towards common noise assessment methods in eu dr. stylianos kephalopoulos european commission

EIONET National Reference Centres for Noise meeting, 14-15 October 2009, Copenhagen 1

Towards common noise assessment methods in EU

Dr. Stylianos Kephalopoulos

European Commission DG Joint Research Centre Institute for Health and Consumer Protection 21027-Ispra(VA), ITALY

Meeting of the

EIONET National Reference Centres for Noise

14-15 October 2009, Copenhagen


Common assessment methods are foreseen by the END

In article 6 of the Directive it is stated that: “common assessment methods for

the determination of Lden and Lnight shall be established by the Commission

in accordance with the procedure laid down in Article 13(2) [regulatory committee] through a revision of Annex II”.

for ensuring consistency for noise exposure data among Europe to achieve accuracy, precision and credibility of the assessment performed throughout the EU and in the estimation of the population exposure


Roadmap towards common noise assessment methods in EU

DG JRC on behalf of DG ENV and in collaboration with EEA and a Network of European noise experts so far have undertaken the following steps:

1. Workshop on “The target quality and input values requirements for European noise mapping” 2. Elaborate a ‘fit for purpose’ framework for common noise assessment methods3. A literature survey on existing noise mapping methods available in Europe, USA and Japan 4. Requirements and criteria to be applied for the selection of the common assessment methods5. Evaluation of and pre-selection among existing noise assessment methods


1. Workshop on “The target quality and input values requirements for European noise mapping”

Reliable and comparable results at EU level should be obtained through

establishing common assessment methods.

The reliability and comparability of results should be maximised through setting up a guidance on the competent use of noise assessment methods accompanied by a quality system in relation to:

a) the relevant quality and quantity of input data;b) the use, extraction, and management of input databases;c) the calculation settings in software; d) the software use and the modelling techniques used.

Reporting mechanism to report noise maps and population exposure should be made mandatory.

Conclusions and recommendations (1/3)



The quality system to introduce regarding input data collection and use should

specifically comprise the following elements:o Specifications for GIS input/output data and data collectiono Specification on degree of detail of the input data tailored for different noise

mapping needs, e.g., strategic (global) noise mapping versus detailed (local)

noise mapping for action planningo A standard scheme to be followed for the collection of information on the

datasets used and data processing procedures usedo Specific conditions related to the definition and usage of “default” input datao A fixed methodology to attribute population exposure to noise levels

An EU calculation code (both, for strategic and detailed noise mapping) should

be established and updated centrally and periodically by the EC in collaboration

with the software developers.




There is a need to constitute an open and public database of global input values to be

used together with the common assessment methods, that is centrally managed and

periodically updated by the EC on the basis of contributions from the EU MS

The same degree of “comparable” results for all four calculation methods

(i.e., road, railway, industrial and aircraft) should be ensured

An integration of the noise GIS data into the set-ups under the INSPIRE directive

(Annexes I to III) is envisaged.



2. “Fit for purpose” framework for common noise assessment methods (1/3)

1st Purpose: overall impact assessment of exposure to noise

1. Support to the EU level policy:

Strategic noise maps (simplified assessment methods with reasonable

data approximations)

2nd Purpose: precise determination of exposure levels to noise


More sophisticated assessment methods with detailed input values to: Provide the basis for source noise legislation (e.g. tyre noise, vehicle pass by

noise, road surfaces descriptions, rail vehicle interoperability, aircraft fleet restrictions)





More sophisticated assessment methods with detailed input values to: Support the assessment of impact of policy alternatives (“what-if” scenarios)

2. Support EU MS policy aspects: vehicle restrictions tyre restrictions or special types traffic calming promotion of electric / hybrid vehicles promotion of vehicle fleet change through financial incentives to scrap older

cars, older trains, older aircrafts noise-differentiated track and airport access charging action plan policies etc




3. Local action plans policy aspects:

local actions such as those within the ‘Silence’ handbook road surface changes different types of barriers (in general, e.g. berms, walls, embankments etc.),

their materials, shapes, sizes, acoustical performance or other functionalities (e.g.: absorbent/reflective, curved, tilted, complex overhanging, with photovoltaic devices and with top devices).

