Melbourne Metro Rail Project Matthew Stead Noise, Vibration & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Melbourne Metro Rail Project Matthew Stead Noise, Vibration & EMI from MMRP at the University of Melbourne 14 September 2016

Outline

• Expertise
• EES issues at University of Melbourne
• Gaps in IAC EPRs V1/2
• Conclave EPRs
• Example of issues

Expertise – Matthew Stead

• Sensitive equipment/ facilities for variety of Universities and

Hospitals (Adelaide, Monash, Curtin, Queensland, RMIT, Sydney, Deakin, Wollongong, RPAH, POWH for example)

• Large infrastructure (Eastlink, Port Capacity Project and Channel

Deepening EES for example)

• Worked as consultant for end clients, designers and contractors

(noise, vibration & EMI)

• Advisor for Universities and Hospitals where sensitive facilities

impacted by third party infrastructure.

Project Delivery Model

• Availability based Public Private Partnership (PPP) – Tunnels and

Stations

• Competitive Alliance (CA) – Systems/ Infrastructure
• Understand that it will be a requirement to comply with the

Environmental Performance Requirements (EPRs) for PPP and CA. Mitigation to be provided where EPRs can not be met.

Key Gaps and Issues in EES

• Electro Magnetic Interference – not addressed.
• Noise impacts on sensitive equipment – not addressed.
• Trigger for management actions related to day time noise impact for
• ccupied areas – not addressed. No assessment of effects on UoM
• ccupants.
• Future flexibility – not addressed.
• Vibration limits for bio resources – not formalised in EPR. Issues

with blasting.

• Noise limits for ventilation and mechanical systems at non residential

locations – not formalised in EPR.

• Low frequency operational vibration not assessed (less than 10 Hz).

Key EPR Issues at University of Melbourne (EPR IAC v 1 & 2)

• NV5 – Include a day time management trigger level for occupied spaces

at UoM.

• NV10 – Include equipment airborne noise limits and equipment specific

limits for sensitive equipment when in use.

• NV11 – Expand to cover educational institutions for ground borne

construction noise.

• NV12 – Expand to prevent impact on bio resources for blasting.
• NV13 – Include vibration limit for bio resources. No impact to bio

resources.

• NV16 – Expand to address mechanical plant and ventilation noise at

educational institutions

• NVA - Not clear what the mechanism is for the Parkville Precinct

Reference Group to address impacts.

• EMI – No current EPRs.

Conclave agreement – relevant EPRs

• NV1/NV 5 – Include a day time management trigger level for occupied

spaces – Not agreed. Consideration to be given by the IAC.

• NV10 – Include equipment airborne noise limits and equipment specific
• requirements. Increased factor of safety for trackform vibration isolation.

Agreed.

• NV11 – Expand to cover educational institutions for ground borne noise.

Agreed.

• NV12 – Expand to prevent impact to bio resources for blasting. Agreed.
• NV13 – Application of limit and no impact to bio resources. Agreed.

Include specific vibration limit for bio resources. Consideration to be given by the IAC.

• NV16 – Expand to address mechanical plant and ventilation noise at

educational institutions. Agreed.

• NVA – Update. Consideration to be given by the IAC.
• EMI – No MMRA experts. No agreement.

Example - Why day time noise is important NV5

• Academic, research and teaching activities requires concentration

and clear aural communication.

• Potential for noise to disrupt concentration and communication.
• Current EPR’s don’t include a day time trigger or management noise

level for non residential receivers. Effects not assessed in EES.

• Extended duration of construction activity (prior to acoustic sheds

and acoustic hoarding).

• Close proximity of noise sources to Medical Building, Peter Doherty

and Alan Gilbert buildings (from 5m).

• Façade upgrades considered to be reasonable and feasible.

Medical Building PDI Alan Gilbert

Indicative construction of Parkville Station

• Extended duration of construction activity (prior to acoustic sheds

and acoustic hoarding).

• Bored piers (nominal 9 months)
• Cut & cover (nominal 6 months)

Indicative construction of Parkville Station

Why day time noise is important NV5

• Estimated piling rig 111 dB(A) sound power level (exclude vibratory

and impact). Estimated excavator 107 dB(A) sound power level.

