 Hz 9l 64 37 2000 Hz 90 M
45 550 Hz 1/3 0.3 N
di 2.8 Sackground Noise at pi.llow with operating, and windows closed:
d5A I
500 Hz 0.5 550 Hz 1/3 0.3 OCCUPANT'S CmMENTS:
EXPERIMDITER'S CG90:NTS s Y S [h' A k (/Mll d _
0
.. A c Av... i
. s
o
(
3 Page 1 of A MEASURmENT OF ACOUSTIC By: ONK & JHF PROPERTIES OF HOtES IN SfE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ house e
//
= ATE: f//4/8f TmE v PH h?M Yb 3 COVt ADCRISS:
STRUCTURI Frame Masonry Other (describe) :
Stories:
Ages 78 */dd years Ceaunent BEDR004 NO. 1 - Locations
[c3 *.
C'. b k
Area l 6L.b sq. ft.
Window Types dovhk hu.AA.
Storms V
Window Areas l l. 76' sq. ft.
Operable Window Area
[a sq. ft.
Absorbtion: Hard Y Soft Meditan Air Conditioning Central Window Fan None V
Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.8 Outside 0 89 f t.
Inside Noise Reduction (da)
(ds)
(ds) 125 Hz ON NY A
250 Hz
/oS 7
78 500 Hz 1000 H2 NI I
b N
N l
2000 Hz W
550 Hz 1/3 0.5.
l l
r m
hm H um Associ ATas. Inc. d i
[
o-(
3' Page2ofh MEASUPE.Cl? OF ACOUSTIC
~
PROPERTIES OF HO4ES IN 3(E SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
//
Noise Reduction w/ windows (including stom windows, if any) closed:
0.8.
Outside 4 @ )
ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 125 Hz 60 V
- f V 2_
250 Hz 70
- 5 25 500 Hz
$2.
59
.33 1000 Hz 9@
[@
40 2000 Hz b
8[
4l 550 Hz 1/3 G.B.
D M
dk Background Noise at pillow with rdtvlM d(d,
operatingf [
and windows closed:
M dBA 4D 500 Hz 0.8.
b4 550 Hz 1/3 0.8.
OCCUPANT'S CCMMDITS:
EXPERIMDITER'S COeiDITS: Y
- I/1AA/N f. [/A -
I l
m hm e An5. i c. s w-
e Page 1 of %
MEASURD4ENT OF ACOUSTIC By: DNK & 'HF PROPERTIES OF HO4ES IN THE SNEARCN HARRIS EPZ HouSEo_j.L_
DATE:
9-14 TIME:
7'30 %
AccazSS:
/hk/
- 7arku.hM i NGUag-\\/1v$n6L STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe) :
h Stories:
Ages years Comment:
1 - Locations h0MWteY of/W BEDMOO4 NO.
Area lN sq. ft.
Window Type /ffuNe kiLMD Storms Window Area
/ 8. 7 83 sq. ft.
Operable Window Areat h.I sq. ft.
Absorbtion: Hard Soft Medium Air Conditioning Central Window Fan None V
Noise Reduction w/ windows open 0.B.
Outside G M b ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB) 4 II 125 Hz
^
b 5b
!b 250 Hz N
!b 500 Hz b
M
$7 1000 Hz M
E 2000 Hz 550 Hz 1/3 0.3.
m hm num AssociaTss. inc.d e
1-F MEASt.,RIMENT OF ACOUSTIC pcg) 2 cf K PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN WE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ HOUSE #
closed:
Noise Reduction w/ windows (including storm windows, if any) 0.B.
Outside 9 49 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (ds)
(dB)
(dB)
I b(O dN Y ID s
125 Hz N
49 IT 250 Hz b\\
E7 500 Hz 95 ST 37 1000 Hz Sh bl 33 2000 Hz 550 Hz 1/3 e.s.
90 30 g,cra.
hf, Background Noise at pillow with hiiMd df COnd operatingf and window closed:
M dBA 33 500 Hz O.B.
hI 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CCNMENTS:
EXPERIMENTER'S CCHMENTS: \\/ 5 Y(AN S 6 Ild dh i
r m
hm H M M ASSOCI ATES, INC. d t
b w
- e 3
I Page 1 of 1 MEASt.*,RDtENT OF ACOUSTIC By: ::t;K & JHr PROPERTIES OF HCHES IN THE SHEARCN HMUlIS EPZ i
HOUSE #
lh DATE:
- 8. IS-535 TIME:
3
- Do AM ADDRESS:
% l0113 dkJ ki STRUCTURE:
Frame Masonry Other (describe) :
Stories:
Ages years wcndo>s
/oose Ah _.
m.
Co enes mm Wr cs i w s
$ N t.sbu b s s1 l
mu
\\'
BEDROO4 NO. 1 - Locations Cod M4Y MMA lM.5 sq. fe.
Window types c ove ka storms No Area:
)
Window Area:
O. I sq. ft.
Operable Window Area:
- 4. 5 sq. ft Absorbtion: Hard /
Soft Medium Air Conditioning Central Window Fan
/
None Noise Reduction w/ windows open:
0.8.
Outside e M 9 ft.
Inside Noise Reduction (dB)
(dB)
(dB)
Gf Y 4! Y O
125 Hz
.M 05 9
25o H.
45-32.
1l Soo Hz W
3 b
1000 Hz 97 30 17 2000 Hz H
M 55o Hz 1/3 0.B.
m hm M M M ASSOCI ATES. INC.
MEASUPl2(ENT OF ACOUSTIC rPtg32of$
PROPERTIES OF HO(ES IN THE SHEARON HARRIS EPZ
=,
OUSE e _ \\8 if any) closed:
H Noise Redu-tion w/ Windows (including storm windows, Noise Reduction Inside Outside 6 h$
ft.
(dB)
(dB) _
O.B.
(dB) d7 Y I4 6l \\/
125 Hz bC l4 74 250 Hz 7I IO 9D 500 Hz 75 2.I 1000 Hz 7b 2d 97 2000 Hz 7b
/d k
550 Hz 1/3 9.B.
bu
_ operating, e*
Background Noise at pillow with l
and windows closed:
l 4k dBA 4 (.0 500 Hz O.B.
]
47 550 Hz 1/3 0.B.
OCCUPANT'S CO(MENTS:
NLn d(."d
'/) shM 72Ci r7(_,, if4, c [9,.
fM.
EXPERIMENTER'S CCHMENTS:
d i
r m
hm MMM ASSOCl ATES, INC. M a
k W
6 6
a
= gi Ri e. li:sl
=Ili!
.Egll!=$
1.
s S
q -('..
.N_ t, =
g r=. s
=.siil5 l
i e
e 8
d
.; J p.
)
- h F
l
,i i.
I*
ra4n
,5. p -
[
(
17 i u..U.*A EI l
s e
i
)
4
b a
4, HOISE ENFilt00serr or tNtBAll AffD SUBUltBAN AREAS I
Developed under I
TIE TECIOSICAL STUDIES fit 0 craft a
of the FEDERAL IIOUSIIEC ADMINISTIUtFIGH DEFAR1?ENT OF IIDUSING AND URBAll DEVEtDFlmfr f
by i
Bolt Beranek and Newman, Inc.
Ims AnBeles, California 9
January 1%7 Fee enie by the Superintendent of Ikeuments, if 8. Gawrnement Printing Omee Washinsten. D.C 20402 - Prw 40 wate r
l O
- OO O
e
d PossuotD The Departsent of Moustna and Urban Development and the Federal busing Aestnistration are concerned with the livability of properties for which mortgage insurance is issued. In a con-tinuing ef fort to improve livahtitty, FMA sponsors research through l
tts Technical Studies Program to find better methods in design to provide comfort and privacy within the household environnent. Pub-Itcetion of this newly assembled field study data to part of our effort to. attain this goal.
I
',4 t
e e
S d b
e
i PREFACE Under the sponsorship of the Federal Housing Administration, the Acoustical Consult ing firm of Bolt Beranek and Neuman. Inc.
was contracted to conduct a series of studies on the subject and prepare the data contained in this guide. It identifies all signtitcant noise sources, other than aircraft, known to create disturbances within the home.
It analyses the results of a social survey made to determine cannunity responses to traffic noise. Noise reduction nessurements recorded in three major ettles as characteristic of typical urban noise criteria is also discussed.
The intended objective of this guide is to provide FMA inauring offices as well as architects builders and homeowners a resdtly useable source of inforwet ton dealing with the noise environment of our communit y.
It does not in any way amend or supplant FMA's Minimum Property Standards.
l S 9 4
9 g
e
i TABLE OF COfffEFFS M
I.. INTRODUCTION 1
i II. SOCIAL SURVEY................
3 A.
Structure of the Questionnaire......
3 B.
Analysis of the Responses 5
III. TRAFFIC S1tfDIES...............
8 A.
Penetration of Freely-Flowing Traffic Noise into Residential Areas.......
8 B.
1he Estimation of Traffic Noise Levels..
11 C.
Urban Exposure to Traffic 13 I
IV.
NOISE REDUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL BUIIDINGS...
15 REETRENCES...............
19 TABLES.
21 FIGURES APPENDIX A - COMfUNITY NOISE SURVEY -- SHORT FORM APPENDIX B - ACOUSTIC DATA ACQUISITION AND REDUC I
O i
e*
O G
m
l 1
NOISE IN UREDN AND SUBURMN AREAS: RESULT 3 OF FIELD STUDIES I.
INISODUCTION Under the sponsorship of the Federal Housing Administat'lon, Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. has conducted a technical study of the noise envirorusent of urban and suburban areas. This study is intended to include all significant noise sources other than aircraft, which are being considered in other programs. S e study has been performed over the period of June 1966 to January 1967, under Contract l
FH-994 l
l A major portion of this study has consisted of a compilation of pertinent data contained in the technical lite.sture.
21s compilation is being submitted to the FHA in a separate report.M Several specific studies have been designed to generate additional engineering information, and these studies are contained in the present report.Section II describes the limited social survey developed to determine the relative'importance of various urban and'auburban noise sources. The survey corroborated the results of previous workers, showing that traffic noise is generally the primary source of bother, but the survey showed also that other sources, particularly neighborhood-generated i
noises (animals, children, and neighbors) can be of impor-tance comparable to traffic.Section III reports the results of traffic studies made in this program and contains simple engineering procedures for estinsting mean values of traffic noise.Section IV presents the results of a series of noise reduction measurements made on residential buildings in New York, Boston, and Los Angeles.
G 9
. O e
A copy tf the queltiormeiro ttilised la the svin1 surveFe
' e yo II. SOCIAL StmfET and d3striptions tf the noico data acqui ition and reduction systems, cr3 civen in appendicos.
A brist questionnairs waa prepared far the limited cocial survey conducted on this program. 1he basic material Magnetic tape records of several kinds of noise sources utilized in the questionnaire was supplied by Paul Borsky have been acquired in the course of this program. These of the National Opinion Research Center.
Mr. Borsky records are on file at the BIEI Ice Angeles laboratories has been associated with a number of detailed social and are available to the FNA and its designated contractors surveys studying cosumunity responses to noise, including for use as test stimuli in future studies of subjective the Iondon social survey of 1961-1962, surveys around response to urban and suburban noise.
U.S. Air Force beset, and the Oklahoma City sonic boom survey. Modification of the material for use in the present survey was done by BBN.
A.
Structure of the Questionnaire A copy of the questionnaire is given in Appendix A.
1he questionnaire contains the following ten elements:
i
- 1) Introduction (Items 1-3 in the questionnaire)
- 2) Characterization of the general neighborhood noise environment (Item 4).
- 3) Recall of the kinds of noises usually heard in the house. The purpose of this item was to start the respondent thinking about various noise sources, to aid his rank ordering in the next item. Care was taken to ensure that the noise of air conditioning, children, or neighbors was designated as an iriternal or external source. (Item 5)
- 4) Rank ordering of sources in terms of conscious awareness. Care was taken to avoid use of the. -
J 4
0
6 words "bothsr' or "tanoy" in this step. (Items 6 he questionneire tm giv1n in Los Ang;1sc, Boston, cad and 8)
Ne3 Y rk, in osvarsi cr3cs cf each city. No intervisws were nada in er:co near maj:t cirports. A tetal of 259
- 5) separate handling of aircraft noise annoyance, complete responses was ouained.
since this source was not of primary interest in the study. (Items 6A-B)
B.
Analysis of the Responses
- 6) Nature and frequency of most bothersome noise.
As mentioned previously in this section, each respondent A brief attempt was made to determine the reason was asked to designate those noises of which he was most for the annoyance. (Item 7) conscious and those noises by which he was most bothered.
In order to susuarize the complete set of conscious noise
- 7) Nature and frequency of second most bothersone sources given by all the respondents, a rating of ten noise. We question sequence was identical with was assigned to the noise source ranked by each respondent as being the one he was most conscious of.
Values of that for the most bothersome noise. (Items 8 and 9) nine, eight, etc. were then given to those noise sources that were ranked second, third, etc. by the respondent.
- 8) Individual comuments on noise. (Items 10 and 13)
The ratings were averaged to give the mean rating per
}
questionnaire for each noise source. A value of ten
- 9) Indication of individual sensitivity to noise.
was assigned to the noise source with the largest rating (Item 11) average, and the other averages were adjusted accordingly.
Thus all the noise sources were rank ordered in the same
- 10) Background of respondents. (Items 12 and 14)
A longer version of the questionnaire was also considered.
Table I presents the rank ordering of aonscious noise This version investigated fully the nature and frequency sources for the three cities separately and combined.
of all noises mentioned by the respondent. In trial The results are separated into three general income brackete runs it was found to be somewhat more difficult to give (as estimated by the interviewers) and for all incomes combined. Me questionnaire was not designed to provide than the briefer form, and brought the response that it was " repetitive" and " boring". The briefer form, an in-depth study of subjective response to noise, and which took between eight and nine minutes to administer' therefore small differences in the numbers in Table I appeared to give almost as much information as the longer cannot be considered significant. However, the results form without these negative reactions.
do show the following definite trends:
_4 I
. U 9
g i.
6
- 1) "Automotiva traffic
- is cren t3 b2 generally Tablo II c1:3 shows that in each cf the three ceographie-1 (but not c1 ways) the highe:t ranking conscious creas ctudied, low income tropond;nto wer3 least bothered noice courco. This recult is in line with recults by noico and middle income re pondents were mo;t bothered found in more extensive social surveys.1-3/
by noise. Although the survey offers no basis for this result, we may speculate that the low income respondents
- 2) " Children and neighbors" constitute an important may consider noise an item of secondary importance, while noise source of which respondents were conscious.
the high income respondents may live further away from If we group " children and neighbors" with " animals Dolse-producing activities and/or may have houses that a
as a composite group called " neighborhood-generated are inherently better designed from a noise point of noise," we find that this group is often ranked view, that is, be shielded from traffic or neighbors.
higher than automotive traffic noise.
