A pilot study on the establishment of national ambient

Applied Acoustics 103 (2016) 20–29

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Acoustics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apacoust

A pilot study on the establishment of national ambient noise monitoring network across the major cities of India N. Garg a,⇑, A.K. Sinha b, V. Gandhi b, R.M. Bhardwaj b, A.B. Akolkar b a b

CSIR-National Physical Laboratory, New Delhi 110 012, India Central Pollution Control Board, Parivesh Bhawan, East Arjun Nagar, Delhi 110 032, India

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history: Received 17 December 2014 Received in revised form 8 September 2015 Accepted 10 September 2015 Available online 24 October 2015 Keywords: National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network (NANMN) Day equivalent level, Lday Night equivalent level, Lnight

a b s t r a c t The paper describes the pilot project on the establishment of National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network (NANMN) across seven major cities in India for continuous noise monitoring throughout the year. The annual average Lday (06–22 h) and Lnight (22–06 h) values observed since past three years are described. The long-term noise monitoring shows that ambient noise levels have marginally increased since past three years in the 35 locations under study in which 14 locations are in commercial zone, 5 in Industrial, 7 in residential and 9 in silence zones. The study is very helpful in ascertaining the magnitude of annual average ambient noise levels, planning for noise abatement action plans and formulation of revised ambient noise standards in Indian scenario. Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction Noise pollution has become a serious concern globally. Every nation is concerned toward the health effects of noise emitted from the expanding number of vehicles moving on the roads. It is thus imperative to adopt long-term noise monitoring strategies to monitor the noise levels and planning of suitable noise abatement measures for noise control. The European Environmental Noise Directive 2002/49/EC require that the noise maps should present the noise levels expressed in harmonized indicators: day–evening–night level, Lden and night equivalent level, Lnight [1]. The Directive articulates the assessment methods and their timing for the purpose of strategic noise mapping and their corresponding action plans which implies the use of harmonized indicators and evaluation methods as well as criteria for noise mapping [2]. There have been many such studies reported across the globe for monitoring the ambient noise [3–21]. The road traffic noise has been observed to be the major source of noise pollution in most of these studies carried out in the different parts of the world. Also, there have been few studies focussed on sampling strategies for the measurements to be conducted as a substitute to the long-term noise monitoring [22–26]. Thus, it is imperative to adopt continuous long-term noise monitoring for ascertaining the magnitude of ambient noise levels and comparison with the established noise limits. The health effects of the exposure to high ambient noise ⇑ Corresponding author. E-mail address: [email protected] (N. Garg). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2015.09.010 0003-682X/Ó 2015 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

levels can be severe and as such many studies have investigated annoyance and health related effects caused by exposure to the high ambient noise levels [27–33]. There has been no such comprehensive long-term noise monitoring study previously reported in India. Apart a validated road traffic noise model useful in conducting Environmental Impact Assessment studies in respect of noise similar to that used in developed nations is required in Indian conditions [34,35]. The Central Pollution Control Board (CPCB), New Delhi has taken many initiatives and carried out numerous studies for monitoring the ambient sound levels at noise hot spots in metropolitan cities like Delhi city for the implementation of suitable measures for noise mitigation. CPCB, India initiated the process of developing National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network (NANMN), a follow-up of Section 5.2.8 (IV) of National Environmental Policy (NEP)-2006, through which it was decided to include ambient noise as a regular parameter for noise monitoring in urban areas [36,37]. The noise pollution norms were framed under Regulation and Control Rules 2000 by Government of India. Accordingly, Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) Rules 2000 has been amended vide S.O. 50 (E) dated 11.01.2010 with the title ‘‘The Noise Pollution (Regulation and Control) (Amendment) Rules, 2010”. In order to implement these regulations effectively, it was felt necessary to monitor the noise levels in different cities continuously. The real time noise monitoring network, NANMN project was established with an objective of collecting the real-time continuous noise monitoring data. A turnkey solution has been implemented that includes the real-time data acquisition, communication, analysis and display system for effective noise

