Journal of Ecological Engineering Received: 2020.02.

17
Revised: 2020.03.25
Volume 21, Issue 4, May 2020, pages 82–93 Accepted: 2020.04.04
Available online: 2020.04.17
https://doi.org/10.12911/22998993/119804

Noise Monitoring, Mapping, and Modelling Studies – A Review

Pervez Alam1*, Kafeel Ahmad1, Shakil S. Afsar1, Nasim Akhtar2

1
Department of Civil Engineering, Jamia Millia Islamia, 110025, New Delhi, India
2
CSIR, CRRI, Mathura Road, New Delhi, India
* Corresponding author’s e-mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT
This paper reviews the literature on noise monitoring, noise mapping and noise modeling studies carried out in
different countries by many researchers. The article reveals the current status of the noise-related studies and noise
mapping studies. It was discovered that 90% of the noise monitoring studies were focused on the traffic noise, while
the remaining 10% focused on the residential, commercial and industrial areas. Sometimes, there may be a necessity
to analyze the sound pressure levels all over the place, or around a particular piece of land and machinery of indus-
try. Researchers have used the noise monitoring data for the development of 2D and 3D noise maps which gives a
clear picture of the noise level around the source of noise in X, Y, and Z direction. For taking a decision regarding the
noise level for any development project, predicting the noise level is always necessary. The traffic noise models are
generally used for the purpose of prediction. Early models are based on constant vehicle speed, later some models
predicted the noise level for interrupting the traffic flow. For instance, the Stop and Go model can be used for the
prediction of the noise level in an interrupted flow. Four such models were reviewed and compared in this article.

Keywords: noise mapping, noise monitoring, noise modelling, CoRTN, FHWA

INTRODUCTION Piccolo, et al., 2205; Zannin, et al., 2006]. The

increase in noise pollution is not sustainable be-
Today, the noise pollution is one of the prin- cause it involves direct, but also cumulative, ad-
cipal types of urban natural contamination. What verse health effects. It also harmfully affects the
is more, it is responsible for the negative effects future generations and has socio-cultural, aes-
that are harmful to the Earth and the personal wel- thetic and economic effects. Noise monitoring
fare of the people. The increase in noise pollution under different road and environment condition
relies upon numerous elements and in addition, is one of the best tools to discover the critical lo-
they increase in the urban population and thus cations in residential, commercial and industrial
the expansion in the number of development ex- areas [Akhter, et al., 2016]. In order to develop an
ercises and vehicles [Directive EP, 2002]. Noise acoustic model, it is necessary to know as many
pollution can be considered as one of the signifi- details as possible [Iliescui, et al., 2015]. The traf-
cant toxins present in urban areas. Its assessment, fic noise prediction models are required to assist
control, and decrease are among the major natu- in the design of highways and roads and some-
ral well-being concerns for specialists [Moham- times, in the evaluation of the existing or planned
madi, 2009; Zannin, et al., 2013]. Many research- changes in the traffic noise conditions. Normally,
ers have also reported that road traffic is the most for prediction of the sound pressure levels, the
general and prominent noise pollution source in noise levels in terms of Leq are required by most
the developing countries [Mocuta, 2012]. Some of the sound prediction models [Steele, 2001].
researchers from different countries also inves- The results from the noise prediction model may
tigated and characterized noise pollution under further be used for the development of 2D and
different types of traffic conditions [Boer, 2007; 3D noise maps [Stoter, et al., 2008]. Noise map-
Stoilova and Stoilove, 1998, Zannin, et al., 2003; ping is the graphic representation of the sound

82
 Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

level distribution existing in a given region and 75.35 dB, which is also higher than the prescribed
environmental condition, for a defined period of standard of these all locations. The noise study at
time. Noise mapping is broadly divided into two Columbia [Danie, et al., 2014] and Poland [41]
categories i.e., 2D and 3D. The 2D mapping has only shows the Leq noise level within the pre-
been extensively and successfully used for envi- scribed standard. However, noise monitoring in
ronmental impact studies like Air pollution, Soil Nigeria [Avwiri, and Nte., 2003] and the Philip-
pollution and Noise in the existing environment. pines [Vergel et. al., 2004] shows the maximum
Noise monitoring, mapping, and modeling stud- noise level among all 22 developing countries
ies are interrelated. The results of noise monitor- i.e., 81.4 and 84.3 dB, respectively. The noise
ing can be used for the prediction of the sound monitoring was carried out in three states of India
pressure level employing different prediction by Rajiv B. Hunashala, Yogesh B. Patil, Pervez
models; the predicted results may further be used Alam et al., and Ambika N. Joshi et al. The re-
for the development of noise maps. sults show that the equivalent noise level remains
maximum at Mumbai [72.0 dB] followed by
Delhi [70.2 dB] and Kolhapur [65.3]. Thus, the
NOISE MONITORING STUDIES noise level of these three cities of India remains
IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES higher than the prescribed standard of Central
pollution Control Board (CPCB). Furthermore, it
Significant negative effects on the children’s has been found that most of the study areas of the
blood pressure and mental health due to noise selected developing countries have been exposed
pollution have been found. Some studies show to the noise levels higher than the prescribed stan-
that the people who are exposed to high street dard of the competent authority in the respective
traffic noise levels often suffer from hyperten- countries.
sion [Chang, et al., 2011]. The noise monitoring
studies are especially needed for monitoring the
sound levels and appropriate reduction measures NOISE MAPPING
can be implemented to control the noise pollution OF DEVELOPING COUNTRIES
[Garg, et al., 2017]. Studies on monitoring and
applying noise abatement measures to ambient Certain locations required more detail on the
noise and controlling them have been conducted noise levels than cannot be provided by a simple
in various parts of the world. The advancement noise survey. Sometimes, there may be a necessi-
of developing countries is accompanied by in- ty to analyze the sound pressure levels all over the
dustrialization. We see not only a higher level of place, or around a particular piece of land and ma-
noise in industry and traffic, but also a concentra- chinery of industry. Noise mapping can provide
tion of population, on the one hand, and a higher the details of the noise level around any machin-
construction of high rise buildings on the other ery, road, house or a piece of land. A noise map
[Barrekette, 1973]. The noise monitoring studies is a visual depiction of noise levels for a specific
of 22 developing countries and 25 cities for two area and for a specific time in the form of a con-
decades were reviewed to demonstrate the current tour map [Hede et al., 1998]. Contours are gener-
state of the investigation on the acoustic pollution ally colored maps to signify the intensity of noise,
in developing countries and the gaps in the stud- as well as the occurrence of low or high frequen-
ies. Table 1 shows the maximum, equivalent and cies of noise. The map is usually overlaid on a
minimum noise level of developing countries. A plan of the area or workplace for which the noise
noise monitoring study was performed by [Chow- mapping is required. One of the major advantages
dhury, et al., 2010] at Dhaka city of Bangladesh. of noise mapping is to accurately assess the ad-
The monitoring results show a maximum noise verse effect of a proposed new road on the nearby
level of 87 dB (A) and Leq of 82 dB (A) is enough structures in order for the decision-makers to take
to create discomfort for the people living in the suitable noise mitigation measures to minimize
nearby areas. A study conducted in China, Brazil, the impact. This is very important in noise action
Egypt, and Iraq [Bengang, et al., 2002; Henrique, planning, where a cost-benefit study of various
et al., 2002; Zekry and Ghatass, 2009] revealed options can be experienced before a decision is
that the equivalent noise level at the study area made. The authors have reviewed the noise map-
of these countries remains in between 75.2 dB to ping studies of 23 developing countries and 27

