CH708893A1 - A method for operating a noise emitting plant and a plant for carrying out the method. - Google Patents

Abstract

The invention relates to a method for operating a noise-emitting system (11), which distributed over the day at predeterminable times in the form of each extending over a period of time, operational noise events noise protection provisions underlying noise in the environment. A reliable noise protection is achieved by continuously recording the sound pressure level with at least one sound pressure transducer (M1-M10) in the noise-emitting system (11) and detecting by means of the recorded values of the sound pressure level when and over which period of time a noise event occurs in that the sound pressure level occurring in the respective noise event is summed or integrated over the duration of the noise event, summing the summed up or integrated sound pressure levels of successive noise events into a noise dose, and continuously comparing the resulting noise dose with predetermined dose limits and the operation of the facility (11) is controlled according to the results of the comparison.

Description

Description TECHNICAL AREA

The present invention relates to the field of noise protection. It relates to a method for operating a noise-emitting system and a system for carrying out the method.

STATE OF THE ART

Shipyards are usually available at large airports in the airport, in which aircraft of various types can be maintained and repaired if necessary. As part of the maintenance and repair of such aircraft, it is common and necessary to perform so-called engine stands, in which the engines are tested when the aircraft is stationary. Within such a ground running, the engines are operated in stages at idle, at partial load and also at full load.

It goes without saying that in such locations, depending on the load stage of the engines, a significant noise is generated, which spreads in the vicinity of the airport and meets more or less distant residential areas. Increasingly, measures are being taken to curb the noise emitted during these day and night runs and to minimize the noise pollution of the population in the neighboring residential areas. Thus, for example, special soundproofing halls will be erected for stands, into which the aircraft will be set up for stand runs.

Even when using a soundproofing hall noise is still emitted during the stands, which must be monitored in order to comply with legal requirements.

Thus, for example, in some countries according to the applicable noise protection ordinance (LSV), the noise of repair shops, maintenance businesses and similar facilities at an airport equal to the noise of industrial and commercial installations. Therefore, an engine idle run is basically also to be assessed accordingly. However, because this assessment only insufficiently takes into account the special noise pattern of the engine stands with its high noise peaks (individual events) at night, especially during flight-free time, additional assessment methods must additionally be used for the assessment of the engine idle runs. In this case, in particular the total summed over the time total burden on the type of noise dose play an important role.

Various methods and methods for monitoring sound emissions and emissions are known from the prior art.

Document DE 10 138201 A1 describes a method for monitoring sound immissions, in which sound level values are continuously determined for a measuring location. From the continuously occurring sound level, at least one of the two extreme values occurring in the interval is selected at successive intervals as the sound level value relevant for the monitoring. Advantageously, this procedure achieves monitoring facilitating data compression with relatively little loss of information. The method reduces the information to minimum or maximum values. It is therefore not suitable for monitoring a noise dose.

Document EP 1 748 184 A2 discloses a method of controlling noise of a wind farm comprising a plurality of wind turbines. The noise emissions of the wind turbines are monitored in a near field area. By means of a transfer function, the noise pollution by the wind turbines is determined at one or more other locations in the far field area outside the wind farm. If required, wind turbines are operated in a noise-reduced mode. Also in this case, the accumulated over time noise dose does not matter.

From the document EP 2 336 737 A2 it is known to detect temporal trends of noise emissions of rail traffic. For this purpose, in a first period and in a second period, the sound event level and a quantity representing the number of sound sources are determined by means of measurement. The standardized sound event levels of both periods are then compared with each other.

Document US 2007/0217288 A1 discloses a system and method for monitoring airport noise arising during aircraft takeoff and landing. Noise data from the airport are compared with corresponding noise regulations for the airport and an alarm is generated based on the comparison.

WO 03/064853 A1 describes an apparatus for operating wind power plants, which comprises a unit for controlling the emitted noise. Furthermore, means are provided to measure parameters needed for the calculation of sound propagation from the wind turbine to other locations where noise is to be limited. The noise emissions of the system are controlled according to the calculated sound immissions.