rail grinding, rail vehicle brake changes, tuned rail absorbers, mitigation of rail curve squeal

transferring night time rail and aircraft movements to the day switch to different type of cars and trains (e.g.: electric/hybrid cars, diesel to

electric locomotives) low emission zones calculations for quiet areas in open countryside


3. Literature survey of existing methods in EU, US and Japan

Investigate on the source and propagation elements of the methods in terms of:

theoretical assumptions and mathematical formulations degree of applicability range of validity development and updating plans over time documentation

Sources of information used:

peer-reviewed journals conference proceedings (e.g. JASA, Journal of Sound & Vibration, ACTA

ACUSTICA, Euronoise and Internoise) directly from the developers for unpublished material


3. Literature survey of existing methods in EU, US and Japan

Road Country

ASJ RTN 2009 JP

CRTN UK

HARMONOISE/IMAGINE EU

NMPB 2009 FR

Nord 2000 DK- FI - IS- NO- SE

RLS90 / VBUS DE

RMW NL

RVS AT

Sonroad CH

Railway Country

CRN UK

HARMONOISE/IMAGINE

EU

Nord 2000 DK- FI - IS- NO- SE

Onorm 305011 AT

RMR NL

Schall 03 / VBUSch DE

Semibel CH

Industrial Country


ISO 9613 EU

Aircraft Country

AzB 2008 DE

ECAC Doc. 29 3rd rev.-ICAO doc. 9911

EU

(FLULA) CH

(INM) US

(JCAB) JP

(NORTIM) NO



4. Requirements / criteria for the selection of the common noise assessment methods (1/3)

Requirements for the selection of the common noise assessment methods

Essential Recommendable

GENERAL REQUIREMENTS Possibility to modulate the method between a detailed (user defined specific input values) and an easy implementation with default values

X

Fulfilment of requirements of END (Lden and Lnight, 4m/0.1m, average meteorological year, neglecting corresponding façade reflection)

X

Octave bands calculations X Geometrical divergence X Atmospheric absorption X Terrain profile X Ground effect X Reflections / diffractions X Specific description of the segmentation technique to be used for decomposition of the large sources

X

Propagation condition (are more propagation conditions allowed?)

X

Meteorological influence (consider the effect of temperature, pressure, wind speed and direction on yearly average basis)

X



ROAD SPECIFIC Road surface type correction X Tyre type correction X Ability to split between tyre and engine noise X Acceleration/deceleration (Traffic flow) X At least 4 classes of vehicle types X Gradients X Specific cases (bridges, tunnels, viaducts) X RAILWAY SPECIFIC Wheel and rail roughness X Differentiation between track/support structure X Differentiation between engine noise, rolling noise, aerodynamic noise

X

Differentiation between different types of vehicles/ locomotives X Specific cases (bridges, tunnels, viaducts) X



INDUSTRIAL SPECIFIC Point, line, area source X Lateral diffraction around obstacles X AIRCRAFT SPECIFIC Aircraft performance as a function of air parameters, aircraft type, engine type, TOW

X

Differentiation between different take off procedures and between different approach procedures

X

Terrain shielding / screening effects X Ground absorption (correction for hard ground at the receiver) X OTHER REQUIREMENTS Scientific evidence X Validation of the method/extent of validation X Royalties / IPR issues X Easiness of implementation into software (complete and clear description)

X

Availability of parameters and input values databases X Frequency of update of database X


5. Evaluation of and pre-selection among existing noise assessment methods (1/5)

HARMONOISE/IMAGINE and NORD2000 for road, railway and industrial noise

Further investigation on ECAC-Doc29 and AzB has to be performed for aircraft noise, since both methods fulfil most but not all the essential requirements outlined during the previous technical discussions held among the noise experts.