N. Garg et al. / Applied Acoustics 103 (2016) 20–29

monitoring at the sensitive sites. The phase I of the Real Time National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network was established in year 2011 that covers 35 locations in seven metro cities (Delhi, Hyderabad, Kolkata, Mumbai, Lucknow, Bengaluru and Chennai) and by phase II and phase III, 160 locations spread over 25 cities in 18 states will be established [38]. Although the continuous noise monitoring for such a long-term is cumbersome and expensive especially for developing countries like India, yet it is imperative to adopt this strategy for ascertaining the magnitude of ambient noise levels at sensitive sites and planning for noise abatement measures. The present work describes about the pilot project on the establishment of National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network (NANMN) across the seven major cities in India for continuous noise monitoring throughout the year. The annual average Lday and Lnight values observed since past three years are described. Out of these 35 locations in seven major cities of India, 14 locations lie in commercial zones, 5 in Industrial, 7 in residential and 9 in silence zones. Such as pilot study has been for the first time carried out in Indian scenario as earlier CPCB and State pollution control boards had been carrying out short-term sporadic or isolated noise monitorings in urban areas. The network will result in creation of the base line data and facilitate its analysis for policy makers and implementation agencies to take appropriate actions for noise control at regional and national level. The 35 locations are judiciously selected in the study based on the preliminary short-term noise monitoring surveys conducted by CPCB and State pollution control boards previously [39–43]. 2. Methodology and instrumentation The noise monitoring data analyzed are reported from CPCB noise monitoring stations established under NANMN project and situated at thirty five different locations all over India since the year 2011. Fig. 1 shows the schematic diagram of the ambient noise monitoring network. The real time ambient noise monitoring network consists of [38,44–46]: Automatic Data Collecting Remote Stations comprising of noise monitoring sensor, data logger, internal Global Positioning System (GPS), microprocessor, protection circuits, communication modem, power source including battery and charge regulator for solar panel or mains AC power supply.

21

Automatic Communication options for data communication comprising of Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol, TCP/IP (Telnet; Simple Mail Transfer Protocol, SMTP; File Transfer Protocol, FTP etc.), short SMS messages to mobile telephones for notices or alerts, Global System for Mobile Communication (GSM) modem, General Packet Radio Services (GPRS) modem, fiber optics, Radio-modem, Ethernet, Serial digital interface at 1200 baud (SDI-12), local area wireless technology such as Wi-fi, Bluetooth [47–49], satellite (internal or external transmitter). Central Processing Station comprising of hot redundant server, user workstations, software for data visualization and processing. Web Enabled Software for uploading on internet or sharing among CPCB and State Pollution Control Boards only to the authorized personnel. The Noise Remote Terminal (NMT) manufactured and installed by Geónica Earth Sciences, Spain [46] is a standalone operating remote terminal consisting of a sound level meter traceable to the national standards for continuously measuring the ambient noise. Each terminal consists of a high quality outdoor microphones (Model: 41CN) connected to an advanced acoustic signal processing unit and a high resolution data logger. The outdoor microphone complies with IEC 61672 Class 1 requirements with either 0° and 90° reference direction. It has an electrostatic actuator for validity of the system functionality and has protectors for wind and dust protection, birds protections and humidity protection. The Noise Processor 2000 NP receives and digitizes the output signal generated by the microphone and computes the acoustic parameters such as Leq, time, frequency weighting A and C and time weighting SLOW (S) and FAST (F). High resolution (via a 20 bit A/D converter) and very high storage capability (via 64 MB internal memory and optionally 2 GB SD card) are noteworthy features of automatic data acquisition unit. The sound level processor, Model 2000-NP has operating temperature range of 40 °C to +60 °C and humidity up to 100% R.H. The Data acquisition and transmission unit model 3008CP is connected to the 2000-NP analyzer through a RS232 or RS 485 port. The single PCB inside the 3008CP contains the power supply to be connected to the mains or to a solar panel. Optional meteorological sensors can also be connected to 3008CP unit for measuring temperature, atmospheric pressure, relative humidity, etc. The noise data along with data from other sensors if any is stored in the 3008CP unit, which is

Fig. 1. Schematic diagram of noise monitoring system [45].