The publication WO 2010/037387 A2 discloses a method for monitoring the noise emissions of a wind turbine. Wind speed and wind direction are measured and forecasts for the emitted noise are made on the basis of measurements using a model. From this forecast, the noise emissions are derived at certain distant points. The wind turbine is operated so that the noise emissions do not exceed specified limits.

The document WO 2013/023 660 A1 relates to a noise monitoring system for a wind turbine with a microphone, which is externally attached to the turbine housing, and a processor and a memory, with the aid of a transfer function is applied to the recorded with the microphone noise data to close data on noise emissions at distant points.

One for irregular, distributed throughout the day, singular noise events suitable monitoring method is not known.

PRESENTATION OF THE INVENTION

It is therefore an object of the invention to provide a method for operating a noise-emitting system, which distributed over the day at predeterminable times in the form of each extending over a period of time, operational noise events noise protection regulations underlying noise in the environment, by means of which the corresponding statutory provisions and requirements can be met safely and easily.

It is a further object of the invention to provide a system for carrying out the method.

These and other objects are achieved by the features of claims 1 and 14.

The inventive method for operating a noise-emitting system, which distributed over the day at predeterminable times in the form of each extending over a period of time, operational noise events noise protection regulations underlying noise in the environment, is characterized in that at least a sound pressure transducer in the noise-emitting system continuously recording the sound pressure level that is detected by the recorded values of sound pressure level, when and over which period a noise event occurs, that the sound pressure level occurring in the respective noise event over the duration of the noise event is summed or integrated in that the accumulated sound pressure levels of successive noise events are summed to form a noise dose, and that the resulting noise dose is continuously associated with one or more predetermined dose limits values are compared and the operation of the plant is controlled according to the results of the comparison.

An embodiment of the method according to the invention is characterized in that in the continuous recording of the sound pressure level, the time is divided into similar time periods that each time period during the measurement is added to a recorded in this period sound pressure level of energy equivalent constant continuous sound level, and that A sound pressure level is then evaluated as a noise event when the energy equivalent constant continuous sound level exceeds a predetermined threshold.

In particular, the energy equivalent constant continuous sound level of the noise event is summed up to summation or integration of the sound pressure level in a noise event.

Preferably, each noise event is assigned a sound exposure level corresponding to the level of a certain period of time, in particular one second duration, containing the same noise energy as the sum of the energy equivalent constant continuous sound level of the noise event, the sum of the sound exposure levels of all noise events within of a period of time to be assessed (assessment or observation time) forms the noise dose.

Another embodiment of the method according to the invention is characterized in that the resulting noise dose is compared simultaneously with a plurality of dose limits and the operation of the system is controlled in accordance with the results of the comparison.

In particular, the resulting noise dose is compared with a related to a certain period dose limit.

Preferably, the noise dose is reset to zero when the corresponding period has expired

Preferably, the resulting noise dose is compared with a day or night related dose limit and / or with an hourly dose limit and / or with a week-related dose limit.

In particular, the dose limit values are determined by measurements of the sound immission at the immission locations farther away from the installation.

A further embodiment of the method according to the invention is characterized in that the comparison is displayed optically in the form of a column.

Yet another embodiment of the method according to the invention is characterized in that the noise-emitting system is a soundproofing, in which aircraft are tested individually in the ground running, and that the sound pressure level is recorded inside the soundproofing hall.

In particular, several, in particular six, microphones are arranged around the aircraft to be tested around to record the sound pressure level, wherein only that of the microphones is used to determine the noise dose, which receives the highest sound pressure level.

In particular, the aircraft to be tested is arranged along a longitudinal central axis of the soundproofing hall, the microphones being mounted mirror-symmetrically to the longitudinal central axis on the side walls of the soundproofing hall oriented parallel to the longitudinal central axis, preferably at the same height above the floor.

The inventive system for carrying out the method according to the invention is characterized in that the system includes a soundproofing, which is designed to accommodate aircraft that are subjected to a casserole test in the soundproofing that in the soundproofing microphones for recording of the sound pressure level generated during standstill are arranged, that the microphones are connected via associated analyzers to an evaluation unit for determining the noise dose, and that the evaluation unit is connected to a display unit for the noise dose.

