Laserfiche WebLink
this point is overlooked )ecattse the people involved are not <br />aware of the situation, l- owever, an attorney who hires an <br />acoustical expert may re' cai this discrepancy and get a <br />client's violation dismissed on that basis. <br /> Another hindrance to ~nforcement is that octave band <br />analy-zers are expensive (~picall), more than $4,000 each). For <br />this reason, man), municipalities do not even have the <br />equipment required to <br />enforce their own <br />ordinances. In such <br />instances, only high- Antiquated Octave <br />visibilir)' cases are Band Frequency <br />investigated because Designation (Hz) <br />an acoustical <br />consultant must be 0- 75- <br />hired to perform the 75 - 150 <br /> 150 - 300 <br />measurements. <br />Another limitation 300 - 600 <br />on the effectiveness of 600 - 1,200 <br /> 1,200 - 2,400 <br />these ordinances is the <br /> . 2,400- 4,800 <br />setting of absolute above 4,800 <br />limits for noise levels ....... " <br /> <br />These limits are <br />typically in terms cfA-weighted SPLs (denoted in units of dBA, <br />or A-weighted decibels). A.-weighting attempts to compensate <br />for the human hearing m4chanism's differing sensitivities to <br />different pitches. The dec!bel scale is logarithmic in nature, <br />similar to the Richter scal~ used in earthquake analysis. Because <br />of this mathematical basis~ a doublin~ of sound power equals an <br />addition of three decibels ~o the soun~d level and a ] 0-fold <br />increase tn sound power e~uals an addmon of 10 decibels. Table <br />2 shows SPLs in terms of~ommon <br />associated sources. <br /> A common example of using absolute <br />limits in noise ordinances ~is statin~ that <br />no,se levels cannot exceedfX dBA ourmg <br />the da.,,, and Y dBA at nigfit. For example, <br />Houston's noise ordinanc{ (promulgated in <br />January 1993) sets X at 6~and ¥ at 58 for <br />residential properties. If _~e background <br />noise level without the off~nding sound <br />source operating were 45 ~BA, the <br />ordinance states that it wC~Uld be acceptable <br />for a noise source to raise fl~e backuround <br />level by up to 20 dBA dur!ng the day and <br />13 dBA at night. Table 3 thews typical <br />human perception of soun!d level increases. <br />The hypothetical increase~ discussed above <br />would create a clear intrusion for any <br />person with normal hearir~g but wot;Id not <br />violate the ordinance. <br /> Yet another common limiting criterion <br />is the use of vague qualific4tions on noise, <br />such as nuisance or disturbJ~nce, without any <br />ouantificarion. We can int0ude in this category the commonly <br />~ed qualification of a sou~. d being audibl~ These are purely <br />subjective criteria and ofteh cause the dismissal of cases <br /> <br /> TABLE 1 <br /> <br />Current Octave <br />Band Frequency <br />Rsnge (Hz) <br /> <br />invoiving clear violations, depending more on the sav~, of the <br />legal representation than on the case at hand. <br /> <br />Effective Sections to Include <br />The most important thing to remember when drafting a noise <br />ordinance is that it will be enforced by people with little or no <br />background in acoustics. ]t should therefore be as simple as <br /> possible. A single number can be read <br /> from a sound level meter having no or <br /> few buttons. Such sound level meters <br /> can fit in an officer's pocket. They are <br /> Current Octave also the least expensive of all nrpes of <br /> Band Frequency , <br /> Designation (Hz) meters, usual}), costing under $500 for <br /> a complete