Of the 259 completed responses to the questionnaires,
- 3) " Automotive traffic" and " neighborhood-generated 156 indicated bother, and 53 respondents described their noise" ranked significantly higher than did other reaction as "very bothered." Table III shows the reasons
(
sources, except for certain sources peculiar to associated by these "very bothered" respondents with their the local area (for example, " sirens and horns =
reaction. (It should be noted that most respondents mentioned in the high income New York area, and " sonic several reasons.) It appears that the primary reasons for booms" in the middle income los Angeles area),
being very bothered are associated with being awakened or unable to sleep. Being startled or being disturbed The analysis of the responses to the questions concerned from television or conversational activities are important seith bother focused on the primary source of bother, as secondary reasons for annoyance.
described by the respondents. Table II gives the percentages of respondents listing the various sources, divided by income and geographical groupings. Because only one source of bother was used in compiling the data in Table II, the percentages are representative of the actual number of people bothered by each source. As might be expected, the results show the same general trends observed in the study of conscious noise sources: " automotive traffic" and " neighborhood-generated noise" are the primary sources of bother. These two source groupings account for more than half of the 156 responses in which bother was indicated. -7
~
9
- e G
e I
III. TRAFFIC S1UDIES 6
(
was f und covsring the cosuson era in whith the crea cf intsr:st did not hava line-tf-cight, that is, the crea As the social curvry rxults hava shown, curfaco automotiva was thisidrd from the trOffic noico c4urca by one er mora traffic to o majrr source of urban and suburban noise.
intermediate buildings. (A related study showed level In addition, surface automotive traffic noise lends itself reductions between 9 dB at 160 Hz and 15 dB at 5000 Hz, to study more readily than most of the other noise sources.
for sound propagating out of line-of sight into a side It is generally more continuous in nature and less variable street.N) Accordingly, a brief series of measurements from site to site than other noise sources, such as was made to explore this situation.
neighborhood-generated noises (neighboro, children, and l
animals).
Observation of freely-flowing traffic noise indicates l
that this source may be conveniently analyzed into two Periews of laboratory results of subject responses to components. The first component consists of the quasi-present-day surface automotive traffic noise indicate steady-state noise from the flow of passing automobiles, that there are several one-number physical measures of This source is distributed along a line (the freeway or noise which correlate quite well with the subjective expressway) and therefore radiates with cylindrical sysasetry response. b Rese measures include loudness level, to the adjacent areas. His radiation property gives perceived noise level, and sound pressure level weighted rise to a decrease in sound pressure level of 3 decibels by the A-scale network (dBA). However, dBA is the only for each doubling of distance from the line source (neglecting such measure that can be read directly from a commercially atmospheric attenuation), and this result has been observed available meter having standardized performance. For in mathematical simulations and actual measurements. N this reason most of the discussion in this section of De second component is associated with discrete moving the report will be in terms of dBA, although octave band sources (usually trucks). Because of its localized nature, information will be given for the traffic noise sources this source radiates with spherical symmetry, giving used in the prediction procedure.
rise to a fall-off of 6 decibels per doubling of distance from the source. The passage of each truck gives rise A.
Penetration of Freely-Flowing Traffic Noise into to a peak in sound pressure level which is superimposed Residential Areas upon the " background" of automobile noise. Dese truck The literature survey has provided information on the E
E prediction of noise from freely-flowing traffic and the propagation of this noise to adjacent locations having the continuous automobile " background" remains fairly line-of-sight to the traffic noise source. No information steady for constant traffic flow and average vehicle speed..
O G
In the penetr tion ctudy it wa1 not po1cible to mak3 f
cimult;neous messiremento et the cev:r:1 po2itions di:tri-in Fig. 3-1 cxhibit a fall-off of approsimat31y 1D decibelo PIr decada of dictanc2, which corrseponda to the cylindrien1 buted in the racidenti:1 ress. 'herafcra the quast-;teadT radiation cf 3 d;cibile per drubling as:ocinted cith a cutomotiva no132 wa1 used i:n the p:netration ctudy.
line source. his behavior suggests that the presence In the building noise reduction study described in the following section, it was possible to make simultaneous of shielding buildings introduces a level reduction of 10 20 decibels from the unshielded case, and that this measurements, and the discrete truck noise was used, reduction remains essentially constant independent of the number of intervening structures. In other words, ne penetration study was made around the Ventura Freeway the first shielding structure is most effective in intro-in the western San Fernando Valley of Ios Angeles during ducing a level reduction, and subsequent structures do the middle of a weekday. The traffic flow was approxi-not reduce the level significantly more.
mately two vehicles /second, and the average vehicle speed was approximately 60 miles / hour. Sound pressure level B.
The Estimation of Traffic leoise Invels measurements were made along three lines perpendicular to the freeway and extending into the residential areas As mentioned previously, the noise of freely-flowing cpproximately 2000 feet. Except for the nearest set automobiles is dependent primarily upon the traffic flow of measurements (within approximately 100 feet of the freeway),
and average speed. The average A-scale sound pressure c11 measurement positions were blocked visually from the level at 100 feet from the center of freely-flowing auto-freeway by at least one set of buildings, n e freeway mobile traffic on grade is given by the expression t'as elevated approximately 20 feet at two of the measurement locations and was on grade at the third location, dBA = 37 + 10 log 10 0 log 10
- m+
Re coded points in Fig. 3-1 ebow the A-scale sound pressure levels obtained at the measurement points, as a function of the distance from the center of the freeway. De lines where a is the flow in automobiles /see and v is the average in this figure show the estimated levels for the freely-automobile speed in miles / hour.M 2 e distribution of flowing traffic in the absence of shielding by buildings.
levels about this mean value is dependent upon the parti-The estimates for the elevated freeways follows the suggestion cular traffic flow and speed conditions. A typical value in Reference 7 that the elevation provides a level reduction of standard deviation is + 3 decibles. A further refinement that extends to approximately 300 feet from the freeway.
W edmEWn pmee ensWe W en d W With the e.xception of the measurements closest to the road surface, adding or subtracting 5 decibels for very
- y freeway, which have line-of-sight to the source, the data e
e
...Z.
1.Ivunu ps ex_ _u_ra arv. - _----------- - -
s1 ct 100 fe'it from o proNrly muffled cruicing discal truck is tppr:::ximats!
line cnd point courcss t:ithout atmorpheric cttsnuation.
77 dIcibels, end is not strongly depend;nt on truck cpied.2 mis value The ctmospheric cttenuation producsc reductisne of 1sco may increm s by approximatsly 5 d;cibels during truck than I decibel et 1000 fest cnd cpproximatsly 2 decibelo acceleration. Also, the presence or condition of the at 2000 feet from the source, truck exhaust suffler has a major effect on the truck De difference between no muffler and a stock In addition to freely-flowing traffic, an important traffic noise.
muffler in good condition is typically 15 decibels.
noise source in urban areas is stop-and-go traffic on Field main roads.
observation indicates that the truck noise sources that Figure 34 gives the octave band spectra are generally observed in residential areas are those measured at 25 to 50 feet from heavy urban traffic.E with a muffler in a somewhat deteriorated condition.
he range in Fig. 3-4 corresponds to a range of 67 to 76 dM.
For prediction purposes it is suggested that the A-scale Reference 6 reports average values of approxi-sound pressure level at 100 feet be taken as 77-82 dB, mately 75 dB4 under similar heavy traffic conditions and that occasional peaks as much as 10 dB higher than with standard deviations of approximately 5 decibels, Figure 3-2 shows the octave band spectrum In the present progren a 10 minute sample of noise from this be expected.
chapes associated with the freely flowing automobile and heavy traffic in New York City Jaa analyzed to provide truck noise sources.
a mean value of 81 dB4 and standard deviation of 4 decibels, at 15 feet from the traffic. This corresponds to a value of 76 dBA at ' pproximately 50 feet from the traffic.
D e solid lines in Fig. 3-3 show the estimated sound pressure a
level for the two kinds of flowing traffic sources, relative Rese results corroborate the range shown on Fig. 34 to the levels measured at 100 feet.
for heavy urban stop-and-go traffic, De average values of atmospheric attenuation given in Table IV have been C.
Urban Exposure to Traffic used to obtain Fig. 3-3.Y Rese values are averages of several field measurements; the detailed attenuation In order to examine the traffic exposure experienced tatues will of course depend somewhat upon the meteoro-by a fairly large segisent of an urban population, a study Logical conditions, was made of a large number of residential areas in the city of Boston. Figure 3-5 shows the portions of the city Figure 3-3 shows that the average atmospheric attenuation selected for the study. Data from the Boston Redevelopment values have a small effect on the dBA levels up to 2000 feet Authority provided the necessary information describing from the noise source.
De light broken lines in Fig. 3-3 traffic volume, type of traffic, peak-hour volumes, etc.
rihow the theoretical level reductions associated with for the major traffte arteries in this area.
These arterial flows were then divided into the nine categories shown on Fig. 3-6.
The Massachusetts State Census provided l.
e em
population figur:0 far each politic 01 pr:cinct, and the cy; rage popul tion density far ecch precinct was dst:rmined IV, NOISE REDUCTION OF RESIDENTIAL BUIIDINGS from the area and population information.
A review of the literature indicates that, although much To estimate the distribution of population along the information is available on the noise-reducing properties various traffic arteries, the following assumptions weea of building walls in laboratory configurations, relatively utilized:
little has been reported on the noise-reduction properties of actual residential buildings. In order to develop
- 1) n e population density within the residential improved engineering information on the noise-reducing area within a precinct is uniformly distributed, properties of residential buildings, several series of 1his assumption appears justified because of noise reduction measurements were made in the Ice Angeles, the amall area covered by an average precinct Boston, and New York areas. In this study noise reduction and the relative uniformity of building sizes is defined as the difference between the sound pressure normally found within such an area.
levelsobserved outside the building and inside the building.
One measurement system (such as described in Appendix B)
- 2) he exposed residential area adjacent to each was placed inside the room under study, and another system traffic artery extends 75 feet to each side of was placed outside the building away from the inusediate the center line of the artery. His assumption influence of nearby building surfaces, was used to include only the first (unshielded) row of residences facing the street.
Traffic sounds were used as the noise sources.
As was pointed out in the previous section, traffic noise may We nussber of people exposed to each traffic category often be considered to be comprised of two components:
was computed from the precinct population density and a quasi-steady source associated with the steady flow the linear dimension of each traffic category in each of autos, and superimposed discrete sources associated precinct.
Figure 3-6 plots the fractional parts of the with trucks.
Both kinds of sources were considered in population exposed to the various categories.
This figure portions of the noise reduction study; however, the quasi-shows that appreximately 3/4 of the urban population steady noises were found to be occasionally too low in level considered is exposed to traffic flows of less than 5000 to provide dependable data, and only data using discrete vehicles per day (category 0), and that approximately noise sources will be reported.
1/16 sf the population is exposed to flows greater than 20,000 vehicles per day (categories E, F, 0, and H).
Figures 4-1 and 4-2 show the noise reduction results obtained on 8 residential buildings in New York, and Figs. 4-3 and 4-4 show the noise reduction results obtained. -
e 9
9
t, on lo ra identini buildings in Boston.
De building con
- ctructions ranged from fully fireproofed to wood frame and a common v.lua cf 1/2 cecond revsrberation time,
(
and the window 3 included a variety of constructions and by the expression s
exposed areas.
he figures indicate that closing the windows produces typical A-scale noise reduction increases of 10 dB.
1 normalized noise reduction l
The variety of constructions and range of exposed window
= measured noise redaction areas encountered in the New York and Boston measurements windows closed provided the opportunity to examine the possible effects
+ 10 log 10
+1 g
i 10 of building construction and window area on noise reduction.
No significant effec +. related to building construction was found.
However, Fig. 4-5 shows that an increase
- measured noise reduction in exposed window area generally provides a decrease
, windows open in the A-scale noise reduction, and similar results are
+ 10 log
+ 0 log 10 lO seen in octave band data. This result is in line with the general observation that building penetrations are often the weakest acoustic link in insulating from outside where S is the exposed window area and P is the open window noise, and noise control measures for residential buildings area, in square feet, and T is the reverberation time will thus generally involve improvements in the windo.r in seconds, n e results are shown in Fig. 4 6.
De e ne ruction.M normalization is seen to reduce the data spread. Figure 4-6 and the preceding formula can be used to estimate the The New York noise reduction measurements afforded an noise reduction for other values of exposed or open window opportunity to normalize the data to common values.
areas or reverberation times, n ese measurements included an experimental determination cf the reverberation time of the rooms, using an impulsive Figure %-7 shows the noise reduction results obtained cource (exploding balloon). The reverberation time was on 11 residential buildings in suburban Ios Angeles.
l found to be 1/2 second in all octave bands for furnished The buildings were of stucco or frame construction typical j
rooms, with or without the windows open, and approximately of the area, and the window copatructions and exposed twice this value for unfurnished, uncarpeted rooms, areas were similar in all buildings. The data in Fig. %-7
{
m e noise reduction data were normalized to common values show good agreement with the corresponding data from of 30 square feet exposed window area for closed windows New York and Boston. In contrast, similar studies using snd 15 square feet open window area for open windows, aircraft flyovers indicate that New York and Boston resi-dential dutidings provide higher noise, reductions above 1 1
-17 O
I
q 125 Hz than 63 1c3 Angalso building's. M This comparicon REFERENCES suggests that the sound transmission through the ceiling and roof construction may be of much greater importance 1
Bolt Beranek m2 Newman Inc. Report 14f0, " Literature for noise from aircraft flyovers than for noise from Search for the FHA Contract on Urban Noise," submitted surface traffic.. Based on this idea, the lighter-weight to Federal Housing Administration, January 1967.
ceiling and roof constructions in los Angeles limit the noise reductions for flyovers to lower values than are 2.
Noise. Final Report, Coussittee on the Problem of obtained in New York and Boston, while the comparable Noise, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, July 1963 window constructions provide comparable noise reductions (Iondon).
for surface traffic in all areas.
3 P. N. Borsky, Ca== amity Reactions to Air Force Noise, WADD Technical Report 60-689, Parts 1 and 2, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Ohio, March 1961 t
4 Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. Report 1195, "Interin Report: Research on Establishment of Standards for Highway Noise Levels," submitted to Highway Research Board, February 1965.
5.
F. M. Wiener, C. I. Malme, and C. M. Gogos, " Sound Propagation in Urban Areas," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. E, 738-747, April 1965.
6.
Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. Report 1452, " Noise and Vibration Effects Study -- New Orleans Riverfront Expressway," sutaitted to Marcou, O' Leary and Associates.
October 1966.
7.
Bolt Beranek and Newman Inc. Report 1089, " Traffic Noise Expected from the Proposed Beverly Hills Freeway,"
submitted to the City of Beverly Hills, June 1964.
. I..
e*
f REFERENCES (Concluded)
TABLE I 8
G. L. Bonvallet, " Levels and Spectra of Traffic, RANK ORDERING OF CONSCIOUS NOISE SOURCES Industrial, and Residential Area Noise," J. Acoust.
p, Soc. Am. 23, 435-439, July 1951 All Incomes Middle g
9.
