SCALE MODELLING OF RAILWAY NOISE BARRIERS

• Published in: Journal of sound and vibration 2000-07, Vol.234 (2), p.207-223
• Main Authors: HOTHERSALL, D.C., HOROSHENKOV, K.V., MORGAN, P.A., SWIFT, M.J.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Acoustics; Exact sciences and technology; Fundamental areas of phenomenology (including applications); Noise: its effects and control; Physics
• ISSN: 0022-460X; 1095-8568
• DOI: 10.1006/jsvi.1999.2886

Experiments were carried out in an anechoic chamber using a 1:20 scale model of a high-speed train to determine the insertion loss of various forms of track-side noise barrier. All the barriers investigated had the upper edge level with the bottom of the train windows and were positioned as close as possible to the train, within the limitations of the structure gauge. They thus provided attenuation of noise from sources in the lower portion of the train, in the region of the rails and wheels. The measured performance of plane screens with rigid and sound-absorbing surfaces is compared with values predicted by standard prediction methods for railway noise and the results of a numerical model. The effect of barrier shape and absorptive surfaces upon screening performance is investigated. Results are presented in terms of the insertion loss of the peak SPL of the pass-by profile for a single bogie noise source and for the whole train, and also insertion loss based onLAeq,1 h . Results for these three measures show similar trends. For the conditions tested insertion loss values for all the screens were lower when the ground behind the barrier was absorbing than when the ground was rigid. The relative changes in insertion loss for the different forms of barrier were similar for the two ground types. Insertion loss values for rigid screens were between 6 and 10 dB lower than those for similar screens with complete sound absorbing surfaces. The application of absorbing areas on rigid screens significantly increases the insertion loss by between 3 and 6 dB. The least efficient screen was a corrugated barrier with a rigid surface. The most efficient screens tested were plane and curved barriers with absorbing surfaces and a multiple edge screen with a part-absorbing surface.