A unique field experiment to assess the noise annoyance caused by maglev trains Bert De Coensel, Luc Dekoninck, Tom De Muer, Dick Botteldooren Acoustics Group, Ghent University, Belgium Peter Lercher Division of Social Medicine, Medical University Innsbruck, Austria Birgitta Berglund, Mats Nilsson Gösta Eckman Laboratory, Stockholm University, Sweden Ministry of Transport, Public Works and Water Management Directorate-General of Passenger Transport Projectorganization Zuiderzeelijn UNIVERSITEIT GENT Den Haag, Nederland
Overview 1. Introduction 2. Experiment 3. Results 4. Conclusion Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 2
Introduction • Transportation noise annoyance - Trains ≠ highway traffic - Railway bonus for L Aeq • Valid for high-speed trains & maglev trains? - Vos (2004), Neugebauer et al. (1997), Fastl et al. (1996) • Questions raised - Short samples used (45s) → temporal effect obscured - Small testperson panel → representativity - Nonacoustical factors (e.g. noise sensitivity) not taken into account • The experiment presented - Conducted in a realistic setting (holiday cottage) - Exposure to longer fragments of sound + quiet periods - Traffic noise reproduced in ecologically valid way - Representative panellists selected using questionnaire Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 3
Overview 1. Introduction 2. Experiment 3. Results 4. Conclusion Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 4
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Natural setting - Holiday cottage in Westkapelle (Zeeland, The Netherlands) - Quiet environment - Subgroups of panellists seated in living room - Reading magazine, light conversation, something to drink Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 5
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Sound reproduction objectives - Realistic indoor 3D sound of outdoor pass-by sources - Preserve natural feeling inside experiment room Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 6
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Sound reproduction objectives • Methodology and validation - Assumption: 2-channel recording - Checked for low speed trains at short distance: 2 phases record playback level level - Ideally: A = B binaural recording A binaural recording B Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 7
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting 50 • Sound reproduction objectives real 45 reproduced 40 LAeq,18sec [dB(A)] 35 • Methodology and validation 30 25 - Assumption: 2-channel recording 20 15 10 - Checked for low speed trains at 5 Passage 1 - left ear 0 short distance: 2 phases 31.5 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k 16k 50 real frequency [Hz] 45 - Ideally: A = B reproduced 40 LAeq,23sec [dB(A)] 35 - Error within 5 dB in each 30 25 tertsband 20 15 - Low frequency 10 5 Passage 2 - left ear 0 31.5 63 125 250 500 1k 2k 4k 8k 16k frequency [Hz] Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 8
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Sound reproduction objectives • Methodology and validation • Reproduction setup - 2 loudspeakers + subwoofer in front of slightly opened window - Played on PC, equalized (31 bands) and amplified - Façade level + indoor soundfield - No visual presentation Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 9
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Sound reproduction objectives • Methodology and validation distances: 25, 50, 100 and 200 m • Reproduction setup mic head mic • Sample collection 20 m Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 10
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Sound reproduction objectives • Methodology and validation • Reproduction setup • Sample collection - IC: 140 km/h - TGV: 140 & 300 km/h - Maglev: 200, 300 & 400 km/h - Highway: free flow • 45-sec passage fragments cut Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 11
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting 25% • Selection of panellists participants 20% reference - Questionnaire to 1500 people in 15% neighbourhood of testhouse 10% 5% - Representative structure Dutch 0% population 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 noise sensitivity • RIVM environmental noise survey 25% participants • Eurobarometer questionnaire 20% reference - Drawing 100 out of 255 replies 15% 10% • Age & hearing ability 5% • Disimilarity using binary coding 0% • Fuzzy resemblance Dutch person 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 quality of traffic noise Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 12
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Listening test menus - Longer exposure → 10 minutes - Called “menu” - Consists of • 2 passages of same train • 4 passages of same train • 8 minutes continuous highway noise - Scaling context for panellists: • 7 reference 45-sec fragments • Produced of highway noise at 50 m • Scaled up and down + spectral Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 13
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Listening test menus 100 LAeq,1s [dB(A)] 90 80 • Outline test 70 60 50 40 - ± 5 panellists / session 8:20 8:30 8:40 8:50 9:00 9:10 9:20 9:30 9:40 9:50 10:00 100 Time [s] 90 - Session façade level 80 70 60 • 14 minute training session 50 40 • 7 menus of 10 minutes IC/TGV or 10:10 10:20 10:30 10:40 10:50 11:00 11:10 11:20 11:30 11:40 11:50 Maglev 10 0 Time [s] 90 80 • 14 minute training session 70 60 • 7 menus of 10 minutes Maglev or 50 40 IC/TGV 11:50 12:00 12:10 12:20 12:30 Time [s] • Conventional listening test Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 14
Experiment Ecologically and Good quality acoustic Panel of representative socially valid setting field reproduction testpersons Field experiment in natural setting • Listening test menus 80 70 • Outline test A = 70, assessment 60 Annoyance 50 • Perceived noise annoyance R = 55, ms annoyance 40 - Free number estimation 30 20 - Master scaling 10 0 40 50 60 70 80 90 Road traffic reference sound level [dB(A)] Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 15
Overview 1. Introduction 2. Experiment 3. Results 4. Conclusion Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 16
Results • Average master scaled annoyance vs L Aeq,10min 2 events / 10 minutes 70 60 Annoyance (master scale) 50 40 30 20 Inter-city 10 Maglev Road-traffic 0 TGV Master function -10 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Sound level (LAeq,10min) Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 17
Results • Average master scaled annoyance vs L Aeq,10min 4 events / 10 minutes 70 60 Annoyance (master scale) 50 40 30 20 Inter-city 10 Maglev Road-traffic 0 TGV Master function -10 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 Sound level (LAeq,10min) Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 18
Results • Average master scaled annoyance vs L Aeq,10min 50 Conventional train 45 • L Aeq < 65 dB(A): annoyance (master scale) TGV high speed 40 Maglev high speed - Maglev ~ IC 35 30 • L Aeq > 60 dB(A): 25 - Maglev ~ TGV 20 15 • 55 dB(A) → 65 dB(A): 10 - Annoyance ↓ [T,v,d] 5 0 55 60 65 70 Sound level (LAeq,10min) Ghent University – Medical University Innsbruck – Stockholm University 19
Recommend
More recommend