Dolt neranek and Neuemn Inc. Reports 1387 and 1390, childrer/ neighbors 10.0 10.0 8.2
" Methods for Improving the Noise Insulation of Houses traffic 9.3 8.0 10.0 with Respect to Aircraft Noise," submitted to Federal animals 5.1 5.o 4.2 Housing Administration, November 1966.
sonic boom 5.1 73 1.1 planes 3.1 30 3.1 trains 2.4 0
5.6 others 2.2 2.7 1.1 motorcycles 1.8 2.3 1.1 industry 0
o o
strens/ horns 0
0 0
passersby 0
0 0
Boston All Incomes Ng Middle g
traffic 10.0 10.0 10.0 10.0 ch11drerVneighbors 4.6 3.9 4.1 7.1 industry 35 2.0 4.5 3.6 planes 2.8 3.7 3.0 o
animals 1.6 2.8
.7 1.3 other 1.2
.7 1.6 1.5 sirens / horns
.9 4
1,5 o
motorcycles 4
.7
.3 0
trains
.1
.4 o
o sonic boom
.1
,3 o
o passersby 0
o o
o -21 e
9
(
i i
TAPLE I (Concluded)
TABLE II New York PERCENTAGE OF RESPGIDENTS INDICATING BOTHER All Incomes High Middle Low A geles arrie 10.0 9.7 10.0 6.7 First source or bother All Incomes Middle Low 411drer/ neighbors 9.7 9.7 6.3 10.0
~
strens/ horns 4.5 10.0 2.8 2.7
" III*
13*
e nie b =
13.0 16.7 6.3 passersby 3.5 3.2 4.6 1.1 other 3.2 1.7 59 1.6 childrer/ neighbors 10.9 13 3 6.3 animals 10.9 10.0 12.5 motorcycles 1.1 15 1.6 0
planes 1.1 1.5 1.6 0
own 8.7 10.0 6.3 planes 4.3 6.7 o
antarils
.8 1.7 0
1.1 industry
.5 0
1.0 0
l**
2*2 3*3 trains
.3 0
0 6
mins 2.2 0
6.3 sonic boom 0
0 0
o not bothered-34.8 26.7 50.0 Los Angeles, Boston, and New York Combined Boston All Incomes Hg Middle D
First source-traffic 10.0 10.0 10.0 9.8 or bother All Incomes M
Middle Low children / neighbors 6.9 5.0 6.2 10.0 trarfte 17.2%
12.8%
20.8%
16.7%
planes 2.3 3.2 2.7
.8 planes 8.6 15.4 75 o
industry 2.3 1.6 2.9 1.3 childrer/ neighbors 6.0 2.6 75 8.3 other 1.9
.9 2.5 1.7 anim is 52 12.8 19 o
Enimals 19 2.7 1.4 2.0 t;. dust ry 5.2 0
7.5 8.3 cirens/ horns 1.7 2.1 1.7 1.4 other 35 0
38 8.3 passersby
.9
.6 1.3 6
sirens /homa 2.6 0
1.9 0
son 1c boom
.8
.3 1.4
.3 motorcycles 1.7 2.6 19 0
motorcycles
.8
.8 1.0
.3 trains
.5
.3 0
1.7 not bothered 50.0 53.8 43.4 58.4
. O 9
f TABLE II (Concluded)
TABLE III New York First source REASONS ASSOCIA1TD WITH BEING "VERY BOTHERED" of bother All Incomes M
Middle g
f childrerv neighbors 24.8%
19 0%
20.0%
33.3%
e a
traffic 14.4 19.0 12 5 13.9 8'**
y 0e U
o other 8.2 4.8 12.5 5.6
.N Y
strens/ horns 7.2 19 0 75 0
uI II II m
e Passersby 6.2 4.8 12*5 0
O I
Source j
- E 3
motorcycles 3.1 0
7.5 0
g
- o y
33 go
,p g
Planes 2.1 0
5.0 0
animals 2.1 4.8 0
2.8 Children /
13 10 9
7 7
4 2
trains 1.0 0
0 2.8 Neighbors industry 1.0 0
2.5 0
Traffic 6
9 3
7 4
3 2
not bothered 29.9 28.6 20.0 41.6 Passersby 4
4 4
4 4
3 0
Los Angeles. Boston, and New York Combined P1rst source of bother All Incomes yH Middle D
Animals 6
3 2
0 1
0 0
traf:Ac 15.4%
15.0%
16.3%
14.5%
children / neighbors 13.9 8.3 13.0 19.7 Motorcycles 2
2 3
2 2
0 0
other 6.2 1.7 8.1 6.6 planes 5.4 10.0 6.5 0
Industry 1
0 1
2 2
2 0
cnimals 5.0 10.0 3.3 4.0 g
s t rens/ horns 3.9 6.7 4.9 0
Sirens / Horns 2
0 1
2 1
0 0
industry 2.7 0
4.1 2.6 sonic boom 2.3 0
4.1 1.3 Subways 1
1 1
1 1
1 0
totorcycles 2.3 1.7 4.1 0
passersby 2.3 1.7 4.1 0
Sonle Booms 0
0 1
0 1
0 0
t rains
.8 0
0 2.6 not bothered 39.8 45.0 31.7 48.7 24-
~ ~
9 6
y, 5Y38V 1V11N1015 34 NI IllON 31100 W O A A V ONimold-A1338d dO NOl1Vt13N 3d I-C 34001d 8"I wl hd #* meus3 84.*!*45 b aasseW wea# enweesto l
0001 001 4
i t
OC epsso uO o P*** *ll.
P****ll O
- yL 0
h a
o 8
[
O o
?
"i Amm4GJj k
A Po+sasil PePl*!*wn p 5' del P**li'3 0
s ___
r
%t a
01 o m
l.O.
.t
..~,. 3 Oe E
5.
p q
E l
3
~
'i'
'^
S lb25 E'.
=
M a
-[
s v
B h
8 a
s e U
l Lr l
~E j w
0 e
e 5
S 0
k M
. 1lll l
lll%
1~
4
'//////liW*K"""%ggig,,,,
N
,,0 a
-int e
-f.
2,_VehicleVeec.
w,..,. n..F.
C.n..r,,n.
N-3-
., e,,,
, -,_e L.
le s.
4 Indiviesel frucks.irls fypical tuhovet MvHilas, too ft from frucks @eend en Ref. 4) i 4
]30 40 AA 31.5 63 123 250 500 1000 2000 4000 0000 Octeve tend Center Fregwency in Herts F10Utt 3 2.
TYFICAL Fatt-FLOWING AUTOMOflVE TR AFFIC NOlst $PECit A Seurses and Okeerverlen Felnt en Grade No Shlelding
+10
\\
O h 1 8
5
-10 C
v
=
4 s
s j
N 1 Freely-Fle ing l
f Awees (Line Sevrce)
$ 20 h
2
,N 3
N i
N s g 3g
{ fndiv3Ami frucks f (Feint Sevrce)
-- Wrehove AtWe Attenveelen 4 *40 w;,h Atmospherie Attenverien
-50
' 100
' 1000 Oleteice from Source in Feet FIGutt 3 3.
ESTIMAfl0 NOl5E LEVEL 5 FOR FtitLY-FLOWING f t AFFIC Sourses and Observetten Palae, sa n eds No 5hleiding
e 90 80 2
e 70
,'(,
'r t i:
t!/l1.,'jjj,/,,'t i
7p/.
C
'///f Range of Average Levels from E 50 Heavy Traffic 25-50 Ft from J
Observation Point. (Scsed on Ref 8) h
'////
40 dBA 63 125 250 500
'000 2000 4000 Octave Bond Center Frequency in Hert:
FIGURE 3-4 TYPIC AL STOP-AND-GO TR AFFir NOl5E SPECTR A Source and Observation Point on Grade No Shielding p_-
~ ~ '
$Q g
e y
?
.\\
.s \\
4
!,c e et 1
m m
us s
Q
O G I
a 8-l/2%
O Z
5 5-l/2%
73-l/2%
g
=
gg
=
c I/2%
H
-1 E
I/ M I/2%
g1 5
- ?
O
^ ll ki L
e.
k k **
o3 1
z I-6
$U O 4y so d D s
}
z2 so.s a.d i
ae
- O R
Avel.oriey f*
3 00 '
36 5
CAftGORY NO. OF VEHICLES Pit DAY TYPE OF TeAFFIC 3
0 0
< $000 t%cif ed I
A 5000 so 10,000 TewcLe and Cars 5
8 5000 to 10.000 Meialy Cars C
10,000 to 20,000 fewcas and Cars
'I D
10,000 to 20,000 Meialy Cars M
E 20.000 so 40,000 fevcks sad Cars F
20.000 e 40,000 Maiasy Cars J
G
> 40,000 Teveks oad Co,s H
> 40,000 Meialy Cars
~O FIGutt 3-S. Dl5f tlBuilON OF POPUL ATION EXPO 5ED TO b:
l TR AFFIC C Alf GOtlE 5 R
S g
g g
a stavar =l wasma som 4
eG 4
o e
50 40
- Median Velves
.No 4 30 b
- l
.1 4,
' /g'-
~
5
-=
.I f
10 O f AA 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Octne send Center Frequency in Herra FIGURE 4 2.
NOl$E REDUCTION OF NEW YORK RE$iDENTI AL BUILDING $
W3ndows Closed Discrete Treffle Sources 50 40 Median Values
.2
.Ii 30
.5
.E 20 t
}
i f
j
W,,
r 1P ip 10
'k J.'
P ll jb I,
1 0
AA 31.5 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 m
8000 Octee send Center F,,y in H,,,,
FIGURE 4 3.
NOl$E REDUCTION OF to$f 0N RE$1DENTI AL BUILDINGS Windows Open Olsetete freffle Seu,es,
_ _~
e e
e
$0
- Median Volves f.
3 iP k
4m
.T Y
i P I
i g
i Il h
'l I
A 1
a
./ r.
r
. m i
s
' I 97 10 o
O dBA 31.5 63 125 250 m
1000 m
a g
Octave Bond Cente, Frequency in Herra FIGUtt 4-4 NOl$E REDUCTION OF BOSTON RE$1DE NTI AL BUILDING 5 Windows Closed Olscrete Traf fic $oveces 50 2
40 1
'O 4
.5 5
30 k
E Windows Closed I
b 20 A
)
k oyMadows Open g
' %,,'1>~~,,,,
j 10
's,_
%g'w p 0
< 25 25-50 50 75 75-100
> 100 I"Po8'd Wndow kee in square fee, FlO UR E 4-5.
DEPENDENCE OF RE510ENTI AL NOl5E REDUCTION ON WINDOW AREA New Yn.h
..g m osm his e
e e
40 I
- usaron values i
l
- l!
O 4
f 4
j it k 30
- - - - - -sK L
g e
clo o
e op l
.I l
l l
U tl 4
Wiadows Closed j
co a 20 5b i
5 e
f f
1 y
a
=
i i-
-li
,o l c
.a '.
{
t l
g Windows Open 0
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 m
m Octave Band Center Frequency in Her, FIGURE 4-6.
NORM ALIZED Nol5E REDUCTION OF NEW YORK RESIDENTI AL SUlLDINGS See Test for Normalization Procedure 50 i
I
~ Mediaa volwe, f
I l
f 9-i I
?
4 i
4M
.i l
A.
4 v.
- 20 2
e
.E f
10 I
e i
i i
l O
r l
1 i
atA 3,'
83 325 250 500 13 g
i oc. e... Co.,e.,,e.en..,n e,re FIGutt 41 NOISE REQUCTION CF LOS ANGELE S RESIDE Nfl AL Bull 0 LNG 5 wladows Closed Discrete Tra f fic Sources
APPENDIX A Community Notse Survey -- Short Form 1.
Respondent No.
2 Name 3
Address Hello.
I'm from Holt Beranek and Newman, a local engineering firm. We're doing a study of people's feelings about noise and would like some of your views. Would you mind answering some questions?
This will take about nine minutes. Thank you. First.
4.
On the whole, would you call your neighborhood very noisy, fairly noisy, fairly quiet, or very quiet?
very noisy fairly noisy fairly quiet very quiet A-1 S
9*
M SA.
Could you tell me what kindJ of noises you uIually' hear when you cre in your house? (List und2r "rce:11 6.
Let's ese. You mentioned noises free (repent lict to in numeric ordar of mention.)
re8Pondent). Which one of these would you say you are most conscious of in your home'? (List as "1" under OR M "c nacious" in SA.
1 hen, ir " airplane," so to 64.
^
E
^*
Beca11 Conscious Out In Cars or trucks (A.
Does this airplane noise bother you in your home?
Notorcycles Airplanes Nearby Induntry yes Air Conditioning (ask SB)
Children or Neighbors (ask SC) don't know Animals Other (specify)
(If "no", use question 6C.)
6B. Does it bother you very often, fairly often, or AIR CONDITIONING occasionally?
SD.
Is that air conditioning your own or your neighbor's?
very often (Note "in" or "out" in SA. )
fairly often CHILDREN - NEIGHBORS ceasionaH y SC.
Are the children or naighbors in this building or outside?
(Note "in" or "out" in SA. )
6C.
Forgetting airplanes for a minute, what other noise would you say you are most conscious of? (If "none",
go to 10A; if "yes", mark under " conscious" in SA, then go to 7A.)
A-2 A-3 e
7-?A.
l' hen you cre in your home, do you usually hear 7 9E, Phen this.
noine bothers you, doen it' mke thin (noise) noise v2ry often, fairly often, or Just occasionally?
you feel very annoyed, a littic annoyed, er not at all annoyed?
7E 9E 7A 9A very annoyed very annoyed very often very often a little annoyed a little annoyed fairly often fairly often not'at all annoyed not at all annoyed occasionally
' occasionally don't know don't know don't know don't know 7-9F.
Does this noise ever startle you! (Pause) Does it 7-9D.
L'ould you say this noise is usually extremely loisd, fairly loud, or not loud at all?
keep you fron going to sleep? (Pause) Does it wake you up' l
78 9R Yes No Yes No startic startle extremely loud extremely loud keep from golng keep from going fairly loud fairly loud to sleep to Sleep not loud at all not loud at all wske up w2ke up don't know don't know none of these none of these don't know don't know 7-9C.
Does this noise ever bother you?
f 7-9G.
Does this noise ever interfere with your listening 7C 9C to radio or 1v' (Pause) Does it interfere with-yes yes your conversation" no no Yes No Yes No don't know don't know (If "no" or " don't know," use question 7-9F. )
radio or TV radio or 71 conversation conversation 7-9D.
How of ten does it bother you '
neithe=
neither 7D 90 don't know don't know very often very often fairly often fairly of ten occasionially occasionally I
don't know don't know A li A-5 a
g o
7-9H.
Does this noise from tver make your 11A.
house shake or vibrate '
Would you say you are more Eensitive or legs scnsitiva 7H to noise than most people?
9H more sensitive yes yes lass sensitive no no (After 9H, go to 10A - directly.)
somewhat sensitive don't know 8
We've been talking about noise from 11B.
Is there any other noise that you are conscious of Would you say that noise affects your health very much, moderately, or not at all?
when yc.u are in your home' (If "yes", list under
" conscious" in SA.
If " airplane", go to question very much moderately sequence 6.
If other, go to 9A.
If "no", use question 10.)
not at all don't know 10A.
Do you think anything at all can be done to reduce 12 any of the noise that you hear coming into your home*
About how many years have you been living in this area?
yes 13.
Do you have any other ideas that you think might help no us in our study about noise?
don't know (If "no", go to 11A.)
10ft. Yhat do you think c.in be done?
Thank you very much for answering these questions.
You've Suggestions:
been very helpful.
1 14 (Complete after interview) Sex: Male heale Race: White Negro Other Approximate Age Income Grouping:
Iow upper middle lower middle high A-6 A-7 e=
APPENDIX B ACOUSTIC DATA ACQUISITION AND REDUCTION PROCEDURES The reruits presented in Sections III and IV of this report involved a number of field acoustic measurements, rigure B-1 illustrates a typical instrumentation system utilized for acquisition of the acoustic data.
This instrumentation consisted basically of Bruel + Kjaer microphone and signal conditioning equipment, and a Kudelski magnetic tape recorder. The details of the instrumentation varied somewhat among the different measurement sites.
For the noise reduction measurements, when two simultaneous and synchronized measurement stations were required, citizen band radios were used for communi-cation between the stations. The outside microphone was located several feet from the building, in an attempt to measure the incident sound field (the field that would have existed in the absence of the building).
The inside microphone was generally placed near the center of the room, away from reflecting surfaces and approximately at head height.
The instrumentation shown in Fig. B-2 was used to reduce the acoustic data. The data were analyzed in octave frequency bands from 315 to 4000 Hz center frequencies and plotted on graphic level charts.