22


then transmitted to the central facility usually through usually through GSM/GPRS mode. The four communication ports viz., General purpose RS 232 serial port; Serial port Complementary metaloxide semiconductor [50], CMOS (ethernet optional); General purpose programmable RS 232/422/485 serial port and serial port for connection to the modems GSM, GPRS, etc. offer total versatility to the system whereby the noise data is acquired locally, archived and communicated to the central station through an integrated GPRS modem. Data transmission is done in parallel with the data acquisition and processing. The remote data acquisition and transmission unit is mounted in a heavy duty weather proof Polypropylene housing with Ingress Protection, IP-67 protection [51]. The 40 W solar panels with 19 AH internal battery with solar charger is installed at each remote station to give power autonomy to the system and such the system can operate for 48 h without any external power supply. The Central receiving station consists of [38]: One dual redundant hot standby web enabled server for data receiving, retrieval and archiving with the software. KVM switch for communication between the data server. Keyboard, Mouse and 1900 Monitor for dual redundant hot standby server. Data processing workstation computer with printer and external hard disk. Router, USB adaptor. 10 kW online UPS. 42 in. Plasma screen for data display. Fig. 2 describes the architecture of Central receiving station. The high-end dual servers have been used for data reception, processing, visualization, communication and archiving. The servers are in hot redundant mode [52] ensuring that under no condition data

reception process fails as in the event of failure of main server, the alternate hot redundant server takes over the entire process automatically with minimal time delay in milliseconds. Thus, the central receiving station gets data from all the remote stations through GPRS mode, processes the noise data and generates reports. The modem allows transmitting the data to a central station called the National Noise Monitoring Centre, NNMC located at CPCB Headquarters, Parivesh Bhawan, New Delhi where the dynamic noise maps are prepared and presented with reliable and precise data updated in real-time, fed by continuous noise measurements from all the 35 sites under consideration. The software is capable for downloading, editing, processing and representation, management and storage of real-time noise database in Microsoft Access database. The entire system saves time and eliminates the involvement of large manpower, increases efficiency, eliminates human error and generates a high degree of accuracy as well as flexibility according to the user needs. Fig. 3 shows the pictorial view of typical remote noise monitoring station installed at a commercial zone in Delhi city. The noise monitoring data can be viewed on the website http://www.cpcbnoise.com [53] developed exclusively for showing the daily ambient sound levels for all the 35 sites under consideration. For dissemination of the real-time information to public, bright LED display boards are installed at various locations. Fig. 4 shows one such LED display installed outside the CPCB, Delhi office.

3. Results and discussion The Day equivalent level, Lday and Night equivalent level, Lnight is calculated from the 24 h noise data for each day of the year. The day-time means from 6.00 a.m. to 10.00 p.m., while the night time means from 10.00 p.m. to 6.00 a.m. It may be noted that the ambient air quality standards in respect of noise recommended

Fig. 2. Central receiving station architecture [44,45].

23

N. Garg et al. / Applied Acoustics 103 (2016) 20–29 Table 1 Ambient air quality standards in respect of noise in India. Area code

Category of area/zone

A B C D

Industrial area Commercial area Residential area Silence zone

Limits in dB(A) Leq* Day time

Night time

75 65 55 50

70 55 45 40

* Leq denotes the time weighted average of the sound level in decibels in Aweighting.

where n is the number of days or nights included in the long-term (e.g. for a month, n can be 28, 30 or 31) and Lday;i and Lnight;i are the ith corresponding A-weighted equivalent levels for the considered period. The annual average day equivalent level and night equivalent level is calculated in present study as:

"

Lday;m ¼ 10 log

m 1X 100:1ðLday Þi m i¼1

" Lnight;m ¼ 10 log

#

m 1X 100:1ðLnight Þi m i¼1

ð3Þ # ð4Þ

where m is number of months in a year for which noise monitoring is conducted. The monthly standard deviation of the Lday,i values is given by:

sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Pm 2 i¼1 ðLday;i Lday Þ r¼ m1

Fig. 3. Typical remote noise monitoring station for CPCB NANMN project.

in terms of Lday and Lnight as enlisted in Table 1. The silence zone is an area comprising not less than 100 m around hospitals, educational institutions, courts, religious places or any other area which is declared as such by the competent authority. Mixed categories of areas may be declared as one of as one of the four mentioned categories in Table 1 by the competent authority [36]. The value of Lday and Lnight is calculated as:

Lday;n ¼ 10 log

Lnight;n

" # n 1X 100:1ðLday;i Þ n i¼1

" # n 1X ¼ 10 log 100:1ðLnight;i Þ n i¼1

ð1Þ

where Lday is average of values of Lday;i for each month of a year. The Day–Night average sound level, (Ldn) calculated using Eq. (6) is also described in the present work. Ldn has been also endorsed by many scientific bodies (American National Standards Institute, 1980; American National Standards Institute, 1988; U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1974; Federal Interagency Committee On Urban Noise, 1980 and Federal Interagency Committee On Noise, 1992) for the assessment of community noise impact as 10 dB penalty to night time is applied to account for increased human sensitivity to noise at night [54–57]:

ð2Þ

ð5Þ

Ldn ¼ 10 log

Lday Lnight þ10 1 ð16 10ð 10 Þ þ 8 10ð 10 Þ Þ 24

ð6Þ

The level of significance for assessing noise impacts has been identified as a Ldn of 65 dB(A); whereby a 65 dB(A) Ldn is described as the onset of a normally unacceptable zone. Table 2 enlists the annual average ambient levels, Lday and Lnight for three years (2011–2013) for 35 noise monitoring stations installed under NANMN program across the seven major cities in India. These observations are thus helpful in analyzing the status of ambient noise levels exclusively in terms of city and zone wise and the comparison of ambient noise levels with the standards (Table 1). 3.1. City wise analysis

Fig. 4. LED display outside CPCB office in Delhi showing the ambient sound levels (LAeq,10min).

3.1.1. Delhi city It is observed that there is a marginal increase in ambient noise levels in Delhi city since past three years. The maximum increase in Lday value since past three years is less than 1 dB(A), while that for Lnight is 2.2 dB(A). Lnight levels are very high as compared to the ambient noise standards for Dilshad Garden, Delhi Technological University (DTU), ITO and NSIT Dwarka sites. The ambient noise levels at ITO site are very high as compared to the ambient standards and as such it is imperative to adopt a comprehensive noise abatement strategy for noise control. It can be observed that only

24


Table 2 Annual average ambient levels, Lday and Lnight for three years for 35 noise monitoring stations installed under NANMN program across seven major cities in India. Name of location

