Noise Classification Road Pavements (Technical)

European Commission
Directorate-General Environment
Noise classification of road pavements

Task 1: Technical background information
Draft report
June 2006
Report no.
Issue no.
Date of issue
12/06/2006
Prepared
G. Descornet / L. Goubert
Checked
Approved
DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05
Contents
1
INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................3
TRAFFIC NOISE AND ROAD SURFACES ....................................................................................4

2.1
2.2
2.3
LOW-NOISE ROAD SURFACES ...................................................................................................11

3.1
3.2
3.3
TEXTURE-OPTIMIZED ONLY .........................................................................................................11

POROUS SURFACES ......................................................................................................................13
ELASTIC SURFACES .....................................................................................................................15
MEASUREMENT METHODS AND STANDARDS .....................................................................18

4.1
4.2
4.2.1
4.2.2
4.2.3
4.2.4
4.3
4.3.1
4.3.2
4.3.3
4.4
4.4.1
4.4.2
WHY ABATE TRAFFIC NOISE? ........................................................................................................4

AVAILABLE TOOLS FOR TRAFFIC NOISE ABATEMENT .....................................................................6
THE INFLUENCE OF THE ROAD SURFACE ........................................................................................8
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................18
NOISE MEASUREMENTS METHODS ...............................................................................................18
Controlled pass-by (CPB)......................................................................................................18
Statistical pass-by (SPB)........................................................................................................19
Close proximity (CPX)...........................................................................................................19
Comparison between noise measurement methods................................................................20
AUXILIARY MEASUREMENT METHODS ........................................................................................21
Surface texture.......................................................................................................................21
Sound absorption ...................................................................................................................21
Mechanical impedance ..........................................................................................................22
STANDARDIZATION .....................................................................................................................22
Noise measurement methods..................................................................................................23
Auxiliary measurement methods ............................................................................................23
NOISE CLASSIFICATION OF ROAD PAVEMENTS.................................................................25

5.1
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................................................25
5.2
STATE-OF-THE-ART AT NATIONAL LEVEL ....................................................................................25
5.2.1
Austria ...................................................................................................................................25
5.2.2
Belgium..................................................................................................................................26
5.2.3
France....................................................................................................................................27
5.2.4
Germany ................................................................................................................................28
5.2.5
Hungary .................................................................................................................................28
5.2.6
Italy........................................................................................................................................29
5.2.7
Japan .....................................................................................................................................30
5.2.8
The Netherlands.....................................................................................................................30
5.2.9
Slovenia .................................................................................................................................32
5.2.10
Spain .................................................................................................................................33
5.2.11
Switzerland........................................................................................................................34
5.2.12
United Kingdom ................................................................................................................34
5.2.13
USA ...................................................................................................................................35
5.2.14
Nordic countries ...............................................................................................................35
5.3
EUROPEAN PROJECTS ..................................................................................................................37
5.3.1
Introduction ...........................................................................................................................37
5.3.2
HARMONOISE ......................................................................................................................37
5.3.3
SILVIA ...................................................................................................................................39
5.4
DISCUSSION.................................................................................................................................41
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................46
REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................49
SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................57
G. Descornet L. Goubert
2/58
1 Introduction
Recent estimates indicate that more than 30% of EU citizens are exposed to road traffic
noise levels above that viewed acceptable by the World Health Organisation (WHO) and
that about 10% of the population report severe sleep disturbance because of transport
noise at night [116]. In addition to the general disruption of activities and quality of life,
there are additional adverse health and financial effects. According to OECD [117], the
threshold of annoyance is 55 dB(A) in terms of average traffic noise level outside and the
threshold of unacceptability is only 10 dB(A) higher: 65 dB(A). Now, the difference in
vehicle noise emission between a noisy and a silent road surface can be much more than
10 dB(A), which means that the road surface alone could make the difference between a
comfortably quiet road and a disturbingly noisy road.
Thanks to legislation and technological progress, the noise from cars has been reduced by
85% since 1970 and the noise from lorries by 90%. Despite that, no significant relief of
the exposure to road traffic noise has been recorded over the years. The growth and
spread of traffic have offset the technological improvements. Another important factor is
the dominance of tyre noise above quite low speeds (50 km/h). Now, noise abatement is
more effective by reducing the emission at the source. That is why the Green Paper of
1996 states that the next phase of action to reduce road traffic noise will address tyre
noise and promote low noise surfaces through Community funding [65]. Directive
2001/43/EC [109] provides for the testing and limiting of tyre rolling noise levels, and for
their phased reduction. Limits differentiate between vehicle type (cars, vans and trucks)
and tyre width (5 classes), and will be enforced by including tyre rolling noise tests in
European Community type-approval certificate requirements, which must be met for any
new tyre being placed on the European market [108].
No such regulation exists yet for road surfacings. A major problem to be overcome is the
fact that a road surfacing is not a ready-made product. Tests made on the components are
of no use with respect to noise. The noise performance will be essentially determined by
the resulting superficial characteristics, which in turn will highly depend on the
conditions and circumstances of the mixing and laying processes. Therefore, classifying
or labelling such a product requires specific procedures based on specific testing methods
to be developed, validated and standardized before an harmonized classification system
can be proposed at European level.
The purpose of this report is to overview the progress made so far in that direction and to
derive recommendations on the efforts that remain to be accomplished.
3/58
2 Traffic noise and road surfaces

2.1 Why abate traffic noise?
According to the WHO [64], noise can have a wide variety of adverse effects on human
health and/or well-being:
Pain and hearing fatigue

Hearing impairment including tinnitus
Annoyance
Interferences with social behaviour (aggressiveness, protest and helplessness)
Sleep disturbances and all its consequences on a long and short basis
Cardiovascular effects
Hormonal responses (stress hormones) and their possible consequences on human
metabolism (nutrition) and immune system
Performance at work and/or school decrements
For the European Union alone (excluding the NMSs), it has been estimated that 80
million people are exposed to noise levels which are considered to cause one or more of
these adverse noise effects. 170 million more people live in so called grey areas, where
the high noise levels are likely to cause serious annoyance [65]. The general annoyance
effect is considered as the most important effect of environmental noise pollution, and
therefore it is widely considered as the basic health effect which should be controlled in
the general population [66]. Sleep disturbance is considered as the second important
effect of noise on human well-being, but recent research [67] shows that cardiovascular
effects cannot be omitted: noise appears to affect the prevalence of myocardial infarctions
at 60 dB(A) and higher1.
Environmental noise does not only affect human health and/or well-being, it is also
expensive. Estimates of costs of noise range between 0.2 and 2 % of the gross domestic
product [65]. This corresponds for the E.U. with a minimal cost of 12 billion [66].
Different sources contribute to the excessive exposure of European citizens to noise, but
transportation noise and in particular road traffic noise is by far predominant.
Figure 1 shows the relative contribution of the main sources of noise, according to a
study in the Flanders region in Belgium [68].
Lday = 60 dB(A) is considered as the no observed adverse effect level for myocardial infarctions
4/58
16
neighbours
industry
11
construction
5
agriculture
road traffic
air traffic
rail traffic
commercial activities
recreational activities
40
Figure 1 - Relative contribution to nuisance by different sources of noise in

Flanders
According to this study, 40 % of the people highly annoyed by noise are annoyed by
traffic noise. Figure 2 shows the development of the relative contribution to nuisance of
the different noise sources in The Netherlands [69]. It appears that road traffic noise is
not only the most important source, but also that its contribution is increasing.
30
percentage highly annoyed
25
20
1993
1998
15
2003
10
0
road traf f ic
rail traf f ic
air traf f ic
industry
recreation
neighbours
Figure 2 - Development of the relative contribution of different noise sources to

nuisance
5/58
2.2 Available tools for traffic noise abatement

There are different means to reduce the traffic noise level at or in the dwellings.
Available tools are:
Legal measures
This type of measures is possible on the European (European Product standards, the Tyre
Noise Directive and the European Noise Directive), the Member State, the regional and
the local level. Although they are necessary to incite stakeholders to do efforts to reduce
noise, this type of measures has in general only effect after a long time. For an extensive
review, see [119].
Socio-economic measures
This type of measures includes noise awareness rising, training and education, control
and behaviour sanctions, economic stimulations and sanctions and eco-taxing. These
types of measures are often introduced with another primary goal, e.g. air pollution
reduction or traffic safety, but turn out to have a positive effect on traffic noise (see also
[119]).
Land use
By taking into account the traffic noise aspect while designing new cities and roads, a lot
of noise exposure and annoyance can be avoided in this in a rather cheap way.
Unfortunately, the noise aspect has only recently been discovered by land use planners,
hence in Europe a lot of historically grown black points - a densely populated area
exposed to a high traffic noise level have been inherited. This is especially the case for
densely populated countries like Belgium and the Netherlands. For these existing black
points other measures will be necessary.
Source-oriented measures
Several sources can be located in motor-driven vehicles and motorcycles. One has to
distinguish between cars, vans, heavy vehicles and motorcycles. For each type of vehicle,
the ranking of the sources may be different. Some examples of noise sources are:
o Tyre/road noise
o Engine noise
o Exhaust noise
o Aerodynamical noise
This category of measures has relations with legal measures and infrastructural
measures (tyre/road interaction, see further).
For a further discussion, see also [119].
Traffic management (see also [65])
One can reduce the noise of a road by influencing the speed and/or traffic flow. Speed
reduction is one way to reduce the noise, but this tool has of course its limits. Another
example of traffic management are measures which induce the traffic flow to become
more fluent, e.g. by a clever tuning of the traffic lights, in order to avoid as much as
possible stop-and-go traffic. An overview of traffic flow measures and their potential
6/58

noise reduction is given in Table 1 [70]. For an extensive review of possible traffic
related measures, see [120].
Table 1 Potential noise reduction of traffic flow measures
Traffic management measure
Potential noise reduction (LAeq)
Traffic calming / Environmentally adapted through roads
up to 4 dB(A)
30 km/h zone
up to 2 dB(A)
Roundabouts
up to 4 dB(A)
Round-top/circle-top road humps
up to 2 dB(A)
Infrastructural Measures
There are several infrastructural measures possible: a low noise road surface (which
prevents tire/road noise to be generated), noise barriers and faade insulation (which both
reduce noise propagation to the neighbours of the road. The three methods have their
advantages and disadvantages (see Table 2).
Table 2- Comparison of three possible measures to abate road traffic noise
Low noise road surface

Acts on noise generation
Moderate noise reduction
(typically 3 up to 6 dB(A)
for current generation of
low noise surfaces)
Not intrusive
Reduces noise in open air
Relatively cheap
Medium lifetime
Not vulnerable to
vandalism
Maintenance required
Noise screens
Acts on noise propagation
High noise reduction
possible (typically 7 to 12
dB(A))
Faade insulation
Acts on noise propagation
High noise reduction
possible (typically 10 to 20
dB(A))
Intrusive
Reduces noise in open air,
but mainly at short distance
of the source
Expensive (extra
construction)
Long lifetime possible
Often vulnerable to
vandalism (graffiti)
Maintenance required
Not intrusive
Reduces noise indoor only
and with windows closed
Generally most expensive
solution
Long lifetime
Not vulnerable to
vandalism
No maintenance required
A tool to compare the effectiveness of different noise abatement measures was developed
in the frame of the SILVIA-project [33].
7/58
2.3 The influence of the road surface

The noise generated by the interaction of the tires and the road surface is for passenger
cars nowadays the predominant noise source at very low speeds. This is due to the fact
that other noise sources (like power train noise, exhaust noise ) have been efficiently
dealt with by car manufacturers in the last decades. For new cars2, tire/road noise is
already predominant at speeds between 15 and 35 km/h. For older cars, this limit lies
between 30 and 50 km/h [35].
Tire/road noise is a complex addition of several mechanisms of noise generation and
amplification, depending both on tire and road surface properties3:
Noise is partly generated by impacts and shocks on the tire, caused by road
surface irregularities or irregularities on the tire tread. These shocks make the tire
vibrate and radiate noise. Vibrations of the tire tread spread to the sidewalls,
which radiate noise on their turn.
Aero dynamical noise sources include the so called air pumping, consisting of the
noisy pushing away of air on the leading edge of the contact zone between tire
and road surface and the noisy sucking of air on the rear edge. Also the
resonances in the tire cavity and in tread pattern canals can be considered as aero
dynamical noise sources.
A micro movement effect is the stick/slip tread elements motions relative to the
road surface, causing the tread elements to vibrate tangentially
An adhesion effect is the stick/snap effect of the sudden loosening of the tire tread
from the road surface, comparable to the sudden loosening of a suction cup.
The horn effect is a noise amplification mechanism. Noise being generated near
the edge of the tire/road surface contact area is reflected several times between the
tire tread and the road surface, amplifying the noise in a certain direction. This is
the same phenomenon which is wanted with the conical part of e.g. a trumpet or a
megaphone.
A breakthrough of the understanding on the influence of the road surface on the noise
generation and amplification came in the beginning of the 1980s [73], when one found
that coarse irregularities4 on the road surface are a negative factor as they induce tire
vibrations. Fine irregularities5 on the other hand were found to have a favourable
influence on the noise generation, as they prevent air pumping. Before the air can be
trapped and compressed in the tread pattern and consequently escape in a noisy way, the
fine texture allows it to flow away silently between the fine horizontal channels formed
by the tire tread and the irregularities. Fine texture is not necessary in the case of porous
surfaces, as in this case air can flow away vertically through the pores before it is
2
cars built later after 1996

for extensive reviews, see e.g. [35, 71, 72]
4
with horizontal dimensions (texture wavelength) of a approximately 1 cm up to a few tens of cm, the
worst being irregularities with horizontal dimensions of about 8 cm, corresponding to the dimensions of the
tire/road contact zone. This unfavorable irregularities belong to the so called megatexture region (5 cm up
to 50 cm) and partially also to the macrotexture region (0,5 up to 5 cm). For definitions see [78].
5
With horizontal dimensions of typically 2-3 mm, also belonging to the macrotexture range.
3
8/58

compressed. Porous surfaces can be made to absorb sound by a proper design, including a
high content of interconnecting voids, a sufficient layer thickness and a flow resistance
which is not too high.
The basic requirements for a low noise road surface may be summarized in the following
rules of thumb [35]:
For dense wearing courses

o Minimal megatexture and minimal macrotexture in the texture wavelength
10 50 mm
o Maximal macrotexture in the wavelength 1 8 mm
For porous road surfaces
o Minimal megatexture and minimal macrotexture in the texture wavelength
10 50 mm
o Void content of at least 10 % by volume, preferably higher
o Porous layer thickness of 40 mm or higher
o Flow resistance of 20 to 50 kNsm-4 for high speed roads and 12-30 kNsm4
for low speed roads
Since the 1980s, several solutions have been developed to approximate these
requirements in practice, taking into account also other requirements like skidding
resistance and durability.
Very fine texture (microtexture) also has some influence on the tire/road noise [35],
which is however not yet studied in a quantitative way, due to the lack of proper
measurement techniques to quantify microtexure.
Besides texture and noise absorption, a third basic parameter of the road surface
influences the tire/road noise generation, namely its stiffness, also called mechanical
impedance. It is showed that if the stiffness of the road surface is of the same order of
magnitude as the tire, huge noise reductions can be obtained (in the order of 10 up to 12
dB(A)). As low noise road surfaces with texture and noise absorption which does
approximate the ideal situation quite well, mechanical impedance is currently the only
parameter with which large additional tire/road noise reductions may be obtained in
practice.
Water on the road surface may significantly influence the tire/road noise, but only
approximate corrections factors exist. No studies are available in which the amount of
water on the surface has been quantified. The corrections factors [75] for dense asphalt
concrete (DAC) and Stone Mastic Asphalt (SMA) road surfaces are given in Table 2. On
porous surfaces, no significant increase of tire/road noise has been found [76], which can
be considered as important advantage for this type of road surface in rainy climates.
9/58
Table 3 -Correction factors for humidity on DAC and SMA-surfaces
Amount of water on road surface

dry
humid (drizzle)
0-60 km/h
reference
+ 2 dB(A)
61-80 km/h
reference
+ 1 dB(A)
81-130 km/h
reference
+ 0 dB(A)
wet (moderate rainfall)

wet (heavy rainfall)
+ 4 dB(A)
+ 6 dB(A)
+ 3 dB(A)
+ 4 dB(A)
+ 2 dB(A)
+ 3 dB(A)
Temperature has also an influence on the tire/road noise generation, depending on the tire
and the road surface texture. Generally, the tires become less noisy the higher their
temperature, due to the weakening of the rubber, making noise radiation by tire vibration
less efficient. The effect is typical -0,05 up to -0,10 dB(A)/C on the result of a noisiness
measurement of the statistical pass-by level. A table with state-of-the-art correction
factors is given in reference [77].
10/58
3 Low-noise road surfaces

