Technology for a Quieter America

Committee on Technology for a Quieter America

NATIONAL ACADEMY OF ENGINEERING
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Technology for a Quieter America Committee on Technology for a Quieter America

OCR for page R1
THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS 500 Fifth Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20001 NOTICE: To arrive at the findings and recommendations of this report, the National Academy of Engineering has used a process that involves careful selection of a balanced and knowledgeable committee, assembly of relevant information, and peer review of the resultant report. Support for this project was provided by a generous gift from NAE member William W. Lang, the National Academy of Engineering Fund, and the Federal Highway Administration. The opinions, findings, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the supporting organizations. Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Technology for a quieter America / National Academy of Engineering of the National Academies. p. cm. Includes bibliographical references. ISBN 978-0-309-15632-5 (pbk.) — ISBN 978-0-309-15633-2 (pdf) 1. Noise control— Technological innovations—United States. 2. Noise pollution—United States. I. National Academy of Engineering. TD893.T43 2011 363.740973—dc22 2010037657 Copies of this report are available from the National Academies Press, 500 Fifth Street, N.W., Lock - box 285, Washington, DC 20055; (888) 624-8373 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area); online at http://www.nap.edu. Copyright 2010 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a man - date that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibil- ity given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scien- tific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. www.national-academies.org

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
COMMITTEE ON TECHNOLOgy FOR A QuIETER AMERICA GEORGE C. MALING, JR. (NAE) (chair), Institute of Noise Control Engineering of the USA, Inc. (retired), Harpswell, Maine ROBERT J. BERNHARD, University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, Indiana ROBERT D. BRUCE, CSTI Acoustics, Houston, Texas BETH A. COOPER, Glenn Research Center, NASA, Cleveland, Ohio PATRICIA DAVIES, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana CARL E. HANSON, Harris Miller Miller and Hanson, Burlington, Massachusetts ROBERT D. HELLWEG, JR. (consultant), Wellesley, Massachusetts GERALD C. LAUCHLE, Pennsylvania State University (retired) RICHARD H. LYON (NAE), RH Lyon Corp., Belmont, Massachusetts IAN A. WAITZ, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge Project Staff CAROL R. ARENBERG, Senior Editor, National Academy of Engineering VIVIENNE CHIN, Administrative Assistant, Program Office, National Academy of Engineering LANCE A. DAVIS, Executive Officer, National Academy of Engineering PROCTOR P. REID, Director, Program Office, National Academy of Engineering RICHARD TABER, Program Officer, Program Office, National Academy of Engineering (until February 2009) 

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Preface Noise emissions are an issue in industry, in communi- mittee and five supporting panels of experts appointed by ties, in buildings, and during leisure activities. As such, the the NAE and reviewed by an independent panel appointed audience for a report on noise control is broad and includes following NAE procedures. Implementation of the recom- the engineering community; the public; government at the mendations in the report will result in reduction of the noise federal, state, and local levels; private industry; labor unions; levels to which Americans are exposed and will improve the and nonprofit organizations. These stakeholders should find ability of American industry to compete in world markets something of interest in this report. where increasing attention is being paid to the noise emis- In the past few decades advances have been made in noise sions of products. control technology, instruments for noise measurement, and Key areas where recommendations have been made criteria for noise control. These advances need to be rec- include cost-benefit analysis of noise reduction, especially ognized in our approach to the control of noise and public related to road traffic noise; improved metrics for noise policy designed to improve the noise climate in the United control; lower limits for noise exposures in industry; “buy States. This, together with increasing worldwide interest in quiet” programs; wider use of international standards for reducing noise, makes it necessary to examine American noise emissions; airplane noise reduction technology; and interests in the production of low-noise products with a noise control in structures such as schools, hospitals, and view toward remaining competitive. Reducing product noise office buildings. Also recommended is improved cooperation emissions and achieving noise reductions in our factories, between industry and government agencies involved with office buildings, classrooms, homes, and the environment noise and, in particular, an expanded role for the Environ- are challenging problems. mental Protection Agency, which can be undertaken under This study was undertaken by the National Academy of existing law. Engineering (NAE) to emphasize the importance of engi- neering to the quality of life in America, in particular the George C. Maling, Jr. role of noise control technology making possible a quieter Chair environment. This report was prepared by a study com- Committee on Technology for a Quieter America ii