City

Area characteristics

Geographical coordinates

Lday

Lnight

Lday

Lnight

Lday

Lnight

Dilshad Garden CPCB HQ. DTU, Bawana ITO NSIT Dwarka

Delhi

Silence Commercial Silence Commercial Silence

77°190 E, 28°400 N 77°170 E, 28°390 N 77°50 E, 28°440 N 77°14 E, 28°370 N 77°20 E, 28°360 N

52.4 ± 0.9 63.8 ± 2.0 52.3 ± 1.3 73.1 ± 0.6 56.6 ± 1.3

50.8 ± 1.4 53.9 ± 1.4 49.4 ± 2.1 70.8 ± 1.0 54.0 ± 0.8

51.9 ± 1.1 62.2 ± 1.0 51.3 ± 0.9 72.0 ± 4.0 56.6 ± 0.7

50.0 ± 2.1 52.7 ± 1.3 50.0 ± 3.2 70.6 ± 5.3 53.8 ± 1.1

51.3 ± 1.1 63.2 ± 0.8 52.3 ± 1.7 73.6 ± 0.7 56.1 ± 0.5

49.4 ± 2.4 53.4 ± 1.0 49.8 ± 3.0 73.0 ± 0.4 53.4 ± 0.9

Gomti Nagar Hazrat Ganj Indira Nagar PGI Hospital Talkatora Industrial Area

Lucknow

Residential Commercial Residential Silence Industrial

80°590 E, 80°530 E, 80°590 E, 80°550 E, 80°530 E,

26°510 N 26°510 N 26°520 N 26°450 N 26°500 N

61.3 ± 0.8 72.0 ± 0.9 54.2 ± 1.2 55.3 ± 2.5 63.1 ± 0.4

53.7 ± 1.5 61.8 ± 1.0 48.8 ± 2.9 49.8 ± 2.8 55.7 ± 1.6

62.9 ± 0.9 72.4 ± 0.5 53.6 ± 1.1 58.2 ± 1.2 63.6 ± 0.7

55.3 ± 1.1 61.1 ± 1.0 48.1 ± 3.0 52.3 ± 3.6 55.9 ± 1.6

67.0 ± 2.2 72.5 ± 0.5 54.2 ± 1.4 60.5 ± 1.4 63.4 ± 0.5

57.3 ± 1.6 62.0 ± 1.3 49.3 ± 3.6 53.3 ± 3.0 56.1 ± 1.9

Kasba Gole Park New Market Patauli SSKM Hospital WBPCB HQ

Kolkata

Industrial Commercial Residential Silence Commercial

88°230 E, 22°300 N 88°210 E, 22°330 N 88°220 E, 22°280 N 88°200 E, 22°320 N 88°24 E, 22°340 N

63.6 ± 1.2 67.3 ± 0.5 55.2 ± 1.0 61.4 ± 0.4 61.9 ± 0.6

59.6 ± 1.3 60.0 ± 1.4 49.4 ± 2.0 54.3 ± 0.9 55.7 ± 1.3

65.2 ± 1.6 67.0 ± 0.7 54.7 ± 1.0 62.0 ± 0.8 61.0 ± 0.7

62.0 ± 2.6 59.6 ± 1.4 50.2 ± 3.2 56.6 ± 1.8 54.5 ± 1.1

68.8 ± 3.5 67.6 ± 0.5 54.7 ± 1.6 62.3 ± 1.2 62.1 ± 1.4

66.2 ± 4.7 60.5 ± 1.6 54.3 ± 6.2 57.1 ± 1.9 55.5 ± 1.4

AS HP Bandra MPCB HQ. Thane MCQ Vashi Hospital

Mumbai

Silence Commercial Commercial Commercial Silence

72°510 E, 19°10 N 72°490 E, 19°30 N 72°520 E, 19°60 N 72°510 E, 19°00 N 73°00 E, 19°40 N

66.5 ± 1.2 69.8 ± 0.5 66.7 ± 0.6 62.6 ± 1.8 68.2 ± 1.7

59.7 ± 1.5 67.4 ± 0.8 62.8 ± 0.5 55.0 ± 2.3 58.7 ± 1.4

65.5 ± 1.0 69.0 ± 0.7 66.4 ± 0.5 61.7 ± 0.7 68.8 ± 0.9

58.7 ± 0.3 67.9 ± 1.9 63.1 ± 0.7 54.9 ± 1.9 59.3 ± 2.7

65.4 ± 0.8 69.2 ± 0.4 68.4 ± 1.6 62.5 ± 1.2 68.7 ± 0.8

60.6 ± 1.5 66.5 ± 0.5 65.3 ± 2.0 55.4 ± 1.4 57.0 ± 0.8

Abids Jeedimetla Jubilee Hills Punjagutt Zoo Park