A-scale weighted levels were obtained either by direct analysis with a sound level meter or by digital computer calculations from the octave band levels. Correction factors were applied to the data as required to compensate for the B-1 O
w
f l
h frequency responne characterir, tics of the clerophone and c.1thode follower and the various tspa recorder com-
~
a binstions used in recording and playing back the magnetic fy,f, gong CAtise Aion tape.
]
WINDSCRE E N As mentioned in the body of this report, the quasi-steady
( -J, a a r 4t3t (I-)
background" levels on the graphic level charts were
., 4:33 gif2 3 WCROPHONE associated with the continuous flow of passing automobiles, while the peaks superimposed on this background were e & K M30 CATHODE associated with discrete sources (usually trucks).
The FOttOwt t quasi-steady automotive background noises were used in p 5HUREdelB the penetration study, and the discrete truck peak noises actOPHONE wtTH were used in the building noise reduction study.
Pats 5-TO. TALK SWtiCH
{
Two methods were used for reading the graphic level records KUDttSKl of the peak :.oises. One method concentrated on the maximum Tart etCORDER
-a & K 2203 values of the peaks of the outside and inside records NAGRA HI SOUND and took the difference between these two maxima LEvtL as the W itt noise reduction.
This method has been used consistently in prior studies of aircraf t noise.
It was used for the flG B4.
DA A A C ulH T10 N SmtM Boston and Los Angeles building noise reduction data in this report. A second method overlaid the outside and inside records and shif ted them up or down until a good KU t "'
0'# r '
g fit was obtained between the discrete events in both 3+h2305 x
3 5LM A OR AMPtx 600 8
- K 3 records.
The noise reduction was then taken as the difference TAPE RtconDER OCTAW FILTER arconDet between the scales of the two records.
SE T This method was used for the New York data. A check using both methods on the same data indicates that both methods tend to produce ti.e same mean value and that the second method CRYSTAL produces less data spread than the first.
This smaller PHOM5 spread is apparently due to a visual averaging that occurs when the entire curve shape rather than maximum values only is considered.
FIGutt 8-2.
DATA REDUCTION SYSitM B-2 S
- e er g
t.
t'.
1 ray AEROSPACE AIR 1081 455M INFORM ATION Societyof Automotive Engineers.Inc.
REPORT
';;,, october tS71 HOUSE NOISE-REDUCTION 3IEASURE31ENTS FOR USE IN ST1. DIES OF AIRCRAFT FLYOVER NOISE Tan 8M 1.
INTRODUCTION E a ".
I{a This AIR describes the results of some house noise reduction measurements that were made in five i
l-[
1 2
3 1966.1964,1967. and 19694 locations in the l'.S. in The houses used in these tests included a j
wide range of construction tpes of single and multiple family dwellings. The house noise reductions h*a also cover a wide range. The average house noise reduction developed in this AIR should be used only 8,
- i when such an average is needed.
51 j j The principle objective of this AIR is to use these noise reduction measurements to develop curves e g showing the noise reduction of aircraft flyover noise when the noise passes from the outside to the in-h side of houses located in various climates. The noise-reduction data presented herein can be applied
$p]='la
=$
to measurements of aircraft noise made outdoors in order to estimate the noise levels indoors.
2.
HOUSE NOISE REDUCTION DATA N* ! s =
[!,I s T The measurements were obtained by recording the sound pressure levels inside a house under study M
and outside the dwelling at a distance from any outside surfaces of the house. The noise signals re-
?*$3 ceived by the two microphones during aircraft flyovers were recorded simultaneously on magnetic 3
/ 0 5j tape. Later the two recordings obtained for each flyover were played back through a sound lever meter, a band-pass tilter for a frequency weighting network), and a graphic level recorder. The max-SQ imum s alues of the rising and falling noise signals resulting from the aircraft flyover were then read g{i from the graphic le.el charts. The notse reduction ts expressed as a difference in the maximum jpg sound pressure !evels measured in the individual octave bands, as a difference between calculated per-3,n ceived noise levels, and as a difference between A-or N-weighted sound levels.
752%
N ~ ".
The 1966 house noise reduction measurements were made in Boston and New Yo:-k and included tests 1
5j in 19 rooms in stx houses; measurements m 3!tami were made in eight rooms in four houses. The 5
y:$f noise reduction measurements are summartzed in Table I. which also provides some dimensions of f4 g{gi the individual rooms and median noise reduction values for those rooms where the noise reduction from more than one flyover was measured.
N!?!
5[5$
References 2. 3. and 4 present data from measurements of house noise reduction of aircraft notse in y$*
60 different rooms with windows closed and in 46 different rooms with wtadows open. This additional qgi data provides a broader base from which as erage house noise reduction values can be obtained and E-y therefore greater confidence in the r,esults can be placed: they do not, however. significantly change the sverages obtained using the data in references 1 and 2 only.
Ai G
- Qg Reference 3 contains information on house noise reduction for aircraft flyover noise obtained for e 1 houses used in extensive tests by NASA of subjective judgments of streraft noise at Wallops Station, h
,I, Virgtnia, in October and November,1969. In these tests. four rooms in a brick veneer house and
] ~N 'i 4-four rooms in a wood stdtng house were used. The house noise reduction tests were made on e
December 11 and 12,1963. There were 25 overflights of propeller and jet aircraft for the noise re-Jj';
duction measurement in one house and 22 overflights of the same aircraft for measurements in the y
pii other. Tests were made with windows closed only. The results of these tests are presented in
,s Table III. The average of the data for the wood siding house agree well with the data from the SIiaml 4
7, and Los Angeles tests. The brick veneer house noise reduction data are higher than the Af tami and Q<.s V.sLos Angeles data but not as high as the New York and Boston data. The brick veneer data are aver-N aged in with the data for the lighter house constructions on the basis that there probably are only a p
h
'snalt number of brick veneer houses in warm climates.
-Q c m +11971 er Society of Automotne EUqCtc
't
\\
.u 1
Results from reference 4 cre given in Tables IV through VII. Table IV presents a description of the house and rooms tested and tne source of the aircraft noise. Tables V, VI. and VII present house noise reduction data with windows open and closed for houses located in or near Los Angeles, New York, and Boston, re-spectively.
2.1 Variability In Aigasurements From Reference 1: Previous measurements have shown that there is consider-able variability la the house noise reduction data obtained with different aircraft flyovers. The noise re-duction values vary with the type of aircraft and with flight paths as well as with measuremer.t positions in-side and outside the rooms. To illustrate this. Fig. I shows the house noise reductions observed for a bedroom of a SItami house from eleven successive flyovers. Two measurement graphs are shown, one for windows closed and one for windows open. The shaded bands indicate the range of the measured noise re-ductions; individual flyovers are identified by distinctive symbols. The heavy line represents the median for the respective sets of windows-open or windows-closed measurements. In this room, the noise reduc-tion ranged from 11 to 20 PNdB fer windows closed and from 8 to 12 PNdB with windows open. The noise reductions in dBA showed similar variations.
2.2 Comparisons of House Noise Reduction SIeasurements From References 1 and 2: Referring now to the noise f
reductions measured in different rooms, Fig. 2 shows the range of median noise reduction values measured for the rooms in the Boston and New York houses in tests described in reference 1.
Two sets of curves are f
again shown, one for rooms with windows closed and one for those with windows open. The heavy line in-dicates the median value for all the rooms measured. The noise reduction, expressed as a difference in PNdB, ranged from 23 to 34 PNdB for houses with windows closed and from 11 to 28 PNdB with windows open. There is a shift of 10 PNdB between the median values for houses with windows closed (30 PNdB) and those with windows open'(20 PNdB).
Figure 3 shows a similar comparison of the house noise reduction measurements for the h!Lamt houses.
The noise reduction. expressed as a difference in PNdB. ranged from 15 to 24 PNdB for rooms with windows closed and from 5 to 13 PNdB with windows open. There was 11 PNdB difference between the median noise reduction for houses with windows closed and those with windows open. The noise reductions in terms of dB(A), in Figures 2 and 3, were comparable to the reductions expressed in tenns of PNdB.
A comparison of window areas showed that, on the average, the Boston and New York rooms nad somewhat lower ratios of window area to exposed wall surfaces than did the SItami rooms. The windows in several of the h!!amt houses were no tightly fitted, in contrast to the generally well-fitted windows found in the Boston and New York test houses. In addition, the roofs of several of the 3Itami houses were of relatively light-weight construction.
The data in references 1 and 2 were examined to compare the differences in house noise reduction values measured by three separate quantities: the change in perceived noise level and the noise reduction in terms of the change in A-or N-weighted sound level.
The differen.:es between PNL and A-weighted noise reduction values obtained from the measurements reported in reference 1 are summarized in the first column of Table II. In comparisons the results of PNL and A-weighted measurements in los Angeles houses in 1964. reference 2, are tabulated in the second column of Table II. The standard deviations listed in Table II are comparable, or only slightly larger, than the standard deviations of A-weighted measurements and calculated perceived noise levels, for current jet aircraft flyover noise signals.
The differences in N-weighted levels in the third column of Table II show, on the average, somewhat closer agreement with the differences in perceived noise level than do the A-weighted measurements. However, the range of differences and the standard deviations are quite similar to those shown in the first and second columns. Thus, it is expected that either the N-weighted or A-weighted sound level measurements can be used as good predictors of house noise reduction, expressed as a difference in perceived noise levels.
3.
GENERALIZED VALUES OF HOUSE NOISE REDUCTION In studying the impact of noise on people living near airports, there is a need for curves of noise reduction vs. frequency to indicate the amount by which a noise recorded outside should be attenuated to represent the noise inside a house. These curves may be used in studies of the effects of the noise of aircraft operating from airports in general at all times of the day and in all seasons of the year.
e 3.1 House Noise Reduction By Categories: Intarmation on house noise reduction for aircraft noise obtained from the four references is correlated in four categories:
s) 1.
Warm climate houses, windows open Table VIII 2.
- closed, IX 3.
Cold
- open, X
4.
closed XI The curves of the averages for these four categories are plotted in Fig. 4 (dashed lines for warm climate solid lines for cold climate), together with their averages and dot dash lines for averages of:
1.
Windows open and windows closed, warm climate, 2.
Windows open and windows closed, cold climate and, 3.
Overall average for warm and cold climate The average curves for warm or cold climate house noise reduction are provided for studies of the impac of noise on people living near airports in warm or cold climates. The overall average curve is provided for studies of noise from aircraft which operate from airports in both warm and cold climates. Table XI' presents the average house noise reductions for warm and cold climates and Table XIII presents the over all average.
3.2 Response Characteristics For Octave-Band Filters For Use in Simulating Indoor Noise From Outdoor Noise Recordings: The data in Tables XII and XIl! contain smoothed average values sufficient for specif>
ing the response of filters used to provide simulated indoor-noise levels from outdoor noise recordings.
The value for the noise reduction in the octave band centered at 125 Hz is increased by 0.5 dB to simplify the construction of the filter. The tolerance on the octave band response of the filter is 10.5 dB in the pa bands.
T 4.
REFERENCES
- 1) Bolt, Beranek. and Newman, Inc., Report 1397, "3fethods for Improving the Noise Insulation of Houses with Respect to Aircraft Noise " November 1966.
2)
D. E. Bishop. " Reduction of Aircraft Noise Steasured in Several School, Stotel and Residential Rooms," J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 39,, 907-13, 3!ay 1966.
- 4) Bolt, Beranek, and Newman, Inc., 31easuremerits of House Noise Reduction, unpublished data as of this date.
PREPARED BY s
SAE COhthilTTEE A-21, AIRCRAFT NOISE h!EASUREhtENT
TAltl.l: I SUMKIAltY Ol' A l'ultTit >N e 8F Till: AlltCitAl'T NOISE Iti-:1)llCTION MFAS!!ItEMENTS llOUSE ItOOM !)l'SCit!!'TIONS M E ASillt EMi{ N T NOISI: Ittst)l1CTION IN dll CONI)!TIONS (MI:DIAN val.IIE)
Fxtosed Octave liand center freipiency in 114 Floor Walt Win. low Door No.of A rea A rea A rea A rea hira su re-Type
- l It SI'll S'I 11
- >< l 1:
Waiu tow na id a l'N< lit silla 63 125 250 Sou Inon 2nno loon
/
Mitmi fl
- lied roorn ilo 163 4:.
( q.cn 6
9 9
il to 8
9 9
9 15 Clo:,cil 5
17 17 16 12 13 11 13 20 20 Mianni #2*
Living It.asm 231 108 29 a gnen 6
10 9
11 9
9 9
9 12 12 Closed 2
18 19 14 13 14 20 21 23 20 11cdremain luo 101 25 t q c's I
8 10 15 2
9 12 12 7
N Clo3eil 3
22 22 18 IN lH 21 28 26 24 Miami #3' liedrouin 121 lus 71 e g>esi 2
5 4
4 4
5 5
2 5
9 Closed 4
17 16 16 13 13 16 18 25 21 I,aving Itoinn 210 135 an Closed i
21 22 17 8
2n 20 24 2n 28
{
Miami 44
- 11ack iteatriusm 99 I:.2 23 t heen 3
9 11 2 10 Il 12 11 5
6 Closcal 4
20 22 8 17 15 17 20 23 25 1.sv mg Itinam 2a.o 29i.
-12 t i>en 9
12 13 7
H 9
8 to 13 la Closed i
23 23 12 13 18 20 23 22 2ti Front Itcitriunn 130 ist 25
( q.cn 1
8 8
10 3
7 11 7
5 9
Closed 2
15 17 7 13 la 11 1H 16 1:e New York #1 1.tving it<mam 2 10 123 32 19 geen 2
17 21 13 16 17 21 22 23 22 Closed 2
26 28 17 18 25 30 31 27 al Katelsen 96 no n
18 t ilien 2
12 11 21 12 11 18 13 11 il liedroom IIn 96 22 t heen i
22 22 23 19 21 22 22 22 23 Closed i
28 33 20 21 25 26 29 3.-
39 New York #2 Kitelien 150 94 11 20 Open 4
23 23 14 18 17 19 23 23 21 Closed 2
31 31 16 22 25 28 33 35 36 Lav mg Iti=>m 130 161 17 t hacn 2
28 28 14 25 22 21 27 27 au lleilr..om 140 7H Ii a spent 5
20 19 17 IS I4 17 20 2.i 29 Closcal 2
33 33 18 23 25 30 31 40 42
_____._-_.4
- l in t u rn e sl...l
e e
e e
e e.
3
.M e.*
M
- 4
=
M O
O
- 3 O * '* M r
2
=
= M -i.
N T
?3 M M
?3
-M
?3 M 23 T
- P N
M N
=P O
age =
?3
= M N
- . M
?#
= M
= M 23 M
?
M M
r T.=
M t*
C O
- 3 I M
- 3 "3
t=
=
.- M N e
.'d
?)
n.ll.
C 5
.M. *3 9=
0 C D
3 T
- M
== N
= M M
- 4 N
- O t.
3 T
c
?3 3
.O M
?3
- M
=
?3 M 74 ey=
=-.
g 3,,
M "* =
- 2 tw V
T O
?3 O O "J= N
- ?3 T
tw
~ N M
N
~
as z.~ v
~
~ N N
= :s = :s N N
Z"""."
M -
?3 m
- 3 m
- M O ~< b
=
t-O
- M ee t-
= ?3
?3
- N 23 N N
ta -= M
= ?l
- 3
==
?I J
E M
g
> c
-V
-U
.. Z s
- 8 O
' ' ' =
.r O S
.O-
== ?3
= =
-e
=
=.
