ICAO Environmental Colloquium April 2001 Presented by Mr. T. Connor Session 1: The Nature of the...
-
Upload
elinor-green -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of ICAO Environmental Colloquium April 2001 Presented by Mr. T. Connor Session 1: The Nature of the...
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
Session 1: The Nature of the Problem
noise sound, especially when it is unwanted, unpleasant or loud
sound sensory perception as a result of periodic vibrations that are propagatedthrough a medium,such as air, aspressure waves,so that the mediumis displaced from itsequilibrium 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
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
Pe
rce
nt
Hig
hly
An
no
yed
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 AudibilitySoundSpectra
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 MeasurementDecibel (dB)A unit for measuring the loudness of sound. The logarithm of the ratio of acoustic power(sound) intensities.
Noise MeasurementDecibel (dB)A unit for measuring the loudness of sound. The logarithm of the ratio of acoustic power(sound) intensities.
A-weightingWeighting of the soundspectra to approximatethe human ear’sresponse to sound.
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
110
120
130
140
Noise Measurement Comparison of Noise Levels in dB(A)
Threshold of hearing
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 A-weighted 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 AssessmentMetrics
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 AssessmentMetrics
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 Noise AssessmentMetrics
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.
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
0:00 2:00 4:00 6:00 8:00 10:00 12:00 14:00 16:00 18:00 20:00 22:00
Time of Day
SE
L
10 dB Penalty
10 dB Penalty
Aircraft Time History and Associated Noise Metrics
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
11:33:30 11:34:05 11:34:39 11:35:14 11:35:48 11:36:23 11:36:58
Time Of Day
LA
eq (
dB
)
The Sound Energy Averaged over 1 second (SEL) is 91.2 dB
The Maximum Level (LAMAX) is 80.1 dB
The Time Above 65 dB (TA 65) is 46 Seconds
Aircraft Noise AssessmentDNL and Annoyance
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70 75 80 85 90 95 100
Day Night Noise Level (DNL, dB)
Pe
rce
nt
Hig
hly
An
no
yed
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 AssessmentUse of Computer Models
Aircraft Noise AssessmentUse 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 AssessmentIntegrated 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 AssessmentIntegrated Noise Model
Integrated Noise Model (INM) produces the noise exposure maps used for land use planning.
PremiseAircraft 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 AssessmentRegional and Global Evaluations
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
• Departure– Engine power cutback
• Arrival– Continuous descent
• Flight tracks– Geographic feature (bodies of water)
– Other compatible ‘pathways’ (major roads, railways)
• Preferential runway usage
737-700 - NADP 1 vs ICAO A - SEL
-1.0 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0
ICAO A 80 dB NADP 1 80 dB
ICAO A 90 dB NADP 1 90 dB
Distance from Brake Release (nm)
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
International Anti-Noise Groups
• Friends of the Earth Europe (Austria, Belgium, Cyprus, Denmark, England, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Slovenia, Spain, Switzerland).
