Download connor1

Session 1: The Nature of
the Problem
ICAO Environmental Colloquium
April 2001
Presented by Mr. T. Connor
Session 1: The Nature of
the Problem
ICAO Environmental Colloquium
April 2001
Presented by Mr. T. Connor
Session 1: The Nature of
the Problem
ICAO Environmental Colloquium
April 2001
Presented by Mr. T. Connor
noise
sound, especially when it is unwanted, unpleasant
or loud
sound
sensory perception as a result of periodic vibrations
that are propagated
through a medium,
such as air, as
pressure waves,
so that the medium
is displaced from its
equilibrium state
Adverse Effects of Noise
• Noise-induced hearing impairment
• Cardiovascular and physiological effects
– Hypertension, heart disease
• Mental health disorders
– Anxiety, emotional stress
• Performance deficiency
– Ability of children to learn
•
•
•
•
Interference with speech communications
Sleep disturbance
Annoyance
Degradation of quality of life
Percent Highly Annoyed
annoyance
a feeling of displeasure associated with any agent
or condition, known or believed by an individual or
group, to adversely affect them
Aircraft Noise Exposure
Noise (Sound) Properties
Pressure: Source vibration
causes compressions and
rarefactions of the air
particles; pressure wave
Frequency: Number of
compressions/rarefactions per
second
Amplitude: Height of the
pressure (sound) wave
Noise (Sound) Properties
Pressure: Source vibration
causes compressions and
rarefactions of the air
particles; pressure wave
Frequency: Number of
compressions/rarefactions per
second
Amplitude: Height of the
pressure (sound) wave
Frequency and Audibility
Sound
Spectra
Frequency and Pitch
Source
Sound Spectra at Peak Level
Frequency and Pitch
Source
Sound Spectra at Peak Level
Frequency and Pitch
Source
Sound Spectra at Peak Level
Frequency and Pitch
Source
Sound Spectra at Peak Level
Noise Measurement
Decibel (dB)
A unit for measuring the
loudness of sound. The
logarithm of the ratio of
acoustic power
(sound) intensities.
Noise Measurement
Decibel (dB)
A unit for measuring the
loudness of sound. The
logarithm of the ratio of
acoustic power
(sound) intensities.
A-weighting
Weighting of the sound
spectra to approximate
the human ear’s
response to sound.
Noise Measurement
Comparison of Noise Levels in dB(A)
140
130
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
Threshold of hearing
0
Threshold of pain
Noise Measurement
Sound Exposure Level (SEL)
A measure of the physical energy of the noise event
taking into account intensity and duration.
Noise Measurement
Noise Measurement
Sound Exposure Level
(SEL)
• Integration of Aweighted levels (AL)
• Human ear’s
response to sound
• Assess community
noise
Effective Perceived
Noise Level (EPNL)
• Tone-corrected PNL
• Noisiness of discreet
frequencies
• Aircraft noise
certification
Aircraft Noise Assessment
• Concerns to address
– health and welfare
– land use compatibility
– environmental degradation
• Desired characteristics
–
–
–
–
–
applicable to above concerns
simple to understand and use
relates to community/environmental noise
‘figure of merit’
accounts for magnitude, frequency of occurrence,
and time of day
Aircraft Noise Assessment
Metrics
Method
Basic Noise Measure
Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL)
Sound Exposure Level (SEL)
Day Night Evening Noise Level (DNEL)
SEL
Day Night Sound Level (DNL)
SEL
Equivalent (Continuous) Sound Level
(Leq)
SEL
KOSTEN
A-weighted Sound Pressure Level (AL)
Noise and Number Index (NNI)
Perceived Noise Level (PNL)
Noise Exposure Forecast (NEF)
Effective Perceived Noise Level (EPNL)
Psophic Index (IP)
PNL
Weighted Effective Continuous
Perceived Noise Level (WECPNL)
EPNL or AL
Aircraft Noise Assessment
Metrics
CAEP/5 chose DNL to assess the benefits of new
aircraft noise standards and transition strategies with
‘significant’ exposure defined as DNL 55 dB or higher
and ‘high’ exposure defined as DNL 65 dB or higher.