This chapter describes the practical realizations of low-noise road surfaces.
3.1 Texture-optimized only
Resin-bound surface dressing
Definition: a high performance surface dressing which consists of a layer of resinous

binder densely spread with high PSV6, small size aggregates (e.g. 2/4 calcined
bauxite) [78]. As chippings, crushed natural rock as well as an artificial aggregate
(e.g. milled steel slag) can be used. An example is the so called Italgrip, consisting of
milled steel slag aggregates (1-4 mm) bound in a layer of epoxy resin [81].
Properties: This surface type is durable and has a high, durable skidding resistance,
which makes it especially suitable for use in bends, highway exits etc. The surface is
very quiet, due to the smoothening of the megatexture by the initially very liquid resin
and the good fine macrotexture of the closely packed fine array of small stones. A
disadvantage is that it is quite expensive.
History: After the discovery of the surface characteristics which influence tire/road
noise generation in the second half of the 70ties, some experiments [79] were
conducted in Belgium with surface treatment techniques in order to approximate the
ideal texture. A surface dressing with 1-3 mm chippings bound with a polyurethane
binder gave after two years of operation a noise reduction of 3-4 dB(A). A similar
surface dressing was later applied in Austria, in order to reduce the rolling noise on
noisy cement concrete surfaces [80].
Exposed aggregates cement concrete
Definition: this type of cement concrete undergoes a special treatment immediately

after the construction: the still wet cement concrete is sprayed with a retarding agent
and covered with a tin foil. After one up to two days, the foil is removed and the
upper layer (of a few mm) of cement, which is not hardened, is removed with brushes
or water under pressure.
Properties: very durable surface with reasonable acoustical properties, if the following
conditions are satisfied:
o Smoothening of the wet surface must be done by means of a longitudinal
smoother (not by a traditional transversal one which often induces waves in
the megatexture range in the surface)
o Appropriate aggregate grading must be used in order to obtain a closely
packed array of small stones at the surface.
6
Polished Stone Value
11/58
Optimized exposed aggregate cement concrete my yield a reduction of up to 3 dB(A)

with respect to the reference surface, a dense asphalt concrete with 11 to 16
aggregates. Because it is not easy to design a cement mixture which is at the same
time strong and texture optimized, one sometimes applies two layers. The under layer
being strength optimized and the upper layer texture optimized. More expensive
aggregates may in that case used for the upper layer without making the surface
extremely expensive.
History: This type of surface has been applied since the beginning of the 1990s in
Austria [82], Belgium [83] and the Netherlands [84]. Especially in the Netherlands,
research was done afterwards about the optimization of this road surface type [85].
Ground cement concrete
Definition: the grinding of a concrete surface is done by means of set of closely spaced
diamond disks, forming thin (typically 3 mm wide) parallel, longitudinal grooves. The
closed packing leaves the edges between the grooves smooth, as most of the peaks split in
the process.
Properties: This is an attractive way to reduce the noise of an existing cement concrete
road with a lot of megatexture, but which is still in a technically good condition. A
ground cement concrete surface is generally much less noisy than cement concrete before
the grinding (about 5 dB(A) [78]), and its noisiness may be of the same order of a
reference dense asphalt concrete surface. Hence it is not really a low noise surface in the
sense of the definition given in the beginning of this chapter. The new texture may last
for about ten years, provided it is not in a region or country where studded tires are used
in winter times, where the lifetime is only one to two years. After the wearing away of the
texture, it may be ground again. This cycle may be repeated three or four times [87]. A
disadvantage is the relatively high cost (about 1 /m/mm depth) [78].
History: Grinding of cement concrete was done for the first time in California in 1965
and has been done a lot in the USA and occasionally in Europe [35].
Thin layers
Definition: A thin layer can be defined as an integrated, independently functioning

wearing course consisting of a warmly produced bituminous mixture, excluding mastic
asphalt [88]. It is in fact a set of different types of surfacings and includes three
subcategories:
o Very thin surfacings: thickness between 20 and 30 mm (definition according to
[90])
o Ultra thin surfacings: thickness between 12 and 18 mm (as defined in [35])
o Micro surfacings: thickness between 6 and 12 mm (as defined in [35])
12/58

Sometimes a broader definition is used [78], also including coldly produced bituminous
mixtures and surfacings on resinous basis (which were discussed above).
To the very thin surfacings belong:
o SMA-type layers (open-graded but semi-dense)
o Porous layers
Properties [91]: Thin layers are a compromise between the acoustical performances of
single or two-layer porous asphalt and the durability of normal SMA. In order to get an
optimized texture, generally small aggregate sizes are used. Noise reduction is due to this
good texture and not to noise absorption: due to the low layer thickness, the absorption
peak in the absorption curve lies at a frequency which is too high (around 2000 Hz) in
order to play a significant tool. Nevertheless, the porous version is very effective to
prevent air pumping [92]. Mixtures are often reinforced by addition of elastomers or
fibres. Due to their stony skeleton, they resist well to rutting. According to French results,
noise reduction of thin layers is between 0 and 3 dB (A) with respect to the reference
surface dense asphalt concrete [93]. The Dutch IPG7 reports a reduction of 4 up to 7 dB
(A) for porous thin layers and 3 up to 5 dB (A) for the SMA-type mixtures [91].
History: Thin layers have been used in France since de mid 1990ties. There is some
renewed interest in this type of surfaces, especially in The Netherlands, as they are
considered in the frame of the IPG as a valuable alternative (reasonable costs for
construction and maintenance, reasonable durability and quite good acoustical properties)
for the two-layer porous asphalt, the quietest road surface so far (see below).
3.2 Porous surfaces
Single layer porous asphalt
Definition: this is a wearing course with a high stone content (typically 81-85%) with a
typical grading of 0/14 with a gap at 2/7 resulting in a high void content (typically 20 %).
Thickness is about 4 cm [78].
Properties: The low noise aspect of porous asphalt is due to its good absorption of both
rolling and power train noise, which leads to a noise reduction of on average 3 dB(A) at
higher speeds. The use of the coarse aggregates leads to a surface texture with some
megatexture and is hence far from ideal. There is a large variety on the acoustical
performances of single layer porous asphalt. In certain cases, a higher noise reduction (up
to 9 dB(A)) has been reported, in other cases one measured an increase of the rolling
noise of up to 3 dB(A) [94, 95, 96]. Hence it cannot always be considered as a low noise
road surface. Porous asphalt has some advantages compared to dense wearing courses:
during rain the water does not form a film on the road surface, avoiding the dangerous
7
Innovatie Programma Geluid (Noise Innovation Programme).
13/58

splash and spray effect and the reflecting of lights is avoided. The absence of an increase
of noise in rainy conditions is an important advantage, especially in those regions with a
lot of rainfall. Due to its stony skeleton, porous asphalt resists very well to rutting, but it
is more sensitive to ravelling. Another problem is the clogging of the pores, decreasing
the acoustical performance of the road surface. Also winter maintenance problems have
been reported.
History: Porous asphalt has been used especially on highways since the beginning of the
1980ties in a number of countries, especially in France, Belgium, Italy and the
Netherlands. E.g. in the Netherlands, it is the standard road surface for highways since
the end of the 80ties [92]. In Italy, about 10% of the highway network of AUTOSTRADE
has been provided with a porous asphalt wearing course [78].
Two-layer porous asphalt
Definition: two layer porous asphalt consists of a sub layer of porous asphalt with a
coarse grading (typically 0/14, 0/16, 11/16) and a typical thickness of 4,5 cm, with on top
a wearing course with a fine aggregate (typical 4/8, but sometimes even 2/4 or 2/6) with
a typical thickness of 2,5 cm.
Properties: two-layer porous asphalt combines an optimized surface texture (densely
packed grid of fine aggregates) with an optimized noise absorption in the appropriate
range of the noise spectrum (between 500 and 1000 Hz), due to a high void content
(typically 25 30 %). The acoustical performance is initially excellent: the noise
reduction is 4 - 6 dB(A) for passenger cars at 50 km/h [97], and two-layer porous asphalt
is among the quietest road surfaces which are actually in use. The versions with the finest
aggregates (2/4, 2/6) on the top layer perform on average about 1,5 dB(A) better than
those with coarser aggregates (4/8) [98]. In the frame of the Noise Innovation Program,
one aims even at noise reductions of 7 up to 9 dB(A) for optimized two layer porous
asphalt [99]. The good acoustical properties are combined with the series advantages
which were mentioned for the single layer porous asphalt above. Unfortunately, also the
two drawbacks for single layer porous asphalt exist for two layer porous asphalt: it has
the tendency to clog, decreasing its acoustical performances with roughly almost 1
dB(A)/year [100] and its sensitive to ravelling. Nevertheless, there are indications that
the technical lifetime of the two layer porous asphalt in the Netherlands is increasing by
the technical improvements [101].
History: the concept of two-layer porous asphalt has been developed in the Netherlands
and the first section of this road surface type was built there in the beginning of the
1990ties, and since then about 40 sections are built in the Netherlands on local and
secondary roads. Numerous other sections have been built on highways. From the mid
1990ties, about 20 mainly test sections were built in several other European countries.
From 2001 on, about 100 sections have as well been realized in Japan. See [101] for a
survey.
14/58
Porous cement concrete
Definition: Porous cement concrete is made with almost the same mixture as porous
asphalt, but as binder one uses cement instead of bitumen. A variant is Modieslab, which
has been developed by a Dutch firm: the road is built with prefabricated two layer porous
cement concrete slabs. They are self supporting and especially designed for use in areas
with unstable underground [103].
Properties: Acoustical performance of porous cement concrete is of the same order as
porous asphalt [35], sometimes even slightly better [102]. One expects a better durability
and less clogging than with porous asphalt, but this has not been proven yet
experimentally. This type of road surface is very expensive, partly due to the use of
polymer additives in the mixture. Construction is also quite delicate: it is more difficult to
avoid megatexture as the surface is not rolled like a bituminous surface.
History: Porous cement concrete sections have been built in several countries, especially
in the USA, Germany, the Netherlands and France since the end of the 1980ties.
Euphonic pavements
Definition: a road surface with on top a porous wearing course of 40-60 mm with
underneath a continuously reinforced concrete slab, with built in Helmholtz resonators of
about 500 cm.
Properties: Although earlier laboratory results with this concept were quite promising8,
the only once it has been realized in full scale (on the highway between Rome and
Anagni in Italy in the frame of the EC funded SI.R.U.US-project) was not convincing.
Noise measurements revealed a good noise performance, but which was basically 1 2
dB(A) less good than the performance of the adjacent ordinary two layer porous asphalt
[104] hence, so far the extremely expensive construction doesnt seem to be justified by
an extraordinary noise performance.
History: This pavement was developed by Ejsmont in the 1980s during a scholarship at
the University of Gtingen, and around 1990 some limited trials were made at VTI in
Sweden [35]. The idea was picked up in the late 1990s in Italy, which resulted in the
only full scale realization so far on the motorway Anagni-Rome (see above).
3.3 Elastic surfaces
Rubberized asphalt
Definition: dense asphalt concrete or SMA surface with a certain percentage of rubber
granulates added to the mix
8
See discussion in [78]
15/58
Properties: Rubber may be added as granules to a bituminous mix (typical 3 to 6 % by

total weight). This is the so called dry process, and one speaks about rubberized
asphalt Rubber may also be added as a powder (up to 15 %, typically 7 %) to modify the
binder (the wet process). The wet process is sometimes used to improve binder quality
in porous surfaces. According to Sandberg, there was until 2002 no conclusive evidence
that the adding of small quantities of rubber to a bituminous wearing course would
significantly reduce the noisiness of it [35]. On the other hand, Donovan [105] did in
2004 a comparative measurement campaign both in the USA (Arizona & California) and
Europe with his CPX-like measurement device based on sound intensity technique. He
found noise levels for two layer porous asphalt between 94,5 and 96,5 dB(A) and for the
so called Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (RAC) between 95,5 and 97,5 dB(A). The RAC is
a non porous SMA like wearing course with a thickness of 2,5 cm and containing 8 up to
10 % binder. The asphalt-rubber mixture contains typically between 14 percent and 20
percent rubber by weight of the total asphalt-rubber mixture [106].
History: The process of rubberized asphalt was originally developed in Sweden, where it
was called RUBIT. In the USA it is called Plusride. The Asphalt-Rubber is described in
an ASTM-standard (ASTM D8-88). See further [35].
Poro-elastic surfaces
Definition: A poro-elastic road surface (PERS) is a wearing course for roads with a very
high content of interconnecting voids so as to facilitate the passage of air and water
through it, while at the same time the surface is elastic due to the use of rubber (or other
elastic products) as a main aggregate. The design air void content is at least 20% by
volume and the design rubber content is at least 20 % by weight.
Properties: The typical mixture for a PERS consists nowadays of cubic and/or fibre-like
rubber particles (new rubber or from scrapped tires), sometimes stony aggregates, sand or
another friction enhancing agent, glued together with a polyurethane or another artificial
resin. Typical thickness is 3-4 cm. The PERS can be made on site or be prefabricated as
mats, which are glued to the hard sub layer. The typical glue for this is epoxy resin. PERS
shows generally extremely high noise reductions (typically 10 up to 12 dB(A)). Reported
problems are insufficient binding to the hard sub layer, damage by snow ploughs and
insufficient skidding resistance. The actual formulations are also quite expensive, due to
the high content of costly ingredients (resin). This type of road surface is still in an
experimental stadium. An extensive state of the art of this surface type can be found in
reference [54].
History: PERS has been invented at the end of the 1970ties in Sweden by Mr. R. Nilsson.
Early trials have been done in Sweden in the 1980ties. A limited experiment in 1989 in
Norway was aborted after the destruction of the test section by a snow plough. Since
1994 the Public Works Research Institute of Japan is also doing research on PERS and
since 2000 there is collaboration with the Swedish VTI, concentrating on remaining
problems like adhesion to base course, wear resistance, wet friction, cost and fire
16/58

resistance. After some experiments with limited success since then, most likely research
will be continued in Sweden, Japan and possibly also in some other countries, as the
surface type is extremely interesting from an acoustical point of view and it offers a
variety of additional advantages (like the possibility to recycle worn tires).
17/58
4 Measurement methods and standards

