Handling Noise Problems - Research Paper Example

Noise: the annoyance of noise; handling noise problems Presented to [Teacher’s In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements of [Project name] Dated Contents Contents 2 1.Introduction 3 1.1.Noise 3 2.Aims and objectives 3 3.Literature review 4 3.1. Annoyance and handling 4 3.2.Moderating factors 4 3.3.Health effects and coping 5 4.Real live exposure limits: legal perspective 6 4.1.Exposure metrics and limits. 6 4.2.Sources of noise. 6 5.Noise control 6 6.Conclusion 7 References 8 1. Introduction 1.1. Noise The World Health Organization (WHO) defines noise as “unwanted sound.” Noise of an oderate level acts via an indirect pathway and can have health outcomes similar to those caused by high Noise exposures on the direct pathway. The main health risks of noise, identified by WHO, include the following: pain and hearing fatigue, hearing impairment, tinnitus, annoyance, interferences with social behavior, interference with speech communication, communication, sleep disturbance, cardiovascular effects, hormonal responses, and reduced performance at work and school. Not all sounds are necessarily noise. Noise is unorganized sound which people don’t like. Noise may be annoying and interfering with one’s ability to work hence causing disturbance to the level of concentration and cause. Noise can lead to accidents through interference to warning and communication signals. The origin of the word noise is no suggest that it comes from the Latin word ‘noxia’ to harm injure, hurt or damage while others claim that it comes from another Latin word ‘nausea’ meaning nausea or disgust. This key difference in our community reflects the current numerous initiatives of research that suggest that noise is treated as nauseating, bothersome or problematic. 2. Aims and objectives The main aim of this study is to achieve further understanding of the consequences for health and well being of individuals when they come into contact with noise. To help achieve this, it was seen very important to review the literature materials that can be used to hypothesize the predictors and the predicted noise annoyance. The objectives of the study include: To establish general relationships of noise exposure levels and annoyance. To examine how characteristics of noise from neighborhood area affects the experience of residential noise. To examine how age variable help explain exposure and annoyance of noise To examine the role of sleeping problems in the noise health relationship To investigate whether increased exposure to noise and annoyance can lead to cardiovascular diseases. 3. Literature review 3.1. Annoyance and handling Most of the empirical studies which focus on residential quality invariability implies that road traffic are the major challenge to a safe local environment. The main reason being noise pollution(Kolbenstvedt and Fyhri, p. 252). The most common reaction to community noise is annoyance. The crucial prerequisite for noise annoyance is because sound can be heard or can be noticed. Perception of moderate and low levels of sound is imitated by the responses of the sensoneurial hair cells in the cochlea. These responses are recognized and interpreted by the central structures of the brain. Whether or not, a sound perception depends on the character of the sound for example the present background and the frequency content of the sound. Noise annoyance id described as a feeling of displeasure initiated by noise(Berglund and Lindavall p.65). The magnitude and occurrence of noise annoyance does not only relate to sound properties and sound pressure level, but also depends on the noise source, situational and individual factors. Nowadays, measurement of noise annoyance in surveys are standardized (ISO ITS 15666,) and the outcomes are expressed as percentage of annoyed or highly annoyed and comprises of the response in the dose response relationships. Response to industrial noise and noise from transportation sources like aircraft, railway and road traffic has been explored in several studies. Attempts have been made to construct a joint dose response models that can be used by the community to detect noise annoyance. Schultz(p.24) started with data from 18 studies which dealt with transportation noise. Eleven of this studies showed that most of the respondents were highly annoyed by the noise. Suggested reasons for notable differences in the 11 studies were differences in time of the year when the measurements were taken and the subjected measurement procedures. Among other factors were the background sound and the size of the community from where the studies were undertaken. Later Fidel et al(p.32) updated the work with 15 new studies resulting in one curve illustrating a common dose relationship for transportation noise. 