• European Union Against Aircraft Nuisances (UECNA), England (Members of the UECNA are the national umbrella organizations against aviation noise)
Europe • Net-Sky Coalition against expansion of Liege-
Airport (Belgium)• French National Association Against Aircraft
Noise and Pollution, UFCNA (France)• Federal Organization Against Airport and
Aircraft Noise (Germany)• Environmental Organization of Copenhagen
(Denmark)• Heathrow Association for the Control of Aircraft
Noise, HACAN (England)• Coalition Against Runway 2, CAR2 (England)• Mileudefensie (the Netherlands)
Australia
• Bankstown & Environs Airport Resistance
• Coalition of Airport Groups
• Save Our Skies
• Third runway Protest Page
United States• Citizens Against Airport Pollution, CAAP (CA)• Citizens Concerned About Jet Noise, CCAJN (VA)• AReCO Alliance of Residents concerning O’Hare (IL)• Sane Aviation For Everyone, SAFE (NY)• Boulder County Citizens Against Aviation Noise, BCCAAN (CO)• Airport Coordinating Team, ACT (MD)• Citizens against Sea-Tac Expansion, CASE (WA)• Westside Civic Federation, WCF (LAX)• South Metro Airport Action Council, SMAAC (MN)• Airport Neighbors Decide, AND (OH)• Colorado Citizens Against Noise, COLCAN (CO)• Airport Area Residents Alliance, AARA (TN)• 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 Shell 2Shell 1 % Exposure
Non - Exempt Regions:
a) North America (US and Canada) 102 343
b) 28 ECAC States 35 232
c) Japan, Australia, New Zealand 14 82
Exempt Region:
Rest of World (excl. CIS) 34 882 80
TOTAL 185 1539 91
96
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, Intra-US, 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)
Seat Class AircraftArrivals
Stg 1 Stg 2 Stg 3 Stg 4 Stg 5 Stg 6 Stg 7<80 727D17 2.8 1.33 0.84 0.28 0.14
727EM2 16.86 8 5.16 1.72 0.86727Q15 1.34 0.67BAC111 1.7 1.7BEC58P 3 3
CIT3 0.4 0.4CL600 1.29 0.91 0.37CL601 75.71 53.09 21.63
CNA441 9 7 2DC870 4 1 2DC9Q7 7 4 3DHC8 10 9
HS748A 5 5IA1125 2.33 2.33
MU3001 0.57 0.57SD330 4 4SF340 170 170
80-150 737300 46 28 18737400 1.5 1.5727Q15 49 24 11 3 127373B2 1.5 1.5737QN 3 3DC9Q7 1.16 0.8 0.36DC9Q9 6.84 6.2 0.64F10065 1 1MD82 78 54 21 3
150-210 757RR 29 10 7 4 5767CF6 5 1 1 1 1
210-300 767300 0.9 0.45 0.45767CF6 1.1 0.55 0.55
300-400 L1011 3 2 1
400-500
500-600
>600
DeparturesOperations
Intra-US
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 countriesRegion 3 – Japan, Australia, New ZealandRegion 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?Aviation GrowthFLEET GROWTH IN NON-EXEMPT COUNTRIES
Chp 2HK Chp 3
Chp 3 (-8)
Chp 3 (-11)
Chp 3 (-14)
BP (Chp3)
BP (-8)
BP (-11)
BP (-14)
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
1998 2002 2006 2009 2013 2016 2020
Year
Nu
mb
er
of
Op
era
tio
ns
in T
ho
us
an
ds
BP - Best Practice Aircraft
What are the trends?Aviation Growth
Airports in Non-Exempt Countries Theoretically Reaching Capacity without Runway Additions
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
2002 2006 2009 2013 2016 2020
Year
Nu
mb
er
of
Air
po
rts
What are the trends?Source Reduction Technology
Date of Entry into Service
1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005
10 dB
Chapter 2 Chapter 3Increase in
weight or range
Low-bypass-ratioTurbofans
Low-bypass-ratioTurbofans
First-generationhigh-bypass-ratio
Turbofans
First-generationhigh-bypass-ratio
Turbofans Second-generationhigh-bypass-ratio
Turbofans
Second-generationhigh-bypass-ratio
Turbofans
TurbojetsTurbojets
CONCORDE
What are the trends?Airport Restrictions
Growth in World Airport Noise Restrictions
0
50
100
150
200
250
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 1996 1997 1998 2000
Year
Nu
mb
er o
f R
estr
icti
on
s
Curfews Surcharges Noise Level Limits Quotas Budgets
What are the trends?Number of People Exposed to Aircraft Noise
0
5,000,000
10,000,000
15,000,000
20,000,000
25,000,000
30,000,000
35,000,000
Year
Po
pu
lati
on
ab
ov
e D
NL
55
Rest of World
US & Canada
Europe (ECAC)
Japan, Australia, & New Zealand
Unconstrained Capacity
1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020