83
Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

Table 1. Maximum, equivalent and minimum noise level of developing countries

Type of Data Noise Noise levels (dB A)
S.No Author Country City
study Source measurement Lmax Leq Lmin
Field
1. Chowdhury et,al., 2010 Bangladesh Dhaka Journal Yes 87 82.0 53
Survey
Field
2. Bengang et.al., 2002 China Beijing Journal Yes 87.3 75.2 -
Survey
Field
3. Zannin, 2002 Brazil Curitiba Journal Yes - 75.6 -
Survey
Field
4 Ghatass, 2009 Egypt Alexandria Journal Yes 47.7 75.6 98.7
Survey
Essandoh and Field
5. Ghana Cape Coast Journal Yes 87.3 73.5 51.1
Frederick, 2011 Survey
Field
6. Galindo, et al., 2017 Colombia Santa Marta Journal Yes 76.04 64.0 54.8
Survey
Field
7. Daniel et al., 2014 Colombia Bagota Journal Yes 65.3 56.5 45.7
Survey
Dire-Dawa Field
8. Mesfin, et.al., 2018 Ethiopia Journal Yes 68.08 - 52.26
City survey
Field
9. Abankwa, et al., 2017 Ghana Kumasi Journal Yes 83.5 72.6 66.8
survey
Hunashala and Patil, Field
10. India Kolhapur Journal Yes 73.7 65.3 -
2012 Survey
Field
11. Akhtar et al., 2016 India Delhi Journal Yes 79.3 70.2 60.2`
Survey
Field
12 Joshi, et.al., 2015 India Mumbai Journal Yes 80.6 72.0 64.5
Survey
Ratulangi Field
13. Sondakh et. al., 2014 Indonesia Journal Yes 87.4 71.6 49.2
Manado Survey
Field
14. Biglari et al., 2016 Iran Tehran Journal Yes 102.57 75.3 66.7
survey
Field
Rauf et al., 2015 Iraq Sulaimani Journal Yes 75.5 65.3 55.4
survey
Awadhi and kandari, Field
Kuwait Kuwait City Journal Yes 82.0 80.0 70.5
2017 Survey
Field
Aziz et al., 2012 Iraq Erbil Journal Yes 85.0 75.2 69.1
Survey
Field
Fernandez et. al., 2013 Maxico Maxico City Journal Yes 80.1 77.2 58.1
Survey
Field
Avwiri, and Nte., 2003 Nigeria Nigeria Delta Journal Yes 93.2 81.4 68.3
Survey
Field
Vergel et. al., 2004 Philippine Quezon City Journal Yes 95.6 84.3 70.1
Survey
Field
Vasilyev et. al., 2017 Russai Samara Journal Yes 80.1 65.3 52.0
Survey
Field
Zytoon, 2016 Saudi Arabia Jeddah Journal Yes 70.1 62.3 50.5
Survey
Field
Vasilyev, 2017 Russia Samara Journal Yes 65.6 59.8 46.2
Survey
Field
Çoban et al., 2018 Turkey Turkey City Journal Yes 76.2 61.3 52.5
survey
Szopinska and Rącka, Field
Poland Polish City Journal Yes 68.9 57.3 47.3
2017 Survey

cities for around two decades to demonstrate the respectively. Using 2D noise mapping in Guja-
current state of the noise mapping studies in de- rat, Tiwari et al. were able to establish a critical
veloping countries and the gaps in the studies. location where remedial measures are required
Table 2 shows the assessment of 2D and 3D noise to reduce the adverse effect of noise on human
mapping of developing countries. In India [Ti- beings. Furthermore, [Nasim Akhtar et al., 2016]
wari et al., 2017; Akhtar et al., 2016] performed has also developed 2D as well as 3D noise maps
the 2D and 3D noise mapping for Gujarat and for selected locations of Delhi. Their study shows
Delhi, using ArcView and soundPlan software, the importance of a 3D noise map, as using 3D