4.1 Introduction
In this chapter, we are reviewing the measurement methods and standards that are
currently used to evaluate the influence of a road surface on traffic noise. There are three
basic methods for determining the noise performance of a road surface:
The Controlled Pass-By method (CPB)

The Statistical Pass-By method (SPB)
The Close Proximity method (CPX)
and three auxiliary measurement methods for determining noise-relevant surface

characteristics:
Surface texture measurement

Sound absorption measurement
Mechanical impedance measurement
The latter series can serve either as substitutes or as complements to the basic methods.
4.2 Noise measurements methods

4.2.1 Controlled pass-by (CPB)
In this method, the peak noise level of vehicles is measured when they pass in front of a
microphone fixed at 7.5 m meter from the centre line of the measured lane and at 1.2 m
above ground. The vehicles here have been purposely chosen as reference vehicle/tyre
combinations; hence, the term controlled . Depending on the aim of the measurements,
the test conditions may widely vary. The operating conditions of the vehicle may for
instance be normal cruising or coasting by, engine off, to specifically study tyre noise.
The vehicle speed may be chosen; however, measurements have to be corrected for speed
in order to be able to be compared on an equal speed basis. In cruising conditions,
different gear ratios may be selected. The surface may be wetted if one wishes to study
the effect of rain, etc. To our knowledge, there are two published procedures: the BRRC
method [16] using a single car and the so-called French-German Procedure relying on a
set of four representative car/tyre combinations [17, 40]. The latter is applied in France
and Germany to characterise the acoustic performance of a road surface with respect to
tyre noise. Measurements are performed with a limited set of light vehicles, not with
trucks. Both procedures may be and have been used to measure tyre noise only by
turning off the engine when the vehicle approaches the microphone. In this case, it is
called coast-by instead of pass-by method. Since the microphone position is the
same, the method is compatible with ISO 362 [41] and ISO 7188 [42]. It can then be used
to study the contributions of various factors to the vehicle noise levels as determined by
the latter standards.
18/58
4.2.2 Statistical pass-by (SPB)

The noise measurement set-up is exactly as in the CPB method; however, the measured
vehicles are those freely running into the traffic stream. One measures the peak noise
level of each individual vehicle picked out of the undisturbed traffic along with its speed
by means of a radar tachometer. Plotting noise level versus log(speed) for different
categories of vehicles and calculating the regression line allows characterising each
vehicle category by an average noise level at any reference speed. A certain minimum
number of vehicles in each category is required to get an acceptable significance interval
and for the characteristic level to be reasonably representative of that category. That
method has become an ISO standard [43] and is being taken into consideration by
CEN/TC227/WG5 to be taken over as a European standard. The minimum numbers of
vehicles per category and the reference speeds per category in relation to the type of road
envisaged are prescribed. From the reported values, the standard proposes to characterise
the road surface by a Statistical Bass-By Index (SPBI) which is an aggregate (overall)
level of road surface influence on traffic noise for a mix of different categories of
vehicles, the reference speeds and the weights assigned to light, medium and heavy
vehicles being adapted to be representative of three road categories, namely: low-,
medium- and high-speed roads. By adapting the reference speeds and weights of the
different categories, one may define SPB indices specific to different traffic conditions
like, urban versus rural for instance.
The method requires the site to be free of sound reflecting objects over a large area round
the microphone, which is often impossible in urban streets. That is why work has been
carried out in the UK to develop an extension to the standard SPB method to allow its use
over a wider range of site conditions [62, 63]. This method uses a reflective backing
board placed directly behind the receiver microphone. Such an approach is being
considered for adoption by the ISO Working Group that is responsible for revision of the
ISO standard describing the SPB method.
4.2.3 Close proximity (CPX)

In this method, one or several microphones are placed very close typically 20 cm from
the tyre side wall - to the tyre for measuring near-field tyre noise emission while rolling.
The tyre can be either on one of the wheels of a normal vehicle or of a special trailer. In
either case, severe protection measures must be taken to prevent the measurement to be
influenced by wind turbulence, noise from traffic and noises from the vehicle or from the
trailer or both. Specifications have been developed in an ISO Committee Draft. The most
critical ones bear on the choice of the reference tyre(s) and on the precise microphone
position(s) because it has been observed that the latter have a very important influence on
the measurement results. The work is still presently on-going.
Quite a number of CPX vehicles or trailers have been developed in Europe, all different.
Twenty-one trailers and four instrumented cars had been identified in 1998 [44]. To our
knowledge, there are presently such devices in service in The Netherlands, in United
Kingdom, in Germany, in Austria, in Poland and in France. Several comparisons (Round
Robin Tests) have been carried out [33, 45, 46, 47, 48], the outcomes of which have
consistently shown serious discrepancies between the different devices.
19/58
4.2.4 Comparison between noise measurement methods

The main interest of the CPX method is that it can be implemented in urban situations: it
is not disturbed by acoustic reflections of nearby buildings like the pass-by procedure.
Another advantage is that the road surface can be tested in a continuous way while the
pass-by method is only representative of the spot facing the fixed microphone.
However, methods using microphones close to the tyre lack of realism because the far
field, where human receivers are, can be very different from the near field due to
interference between correlated sources. One of the main problems with the near-field
procedure is to obtain measured values well related to pass-by values. The difference
between near-field and far-field comes out to be significantly dependent on speed, tyre,
sound frequency and acoustical impedance (absorption) of the road. Recent comparisons
carried out in the frame of SILVIA have shown that the correlation is generally poor
between SPB and CPX results and the regression equations appear significantly different
for different CPX devices (Table 4) [33].
Table 4 Results of comparisons between SPB and CPX by different laboratories
CPX equipment
Arsenal (AT)
DWW (NL)
M+P (NL)
TUG (PL)
Regression equation
SPB = 1,10CPX --- 28,9 dBA
SPB = 1,22CPX --- 42,3
SPB = 0,79CPX + 2,0
SPB = 1,22CPX --- 40,9
Corr. Coef. R2
0,96
0,56
0,40
0,95
Residual (dBA)
0,70
1,47
1,63
0,73
Also because no propagation effects are taken into account like sound absorption by
porous surfaces which are then likely to be underestimated regarding their noise
reduction potential. Lorry tyres are not easy to test. The majority of existing CPX test
devices is for car tyres.
The CPX method obviously lacks reproducibility (between different pieces of equipment)
and representativity (of the actual traffic noise). In addition, it is to be noted that, even
though SILVIA has developed a procedure, how to determine the intrinsic background
noise of a CPX device remains a difficulty.
The CPB method seems more realistic than the CPX method since it can take into
account the total noise of vehicles. However, since it relies on an arbitrary set of vehicles,
its representativity remains questionable.
The representativity issue is almost completely solved by the SPB method since it takes
into account all types of vehicles in normal driving condition. The only caveat is about
the repeatability and reproducibility if one considers that the sample of vehicles is always
different form one measurement to another. The differences are assumed to be averaged
out thanks to the minimum, statistically significant number of vehicles specified to be
measured in each category. However, one might argue that comparisons between roads in
different countries or regions could be affected by differences in some characteristics of
the vehicle fleets.
20/58

That problems remain to be solved is illustrated by Project group 5.1 of IPG [63]. Their
goal is to define a set of unambiguous, standardised measurement and assessment
methods which will improve the exchange and use of measurement data and which can
be used in the technical content of regulations and legislation. To achieve that goal, they
have identified the following sub-projects:
A literature survey to describe the current status of normative standard measurement
methods,
A study of the relationship between SPB and CPX measurement results,
A European assessment method (from the SILVIA project) for evaluating the noise
effects of road surfaces (product labelling, conformity of production, monitoring),
Overcoming problems with the current CPX method,
Harmonisation of the characterisation of texture by means of spectral analysis,
Study of rolling resistance.
4.3 Auxiliary measurement methods

4.3.1 Surface texture
As stated in Chapter 4, the main surface characteristics that determine tyre/road noise are
macro- and megatexture. Despite modern methods are widely available, macrotexture is
still often measured (essentially for work acceptance testing) by means of the so-called
Sand Patch or a similar volumetric method. The method is an ISO [49] as well as a
CEN standard [50]. However, as it does not cover the important megatexture range, it is
not sufficient with respect to noise. Modern profiling devices using lasers are now able to
measure the whole range of macro- and megatexture at once. There are static versions,
transportable or mobile (stop, measure and go), as well as dynamic devices capable of
measuring at traffic speed. That type of equipment is subject to a set of ISO standards
either already published or in development [51, 52, 53, 113, 114]. See 4.4.2.
4.3.2 Sound absorption

The sound absorption coefficient is the fraction of sound energy absorbed by a material
when a sound wave is reflected by its surface. It generally depends on the frequency of
the sound considered (or its spectrum when it is not a pure sound) and the angle of
incidence of the sound wave.
The sound absorption coefficient of a surface is usually evaluated for plane wave
incidence conditions. It can be measured by various methods:
the so-called impedance tube method also referred to as the Kundts tube: the basic
principle is that when the lateral dimensions of a tube are small compared to the
wavelength of the acoustic signal, only planes waves will propagate. The sample,
placed at one end of the tube is submitted to normal incident wave fronts. The
absorption coefficient is derived from the shift of the nodes of the stationary wave in
presence of the sample. Two variants of the method are ISO standard [37, 56].
21/58
the external point source method: if a point source is far enough from the measured
surface, the spherical wave front geometry can be approximated by a plane wave
front. Depending on the relative positions of the source and the microphone, normal
or oblique incidences can be considered. This impulse method is in fact an ISO
standard [36] adapted from the AFNOR standard S 31-089 for the on-site
determination of the absorption coefficient of absorbing materials used in the
construction of noise screens.
the reverberant room method: in a room with very reflective walls (no absorption) the
spatial sound distribution becomes diffuse. A sample placed in such a room is
submitted to an acoustically diffuse field (random incidence distribution of plane
waves). The absorption coefficient is derived from the decrease of the reverberation
time and from the relative area of the sample and the room walls. The method is an
ISO/CEN standard [57].
For road surfacing materials, using the reverberant room method requires a rather large
flat sample of the road surface to be either prepared in the laboratory or taken out of the
road itself, which is not practical. For the tube method, a sample must be bored out of the
road surface in the form of a core of appropriate diameter. However, an in situ version
has been developed in the Netherlands [58]. It uses a transportable tube to be applied
vertically onto the surface. The external point source method is the most suitable for field
use. It can be either mounted on a static frame or attached to a van, in which case the
measurements can be made moving (stop, measure and go) or dynamic (non-stop,
repeated measurements). Such mobile systems are already in service in Italy [59] and in
UK [60].
4.3.3 Mechanical impedance

Mechanical impedance is the complex ratio between the dynamic force and the resulting
displacement of a surface submitted to that force. For simplicity and understanding one
uses the term stiffness. The stiffness of the pavement has sometimes been put forward
as the reason for the difference of noisiness between Cement Concrete and Asphalt. It has
been shown that, once the influence of texture is accounted for, there is no significant
difference in noise performance between the two materials [61]. It has been further
demonstrated by SILVIA that, for a road surface stiffness to have any significant
influence on tyre/road noise, the surface material must have a stiffness comparable to that
of the tyre. That condition is now met with the so-called Poro-elastic road surface
(PERS) made of rubber from scrap tyres. Now, if that innovative material proves
effective and starts spreading, a test method for its stiffness will become necessary. That
is why, in SILVIA, a tentative measurement method has been tested [33]. Further
developments are still needed for a method to be ready for standardisation.
4.4 Standardization
This chapter reviews the progress achieved in the relevant international (ISO) and
European (CEN) standardization.
22/58
4.4.1 Noise measurement methods

Regarding the determination of the noise performance of a road surface based on vehicle
noise measurements, two methods are to be taken into consideration: SPB and CPX. The
CPB method as such is not standardized at international nor European level. CPB is not
to be recommended for standardization because the results are essentially dependent of a
few vehicles, even only one in some reports. Therefore, representativity and
reproducibility of the method are questionable. However, let us quote as a reminder that
ISO standards do exist that specify the test procedure for determining the noise emitted
by road vehicles in completely controlled conditions and environment, including a
reference surface (ISO 10844:1994). This is for type approval purpose of either vehicles
(ISO 362:1998 and ISO 7188:1994) or tyres (ISO 13325:2003).
The SPB method is standardized as ISO 11819-1:1997 [43]. It is presently in the revision
process by ISO Working Group ISO/TC43/SC1/WG33.
The CPX method has been in development for several years. A committee draft has been
circulated for some years, namely ISO/CD 11819-2:2000 [38]. The essential issue
pertains to the representativity and the enduring availability of the types of reference tyres
to be used. Working Group ISO/TC43/SC1/WG33 is presently trying to overcome the
difficulties.
4.4.2 Auxiliary measurement methods

Regarding the auxiliary methods, only texture and sound absorption have been subject to
international or European standardization. There is no standard applicable to the
measurement of road pavement surface stiffness in a way relevant to noise.
In the beginning of the studies on tyre/road noise, namely in UK in the early 1970s,
macrotexture was first suspected to be the main factor determining tyre/road noise on
different surfaces. At that time, macrotexture was measured by means of the so-called
Sand Patch Test delivering a Mean Texture Depth (MTD). That test is still in use for
some purposes related to skid resistance and also to noise as in the HAPAS scheme (see
5.2.12). The Sand Patch Test is standardized at European level in EN 13036-1:2001
where it has been re-worded as Volumetric Patch Test because it makes use of glass
beads instead of sand. Modern technology using lasers is capable of determining even at
traffic speed the so-called Mean Profile Depth (MPD), which can be converted into MTD
values. MPD has been standardized first by ISO (ISO 13473-1:1997) and taken over later
by CEN (EN ISO 13473-1:2001). That new technology soon required some clarification
regarding new specific terms, profile data processing, specifications for the prolfilometers
and their classification. This is provided by two associated standards, namely ISO 134732:2002 and ISO 13473-3:2002. However, later research resorting to spectral analysis of
surface profiles showed that simple measures like MTD and MPD were not sufficient to
characterize the surface influence on tyre/road noise. Megatexture was identified as
another very important factor (see Chapter 2). A method for determining megatexture is
presently taken into consideration by CEN after an ISO Committee Draft (ISO/CD
13473-5:2005) not yet turned into a standard. Finally, as precise determination of noise-
23/58

relevant macro- and megatexture calls for spectral analysis of the road surface profile, an
ISO Technical Specification for pavement profiles spectral analysis is under development
(ISO/CD TS 13473-4:2004). Working Groups ISO/TC43/SC1/WG39 and
CEN/TC227/WG5 are presently dealing with road surface texture measurements.
Sound absorption of road material samples can be determined in a reverberation room
provided they cover a sufficient area (e.g. one m2); therefore, ISO 354:2003 or EN
20354:1993 can be used. Cores can be either made in the laboratory or bored out of the
road surface and fitted into a so-called Kundts tube or impedance tube in order to
determine their sound absorption spectrum. Two slightly different methods are
standardized: ISO 10534-1:1996 and ISO 10534-2:1998. In search of more practical, nondestructive methods in-situ, some new methods have been or are being developed. The
so-called Extended Surface Method is specified in ISO 13472-1:2002. It consists of
comparing an acoustic signal reflected by the surface to the signal sent onto the surface,
using a loudspeaker and a microphone. As there is no contact with the surface, the
measurement can be made mobile. Another non-destructive, in-situ method uses a variant
of the impedance tube so-called Guard tube applied directly on the road surface. Two
slightly different versions of a draft standard are presently under development (ISO/CD
13472-2:2005 and ISO/CD 13472-3:2005). Working Group ISO/TC43/SC1/WG38 is
presently dealing with sound absorption measurement methods applicable to road
surfaces.
Table 5 summarizes the present state of progress of standardization.
Table 5 Present state of progress of the relevant standardization.
Subject
Reference surface
Vehicle noise
Vehicle noise
Tyre/road noise
Surface influence
Surface influence
Ref.
[49]
[41]
[42]
[115]
[43]
[38]
Macro- & megatexture