Aircraft Time History and Associated Noise Metrics
Aircraft Noise Assessment
85
80
Metrics
75
The Maximum Level
(LAMAX) is 80.1 dB
The Time Above 65 dB (TA
65) is 46 Seconds
LAeq (dB)
70
65
Day Night Level (DNL) is the energy-averaged sound level measured
over a 24-hour period with a 10 dB penalty applied to nighttime events
(2200 to 0700 hr) to account for increased annoyance of sound during
night hours.
60
55
The Sound Energy
Averaged over 1 second
(SEL) is 91.2 dB
50
45
40
35
11:33:30
11:34:05
11:34:39
11:35:14
11:35:48
11:36:23
Time Of Day
120
100
10 dB
Penalty
10 dB
Penalty
SEL
80
60
40
20
0
0:00
2:00
4:00
6:00
8:00
10:00
12:00
14:00
Time of Day
16:00
18:00
20:00
22:00
11:36:58
Aircraft Noise Assessment
DNL and Annoyance
Percent Highly Annoyed
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
Day Night Noise Level (DNL, dB)
90
95
100
Aircraft Noise Assessment
Use of Computer Models
Attributes
• aircraft noise and performance database
• sound propagation and attenuation algorithms
• runway orientation
• flight track definitions
• operations distribution
• GIS tie-in (population centroids, geographic
features, political boundaries)
Aircraft Noise Assessment
Use of Computer Models
CAEP/5 decided to:
1. Initiate the effort to adopt FAA’s Integrated
Noise Model (INM) as the noise engine to
drive strategic assessments
2. Develop an ICAO database for noise
modeling, building on the principle of the
INM database
Aircraft Noise Assessment
Integrated Noise Model
• Capable of producing noise contours for a
variety of noise metrics
• Extensive aircraft noise and performance
database
• Wide distribution
• Available in Windows 95, 98 or Windows NT
• User’s Guide and Technical Manual
• Web page for information and model updates
– http://www.aee.faa.gov/aee-100/inm
• Technical support provided
• Commercial training courses available
Aircraft Noise Assessment
Integrated Noise Model
Integrated Noise Model (INM) produces the noise exposure
maps used for land use planning.
Aircraft Noise Assessment
Regional and Global Evaluations
Premise
Aircraft noise exposure around an airport depends
principally on the volume and mix of aircraft traffic,
departure and arrival flight routings, operational
practices, and the number and distribution of people
living nearby.
CAEP experience
• Before CAEP/3, an “average” airport had been used
to assess stringency proposals.
• At CAEP/3, a small sample (13) of airports was used
in the assessment.
• CAEP/4 agreed to evaluate a global model which became
the Model for Assessing Global Exposure to the Noise of
Transport Aircraft (MAGENTA).
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
•
•
•
•
•
Source reduction
Noise abatement procedures/routes
Noise mitigation at the receiver
Land use compatibility management
Operating restrictions
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Source Reduction
• Advancements in technology
• Industry/government partnerships
• Criteria for new noise standard:
–
–
–
–
–
technologically practicable
economically reasonable
appropriate to type
environmentally beneficial
maintains highest degree of safety
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Noise Abatement Procedures/Routes
• Departure
– Engine power cutback
• Arrival
– Continuous descent
• Flight tracks
– Geographic feature (bodies of water)
– Other compatible ‘pathways’ (major roads,
railways)
• Preferential runway usage
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Noise Abatement Procedures/Routes
737-700 - NADP 1 vs ICAO A - SEL
• Departure
– Engine power cutback
• Arrival
-1.0
0.0
– Continuous descent
• Flight tracks
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
Distance from Brake Release (nm)
ICAO A 80 dB
NADP 1 80 dB
ICAO A 90 dB
NADP 1 90 dB
– Geographic feature (bodies of water)
– Other compatible ‘pathways’ (major roads,
railways)
• Preferential runway usage
6.0
7.0
8.0
9.0