84
 Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

mapping enables to locate the effects of noise pol- review of noise mapping it can be concluded that
lution in X, Y and Z direction on any residential the 2D noise mapping is an effective way to show
building or setup. Most of the researchers used the noise level distribution along with any source
GIS as a tool for development of 2D noise map of noise in X and Y direction only. The 3D noise
in different countries like Taiwan, Netherlands, mapping is more effective than 2D in the residen-
Russia, Poland, Turkey, Kenya, Spain, Nigeria, tial areas, as it can also provide noise exposure
Portugal and Egypt. In some countries, research- level in the Z direction and also gives a number of
ers used other tools for the development of noise people affected in high rise residential buildings.
maps; for instance, Nasim Akhter et al. (in India), The review also shows that very few research
and Zannin et al. (In Brazil) used soundPlan for works has been performed in the field of 3D noise
the development of 2D and 3D mapping. In Chi- mapping. On the other hand, 2D noise mapping
na, [Wu, et al., 2018] used Swallow sound for the has been used extensively by researchers.
development of a 2D noise map for the selected
locations. In Latin America [Fiedler and Zannin,
2015], used Predictor 8.11 for the development of NOISE PREDICTION MODELS STUDY
2D and 3D noise mapping for the selected loca-
tion of the Curitiba city. CAD 3D software has Noise prediction is one of the essential tools
also been used in two countries i.e., in Spain and for decision-makers to reduce the adverse effect
Brazil, in Madrid and Brasilia, respectively, for of noise and their control. The prediction mod-
the 2d noise mapping only. Most of the research- els are generally used by three major sections
ers have developed 2D noise maps only for the of society.
selected locations of different countries such as 1. Acoustic Engineers: Acoustical engineers are
[Kartikey Tiwari et al., 2017] for India, [Tsai et generally worried about the plan, investigation,
al., 2009] for Taiwan, [Paulo and David, 2011] for and control of sound.
Brazil, [Wu, 2015] for China, [Vasilyev, 2017] for 2. Acoustic specialist: They are generally part of
Russia, [Awadhi and Kandary, 2017] for Kuwait, the team to prepare an environmental impact
[Dursun et. al., 2006] for Turkey, Brainard et al., assessment report.
2004 for United Kingdom, [Wawa and Mulaku, 3. Decision maker: Prediction models are gener-
2009] for Kenya, [Arana et al. 2009] for Spain, ally used by decision-makers to identify the
[Coelho and Alarcao, 2005] for Portugal, [Eldien, distribution of noise in the upcoming days.
2009] for Egypt, [Nicolas et al., 2016] for Chile,
[Olayinka, 2012] for Nigeria, and [Farcaş and This procedure is a unique way, after the
Sivertunb, 2015] for Sweden. Few researchers directives by ministries, to control the environ-
have developed 3D noise maps for a selected lo- mental noise, wherein noise maps have been sug-
cation of some countries, such as [Nasim Akhtar gested for transportation sources and urban ag-
et al., 2016] for India, [Stoter et al., 2008] for the glomerations. Consequently, many logical sound
Netherlands, [Kossakowski, 1990] for Poland, prediction models have been created as of late,
[Fiedler and Zannin, 2015] for Latin America. focusing on this angle and presenting only source
As per the above literature review of 2D and 3D outflow and sound engendering observational
noise mapping, it has been established that the 2D details. Lots of prediction models have been de-
noise maps have been developed by most of the veloped and validated by researchers for their re-
researchers for their respective developing coun- spective countries. They have been successfully
tries to find out the distribution of noise along a used by various agencies for the development of
central line of a road or along the periphery of noise maps. Aside from the source interpretation,
an industry. However, the literature survey also progressed numerical strategies including wave
shows that the 3D noise gives a clear picture of the condition and equation of continuity are utilized
noise distribution in all three directions X, Y, and to resolve the sound engendering impacts. Thus,
Z. In one of the studies of India, 3D noise maps it is very important to logically investigate and
have been developed by [Akhtar, et al., 2016] for compare these models so as to discover their
the selected location of Delhi which gives clear reasonableness by and large and furthermore to
picture of noise distribution in all three directions discover the best methodology among them for
and also provides a number of the people affected traffic noise modeling. [Steele, 2001] conducted a
in a particular residential building. Thus, from the thorough review of the major traffic noise models

85
Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

Table 2. Assessment of 2D and 3D noise mapping of developing countries

Noise Mapping
Type of Data
S.No Author Country City Software Used 2D and
study Source 2D 3D
3D
Field ArcView or
1. Tiwari et al., 2017 India Gujarat Journal Yes - -
Study ArcGIS
Field
2. Akhtar et al., 2016 India Delhi Journal SoundPlan Yes Yes Yes
Study
Field
3. Tsai et. al., 2009 Taiwan Tainan Journal GIS Yes - -
Study
Field
4. Stoter et. al., 2008 Netherlands Delft Journal GIS Yes Yes Yes
study
Field
5. Paulo and David, 2011 Brazil Brazil Journal CAD and GIS Yes - -
study
Field
6. Wu , et al., 2015 China Hnagzhou Journal Swallow sound Yes - -
Study
Field
7. Wang et al., 2018 China Guangzhou Journal ArcGIS yes - -
Study
Field
8. Vasilyev, 2017 Russia Samara Journal GIS Yes - -
Study
Field
9. Kossakowsk, 1990 Poland KUT Journal GIS Yes Yes Yes
Study
Awadhi and Kandary, Field
10. Kuwait Kuwait City Journal CUSTIC 2.0 Yes - -
2017 Study
Field
11 Dursun et al., 2006 Turkey Konya Journal GIS Yes - -
Study
Field
12. Casas et al., 2014 Brazil Brasil Journal CAD 3D Yes - -
Study
Yilmaz and Hocanli, Field
13. Turkey Sanliurfa Journal GIS Yes - -
2006 Study
Field
14. Zannin et al., 2013 Barazil Parana Journal SoundPlan Yes - -
Study
Field
15. Brainard et al., 2004 UK Birmingham Journal Lima Yes - -
Study
Field
16. Wawa and Mulaku, 2009 Kenya Nairobi Journal GIS Yes - -
Study
Field
17. Arana et. al., 2009 Spain Pamplona Journal GIS Yes - -
Study
Coelho and Alarcao, Field
18. Portugal Lisbon Journal GIS Yes - -
2005 Study
Field
19. Eldien, 2009 Egypt Suez city Journal GIS tool Yes - -
Study
Field
20. Coelho et al., 2005 Portugal Odivelas Journal GIS Yes - -
Study
Field
21. Nicolas et al., 2016 Chile Valdivia Journal RLS-90 Yes - -
Study
Ilorin Field
22. Olayinka, 2012 Nigeria Journal GIS Yes - -
metropolis Study
Kliucininkas and Field
23. UK Kaunas Journal GIS Yes - -
Saliunas; 2006 Study
Field
24. Kalipci and Dursun, 2009 Turkey Giresun Journal GIS Yes - -
Study
Merchan and Field
25. Spain Madrid Journal CAD and GIS Yes - -
Balteiro,2013 Study
Latin Field
26. Fiedler and Zannin, 2015 Curitiba’s Journal Predictor 8.11 Yes Yes Yes
America Study
Farcaş and Sivertunb, Skane Field
27. Sweden Journal ArcGIS Yes - -
2015 region Study

in 2001, but some of them have been revised comparison done by Garg and Maji again. The
between 2007–2013 and updated by [Garg and present study reviews the implication and strat-
Maji, 2014] in 2014. Now, they have been around egies of the recently developed models such as
for six years; thus, it is imperative to update the CoRTN, Start and Stop, FHWA, etc.