Document
ISO 10844:1994
ISO 362:1998
ISO 7188:1994
ISO 13325:2003
ISO 11819-1:1997
ISO/CD 11819-2:2000
ISO 354:2003
EN 20354:1993
ISO 10534-1:1996
ISO 10534-2:1998
ISO 13472-1:2002
ISO/CD 13472-2:2005
ISO/CD 13472-3:2005
EN 13036-1:2001
ISO 13473-1:1997
EN ISO 13473-1:2004
ISO 13473-2:2002
ISO 13473-3:2002
ISO/CD TS 13473-4:2004
Megatexture
ISO/CD 13473-5:2005
[114]
Sound absorption
Sound absorption
Sound absorption
Sound absorption
Sound absorption
Sound absorption
Macrotexture
Macrotexture
Comments
Currently under revision
Currently under revision

In development
[57]
[56]
[37]
[36]
[111]
[112]
[50]
In development
In development
[51]
[52]
[53]
[113]
In development
In development. Under consideration to
be taken over by CEN.
24/58
5 Noise classification of road pavements

5.1 Introduction
We have identified sixteen countries among which twelve EU Member States that are
applying some kind of noise classification of road surfaces for different purposes. We are
reviewing hereafter the available information from each of those countries. In addition,
we are quoting two recently completed European projects that have brought interesting
contributions to the subject.
5.2 State-of-the-art at national level

5.2.1 Austria
In Austria, a model is used that is called RVS 3.02. The road surface corrections Csurf used
in RVS is dependent on vehicle category and vehicle speed as shown in Table 6 [1].
Table 6 - Road surface correction in the Austrian model RVS3.02
Those values are based on SPB and CPB measurements converted in Leq values.
Subsequently, guidelines were issued describing a measurement method using a homemade trailer [2] that was used in an investigation by ARSENAL Research [3]. The
measurement campaign covered 11 road sections with different surface materials.
Measurements were carried out using four methods, namely: trailer complying with
RVS11.066 delivering LMA-values, trailer complying with ISO/CD 11819-2 [38]
25/58

either using all four tyres (E9, B, C, D) delivering CPXI4-values or tyres E & D
delivering CPXI2-values and SPB according to ISO11819-1 [43] delivering SPBIvalues.
The results are given in Table 7. From those results, the correlations between trailers
appear to be excellent (0.95<R2<0.97) while the correlations between any trailer and SPB
method are rather poor (0.26<R2<0.30). The ranking of surfaces happens to be much
dependent of the measurement method as Figure 3 shows.
Table 7 Summary of Austrian measurement results [3]
Road surface
Type
RVS11.066-IV
LMA
ISO/CD11819-2
CPX4
CPX2
ISO11819-1
SPBI
Exposed aggregate cement concrete

1
101.2
103.3
103.4
85.8
Exposed aggregate cement concrete

2
100.5
102.5
102.8
86.7
Cement concrete
103.2
104.3
104.3
86.9
Thin layer 1
102.1
103.5
103.4
84.6
Thin layer 2
101.7
104.6
SMA 1
99.6
102.4
102.5
84.4
SMA 2
102.5
103.9
Porous asphalt 1
103.0
103.7
Porous asphalt 2
101.8
103.5
103.9
84.5
10
Asphalt concrete 1
102.2
102.3
102.8
87.8
11
Asphalt concrete 2
103.3
103.5
85.8
5.2.2 Belgium
Referring to the German calculation scheme (RLS-90, see 5.2.4), the Brussels Institute
for Managing the Environment (IBGE-BIM) applies corrections determined for the 5
types of surfaces encountered in the Brussels Region (Table 8) [110].
Table 8 Corrections applied by the Brussels Region
Surface type
Porous asphalt
SMA
Asphalt concrete
Gussasphalt
Surface dressing
Cement concrete (slabs & blocks)
Cobble stones
30 km/h
40 km/h
70 km/h
-1.0
0.0
100 km/h
0.0
50 km/h
-2.0
0.0
0.0
+1.0
+1.5
+2.0
-2.0
0.0
+2.0
+2.0
+2.5
+4.5
+3.0
+6.0
+3.0
+4.0
+3.0
+6.0
0.0
An alternative for ISO tyre A.
26/58
89
88
dB(A)
87
SPBI
86
LMA-16 dB(A)
85
84
83
6
11
10
Surface n
Figure 3 Ranking of surfaces versus the measurement method in the Austrian

noise measurement campaign [3]. SPBI is the SPB Index according to ISO 11819-1
[43]. LMA is the Austrian CPX trailer with 16 dB(A) subtracted to the CPX level.
5.2.3 France
In France, the calculation method developed in the seventies [4] does not consider the
influence of the road surface. Presently, work is in progress with a view to updating the
procedure, namely by including that influence and also taking into account the evolution
of vehicle technology [5, 6]. So far, formulas predicting the level of the rolling noise
component have been established for different categories of surfaces versus vehicle
category and speed as in Table 9.
Table 9 Rolling noise level (LAmax at 7.5 m) versus speed, surface category and
vehicle category. The speed range is 5 to 130 km/h for light vehicles and 5 to
100 km/h for heavy vehicles
Surface category
R1
R2
R3
Light vehicles
73.8 + 30.2 log(V/90)
77.7 + 31.5 log(V/90)
80.2 + 32.2 log(V/90)
Heavy vehicles
83.8 + 26.0 log(V/90)
87.2 + 31.0 log(V/90)
88.3 + 32.6 log(V/90)
The surface categories include the following (Table 10):

Table 10 Road surface categories in the French updated calculation method
R1
Very thin asphalt layer 0/6 (types
1 & 2)
Ultra thin asphalt layer 0/6
Porous asphalt 0/10
Very thin asphalt layer 0/10 (type
2)
R2
Very thin asphalt layer 0/10 (type
1)
Dense asphalt concrete 0/10
Cold mix
Ultra thin asphalt layer 0/10
R3
Cement concrete
Very thin asphalt layer 0/14
Dense asphalt concrete 0/14
Surface dressing 6/10 & 10/14
It is to be noted that there is no reference surface. The formulas are not corrections: they
give the contribution of tyre/road noise in terms of noise levels.
27/58
5.2.4 Germany
The German guidelines Richtlinien fr den Lrmschutz an Strassen, 1990 (RLS90)
include the surface corrections (DStrO) n 1-4 presented in Table 11a in their
prediction model [7].
Table 11a - Road surface correction according to the German prediction model
DStrO in dB(A)
at posted speed limit of
Road surface
1
2
3
4
Non-grooved Gussasphalt
Asphalt concrete
Stone mastic asphalt
Cement concrete
Grooved Gussasphalt
Paving stones with even surface
Miscellaneous paving stones
30 km/h
40 km/h
50 km/h
+1,0
+1,5
+2,0
+2,0
+3,0
+2,5
+4,5
+3,0
+6,0
There are additional surface corrections included in Allgemeines Rundschreiben

Straenbau Nr. 14/1991 [34] presented in table 11b.
Table 11b Road surface correction according to the German prediction model
Road surface
5
6
7
8
9
Cement concrete after ZTV Beton 78 with steel brush

with longitudinal smoothing
Cement concrete after ZTV Beton 78 without steel
brush with longitudinal smoothing, textured with burlap
Asphalt concrete 0/11 and stone mastic asphalt 0/8
and 0/11 without loose chippings
Open porous asphalt with a void content 15 % after
construction with grain size 0/11
Open porous asphalt with a void content 15 % after
construction with grain size 0/8
DStrO in dB(A)
for rural roads with speeds > 60 km/h
+1,0
-2,0
-2,0
-4,0
-5,0
The corrections can be determined using either the SPB or the CPB method according to
GEStrO-92 (Geruschemission von Strassenoberflchen, 1992) [8].
5.2.5 Hungary
Guidelines have been recently issued by the Hungarian Ministry of Environment and
Water [9]. They specify the investigation and calculation methods for establishing
strategic noise maps. They include corrections to be applied on the traffic noise level as
in Table 12.
The indicator is LAeq at 7.5 m. The correction applies equally to daytime, evening and
night traffic noise levels.
28/58

Although it is not explicitly quoted as such, the reference surface can be considered here
as a Dense Asphalt Concrete similar to many other reference surfaces.
Table 12 Road surface corrections in the guidelines of the Hungarian Ministry of
Environment and Water
Road surfaces
Category
Types
Dense asphalt concrete (0/8)
Stone mastic asphalt (0/8)
Mastic asphalt (0/8)
Mastic asphalt (0/12)
Modified thin asphalts layers
Dense asphalt concrete with polymer-modified binder
Mastic asphalt with polymer-modified binder
Thin asphalts layers older than 4 years
Stone mastic asphalt (0/12)
Modified stone mastic asphalt (0/12)
Surface-dressed asphalt concrete (0/12)
Dense asphalt concrete with polymer-modified binder older than 4 years
Mastic asphalt with polymer-modified binder older than 4 years
Single and double surface dressing (5/8, 2/5)
Surface-dressed asphalt concrete (0/16)
Cement concrete
Cracked asphalt concrete
Dense asphalt concrete (0/16) older than 4 years
Surface-dressed asphalt concrete (0/16) older than 4 years
Dense asphalt concrete (0/20) older than 4 years
Fretted or plucked cement concrete
Small sett paving
Ornamental paving blocks
Ceramic blocks
Chipped sand asphalt (0/16)
Chipped sand asphalt (0/20)
Correction
dB(A)
+2.9
+4.9
+6.7
+7.8
5.2.6 Italy
In Italy, there are software models for noise prediction by the name Citymap and Disiapyr
[10]. These include a road surface correction table, which appears in Table 13. This table
is unique in that it includes corrections in octave bands, not just a flat correction for the
A-weighted overall level. It also includes, as the two last lines, a correction for
longitudinal road gradient, one for driving 5 % uphill and another for driving 5 %
downhill.
29/58
Table 13 - Road surface correction in the Italian model Citymap [10]. The last two
lines are corrections for longitudinal road gradient
63 Hz
125Hz
250Hz
500Hz
1 kHz
2 kHz
4 kHz
8 kHz
dB(A)
Conventional asphalt pavement

(reference)
Road surface
81.7
87.4
81.4
76.2
75.1
73.8
70.6
71.1
81.3
Paving stones
+1.1
+1.2
+2.1
+2.3
+1.5
+1.6
+1.8
+1.3
+1.9
Drainage asphalt pavement
-0.1
-0.3
-1.1
-1.8
-2.4
-2.1
-1.2
-1.3
-1.4
Conv. asphalt, gradient + 5 %
+2.2
+2.4
+3.1
+2.1
+2.0
+1.3
+1.6
+1.4
+2.2
Conv. asphalt, gradient - 5 %
-1.2
-1.3
-0.8
-1.1
+1.0
-0.2
+0.7
+0.8
+0.1
5.2.7 Japan
The model used in Japan is called the ASJ Model. The latest version is from 1998 [11].
This model contains a surface correction, but only for porous asphalt pavements (PA
0/13, usually having about 20 % voids in new condition) in relation to "normal" dense
asphalt pavements (DAC 0/13), the former being the most used for noise reduction. The
correction is valid over the speed range 40-140 km/h for light vehicles and 40-120 km/h
for heavy vehicles, and it is as follows [12]:
Correction = 3.5 log(V ) + 3.2
(1)
Where V is the vehicle speed in [km/h].

The Japanese are going to revise this model. One of the improvements considered is to
take the age of the surface into account.
Tyre/road noise levels are measured by means of special vans (Road Acoustic Checker)
equipped with a special tyre as a fifth wheel. The method resembles the CPX method.
The tyre is a normal Bridgestone tyre for which the normal tread has been buffed-off and
a new tread has been fitted with a very special tread pattern. The tread pattern consists of
large suction cups on one side of the tyre and large crossbar lugs on the other side. In
this way, both the vibrational impact mechanism and the air-pumping mechanism are
excited in a maximum way. The classification of surfaces with this tyre does not
correlate so well with the SPB method, since on smooth surfaces both mechanisms are
excited to a very high degree. However, within the porous asphalt surface group, the main
subject of the system, tested relations show a reasonable correlation CPX-SPB [32].
5.2.8 The Netherlands

The Dutch official specifications for noise calculation and measurement [13] provides for
a correction term for the road surface influence called Croad. It is as a function of
vehicle category and speed if one uses the simplified procedure. It is also given by
octave-bands if one uses the full procedure. It is defined as follows:
30/58
Simplified procedure:
Full procedure:
V
C road ,m = Lm + bm log m
V0,m
V
C road ,m ,i = Lm ,i + bm log m
V0,m
(2)
(3)
where m and i are respectively the subscripts for vehicle category and frequency band
(octaves). That correction is to be applied with respect to a reference surface, which is a
smooth, dense asphalt concrete. That surface is specified by means of its reference values
given in Table 14 [14].
Table 14 Reference values of the parameters in the equation of the noise level
vs. speed of the reference surface: L = a + b log(V/V0)
a
dB(A)
Light vehicles
Medium heavy vehicles
Heavy vehicles
74.8
80.9
83.5
b
dB(A)
33.0
20.9
22.5
V0
(km/h)
80
70
70
The measurement method specified to determine Croad is the SPB with a microphone
height of 5 m. Tables 15 & 16 list Croad values for light and medium/heavy vehicles
respectively [15].
Table 15 Corrections for the road surface to be used in the Dutch noise
calculation procedure for light vehicles
N
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Product type
Reference surface
Double layer porous asphalt
Double layer porous asphalt (fine)
SMA 0/6
(optimized)
Finely brushed cement
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
Surface treatment
common pavement blocks
Silent pavement blocks
Thin layers 1
Thin layers 2
ZSA10 - open
ZSA - semi dense
Dubofalt
Nobelpave
11
ZSM
Micropave
SilentSTONE
Viagrip
Geosilent
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
cement
cement
cement
asphalt /
cement
blocks
blocks
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
blocks
asphalt
blocks
Vmin
40
50
50
50
40
50
Vmax
130
130
130
120
80
130
L
0,00
-2,61
-5,05
-6,39
-1,91
1,42
b
0,00
-8,02
-5,41
-5,38
-3,94
-0,21
70
70
80
120
-0,07
1,63
-1,63
5,09
70
40
40
40
40
40
40
50
40
40
50
40
40
40
130
60
60
80
80
50
60
60
50
50
80
50
50
50
2,29
4,00
-2,18
-4,21
-5,71
-6,64
-6,08
-6,01
-6,29
-5,76
-4,78
-1,43
-6,36
-2,93
-2,81
0,00
-5,72
-7,24
-6,59
-10,62
-7,10
-3,60
-8,52
-8,83
-4,89
-3,04
-13,48
-8,48
10
ZSA is a product name of the company KWS. ZSA stands for Zeer Stil Asfalt, which means Very Silent Asphalt
ZSM is a product name of the company Temmink Infra B.V. ZSM stands for Zeer Stil Mastiek, which means Very
silent mastic
11
31/58