-fi
- N tl
? O rO
? D
(*
- 4 3
==
s
= ?3 N N
=
.A
.*..g M
V d
=='
t*
d O
d O c
d = = N
= ?3
- 3 O O
- O ?3
.e O N Z.;
N
= = = - - ta =
e
,,: 4
- s
=
'F.
4
=
p m,,,
e.s g
g
.M M 3
'O "3
O
"'I O
=
- 1 O
O 3 E S
= M
=
==
= M N
- 3 M =
M "3
- 3
== N
=
"3 N M M
N N Z.
f
- C O
==
a, N,
0 t=
t=
M 3
T O
?! M O
M 3
n
- 3 0
=
==
g
=
- M
==?3 "I M
?I N N
- 3
=
- I
==.'*. N M M
N N
=
Z "J.
w
==
e E
N 6
- J
.T.,
- s g
.4
?-
=
Z.. Z
=,
. d" s.
-A M "" = = = =
?3 -
M
== N - ?3 N N 04 u
a 3:
- 4 3
e w
=.o.
t =-,,,,
Zd
- 3 g., =
y 1
=)
- f O
J "".*
J
~~s 2
r.
U 9
U m
=
A.*
k
~J
-r.
U J
~.I r'
A g
A r
A r A r A A
A A
t
- Z
- a r A At*
v.a.
=
L.
d 2
R* *=*d JE* :*
R*
a.
.J J.
3
.J 3~
~ ~* **
=
3 0
.a.
J.
a.
w Z
a.
N* ~
R*
n* ;'*
M "*
R* ~d J
3 w
me wa j
2,
=e w w w
w
-. w w w
=
e.
.n=
O W
==
=3
- u. '.. * =
L
..5 b
O I
4 to O
e T
T e
T tw I
~
"2"
=
=
= _.
,g A
=
- C
=
~-
2
- 'l "l
g
=,*
=
.*4 r -.
==
P
- t
- =
N
=
- l" O
r==
?I M
= -
7"
=
M
==
- 3
=
A
- 3 tw y
d L
w 2
h,.*/,*
=
I
=
"e
- *=
'J f6
.-e""".* -
F*
O 2
f
=
M A
0 -
O"
- 3 3
(*
f 7.
=
T
- =
t=
- w
=
Lb4 A n
n N
?3
- =
?s
=
Z
==.
- C Q=
A
.i
=
- f a.t y
=
-.s w
u
?: E "s
=
a 5
.J
=
=
d
-- *C :
2 r.
0 a
= n
=
r M
=
=
0 2
=
N
- r =
u M
~
.=
=
?I
-N
=
=
=
2 z,
e a
'==.
d=
A 73 23 fa d.
~
.n o.
.~.
'A C
e
=,
=.
=.
=.
v.
I 5
1 y
5
- C 4
4
=.
=
=.
-a
~
...u 2 -
2
.u.
s y
..e 5
w
=
.s.
,,u,,,
i
.s.
=.,
~3 g
=
.s y
=,.
i,-
a 2
a =
x a 3 2 3
- 2 3 Z
~
N 8,9 8*
="
m m
a m
- A 1
- =
=
=
=
=
+
C
=
3 0
0,
-A
\\
'on R
A
=
.s x
,2
.x=
n m
l l
e
e
\\
1 J
t,' I TA BLE II Comparison of House Noise Reduction Values Expressed as Differences Between Noise Reduction in Terms of the Change in Perceived Noise Level and the Noise Reduction in Terms of the Change in A-and N-Weighted Sound 14vels PNdB~
dBA PNdB dBN Boston, New York, Miami Los Angeles Los Angeles (1966)
(1964)
(1964)
Average Difference
-0. 6 dB
-1. 0 dB
-0.1 dB Range of Differences
+1 to -9 dB
+4 to -7 dB
+4 to -6 dB l
Standard Deviation
- 1. 8 d B
- 1. 7 dB 2.1 dB Number of Operations 105 81 81 TABLE III Average Attenuation of Aircraft Noise in 4 Rooms in Each of 2 Houses at Wallops Station. Virginia, Windows Closed, Reference 3 Frequency, Hz 63 123 250 500 1000 2000 4000 House No. la 17.1 23 21 20 27.8 30.3 30.5 House No. 2" 16.2 21.1 21.3 20.2 21.3 24 25
- House No. I has a brick veneer siding.
" House No. 2 has wood siding.
I
^
J
-1
\\
)
TABLE IV DESCRIPTIONS OF hot lSES TESTED California "I California #2 New York *3 New York e4
.ilassachusetts =1 Major aircraft Takeoff Landing Takeoff Takeoff
- Takeoff, sou rces sideline No. of floors 1
1 1
2 1
No. of bedrooms 2
3 3
3 1
Size (sq. ft. )
1500 1200 1200 1100 600 Approx. Age 16 25 30 40 30 Exterior walls
- Stucco, Stucco, Brick veneer, Asphalt shingles.
Cedar shingles, plaste r plaster plaster plaster plaster
'e e.
i TA.' LE V SU513tARY OF AIRCRAFT NOISE REDUCTION alEASURE5 TENTS IN dB
^
^
I Octave Band Center Frequencies in Hz # CPS)
Oper.
Level
>!eas.
CALIFORNTA et 63 125 2in 500 t000 2000 4000 an00 LIVING ROO3!
Existing - wtndows open T. O 22 2 14 9 12.2 17.5 19.6 20.3 23.0 25.5 9
l Existing - windows closed T. O 29.0 15.2 15.1 21.9 23.7 25.6 2*. 5 31.0 3
BEDROOlt i
{11.2 5.00 9.9 Il 7.1 9.1 10.3 i
Existing - windows open T/O 9.7 9
i Existing - windows closed l T,0 23.3 19.3 15.0 20.2 21.4 22.9 24.3 32.5 S
I FA5!!LY ROO3!
Existing - sliding door TO 6.6 i 5.5 5.1 7.2 5.5 4.1 4.9 6.6 9
open l
1 Existing - sliding door T. O 22.4 16.1 13.4 20.9 22.5 21.9 22.6 23.0 7
C A LIFORNIA =2
.1 LIVING ROO>t i
Existing - windows open L
11.4 l10.2
- 4. 9 11.6 10.5 11.9 12.4 13.9 15.4 10 0.9 l 3. 3 1.1 0.7
!. i
- 1. 0 0.7 0.4
- 1. O Existing - windows closed L
26.3
.I 14.9 17.1 21.3 24.3 27.I 27.3 31.9 32.4 )
9
- 0. 9 I 3.1
- 0. 9 2.0
- 1. 9
- 0. 9 1.4
- 1. 3 2.9 I
B EDROONI NO.1 f t!.9 Existing - windows closed L
25.6 15.9 24 1 24.3 29.3 25.6 30.0 29.0 9
- 2. 3 ' 4. 6 2.4
- 1. 6
- 2. 0 2.5 3.1
- 1. 9 2.7
- {!TCHEN t
Existing - windows open L
9.1
!!2.3 6.1
- 11. ')
). 4 3o 9.4 10.3 14.3 i
- 1. 6
- 2. 9
- 3. 0
- 3. )
1.1
- 0. f 0.7
- 1. 6 1.4 l
Existing - wtndows closed L
20.3
- 19. !
15.4 23.3 li. ) 20.3 21.4 23.1 25.7 9
0.9 4.1 2.9 2.4 0.7 1.1 0.9 0.7 1.3 DEDROO5! NO. 2
{
Existing - windows open L
14.6 12.6 s.6 13.0 13.3 11.9 15.0 16.4 19.4 i
- 1. 3
- 3. 3
- 1. 9 3.3 1.7
- 1. 6
- 1. 4
- 1. 5 1.9 Existing - windows closed L
32.9 15.4 19.4 24 9 31.6 34.0 36.0 36 9 39.9 9
2.5
- 4. 7 1.5 2.1 1.1 2.4
- 3. 3 4.7 3.6 DEDROO3! NO. 3 Existing - windows open L
19.5
!!3.6 12.4 19.3 17.0 19.4 21.3 20.4 26.3 9
2.6
' 4. 7
- 1. 3
- 1. 7 2.2 3.1
- 1. 0
- 4. 0 19 Existing - windows closed L
32.3
.17 1 19.2 29.3 27.9 30.5 35.5 40.5 43.3 10
- 1. 3 l 6. 4 2.0 1.5
- 1. 4 2.2
- 1. 4
- 2. 0 1.6 i
s 3
\\ B L E 'cl SCS13fARY OF AIRCRAFT NOI5E REDUCTION '.!EASURE31ENTS IN dB
.AC A
Octase Band Center Frevencies :n Ha iCPS:
No cf Oper.
Lesel Steas.
NEW YORK =3 61 121 210
- a)
M^o 2000 4a00 3000 LIVING ROO.'.!
Existing - windows apen L
l'
)
!!.1 10.4 13.3 1i.1 2 a.1 21.1 23.1 7
- 2. 2 46
- 2. 4
- 0. 5 2.2 4.1 56
- 3. 2 Existing - wtndows closed TO 9 *i J. 9 11.7
- 19. 3 24.6 50 4 35.1 33.3 6
3.i
- 5. 3 3.5
- 3. 0
- 3. 7
- 5. 0
- 3. 5
- 5. 5 K!TCHEN Existing - windows open L
14.6 1.1 7.5 11.4 15.1 13.7 19.7 15.9 19.0 9
2.0
- 4. 4 3.3 3.4
- 2. 3 3.5 3.5
- 6. 9 3.9 Exist ing - windows closed L
22.4 11.3 13.1 10.3 24.0 27.0 29.3 21.9 9
- 2. 0 4.2 5.0
- 2. 3
- 0. 9 2.4
- 2. 0 6.5 BEDROO.\\tNO.1 Existing - windows open TO 17.4
- 4. 3
- 6. 4 12.9 14.4 2LS 21.0 21.1 7
- 2. 4 5.1 2.6 2.1 2.d
- 2. 2 7.5
- 4. 2 Existing - windows closed TO 17.3
- 17. 0 11.0 14.7 16.0 19.-
19.0 22.0 3
4.1
- 2. 4
- 3. 0 3.6 3.9
- 1. 9
- 1. 4 6.7 DEDROO5!No.2 Existing - windows open TO 13.7 19.0 13 3 13.2 13.0 13.2 14.2 17.0 19.3 6
s
- 4. i 7.2
- 3. 3
- 4..
- i. 2 5.1 7.9 7.6 2.9 Existing - wtadaws cl> sed TO 19.3 20.7 bl. 0 16.o
- 14. 0 22.0 25.2 27.0 27 0 5
J.i
- 3. 0
- 1. 0
- 4. 0 3.2 J.J J. 4 2.6 3.2 BEDROO3! NO. 3 Existing - windaws open TO 1i.0 11.7
- 1. -
11.7 u.a
- 4. 5 13.4 19.2 6
2.1 4.1
- 1. 3 22
- 1. i
- 4. 2
- 4. )
- 4. 0 Existing - winih'v3 c!) sed TO 19.0 10.0 1 4
'~.4 6 21 4 2~. i On. 4 3
4.1 2.1 2.0 4
- . 4
- 1. 1
- 2. 5 L
22.0 24.
l i. '
- 24.,
' 4. 0 2
- 2. 4
- 1. 4
- 2. '
2.
- 4. 2
- i. 4
~
NEW YORK = 4 LIVING ROOlt Existing - windows open TO 17.4 11 4 12..
14,4
- 17. +
2.). 2 19.6 22.2 4
- 4. 4
.i. 7
- i. 4
.i. i
- 4. 6
- i. 7 4.1
- 4. 9
- 4. i Existing - wtndows closed To 21.3
- l +
- 13. ~
22.2 23.4 21.5 24.3 7,0. 7 29.4 4
2.6 2.3
- 3. 6 J.*
2.1
- 2. 3
- 1. 6
- 5. 0
- 9. 0 KITCff EN Existing - windows open rO 19.4
- 14. 0 13 3 12.3 14.4 17.4 13.6 14.0 21.6 3
4.2 5.2
- 4. 4 9..
- 9. 2 4.2
- 6. 0
- 1. 0
- 3. 3 15.0
- 11..)
13.0 17.5 1 *>. 0 11.1 11.0 22.0 21.0 2
- 0. 0
- 3. 5
- 1. 4 2.1 0.0 3.5
- 1. 4 4.2
- 0. 0 Existing - windows closed To 26.2 21.2 21.2 26.0 23.7 29.5 21.0 32.7 32.3 3
0 5.0
- 2. 3 2.1
- 4. 6
- 4. 0
- 2. 3 9.3 4.2
- 6. 7 L
21.5 16.5 12.0 21.5 17.0 20.5 22.0 27.0 34.0 2
- 0. 7 4.9 4.2 0.7 2.1 3.5 4.2 4.2 0.0 l
1 I
- i0 TA B LE VI (Continued)
SU3!3tARY OF A!RCRAFT NOISE REDUCTION SIEASURE3!ENTS IN dB AC A
Octa.e Band Center Frequenc es in ilz iCPS w. r'
- . tea s. '
Oper.
Le.el NEW YORK '4 4.1 Ili 2"o 10')
t oi>0 2000 to' a ian BEDR0011NO.1 Existing - windows open TO li. i 14.2 12.0 11.2 11.0 10.0 10.0 14.0 21.0 1
- 1. 9
- 1. 2
- 4. 0
- 3. 4 4.0
- 3. i
- 6. 4 4.9
- 4. i L
l't. i
- 7. 0 11.0 11.0
')
i
- 12. 1 11.0 16.5
- 19. 5 2
- 0. 7 2.5
- 1. 4
- 1. 4
- 3. 3 3.3
- 1. 4 4.9 4.0 Existing - windows closed TO 23.2 It). i 16.1 20.0 22.7 20.0 30.0 25.2 l i. i>
4 3.0
- 1. 5
- 3. 0
- 2. 5
- 2. 3 3.7
- 4. 9
- 3. 0 f.1 L
2^. 3 11.6 14.6 17.0 21.6 24.3 24.0 27.0 22.6 3
- 3. *i 2.6
- 3. 4
- 0. 0 3.1
- 3. 0
- 0. 0 3.6 2.1 BEDROO31 N0. 2 Existing - windows open L
12.n 14.0
- 12. ?
11.2
- 15. t 11.i 12.2 14.9 11.3 4
J. 0 6.4
- 1. 0
- 3. 7 4.1 2.2 3.1
- 4. 4 Existing - windows closed TO 27.7 23.0 2 -). 1 2.1. -
31.2
- 17. i
- 37..)
27.0 17.0 1
- 4..I
- 7. 0
- 1. 4
- 2. 7
- i. 4
- 4. 7
'i. 3
- 1. 7 L
26.1 26.i 20.1 21.i 2a 2d. i 2 '>.1 27 i 22.0 2
0.7 2.1 2.1
- . i
-). 7 2.1 2.1
.). O BEDRoo'.!No. t Extstin.t - windaws > pen L
- 14. 0
' 6. 7
.i-7 i
- 2..i 4.1
- 1. 4 3.1 2..-
,, i -
Existing - wind >ws e!osed L
27.1 21.0 22 2.
J.>
- s. 4 !
- 3. J
- 3. 4
- 1. ;
TAltl.I: Vil Si1M AI Ally t si' Allie'llAIT Na stSl* 181.'1111C l'is sN All:ASilitl' All:N'85 in ell!
A 4' A
No...I e si.c s.
l.cs e i e h l.as a. Itsu.I 4 '. na ce l'ri<liss4u ecs in !!i It 'I'S)
Mras.