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Acknowledgments This report was reviewed in draft form by individuals cho- asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations and sen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in did not see the final draft of the report before its public accordance with procedures approved by the National Acad- release. The review of this report was overseen by James emy of Engineering (NAE). The purpose of this independent L. Flanagan, Retired Vice President for Research, Rutgers, review is to provide candid and critical comments that will The State University of New Jersey. Appointed by NAE, he assist the committee and NAE in making its published report was responsible for making certain that an independent ex - as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets insti- amination of this report was carried out in accordance with tutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsive- institutional procedures and that all review comments were ness to the study charge. The reviewers’ comments and the carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following and NAE. individuals for their reviews of this report: In addition to the reviewers, the committee extends its sincerest gratitude to the members of the five expert panels Lewis M. Branscomb, Emeritus, Harvard University, that supported this study (Appendix K), and to the indi- and Adjunct Professor, University of California, San viduals who participated in the project’s eight fact-finding Diego workshops (Appendix L) for sharing their expertise, insights, Mahlon D. Burkhard, Consultant and best ideas to the study. The committee also wishes to William Cavanaugh, Cavanaugh Tocci Associates, Inc. thank the consultants to the committee—Leo L. Beranek, M alcolm J. Crocker, Sound & Vibration Research Stephen H. Crandall, Kenneth M. Eldred, and William W. Laboratory Lang—who provided invaluable advice throughout the Tony F.W. Embleton, Retired, National Research Council project. The committee also thanks the project staff. NAE of Canada executive officer Lance Davis and NAE senior editor Carol David K. Holger, Iowa State University Arenberg substantially improved the readability of the report. Alice Suter, Consultant in Noise and Hearing Conservation Study director Richard Taber managed the project through István L. Vér, Consultant in Acoustics, Noise, and Vibra- January 2009, and NAE program director Proctor Reid man- tion Control aged the project from February 2009 to completion. Vivienne Chin managed the committee’s and panels’ logistical and Although the reviewers listed above provided many administrative needs. constructive comments and suggestions, they were not ix

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Contents Executive Summary 1 1 Introduction 5 A Taxonomy of Noise, 5 Technologies, 7 Competitiveness, 8 Cost-Benefit Analysis, 8 The Role of Government, 8 Education and the Workforce, 9 Summary, 9 2 Community Noise 11 Aircraft Noise, 11 Surface Transportation Noise, 12 Construction Noise, 13 Rail Noise, 13 Noise in Urban Areas, 13 Noise in Quiet Environments, 14 Noise from Industrial Facilities, 14 Wind Turbine Noise, 15 Noise in Buildings, 15 Noise from Consumer Products, 15 Summary, 16 3 Metrics for Assessing Environmental Noise 19 Loudness and A-Weighting, 20 Metrics for Measuring Community Reaction to Noise, 20 Alternative Metrics, 22 Metrics for Communicating with the Public, 23 Noise Metrics for Rural/Naturally Quiet Areas, 24 International Activities Related to Noise Metrics, 24 Summary Findings and Recommendations, 26 4 Control of Hazardous Noise 31 Criteria for Determining Acceptable Risk of Damage, 32 Hazardous Noise Levels in Government and Industry, 32 Hazardous Noise from Consumer Products and Leisure Activities, 33 Impulsive Noise, 35 xi

