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


April 2001




April 2001



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


Frequency and Pitch


Frequency and Pitch


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


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.


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







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 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

Documents

ICAO Environmental Colloquium April 2001 Presented by Mr. T. Connor Session 1: The Nature of the Problem