Noics XI ASSAt'lli'S1 'ITS # 1 e..t 12..
- 2..o
.sna tono 2opo soon sanni I.IVINt; lit is til th est en;; - wiralows ipns u T, 0
- 18..
- s. o Il 2 l o...
is. 2 11.2 II.-.
13.o es. 2
.I A
- 1. 7
- 1. I
- 2. 2
- 1.,
- 2. o
- 1. 7
- 1. o
- o. 7
- 3. 9 1.
- 7. 0 7.o
- 1... o 12.0 10.0 11.o
.i. o is o 5.o l
Il T te I I. 3 1.. I 12.I
- 13. si I 4. 2 1 -I. ei 15.I 18.9 13 ei lo
- o. 9
- 1. 2
- 1. 2
- o. I
- o. 7 8.2
- 1. I
- 1. 3 1.5 fiestasy - weaki..ws closcel T es J..
7 17.2
- 13...
21.5 2:s. 2 31.o
- 3. 7
- 23...
23.2
.I C
. I 2.1
- 1. o I.1 3.1 2.1 1.9 f.7
- 3. 5 1%isting - wasulows cl..sr.1 iee 23.2 20.I 19.3 23,3 31.2 asi. I 37.I 29.I 23,2 3
2 e
t ',
woli storen s.asta 8. e.
2.1
- 1. ei
- 2. 0 1.1
- 2. 0
- 1. 7
.l. 9
- 2. 9 its gal.are s
Ill:llite M 61I t'x eSting - warhi. n s e-loss.!
l' e e as is
- 1. I
- 21. e.
2.'.. ei 29.4.
34.M
-10. o 31.2
.'l3. ei si. orris s.asti ess 2 3
- 3. 2
- 2. e.
- 2. si
- 1. 8
- 3. l
- 2. si
- 1. si
- 3. rs til.are KITClit:N l'xist eog - winilows rl..sisi T,el
- lo o 13.0
- 21. :.
23.8 32.5 33.0
- 43. rs 1 -I. 3 3si..
l storen s.eali an
- 1. 1
- 2. 9
- 3. 8 f.7 2.4
- 0. 3
- 2. 2
- 1. 7 3.1 g>Iacel A ITIC SI'ACI:
Finstoig - wanetow.. su rimona l' e n 20.
- 8. 0 11.3 17.M 21.3 22.1 29.o 34.5 3i...
l teclow cl..scel.in.1
- 2...
- 3. 8i
- 1. 3
- 2. 5
- 3. 5 1.3
- 1. si
- 2. si
- 1. 7 st. rrn s.a.slics in g el.are Niillj.
.)
T.al eults Irosn Ibanw.as 221.
It - I.an.lan;;s..n llunw.sg 221.
. rAnti vitt WAR 51 CLDIATE HOUSES. WINDOW 3 OPEN ne average house attenuation for each group tested is multiplied by the number of rooms in the group and the total for all groups divided by the total number of rooms tested Octave Center frequency. Hz 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 S!!aml 8 Rooms 89 76 89 104 88 72 88 4
3 Rooms 31.5 22.3 34.5 32.2 31.5 36.0 42.4 Playa Del Rey Westchester4 4 Rooms 49.7 36.3 54.1 56.1 56.1 58.3 61.5 Total 15 Rooms 169.2 134.6 176.6 192.3 175.6 166.3 191.9 Average 11.2
- 8. 9 11.7 12.8 116.5 11.1 12.8 h:
Data from references TABLE N WARS 1 CLD! ATE HOUSES, WINDOWS CLOSED The average house attenuation for each group tested is multiplied by the number of rooms in the group and the total for all groups divided by the total number of rooms tested Octave Center frequency Hz 63 125 250 300 1000 2000 4000 E!Lami 8 Rooms 144 136 144 180 200 216 232 Los Angeles 4 Rooms 76 64 80 96 100 100 106 Wallops 4 Rooms 68.5 92 84 80 111 121 122 (Brick)
Wallops 4 Rooms 65 84.5 85 91 85 96 100 (Wood)
Playa Del Rey 3 Rooms 50.6 43.4 62.9 67.6 70.4 74.4 86.5 4
Westchester 5 Rooms 94.3 96.3 119.9 126.9 141.0 146.9 162.2 Total 28 Rooms 488.4 506.2 574.8 621.5 707.4 754.2 808.7 Average 17.4 18.1 20.6 22.2 25.2 27.0 28.8 1,2,3.4 l!,2tg,;
Indicate data from references 1, 2, 3 and 4
. TABLE X
/
COLD CLDIATE HOUSES, WINDOWS OPEN The average house attenuation for each group tested is multiplied by the number of rooms in the group and the total of all groups divided by the total number of rooms tested Octave Center i
frequency Hz 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 New Yogk-18 Roome 270 299 314 324 360 396 414 Boston A
New York 5 Rooms 55.9 46.3 61.1 74.1 86.8 89.5 96.3 j
New York 5 Rooms 78.5 69.9 69.9 73.6 73.0 78.3 85.2 Winthrop 3 Rooms 30.1 41.6 36.1 33.4 36.8 34.9 33.9 i
Total 31 Rooms 434.4 445.8 493.1 505.1 556.6
$98.7 629.4 Average 14.0 14,3 15.6 16.3 19.9 19.3 20.2 Note:
4A. 4B and 4CData from reference 1 (see Figure 2) and reference 4 TABLE XI COLD CLDIATE HOUSES. WLNDOWS CLOSED The average house attenuation for each group tested is multiplied by the number of rooms in the group and the total of all groups divided by the total number of rooms tested.
Octave Center frequency, Hz 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 New Yorp -
18 Rooms 306 360 396 496 567 630 639 Boston 4
New York ^
$ Rooms 76.4 63.1 66.3 100 100.7 135.2 136.5 New York 5 Rooms 100.5 94.8 115.7 133.3 156.5 154.4 153.4 C
Winthrop
_4 Rooms 59.7 81.4 97.7 122.5 142.9 156.6 140.1 Total 32 Rooms
$42.6 599.3 695.7 841.3 967.1 1076.2 1068.0 Average 17.0 18.6 21.7 26.3 30.2 33.5 33.4
^'
.Enl.t; '
Data from reference 1 (see Figure 2) and reference 4
)
e
. TABLE XII A AVERAGE HOUSE NOISE REDUCTION. WAR 51 CLD! ATE 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000 Windows open 11.2 8.9 11.7 12.5 11.6 10.9 12.8 Windows closed 17.4 19.1 20.6 22,2 25.2 26.9 29.3 Total 29.6 27.0 32.3 34.7 36.8 37.8 41.1 Average 14.3 13.5 16.2 17.4 18.4 18.9 20.6 20.6 Smoothed Values 14 14 16 17.5 18.5 20 20.5 20.5 TABLE XII B_
AVERAGE HOUSE NOISE REDUCTION. COLD CLIMATE 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8008 Windows open 14.0 14.3 15.6 16.3 18.9 19.3 20.2 Windows closed 17.0 19.6 21.7 26.3 30.2 33.5 33.4 Total 31.0 32.9 37.3 42.6 49.1 52.S 53.6 Average 15.5 16.5 18.7 21.3 24.6 26.4 26.9 26.8 Smoothed Values 15.5 16.5 18.5 21.5 24.5 26.5 27.0 27.0 TABI.E Xfit GRAND AVERAGE OF HOUSE NOISE REDUCTIONS 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000
$000 Warm c!! mate 14.3 13.5 16.2 17.4 19.4 19.9 20.6 20.6 1
Cold climate 13.3 16.5 18.7 21.3 24.6 26.4 26.8 26.8 Total 29.9 30.0 34.9 39.7 43.0 45.3 47.4 47.4 Average 14.9 15.0 17.5 19.4 21.5 22.7 23.7 2J.7 Smoothed Values 15.0 15.0 17.5 20.0 21.5 23.0 23.5 23.5
)
e
.. 30 WINDOWS CLOSED Range of Measurements, h
[
.c,,
Ny E
Median Value t
0 PNdB dBA 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4003 30 WINDOWS OPEN S
20 Median Value Range of Measurements 10 b
O\\
yi
,\\\\
f s
0 PNdB dB A 47 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 Octave Band Center Freq.ency in Hz FIGUI\\ t 1.
HOOM NOISE REDUCTION OBTAINED FRO 31 SUCCESSIVE FLYOV FOR A BEDROOM IN ONE STORY IIOUSE IN MIAMI, FLORIDA (flouse had concrete block with stucco walls, flat compo-4 sition roof and poorly sealed double hung windows.)
o
. 50 CLOSED WINDOWS Range of Measurements i
i J :
RadEP
- - - Median Value 1
g I
s 10 40 OPEN WINDOWS 3
30 20 i i Bd,-s9LxV
~ ~ - Median Value O
PNdB dB A 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 Octave Band Cent er Frequency in Hz RANGE IN ROOM NOISE REDUCTION VALUES MEASURED IN EIGilTEEN FIGURE 2.
ROOMS IN FIVE }{OUSES IN BOSTON AND NEW YORK
,. 30 A
l l
WINOow$ CLOSSO o
1*,
20 ;
.E N
ll,
' *I Measu,ements N%Medion voy 0
PNdB dB A 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 30 WINDOWS OPEN
.5 20 i
o
--Median Value Range of Measurements 10
\\\\\\ \\\\\\ N b
$ N k h"i m
$E 1 1
$$\\
O PNd dBA 63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 Octave Bond Center Frequency in Hz FIGURE 3.
RANGE IN ROOSI NOISE REDUCTION VALUES $1EASURED IN EIGHT ROO3!S IN FOUR HOUSES IN MIAMI NOTE: These data were obtained in u. furnished rooms. To make these data comparable with data taken in furnished rooms 4dB are added to the windows closed measurements and 2 dB to the windows open measurements.
4 D,
f.
35 i
i b = 4 WARM CUMATE WINDOWS OPEN b = M WARM CUVATE WINDOWS CLOSED M d WARM CUMATE AVER AGE C
O COLO CUM ATE WINDOWS OPEN i
h h ~,0LO CUMATE WINDOWS CLOSE0
(
g D*N COLD C'.lM ATE AVER AGE b---O ovEaALL AvEa AGE O
s I
/
W sp
-V Wj' l
1s f
/, f JY.a t
l i
l l
f)#
l l
1
/
=
/
~4
/
- 20
. l z
/
h
/ /'7
/
/
8
/
c i
V y"
W
/
2 M
15 z
L
,r
-~
.a
,O
-<k, ' Y
~,
8
/
G, l
io N
s M-I a
63
- s 250 500 1000 2000 go S
OCTAVE BAND CENTER FREQUENCY IN Hz NOISE REDUCTION THROUGH HOUSE WALLS IN WARM AND C FIGURE 4, CLDIATES WITH WINDOWS OPEN AND CLOSED
n.
4h* O
\\ l HOUSING UNITS WITHIN SHEARON HARRIS EPZ WITH STORM WINDOWS Housing Units With Stora Total County Windows Housing Units Chathan 651 1,106 Harnett 382 648
' Lee 223 378 Wake 3,072 5.215 Total 4,328 7,347 Sources: CP&L,1984 Appliance Information Study Sanford areal CP&L surveys of number of housing units inside EPZ,1982.
9410s
s
.j.
DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSING UNITS BY AGE AND BY WINDOW ARIA REQUIREMENTS, SHEARON HARRIS EPZ Min 10fg2 Min 8 ft2 Habitablelfer per Window Area None:
Room:
Habitable Room:
Total Requirement / Year Before 1948 1948-1976 1976-1982 Housing Units County Chatham 3372/
496 273 1106 (30.5%)2/
(44.8%)
(24.7%)
(1001)
Harnett 230 338 80 648 (35.5%)
(52.2%)
(12.3%)
(100%)
Lee 101 211 66 378 (26.7%)
(55.8%)
(17.5%)
(100%)
Wake 1,477 2,895 843 5,215 (28.3%)
(55.5%)
(16.2%)
(100%)
Total 2,145 3,940 1,262 7,347 (29.2%)
(53.6%)
(17.2%)
(1001)
Sources:
North Carolina Insurance Commissioner's Office, Engineering and Building Department, personal communications, 1985: US Census of Population and Housing,1980 - Summary Tape File 3. North Carolina, for Enumeration Districts and Census Tracts within the Shearon Harris EPZ; CP&L surveys of number of housing units inside EPZ,1982.
Notes:
1/
All rooms except bathroona and closets.
2/
Numbers of housing units on tops percent of total housing units in parentheses.
9410s
J~
~
0 EXTERIOR MATERIAL OF YEAR-ROUND HOUSING UNITS,1982
^
SHEARON HARRIS EPZ l Total I
Hood l
l l Concrete 1 I
I nobile County l Units l
Frame i
Brick l Stone l
Riock l
Stucco l Aluminum l
Homes i
I I
I I
I I
I Onathan i
1,106 1
562 1
179 l
9 1
30 1
4 1
36 l
286 I
I I
I I
I I
I Marsett i
648 l
195 1
261 1
0 1
101 1
0 1
0 l
91 1
I I
I I
I I
I Ime 1
378 l
151 1
128 1
0 1
0 1
0 1
41 1
58 I
I I
I I
I I
I hke 1 5,215 1
2,597 l
1,465 1
5 1
252 l
13 1
262 1
621 I
I I
I I-1 I
I Total EPZ l 7.347 1
3,505 1 2,033 1
14 1
383 1
17 1
339 l
1,056 I
I I
I I
I I
l Percent of l
1001 1 47.71 1 27.71 1 0.21 1 5.2%
1 0.21 1
4.6%
l 14.4%
Nousing Units Sources: Survey of housing units within EPZ, September,1984; Chatham County Tax Supervisor's Office, property data cards sampling survey, September,1984; Umke County Computer Center, tax assessment data base September,1984; CP6L surveys of number of housing units inside EPZ,1982; US Census of Population and Housing,1980 - Summary Tape File 3. North Carolina, for Enumeration Districts and Census Tracts within the Shearon Harris EPZ.
M
.v'.S.
.. s; I'
s.
[
c i
$s 1
+
q 4 ':'
\\-
n
+
g.
,9 $a
(,
96 period when the attention of both the new s media and the public was focused on David, Hurricane Frederic formed somewha t to the south and about 7 to 8 days behind David. The intensity of Frederic varied considerably as it moved through the Caribbean Sea and into the Gulf of Aiexico south of Cuba.
During portions of this trek, Frederic was downgraded to a Tropical Storm, and almost downgraded to a Tropical Depression. I low ev er, as Frederic mosed south of Cuba into the warm Gulf waters, it began to regenera te and curve to the north.
After passing oser the western tip of Cuba, Frederic was again classified as a hurricane and began to intensify rapidly.
At 5 P \\1, CST on Tuesday, September 11, the L'. S.
National Hurricane Center issued a Hurricane 4 atch for a large portion of the central Gulf Coast east of the Mississippi River.
Later that evening, at 9 P \\1, this Hurricane M atch was changed to a Hurricane W arning.
The warning message included the statement that protec-tive action should begin early Wednesday morning, Sep-tember 12.
During Tuesday night and Wednesday, Frederic followed l
a straight path aimed directly at the city of Mobile.
During this period it continued to intensif y until the maximum sustained winds reached about 115 MPH.
At about noon on Wednesday, gale force winds began buffet-ing Dauphin Island at the mouth of Mobile Bay. These winds reached the city of Mobile by mid-af ternoon, and damaging winds began in Mobile about 7 PM.
The full f orce of Hurricane Frederic hit Mobile betw eer, 11 PM Wednesday night and 3 AM Thursday morning, September I
13.
