首页> 外文会议>International Congress and Exposition on Noise Control Engineering >Human response to wind farm noise compared to road traffic noise based on focused listening tests
【24h】

Human response to wind farm noise compared to road traffic noise based on focused listening tests

机译:基于重点听力测试的人类对风电场噪声的响应与道路交通噪声的对比

获取原文

摘要

Although various wind farm noise (WFN) complaints have been raised, the evidence regarding the effect of WFN on health is still not well established, compared to road traffic noise (RTN). In addition, WFN dose-response relationships for sleep have not been derived before, either on a subjective or objective basis. This paper presents dose-response relationships for WFN and RTN as well as their effect on annoyance and sleep disturbance using stimuli measured at different distances from the respective noise source. The stimuli were reproduced using loudspeakers and the tests involved twenty-two participants who rated their subjective response via questionnaires. The results show that WFN can be more annoying and more likely to disturb sleep than RTN at the same A-weighted sound pressure level, especially when it contains amplitude modulation. Despite this, WFN is interestingly perceived to be quieter than RTN at the same A-weighted level. These results can help develop current allowable limits for WFN, which still vary considerably between jurisdictions.
机译:尽管已经提出了各种风电场噪声(WFN)投诉,但与道路交通噪声(RTN)相比,有关WFN对健康的影响的证据仍不完善。此外,以前尚未在主观或客观基础上得出睡眠的WFN剂量反应关系。本文介绍了WFN和RTN的剂量反应关系,以及它们在距各自噪声源不同距离处测得的刺激对烦躁和睡眠障碍的影响。使用扬声器复制刺激,测试涉及22位参与者,他们通过问卷对他们的主观反应进行了评分。结果表明,在相同的A加权声压水平下,WFN可能比RTN更烦人并且更可能干扰睡眠,尤其是当它包含幅度调制时。尽管如此,有趣的是,在相同的A加权水平下,WFN被认为比RTN安静。这些结果可以帮助制定当前的WFN允许限制,各辖区之间仍然存在很大差异。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

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