set including a calibrator <br /> and al} necessaD' associated equipment. <br /> Be sure to note that all <br /> monitoring equipment should <br /> comply with ANSi standard S1.4- <br /> 1983, or the latest version thereof. <br /> This standard divides sound level <br /> meters into categories called types, <br /> labeled by the numbers 0, 1, or 2. <br /> Type 2 meters have the minimum <br />sensitivity required by the standard, and type 0 have the best <br />sensitivity. Type 2 meters are usually good enough for the <br />purposes of ordinance enforcement while type 0 meters are <br />used for laboratory-precision measurements. <br /> All an enforcing officer would have to check is that the <br />sound }ex, el meter she is using complies with either g, pe 0, l, or <br />2. This information should be printed directly on the sound <br />level meter, but if not, it would be listed in the user's manual. <br /> The reliability, of the <br /> -.. monitored data <br /> TABLE 2 cannot be assured <br /> without this <br /> Sound Pressure k~vel (dBA) information. Sound <br /> level meters costing <br /> tess than $200 <br /> probably do not meet <br /> the tolerance of these <br /> standards and are <br /> therefore nor <br /> recommended for any <br /> enforcement use. <br /> The most <br /> practical criteria for <br /> noise ordinance <br /> compliance are <br /> relative criteria in <br /> which the difference <br /> in sound level <br /> between the cases <br /> with and without the <br /> sound source <br />operating ' 4s limited. For clarification, a clear distinction <br />must be made. bet~,een ambient and background sound <br />levels. These' ierms' are used interchangeably in man), <br />ordinances, but the), are quite different. <br /> The ambient sound level includes all sound sources in an <br />area. The background sound level is the level of sound <br />monitored, including all sound sources exce?r the specific source <br />in question that may be violating the ordinance. When using <br />relative criteria, we are then assessing the difference between the <br /> <br />· 45 - 8B 63 <br />88 -177 . 125 <br />177 - 354 250 <br />354 - 7O7 500 <br />707- 1,414 1,000 <br />1,414 - 2,828 2,000 <br />2,828 - 5,657 4,000 <br />5,657- 11,314 8,000 <br /> <br />Sound Environment <br /> <br />i 'Threshold.of:hearing 0 -:? -,. <br /> <br />: ..Broadcast~studio.imerior.: ':- · '.- .:lO . . -.. -~,.-.. <br /> <br />! '.Quiet:house interior .... ;:20 .. ':::. '= <br />...... ' .... " ..... .." ':'-."5_i':":'-:;- - '. ..... ' .' <br /> 'tau~et~'' omce.~ntenor.,-' ._ . -:..: _: :....:. :-: ,. :30 - . ..::,..... <br /> <br /> ..~Ouiet:rural..area . -'Z 'ii- '-' '~ ".'. '.-- .40. . <br />; '..C~Jie! ~uburbamarea ' "- "' -'7 ~:" ~:';:;:'(:750 '!-') <br /> Office interior . .60 <br /> <br />Human voice at 1011. '"70 <br />;...Passing :ca[at~?0~ It....: ... =7; '.-. ,....:.:,-:; ',.:80.!: ....-. <br />:';Passing bus orlmck.at .1011:~::,. :"-.'.:5'5:::}i':~:~ z:90 .( <br /> _ %;:2 ;' '-' < 7 .' - _' ::%~,g¢~i'~;~,; · ,"7-L"':~' -:'-'.;7:T/ZU;'-'g~' ';k:; <br />i Passlng:subwa. y,trmn:atT~O~tt.:~.:&:='!' :.-._-; :~.~ O0 :}Z"::.:. <br />! ::. Night club With ;ban d .playing :;.~}:':' )'~'..:.:)i-:.'-: '. _/110: ~.!-i~.':': <br /> %hreshold or,pain :Z' '-;;~(~,?.;(i.;_~;.:.;~;!:7~-). *i'--' 7'120 (;!...:. !'. <br /> <br />J,,mes ?. Cowan is the rr~na~er of acoustical analysis for McCormick, <br />Tailor & Axsocime~ in ?3ilal~lphia. He is a cerfifiM nobe-conrrg <br />engineer ~nd th~ ~urhor of l'~andbook of Environmental Acoustic, <br />just published b), Van Nosrra~d Reinhold. <br />2 <br /> <br /> <br />