The eye of Frederic passed about 10 miles to the southwest of the city about 1:30 AM.
Local of ficials in Mobile held a general meeting to assess the situation at 9 AM on Wednesday morntng.
At about noon on Wednesday, they advised the evacuation of a large area of the city adjacent to Mobile Bay. By this i
t:me, however, many residents had already begun evacua-ting, end the evacuation continued until about 7 to 8 PM W ednesday night.
W hile Mobile was desastated by the winds of Frederic, the storm surge did not funnel up the bay, as it was feared l
it might.
Therefore, there was slight flood damage in Mobile, despite a water level es tima ted to be about i
tweise feet abose mean sea level.
l
.--e L
l
.t h
- : =-
.c W'
?
? '
I.
.AJ
'. [
+
(-
. ' 1.
.M g,
tene m of both the news media and the Research Design fh c
end, Hurricane Frederic formed
!8 sot and about 7 to 3 days behind The research reported here is a por tion of a much I[
ty of Frederic varied considerably as it larger study focusing on " community response to natural j,i
? Caribbean Sea and into the Gulf of hazard w a r ning s."
This projec t, funded by the L.S.
d
- u'a.
During portions of this trek, National Science Foundation, examined the response of ly o
graded to a Tropical Storm, and almost local emergency service agencies and residents to torna-
- (
- ldoes, Tropical Depression. liow es er, as flash floods, hurricanes, and earthquakes in 3G ath of Cuba into the warm Culf water %
American communities between March,1977 and October,
? rate and curve to the north.
After 1979 As part of this project, the senior author obsersed estern tip of Cuba, Frederic was again and documented the actions of Cat) of ficials in the Mobile icane and began to intensify rapidly.
Cits/ County Civil Defense of fices from S A M W ednesdas, on Tuesday, September 11, the U.S. '
September 12 through 8 AM Saturday, September 15.
Center issued a Hurricane Watch for a The basic research design of this project was a bef ore-the centdal Gulf Coast east of the af ter tspe of study of both the agencies and the residents.
Later that eNening, at 9 PM, this Mobile was picked as a study site for a hurrtcane threat, was changed to a Hurricane W arning.
along with 7 other coastal communittes, in 1977. Studies ge included the statement that protec-of the general preparedness of Mobile were conducted in begin early Wednesday morning, Sep-August, 1977.
At that time, personal interview s were conducted with of ficials in 49 community organizations, iight and Wednesday, Frederic followed and telephone interviews were conducted with 228 res -
med directly at the city of Mobile.
den t s.
,p
! it continued to intensif y until the W ithin a month af ter Hurricane Frederic struck Mobile, i winds reached about i15 MPH.
At
+
w e began a series of follow-up interviews with of f acials of k
nesday, gale force winds began buf fet-the same :49 organiza tions and the same 228 residents
,_f at the mouth of Mobile Bay. These originalls interview ed in 1977 (electrical power was not ci f Mobile by mid-af ternoon, and fus restored in the cits for three weeks af ter the F
ga Mobile about 7 PM.
The f ull disaster).
'f Frcueric hit Mobile between 11 PM Of the original 223 res < ents, w e were able to relocate
(
id 3 AM Thursday morning, September and inters tew 142 af *er the tw o-s ear intervening period.
y rederic passed about 10 miles to the To supplement this sample, we drew another sample of
.-t-ty about 1:30 AM.
4 3 residents. Thus, our total sample size for the resident
![* f. '
in Mobile held a general meeting to portion of the study is 50 5 respondents. The telephone at 9 AM on Wednesday morning. At intersiew s with the resident sample, which is the focus of
% I
,esday, they advised the evacuation of this paper, examined the residents' response to the hurri-city adjacent to Mobile Bay. By this cane threat. Our primary interest was the process which
,y residents had already begun esacua-led the residents to decide to evacuate or not tc esac aate
. ' ~.
ation continued until about 7 to 8 P\\
their homes.
g.
In an earlier report on this protect (Carter, Kendall, and l[.
- devastated by the winds of Frederit, Clark, 1980), we developed a general decision-making not funnel up the bay, as it was feared model of public response to hurricane threats (this model f=
r e, there was slight flood damage in was also estimated for residents of M ia m i, Florida in water lev el estimated to be about response to Hurricane David). In this paper we divide our I
nean sea level.
sar ple into groups based on simt!ar f amily structures and l'
Ji 1
,98 aw i ',
.. 7 4
g 7
s t
.v I
er s
/
g*
- s ap
?,
M e
+
w
. g s
E 4
' y9s q
-,y x
+
1
.r
~*.
n
+ *
~
y l
t ey l.'
~
\\
N.
I
~
l 1 I 98 examine tre estimated parar eters of the model f or ca.
group separately.
Our basic hypothesis here is that the manner in w hich residents decide to evacuate will dif fer depending upon the structural characterstics of their nuclear f amily. Our hypothesis is not nec essa r ily that residents with one f amily type will evacuate at a higher rate than residents with another f amils ts pe, but rather that residents with one f amils ts pe will f ollow a dif f erent decision-making process, in decid,ng w hether or not to esacuate, than residents with another family ts pe, in short, we are hypothesizing that the constraints placed upon residents by their f amily structures influence the manner in w hich they reach decisions to evaucate or not to esacuate.
The General Model Figure l presents a graphial summary of our decision-making r"odel. In effect, we dnide the process into two phases. The first phase deals w ith whether or not the residents considered es acuat ion as an appropriate response to the hurricane threat. This phase is represent-ej in Figure 1 by the arrow s conserging on the variable labelled " considered evacuation" This is a dichotomous no (as are all the yes and 0 variable coded as 1 variables in our model). W e evamine the ef fects of four sets of s ariables on w hether or not the residents consider-ed evacuating their homes.
First, w e examine the ef fect of recessing or hearing three "of ficial statements" issued bs ;ocal of ficials: (l) the hurricane "w atch", (2) the hurricane "w arning", and ( 3) the "esacuation recommendation" The second set of variables deal with more inf ormal ts pes of inf or,ation.
The variable labelled " advice" refers to w hethr. or not the residents received any advice on how to ' epare for the hurricane, and the variable labelled "of f.aals" refers to whether or not the residents recen ed w eather informa-tion directly f rom local of ficials.
In addition to these two sets of s ar. ables relating to the type of information the residents recen ed, we examine the ef fects of whether or not the residents perceived their neighborhood to be at risk to storm surge flooding i
and w hether or not they engaged in ans ty pe of social contacts over now to respond to the tnreat.
The "prter
e V
99
[
tF 3 del for each risk" variable refers to whether or not the residents felt E
their neighborhood was subject to storm surge flooding I
h2 n enner in which before the threat from Frederic became apparent. The
[.
fer d pending upon variable labelled " flooding likelihood" is somewhat unique D'
nuc!2tr family. Our in the way it was measured. If the respondents said that residents with one they heard the evacuation recommendation, they were
! J-rate than residents asked whether or not, on the basis of that recommenda-
'I that residents with tion, they thought storm surge flooding was hkely in their
}'
ent decision-making to evacuate, than In short, we are CONSTAN T ADDITIONAL
.)
3ced upon residents INFOR.\\1 A T!ON l{-
he manner in which l
t to evacuate.
OFFICIAL WHERE TO GO l
ROUTES l
WATCH ary of our decision.
WARNING
}
he process into two EVAC. REC.
[
ubethtr or not the is an appropriate UNOFFICIAL l.
phase is represent.
INFORMATION l
ing on the variable s is a dichotomous ADVICE
' CONS DERED no (as are'all the OFFICIALS
/
the af fects of four
,I'-
r its consider-RISK PERCEPTION if,
4o t
=ceiving or hearing PRIOR RISK g. g.
y
- ocal officials: (1)
FLOODING
'i.&.!
e " warning", and (3)
LIKELlHOOD
' EVACUATION The second set of
("N j;h,}
oes of information.
to whether or not SOCIAL how to prepare for CONTACTS CONFIRMATION iit
.d " officials" refers
,INE d weather informa-DISCUSSIONS PLANS W/
jt i-R EL ATIVES R EL ATIVES
.bles relating to the CHECKED PLANS W/
h.i eived, we examine FRIENDS NEIGHBORS l'3 esidents perceived CHECKED AUTHORITIES orm surge flooding any type of social j
threat. The " prior Figure I: Decision-Making Model of Public Response to p.j Hurricane Frederic in Mobile, Ala.
- ..,9 g
k
?
100 neighborhood. Thus, this variable is closely linked to the ture. we l
" evacuation recommendation" variable. The final three the follow.
variables in the first phase of the model focus on social 97 (19.2 7 contacts: (1) whether or not the residents engaged in adult (s) -
" discussions" of previous hurricanes in deciding how to children -
respond, (2) whether or not the residents' " relatives any childr.
checked" on their safety, and (3) whether or not the with chile residents' " friends checked" on their safety.
extremely and th:rc The second phase of the model examines factors which remainder influence the decision to evacuate. This phase is estimat-Table !
I ed only for those who considered evacuating their homes I
in the first phase. Thus, our two-phased model deals first Table 1: (
with factors determining whether or not residents enter a i
decision-making mode, and second with factors determi-I ning the nature of the decision for those who do. In this second phase, we allow both risk perception variables to have direct as well as indirect effects on the decision to evacuate.
Variadie in addition, we include two other sets of variables. First groups is a set of variables which indicate (1) whether or not the residents knew "where to go" if they evacuated, and (2) constant whether or not the residents knew which " evacuation ogg,c3,,
routes" to take. The final set of three variables refers to staternents the confirmation of the threat that the residents re-Watch ceived: (1) whether or not the residents discussed their warning evacuation " plans with relatives", (2) whether or not the he*,#7 ". g residents discussed their evacuation " plans with neigh-bors", and (3) whether or not local " authorities" (mainly
,n g or,.,, n e,
police) personally advised the residents to evacuate. Since w ee Offic:als this phase was estimated only for those who considered evacuation, the constant in this equation represents the Risk percepta ef fect on evacuation of considering evacuation.
Pricr risk Flooding !;.e:. o.
This two-phased model was estimated by means of two 3 *'
5" linear multiple regression equations. Since all the variab-nis si les in the model are dichotomous (coded I = yes and 0 =
R elatnes e.ne Friends cFe-:.ed no), the unstandardized linear regression coef ficients can R2 be interpreted as increments in the probability of the dependent variable associated with a "yes" response on y
the independent variable, holding the remaining variables constant.
a) Type 1 in:.6 T P' 2
- c m Y
The Results Type 3 - ~.a As indicated above, we first divided the sample into homogeneous groups based on the residents' family struc-n-
'W j
101 3
sely linked to the ture. We employed five types of family structure with p'
T' lnal three the following distribution: (1) single person living alone -
/g on social I
97 II9*2 Percent), (2) single person living with other j-,'
lents engaged in adult (s) = 48 (9.6 percent), (3) single person living with f
deciding how to children = 27 (5.4 per cent), (4) married couple without any children =,J79 (35.5 percent), and (5) married couple d:n ts' " rela tives i
4, tther or not the with children 153 (30.3 percent).
Because of the
=
i extremely small number of residents falling in the second cs factors which and third categories, these were excluded from the phase is estimat-remainder of the analysis.
5, iting their homes Table i presents the unstandardized regression j
model deals first residents enter a Table 1: Comparison of Unstandardized Regression factors determi-Coefficients for First Equation of the Model of e who do. In this Response to Hurricane Frederic in Mobile, Ala.
by Type of Family Structure ition variables to 7 n the decision to
)! variables. FirsN
~
Type of respondents )
Difference between g
Variable a
hether or not the groups
'1 2
3 I&2 I&3 2&3
.acuated, and (2)
Constant
.347
.057.202
.290.I45.145 7-hich " evacuation U
official ariables refers to g sta tyents
.356. 262.132
.094.224.130 he residents re.
Watch
.046
.193.101
.239.055.294 5 discussed their
?
Warning
~035 ~ l 15.139
.080.174.254 Evacuation ether or not the recommendation
.275
.340.170
.065.105.170 1,
'an* 'vith neigh-Unofficial
- " (mainly m
informa tion
.063
.108.345
.171 408.237 I
)t Jate. Since Advice
.107
.!89.223
.082.116. 0 34 who considered officials
.170
.081.!22
.089.292.203 f, fy.
n represents the Risk perception
.453
.636.
519
.183.066.!!7 M
.ation.
Prior risk
.053
.250.237
.197.184.013 Dy means of two Flooding likelihood
.400
.386.232
.014.118.104 iO e all the variab-Social contacts
.232
.147.034
.085.198.!!3 Discussions
.250
.153.013
.097.237.140 1 = yes and 0 :
Relatives checked
.104
.124.033
.020.071
.091 coefficients can Friends checked
.122
.130.012
.008.110.!!8
- i robability of the R2
.121
.302.195
-O
- ves" response on N
97 178 154 maining variables a) Type ! = individual living alone ff."
Type 2 = couple without children Type 3 = couple with children the sample into Values significant at the.05 level or better in italics.
- t
--M its' family struc-k
~~ -
102 coef f taents of the f ir st cauation of the model est. ated Gisen our f or each of the three ty pes of f amily structure.
hypothesis stated abose, we are interested in corr paring the coef ficients across these three groups.
The tabie presents a comparison of these coeficients for each of the three pairs of the three groups and indicates the coef ficients, the absolute dif f erences bet w een the coef ficients, and the results of a t-test of these dif feren-ces.Fis e significant cif ferences among the coef f.cients are indicated in this table:
(1) ~ouples w ithout children are more likely to respond to the A at( n than are couples with children:
(2) couples with children are more likely to respond to the warning than are couples without children;
( 3) couples with children are more likely to respond to weather inf ormation f rom of ficials than are either single residents or couples without childrem (4) couples w i t hou t children and couples with ^tidren are more likely to respond on the basis of their prior perception of risk to storm surge flooding than are single residents:
( 5) single residents and couples wtthout children are more likely to respond on the basis of discussions of previous hurricanes than are couples with children.
j needs Before interpreting these dif ferences, one point l
to be made concerning the generally negative coef ficiente of the "of ficial statements" set of variables. It must be remembered that these coef ficients represent the change in probability of considering es acuation net or inde-pendent of the other s ariables in the equation. Supple-mentary analyses have indicated that these s ariables assume their negatise ef fects primarily in the presence ci the " risk perception" variables.
That is, residents who hear the of ficial statements but, based on these state-ments, do not consider their neighborhood at isk to storm surge flooding, are less likely to constder es acuating than To find those residents w ho did not hear th = statements.
the ef f ect of both hearing of ficial statements and consid-ering their neighborhood at risk to storm surge flooding, one would simply add the two sar.able ef fects toget'e.
j l
Based on this type of analysis, in general, we find that single residents lising alone are less likely to respond to either of ficial statements or unof ficial in f or m a tion, tr-y
.g 103 3:'
the
' del estimated respective of their perceptions of risk, and more hkely to a
str
- e. Given our respond to their social contacts.
On the other hand, f.
tres.. in comparing married couples, with or without children, are about
[,
groups.
The table equally likely to respond to official statements, although
- ients for each of the married couples with children are more likely to respond
_}..
tnd indicates the to unofficial information as well.
Finally, married p
mces between the couples with children are much less likely to respond to
)
st of these dif ferE-their social contacts.