Hyderabad

Commercial Industrial Residential Commercial Silence

78°280 E, 78°280 E, 78°240 E, 78°270 E, 78°280 E,

17°230 N 17°300 N 17°250 N 17°250 N 17°220 N

71.9 ± 0.5 62.3 ± 0.5 57.4 ± 1.0 75.7 ± 0.6 53.8 ± 1.5

63.1 ± 0.9 56.2 ± 1.4 50.7 ± 1.7 71.0 ± 1.0 50.5 ± 2.8

72.4 ± 0.9 63.0 ± 1.2 56.2 ± 0.7 75.5 ± 0.5 54.2 ± 1.8

63.7 ± 1.9 56.8 ± 2.1 48.6 ± 0.5 70.3 ± 0.5 48.7 ± 2.0

72.4 ± 0.8 63.0 ± 1.3 56.3 ± 0.6 76.6 ± 1.7 54.4 ± 1.4

64.0 ± 2.1 56.5 ± 1.6 48.9 ± 1.2 71.1 ± 1.3 48.7 ± 1.1

BTM Marathahalli Nisarga Bhawan Parisar Bhawan Peenya

Bengaluru

Residential Commercial Residential Commercial Industrial

77°350 E, 77°340 E, 77°350 E, 77°340 E, 77°300 E,

12°540 N 12°540 N 12°590 N 12°580 N 13°10 N

66.4 ± 0.4 56.9 ± 1.9 58.1 ± 3.0 66.5 ± 1.1 56.5 ± 1.6

56.5 ± 0.4 54.1 ± 1.8 48.4 ± 1.8 58.2 ± 0.7 55.0 ± 2.6

66.1 ± 0.5 54.5 ± 0.7 56.6 ± 2.0 64.9 ± 0.3 55.7 ± 1.2

56.0 ± 1.0 51.9 ± 0.6 47.7 ± 1.9 57.0 49.2 ± 1.2

66.0 57.3 ± 2.1 56.7 ± 1.9 65.0 ± 0.7 58.1 ± 1.1

56.3 ± 0.8 55.3 ± 2.8 48.0 ± 1.6 57.3 ± 0.8 53.1 ± 2.3

Eye Hospital Guindy Perambur T. Nagar Triplicane

Chennai

Silence Industrial Commercial Commercial Residential

80°170 E, 80°120 E, 80°140 E, 80°130 E, 80°160 E,

13°60 N 13°00 N 13°60 N 13°20 N 13°30 N

64.2 ± 0.6 76.1 ± 0.6 68.5 ± 0.9 72.4 ± 0.5 67.8 ± 0.4

51.7 ± 1.2 71.8 ± 1.1 59.1 ± 0.8 61.9 ± 1.1 56.2 ± 1.0

62.5 ± 1.5 75.5 ± 1.1 68.8 ± 1.2 73.1 ± 0.3 67.6 ± 0.5

53.2 ± 3.1 70.9 ± 1.3 58.3 ± 1.2 62.2 ± 1.0 56.3 ± 0.8

64.3 ± 1.5 75.2 ± 1.0 68.3 ± 0.5 73.9 ± 1.0 67.7 ± 0.5

53.8 ± 2.2 70.8 ± 1.5 57.6 ± 0.7 64.7 ± 2.0 56.2 ± 0.7

one site i.e. CPCB Head quarters lying in commercial zone meets the ambient noise standards.

3.1.2. Lucknow city The ambient noise levels have marginally increased in three years except for the Gomti nagar residential area and that for PGI Hospital. The Lday levels have increased by 5.7 dB(A) and Lnight by 3.6 dB(A) for Gomti nagar area since past three years. The PGI Hospital site experienced an increase in Lday levels by 5.2 dB(A) and Lnight by 3.5 dB(A) since past three years. The night levels, Lnight at Gomti nagar, Harat Ganj and PGI Hospital are very high as compared to the ambient noise standards. It is observed that only one site (Talkatora industrial site) meets the ambient noise standards.