86
 Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

FHWA Traffic Noise Model Version 3.0 (2016) Input Parameters required for prediction of noise
level (FHWA)
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA)
Traffic Noise Prediction Model [Anon, 1978] For validating the FHWA model, traffic noise
was developed for the United States of America monitoring, the characteristics of traffic, includ-
(USA) Department of Transportation Federal ing its composition and volume of traffic on the
Highway administration by Barry and Reagan road, are required. For the FHWA model, traffic
(1976); they received help from preceding Na- composition is normally divided into each type
of vehicle such as medium truck, heavy truck and
tional Cooperative Highway Research Program
passenger car. The light vehicles included per-
(NCHRP) [Anon, 1976]. The prediction noise
sonal cars, local taxis, vans, and motorized two-
model was published as a Report No. FHWA-
wheelers, while trucks and buses are included as
RD-77–108 which included calculation and pro-
the heavy vehicles.
grammable program. The reference noise level is
the maximum noise level of the vehicle, emitted
by the vehicle passed at a distance of 15 m. In RLS-90 model
the FHWA model, Leq (Near) and Leq (Far) were RLS90 is an efficient model, able to determine
calculated and the average of far and near were the noise pollution level of road traffic and, in
taken into consideration for noise average Leq current days, is the main appropriate calculation
noise level. method used in Germany. It is a German national
Leq (near)=10log (∑alli 10Leq (hi) (near)/10) (1) model for the prediction of road traffic noise and
where Leq (near) = Noise level of all classes of ve- parking noise. It is made up of two different mod-
hicles from the near side of the road els; the first corresponds to the determination of
Leq (hi) (near) = The noise level of vehicle noise level emission (Lme) at a distance of 25 m
from the center of the road and 4 m above the
class-I from near side of the road
ground level. Lme is determined by taking into
Leq (far): 10log ∑alli 10Leq (hi) (far)/10) (2) consideration traffic such as the speed of the ve-
hicle, distribution of the vehicle, road surface
where: Leq (far) = Noise level of all classes of ve- condition. The sound pressure level for a street:
hicles from the far side of the highway
Leq(hi) (far) = Noise level of vehicle class I LT = Lm + K (4)
from the far side of the highway where: Lm = mean A-weighted noise level
K = Addition for increase in noise due to
Leq(hourly)= ELi + A(traffic) + Ad + As (3) effect of traffic signal controlled intersec-
where: A (traffic) = Correction for traffic flow tions and other intersections
Ad = Correction for distance between the
Lme = L25 + Cs + Crs+ Cg + Cr (5)
roadway and receiver
As = Correction for all shielding and where: L25 = Standardized noise level for assump-
ground effects between the roadway and tion of a speed amounting to 100 km/h for
the receiver. cars and 80 km/h for trucks.
Cs = Speed correction
Assumption for noise prediction (FHWA) Crs = Road surface correction
Cg = Gradient correction
The following are the major assumption for Cr = Multiple reflection correction
the prediction of the noise level by FHWA
1. The vehicles will be represented as an acoustic L25 = 37.5+10×log10 [M× (1+0.082×P)] (6)
source . where: M = Number of vehicles (h-1)
2. Noise emission levels will be assumed as group P = tracks exceeding 2800 kg (%)
noise source such as (Bus, medium and heavy
trucks) are normally distributed. The second model is for the transmission
3. Noise propagation losses will be adequately stage, in which, the noise level at a definite
represented by the effect of distance. location is determined by making the suitable

87
Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

addition of all the contributions carried out by Volume of traffic =

the sources taking into account the length of the = (AU) +1.04(LT) + 1 1.12(MT+TT) + (7)
road, the reduction of noise due to the distance, + 1.14(HT) + 1.09(MC+BU + MB)
air absorption, and sound propagation due to where: MC = Motorcycles
the temperature gradient. MT = Medium truck
BU = Bus
Assumption for noise prediction (RLS-90) TT = Tuk-Tuk
MB = Minibus
The following are the major assumption for
the prediction of noise level by the RLS-90 model The single Stop and Go model approach has
1. The day and night time has been assumed as 6 been firstly applied to build a single stop and
AM to 10 PM and 10 PM to 6 AM, respectively. go traffic flow, noise model. This model can be
2. It will take into account the major features used to both sides of an urban roadway. The
which influence the noise propagation, such as Leq by Stop and Go single-lane model can be
obstacles, vegetation, absorption, reflections predicted by:
and diffraction [Quartieri et al., 2012 ]. Leq = 71.05 + 0.10Sn + 0.95 Log Vn +
(8)
+ 0.04 Sf + 0.015 Log Vf – 0.111Dg
3. Parking spots and the number of vehicles in
parking spots will be considered for noise where: Dg – Geometric mean of road section
prediction. (m); = (Df x Dn)
In a separate lane model, the Leq noise level
Input Parameters required for noise prediction for acceleration and deceleration lane are taken
(RLS-90) into consideration and the average of both lanes
Prediction of the noise level by RLS- 90 re- remains the actual Leq level. The equation men-
quired some input parameters such as the aver- tioned below is generally used for the determina-
age hourly flow of traffic, separated two-wheel- tion of Leq by a separate lane model.
ers, light and heavy motor vehicles, the aver- Acceleration lane Stop and Go separate lane
age speed for each group of traffic, road dimen- model
Leq = 56.91 + 0.09Sn(a) + 5.22 Log Vn(a) +
sion, the geometry of road and road type and
+ 0.04Sf (a) + 0.02 Log V (a) – 0.006D(a)
any natural and artificial obstacles. This model
considers the fundamental highlights which Deceleration lane Stop and Go separate lane
impact the propagation of noise, for example, model
obstacles, vegetation, reflections, and diffrac- Leq = 71.12 + 0.07Sn(b) + 0.42 Log Vn(b) +
tion. Specifically, it makes checking the noise + 0.08Sf (b) + 0.44 Log V (b) – 0.061D(b)
decrease created by obstacles conceivable and
likewise considers the reflections delivered by Assumption for noise prediction (Stop and Go
the screens. Model)
For the prediction of noise characteristics for
Stop and Go model interrupting traffic flow, the Stop and Go model
is used. This model is based on the following
Pamanikabud and Tharasawatpipat [1999] assumption.
of the Urban Transport Department in 1997 de- 1. Two modes of vehicles motion
veloped the Stop and Go model for the central a) Cruising with a steady uniform speed of traffic
part of Bangkok. The model gives emphasis on b) Stopping of traffic
formulating an empirical model of the intermit- 2. The road is a straight, good surface condition,
tent flow of traffic in Bangkok using two ana- no variation
lytical approaches. The first is the single model 3. No noise barrier between the observer and the
analysis and the second is the separate lane noise source
analysis or dual model analysis. Traffic noises 4. Traffic noise is measured in equivalent noise
due to interrupted or stop and go flow of traf- level (Leq)
fic situation on urban roads create considerably 5. Background noise should not exceed more
diverse noise than 10dB (A).