3.2. Moderating factors The relationship between noise and response to noise is moderated by a number of factors. A moderating factor is a factor that changes the impact of noise on the response so that the degree of annoyance can be enhanced or lessened. This implies that correlating facto does not depend on the noise but on the response. In most studies no difference in response to noise has been found between sexes(Fields. P.58). Reported case or noise sensitivity has been associated with noise annoyance. Noise sensitivity is the general negative attitude towards noise or a strong reaction to specific noise situations(Miedema et al p.67 or personality trait(Ellevmier et al p.8). Other definitions identify noise sensitivity as the response which increases the degree of reactivity of an individual’s internal state for example physiological, lifestyle or psychological determinants(Van Kamp et al, p.76). The attitude of an individual towards noise in a number of community noises has been found that is associated with response to noise. In a review of twelve studies regarding noise from rifles and traffic the mean correlation between noise response and the attitude towards the noise source was 0.41(Job p. 212). The definition of attitude toward the source of sound differed between the studies, this makes comparison very difficult, according to Field(p.25), and attitude is often measured as the fear of the noise source. This may also include noise sensitivity. Guski(p.90) has pointed out that attitude is a distinct factor which consist of variance of evaluation of the source between individuals. According to Djkvicic et al(p255-257), experimental studies show that people react more negatively to sound from s less preferred source, attitude towards noise source has been possible to manipulate. For example traffic noise verses ocean waves. People react more negatively when a negative attitude towards the source is created for example noise from aircraft and road traffic(Jonson and Sorensen, p.47). Visual appearance of the source of noise influences noise annoyance. In several field studies, noticing the source of noise has been discovered to increase noise annoyance(Bangjun et al p. 11-12). Loudness was taken to be lower when there was a barrier that partially obscured the source of the sound than when there was no barrier. Loudness was also judged to be greater when the source of the sound was totally obscured(Aylor and Marks p.54). It has also been observed that a reduction in noise annoyance can be due to positively evaluated visual appearance(Kstka and Hngartaner p.75-78 & Kastka and Noack, p.65), and when the object evaluation is in the context of the surrounding landscape (Viollon and Lvandier, p.67). Visual rating seems to reduce negative ratings since they are appraised as natural as urbanized(Viollon et al p. 251-252). 3.3. Health effects and coping Hindrance of relaxation, rest and sleep disturbance is the most observed direct impacts of traffic noise(Ahlstrom et al p. 342 ). In laboratory studies, sleep has been found to depend on the number of noise events that occurs at indoor noise levels of 45dB(A) or more(Ohstron p.565). Physiological and psychological stress related symptoms have also been related with exposure to noise (Evans et al 311). In several studies, increased risk of cardiovascular diseases associated directly with noise annoyance or noise exposure have been reported (Van Kmpen et al p.5). The observation threshold for ischemic heart disease and hypertension in the community has been estimated to be 70 DNL (Passchier-Vrmeer and Passchier p.678). At the same time low level of noise have been associated with hypertension in single studies (Rosenlund et al 2001). Noise may directly affect health. Physiological activation like increase in peripheral vascular resistance, blood pressure and heart rate are the acute effects of noise exposure. Endocrine responses, that is, raised levels of cart sol, adrenalin and noradrenalin have been observed as an effect of noise exposure. Autonomous responses threshold are between 60 and 70 dB(A) during walking hours and between 50 and 60 dB(A) during sleeping hours. This can be modified by personal characteristics and the stimuli which receive simultaneously with the noise(Griefahm p.35). 4. Real live exposure limits: legal perspective 4.1. Exposure metrics and limits. Because of a number of health effects that have been identified to be the cause of noise, exposure metrics and limits are used today to promote protection. The united states EPA recommends that an average 24 hour exposure limit of 55-A weighted decibels (dBA) that will protect all type possible long term effects. This is a day night 24 hour average noise level. The 4.2. Sources of noise. Main sources of noise in the United States are road and rail traffic, occupational and industrial and air transportation activities as listed by the National]. Additional individual-level exposures include amplified music, recreational activities (including concerts and sporting events), and firearms. Personal music player use appears to be common among adolescents and may involve potentially harmful sound levels. Exposures from music and reaction activities are not “noise” in the sense of being unwanted sound, but adverse health effects are possible even from desirable sounds. 