You are on page 1of 7

Indian Journal of Biomechanics: Special Issue (NCBM 7-8 March 2009)

Mathematical Modeling of Environmental Noise Impact


K. Rawat, V. K. Katiyar, Pratibha Department of Mathematics , Indian Institue of Technology, Roorkee,IndiA-247667. Abstract Noise can have negative impact on health. Hearing damage, annoyance, sleep disturbance, high blood pressure, poor cardiovascular health is all linked to community noise. Children, people with existing physical and mental illness and elderly people are most susceptible to community noise. High level of noise from sources such as busy traffic can adversely affect the health of the people living near road highways. It is therefore desirable to model a road traffic noise that predicts well the traffic noise near highways so that the people living near highways who are highly exposed by everyday traffic noise can be protected from noise exposure to some extent . Measurement of noise level ( dB ( A) ) by noise analyzer will be conducted on road segment of Dehradun Haridwar highway for Dehradun city at different locations. The noise level predicted from the developed model is compared with the measured one .t-test is then applied and observed highly significant at 5% level and 95% confidence level. The proposed road traffic noise model can be effectively used as a decision supporting tool for prediction of road traffic noise in Indian conditions. Examining the behavior of various factors affecting road traffic noise, people living near highways can be better prevented from high degree of environmental noise impact. Key words: Traffic noise, t-test, traffic flow, traffic speed 1 Introduction Community noise (or Environmental noise) is defined by WHO as noise emitted from all sources except the industrial work places. Main sources of community noise include heavy road traffic. Investigation in different countries in the past several decades have shown that the noise affects badly health of the people living in close proximity to busy road highways (Rylander et al.1976; Calixto et al. 2003; Ouis 2002). Dehradun Haridwar highway is one of the busiest roads in Dehradun city. The high volume, high speed and percentage of heavy vehicle on freely flowing motorways in the developing countries create a high degree of environmental noise impact on inhabitants around the motorways. To create a healthy and noise pollution free environment, a noise prediction model is needed so that the noise level along a busy highway can be forecast and investigated in advance during the planning and design process (Brown and Macdonald 2003). The noise generated by single vehicle in freely flowing traffic was investigated by Lewis (Lewis 1973).He indicated that vehicles traveling in such a condition formed two distinct groups, petrol or diesel, with respect to noise emissions and proposed by a simple regression model for each group. An analytical description of the noise field emitted from steady stationary traffic flows by means of a classical acoustic model has been given by Yeow (Yeow 1973). Gilbert (Gilbert 1976) investigated L10 noise levels in urban streets by presenting two regression 75

models for predicting curbside traffic noise. Road traffic noise at 24 traffic junctions of Kolkata city was measured and a regression equation was developed for predicting the noise level by using equivalent number of light/ heavy vehicles/ hour and distance from the traveling centerline (Chakraborty et al. 1997). Heavy vehicle such as delivery truck was observed as an important vehicle component responsible for contributing noise to environment (Bjorkman and Rylander 1997). A simulation model making use of Monte Carlo techniques was devised to incorporate the uncertainty in traffic noise estimates and traffic flow, traffic speed and traffic composition (in terms of % of heavy vehicle) were identified as key factors influencing the generation of traffic noise (Lam and Tam 1998). A statistical model for prediction of road traffic noise which is based on Poisson type traffic flow was developed and discussed by Donato and Morry (Donato and Morry 2001). Pamanikud and Vivitjinda (Pamanikud and Vivitjinda 2002) proposed a high traffic noise simulation model for free way traffic conditions in Thailand that provides a more accurate measurement of noise energy from each type of vehicle under real conditions. Noise created due to freely flowing traffic on the inclined trunk roads in the residential area of Hongkong was discussed by Tang and Tong (Tang and Tong 2004). Nassiri et al. (Nassiri et al. 2005) examined reliability of traffic noise estimation and measurement techniques, obtained from the combined probability distribution of the traffic speed, traffic composition and traffic flow by Monte Carlo Simulation method. A motor traffic noise model based on the perpendicular propagation analysis technique (direction perpendicular to the center line of motorways carriageway ) is found performed well in a statistical good-ness-of-fit test against the field data (Tansatcha et al. 2005). A road traffic noise model is developed for industrial town of Asansol (Banerjee et al. 2008). Their study shows that L dB ( A) values are mainly influence by hourly traffic volume and day time data reveals a stronger relationship than night data. An empirical traffic noise model under interrupted traffic flow conditions using two analytical approaches, acceleration lane approach and deceleration lane approach is proposed by Rajkumara and Mahalinga (Rajkumara and Mahalinga 2008). 2 Methodology Noise impact criteria for different land uses close to highways established by Federal Highway Administration (FHA) is given as: : Land Use Residential Commercial LdB(A) 65 dB ( A) 70 dB ( A)

Above this level a statistically significant increase in blood pressure level of the people living near highways since long and continuously exposed by traffic noise is observed. Since traffic characteristics and type of vehicle in India differ from those in Western countries, a new model including traffic flow (vehicle/hour), traffic speed (Km/hour), traffic composition in terms of heavy vehicle (%) were investigated. For each type of