In particular, the soundproofing hall has a longitudinal central axis along which the aircraft provided for the casserole test is set up, wherein the microphones are arranged mirror-symmetrically to the longitudinal central axis.

In particular, the soundproof hall has parallel to the longitudinal central axis oriented side walls, wherein the microphones on the side walls, preferably at the same height above the ground, are mounted.

An embodiment of the inventive system is characterized in that the soundproofing hall is associated with a building automation, and that the evaluation unit is connected to the building automation for the transmission of data.

Another embodiment of the system according to the invention is characterized in that the evaluation unit comprises a database for storing the recorded sound level values.

A further embodiment of the inventive system is characterized in that the display unit is housed in a control room.

Yet another embodiment of the inventive system is characterized in that the evaluation unit is connected to at least one client.

BRIEF EXPLANATION OF THE FIGURES

The invention will be explained in more detail with reference to embodiments in conjunction with the drawings. Show it:

Figure 1 is a perspective view obliquely from above an exemplary soundproofing hall on an airport area with open doors and an aircraft standing in front of the hall.

FIG. 2 shows an exemplary schematic association between the soundproofing hall of FIG. 1 and residential areas located nearby; FIG.

3 shows a plan view from above of the configuration of the soundproofing hall of FIG. 1 with different types of aircraft set one above the other within the soundproofing hall;

FIG. 4 shows the soundproofing hall from FIG. 3 in a front view; FIG.

5 shows an exemplary measurement curve of a sound pressure level recorded in the soundproofing hall as a function of time with the associated energy-equivalent continuous sound levels per unit time (LAeq);

Fig. 6 is a trace with LAeq values over time in which a caused by an aircraft idle

Noise event occurs;

7 shows an exemplary configuration of the measurement and evaluation arrangement for monitoring the noise dose according to the invention; and

8 shows an exemplary display in the form of vertical bars of the noise dose measured in accordance with the invention.

Values in relation to certain time-dependent dose limits.

WAYS FOR CARRYING OUT THE INVENTION

In Fig. 1, an exemplary Schallschutzhalle (SSH) 1 1 is shown on the site of an airport 10 in a perspective view obliquely from above The soundproofing hall 1 1 has side walls 12 (12 a, b in Fig. 3), as soundproof walls are designed, designed for the derivation of the engine exhaust rear 13, a roof 14 and at the front two swinging to the side wings 15 and 16, which are shown in Fig. 1 in the swung (and attenuated in the closed state). The wings 15 and 16 consist of curved lamellae, on the one hand take enough air for the engines, but on the other hand, the resulting sound at the direct

4 Prevent leakage from the hall. Before the SSH 1 1 is an exemplary large, twin-engine aircraft 17 with its two engines 18 and 19 that is to be inserted by a tractor backwards in the open SSH.

In the SSH 11, the engine or engines of such an aircraft 17 are tested by an engine run, in which the engines 18 and 19 are operated when the aircraft is idling, in partial load operation and full load operation. The position of the aircraft to be tested in the SSH 1 1 is clear from FIGS. 3 and 4. Here, for the sake of simplicity, different types of aircraft, from the small twin-jet passenger aircraft to a large Airbus A380, are shown above each other. The aircraft 17 is in each case positioned with its fuselage in the longitudinal center axis 38 of the SSH 11.

For the acoustic monitoring of engine spurs measuring microphones M 1 -M 10 can be installed in the hall at various points. The sound pressure level is measured. From the measured quantities recorded, the noise dose is to be determined and displayed in a "dosimeter" in "real time". The display then takes place at various points for corresponding areas of responsibility. In addition, the runtime data entered by the technician can be linked to the measured noise events of the completed runs and statistically evaluated.

From the measured values, the relevant noise dose for the residents in the adjacent residential areas (20, 21 in Fig. 2) must be determined. The number and arrangement of the microphones are therefore important. The entire measuring chain must be checked regularly. For a smooth daily operation, the maintenance of the measuring system is also essential. The sensitivity and the accessibility of the system components should therefore also be included in the assessment. The following measuring arrangements are conceivable:

A microphone on a side wall 12a, b, e.g. 2 m above the ground (one of the microphones M1-M6 in Fig. 3). Advantages are a simple construction (only 1 microphone) and good accessibility and thus a simplified maintenance of the microphone. However, only a single sound level dependent on the distance of the engines is determined. This results in uncertainties for the calculation of the sound dose.