5. Noise control There are three main ways of controlling noise as listed by the international labor organization. They include: 1. Control at the source: this means that engineers need to design machines that are able to meet the environmental conditions that reduce noise pollution this can be done through Prevention or reduction of impact between machine parts; Reduction of speeds gently between forward and reverse movements; replacement of metal parts with quieter plastic parts; enclosing noisy machine parts; provision of mufflers for the air outlets of pneumatic valves; changing the type of pump in hydraulic systems; changing to quieter types of fans or placing mufflers in the ducts of ventilation systems; providing mufflers for electric motors; providing mufflers for air compressors intakes 2. Use of barriers 3. Control at the user: this may entail use of earmuffs to reduce the damaging effects to the ear. 6. Conclusion Health is the fundamental right of every human being. Exposure to health risk factors like noise should be stopped in order to promote comfort ability and good health. Noise from industrial works and traffic among others seem to carry with them adverse effects not only to the worker or user but also to the neighbors who may not be directly benefiting from the activity. The document has reviewed a number of works related to noise and annoyance in the community. From the graph provided it was discovered that noise from the aircraft and traffic seem to be more eminent that other sources of noise. References Aylor, Donald E., and Lawrence E. Marks. "Perception of noise transmitted through barriers." The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 59.2 (1976): 397-400. Berglund, B., T. Lindvall, and D. H. Schwela. "Guidelines for community noise. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1999." 55-65. Djokvucic, I., Hatfield, J., Job, R.F.S. (2004). Experimental examination of the effect of attitude to the noise source on reaction, and of reaction on performance. Proceedings of Internoise 2004, International Congress and Exposition on Noise Control Engineering, Prague, Czech Republic, 22–25 August 2004, Paper 325. Evans, Gary W., Staffan Hygge, and Monika Bullinger. "Chronic noise and psychological stress." Psychological Science 6.6 (1995): 333-338. Fields, J. M., et al. "Standardized general-purpose noise reaction questions for community noise surveys: Research and a recommendation." Journal of Sound and vibration 242.4 (2001): 641-679. ISO/TS 15666). Acoustics – assessment of noise annoyance by means of social and socio-acoustic surveys. Geneva, Switzerland: ISO. (2003). Kolbenstvedt, & Fyhri, Veger til bedre miljø. Miljøundersøkelser Oslo Øst 1987-2002 [Roads for improving the urban environment. Socio-environmental studies in Oslo East 1987 - 2002] (TØI rapport 743/2004). Oslo: Transportøkonomisk institutt. Miedema, Henk ME, and Henk Vos. "Noise sensitivity and reactions to noise and other environmental conditions." The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 113.3 (2003): 1492-1504. Night noise guidelines for Europe. Geneva (Switzerland): World Health Organization; Available: www.euro .who .int /__data /assets /pdf_file/0017/43316/E92845.pdf (accessed 2014 April . 29). Öhrström, Barregård, L., Skånberg, A, Svensson, H., Ängheim, P., Holmes, M., Bonde, Undersökning av hälsoeffekter av buller från vägtrafik, tåg och flyg i Lerums kommun. (Survey of health effects due to noise from road traffic, train and air craft in the municipality of Lerum.) [in Swedish] Göteborg: Sahlgrenska Akademien, Västra Götalandsregionens Miljömedicinska Centrum. Schultz, Theodore J. "Synthesis of social surveys on noise annoyance." The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 64.2 (1978): 377-405. Selander, Jenny, et al. "Long-term exposure to road traffic noise and myocardial infarction." Epidemiology 20.2 (2001): 272-279. Van den Berg, G. P., and P. van den Berg. The sounds of high winds. Diss. doctoral thesis), University of Groningen, 2006. Van Kempen, Elise, and Wolfgang Babisch. "The quantitative relationship between road traffic noise and hypertension: a meta-analysis." Journal of hypertension 30.6 (2012): 1075-1086. Viollon, S., and C. Lavandier. "Environmental approach of the perception of noise transmitted through barriers." INTER-NOISE and NOISE-CON Congress and Conference Proceedings. Vol. 2002. No. 4. Institute of Noise Control Engineering, 2002. World Health Organization. Noise and health. Available: www .euro .who.int/en/health-topics/environment-and-health/noise (accessed April 30, 2014). Read More