76

vehicle, regression analysis of noise level (dB A) on speed was carried out based on Logarithmic relationship i.e.
L = log( speed ) + ;

Where and are constants and there values differ for each type of vehicle. 2.1 Traffic noise measurement and study area The noise level was measured at different hours (8am-9:30am; 11am-12:30am; 2pm3:30pm; 5pm-6:30 pm), when traffic flow was mild, average and heavy at 20 different locations of Dehradun-Haridwar highway by using noise analyzer (sound level meter).Readings of noise level in dB ( A) at different locations are given in (Table-1). The sound level meter was set back at the edge of the road on pedestrian side walk at a height of 1.2 meter above the ground surface. Traffic flow in terms of vehicle/hour, average traffic speed in terms of Km. /hour and traffic composition in terms of percentage of heavy vehicle at different locations are given in (Table-2). 2.2 Analysis of data and model development A traffic noise model was then developed by applying the basic noise level from this study. The equation being used in practice for predicting the basic traffic noise is the CRTN model (Lam and Tam 1998). The main equation for predicting the noise level is given by

L = 10 log Q + 33 log( V + 40 + 500 / V ) + 10 log( 1 + 5 P / V ) 26 . 6

(1)

Where: Q = Traffic flow P = Percentage of heavy vehicle; V = Average speed of vehicles. For making sensitivity analysis the values of each factor was changed in order to compute, while other factors were kept fixed.
80 Calculated L(dB A) 78 76 74 72 70 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84 Measured L(dB A)

Figure1: Measured L dB( A) against predicted L dB( A) for equation (1). 77

Using the Linear Regression Model, the accuracy of estimated Sound Pressure Level L dB ( A) to the observed value (directly collected from the surveys) is examined. Figure 1 shows the result of regression analysis of the noise level L dB ( A) .The coefficient of determination ( R 2 ) of the 45 0 line is 0.8733 . A simple way of modifying prediction procedure is only to recalculate the coefficient of equation and the constant term using the survey data. Regression model of observed L dB ( A) with the measured L dB ( A) is given as follows:
L meas = 1 .02 * Lcalc 0 .17 ; R
2

= 0.9165

(2)

By substituting this equation into equation (1), the general form of revised equation is:

L = 10.2 log Q + 33.66 log(V + 40 + 500 / V ) + 10.2 log(1 + 5 P / V ) 27.302

(3)

Calculated L(dB A)

80 78 76 74 72 70 70 72 74 76 78 80 82 84

Measured L(dB A)

Figure 2: Measured L dB( A) against predicted L dB( A) for equation (3). 3. Model Validation The new estimated was then compared with the measured values to investigate the accuracy of eq (3). Figure 2 shows that the best fit line generated between measured and new estimated L dB( A) values gives a ( R 2 ) value of 0.9165, which is acceptable. ( R 2 ) value of 1.0 is considered to be the best fit, where as any value above 0.7 is considered to be good. Also coefficient of determination ( R 2 ) for the regression line of new estimated L dB( A) is comparatively higher than the previous one. Using equation (3) the effect of each factor on the traffic noise is assessed and it is found that % of heavy vehicle has great significance in noise prediction. A t-test is then applied to new estimated noise level values and measured values. t calc = 2.0933 and t tabul =1.96 at 20+20-2=38 degrees of freedom. Since calculated value of t is higher than that of

78

tabulated value, therefore relationship given by equation (3) is highly significant at 95% of confidence level. 4. Conclusion Road traffic noise is major concern of communities living in the vicinity of road networks in urban areas. The coefficient of determination ( R 2 ) between measured and predicted noise level L dB ( A) by some empirical models showed that the suggested model has higher value of coefficient of determination compared to previously developed traffic noise prediction models, which indicates the adequacy of model. Finally it can be concluded that the suggested model could nicely predict the road traffic noise in Dehradun city. Percentage of heavy vehicle, speed of vehicles and traffic flow are identified as key factors and play significant role in traffic noise emission and therefore environmental impact on public health. Therefore the study reveals that using the noise prediction model, developed so far in this study, traffic noise level can be reduced and so the health problems of the people living close proximity to busy road highways. Calibrating the model by regression analysis led to increase in accuracy of estimated traffic noise. Table 1: Measurement of Noise Level (dB A) at different locations
S.N. Distance (meters) Level of Noise (dB A) 8AM9:30PM 11AM12:30PM 2PM3:30PM 5PM6:30PM Aggregate of Noise Level(dB A)

1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20.