Two or more microphones on opposite side walls 12a, b (microphones M1-M6 in Fig. 3). The advantage here too is good accessibility and thus simplified maintenance of the microphones. However, analysis and calculation effort are greater than with just one microphone.

- A microphone on the ceiling (one of the microphones M7-M10 in Fig. 3 and 4). Advantages are a simple construction and lack of risk of shielding the microphone by any material. Unfavorable is a complex access for the maintenance of the microphone on the ceiling. Only one microphone is less suitable for calculating the allowable dose and is associated with inaccuracies.

- Four microphones flush in the acoustic ceiling (microphones M7-M10 in Fig. 3 and 4). The advantages of the maximum sound pressure level regardless of the position of the running engine can be detected, and that there is no shielding by any material Unfavorable here again is a complex access for the maintenance of the microphone on the ceiling. In addition, the analysis effort / calculation effort is greater than with just one microphone.

Particularly advantageous in practice is the arrangement of three microphones M1-M3 and M4-M6 on the side walls 12a, b of the 5SH 1 1 (see FIGS. 3 and 4). When mounting the microphones on the side wall 12a, b, the optimum position is estimated from the sound propagation characteristics of the engines for different types of aircraft. The optimum position is where the highest sound pressure level is measured during a full-load floor run. Therefore, only positions on the side walls come into question.

It turns out that for jets with engine arrangement under the wings in the range between 1 10 ° and 130 ° or 230 ° and 250 ° relative to the aircraft axis and the reference point 24 ("Noise Reference Point") would be the optimal position to detect the maximum sound pressure level [dB (A) j. For jets with rear engines the optimum range is between 130 ° and 140 ° or 220 ° and 230 ° and for propeller aircraft between 80 ° and 90 ° or 270 ° and 280 °.

Considering the above-mentioned criteria, the microphones are preferably mounted on the side walls as shown in FIG. In order to be able to record the maximum sound pressure levels of the different types of aircraft as uniformly as possible, it is advantageous if three microphones M1-M3 and M4-M6 are placed laterally at a height of 1.5 m to 2 m above the ground

Each microphone M1-M6 is mounted on a free-standing mast, which is mounted on the wall base at the bottom. The microphones M1-M6 preferably each have the same wall distance of about 10 to 20cm. As protection against pollution, a wind screen is mounted, which can be replaced with virtually no effort.

According to FIG. 7, the microphones M1-M6 each with an associated analyzer A1-A6 form a measuring device which is connected to an evaluation unit 26 which cooperates with a database 26a. The six measuring devices (microphones M1-M6 plus analyzers A1-A6) permanently record the current sound pressure level. For example, analyzers of type 2250 with a standard 4189 microphone from Brüel & Kjaer can be used as measuring instruments. The measurement takes place, for example, with a time constant "Fast" (0.125 s) and a frequency filter A. In order to calculate the evaluation variables, the following measured values per minute are used, respectively. Measured variables picked up by the measuring instrument and buffered on the database 26a:

- Meter number. The serial number of the meter and the microphone are stored in the device software.

- Time stamp. The meter will provide the date and time from the polling date.

5 - measuring time. The measurement duration is delivered in seconds.

- LAeq values. LAeq is the A-weighted, energy-equivalent continuous sound level (averaging level) over the measurement time.

For example, the meter is set to calculate the LAeq every 60 seconds (see Fig. 5). From the evaluation unit 26, a LAeq corresponding to the 1-min LAeq is thus picked up in 60-second intervals from all six measuring devices, in FIG. 6 an exemplary sequence of 1-min LAeq values of a measuring device over the time T is shown played. For the evaluation, the measured values of the measuring device which are the largest are used.

The measured noise dose must be able to be compared in a display (bar graph) with the allowable dose, so that at a glance can be detected whether the limits set (allowable noise dose) is met.