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Noise Abatement Procedures/Routes
• Departure
– Engine power cutback
• Arrival
– Continuous descent
• Flight tracks
– Geographic feature (bodies of water)
– Other compatible ‘pathways’ (major roads,
railways)
• Preferential runway usage
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Noise Abatement Procedures/Routes
• Departure
– Engine power cutback
• Arrival
– Continuous descent
• Flight tracks
– Geographic feature (bodies of water)
– Other compatible ‘pathways’ (major roads,
railways)
• Preferential runway usage
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Mitigation at the Receiver
• Residential noise insulation
• Sound barriers
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Mitigation at the Receiver
• Residential noise insulation
• Sound barriers
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Mitigation at the Receiver
• Residential noise insulation
• Sound barriers
Noise berm at Chicago O’Hare International
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Land Use Compatibility Management
•
•
•
•
Local zoning
Buy-out
Relocation
Disclosure
Aircraft Noise Control and Mitigation
Operating Restrictions
•
•
•
•
•
Curfew
Noise surcharge
Quotas
Noise budgets
Phaseout
Implications of Unresolved Aircraft
Noise Problems
• Organized opposition to airport expansion
• Proliferation of local use restrictions
– 119 in 1980 to 600 as of March 2001
• Imposition of energy inefficient flight routing
• Government outlays for local noise mitigation
• Pressure to execute marginally safe flight
procedures, i.e., “beat the box
Organized Opposition to Airport Expansion
• Individual groups established locally to express
concerns over airport noise and expansion.
• Trend for these groups to coordinate their activities
internationally and share information through the
internet.
• Opposition to new runway addition will result in traffic
shifts to reliever airports where incremental growth
will lead to large increases in noise contours.
• Opposition to new runway addition in the US is
contributing to airport congestion.
Organized Opposition to Airport Expansion
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
United States
Citizens Against Airport Pollution, CAAP (CA)
International
Anti-Noise
Groups(VA)
Citizens Concerned
AboutEurope
Jet
Noise, CCAJN
• • Friends
ofCoalition
the
Europe
(Austria, O’Hare
Belgium,
Net-Sky
against
expansion
of LiegeAReCO
Alliance
ofEarth
Residents
concerning
(IL)
AirportDenmark,
(Belgium)
England,
Finland,
France,
Sane Cyprus,
Aviation
For Everyone,
SAFE
(NY)
Australia
Germany,
Greece,
Ireland,
Italy,
Luxembourg,
•
French
National
Association
Against
Aircraft
Boulder
County
Citizens
Against
Aviation
Noise,
BCCAAN (CO)
•Macedonia,
Bankstown
&
Environs
Airport
Resistance
Noise and Pollution,
UFCNA
(France)
the Netherlands,
Norway,
Poland,
Airport Coordinating Team, ACT (MD)
Coalition
of Airport
Groups
Spain,
Switzerland).
••Slovenia,
Federal
Organization
Against Airport and
Citizens
against
Sea-Tac
Expansion,
CASE (WA)
Aircraft
Noise
(Germany)
Save OurUnion
SkiesAgainst Aircraft Nuisances
• •European
Westside
Civic
Federation,
WCF (LAX)
••(UECNA),
Environmental
Organization
ofofCopenhagen
England
(Members
the UECNA are
Third
runway
Protest
Page
South (Denmark)
Metro Airport Action Council, SMAAC (MN)
the national umbrella organizations against aviation
Airport
Neighbors
Decide, AND
(OH)
• noise)
Heathrow
Association
for the
Control of Aircraft
Noise,
HACAN
(England)
Colorado
Citizens
Against
Noise, COLCAN (CO)
• Coalition
AgainstAlliance,
Runway AARA
2, CAR2
(England)
Airport
Area Residents
(TN)
• Mileudefensie
(the Netherlands)
Alaska
Quiet Rights Coalition,
AQRC
Model for Assessing Global Exposure
to the Noise of Transport Aircraft
(MAGENTA)
Presented by Mr. Ben Sharp
Purpose of MAGENTA
• Determine aggregate world population impacted by
aircraft noise for baseline year (1998).