OCR for page R1
xii CONTENTS Engineering Controls, 36 “Buy Quiet” Programs, 40 Hearing Protection Devices, 42 Hearing Protection Versus (or as Augmentation of) Engineering Noise Control, 43 Hearing Protection Devices: Technologies and Effects on Audibility, 45 Hearing Protection Devices: Effects on Signal and Speech Audibility, 45 Emerging Technologies, 47 Summary, 49 Findings and Recommendations, 49 5 Technology 55 Aerospace and Aeroacoustics, 55 New Technologies for Reducing Noise from Road Traffic, 66 Rail Noise, 71 Noise Control in Buildings, 75 Modeling, Simulation, and Data Management, 80 Consumer Products, 80 Active Noise Control, 83 Summary, 84 6 Standards and Regulations for Product Noise Emissions 89 Immission versus Emission, 90 Determining Product Noise Emissions, 90 International Organization for Standardization, 93 International Electrotechnical Commission, 94 Accreditation and Certification of Noise Emissions, 94 U.S. Accreditation, 94 International Accreditation, 95 Labeling of Noise Emissions, 96 Findings and Recommendations, 98 7 Cost-Benefit Analysis for Noise Control 101 Environmental Economic Analysis, 102 Cost-Benefit Analysis of Aircraft Noise, 103 Cost-Benefit Analysis for Highway Noise, 105 European Cost-Benefit Analyses, 109 Findings and Recommendation, 110 8 The Role of Government 113 Noise-Related Activities by Federal Agencies, 113 Noise-Related Activities by States, 118 Local Noise Control Programs, 118 Summary, 119 Findings and Recommendations, 119 9 Education Supply and Industry Demand for Noise Control Specialists 121 Undergraduate Education in Noise Control Engineering, 121 Graduate Education in Noise Control Engineering, 122 Continuing Education and Skill Development, 123 Supply-Side Challenges, 125 Demand from Industry, 127 Does Demand Exceed Supply?, 128 Findings and Recommendations, 128

OCR for page R1
xiii CONTENTS 10 Public Information on Noise Control 131 Working Toward an Informed Public, 132 Summary Findings and Recommendations, 134 11 Summary Findings and Recommendations 137 Improve Environmental Noise Metrics, 137 Strengthen the Regulatory Framework for Hazardous Noise, 138 Promote the Use of Engineering Controls to Reduce Hazardous Noise, 138 Develop and Deploy Technologies for Noise Control, 139 Develop Product Noise Emission Standards and Regulations, 140 Use Cost-Benefit Analysis as a Tool for Noise Mitigation, 140 Strengthen the Role of Government, 141 Educate More Noise Control Engineers, 141 Improve Public Information on the Effects of Noise and Noise Control, 142 Appendixes A Basic Concepts in Acoustics and Noise 145 B International Activities Relative to Quiet Areas 147 C Additional Information on Standards Activities 149 D Relevant Portions of the U.S. Code 153 E Modern Instrumentation for Environmental Noise Measurement 157 F Guidance for Environmental Economics 163 G Regulations and Voluntary Use of Hearing Protection Devices 167 H Acronyms and Abbreviations 171 I Glossary of Selected Terms 175 J Biographical Sketches of Committee Members 181 K Expert Panels 185 L Workshop Agendas 187

OCR for page R1

OCR for page R1
Tables and Figures TABLES 1-1 Sound Pressure Levels Generated by Various Noise Sources, 6 4-1 Number of Workers Exposed to Noise of >85 dB(A), 31 4-2 Hazardous Noise Exposures as a Function of Exposure Time for 3-dB and 5-dB Exchange Rates (based on exposure to 85 dB for 8 hours), 33 4-3 Action Points, References, and Type of Sound Level, 33 4-4 Worldwide Regulations for Exposures to Hazardous Noise in the Workplace, 34 4-5 Noise Reduction and Productivity in a Beverage Can Manufacturing Plant, 40 5-1 Team Members Available to Work on European Noise Reduction Programs, 64 7-1 Relationship between Day-Night Average Sound Level and Impacts, 104 7-2 Noise Barrier Construction by State, through 2004, 107 7-3 Summary of Barrier Construction and Costs, by State, 107 7-4 Noise Values for Selected European Countries, 111 E-1 Hardware Options for Brüel & Kjær Monitoring Systems, 159 E-2 Software Options for Brüel & Kjær Monitoring Systems, 160 FIguRES 1-1 Comparison of A-weighted sound levels in common outdoor environments, 6 3-1 Variability in survey results. ▼ = road traffic. ★ = air traffic. ♦ = rail traffic, 22 3-2 Three versions of a Schultz curve, 22 3-3 Comparison of the present dose-response curves with results from Miedema and Vos, 26 4-1 Systems approach to reducing noise exposures, 43 4-2 Comparative noise reduction ratings for various earplugs, 44 x