88
 Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

Input Parameters required for prediction Assumption for noise prediction (CoRTN)
of noise (Stop and Go Model)
The following parameters have been assumed
Several parameters are required while pre- during noise level prediction.
dicting noise using the stop and go model. The 1. The source height should be 0.5 m above the
parameters considered are vehicle volume classi- carriage level.
fied into the different vehicle types appearing on 2. Source distance should be 3.5 m from the near
the both sides of the road, average spot speed of side carriageway edge
vehicles in the traffic stream and roadway width. 3. Noise has been estimated at 1 meter in front of
the most exposed part of an external window
or door.
CoRTN Model
4. Meteorological conditions are not taken into
The noise prediction model CoRTN has been consideration.
developed by Delany, Harland, Hood, and Scho- 5. No background noise is taken into consideration.
les for the United Kingdom (UK) Department
of Environmental Engineering [Steele, 2001]. Input Parameters required for noise prediction
(CoRTN)
It is generally used as assistance for the design
of the road, and also for the prediction of noise For validating the CoRTN model, traffic noise
level around a noise source. CoRTN assumes a monitoring, characteristics of traffic including its
line source and constant speed of traffic, and in composition, the volume of traffic, and vehicle
the UK it is the only tool for the classification of speed on the road have been recorded. In the pro-
environmental impact due to the road traffic. Cal- cess of validation, the CoRTN model and traffic
culation of Road Traffic Noise (CoRTN) [Anon, composition are normally divided into the light
1975] has been replaced by a handier, Predicting and heavy vehicles. For this study, the light vehi-
Road Traffic Noise (PRTN) which also followed cles included personal cars, local taxis, vans, and
[Delany et. al., 1976] rationale for the proce- motorized two-wheelers, while trucks and buses
dure. The noise level (predicted or measured) is are included as the heavy vehicles.
expressed in terms of L10 (hourly) dB (A) and
L10 (18-hour) dB (A): 6:00 to 24:00 hrs. If traffic
data has been available hourly, then CoRTN can COMPARISON OF MODELS
be used to produce the hourly values of L(A)10
which can then be converted to Leq (A) hourly A comparison of different aspects of princi-
values. However, for the non-motorway roads pal traffic noise prediction models was shown in
when hourly traffic flows are below 200 vehicles Table 3. The main aspects of FHWA-TNM, RLS-
per hour during the period 24:00 to 06:00 hours, 90, Stop and Go (Single Lane Model) and Stop
the following should be used: and Go (Separate Lane Model) were discussed
in the table. Only the Stop and Go model is pre-
Leq(A), hourly = 0.57*L10(A),1h + 24.46 dB dicting noise level for interrupting traffic flow. In
For motorways Leq may be calculated using turn, all remaining models are designed to predict
the formula below: the noise level for uninterrupted traffic flow. In
India, the traffic flow is usually interrupted. Thus,
L(Day) = 0.98 X L10,18h + 0.090 dB the traffic noise model able to predict the noise
L(Evening) = 0.89 X L10,18h + 5.080 dB level in such a complex scenario is still pending
L(Night) = 0.87 X L10,18h + 4.240 dB to design.
L(Den) = 0.90 X L10,18h + 9.690 dB
For Non motorways the Leq may be calcu- CONCLUSION
lated using below mention formula
L(Day) = 0.95 X L10,18h +1.44 dB This paper reviews the literature on noise
monitoring, noise mapping and noise modeling
L(Evening) = 0.97 X L10,18h -2.87 dB
studies carried out in different countries by many
L(Night) = 0.90 X L10,18h -3.77 dB researchers. Accordingly, the following conclu-
L(Den) = 0.92 X L10,18h +4.20 dB sions were drawn.

89
Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

Table 3. Comparison of noise prediction models

Stop and Go Stop and Go
Model FHWA- TNM RLS-90 CoRTN
(Single Lane Model) (Separate Lane Model)
United State of United
Country Germany Thailand (Bangkok) Thailand (Bangkok)
America Kingdome
Leq(Acc) = 56.91 +
0.09Sn(a) + 5.22 Log
Leq (near)=10log (∑alli
Vn(a) + 0.04Sf (a) + 0.02
10Leq (hi) (near)/10)
LT = Lm + K Leq = 71.05 + 0.10Sn + Log V (a) – 0.006D (a) Leq(A), hourly =
Leq (far): 10log ∑alli
Equation Lme = L25 + Cs 0.95 Log Vn + 0.04 Sf + 0.57*L10(A),1h +
10Leq (hi) (far)/10)
+ Crs+ Cg + Cr 0.015 Log Vf – 0.111Dg Leq(dec) = 71.12 + 24.46 dB
Leq(hourly)= ELi + A(traffic)
0.07Sn(b) + 0.42 Log
+ Ad + As
Vn(b) + 0.08Sf (b) + 0.44
Log V (b) – 0.061D (b)
Acceleration,
Traffic Uniform Acceleration, Uniform
Constant, Grades Uniform Speed Uniform Speed
Condition speed, speed,
intermittent
Traffic type,
Speed of Traffic, Traffic Flow,, Heavy to Light
Type of traffic, Detail of
Traffic Flow, Road data, Type of traffic, Detail of vehicle
interrupted flow, speed of
Data Environment and interrupted flow, speed Ration, Low,
traffic(Acceleration and
Requirement Condition and Environment of traffic and road speed, road
deceleration lane) and
Local Condition and geometry and environs
road geometry
characteristics Local data.
characteristics
Mapping Grid Point Point Point Grid
Prediction Urban road traffic, Urban road traffic, Prediction of
Prediction road
Application road traffic uninterrupted traffic interrupted traffic flows Single traffic
Traffic noise,
noise flows (Leq) (Leq) noise
On the basis of
No local
Not take care traffic L10 Leq is being
Limitations Leq only characteristics
flow of both lanes determine that
take cares.
is obsolete
Equivalent Noise
Noise Data Equivalent Leq, Equivalent Noise
Level and L10 noise Equivalent Noise Level L10 noise level
requirement Noise Level Level
level