22
23
24
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
Micro-Top 0/6
Micro-Top 0/8
Stilstone
Redufalt
Accoduit
Novachip
Tapisville
Fluisterfalt
Microville
Microflex 0/6
Decipave
Twinlay-m (*)
Silent Mastic
Bruitville
Duolay
asphalt
asphalt
blocks
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
50
50
40
50
50
60
40
50
40
50
40
40
50
40
110
60
70
50
60
80
80
50
90
50
80
60
50
60
60
120
-5,53
-2,66
-2,61
-4,67
-1,28
-1,41
-5,24
-5,36
-6,11
-4,81
-5,73
-6,60
-5,85
-4,63
-6,65
-5,97
-3,36
-5,87
-6,43
-4,67
-2,63
-9,06
-6,29
-11,58
-3,86
-6,96
-5,78
-7,12
-4,89
-4,27
(*) Also valid for 110 km/h.
Table 16 Corrections for the road surface to be used in the Dutch noise
calculation procedure for medium and heavy vehicles
N
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Product type
Reference surface
Double layer porous asphalt
Double layer porous asphalt (fine)
SMA 0/6
(optimized)
Finely brushed cement
8
9
10
11
12
14
34
Surface treatment
Common pavement blocks
Silent pavement blocks
Thin layers 1
Thin layers 2
ZSA12-semi dense
Twinlay-m
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
cement
cement
cement
asphalt /
cement
blocks
blocks
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
asphalt
Vmin
40
70
70
50
50
70
Vmax
90
100
100
90
70
100
L
0,00
-3,90
-6,28
-5,66
-0,92
-0,64
b
0,00
-6,05
1,02
-6,08
-3,33
7,01
70
70
80
90
-1,97
1,44
-4,01
6,26
70
40
40
40
40
50
80
100
60
60
80
80
60
80
-0,70
4,00
-0,01
-1,73
-3,36
-4,25
-5,98
4,27
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,00
0,18
-1,73
5.2.9 Slovenia
For taking the influence of road surfaces on traffic noise emission, they use the regulation
that defines the method of evaluation of traffic noise impact on the environment [18]. The
method is entirely based on German guidelines RLS 90, according to which the
corrections listed in Table 17 have been determined.
Table 17 Road surface corrections specified in the Slovenian method for
evaluating traffic noise impact on the environment [18, 19]
Surface types
Porous asphalt
Stone mastic asphalt
New asphalt concrete
Asphalt concrete with bigger chipping sizes
Old cement concrete
Flat paving stones
Damaged stone paving
12
Correction
(B(A)
-3
-2
0
+2
+3
+3
+6
See note .
32/58

From a subsequent measurement campaign covering Surface dressings, SMAs, Porous
asphalts and Dense asphalts [20], it appears that the correction is fairly well confirmed for
SMA but not for PA, the noise-reducing performance of which is significantly
underestimated by the guidelines (Table 18).
Table 18 Comparison between subsequent measurement results and guidelines
AC
SD
SD-AC
SMA
SMA-AC
PA
PA-AC
50
Speed (km/h)
71,7
70,4
-1,3
69,1
-2,6
65,7
-6,0
70
77,4
75,8
-1,6
75,2
-2,1
70,5
-6,8
90
80,7
79,0
-1,7
78,7
-2,0
73,5
-7,2
110
83,0
81,2
-1,8
81,3
-1,7
75,5
-7,5
12
Nr. of sections
16
Average
-1,6
-2,1
-6,9
Guideline
N.A.
-2,0
-3,0
5.2.10
Spain
There is no specific regulation about road surface influence on traffic noise. However,
there are some mentions in two standards, namely:
The standard about rehabilitation of pavements for the Road State Network [21]
includes a paragraph in the section about resurfacing. It says that, in case the
rolling noise should be reduced, it is possible to use porous asphalt or some SMA,
always taking into account the other surface characteristics of these mixes.
The standard for designing pavements in the Andalucia Region Road Network
[22] says that, although in general it's not advisable to use porous asphalt (because
of climatic constraints), they can be used in urban areas with ADT>2000
vehicles/day if noise reduction is needed.
Correction terms for road surface "noisiness" in calculations (noise mapping) have been
proposed [23] (Table 19), which appear to have been take over from the Commission
Recommendation of 6 August 2003 [107].
Table 19 Proposed noise corrections for road surfaces in Spain
Surface types
Porous asphalt
Smooth asphalt concrete
Cement concrete
Rough asphalt concrete
Bald paving blocks
Harsh paving blocks
0-60 km/h
-1
0
Correction dB(A)
61-80 km/h
-2
0
81-130 km/h
-3
0
3
6
3
6
3
6
33/58

Now, measurements of rolling noise using the CPX method are underway. In the future,
they are planning to start a research about the absorption measurement of different kind
of pavements using MLS13 techniques.
5.2.11
Switzerland
The Swiss noise calculation model SonRoad includes corrections for the road surface
as in Table 20 [24].
Table 20 Corrections for the road surface in the Swiss SonRoad calculation
model
Surface type
Porous asphalt (0/8, 0/11)
14
Macro-rough asphalt (0/8, 0/11)
Asphalt concrete (0/8, 0/11, 0/16)
Mastic asphalt (0/8, 0/11, 0/16)
Surface dressing (3/6)
Stone mastic asphalt (0/8, 0/11)
15
Grainy asphalt mix
16
Asphalt mix added with tar (0/10)
Surface dressing (6/11)
Asphalt mix added with tar (0/16)
Sett paving
Correction
dB(A)
-4
-1
+1
+6
Table 20 is said to be valid for pavements between 3 and 20 year old. It is warned that the
correction for the sett paving applies to tyre/road noise only while the other corrections
are for the global vehicle noise. In our opinion, tyre/road noise anyway determines the
global noise level in this case.
5.2.12
United Kingdom
In the method used in the U.K., termed CRTN17, the correction is expressed as follows
[25]:
For roads which are impervious to surface water and where the traffic speed (V) is
>75 km/h the following correction to the basic noise level is required:
for concrete surfaces:
for bituminous surfaces:
Correction = 10 log (90 MTD + 30) - 20 dB(A)

Correction = 10 log (20 MTD + 60) - 20 dB(A)
(4)
(5)
where MTD is the texture depth measured by the sand-patch test. It means that the CRTN
needs access to a measured or predicted texture depth.
For road surfaces and traffic conditions which do not conform to these requirements a
separate correction to the basic noise level is required. For impervious bituminous and
13
Maximum Length Sequences according to ISO 13472-1 [36].

Asphalt macro-rugueux
15
Enrob bitumineux grenu
16
Enrob avec adjonction de goudron
17
Calculation of Road Traffic Noise.
14
34/58

concrete road surfaces, 1 dB(A) should be subtracted from the basic noise level when the
traffic speed (V) is <75 km/h. Roads surfaced with pervious macadam have different
acoustic properties from the surfaces described above. For roads surfaced with these
materials, 3.5 dB(A) should be subtracted from the basic noise level for all traffic speeds.
Later on, the introduction of new proprietary and the failure of previous empirical
relationship to accurately predict noise levels from measurements of road surface
characteristics has led to the consideration of direct measurement of noise [26]. This has
been implemented in the HAPAS18 type approval system, according to which the
influence of the road surface on traffic noise is determined using the SPB method. The
result is expressed in terms of Road Surface Influence as follows:
L veh,L
RSI H = 10 log10 ( 7.8 10
10
L veh,H1
+ 0.578 10
10
L veh,H2
+ 10
10
) - 95.9
(6)
for high speeds, and

RSI M = 10 log10 ( 11.8 10
L veh,L
10
+ 0.629 10
Lveh , H 1
10
+ 0.157 10
L veh,H 2
10
) - 92.3
(7)
for medium speeds.
5.2.13
USA
In the Traffic Noise Model (TNM) used in the USA, the road surface correction is
presented in Table 21 [27]. A mix of DAC and PCC constitutes the reference surface. The
same correction applies for all speeds.
Table 21 - Correction in the US TNM model in dB(A) compared to the reference
case
Automobiles
Reference:
A mix of DAC and PCC surfaces
Dense asphalt concrete
Portland Cement Concrete
Open-graded asphalt
5.2.14
Heavy trucks
Motorcycles
Medium
trucks &
busses
0
-0.65
+2.36
-2.20
-0.64
+1.47
-1.15
-0.59
+0.72
-1.66
0
0
0
Nordic countries
Since first introduced in the 1970's, the five Nordic countries (Sweden, Denmark,
Norway, Finland and Iceland) have had a common prediction model. The latest one is
from 1996 [28] and has an optional road surface correction according to Table 22. This
correction comes from [29] where its background is also described (see also [35]).
18
Higway Authorities Product Approval Scheme.
35/58

A new model called Nord2000 is presently being developed. It is scheduled to be
completed by 31 March 2006. The newest version of the source model [Source modelling
report 060102, only for distribution between project partners] is very brief concerning
road surface characterisation. The road categories will be as in Table 23 [30]. This means
that the very detailed list in the 1996 version will be replaced with a less detailed one.
Table 22 - Road surface correction table in the Nordic model, version 1996
Correction term in dB(A) for a certain % of heavy
vehicles
Road surface
61-80 km/h
0-5 %
6-100 %
1-20
<1
1-20
<1
1-20
<1
1-20
<1
0-20
1-20
<1
1-20
<1
1-20
<1
1-20
<1
1-20
<1
3-7
1-2
<1
3-7
1-2
<1
0-40
0-40
0-5
0-90
0-20
20-100 %
Asph. concr., dense, smooth (12-16 mm)

Do. newly laid
Asph. concr., dense, smooth ( 8-10 mm)
Do. newly laid
Mastic asphalt (max 12-16 mm)
Do. newly laid
Mastic asphalt (max 8-10 mm)
Do. newly laid
Chipped asphalt (BCS) ("hot rolled asph.")
Chip seal, single (Y1), max 16-20 mm
Do. newly laid
Do. newly laid
Do. newly laid
Chip seal, double (Y2), max 16-20 mm
Do. newly laid
Do. newly laid
Porous asph., max 14-16mm (20%voids)
Do. "medium aged"
Do. newly laid
Porous asph., max 8-12 mm (20% voids)
Do. "medium aged"
Do. newly laid
Cem. concr., dense, smooth 20-80 mm
Cem, concr., dense, smooth, 12-18 mm
Cem. concr., ground (grinding not worn)
Paving stones, cobble stones (older type)
Cement block pavement (interlocking)
6-19 %
1.a
1.b
2.a
2.b
3.a
3.b
4.a
4.b
5.
6.a
6.b
7.a
7.b
8.a
8.b
9.a
9.b
10.a
10.b
11.a
11.b
11.c
12.a
12.b
12.c
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
0-5 %
Age
[year]
20-100 %
Type
(max. chipping size also indicated here)
6-19 %
81-130 km/h
0-5 %
0-60 km/h
ref
0
0
-1
0
0
-1
-2
+1
+1
+2
0
0
0
-1
0
+1
0
0
0
-1
-2
0
-1
-3
+2
+1
-1
+3
0
ref
0
0
-1
0
0
-1
-1
0
0
+1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-1
-2
0
-1
-3
+1
+1
-1
+3
0
ref
-1
0
-1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
-2
0
-1
-3
+1
+1
-1
+2
0
ref
-2
-1
-2
+1
+1
-1
-2
+2
+2
+3
0
0
-1
-1
+1
+1
0
0
-1
-1
-2
-1
-2
-4
+2
+2
-2
+5
0
ref
-1
0
-1
0
0
-1
-2
+1
+1
+1
0
0
0
-1
0
0
0
-1
-1
-1
-2
-1
-2
-4
+2
+2
-2
+4
0
ref
-1
0
-1
0
0
-1
-1
0
0
-1
0
-1
0
-1
-1
-2
-1
-2
-1
-1
-3
-1
-2
-5
+2
+2
-2
+3
0
ref
-2
-1
-2
+1
+1
-1
-2
+2
+2
+2
0
0
-1
-1
0
0
0
0
-1
-1
-2
-2
-3
-5
+2
+2
-1
+5
0
ref
-2
-1
-2
0
0
-1
-2
+1
+1
+1
0
0
0
-1
0
0
-1
-1
-1
-2
-3
-2
-3
-5
+2
+2
-1
+4
0
36/58
Table 23 - Road categories in the Nord2000 model

Main
category
1
2
4
5
6
Sub
category
1a
1b
2a
2b
3a
3b
3c
3d
4a
4b
5a
5b
6a
6b
6c
7
8
Name
Asph. concr., dense, smooth (12-16 mm)
Asph. concr., dense, smooth ( 8-10 mm)
Mastic asphalt (SMA) (max 12-16 mm)
Mastic asphalt (SMA) (max 8-10 mm)
Chipped asphalt (BCS) ("hot rolled asph.")
Porous asph., max 14-16 mm (>20 % voids)
Porous asph., max 8-12 mm (>20 % voids)
Cem. concr., dense, smooth max 20-80 mm
Cem. concr., dense, smooth, max 12-18 mm
Cem. concr., ground (grinding not worn)
Paving stones, cobble stones (older type)
Cement block pavement (interlocking)
5.3 European projects

5.3.1 Introduction
This chapter reviews the recently completed or still ongoing European projects dealing
with the road surface influence on traffic noise.
5.3.2 HARMONOISE
HARMONOISE proposes rather detailed correction terms or formulae for the influence
of the road surface on vehicle noise emission.
Since the reference surface type must be one that is reasonably common in each member
state, and states have different preferences and policies, it is impossible to define one and
only one reference surface. Instead, it is proposed to define a cluster of reference
surfaces having fairly similar noise characteristics as follows:
DAC 0/11, DAC 0/12, DAC 0/13, DAC 0/14, DAC 0/16
SMA 0/11, SMA 0/12, SMA 0/13, SMA 0/14, SMA 0/16
A Golden reference is defined within this reference cluster, which is the ideal reference
surface on which the basic values of HARMONOISE are based. It is (basically) close to a
DAC 0/13 or an SMA 0/13. Then, depending on the actual reference surface used in a
particular country and in a particular situation, one may make small corrections that
normalize the actually chosen reference surface to the Golden reference. See further
another technical report within HARMONOISE, dealing specifically with this issue [31].
37/58

The HARMONOISE engineering method for predicting road traffic noise
[39http://www.imagine-project.org/] gives the noise emission from vehicles on the
standard reference at standard temperature. The correction for the road surface is given
by the following formula in dB:
C surf ,m ,i = surf ,m ,i + surf ,m ,i log
vm
v ref ,m
+ K (Tatm Tatm ,0 )
(8)
where:
surf
m
i
= road surface type