OCR for page R1
xi TABLES AND FIGURES 4-3 Comparative noise reduction ratings based on manufacturers’ laboratory tests and real-world “field” performance of different types of hearing protection devices, 46 4-4 Spectral attenuation obtained with real-ear attenuation at threshold (REAT) procedures for three conventional passive earplugs (premolded, user-molded foam, and spun fiberglass) and two uniform-attenuation, custom-molded earplugs (ER-15, ER-20), 47 5-1 Breakdown of typical noise sources for fixed-wing aircraft, 56 5-2 Breakdown of typical noise sources for a rotorcraft configuration, 57 5-3 Noise sources for 1960s and 1990s jet engines, 57 5-4 QTD2 noise reduction technologies, 58 5-5 Toboggan landing gear fairings for reducing landing gear noise tested in QTD2, 58 5-6 Goals of the N+1 and N+2 generation aircraft, 59 5-7 Noise reduction objectives and technology plans set by ACARE, 59 5-8 Aircraft noise research initiatives undertaken in Europe under the Framework Programs, 61 5-9 Engine/nacelle noise reduction technologies, 61 5-10 Aircraft noise reduction technologies, 62 5-11 Negatively scarfed intake reflects fan noise away from the ground, 62 5-12 SAX-40 silent aircraft, 62 5-13 SAX-40 engine design, 63 5-14 Schematic drawing of contra-rotating turbo fan design to be studied in VITAL, 63 5-15 Hybrid wing/body aircraft with vertical tails on either side of the engines to shield jet noise, 64 5-16 U.S. average pass-by noise levels under cruise conditions for light vehicles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks measured at a distance of 15 meters, 67 5-17 Typical levels for noise sources in light vehicles, 68 5-18 Acoustic images of typical noise source regions for light vehicles and heavy trucks obtained with acoustic beaming, 68 5-19 Range in one-third octave band sound intensity levels for tires measured at 97 kilometers per hour on a dense, graded, asphalt-concrete roadway, 69 5-20 One-third octave band pass-by noise levels for the same car and tires operating on different pavements at 97 kilometers per hour, 69 5-21 Example of a double-layer porous asphalt pavement used in the Netherlands, 71 6-1 Permissible sound power levels (dB(A)) for lawn mowers, based on width of cut, 92 7-1 Contour map showing noise levels around Ronald Reagan National Airport in Washington, D.C., 102 7-2 Relationship between percentage of population highly annoyed and DNL level, in decibels, 104 7-3 (left) Noise depreciation indices (percentage of property value loss per decibel); (right) willingness-to-pay values (Euros/household/dB/ year) based on a number of North American, European, Japanese, and Australian studies of aircraft noise, 104 7-4 Cost of barriers per square meter in Maryland for all projects (upper) and for precast concrete (lower), 108 7-5 Cost of barriers per square meter in Virginia for all projects, 108

OCR for page R1
xii TABLES AND FIGURES 9-1 U.S. noise control programs in university departments, 126 E-1 Screen display of discrete frequency analysis for Type 2270 monitor, 157 E-2 Type 2270 meter in use, 158 E-3 Type 3639 monitoring station, 158 G-1 Comparison of hearing protection device NRRs by device type: manufacturers’ laboratory data versus real-world “field” data, 169

OCR for page R1