• Distance from around 5 to 15 m for up to 15 months estimated
• Simplistic noise modelling suggests up to 80 to 90 dB(A)
• Assumed façade noise reduction 20 to 30 dB(A) noting weaknesses

in Medical Building façade glazing

• Internal levels up to 50 to 70 dB(A) for extended periods

Possible day time noise triggers at UoM:

• EPA 1254 – none.
• AS2107 + 5 dB suggests 45 dB(A) for working labs/ office spaces
• City of Melbourne – 75 dB(A) external/ L90 + 10 dB(A)
• NSW ICNG/ TfNSW – 45 dB(A) or 2107 maximum

Façade upgrades considered to be reasonable and feasible if at-source mitigation is not sufficient. No detailed assessment available.

Example - Peter Doherty Institute – Transmission Electron Microscope NV10 (PDI TEM)

• FEI Tecnai G2 Spirit (0.2 nm resolution)
• Vibration, EMI & Noise Sensitive
• Cumulative impact
• Very close proximity
• Some additional vibration mitigation in place (unknown performance)
• EMI active mitigation in place

PDI TEM

PDI TEM

Approximate TEM Location (basement)

Tecnai TEM

• Typical Tecnai factory

acceptance test.

• Lower image shows

Graphitised Carbon and the atomic layers (0.344nm spacing) in the material are visible in all directions.

• Upper right FFT

represents the sample image in frequency space equal to 0.344nm.

< ·~· > FEI COMPANY

~

Too $ fOR NANOTECH

• • •
• • • •

Tecnai G2 Spirit

• • • • • Pre-installation
• • • •

. .

.

4022 190 50699 Modification date: December 5, 2013

3.6 3.6.1 3.8.4 Magnetic fields Magnetic field specification

It is important when placing the microscope to avoid locations subject to strong magnetic fields. The microscope is most affected by stray fields in the horizontal plane. The magnetic field specifications are shown in Table 3-3 Type Horizontal (x, y) Vertical (z)

Tecnai 12 lWIN 350nT

p-p 650nTp-p

Tecnai 12 BiolWIN 185nT

P-P

440nTp-p

Table 3-3 Magnetic Field Specification These specifications include slow varying magnetic fields and/or Near DC Fields (caused by elevators, trams and trains). This specification must be met for the total room in which the microscope is to be located, but is especially critical at the following locations: Position and height of the GIF (if present) Height of the gun Height of the goniometer

Acoustic

Ac<>usties System Tecnai 02

Sfliril T'hin; TEI.I ine res. 0.204nm

60

Ill

J: i-~-~

n

!. -t---+-+--+--1--......

• -.
• -.-+--.--<--t---+

m "' ~ 5

II

3S 1/3 octaw

!Hz)

• Fig. 3-7: Acoustic Guidelines

• :

· ~·

:- FEI COMPANY-

Too

~

fOR NANOTECH

• • •
• • • •

Tecnai G2 Spirit

• • • • • Pre-installation
• • • •
• • •

4022 190 50699

Modification date: December 5, 2013

3.8.3 3.8.1

Floor Vibration - Vertical

10

, ~

___

Aoot

__

¥_e111Ca1

__

Sy_sc_em~T-e<_nao_G2_s_p1_1_

r"

_1n;_

M _

s -. 0_2_C1~_rvn_~-~

1/3 octave <Hz)

• Fig. 3-6: Floor Vibration - Vertical Guidelines

Floor Vibration - Front to Back

1 0 ".-

F -lo _

_

• t _ ~

_

BQ _ C _k ~ ,.-, tem _ T _ ec _Ml_ G2 -

Spitit- ·

_

C$

_ . o_

'··' :---· ..

,,, ·'·' ~+·

...

: ' i

1

.... ·: ····- ··•· ... ,. ·+· .•.• .•

. ........

