Acoustic street design Timothy Van Renterghem Free field sound - - PDF document

acoustic street design
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Acoustic street design Timothy Van Renterghem Free field sound - - PDF document

Introduction Acoustic street design Timothy Van Renterghem Free field sound propagation Ground reflection 1 Specular reflecting facades Ground reflection x=8 m Ground reflection Ground+facade reflection 1000 Hz 1000 Hz 2 Ground+facade


slide-1
SLIDE 1

1

Acoustic street design

Timothy Van Renterghem

Introduction Free field sound propagation Ground reflection

slide-2
SLIDE 2

2

Specular reflecting facades Ground reflection

x=8 m

Ground reflection

1000 Hz

Ground+facade reflection

1000 Hz

slide-3
SLIDE 3

3

Ground+facade reflection

x=8 m

Ground+facade reflection

x=8 m

Diffuse reflection

Thomas et al., Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2013. Ismael et al., Applied Acoustics, 2005.

a b c d

Diffuse reflection

slide-4
SLIDE 4

4

Diffuse reflection Diffuse reflection

Picaut et al., Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 2009

Diffuse reflection

Kang, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2000.

facade height=6 m facade height=18 m

Diffuse reflection

Picaut et al., Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 2009

slide-5
SLIDE 5

5

 Balconies

 Lowering facade exposure

 Direct shielding  Balcony details are important  Higher storeys better protected

 Building up a low-frequency diffuse sound field  Changing the street’s directivity pattern

Diffuse reflection Urban street design

Echevarria-Sanchez et al., Building and Environment, 2016

Urban street design

Echevarria-Sanchez et al., Building and Environment, 2016

Urban street design self-shielding windows

Echevarria-Sanchez et al., Building and Environment, 2016

slide-6
SLIDE 6

6

Urban street design

Echevarria-Sanchez et al., Building and Environment, 2016

model validation

 Quantification

Street amplification

Heutschi, Applied Acoustics, 1995. Thomas et al., Journal

  • f the Acoustical

Society of America, 2013.

simulations experiments

Diffraction to adjacent canyon

low-frequencies are favoured

Diffraction to adjacent canyon

slide-7
SLIDE 7

7

Diffraction to adjacent canyon

  • nly diffraction

facade reflection+diffraction

Van Renterghem et al., Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 2010.

Diffraction to adjacent canyon Diffraction to adjacent canyon

Van Renterghem et al., Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2010.

Diffraction to adjacent canyon

Van Renterghem et al., Journal of Sound and Vibration, 2010.

slide-8
SLIDE 8

8

Diffraction to adjacent canyon Diffraction to adjacent canyon Diffraction to adjacent canyon

Van Renterghem et al., Applied Acoustics, 2006.

 Intermediate canyons

 1-4 dB excess attenuation/canyon

 Rather frequency independent  Canyon depth of limited importance  Canyon width important

 Additive effect  QSide engineering model : 1dB/100 m

propagation over roofs in dense urban setting

 No absorption, no meteo-effects, no variation in

building height

Multiple canyon propagation

Schiff et al., Applied Acoustics, 2010. Wei et al., Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 2014.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

9

 Street design reduces sound pressure

levels

 Promote diffuse reflections  Silent zones (pedestrians, facade)  Small architectural details can have a strong effect  Street amplification mainly governed by street

width

 Reductions in streets will help at the non-

directly exposed side (stronger!)

 Complex interactions between multiple

reflections and diffraction patterns Conclusions