Within the soundproofing hall, a walk event (noise event 25) is detected by means of a measuring threshold (threshold SW in FIG. 6) and a minimum duration of the overshoot. As soon as the currently measured level (LAF in FIG. 5 or LAeq in FIG. 6) exceeds the measurement threshold SW for more than the defined minimum period of time, the noise levels are classified and summed up as pedestal noise (noise event 25) (in FIG Noise events 25 marked). The accumulated noise energy per viewing time corresponds to the sought sound dose.

With the selected and stored data records so noise events 25 are formed. As soon as the LAeq value exceeds the threshold level SW for a minimum period of time, the value is declared as pedestrian noise. As soon as the value SW is undershot or one of the predefined evaluation times has been exceeded, the noise event 25 is concluded.

From each stand event (noise event 25) the sound exposure level SEL is calculated and stored by (energetic) addition of the short-time 1 min LAeq values. The sound exposure level SEL [in dB (A) j is the energy of the total noise event 25, referred to one second. The relevant sound dose within the legally prescribed evaluation time is determined by summing the sound exposure levels SEL of the stands or the associated noise events 25 within the assessment time.

This sound dose measured in this way is now compared with the permissible dose (dose limit values). The comparison is visually shown in a display unit 28a in the control room 28 in three columns arranged side by side (preferably in color) (30, 31 and 32 in FIG. 8). The comparison or the associated data can also be transmitted to connected clients 29a-c (noise management, local resident protection, etc.).

In Fig. 8, the vertical block arrows each indicate the accumulated (measured) sound dose. With a background color in the columns (corresponding to the dose ranges 33-36 in FIG. 8), the proportion of the accumulated dose to the permissible sound dose is marked. Green (Dose Range 36) means less than 50%, Yellow (Dose Range 35) less than 80%, Orange (Dose Range 34) less than 100% and Red (Dose Range 33) more than 100% of the allowable dose as agreed,

In the left of the three columns (hourly limit display 30), the sound energy is displayed, which is obtained within the judged night hour (for example, 22-23 clock). At the end of the corresponding night hour, the previously accumulated value (block arrow) is reset to zero.

In the middle of the three columns (day / night limit display 31), the sound energy (dose) of all stands is shown, which in the period between 7 o'clock and 19 o'clock (day) and between 19 o'clock and 7 o'clock (night ) are added up. The value (block arrow) is also reset to zero after the corresponding day / night has elapsed.

With the right of the three columns (weekly limit display 32), the summed sound energy of all stands is shown, which take place within the current week from Monday to Sunday between 19 o'clock and 07 o'clock. This column (block arrow) is reset to zero on Monday morning at 07:00:00.

The column which has first reached the maximum allowable dose of 100% is limiting, that is, pedestals may then no longer be performed.

The dose limits may theoretically be calculated on the basis of terrain and / or weather-related sound propagation from the reference point 24 to predetermined immission measurement points 22 and 23 in the adjacent residential areas 20 and 21 with suitable computer programs (Figure 2). In addition, however, a calibration must take place based on sound pressure values actually measured at the immission measurement points 22 and 23.

LIST OF REFERENCE NUMBERS

[0060]

10

11

12, 12a, b

Airport

Soundproofing (SSH) side wall

6

Claims (20)