I-Given these general findings, we can form a continuum the coefficients are in terms of the manner in which residents go about considering evacuation, with the single residents at one 3re likely to respond end and the married couples with children at the other
+6-th children-end. Single residents who live alone rely much less on the likely to respond to '
information they receive and much more on their social sout children; contacts as a basis on which to consider evacuation. In likely to respond to contrast, married couples with children appear to form ials than are either more independent decision-making groups in that they it children; rely more heavily on the information they receive and less ouples with children heavily on their social ccntacts.
? basis of their prior Turning to the second equation in our model, Table 2 ge flooding than are presents the unstandardized regression coef ficients of the independent variables on evacuating for each of the three ithout children are types of family structure.
As before, our concern is isis of discussions of primarily with the three sets of comparisons between the i;
ales with children.
coefficients. We find three significant differences:
- es one point needs (1) couples without children and single residents are
- f
'er e coef ficients more likely to evacuate with no additional incentives, I
ar
.. I t must be once having considered evacuation, than are couples eptvent the change with children; 6
.ation net or inde-(2) single residents are more likely to evacuate on the
,e equation. Supple-basis of prior risk perception, once having considered nat these variables evacuation, than are couples without children;
- 1y in the presence of (3) couples without children and couples with children it is, residents who are more likely to evacuate on the basis of their
. sed on these state-perception of the likelihood of flooding, once having
.ood at risk to storm considered evacuation, than are single residents.
i ider evacuating than:
A comparison of the summary measures again reveals
'[
statements. To Gnd that single residents living alone and marriec; couples with
{
- tements and conTd-children align on opposite ends of a decision-making torm surge flooding, continuum.
Once having considered evacuation, single f
ef fects together.
residents tend to evacuate with little effect from other eneral, we find that sources of input. However, as more independent decision-j- -
likely to respond to making groups, married couples with children rely more
- ial information, ir-heavily on their perception of risk to storm suria k
P, L
N 2
_~
[
e i
l 104 flooding, the confirmation of the threat that they receive, D
and the additional information that they receive in deciding whether or not to evacuate.
Summary in summary, families with children appear to be more likely to consider the possibility of evacuating their homes. It also" appears that the complete nuclear f amily -
father, mother, and children--constitutes a relatively Bas.ic self-contained decision-making unit, relying on their own he k interpretation of warning information, while single person and ha households and couples without children rely on their prior of the perceptions of risk and their social contacts with other Libera-uphea significant persons.
f amin-thatc Table 2: Comparison of Unstandardized Regression tions Coef ficients for Second Equation of the Model of uphea Response to Hurricane Frederic in Mobile, Ala.
the c by Type of Family Structure (Equation estimated exaca only for those who considered evacuation) neqd respe-Tvpe of respondents"I Dif ference betwee" the v..
Variable which 1
2 3
!&2 1&3 2&3 groups Considered evacuation
.330
.741
.309
.089.521.432 The Risk perception
.041
.020.323
.021.232.303 disaster Prior risk
.202
.091
.034
.M1
.06
.175 of the Flooding likelihood
.161
.111.239
.272.400.123 Indeed - '
Confirrnation
.076
.144
.227
.068.151.083 altered Plans w/ relatives
.106
.009.025
.115.131.016 selectec,
Plans w/ neighbors
.037
.006.115
.029.078.049 number j Authorities
.067
.087.137
.154.204.050 the est. l Add'n inf orrnation
.046
.051.137
.005.091.086 to erca:
Evacuation routes
.054. 092 -.014
.038.040.078 have oc Where to go
.100
.143.131
.043.051.00s R2
.027
.216.151 tion of ly af te-N 41 60 89 become in the c a) Type 1 individual living alone
'O O l Type 2 = couple without children the rurs ;
Type 3 = couple with children
)
Values significant at the.05 level or better in italics.
-~
l l
I A
e
"*7gr
- r e
[
s rr s
y "J
r 6 }".
I I
1 1
1 1
I i
1 i
I l
l l*
..O
.ha 1
9 4-t Drccrd cr
'p:r,c'c-,
[
,,,c-
_ g,.,
3,.
. 'a r
'C r, C z e. ~ s 4,
I l
l
' r s
- 1 t o;u of $ r
.e"Ce e
'ne r i ve rs, :, - < _ _ ;r u
'.f
_q 3,
v 1
[
%b
re w
e'20,tE dtL
,r r
, e.
w s:
e
- v,*
' fe T'*
EE
,.,g
,s.7, v,
.c+
r 3 Se sr 1,,
' 3, r <
'cf
- r
-(
+
'r r'4" e n'
"*2r~ff t
ardCCVS
'"' 'e'
.c
\\
r' r
9
,e I
j
't$
WCI' I
p r.
e P
f e
trer e:rs
,, P r
'$$,e5 i P e vid r # ' I 'l bI i
r r
n..
g s
6 o
r e,,
s adF#I"'
52"'
E c
i a
( 6
-r P
l 4Y 4 j'{
_V]s b
N>y vb*r
(*
6
..d d, S, r,
3 e.
. 5 s, s, re en r*
4 r
e.
i r.
i
,,3 r r -n mr
_ s w
r ec *a r : 5-r r * *,> r l
,p,
,)_
e; r. [,
$P( hjer'r
'$ d@ iVeIC$* CC ~
r r
V-e
.pr y'
7"r 9, ' ' o '-
'r,
- 3h b hC teer 2
~' S1V
- YQ'r
?f?3 R3r#1 N,
t( -
[rt pr 6 r d, :tc ".
9( C
'c or e
- r t r ;, ' r f v,3 r r i e g s (. r J 0e'
- r 1
r ze;
-s*
- ve r,-ter C' v.dr"'r0$ re'e'=6:
'5
,g'
,g 3re 'r
- "f'r Jt1Cr.
,r, trat neer aderirn re:4;1erts 3## IU' tPO IrC tS D' '
-er c
,e a
r 3
t n
te cre3sec 3r **ert#,re te
- M
,,y,.
3 3,
.-pr r
r I e,-
f
= eam
- ,re,r.- rr'~r-
-w e,
.c
-c5
-^*
"De"2 2'sester s i r
P I
s +
-6 t b t"e 3CCs$. * " 5 eI d O
,,p.
3,.
r.
.1
're s
- P'2*
-re3tts *. e regj (Or 13'l2E
'. r 1 '. O. ' " 1 *.
.r I
'r' 11 r d
g n 'r7 f, ' *Pr' Sug!
..g 4
,> ig;>
-' * + rg; jer tee# 15 21 rect'j rtte
!O
_jp @%r =
wwr V
5 g*F.*
r '
d
)
J rether cr rc;,.
j ' swr,i. t '_.
3.
.~
e,
"3r-+ev
, s car c ', ec
~
o
-ire
'ro 1 *^
(
-r3tek a nd S te;", r cr,
.e,Jr3.t. c.3
-e e.
- je r7*Ed d-'
' e5 a;0F reCe<rt :< t e,
See. ;Orf i r-3 t:ry n'
c a t r
a relate 0 t0 adr"1"4 Ir 2' ader'".
3'-
3F?"g
- srte, is Seer e
I Cor#1rret r
4 e =
44 I
i
. UC
i
,e.'
Two cther variables rerain wrich Pave tne s %.o tc te relatec jng 93. arnirg
~
w tc warnirg ccnfimation: persoral egericrce..itt c3 aster, and geo-ipient telieves the belief is treated 7'pr ica prcximity to the target area cf a. a r< ir.;
'ac; and Eater
'ICFl' Fave illustrated that peccle with crevie ' diu*,ter experiencr nding denger.
re cre liLel, to go through orgari:atice.al c aw ls 'cr infcrraticr, arc scrificatice thar persons withcut soc 5 e s:A r it r.
N r.cral e/cerience
'arnlies warned in is seer as relattd to warning confir a'icr.
Di "cef ' t %(' f o u n'*
that
-t r eans. DefiniE9 the clcscr a persen is to the target are.a f a.:arrir':. *re higner tre warrirg, fcr exacple, incidtrce c' werd-cf-rcuth cctruricatice, and 6 e krrr r 15c nurter cf Nrce is related to infcreaticr. scurces used for cbtiir rg a;di*. ice u ! f r f e r'~a t i cr.. Gec-3
'.te; terson (1971) graphical ;;rc#ity to the tarcet arc. ef e a.rnir. is trerefore ster l:ugnttoconfirr tha t
,s related te..arring cccfirnaticr. :n te m s rf tre rurter of sources rechanis. Definin9 used fer cerfircaticn, geographical prcrimity tc, *.*e tarcet area is
- s delivercd, com-irversely related to confirraticr.
It ras also teen 3.
Emplainirg Warnirg Selie' eir initial warning, s (Oratet, 1969).
Several studies show (Car ig, 1952; Drabek, 1969; nings received is Crabek ard 5techensen,1971) that aarnirg source is related to warning belief. M e ;erecal firding is trat warnings fren official sources, for n,
' eing recipients exarole, the eclice, state patrol er fire decartrent, are interpr ated as er
'lity cf scre credible, less likely to foster sbesticis, ard rare likely believed.
av
'cre be st3ted Se ac%al ccr ent or irfematier certainec in.,arrings, to the extent tc aaraing cerfir-that *re infer-ation it accura *e 3rd ccrsistert across several warrings, s of igeNirg disaster is alsc a predicter of belief (University cf Oklahcra Research Institute.
Tre 'reficctive fear" 1953; Clifferc,1956; Dererath,1957; Frit:,1957; Goldstein,1960; 3
i r, and it is the Scha t: ar, 1960; Mack and Baker,1961; '.lithey,1962). Williars (1952) tes tre reed fer has shewn that different channels of'ccerunicati;r have different degrees aicn car result in cf authcritativeress or credibility fer aarring re: intents. Warning w
.ctly related tc belief has been shown to be greater fer arrings celivered in a cersonal a
arner than fcr those comunicated tv s:re ircerscra: edium (Clifferd,
- c te a furcticn cf 1956,ccre,1963). It is proposec tnat :c.micaticn noce is relatad
-irg is recehed to warning belief.
are core likely to Several works have decurented evidcrct to sucgest that belief apen receiFt of their in eventual irpact increases as the nur ber of warriros received ir. creases relates to warning (Fritz,1961; *rabek and 509g5, 1965; Oratek, 19C9). Williar.s has suggested that the " recognition of the axistence of crisis tends to folicw an erergent or nonlinear pattern" (1957:16). Witncut r aking an assurptien
,}
abcut the shape of the relationship, it Can be stated that the number cf
,y 1
45
> y:
r-
3 AIF/NESP-031 l.
PLANNING CONCEPTS AND DECISION CRITERIA FOR SHELTERING AND EVACUATION IN A NUCLEAR POWER PLANT EMERGENCY Prepared for the
'~
~
National Environmental Studies P. oject of the Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc i
T*( -
~
2 s,
7.
BATTEkE HUMAN AFFAJRS RESEARCH CENTERS Seattle, Washington Michael K. Lindell Patricia A.Bolton y,
Ronald W. Perry and BATTELLE PACIFIC NORTHWEST LABORATORIES Richland, Washington Gregory A.Stoetzel 4s Jerome B. Martin and SOCIALIMPACT RESEARCH,INC.
]
Seattle, Washington Cynthia B. Flynn June 1985
H e
by power plant personnel. This first step would be followed by notification of the State Bureau of Radiological Health (BRH) by the county warning point.
In the third step of the agency notification procedure, BRH would verify the alert and discuss the problem with plant personnel. Following the formulation of a protective action recomendation, BRH would advise the State Office of Disaster Preparedness (ODP), which--in the fourth step--would inform the county governments in the EPZ of the recomended action. The duration of this process is estimated to range from 19 minutes to 78 minutes, with a midpoint of 48 minutes. This time estimate is, clearly, applicable only to situations in which offsite EOCs have not yet been activated.
If all offsite agencies have been activated and are all monitoring a comon conference line, the decision process would be expected to progress more rapidly--possibly 15-30 minutes when only one state is affected. When more than one state is involved, the protective action decision process may well take up to 60 minutes.
5.2.1.2 Public Notification Tiiw The report by Wilbur Smith and Associates presumed the existence of a reliable system of siren alert followed by a radio message to transmit a specific warning. The cumulative proportion of EPZ residents being notified was presumed to be 16% at 5 minutes, 50% at 10 minutes, 84% at 15 minutes and 100% at 20 minutes.
Voorhees and Asssociates postulated a slower dissemination process
~
l with only 15% of the EPZ population being notified within the first 30 minutes. Additionally, the rate of increase was slow, with 40% warned within 40 minutes, 75% at 50 minutes, 90% at 60 minutes and 70 minutes required to achieve complete public notification.
t 5-15
' g
9 Since local officials estimated at the time of the study that only 205 of the EPZ residents would be within range of existing strens, the CONSAD/CPR study assumed that only this proportion would receive imediate warning. The balance of the population would be notified by word of mouth j
at a rate which was postulated to be described by the function:
j f(t) = a2 te-et where a was assumed to be 0.0275. This function projects 355 of the EPZ population notified within 30 minutes, 605 within 60 minutes, 755 within 90 minutes, 905 within 120 minutes and 1005 notification at 210 minutes.
I As a complement to the postulated response functions used in the evacuation transportation analyses, empirical data bearing on the question of warning time distribution functions can be drawn from a report by Lindell, Perry and Greene (1981). These data describe the elapsed time ter first notification of residents of two areas (Toutle/Silverlake and Woodland), following the May 18, 1981 eruption of Mt. St. Helens.
Approximately 30% of the residents of the Toutle/Silverlake area, the area closest to the volcano, first learned of the eruption from personal observation.
An additional 585 heard about the eruption from friends, relatives or neighbors. The warnings spread rapidly in Toutle/Silverlake, as evidenced by the notification of 68% within 15 minutes, 825 within 30 l
minutes, 875 within 60 minutes and 965 within 240 minutes.
The Mt. St. Helens data clearly indicate that the CONSAD/CPR model j
underestimates the rate at which informal warning processes will act.
In fact the CONSAD/CPR data are strikingly similar to the data on elapsed i
time to first notification of the residents of Woodland, a community on the periphery of the threat area. The Mt. St. Helens data yield notification times that are somewhat slower than those assumed in the l
5-16 A
B y_ AV - M3+
3"=^=~
-l.
Voorhees study and substantially slower than those assumed by the Wilbur Smith analysis.
Part of the difference is attributable to the assumption in the two evacuation modeling studies of a highly effective siren system. Since only 305 of the Mt. St. Helens sample were warned by personal observation of the eruption--the equivalent of hearing a stren--the differences between the empirical data and the postulated data can be attributed to this factor. As a final comment, it should be noted that even an extensive siren system might produce incomplete coverage due to a few siren failures, or acoustic disruptions caused by terrain obstacles or meteorological conditions.
The Mt. St. Helens eruption data indicate that limited failures in the siren system are likely to be compensated by infomal cosamnication processes operating among the residents of the affected area.
5.2.1.3 Preparation Time In the Wilbur Smith analysis, preparation time durir.g weektkys was divided into three subcomponents: prepare to leave work, traval home, and prepare to leave home. The assumption that residents would return home before departing the EPZ was based upon the repeated finding in disaster research that families typically seek to reunite prior to evacuation.
Estimates of preparation time for evenings and weekends assumed that since families would be together, preparation time would be characterized only by the distribution function for the third of these subcomponents (prepare to leave home).
The cumulative distributions for two component times (prepare to leave work and travel home) were assumed to be the same as the function describir.g the public notification process (see Section 5.2.1.2).
5-17
r.-
National -
AIF/NESP-031 l-l Environmental Studies Project Planning Concepts and Decision Criteria for Sheltering and Evacuation in a Nuclear Power Plant Emergency A
I l
i i
_.]
Atomic industrial Forum,Inc.
I f-
--