Other methods were also qualified because they contain components resulted from research investigations recently concluded that could eventually be used in the common method:

ASJ RTN 2009 and NMPB 2008 for road traffic noise, RVS and Schall03 for railway noise and ISO 9613 for industrial noise

Based on the agreed criteria, the evaluation exercise qualified the following methods

as the most appropriate to be further processed for preparing the common methods:



Table describing the components of the qualified noise assessment methods

for both, the propagation and the source specific parts

The pre-selected methods were further processed in a Workshop took place

on 8-9 September 2009 in Brussels on the basis:



PROPAGATION SPECIFICA.1 - Geometrical divergence

A.2 - Atmospheric absorption

A.3 - Terrain profile A.4 - Ground effect A.5 - Reflections A.6 - Diffractions / screening obstacles A.7 - Modelling of meteorological influence

ROAD SOURCE SPECIFICB.1 - Classification of vehicles

B.2 - Speed dependence

B.3 - Acceleration/deceleration (Traffic flow)

B.4 - Gradients

B.5 - Road surface type correction

B.6 - Tyre type correction

B.7 - Engine noise/Exhaust noise

B.8 - Aerodynamic noise

B.9 – Bridges

B.10 – Tunnels

B.11 – Viaducts

B.12 – Crossings

B.13 - Segmentation of the source

B.14 - Source(s) position


5. Evaluation of and pre-selection among existing noise assessment methods (4/5)RAILWAY SOURCE SPECIFICC.1 - Wheel roughness

C.2 - Rail roughness

C.3 - Classification of vehicles/ locomotives

C.4 - Rolling noise / speed dependence

C.5 - Engine noise / speed dependence

C.6 - Aerodynamic noise / speed dependence

C.7 - Squeal noise

C.8 - Braking noise

C.9 - Track/support structure classification

C.10 - Bridges

C.11 – Tunnels

C.12 – Viaducts

C.13 – Crossings

C.14 - Segmentation of the source

C.15 - Source(s) position

INDUSTRIAL SOURCE SPECIFICD.1 - Point source definition

D.2 - Line source definition

D.3 - Area source definition

D.4 - Sound power and directivity (database)

AIRCRAFT SOURCE SPECIFICE.1 - Segmentation (function of aircraft performance and track)

E.2 - Aircraft performance and flight profile as a function of air parameters, aircraft type, engine type, TOW (database)

E.3 - Aircraft noise as function of performance (database)

E.4 - Source directivity

E.5 - Dispersion of tracks

E.6 - Ground operations


An ad-hoc Workshop on aircraft noise will be organised before the end of 2009 for achieving consensus among the experts for the components to be used in the common noise assessment methods. The discussions should be based on ECAC doc. 29 and AzB.

Benchmarking/testings should be performed and/or ad-hoc meetings should be organised for the following components:

For the sound propagation part:A4. ‘ground effect’ (benchmark among Harmonoise/Imagine, Nord2000, NMPB)A5. ‘reflections’ (implementation of Nord2000 formula to be tested by software developers) A6. ‘diffraction & screening obstacles’ (test comparison of Harmonoise/Imagine, NMPB)

The way forward (1/3)

A. The following tasks will be performed in the period October-December 2009:


For the road traffic source part: B4. ‘gradients’ (benchmark among Harmonoise/Imagine and NMPB) B9, B10, B11 ‘bridges, tunnels, viaducts’ (ad hoc group of road traffic noise experts

of Harmonise/Imagine for investigating on the inclusion of the Japanese approach) B13. ‘segmentation of the source’ (ad hoc meeting with software developers and

benchmarking of existing software) B14. ‘source(s) position’ (benchmarking and ad hoc meeting between

Harmonoise/Imagine and NMPB)

For the railway traffic source part: C5. ‘engine noise’, C7. ‘squeel noise’, C.10 ‘bridges’, C.15 ‘source position’ (ad hoc

group of railway noise experts of Harmonoise/Imagine and Shall03 to discuss the implementation aspects)



For the industrial source part:

D1. to D4. (to be discussed in an ad hoc group among software developers)

B. The following tasks will be performed in the period November 2009 – April 2010:

A draft of the common noise assessment methods will be prepared for road traffic, railway traffic and industrial noise.

Preparation of good practice guidelines for appropriate use of the common noise assessment methods in relation to the target quality and input values requirements for European noise mapping should be prepared preferably in parallel with the drafting of the common noise assessment methods.



Reports can be retrieved through DG ENV’s Website:

http://ec.europa.eu/environment/noise/

towards common noise assessment methods in eu dr. stylianos kephalopoulos european commission

Documents