13 14 15, 16 17 18, 19 20, 21 22, 23 24 25 26 26a 27 28 28a 29a-c 30 31 32 33-35 37 38 A1-A6 M1-M10 SEL back top, roof leaf plane engine residential area Immissionsmesspunkt reference point noise event evaluation Database building automation control room display unit client Hour limit display Day / night limit display Week limit display dose range dosimeter Longitudinal central axis analyzer microphone Sound Exposure Level claims 1. A method for operating a noise-emitting system (11), which distributed over the day at predetermined times in the form of each extending over a period of time, operational noise events (25) noise control regulations underlying noise in the environment, characterized in that with at least one sound pressure transducer (M1-M10) in the noise-emitting system (11) continuously the sound pressure level is recorded, that is detected by the recorded values of the sound pressure level, when and over which period a noise event (25) occurs that in the respective Noise event (25) is accumulated or integrated over the duration of the noise event (25), summing the summed or integrated sound pressure levels of successive noise events (25) to form a noise dose, and that the resulting noise dose is continuously with one or more several predetermined dose limits (33-36) are compared and the operation of the system (11) is controlled according to the results of the comparison. 2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that in the continuous recording of the sound pressure level, the time is divided into similar time periods that each time period during the measurement is added to a recorded in this period sound pressure level of energy equivalent constant continuous sound level (LAeq), and that a Sound pressure level is then evaluated as a noise event (25) when the energy equivalent constant continuous sound level (LAeq) exceeds a predetermined threshold (SW). 7 3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that the summation or integration of the sound pressure level in a noise event (25), the energy-equivalent constant continuous sound level (LAeq) of the noise event (25) are added up. 4. The method according to claim 3, characterized in that each noise event (25) is associated with a sound exposure level (SEL), which corresponds to the level of a certain period of time, in particular of one second duration, which contains the same noise energy as the sum of the energy equivalent constant Continuous noise level (LAeq) of the noise event (25), and that the sum of the sound exposure levels (SEL) of all noise events (25) within a period of time to be assessed (assessment or observation time) forms the noise dose. 5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that the resulting noise dose is compared simultaneously with a plurality of dose limits (33-36) and the operation of the system (11) is controlled in accordance with the results of the comparison. 6. The method according to claim 5, characterized in that the resulting noise dose is compared with a related to a certain period dose limit. 7. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that the noise dose is reset to zero when the corresponding period has expired 8. The method according to claim 6, characterized in that the resulting noise dose is compared with a day or night related dose limit and / or with an hourly dose limit and / or with a week-related dose limit. 9. The method according to claim 8, characterized in that the dose limit values are determined by measurements of the sound immission at the immission locations further away from the installation (11). 10. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that the comparison is displayed optically in the form of a column. 11. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that the noise-emitting system is a soundproofing hall (11), in which aircraft are tested individually in the ground running, and that the sound pressure level inside the soundproofing hall (11) is received. 12. The method according to claim 11, characterized in that for receiving the sound pressure level several, in particular six, microphones (M1-M10) are arranged around the aircraft to be tested, and that for determining the noise dose only that of the microphones (M1-M10) is used, which absorbs the highest sound pressure level. 13. Method according to claim 12, characterized in that the aircraft to be tested is arranged along a longitudinal center axis (38) of the soundproofing hall (11), and that the microphones (M1 -M6) are mirror-symmetrical to the longitudinal central axis (38) at the parallel to the longitudinal central axis (38). 38) oriented side walls (12a, b) of the soundproofing hall (11), preferably at the same height above the ground, are mounted. 14. Plant for carrying out the method according to claim 1, characterized in that the plant comprises a soundproofing hall (11), which is designed for receiving aircraft that are subjected to a casserole test in the soundproofing hall (11) that in the soundproofing hall Microphones (M1-M6) are arranged to receive the sound pressure level generated during cessation, that the microphones (M1-M6) are connected via associated analyzers (A1A6) to an evaluation unit (26) for determining the noise dose, and that the evaluation unit (26) is connected to a display unit (28a) for the noise dose. 15th 15. Installation according to claim 14, characterized in that the soundproofing hall (11) has a longitudinal central axis (38) along which the spacecraft test provided for the aircraft is placed, and that the microphones (M1-M6) mirror-symmetrical to the longitudinal central axis (38 ) are arranged. 16. Installation according to claim 15, characterized in that the soundproofing hall (11) parallel to the longitudinal central axis (38) oriented side walls (12a, b), and that the microphones (M1-M6) on the side walls (12a, b), preferably at the same height above the ground. 17. Installation according to claim 14, characterized in that the soundproofing hall (11) is associated with a building automation system (27), and that the evaluation unit (26) is connected to the building automation system (27) for the transmission of data. 18. Installation according to claim 14, characterized in that the evaluation unit (26) comprises a database (26a) for storing the recorded sound level values. 19. Plant according to claim 14, characterized in that the display unit (28 a) is housed in a control room (28). 20. Plant according to claim 14, characterized in that the evaluation unit (26) is connected to at least one client (29a-c). 8th