4.5 Article

Noise annoyance from stationary sources: Relationships with exposure metric day-evening-night level (DENL) and their confidence intervals

Journal

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
Volume 116, Issue 1, Pages 334-343

Publisher

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/1.1755241

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Relationships between exposure to noise [metric: day-evening-night levels (DENL)] from stationary sources (shunting yards, a seasonal industry, and other industries) and annoyance are presented. Curves are presented for expected annoyance score, the percentage highly annoyed (%HA, cutoff at 72 on a scale from 0 to 100), the percentage annoyed (%A, cutoff at 50 on a scale from 0 to 100), and the percentage (at least) a little annoyed (%LA, cutoff at 28 on a scale from 0 to 100). The estimates of the parameters of the relations are based on the data from a field study (N = 1875) at 11 locations (2 shunting yards, 1 seasonal industry, 8 other industries) in the Netherlands. With the same (yearly) DENL, the seasonal industry causes less annoyance than the other industries, while the other industries cause less annoyance than the shunting yards. It appears that annoyance caused by vibrations from shunting yards and annoyance caused by noise from through trains are (partly) responsible for the relatively high annoyance from shunting yards. The relatively low annoyance from the seasonal industry presumably is related to the presence of a relatively quiet period. Results for the two shunting yards and the seasonal industry are based on fewer data than the other industrial sources, and are indicative. The same patterns of influence of age and noise sensitivity that are generally found are also found in this study. For comparison, results regarding transportation sources are also given, including previously unpublished results for expected annoyance. (C) 2004 Acoustical Society of America.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available