• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文OA文献 >The comparison of road traffic noise levels from prediction models and actual noise measurement
【2h】

The comparison of road traffic noise levels from prediction models and actual noise measurement

机译：预测模型与实际噪声测量中道路交通噪声水平的比较

页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

This research focuses on the comparison of the traffic noise levels that are calculated fromudprediction models, and the noise levels from actual traffic noise measurement. The researchudwas conducted on Regent Street, Sandy Bay Road and the Tasman Highway, Hobart. At eachudsite, the traffic noise measurement was operated seven days continuously, with siteudtopography and at least 10 hours of traffic volume studies. Repeat measurements were takenudat each site. Three prediction models: T-Noise, STAMSON4.1 and ITFNS1.1 were used forudpredictng traffic noise levels at each study site.udThe study showed that in day-time, all recorded noise levels under normal conditionsudexceeded both NSW road traffic noise criteria and Tasmanian road noise guidelineud(Leq 15 hr = 60 dB(A)) and (L10 18 hr = 63 dB(A), respectively), and most of the night-time noiseudlevels exceeded both night-time criteria of NSW and Tasmania (Leq 9hr = 55 dB(A) andudLeq 1 hr = 55 dB(A), respectively).udTraffic volume studies showed that there were approximately 850 veh/hr with 11 % trucks onudRegent Street, 1600 veh/hr with 13% trucks on Sandy Bay Road and 3200 veh/hr with 6%udtrucks on the Tasman Highway.udThe comparison studies showed that, within the absolute noise levels comparison, on RegentudStreet and Sandy Bay Road, T-Noise showed the greatest accuracy with the smallestudvariation, an average of 0.76 dB over prediction on Regent Street and 1.12 dB underudprediction on Sandy Bay Road. STAMSON4.1 provided less accuracy than T-Noise, with anudaverage under prediction of 1.86 dB on Regent Street and 2.51 dB under prediction on SandyudBay Road. ITFNS1.1 exhibited unreliable predictions for all study sites. None of the modelsudpresented reliable results for the Tasman Highway study site.udThe results from correlation tests on predicted and actual noise levels showed that T-Noiseudand STAMSON4.1 provided no significant difference in the correlation coefficient values. Atudthe urban road sites T-Noise provided the greatest correlation of R2 = 0.57, whileudSTAMSON4.1 provided R2 = 0.43, with only R2 = 0.006 gained from ITFNS1.1. Forudhighway conditions, T-Noise provided the greatest correlation of R2 = 0.64, while R2 = 0.43udwas offered by STAMSON4.1. However, in correlation tests of urban and highway conditions combined, both models showed poor results with R2 = 0.08 and R2 = 0.27 fromudT-Noise and STAMSON4.1 respectively. These results provide an indication of the accuracyudof these models for this application. In the case of correlation between traffic volumes andudthe accuracy of noise level predictions; only T-Noise shows a correlation between these twoudfactors indicating a propensity for improvement in its accuracy for this application.
机译：这项研究的重点是比较从预测模型计算出的交通噪音水平和从实际交通噪音测量中得出的噪音水平。该研究在霍巴特的摄政街，桑迪湾路和塔斯曼公路上进行。在每个 udsite，交通噪声测量连续7天进行，并进行现场 udtopography和至少10个小时的交通量研究。对每个站点进行重复测量。 使用三个预测模型：T-Noise，STAMSON4.1和ITFNS1.1来预测每个研究站点的交通噪声水平。 ud研究表明，在白天，所有记录的噪声水平在正常情况下都

著录项

  • 作者

    Thongserm Siriporn;

  • 作者单位
  • 年度 2002
  • 总页数
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 en
  • 中图分类

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号