1. 90% noise monitoring studies focused on the assessment and management of environmental noise
traffic noise, the remaining 10% focused on the (END). Brussels, the European Parliament and the
residential, commercial and industrial areas. Council of the European Union, 2002.
2. The 2D noise maps were developed by 95% of 2. Mohammadi, 2009. An Investigation of Commu-
researchers only 5% developed 2D as well as nity Respond to Urban Traffic Noise. J Environment
3D noise maps. Health Science, 2, 137 .
3. Most of the noise prediction models use uni- 3. Zannin, P.H.T., Engel, M.S., Fiedler, P.E.K., Bunn,
form traffic flow for the prediction of noise F., 2013. Characterization of Environmental Noise
levels, only a few predict the noise levels for Based on Noise Measurements, Noise Mapping and
uniform as well as interrupted flow. Interviews: a Case Study at a University Campus in
4. On the basis of the above-mentioned literature Brazil. Cities, 31, 317.
survey, it has also been concluded that the noise 4. Mocuta, G.E., 2012. Noise Pollution Emitted as a
monitoring has not been carried out in differ- Consequence of the Urban Transport Development.
ent seasons and 24 X 7 and the 3D noise maps J Environ Prot Ecol, 13 (2A), 852.
have not been developed for the assessment of 5. Eelco, L.C., Boer, D., Schroten, A., 2007. Traffic
noise level. However, the 2D noise maps are Noise Reduction in Europe. CE Delft.
readily developed for noise assessment. 6. Stoilova, K., Stoilov, T., 1998. Traffic Noise and
Traffic Light Control. Transportation Research Part
D: Trans Environ, 3 (6), 399.
REFERENCES 7. Zannin, P. H. T., Calixto, A., Diniz, F. B., Ferreira,
J. A. C., 2003. A Survey of Urban Noise Annoyance
1. Directive 2002/49/EC of the European Parliament in a Large Brazilian City: the Importance of a Sub-
and of the Council of 25 June 2002 relating to the jective Analysis in Conjunction with an Objective

90
 Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

Analysis. Environ. Impact Asses, 23 (2), 245. Marta – Colombia; Colombia Médica – Vol. 48, 2017.
8. Piccolo, A., Plutino, D., Cannistraro, G., 2005, Eval- 23. Paez, Danie; Thirouin, Maïté; Behrentz, Eduardo;
uation and Analysis of the Environmental Noise of Pacheco, José; Perry, Anthony; Where Are We out?
Messina, Italy. Appl Acoust, 66, 447. Spatial Analysis Of Noise Pollution In Bogota; con-
9. Zannin, P.H.T., Ferreira, A.M.C., Szeremetta, B., ference_proceedings/Inter Noise 2014.
2006, Evaluation of Noise Pollution in Urban Parks. 24. Kinfe Mesfin*, Abdrie Seid Hasen and Mohamed
Environ Mon Asses, 118, 423. Birhanu; Determination of Noise Pollution Level in
10. Akhtar, N., Ahmad, K., and Alam P., 2016, Noise Dire-Dawa City, Ethiopia; Int J Environ Sci Nat Res
Monitoring and Mapping for Some Pre-selected Lo- 8(2): IJESNR.MS.ID.555733, 2018.
cations of New Delhi, India, Fluctuation and Noise 25. Abankwa E.O., Agyei-Agyemang A., Tawiah P.O;
Letters Vol. 15, No. 2. Impact of Noise in the Industry and Commercial ar-
11. Iliescu, M., Cadar, Y., Beca, M., 2015. Monitoring eas in Ghana: Case Study of the Kumasi metropolis;
Noise Pollution in Urban Area Through SUNET Int. Journal of Engineering Research and Applica-
System, Bulletin USAMV series Agriculture 72(1). tion; Vol. 7, Issue 7,, pp.11–19, July 2017
12. Steele, C., (2001), A critical review of some traf- 26. Rajiv B. Hunashal, Yogesh B. Patil, 2012. Assess-
fic noise prediction models, Applied Acoustics 62, ment of noise pollution indices in the city of Kol-
271–287. hapur, India; Procedia – Social and Behavioral Sci-
ences 37, 448–457.
13. J.E. Stoter, H. de Kluijver, V. Kurakula: 3D noise
mapping in urban areas, International Journal of 27. Nasim Akhtar, Kafeel Ahmad and Pervez Alam;
Geographical Information Science Vol. 22, No. Noise Monitoring and Mapping for Some Pre-se-
8,907–924, 2008. lected Locations of New Delhi, India; Fluctuation
and Noise Letters, 15(2), 2016.
14. Chang T.Y., Liu C.S., Bao B.Y., Li S.F., Chen T.I., Lin
Y.J. , Characterization of road traffic noise exposure 28. Ambika N. Josh, Nitesh C. Joshi, Dr. Payal P. Rane;
and prevalence of hypertension in Central Taiwan, Noise Mapping in Mumbai City, India; IJISET; 2(3),
Science Total Environment, 409, 1053–1057, 2011. 2015.
15. Naveen Garg, A.K. Sinha, M. Dahiya, V. Gandhi 29. Daniel Sondakh1, Maryunani, Soemarno , Budi
R.M. Bhardwaj, A.B. Akolkar; Evaluation and Setiawan; Analysis of Noise Pollution on Airport
Analysis of Environmental Noise Pollution in Seven Environment (Case study of International Airport
Major Cities of India, Archives of Acoustics, Vol. of Sam Ratulangi Manado, Indonesia); International
42, No. 2, pp. 175–188, 2017. Journal of Engineering Inventions; 4(2), 2014.
16. E. S. Barrekette, Pollution Springer Science Busi- 30. Hamed Biglari, Mehdi Saeidi, Mohsen Poursa-
ness Media New York 1973. deghiyan, Hooshmand Sharafi, Mohammad Reza
Narooie,Vali Alipour, Somayeh Rahdar, Razieh
17. Sanjib Chandra Chowdhury, M. Mahbubur Raz-
Khaksefidi, Amin Zarei, Morteza Ahamadabadi1;
zaque, and Md. Maksud Helali; Assessment of
A Study On Noise Pollution In The City Of Tehran,
Noise Pollution In Dhaka City; 17th international Iran; International Journal of Pharmacy & Technol-
congress of sound and vibration, ICSV17, Cairo, ogy; Vol., 3, 2016.
Egypt, 18–22 July 2010.
31. Kani M Rauf, Hussein Hossieni, Saro S Ahmad,
18. Bengang Li, Shu Tao, R.W. Dawson; Evaluation and Sarkhel Jamal and Aras Hussien; Comparison of the
analysis of traffic noise from the main urban roads Noise Pollution in Sulaimani City between the Years
in Beijing; Applied Acoustics 63, 1137–1142, 2002. 2009 and 2014;Pollution effects and control;Volume
19. Paulo Henrique Trombetta Zannin, Fabiano Belisa- 3, Issue 1, 2015.
rio Diniz, Wiliam Alves Barbosa; Environmental 32. jasem M. Al-Awadhi, Dhary S. AlKandary; Map-
noise pollution in the city of Curitiba, Brazil; Ap- ping and Validation of Noise Level in Kuwait City;
plied Acoustics 63 351–358, 2002. Transactions on Science and Technology Vol. 4, No.
20. Zekry F. Ghatass; Assessment and Analysis of Traf- 1, 38–47, 2017.
fic Noise Pollution in Alexandria City, Egypt; World 33. Shuokr Qarani Aziz Lulusi, Faridah A.H. Asaari,
Applied Sciences Journal 6 (3): 433–441, 2009. Nor Azam Ramli Hamidi, Abdul Aziz Amin Mojiri
21. Paul K. Essandoh and Frederick Ato Armah; De- and Muhammad Umar; Assessment of Traffic Noise
termination of Ambient Noise Levels in the Main Pollution in Bukit Mertajam, Malaysia and Erbil
Commercial Area of Cape Coast, Ghana; City, Iraq; Caspian Journal of Applied Sciences Re-
Research Journal of Environmental and Earth Sci- search, 1(3), pp. 1–11, 2012.
ences 3(6): 637–644, 2011. 34. Luis Pastor Sánchez Fernández, Luis A. Sánchez
22. Angélica Patricia Garrido Galindo, Yiniva Ca- Pérez, José J. Carbajal Hernández; Monitoring
margo Caicedo, Andres M Vélez-Pereira; Noise System of Environment Noise and Pattern Recog-
level in a neonatal intensive care unit in Santa nition; Proceedings of the International Conference