• Include significant noise impact contribution from all
world airports with jet operations.
• Base estimates on actual aircraft operations and
demographic data.
• Estimate the change in population impacted by aircraft
noise worldwide for the following noise mitigation
measures:
 Aircraft phase-out
 Reduced aircraft noise levels
 Air traffic control procedures
 Land-use planning
The History of MAGENTA
• Initiated as an FAA project in late 1996
• Briefings given to:
– ICCAIA, Seattle, Oct 96
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
CAEP FESG, Brussels, Nov 96
ANCAT, Paris, Jan 1997
CAEP Steering Committee, Canberra, Jan 98
CAEP Working Group 2, Ottawa, April 1998
Adopted by ICAO at CAEP 4, April 98
Briefing on capabilities, CAEP Steering Group, Madrid, June 99
Briefing on initial results, CAEP Steering Group, Singapore, May
2000
– Briefing on intermediate results, CAEP Steering Group, Seattle, Sept
2000
• CAEP Magenta Task Group established in April 98
MAGENTA Task Group


Chairman - Dr. John Ollerhead, UK CAA
Task Group members:
–
–
–
–
–
–

FAA
IATA
ICCAIA
ACI Europe
ICAO/CAEP FESG/JET9
CAEP representatives from France, Netherlands, Japan
Attendees:
–
–
–
–
–
Boeing, Airbus
PW,GE
Airlines
Eurocontrol
NASA
Basic Components of MAGENTA
• Airport data
• Airport operations for baseline year (1998)
• Forecasted operations through 2020
• Noise engine to develop noise contours
• Aircraft noise data – current and future
• Population data
Airport Data
Airports classified into categories:
 Shell 1: Airports with INM data files containing
runway usage and flight tracks, allowing noise
contours to be developed and combined with digital
population data to determine population exposed.
 Shell 1B: Airports with manufactured INM files
allowing noise contours to be developed.
 Shell 2: Airports with no INM files. Noise contour
size (not shape) calculated by generalized model
(GCAM) developed from Shell 1 airport data.
Study Regions and Airport Samples
Region
Shell 1 %
Exposure
Shell 1
Shell 2
102
343
b) 28 ECAC States
35
232
c) Japan, Australia, New Zealand
14
82
34
882
80
185
1539
91
Non - Exempt Regions:
a) North America (US and Canada)
96
Exempt Region:
Rest of World (excl. CIS)
TOTAL
Airport Operations
• Aircraft operations classified into seat class/stage
length categories for each of 21 world Route Groups,
i.e. North Atlantic, TransPacific, Europe-Africa, IntraUS, etc. , at each Shell 1 airport.
• Baseline year (1998) mix of operations by seat
class/stage length category at each airport determined
by processing 1998 IOAG data for scheduled passenger,
cargo and charter operations.
• Baseline and future year total aircraft operations by
seat class/stage length category and Route Group based
on traffic projections provided by CAEP/FESG.
Single Route Aircraft Matrix
(Single airport, 1996)
Intra-US
Seat Class
Aircraft
Arrivals
<80
80-150
150-210
210-300
300-400
400-500
500-600
>600
727D17
727EM2
727Q15
BAC111
BEC58P
CIT3
CL600
CL601
CNA441
DC870
DC9Q7
DHC8
HS748A
IA1125
MU3001
SD330
SF340
737300
737400
727Q15
7373B2
737QN
DC9Q7
DC9Q9
F10065
MD82
757RR
767CF6
767300
767CF6
L1011
2.8
16.86
1.34
1.7
3
0.4
1.29
75.71
9
4
7
10
5
2.33
0.57
4
170
46
1.5
49
1.5
3
1.16
6.84
1
78
29
5
0.9
1.1
3
Stg 1
1.33
8
0.67
1.7
3
0.4
0.91
53.09
7
1
4
9
5
2.33
0.57
4
170
28
1.5
24
1.5
3
0.8
6.2
1
54
10
1
0.45
0.55
Stg 2
0.84
5.16
Operations
Departures
Stg 3
Stg 4
0.28
0.14
1.72
0.86
0.37
21.63
2
2
3
18
11
3
12
0.36
0.64
21
7
1
2
3
4
1
0.45
0.55
1
5
1
Stg 5
Stg 6
Stg 7
Fleet Mix Forecast Processor
• Fleet forecast processor operates on 1998
baseline fleet at each airport and takes account
of:
–
–
–
–
–
Growth
Retirement based on survivor curve
Replacement
Phase-out
Stringency
• Replacement aircraft selected from CAEP Jet-9
Best Practice database.
