Skip to main content

Time to set standards for mapping noise and stick to them

Designer and provider of acoustics and air pollution simulation software for environmental modelling, SoundPlan, is calling on the bodies responsible for setting noise standards around the world to ensure that they implement and maintain high quality standards with thorough test procedures and scenarios. According to SoundPlan, the USA’s Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Noise Model (TNM) is identified as an example of poor practice in this arena. When testing the standards SoundPlan software engi
February 25, 2016 Read time: 3 mins
Designer and provider of acoustics and air pollution simulation software for environmental modelling, SoundPlan, is calling on the bodies responsible for setting noise standards around the world to ensure that they implement and maintain high quality standards with thorough test procedures and scenarios.

According to SoundPlan, the USA’s 831 Federal Highway Administration’s Traffic Noise Model (TNM) is identified as an example of poor practice in this arena. When testing the standards SoundPlan software engineers found errors in the TNM source code that meant mapping software would produce incorrect results.

The TNM standards also only allow for noise movement over two dimensions, when in reality sound moves in 3D, for example, the noise at the top of a tower block is not the same as at its base, but it would be according to TNM.

The standard planned for introduction in Europe is also being questioned by SoundPlan. After more than a decade in development, Cnossos is due to become a common European regulation. The European Commission has agreed on the principle procedure and on a schedule of its implementation. However, SoundPlan expects that the equations and parameters will change when the test procedures are written and inconsistencies are discovered.

SoundPlan understands that countries outside of Europe are also looking at this standard, but advises that it would not be prudent to use it yet as the regulation is not firm and there are no procedures for quality assurance (test questions) in place.

SoundPlan believes there needs to be consistent and quality controlled standards to protect people from unnecessary harm across the globe. Noise reduction is important for environmental purposes, but also to ensure companies are meeting health and safety compliance rules and regulations.

However, SoundPlan already has over 70 standards implemented and some countries are re-interpreting the science behind noise calculations every couple of years and altering their requirements accordingly.

Arne Berndt, owner/adviser at SoundPlan and SoundPlan International, said: “Wherever possible we work with the organisations putting together standards to ensure they are of a consistently high level. We are also part of a group that tries to get all internationally relevant software producers to synchronise their procedures. However, it is important to remember that a standard is only as good as the quality assurance that comes with it. Many countries do not release test procedures and test scenarios that can be verified by an outside party. This means that people using mapping software find answers they don’t expect and the modelling cannot be effective.”

Related Content

  • November 8, 2013
    EU citizens ‘pay twenty times too much for traffic noise reduction’
    According to Paul de Vos, strategic advisor at engineering and consultancy firm Royal HaskoningDHV, European policy forces local authorities to make huge investments in traffic noise reduction. Until 2017, European governments will be spending US$168 billion for noise barriers, quieter roads and measures related to the negative effects of traffic noise, including damage to health. However, by simply making cars quieter, the total cost to the taxpayer could be reduced by a factor of twenty.
  • February 3, 2012
    Commercial vehicle cross-border enforcement needs muscle
    A look at the current status of cross-border enforcement of commercial vehicle operation in the European Union and a look at what still needs to happen to realise a coherent working system
  • February 1, 2012
    Legalities of in-vehicle systems and cooperative infrastructures
    Paul Laurenza of Dykema Gossett PLLC discusses the paths which lawmakers may go down on the route to making in-vehicle systems and cooperative infrastructures a reality. The question of whether or not to mandate in-vehicle systems for safety and other applications is a vexed one. There is a presumption on some parts that going down the road of forcing systems' fitment is somehow too domineering or restricting. Others would argue that it is the only realistic way of ensuring that systems achieve widespread d
  • February 1, 2012
    Environmental impact assessments - where now?
    Peter George, MVA Consultancy, questions the future direction of environmental impact assessments