= vehicle category
= third-octave frequency band n
surf, m, i, surf, m i
= road surface correction coefficients for m-vehicles and ifrequency band
= speed of m-vehicles
vm
= reference speed for m-vehicles
vref, m
K
= temperature coefficient
= air temperature
Tatm
= reference air temperature
Tatm, 0
Some road surface correction coefficients are given in an appendix as tentative default
values for the following surfaces:
PA 6/16
2 layer PA
transversely brushed concrete
exposed aggregate concrete
SMA 0/6
surface dressing 1/3
paving stones
HRA 20
block paving.
In addition, corrections are given for the ageing porous surfaces:
Lt = L0 (1 (0,25t 0,016t 2 ))
(9)
where t 7 years, and for wetness (for light vehicles only):
110
f
Lwet = X f log(
) + Y f log(
)
v
2000
(10)
where:
38/58

Xf, Yf = frequency dependent coefficients
v
= vehicles speed
f
= frequency
5.3.3 SILVIA
SILVIA does not propose specific corrections; instead, that project has developed a
comprehensive scheme for not only determining correction terms - like Croad for instance
but, more importantly, for labelling a specific surfacing technology and for
subsequently contractually checking the conformity of production of that technology
once applied on the road. The proposed classification system [33] identifies specific
measurement procedures necessary for labelling the acoustic performance of a road
surface. There are two possible labelling procedures:
LABEL1 (preferred): Assessment based on SPB and CPX measurements;
LABEL2: Assessment based on SPB measurements and measurements of intrinsic
properties of the road surface, e.g. texture and sound absorption (plus mechanical
impedance if relevant).
Both noise labels are based on SPB, which has been chosen in SILVIA as the reference
noise classification method because of its representativity. However, because of the
practical constraints that make the SPB method generally unsuitable for conformity of
production testing in the field (see Chapter 4), the labelling procedure includes associated
measurements that will be used as substitutes to SPB in the COP procedure. The
underlying assumption is that it is sufficient to use either CPX or the relevant intrinsic
surface characteristics of a given material to guarantee the conformity of its noise
performance in terms of SPB.
For the purposes of assessing conformity-of-production (COP), surfaces with a noise
LABEL1 certification are to be assessed using the CPX method, whereas surfaces with a
noise LABEL2 certification are assessed according to the relevant measurement of the
intrinsic properties of the surface used in deriving the noise label.
Table 24 summarises the recommended method of assessment for noise labelling and
Table 25 summarises the recommended method for assessing COP. Rigid surfaces are
defined as normal asphalt and concrete, i.e. being much stiffer than tyres.
Table 24 - Recommended labelling system for assessing the acoustic performance
of different types of road surfaces - Determining the noise label
Label ID
LABEL1
LABEL2
Method of assessment for different road surfaces

Dense Graded
Open Graded
Rigid
Rigid
Elastic
SPB
SPB
SPB
CPX
CPX
CPX
SPB
SPB
SPB
Texture
Texture
Texture
39/58

Absorption
Absorption
Mechanical Impedance
Table 25 - Recommended labelling system for assessing the acoustic performance

of different types of road surfaces - Assessing COP
Label ID
LABEL1
LABEL2
Method of assessment for different road surfaces

Dense Graded
Open Graded
Rigid
Rigid
Elastic
CPX
CPX
CPX
Texture
Texture
Texture
Absorption
Absorption
Mechanical Impedance
5.3.4 EU WG 8
The classification proposed in Table 26 is apparently based on a mix of German and
British data. It has been proposed in a report commissioned by the European Working
Group 8 on traffic noise that was delivered to DG ENT in 2003 [71].
Table 26 Correction terms in dB(A) proposed by EffNoise [120]. The reference

surface is Asphalt Concrete 0/11 and the reference speed is 50 km/h.
Road surface type
Porous asphalt twin layer, less than 3 years old
Porous asphalt twin layer, 3-5 years old
Porous asphalt 0/11, less than 3 years old
Porous asphalt 0/11, 3-5 years old
Porous asphalt twin layer, more than 5 years old
Asphalt concrete 0/11
Stone mastic asphalt 0/11
Porous asphalt 0/11, more than 5 years old
Cement concrete, burlap treated
Hot rolled asphalt
Asphalt concrete 0/16
Even pavement stones
Grip-surface
Cement concrete, exposed aggregate
Cement concrete, longitudinally brushed
Surface dressing 0/11
Uneven pavement stones
Gussasphalt
Cement concrete, transversely brushed
Light
vehicles
-6.0
-4.0
-3.1
-2.0
-2.0
-2.0
-1.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
2.0
2.0
-5.8
3.0
1.3
-0.4
1.3
1.3
-3.8
1.5
6.0
1.9
3.7
Heavy
vehicles
-4.5
-3.0
-3.7
-2.0
-3.0
-1.5
-1.5
0.0
-0.3
0.0
0.0
1.2
1.0
0.0
-3.7
2.0
0.4
0.0
0.4
1.7
-2.0
0.5
4.0
-0.3
2.1
40/58
5.3.5 ROTRANOMO
The ROTRANOMO Project (Road Traffic Noise Modelling) has elaborated a tool to
calculate road related noise emissions in order to meet future standards of the EU Noise
Directive "Assessment and Management of Environmental Noise" [121].
The calculations actually take into account the road surface by means of the classification
developed by WG 8 (Table 26).
5.3.6 EffNoise
EffNoise is a Service contract relating to the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures
carried out in cooperation with EU WG HSEA Health and Socio-Economic Aspects.
Considering measures on the noise sources, they exhibit a classification identical to the
one given in Table 26 [120].
5.3.7 EU WG-AEN
Finally, the same classification again has been taken over by the European Commission
Working Group on Assessment of Exposure to Noise [74].
5.3.8 SILENCE
The European project SILENCE is also presently developing such a correction table in its
Sub-Project F Road Surfaces, Work Package 4 Noise classification [86]. It is
intended to be adapted to urban conditions, which means that the surface influence will
also be considered for low-speed, low gear setting driving conditions.
5.3.9 SIRUUS
The objectives of the SIRUUS project (Silent Road for Urban and extra-Urban Use)
were to develop new solutions for low-noise surfaces capable of reducing traffic noise by
3 dB(A) on motorways and 5 dB(A) in urban areas. The reference surfaces were,
respectively a traditional porous asphalt type road surface on motorways and a
traditional dense bitumen road surface in urban areas.
Three types of low-noise pavements were tested on an Italian motorway, among which
two sophisticated, so-called euphonic and ecotechnic pavement structures and the
already known two-layer porous asphalt. The publishable part of the otherwise
confidential final technical report [123] claims that the objective has been met but does
not tell with which solution.
5.4 Discussion
Across countries, the names of the different surfacing materials and techniques are not
always comparable or translatable. In the Dutch and Swiss tables (Tables 15, 16, 20), the
surfacing types have been translated by us. In all other tables, the categories are as given
in English in the source documents. The comparison is still more difficult when
proprietary names are used. When the comparison seems possible, like between popular
materials and technologies like DAC, PA, SMA, EACC for instance, the rankings are in
41/58

general poorly consistent as Table 27 shows. However, when there is a reference surface,
it is consistently a dense asphalt concrete or a combination of DAC and some other
common surface like in USA and in the HARMONOISE proposal.
There is also a lack of comparability between different classifications due to the use of
different measurement and evaluation methods. In that respect it is to be highlighted that
CPX and SPB are not equivalent as the Austrian data shown in Table 7. See also [33].
Although, in some cases, the ranking is given for different speeds including low speeds,
in general, it is not clear whether it also applies to urban conditions where not only low
speeds but also low gear settings are used. In addition, when a ranking is given in terms
of an index including a certain proportion of heavy vehicles like with SPBI or Leq, the
ranking could obviously not be adapted to urban conditions.
Table 27 Comparison between rankings of popular surfacing types.
Differences are in dB(A).
Country
AT
AT
AT
FR
FR
DE
DE
HU
IT
JP
JP
NL
SI
SI
ES
ES
CH
US
NO
Reference
Table 6
Table 7
Table 7
Tables 9&10
Tables 9&10
Table 11a
Table 11b
Table 12
Table 13
Formula 1
Formula 1
Table 15
Table 17
Table 18
Table 19
Table 19
Table 20
Table 21
Table 22
SMA-DAC
-3,4 / -1,4
-3,7 / +0,3
0
0,0
+2,9
-2
-2,1
0
0 / +1
PA-DAC
-1
-3,3 / -1,3
-1,5 / -0,3
-3,9
-3,5
EACC-DAC
0
-2,0 / 0,0
-2,8 / -1,0
-2,0
-1,4
-2,7
-3,6
-2,61
-3
-6,9
-1
-3
-4
-1,55
-1 / 0
-0,07 / +1,42
Remarks
Light veh. 50 km/h
SPBI
LMA
All 0/10 mm. Light veh. 90 km/h
All 0/10 mm. Light veh. 50 km/h
30-50 km/h
All 0/11 mm. > 60 km/h
All 0/12 mm
All 0/13 mm. 50 km/h
All 0/13 mm. 90 km/h
Light veh.
< 60 km/h
> 80 km/h
Light veh.
All max. 16 mm. Light veh.
Among the factors that influence the precision of the classification, we can quote the
variability of road surfacing materials mainly regarding texture depending on the
characteristics of ingredients, laying circumstances, characteristics of traffic and climatic
effects on ageing, etc. With those remarks in view, it is questionable whether the two
decimals given in the Dutch and American tables (Tables 15, 16, 21) have any
significance. Even the first decimal is probably not significant either, unless it is rounded
to the closest half unit. Actually, nowhere is the precision stated except in the procedures
proposed by SILVIA where tolerances are indicated on the Labelling and COP results
(not reported here; see [33]).
42/58

Until the procedures proposed by SILVIA are applied routinely, a compilation of existing
correction terms could be used as default values for comparable surfacing types.
However, the classifications available so far are generally based on data collected several
years ago. In the meantime, other technologies - like for instance thin layers - have
become popular, often under proprietary names as in the Dutch classification (Tables 15
& 16), which can moreover be different across borders. So, there is a need for
supplementing the tables in that respect. In addition, since urban conditions are probably
not well represented by the available classifications, there is a need for extending the data
base to urban conditions including low speeds and low gear settings.
The main problem with classifying road surfaces regarding noise is the wide variability
within a given category of materials. Figure 4 is a first classification attempt based of
tyre/road noise measurements carried out with a car on several dozens of pavement
types in Belgium in the late seventies. The fact is that the range of variation within a
given type generally exceeds the average differences between types. Figure 5 is a more
recent classification established in France and based on cars pass-by noise. Even though
the categories are much more narrowly defined than in the Belgian study, the same
conclusion can be drawn: it seems illusory to assign a noisiness level to a given
surfacing type. The reason is likely that the acoustic performance of a road surface is not
Cobble stones
Cement concrete
Surface dressings
Asphalt concrete
Resinous slurry
Porous asphalt
65
70
75
80
85
90
dB(A)
Figure 4 Early attempt to classify road surfaces in Belgium based on CPB levels
of a car coasting at 80 km/h, engine off [79].
43/58
Figure 5 French classification based on cars passing by at 90 km/h [118]
only determined by its compound. There is a significant influence of the laying process
and circumstances, which will determine the most noise-relevant surface characteristics
i.e. macro- and megatexture. In addition, over time, wear due to weather and traffic - and
clogging of porous layers - will also affect the noise performance to some extent. Finally,
along any apparently homogeneous road section, the noise level as measured by means
of a CPX-type equipment usually varies by some dB(A)s.
Comparison measurements reported by the Dutch IPG project [63] further demonstrate
the variability of the initial noise performance in terms of SPB noise level reduction19 of
the same type of pavement actually a double-layer porous asphalt laid by the same
contractor and different contractors at different places. The differences within the set of
surfaces built by the same contractor can be up to 2 dB(A) for cars (Figure 6) and more
than 3 dB(A) for lorries (Figure 7). Only two contractors out of eight were able to
reproduce the same pavement performance within a range of 1 dB(A) for both cars and
lorries. The maximum differences between different contractors are also about 2 to 3
dB(A).
19
With respect to a reference level corresponding to a standard Dense Asphalt Concrete.
44/58
Figure 6 Initial noise reductions in terms of SPB average pass-by level for light
vehicles travelling at 110 km/h on different sections in double-layer porous
asphalt in Netherlands [63]. A to H are different contractors. A and B built a 2/6mm
top layer. C to H built a 4/8mm top layer. Each contractor was requested to
reproduce the same pavement on four different motorways: A28, A30, A15 and
A59.
Figure 7 - Initial noise reductions in terms of SPB average pass-by level for heavy
vehicles travelling at 80 km/h on different sections in double-layer porous asphalt
in Netherlands [63]. A to H are different contractors. A and B built a 2/6mm top
layer. C to H built a 4/8mm top layer. Each contractor was requested to reproduce
the same pavement on four different motorways: A28, A30, A15 and A59.
45/58
6 Conclusions and recommendations

When noise classification of road surfaces are required for calculation purposes or as
rough guidance to road authorities, i.e. when high precision is not required, we cannot see
any other solution in the short run than to make the best use of existing data as those
reported in Chapter 5. In the longer run, that kind of data will have to be more reliable
and precise, namely for contractual purposes. To that end, we can but recommend
concentrating on the validation at European level of a classification system such as the
one developed by SILVIA. Basically, the concept is to associate a type approval
procedure and conformity of production procedure.
There is no type approval procedure for road surfaces that applies across the European
Union. However, some countries are beginning to operate schemes that effectively act as
type approval procedures for road surfaces. To our knowledge, the United Kingdom and
the Netherlands are the only Member States having a regulation specifying noise
performance for road surfaces and how to check them in situ.
In the United Kingdom, the Highways Agency Products Approval (HAPAS) was
developed primarily with the aim of assessing the fitness for purpose of different road
surface products. New road surfaces have to comply with the requirements of HAPAS in
order to achieve certification for use in road constructions and maintenance programs. In
1998, the scheme was extended to cover the type approval of proprietary thin surfacing
materials, and it was decided at the time to include an optional noise test. The test
procedure developed by TRL for this type approval largely follows the ISO SPB method,
but uses three classes of vehicle instead of the two classes normally used.
A similar scheme, known as the CRoad scheme, was introduced in the Netherlands in the
late 1990s [89] to act as both a type approval scheme, based around the ISO SPB method,
and for ensuring conformity of production, using CPX measurements.
The procedures proposed by SILVIA are compatible with the Dutch system as they
provide CRoad and the COP procedure accepts the use of CPX measurements.
Indeed, the Dutch as well as the British systems essentially rely on CPX measurements to
make the link between the type approval and the COP tests. However, it is not
exaggerated to state that CPX can be considered as a makeshift. It has become very
popular essentially because it is much more practical than CPB or SPB. But its
representativity is highly questionable because:
it measures only tyre noise, other sources of vehicle noise that could be influenced by
the surface characteristics are not considered;
its representativity of truck tyre noise is doubtful until a CPX for truck tyres is
developed, which does not seem realistic;
it is poorly correlated with far-field measurements;
it is very sensitive to the exact location of the microphones because of the complex
radiation pattern around a tyre;
on porous surfaces, it does not take into account propagation effects;
46/58

on porous surfaces, it does not take into account the possible absorption of power train
noise.
Apart from the reference tyres issue, a big problem with CPX is the wide diversity of the
already existing equipment, which explains the discrepancies between the measurement
results when comparing different devices. Reproducibility problems have moreover been
observed between devices that, in view of their similarity, could be assumed to deliver
identical results. In an attempt to better secure the reproducibility between different
variants of CPX equipment, the SILVIA project proposes a set of certification procedures
that have been published in a booklet by the Gdansk Technical University [122] to ensure
the conformity of a given device to the basic specifications of the ISO standard.
SPB is the only truly representative method since it is actually measured at the road side,
more or less at the position of the exposed faades. It takes into account the whole range
of vehicle types and speeds, which makes it possible to derive the noise level of any real
traffic. Therefore, it is flexible in the use of the results: it can be adapted to any kind of
road (motorway, rural, urban) depending on the main relevant traffic characteristics
(proportion of heavies, average speed). However, it is subject to constraints that prevents
it to be used everywhere. It is not generally applicable in urban areas. Moreover, it tests
only a spot on the road. Therefore, it is neither practical nor cost-effective for acceptance
or COP tests since it would have to be repeated many times along the road section.
That is why SILVIA has introduced the concept of auxiliary testing methods that could
be used as proxies for CPX and SPB. This could work provided a robust model is
available to convert the relevant characteristics (i.e. texture, absorption, stiffness) into
noise levels or noise reduction levels or indices. Such models already exist. SILVIA has
developed one, based both on statistical data and on computer simulations [33]. It still
needs to include the stiffness influence.
Let us finally point out that, in contracts, tolerances should be set at realistic values taking
into account the intrinsic variability of the acoustic performance of road surfacing types,
which can typically reach several dB(A)s in terms of vehicle noise levels. Such
tolerances are suggested in the SILVIA labelling and COP procedures.
Summing up, here are our recommended next steps for setting up a European noise
classification system for road surfaces:
1) Standardization:
1. A CEN standard for CPX equipment should be taken over from - or
inspired by - the ISO draft and include the certification procedures
developed by SILVIA or a reference to it.
2. The revised ISO standard for the SPB method should be taken over as a
CEN standard as soon as it is issued.
3. The draft ISO standard for the determination of megatexture should be
taken over as a CEN standard as soon as the ISO standard is issued.
47/58