0-250 250-500 500-750 750-1000 1000-1250 1250-1500 1500-1750 1750-2000 2000-2250 2250-2500 2500-2750 2750-3000 3000-3250 3250-3500 3500-3750 3750-4000 4000-4250 4250-4500 4500-4750 4750-5000

68.2375 68.5125 66.575 69.8875 71.2375 70.075 69.0625 71.9625 71.1125 70.875 74.0125 71.825 75.425 71.15 75.45 72.85 75.4875 76.3125 73.725 79.1125

63.6625 66.35 67.5875 65 68.5875 69.325 67.8625 68.675 67.575 72.2375 68.675 70.675 73.975 73.975 70.3875 75.2875 75.725 75.1875 74.625 79.025

73.425 73.0375 76.4375 76.05 73.0125 76.0125 77.075 75.3125 79.05 76.65 81.2125 77.2 76.775 78.9375 80.2875 79.75 78.9125 77.9875 87.1125 84.75

83.675 83.625 82.675 82.5125 82.9875 82.125 83.8375 85.3875 84.6125 84.7625 81.2 88.425 83.85 87.9485 86.375 88.1125 87.925 91.5 90.325 87.9275

72.25 72.88125 73.31875 73.5125 73.95625 74.384375 74.459375 75.334375 75.5875 76.13125 76.275 77.0325 77.50625 77.9025 78.125 79 79.34375 80.246875 81.4468 82.70375

79

Table 2: Measurement of Various Parameters


Sr.No. Distance(meters) Traffic % of Heavy Flow(Vehicle/Hour) Vehicle Average Speed (Km./Hour)

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 References

0-250 250-500 500-750 750-1000 1000-1250 1250-1500 1500-1750 1750-2000 2000-2250 2250-2500 25002750 2750-3000 3000-3250 3250-3500 3500-3750 3750-4000 4000-4250 4250-4500 4500-4750 4750-5000

821.64 853.73 868.74 921.79 960.54 989.73 1031.27 1109.71 1166.71 1209.52 1217.52 1289.98 1305.24 1361.43 1400.47 1456.371 1509.43 1587.287 1679.371 1719.59

4.6394 4.76854 4.9134 5.4976 5.61439 5.6333 5.682 5.735 5.965 6.9396 7.41 7.86 7.967 7.99 8.6 9.0834 9.39381 9.4843 9.4934 9.538

39.8 40.4 41.3 42.8 45 46.4 48.3 49.9 51 53.8 54.4 54.79 55.9 57.2 59.3 62.5 64.1 66.25 67.83 69.89

1. Banerjee D, Chakraborty SK, Bhattacharyya S, and Gangopadhyay A (2008). Modeling of road traffic noise in industrial town of Asansol. Journal of Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment 13 (8), pp. 539-541. 2. Bjorkman M and Rylander R (1997). Maximun Noise Level in city traffic .Journal of Sound and Vibration 205 (4), pp. 513-516. 3. Brown AL and Macdonald GT (2003). From environmental impact assessment to environmental design and planning. Australian Journal of Environmental Management 2, pp. 65-77. 4. Calixto A, Diniz FB, and Zannin P (2003).Effects of traffic composition on road traffic noise in an urban setting. Cities 20 (1), pp. 23-29. 5. Chakraborty D, Santa SC, and Mukherjee A (1997). Status of road traffic noise in Calcutta metropolis, India. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 101 (2), pp. 943-949. 6. Donato SR and Morri B (2001).Technical note: A statistical model for predicting type traffic flow. Noise Control Engineering Journal 49 (3), pp.137-143. 7. Gilbert D. Noise from road traffic (1976). Journal of Sound and Vibration 51 (2), pp. 171-181.

80

8. Lam WHK and Tam ML (1998). Relability Analysis of Traffic Noise Estimates in Hongkong. Transport Research Part D: Transport and Environment 3 (4), pp. 239248. 9. Lewis PT (1973). The noise generated by single vehicle in freely flowing traffic Journal of Sound and Vibration 30 (2), pp. 191-206. 10. Nassiri P, Behzad M, Hasseini M, and Allimohammadi I (2005). Relaibility analysis of traffic noise estimation in highways of Tehran by Monte Carlo Simulation Method. Iranian Journal of Environmental Health Science & Engineering 2 (4), pp. 229-236. 11. Ouis D (2002). Annoyance from road traffic noise: A review. Journal of Environmental Psychology 21 (1), pp. 101-120. 12. Pamanikud P and Vivitjinda P (2002). Noise prediction for highways in Thailand. Transportation Research part D: Transport and Environment 7(3), pp. 444-449. 13. Rajkumara HN and Mahalinga RM (2008). Road traffic noise prediction model under interrupted traffic flow condition. Environmental Modeling and Assessment 14 (2), pp. 251-257. 14. Rylander R, Sorensen S, and Kajland A (1976). Traffic noise exposure and annoyance reactions. Journal of Sound and Vibration 47 (2), pp. 237-242. 15. Tang SK and Tong KK (2004). Estimating traffic noise for inclined roads with freely flowing traffic. Applied Acoustics 65 (2), pp. 171-181. 16. Tansatcha M, Pamanikabud P, Brown AL, and Affum JK (2005). Motorway noise modeling based on perpendicular propagation analysis of traffic noise. Applied Acoustics 66(10), pp. 1135-1150. 17. Yeow KW (1973). A stochastic model of the noise field emitted from traffic in steady flow. Journal of Sound and Vibration 32 (2), pp. 227-239.

81

You might also like