91
Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

on Environment, Energy, Ecosystems and Develop- 48. Andrey V. Vasilyev; New methods and approaches
ment 2013. to acoustic monitoring and noise mapping of urban
35. G.O. Avwiri, F. Nte; Environmental sound quality territories and experience of it approbation in con-
of some selected flow Stations in the Niger delta of ditions of Samara region of Russia; Procedia Engi-
Nigeria; Journal of Applied Sciences and Environ- neering 176 (2017) 669–674.
mental Management Vol. 7(2) 2003, 75–77 49. Paweł Kossakowski; Strategic Noise Maps; Envi-
36. Karl N. Vergel, Frielly T. Cacho and Cheryl Lyne ronment; 1–9.
E. Capiz; A Study on Roadside Noise Generated 50. Jasem M. Al-Awadhi, Dhary S. Al Kandary; Map-
by Tricycles; Philippine Engineering Journal, 2004; ping and Validation of Noise Level in Kuwait City;
25(2), 1–22. Transactions on Science and Technology Vol. 4, No.
37. Andrey V. Vasilyev, 2017. New methods and ap- 1, 38 – 47, 2017.
proaches to acoustic monitoring and noise mapping 51. Şukru Dursun , Celalettin Ozdemir, Hakan Karabörk,
of urban territories and experience of it approbation Saim Koçak; Noise Pollution And Map Of Konya
in conditions of Samara region of Russia; Procedia City In Turkey; J. Int. Environmental Application
Engineering 176, 669–674. & Science; Vol. 1 (1–2): 63–72, 2006.
38. Mohamed A. Zytoon; Opportunities for Environ- 52. W J P Casas, E P Cordeiro, T C Mello, P H T Zannin;
mental Noise Mapping in Saudi Arabia: A Case of Noise mapping as a tool for controlling industrial
Traffic Noise Annoyance in an Urban Area in Jed- noise pollution; Journal of Scientific & Industrial
dah City; Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2016, Research Vol. 73, April 2014, 262–266.
13, 496. 53. Guzel Yilmaz and Yuksel Hocanli; Mapping of
39. Nilgün Akbulut Çoban, Cengiz Dalkılıç, Sezer Noise By Using GIS In S¸Anliurfa; Environmental
Kaya, Mevlüt Türkmenoğlu, and Mustafa Çoban; Monitoring and Assessment (2006) 121: 103–108.
Smart Solutions for Recreational Noise Pollution 54. Paulo Henrique Trombetta Zannin, Vinícius Luiz
in Turkey; Noise Mapp. 2018; 5:21–32. Gama, Maurício Laçoni da Cunha, Eduardo Fer-
40. Kinga Szopińska and Izabela Rącka; Assessment raz Damiani, Marcello Benetti, Henrique Bianchi,
of the Sound Environment and Prices of Noise- André Luiz Senko da Hora, Guilherme Bortolaz
Sensitive Real Estate – Case Study of a Polish Guedes, Tiago Luiz Portella, Vitor André Jastale
City; (ICCSEAS 2017) Paris, France on November Pinto and David Queiros de Sant´Ana; Noise Map-
28–29, 2017. ping of an Educational Environment; Canadian
41. Kartikey Tiwari, Shivendra ku. jha and Bhaven N. Acoustics; 40(1), 2013, 20–27.
Tandel; GIS Based Approach for Noise Mapping of 55. Julii S. Brainard, Andrew P. Jones, Ian J. Bateman
Urban Road Traffic; NAP-2017, S.V.N.I.T. and Andrew A. Lovett; Exposure To Environmental
42. Nasim Akhtar, Kafeel Ahmad and Pervez Alam; Urban Noise Pollution in Birmingham, UK; Urban
Noise Monitoring and Mapping for Some Pre-se- Studies, 41(13), 2581–2600, 2004.
lected Locations of New Delhi, India; Fluctuation 56. Enock Abe Wawa, Galcano Canny Mulaku; Noise
and Noise Letters, 15(2), 2016. Pollution Mapping Using GIS in Nairobi, Kenya;
43. Kang-Ting Tsai, Min-Der Lin, Yen-Hua Chen; Journal of Geographic Information System, 2015,
Noise mapping in urban environments: A Taiwan 7, 486–493.
study; Applied Acoustics 70 (2009) 964–972. 57. Miguel Arana, Ricardo San Martín, Iñaki Nagore,
44. Jantien Stoter, Henk De Kluijver, Vinaykumar Kur- David Pérez; Using Noise Mapping to Evaluate the
akula; 3D noise mapping in urban areas; Interna- Percentage of People Affected by Noise; Acta Acus-
tional Journal of Geographical Information Science tica United With Acustica Vol. 95 (2009) 550–554.
Vol. 22, No. 8, 2008, 907–924. 58. J. L. Bento Coelho, Diogo Alarcao; On Noise Map-
45. Paulo Henrique Trombetta Zannin, David Queiroz ping and Noise Action Plans for Large Urban Areas;
de Sant’Ana; Noise mapping at different stages of Forum Acusticum 2005 Budapest.
a freeway redevelopment project – A case study in 59. Bany Bossam Eldien; Noise Mapping In Urban En-
Brazil; Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 479–486. vironments: Application at Suez City Center; IEEE
46. R. Wu, B. Zhang, L. Liu, J. Yang; Application of Explore, 2009, 1722–1727.
noise mapping in environmental noise management 60. J. L. Bento Celho, J. R. Mteus, M. J. Palma, A. M
in Hnagzhou, China; Euro noise 2015, Maastricht. Almeida, C. Patcerio; Noise Mapping of road Traffic
47. Haibo Wang, Hanjie Chen , Ming Cai; Evaluation Noise in Portugal; Inter. Noise, 2000, 1–4.
of an urban traffic NoiseeExposed population based 61. Nicolás A. Bastián-Monarca, Enrique Suárez, Jorge
on points of interest and noise maps: The case of P. Arenas ; Assessment of methods for simplified
Guangzhou; Environmental Pollution 239 (2018) traffic noise mapping of small cities: Casework
741–750. of the city of Valdivia, Chile; Science of the Total