Aircraft Operations Forecasts
Noise Engine - INM
• Shell 1 airports use INM to calculate contour area and
shape - selected because of its comprehensive aircraft
noise data base and widespread use in many countries.
• INM run time is determined by number of
aircraft/stage lengths - for 185 airports, run time is
measured in weeks.
• Equivalent aircraft concept developed by which
aircraft are replaced by combinations of four standard
aircraft.
• This concept reduces run time per airport to minutes total run time for 185 airports is about eight hours.
Population Databases
• MAGENTA population databases include:
– US Census Bureau 1990 population database for the US.
– Joint Resources Assessment Database System (JRADS) - a
worldwide population database that includes population
estimates for all major cities in 130 countries.
– Digital files for selected airports - LHR, SYD, CDG.
• JRADS data in the form of circles for population
centers and grids for distributed population.
• Adjustments made using local land-use maps to
increase accuracy.
Key MAGENTA Assumptions
• No change in airport configuration or routes with time.
• Population distributions remain constant with time.
• All aircraft use INM default departure procedure –
ICAO B
• All new production aircraft taken from CAEP Jet-9
database, and have unchanging noise/performance
characteristics.
• Within any aircraft range/size cell all new production
aircraft are distributed evenly between a)
manufacturers, and then b) eligible types/versions.
MAGENTA Outputs
MAGENTA estimates the number of people
living within the DNL 55 (impacted) and DNL
65 (significantly impacted) contours by region:
Region 1 - North America (US, Canada)
Region 2 - ECAC countries
Region 3 – Japan, Australia, New Zealand
Region 4 – Rest of the world, excluding CIS
countries
What are the trends?
•
•
•
•
Aviation growth
Source reduction technology
Airport restrictions/operational control
Number of people exposed to aircraft
noise
What are the trends?
FLEET GROWTH IN NON-EXEMPT COUNTRIES
Aviation Growth
120
Number of Operations in Thousands
BP - Best Practice Aircraft
100
80
BP (-14)
BPBP
(-11)
(Chp3)
60
Chp 3 (-14)
40
BP (-8)
Chp 3 (-11)
20
0
Chp 3 (-8)
HK
Chp 2
1998
Chp 3
2002
2006
2009
Year
2013
2016
2020
What are the trends?
Aviation Growth
Airports in Non-Exempt Countries Theoretically Reaching
Capacity without Runway Additions
35
Number of Airports
30
25
20
15
10
5
0
2002
2006
2009
2013
Year
2016
2020
What are the trends?
Source Reduction Technology
Turbojets
CONCORDE
Low-bypass-ratio
Turbofans
First-generation
high-bypass-ratio
Second-generation
Turbofans
high-bypass-ratio
Turbofans
10 dB
Chapter 2
Chapter 3
Increase in
weight or range
1955
1960
1965
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
Date of Entry into Service
1995
2000
2005
What are the trends?
Airport Restrictions
Growth in World Airport Noise Restrictions
250
Number of Restrictions
200
150
100
50
0
1970
1975
1980
1985
1990
1995
1996
1997
1998
Year
Curfews
Surcharges
Noise Level Limits
Quotas
Budgets
2000
What are the trends?
Number of People Exposed to Aircraft Noise
35,000,000
Unconstrained Capacity
Population above DNL 55
30,000,000
Japan, Australia,
& New Zealand
25,000,000
Europe (ECAC)
US & Canada
20,000,000
15,000,000
Rest of World
10,000,000
5,000,000
0
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
Year
2012
2014
2016
2018
2020