4. The ISO standard for sound absorption measurement in situ using the
extended surface method should be taken over as a CEN standard.
5. A CEN standard should be developed on how to characterize road
surfacings with respect to noise as proposed by SILVIA. Part 1 would
describe the labelling procedure and part 2 would describe the associated
COP procedure. The first issue does not need to include stiffness.
6. Later on, a CEN standard should be developed on how to measure and
evaluate the mechanical impedance of road surfaces in a way relevant to
noise. It would then be referred to in the next issue of the labelling and
COP standard.
2) Research and development:
7. Measurement methods for stiffness more precisely: mechanical
impedance should be further developed and validated as really noise
relevant, possibly building on the method proposed by SILVIA.
8. The model proposed by SILVIA relating the road surface influence on
vehicle noise to texture, sound absorption and stiffness should be
completed to include stiffness, and validated.
Those eight objectives can be pursued in parallel.
Steps 1 to 5 dont require much pre-normative work, if at all. One can found on SILVIA
but further validation could prove useful. Therefore, those Member States that are not yet
acquainted with the issue should be encouraged to put the procedures on trial in order for
their representatives in a future CEN group to gain specific expertise and to possibly help
improve the procedures. To that end, a project is currently being in negotiation stage with
the Commission, namely INQUEST Information Network on Quiet European (road)
Surfacing Technology. It includes a series of workshops to disseminate the results of
SILVIA in the countries that were not involved in SILVIA and setting up a European
Group of Users.
Steps 6 to 8 should start as soon as possible. The development of a standard on stiffness
(step 6) will of course depend on the research results (steps 7 & 8). The necessary
research must include further development of the technology of the PERS and full-scale
experiments for testing the acoustic effectiveness and durability of different PERS
solutions. This effort would take several years and would need strong support from the
Commission. As such a research project similar in nature to SIRUUS (involving
laboratory research on materials, preliminary tests on small-scale experimental sections
and full-scale experimental road sections), let us take the SIRUUS budget as a first guess,
i.e. 3.5 million over 4 years.
48/58
7 References
[1] Anonymous, Adaptation and revision of the interim noise computation methods for the purpose of
strategic noise mapping. Two reports within the main title are of interest here, namely Final draft report
and Road Traffic Noise Noise emission: databases. Contract B4-3040/2001/329750/MAR/C1,
European Commission, DG Environment, Brussels.
[2] Anonymous, Baudurchfhrung Grundlagen Prfverfahren Feldprfungen
Rollgeruschmessung, RVS 11.066, Bauministerium fr Wirschaftliche Angelegenheiten, Wien, April
1997.
[3] Haider M., Rollgeruschmessung Optimierung von erfahren und Grenzwerten, Strassenforschung
3.277, Endbericht, Arsenal Research, Wien, 2004.
[4] Anonymous, "Guide du Bruit des Transports Terrestres Prvision des niveaux sonores". Ministre de
lEnvironnement et du Cadre de Vie/Ministre des Transports/CETUR, Novembre 1980.
[5] Besnard F. et al., The procedure for updating the vehicle noise emission values of the French Guide
du Bruit , EURONOISE, Naples, 2003.
[6] Besnard F. et al., The procedure for updating the vehicle noise emission values of the French Guide
du Bruit des Transports Terrestres, Ministre de lEquipement, des Transports, du Logement, du
Tourisme et de la Mer, Note Technique, Paris, Novembre 2002.
[7] Anonymous, "Richtlinien fr den Lrmschutz an Strassen (RLS-90)". Ausgabe 1990, Bundesministerium fr Verkehr, Postfach 210360, 5000 Kln 21, Germany.
[8] Anonymous, Verfahren zur Messung der Geruschemission von Strassenoberflchen (GEStrO-92),
Anlage zum ARS 16/1992, Der Bundesminister fr Verkehr, 1992.
[9] Anonymous, Decree on the content- and form-related requirements for strategic noise maps serving
for the assessment and management of environmental noise as well as the calculation and investigation
methods implemented for the preparation of strategic noise maps, Hungarian Ministry of Environment
and Water, Guidelines 25/2004 (XII.20).
[10] http://pcangelo.eng.unipr.it
[11] Tachibana, H., "Road traffic noise prediction model 'asj model 1998' proposed by the acoustical
society of japan - part 1: Its structure and the flow of calculation". Proc. of INTER-NOISE 2000, Nice,
France.
[12] Oshino, Y.; Kono, S.; Ohnishi, H.; Sone, T.; Tachibana, H., "Road traffic noise prediction model 'ASJ
Model 1998' proposed by the Acoustical Society of Japan - Part 2: Calculation model of sound power
levels of road vehicles". Proc. of INTER-NOISE 2000, Nice, France.
[13] Anonymous, Reken- en meetvoorschrift verkeerslawaai, Regeling als bedoelt in artikel 102, 1ste en
2de lid, van de Wet geluidhinder, Den Haag, Sdu, 1981.
[14] Eijbersen et al. : De methode Cwegdek 2002 voor wegverkeersgeluid , Publicatie 200, CROW, Ede
(NL), April 2004.
[15] http://www.stillerverkeer.nl
[16] Anonymous, Mode opratoire mesure du bruit de contact pneu/route , CRR, Bruxelles, MF
50/84, 1984
49/58
[17] Bar P., Delanne Y., Rduire le bruit pneumatique/chausse, Presses de lENPC, collection du LCPC,
1993.
[18] Anonymous, Slovenian Official Gazette n45:1995.
[19] Anonymous, Slovenian Technical Specification TS 06.640:2003.
[20] Ramsak M., Kokot D., Tuar M.: "Comparative study of traffic noise emission for characteristic types
of asphalt mixtures in Slovenia", SIIV 2004, New technologies and model tools for roads, Firenze, 27-29
October 2004.
[21] Anonymous, "Rehabilitacin de Firmes", Norma 6.3 IC, Ministerio de Fomento, Direccin General de
Carreteras, Madrid (Spain), December 2003.
[22] Anonymous, Instruccin para el Diseo de Firmes de la Red de Carreteras de Andaluca , Junta de
Andaluca, Consejera de Obras Pblicas y Transportes, Direccin General de Carreteras, Andaluca
(Spain), 1999.
[23] Alfrez J.R., Echazaretta F. S., Mateos M.D.J. : Elaboracion de mapas estrategicos de ruido de
carreteras , RUTAS, Nov.-Dec. 2004.
[24] Heutschi K., SonRoad Modle de calcul du trafic routier , Cahier de lEnvironnement n366,
OFEFP, Berne, 2004.
[25] Anonymous, "Calculation of Road Traffic Noise", Dept. of Transport, Welsh Office, HMSO, London,
U.K., 1988.
[26] Phillips S., Kollamthodi S., Morgan P.A., Classification of low noise road surfacings,
INTERNOISE 2001, The Hague, Netherlands, 27-30 August 2001.
[27] Sandberg U., Road Surface Categorization and Correction in HARMONOISE Basic
Considerations, Final Technical Report, HAR11TR-030116-VTI05, 2003.
[28] Anonymous, "Road Traffic Noise - Nordic Prediction Method (TemaNord)". Report 1996:525, Nordic
Council of Ministers, Copenhagen, Denmark, 1996.
[29] Sandberg U., "Korrigering i den nordiska trafikbullermodellen fr inverkan av vgyta". VTI
Meddelande 706, Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute (VTI), Linkping, 1993.
[30] Jonasson, H.G.; Storeheier, S.., "Nord 2000. New Nordic Prediction Method for Road Traffic Noise".
SP Report 2001:10, Swedish National Testing and Research Institute (SP), Bors, Sweden, 2001.
[31] Sandberg U., Considerations with regard to reference surface in HARMONOISE, Technical Report,
HAR11TR-030715-VTI01, 2003.
[32] Sandberg U., Low-noise road surface classification and procurement system in Japan, Private
communication, 30/06/2005.
[33] SILVIA, Guidance manual for the implementation of low-noise road surfaces, FEHRL Report
2006/02, Brussels (including an appended CD-ROM with complementary technical documents).
[34] Anonymous, "Allgemeines Rundschreiben Straenbau, ARS Nr. 14/1991", Der Bundesminister fr
Verkehr, 1991.
50/58

[35] Sandberg U., Ejsmont J., Tyre/Road Noise Reference Book, INFORMEX, Harg, SE-59040, Kisa,
Sweden (2002).
[36] ISO 13472-1:2002, Acoustics -- Measurement of sound absorption properties of road surfaces in situ
-- Part 1: Extended surface method.
[37] ISO 10534-2:1996 Acoustics Determination of sound absorption coefficient and impedance in
impedance tube method Part 2: Transfer function method
[38] ISO/CD 11819-2: 2000, Acoustics -- Measurement of the influence of road surfaces on traffic noise -Part 2: Close-proximity method.
[39] HARMONOISE, Engineering method for road traffic and railway noise after validation and finetuning, Technical Report HAR32TR-040922-DGMR20 (Deliverable D18), 20 January 2005
(http://www.imagine-project.org).
[40] Beaumont J., Soulage D., Estimate procedure of vehicle noise on road surfaces - French/German
procedure, International tyre/road noise conference, Gothenburg, SE, pp. 205-216, 8-10 August, 1990.
[41] ISO 362:1981 Acoustics Measurement of noise emitted by accelerating road vehicles
Engineering method .
[42] ISO 7188:1985 Acoustics Measurement of noise emitted by passenger cars under conditions
representative of urban driving.
[43] ISO 11819-1:1997 Acoustics Method for measuring the influence of road surfaces on traffic noise
Part 1: Statistical Pass-By method.
[44] Sandberg U., Noise trailers of the world Tools for Tire/Road noise measurements with the closeproximity method, Noise-Con, Ypsilanti, USA, April 5-8, 1998.
[45] Ejsmont J.A., Classification of road surfaces with respect to traffic noise by using the trailer method,
Technical University Gdansk, Report No. 1992-01-09, 1992
[46] Springborn M., Reifengeruschmessungen im Nahfeld und im Fernfeld zur Beurteilung der
akustischen Eigenschaften von Fahrbahnen, Second international symposium on roads surface
characteristics, Technische Universitt, Berlin, pp. 20-33, 1992
[47] Caestecker C., Van Messem M., Proefvakken van geluidsarme cementbeton verhardingen,
Infrastructuur in het leefmilieu, n 1/97, 1997
[48] Sandberg U., Ejsmont J.A., Development of three methods for measurement of tyre/road noise
emission: coast-by, trailer and laboratory drum, Noise control engineering journal, Vol. 23, n 3, 1986
[49] ISO 10844:1994 Acoustics Specification of test tracks for the purpose of measuring noise emitted
by road vehicles Annex A: Measurement of pavement surface macrotexture using a volumetric patch
technique.
[50] CEN 13036-1:2001 Road and airfield surface characteristics - Test methods - Part 1: Measurement
of pavement surface macrotexture depth using a volumetric patch technique
[51] ISO 13473-1:1997 Characterisation of pavement texture by use of surface profiles -Part 1 :
Determination of Mean Profile Depth
[52] ISO 13473-2:2002 Characterization of pavement texture by use of surface profiles -- Part 2:
Terminology and basic requirements related to pavement texture profile analysis
51/58
[53] ISO 13473-3:2002 Characterization of pavement texture by use of surface profiles -- Part 3:
Specification and classification of profilometers
[54] Sandberg, U; Kalman, B; Nilsson, R: Design Guidelines for Construction and Maintenance of
Poroelastic Road Surfaces, deliverable SILVIA-project n SILVIA-VTI-005-02-WP4-141005 (2005)
[55] http://www.harmonoise.org
[56] ISO 10534-1:1996 Acoustics Determination of sound absorption coefficient and impedance in
impedance tube method Part 1: Method using standing wave ratio
[57] ISO 354:1985 (EN 20354:1993) Acoustics Measurement of sound absorption in a reverberant
room
[58] von Meier A., Van Keulen W., System for measuring the absorption coefficient in situ, M+P
raadgevende ingenieurs b.v., Aalsmeer, MVM.94.1.1, 1995
[59] La rduction du bruit aux abords des voies routires . Recherche en matire de routes et de
transports routiers, OCDE, 1995
[60] Morgan P.A., Watts G.R . A novel approach to the acoustic characterisation of porous road
surfaces, Applied Acoustics, Volume 64, Number 12, December 2003
[61] Descornet G., Tyre/road noise generating mechanisms, noise/texture relationship, noise versus skid
resistance, recent practical achievements in Belgium, ETH Mitteilung Reifengeraeusch und
Strassenbau , International Seminar, Zrich, nr. 57, 1984
[62] Kollamthodi S, Phillips S M and Balsom M H (2000). Factors affecting SPB measurements:
Development of the backing board method. TRL Unpublished Project Report PR/SE/164/00. TRL Limited,
Crowthorne, UK.
[63] IPG Scientific Strategy Document, DWW-2005-70, November 2005.
[64] http://www.euro.who.int/Noise. An extensive study about the adverse effects of noise on man is e.g.
Berglund, B.; Lindvall, T. (ed.) Community Noise, Archives of the Center for Sensory Research, Vol. 2,
Issue 1, Stockholm University and Karolinska Institute, Stockholm (1995), to be downloaded from
http://www.nonoise.org/library/whonoise/whonoise.htm
[65]
EU
Green
Paper
on
future
http://europa.eu.int/en/record/green/gp9611/noisesum.htm
noise
policy
(1996),
see
[66] Anonymous. Updated Strategy Paper of the CALM Network, Oct. 2004. See http://www.calmnetwork.com
[67] Babisch, W., Transportation Noise and Cardiovascular Risk, Review and Synthesis of
Epidemiological Studies, Dose-effect Curve and Risk Estimation, WaBoLu-Hefte, Federal Environment
Agency of Germany, January 2006 (downloadable from http://www.umweltbundesamt.de)
[68] Anonymous. MIRA-T 2001 Milieu- en natuurrapport
Milieumaatschappij en Garant, Leuven/ Apeldoorn (2001)
Vlaanderen:
themas,
Vlaamse
[69] Franssen EAM, Dongen JEF, Ruysbroek JMH, Vos H, Stellato RK, Hinder door milieufactoren en
de beoordeling van de leefomgeving in Nederland (Nuisance by environmental factors and the
evaluation of the living environment in The Netherlands), RIVM-report n 815120001/2004, Dutch
National Institute for Public Health and Environment, Bilthoven (2004)
52/58
[70] Bendtsen H, e.a., Traffic management and noise reducing pavements - Recommendations on
additional noise reducing measures, SILVIA deliverable, doc. number SILVIA-DTF-DRI-008-11-WP5020205-D12 Traffic Management, Danish Road Institute (2005)
[71] Morgan PA, Nelson PM and Steven H, Integrated assessment of noise reduction measures in the
road transport sector, Project Report, PR SE/652/03 ETD/FIF,20020051, TRL Limited/TV Fahrzeug
GmbH, prepared for Enterprise DG, European Commission (2003)
[72] Beckenbauer T. e.a., Einfluss der Fahrbahntextur auf das Reifen-Fahrbahn-Gerasch,
Forschungsbericht FE-Nr. 03-293/1995 MRB Bundesanstalt fr Strassenwegen (Federal Highway Research
Institute of Germany)
[73] Sandberg, U, Descornet, G., Road Surface Influence on Tire/Road Noise Part I, and Sandberg, U,
Descornet, G., Road Surface Influence on Tire/Road Noise Part II, Proc. of Internoise 80, Miami
(1980)
[74] Anonymous. Good practice guide for strategic noise mapping and the production of associated data
on noise exposure, Position paper, European Commission WG-AEN, 13 January 2006.
[75] Sandberg, U, Vgytans inverkan p trafikbulleremissionen korrektionstabel fr
effektsambandmodeller, VTI Notat 30-2000, Swedish National Road and Transport Research Institute
(VTI) Linkping, Sweden (2001), downloadable from http://www.vti.se/info/rapporter/edefault.asp
[76] G. Descornet, Efficiency in noise reduction of pervious coated macadam, Road and Traffic 2000,
International Road and Traffic Conference, Berlin, Vol. 5 (1988)
[77] Sandberg, U, Semi-generic temperature corrections for tyre/road noise, Proc. INTERNOISE 2004,
Prague (2004)
[78] Descornet, G. et al. Traffic Noise and Road Surfaces: State of the Art, SIRUUS-project, BRRC
(2000)
[79] Descornet, G, Experimental study of the rolling noise of a test car on various existing road surfaces
in Belgium, Proceedings of the International Tire Noise Conference, STU-information No. 168-1980,
NUTEK, Stockholm (1979)
[80] Sommer, H, Noise reducing concrete surfaces State of the art 1992 In Heft 409,
Strassenforschung, Bundesministerium fr Wirtschaftliche Angelegenheiten, Vienna (1992)
[81] http://www.italgrip.com (in Italian)
[82] Sommer, H., Herabsetzung des rollgerusches bei betonfahrbahndecken, Zement & Beton, n3/90
(1990)
[83] FEBELCEM, Revtements en bton silencieux, Dossier n18, Bruxelles, novembre 1998.
[84] Spits, PL, Open beton voor minder verkeersgeluid, Cement, n 3 (1990)
[85] Anonymous. Optimalisatie van uitgeborsteld beton en bepaling van Cwegdek (Optimization of
exposed aggregate cement concrete and dertermination of Croad), report 03-09, CROW, Ede, the
Netherlands (2003)
[86] http://www.silence-ip.org
53/58