92
 Journal of Ecological Engineering Vol. 21(4), 2020

Environment 550 (2016) 439–448. prediction models. Applied Acoustics 2001, 62,
62. Oyedepo Sunday Olayinka; Noise Map: Tool for 271–287.
Abating Noise Pollution in Urban Areas; 2012, 1, 71. Naveen Garg and Sagar Maji; A critical review of
185. principal traffic noise models: Strategies and impli-
63. L. Kliučininkas and D. Šaliūnas; Noise mapping for cations; Environmental Impact Assessment Review
the management of urban traffic flows; Mechanika. 46, 2014, 68–81.
2006, 61–66. 72. Anon. FHWA. traffic noise prediction model US.
64. E. Kalipci and S. Dursun; Presentation of Giresun Washington: Department of Transportation, Federal
city traffic noise pollution Mpa Via Geographical Highway Administration National Technical Infor-
Information system; Journal of applied Science; mation Service, 1978.
2009, 479–487. 73. Anon. Highway noise Ð generation and control.
65. Carlos Iglesias Merchan, Luis Diaz-Balteiro; Noise National Cooperative Highway Research Program
pollution mapping approach and accuracy on land- report 173. Washington: Transportation Research
scape scales; Science of the Total Environment 449, Board, 1976.
2013, 115–125. 74. J. Quartieri, N.E. Mastorakis, G. Iannone, C.
66. Paulo Eduardo Kirrian Fiedler, Paulo Henrique Guarnaccia,S. D’Ambrosio, A. Troisi, TLL Lenza
Trombetta Zannin; Evaluation of noise pollution in 2012. A Review of Traffic Noise Predictive Mod-
urban traffic hubs–Noise maps and measurements. els. Recent Advances In Applied and Theoretical
Environmental Impact Assessment Review 51, Mechanics; Vol. 3, 72–80.
2015, 1–9. 75. P. Pamanikabud and C. Tharasawatpipat (1999),
67. Farcaş F. and Sivertunb Å. Road Traffic Noise: Gis Modeling of urban area stop-and-go model. Journal
Tools for Noise Mapping and A Case Study For of Transportation Engineering; 125 (2), 257–271.
Skåne Region; The International Archives of The 76. Campbell Steele (2001); A critical review of some
Photogrammetry, Remote Sensing and Spatial In- traffic noise prediction models; Applied Acoustics
formation Sciences, 34, 2015, 1–10. 62, 271–287.
68. A Hede, N.L. Carter, R.F.S. Job, „Environmental 77. Anon. Calculation of road traffic noise. London:
noise regulation: A public policy perspective”, Noise United Kingdom Department of the Environment
as a Public Health Problem; Noise Effects; 1998, and Welsh Oce Joint Publication/HMSO, 1975.
vol. 2, 687–96. 78. Anon. Predicting road traffic noise. United Kingdom
69. Chi-wing Law, Chee-kwan Lee, Aaron Shiu-wai Department of the Environment/HMSO, London.
Lui, Maurice Kwok-leung Yeung, Kin-che Lam; 79. Delany ME, Harland DG, Hood RA, Scholes WE.
Advancement of three-dimensional noise mapping The prediction of noise levels L10 due to road traf-
in Hong Kong; Applied Acoustics 72, 2011, 534–543. fic. Journal of Sound and Vibration 1976, 48(3),
70. Steele C. A critical review of some traffic noise 305–325.

93