;

10 113 cctave (Hz)

• Fig. 3-4: Floor Vibration - Front to Back Guidelines

PDI TEM – specification converted to velocity

Peter Doherty Institute – Transmission Electron Microscope (Technical Note 32A)

PDI TEM – Conclusion

• Some additional mitigation in place (unknown performance)
• Noise impact from MMRP unknown
• Vibration likely to exceed limits for unknown period
• EMI impact unknown and may exceed possible mitigation capability
• Possible cumulative impact
• Further consultation & mitigation options to be agreed (possible

reference mitigation design).

Example - Additional UoM Equipment

Helium Ion Microscope/ FIB – CfNE Confocal – Medical Building

Example - Operational Vibration

• Vibration less than 10 Hz not considered
• PDI TEM more sensitive in range < 10 Hz.
• Generic rather than specific equipment criteria in EES

Operational Vibration

Example - Bio resources

• Refer previous University of Melbourne submissions
• Consultation and scheduling not reasonable and practical

Example - Why EMI is important – example image without/ with interference

Why EMI is important

• Why equipment is sensitive – charged electrons or ions are accelerated

towards samples. They are detected and results used to help construct

• images. Varying EMI alters the path and hence it is unknown where they

impact the sample.

• What generates primary EMI – current flow (DC power supply) for train

propulsion and secondly the moving train itself (associated with metal structure of the train).

• Mitigation – EMI mitigation measures are difficult at receivers. Active

cancellation systems can address AC and DC EMI with success in some but not all circumstances.

• How far could it be observed - EMI impact could be observed at great

distance (> 200 m) based on extrapolation from City Loop.

• Recommended that a suite of EPRs to be developed to address EMI

impacts similar to Vibration & Noise for sensitive equipment. “Best available design” recommended to minimise impact on future equipment

Example - other experience:

• University of South Australia – New CBD High School
• UNSW – New Sydney Light Rail

UniSA impact from adjacent CBD High School building construction

• Successful agreement (day time construction, sensitive equipment

and bio resources).

• “Reference” noise & vibration design.
• Management plan framework provided to ECI contractors.

New building Existing building (bio resources and equipment)

Impact from Sydney Light Rail on UNSW

Impact from Sydney Light Rail on UNSW

Construction Noise Mitigation B6. Construction noise management levels (NML) shall be established using the Interim Construction Noise Guideline (DECC, 2009). The Proponent shall implement all reasonable and feasible noise mitigation measures with the aim of achieving the construction NMLs. Any construction activities identified as exceeding the construction NMLs shall be managed in accordance with the Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan required under condition B89 and the specific Construction Noise Impact Statements prepared in accordance with condition B5.

Note: The Interim Construction Noise Guideline identmes 'particularly annoying' activities that require the addition of 5dB(A) to the predicted level before comparing to the construction NML.

B7. The Proponent shall ensure that rock breaking, rock hammering, sheet piling, pile driving and any other activities which result in impulsive or tonal noise generation and affect sensitive receivers are only scheduled between the following hours unless approved by the Secretary or by the application of condition B4: (a) 8.00 am and 12.00 pm Monday to Friday; (b) 2.00 pm and 5.00 pm Monday to Friday; and (c) 8.00 am and 12.00 pm Saturdays_ Where these activities are undertaken for a continuous three hour period and exceed the construction noise management levels at noise sensitive receivers, a minimum respite period of at least one hour shall be scheduled before activities recommence.

Note: For the purposes of this condition, 'continuous' includes any period during which there is less than a one hour respite between ceasing and recommencing any of the work the subject of this condition.

B8_ Wherever practical, piling activities that affect sensmve receivers shall be undertaken using quieter alternative methods than impact or percussion piling, such as bored piles or vibrated piles. B9. No blasting shall occur. B

• 10. Where practicable, operational noise mitigation measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the

Secretary prior to the commencement of construction (or at other times during construction) to minimise construction noise impacts.

Conclusions

• Research at risk due to extended duration of noise and vibration

exposure.

• Operation of key buildings at risk from noise impacts.
• EMI significant unknown/ risk.
• Appropriate EPRs critical.
• Continued consultation on reasonable and practical mitigation

measures with agreed EPRs.

• Consider a reference mitigation design.