[87] Rao, S; Yu, H; Khazanovitch, L; Darter, MI, Longevity of Diamond-Grooved Concrete Pavements,
TRB paper 991220, 78th TRB meeting, Washington DC (1999)
[88] Richtlijn dunne asfaltdeklagen, Vereniging tot Bevordering van Werken in Asfalt, Breukelen, the
Netherlands (2004), see www.VBwasfalt.org
[89] van Blokland, GJ; Kuijpers, A. Type approval and COP tests for low noise road surfaces.
Proceedings of Inter-Noise 2001, The Hague, Netherlands 541-546.
[90] prEN 13108:2005, Bituminous mixtures Material specifications Part 2: Asphalt concrete for
very thin layers
[91] Up to date information about thin layers can be found on the web site of the Dutch Noise Innovation
Program: www.innovatieprogrammageluid.nl, especially in the State of the Art Dunne Deklagen and in
the DRI-report International Experiences with Thin Layer Pavements (November 2005), which can be
downloaded from this site.
[92] Van Keulen, W, Banden en wegdekken (Tires and Road surfaces) HMB Lawaaibeheersing,
(2003)
[93] Brosseaud ,Y, Abadie R, Legonin R, Couches de roulement trs minces et ultra-minces en matriaux
bitumineux chaud. Bilan demploi et comportement, Bulletin de liaison des laboratories des Ponts et
Chausses, LCPC, pp. 55-71, n 207 (1997)
[94] Descornet, G, Les enrobes drainants Proprits acoustiques, Demi-journe dtude CRR,
Brussels (1988)
[95] Delanne, Y, Efficacit acoustique des enrobes drainants, Revue Gnrale des Routes et
Arodromes, n 653 (1988)
[96] Legeay, V, Macrotexture and low frequency tyre/road noise correlation, International tyre/road
noise conference, Gothenburg, Sweden (1990)
[97] State of the Art: Advies 2-laags ZOAB, Dutch Noise Innovation Program, downloadable from
www.innovatieprogrammageluid.nl.
[98] Goubert, L; Hooghwerff, J; The, P; Hofman, R, Two layer porous asphalt: an international survey in
the frame of the Dutch Noise Innovation Program (IPG), Internoise 2005, Rio de Janeiro (2005),
downloadable from www.innovatieprogrammageluid.nl
[99] State of the Art: akoestisch geoptimaliseerde wegdekken, Dutch Noise Innovation Program,
downloadable from www.innovatieprogrammageluid.nl
[100] Kragh, J: Traffic noise at two-layer porous asphalt ster Sgade, Year N 6, Danish Road
Institute,
Technical
Note
30
(2005),
downloadable
from
http://www.vejdirektoratet.dk/publikationer/VInot030/index.htm.
[101] Goubert, L, Two layer porous asphalt: an international survey, Dutch Noise Innovation Program,
Report Number IPG-RAP 04.00505 (2005)
[102] Caestecker, C, Test sections of noiseless cement concrete pavements, Test report, Afdeling Wegen
Vlaams-Brabant (Flemish Brabant Road Administration) (1996)
[103] State of the art: Modieslab Derde generatie stil wegdek (Third generation road surface), Dutch
Noise Innovation Program (2005), downloadable from www.innovatieprogrammageluid.nl.
54/58

[104] Goubert, L, Statistical Pass-By Vehicle Noise Measurements on Full Scale implementation on
expressway test site and urban test site, SIRUUS (Silent Road for Urban and Extra-Urban Use)-project
(2002)
[105] Donovan, PR, Comparative Measurements of Tire/Pavement Noise in Europe and the United
States, the NITE-study, Illingworth & Rodkin, Inc., prepared for The California Department of
Transportation (2005)
[106] http://www.rubberizedasphalt.org/rac/racspecs/index.htm.
[107] Commission Recommendation 2003/613/EC, Official Journal of the European Union n OJ L 212/49,
22.08.2003
[108] Report from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council, COM(2004)160, Brussels,
10.03.2004
[109] Directive 2001/43/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 June 2001 amending
Council Directive 92/23/EEC relating to tyres for motor vehicles and their trailers and to their fitting,
Official Journal of the European Union n OJ L 211, 4.8.2001
[110] Bourbon, C.; Mummenthey R.D.; Nol, P. Cartographie du bruit routier Lexprience
bruxelloise, Rapport vulgaris LIFE98 ENV/000/248, IBGE, Brussels, 2003
[111] ISO/CD 13472-2:2005 Acoustics -- Measurement of sound absorption properties of road surfaces in
situ -- Part 2: Spot method using a sealed tube.
[112] ISO/CD 13472-3:2005 Acoustics -- Measurement of sound absorption properties of road surfaces in
situ -- Part 3: Spot method for highly reflective surfaces.
[113] ISO/ TS 13473-4:2004 Characterisation of pavement texture by use of surface profiles - Part 4 :
Spectral analysis of surface profiles
[114] ISO/CD 13473-5:2005 (EN ISO 13473-5:2006) Characterisation of pavement texture by use of
surface profiles - Part 5: Determination of megatexture
[115] ISO 13325:2003 Tyres -- Coast-by methods for measurement of tyre-to-road sound emission
[116] European Environment Agency. Europes environment: The third assessment. EEA Environmental
Assessment Report No. 10. EEA, Copenhagen, Denmark, 2003.
[117] OCDE. Contre le bruit Renforcer les politiques de lutte contre le bruit. OCDE, Paris, 1986.
[118] Brosseaud, Ensais and Anfosso-Lde. Les revtements de chausses limitant le bruit de roulement
exemple de partenariat et de coopration entre ladministration et les entreprises franaises,
Confrence INFRA, Montral, Canada-Qubec, 26-28 novembre 2001.
[119] Popp, C., Heidebrunn, C., Bonacker, M., Richard, J., Krapf, K.-G., Wetzel, E., Prall, U., Steven, H.,
Wende, H., EffNoise, Service contract relating to the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, Final
Report Volume I, 2004
[120] Popp, C., Heidebrunn, C., Bonacker, M., Richard, J., Krapf, K.-G., Wetzel, E., Prall, U., Steven, H.,
Wende, H., EffNoise, Service contract relating to the effectiveness of noise mitigation measures, Final
Report Volume II (Annex 3), 2004
[121] Steven, H. Presentation of Work Package 40 Vehicle Noise Emission Model at ROTRANOMO
Workshop, Brussels, 17 November 2004 (www.rotranomo.com).
55/58
[122] Ejsmont, J.A., Development of procedures for certifying noise testing equipement, Gdansk
University of Technology Publishers, Gdansk, 2005.
[123] Luminari, M., SIRUUS, Final Technical report (Executive publishable summary), 27 June 2003.
56/58
8 Symbols and acronyms

AC
ADT
AFNOR
ASJ
CEN
COP
CPB
CPX
CPXI
Croad
CRTN
Csurf
DAC
dB(A)
DLPAC
DStrO
EACC
EC
EU
GEStrO
HRA
IPG
ISO
LAeq
LAmax
Leq
LMA
MLS
MPD
MTD
NMS
OECD
PA
PAC
PCC
PERS
PSV
RAC
RLS
RSI
RVS
Asphalt Concrete
Average Daily Traffic
Association Franaise de Normalisation
Acoustical Society of Japan
Comit Europen de Normalisation
Conformity of Production
Controlled Pass-By (method)
Close Proximity (method)
Close Proximity Index (derived from a CPX measurement)
Correction for the road surface influence (Dutch method)
Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (UK method)
Correction for the road surface influence (Austrian method)
Dense Asphalt Concrete
A-weighted decibel (unit of noise level)
Double-Layer Porous Asphalt Concrete
Differenz / Strassenoberflache
Exposed Aggregate Cement Concrete
Euopean Commission
European Union
Geruschemission von Strassenoberflchen
Hot Rolled Asphalt
Innovatie Programma Geluid
International Standardization Organization
A-weighted equivalent sound level
A-weighted peak noise level
Equivalent sound level
Lrmmessung Anhnger
Maximum Length Sequences (ISO 13472-1)
Mean Profile Depth (of surface macrotexture)
Mean Texture Depth (of surface macrotexture)
New Member State (in EU)
Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development
Porous Asphalt
Porous Asphalt Concrete
Portland Cement Concrete (in USA)
Poro-Elastic Road Surface
Polished Stone Value
Rubberized Asphalt Concrete (in USA)
Richtlinien fr den Lrmschutz an Strassen (Germany)
Road Surface Influence (term in calculations, UK)
Richtlinien und Vorschriften fr den Strassenbau (Austria)
57/58

SD
SMA
SPB
SPBI
TAC
TNM
VTAC
WHO
Surface Dressing
Stone Mastic Asphalt
Statistical Pass-By (Measurement method)
Statistical Pass-By Index (derived from an SPB measurement)
Thin Asphalt Concrete
Traffic Noise Model (USA)
Very Thin Asphalt Concrete
World Health Organization
58/58

Noise Classification Road Pavements (Technical)

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Noise Classification Road Pavements (Technical)

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

European Commission

Noise classification of road pavements

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

TRAFFIC NOISE AND ROAD SURFACES ....................................................................................4

LOW-NOISE ROAD SURFACES ...................................................................................................11

TEXTURE-OPTIMIZED ONLY .........................................................................................................11

MEASUREMENT METHODS AND STANDARDS .....................................................................18

WHY ABATE TRAFFIC NOISE? ........................................................................................................4

NOISE CLASSIFICATION OF ROAD PAVEMENTS.................................................................25

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...........................................................................46

SYMBOLS AND ACRONYMS ........................................................................................................57

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

2 Traffic noise and road surfaces

Pain and hearing fatigue

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

Figure 1 - Relative contribution to nuisance by different sources of noise in

percentage highly annoyed

Figure 2 - Development of the relative contribution of different noise sources to

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

2.2 Available tools for traffic noise abatement

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

Traffic management measure

Potential noise reduction (LAeq)

Traffic calming / Environmentally adapted through roads

Round-top/circle-top road humps

Table 2- Comparison of three possible measures to abate road traffic noise

Low noise road surface

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

2.3 The influence of the road surface

cars built later after 1996

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

For dense wearing courses

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

Table 3 -Correction factors for humidity on DAC and SMA-surfaces

Amount of water on road surface

wet (moderate rainfall)

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

3 Low-noise road surfaces

3.1 Texture-optimized only

Resin-bound surface dressing

Definition: a high performance surface dressing which consists of a layer of resinous

Exposed aggregates cement concrete

Definition: this type of cement concrete undergoes a special treatment immediately

Polished Stone Value

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

Optimized exposed aggregate cement concrete my yield a reduction of up to 3 dB(A)

Ground cement concrete

Definition: A thin layer can be defined as an integrated, independently functioning

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

3.2 Porous surfaces

Single layer porous asphalt

Innovatie Programma Geluid (Noise Innovation Programme).

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

Two-layer porous asphalt

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

Porous cement concrete

3.3 Elastic surfaces

See discussion in [78]

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

Properties: Rubber may be added as granules to a bituminous mix (typical 3 to 6 % by

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05

DG-ENV_Noise_Classification_Road_Pavements_ Task 1 Report _05