3.1.3. Kolkata city The ambient noise levels have marginally increased in three years in Kolkata city except for Kasba Gole park site whereby the Lday levels have increased by 5.3 dB(A) and Lnight by 6.6 dB(A) since past three years. The night levels, Lnight at Patauli residential area, New Market and SSKM hospital area are very high as compared to the ambient noise standards. The night levels, Lnight have increased by 2.8 dB(A) since past three years. The Kasba Gole park industrial site and the West Bengal Pollution Control Board (WBPCB) head quarters commercial site meets the ambient noise standards.

2011

2012

2013

3.1.4. Mumbai city The ambient noise levels have marginally increased in three years in Mumbai city for all the sites under consideration. The maximum increase in Lday value since past three years is 1.7 dB (A), while that for Lnight is 2.5 dB(A). The night levels, Lnight at Acworth Hospital (ASHP), Bandra, Maharashtra Pollution Control Board (MPCB) and Vaishi hospital are very high as compared to the ambient noise standards. The Thane site lying under commercial zone meets the ambient noise standard out of all the sites in the city under consideration. 3.1.5. Hyderabad city The ambient noise levels have marginally increased in three years in Hyderabad city for all the sites under consideration. The maximum increase in Lday and Lnight levels since past three years is 0.9 dB(A). The Jubliee Hills residential area experienced a decrease in the ambient noise levels since past three years. The Lday value has decreased by 1.1 dB(A), while Lnight has decreased by 1.7 dB(A). The night levels, Lnight at Abids and Punjagutta area are very high as compared to the ambient standards. Only one location (Jeedimetla industrial site) meets the ambient noise standards. 3.1.6. Bengaluru city The ambient noise levels have marginally increased in three years in Bengaluru city for all the sites under consideration. The maximum increase in Lday value since past three years is 1.6 dB

25

80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45

CPCB, HQ ITO Abids Punjagutta Bandra MPCB, HQ

80 75

CPCB, HQ

75

ITO

70

Abids Punjagutta

65

Bandra

December

October

November

September

Month

August

July

June

May

April

Thane

March

MPCB, HQ

55 February

60 January

L day dB (A)

80

Fig. 5. Monthly variation in Day equivalent level, Lday for commercial areas in Delhi, Mumbai and Hyderabad in year 2013.

December Marathahalli Parisar Bhawan

70 65 60 55

Perambur T Nagar New Market Head Quarter

50 45 December

October

November

September

August

July

June

May

April

March

February

Hajrat Gunj

Month

70

Marathahalli

65

Parisar Bhawan Perambur

60

T Nagar

55

New Market

December

October

November

September

Month

August

July

June

May

Hajrat Gunj

April

Head Quarter

45 March

50 February

L Night dB (A)

Fig. 7. Monthly variation in Day equivalent level, Lday for commercial areas in Chennai, Lucknow, Bengaluru and Kolkata in year 2013.

January

3.2.1. Commercial zone Figs. 5 and 6 describe the monthly variation of day equivalent level and night equivalent level, Lday and Lnight for commercial areas in Delhi, Mumbai and Hyderabad in year 2013. It can be observed that Punjagutta, Bandra, ITO and Abids areas require immediate noise control measures for bringing the noise levels below the ambient noise standards. The monthly variation of Lday and Lnight levels is not very high except in case of Marathahalli area and MPCB headquarters. The CPCB site and Thane site meets the ambient noise standards. Figs. 7 and 8 shows the monthly variation of equivalent sound level, Lday and Lnight for commercial areas in Chennai, Lucknow, Bengaluru and Kolkata in year 2013. These observations suggest that T. Nagar, Hazrat Ganj, Perambur and New Market requires noise abatement measures for noise control. Marathahalli and WBPCB, head quarters meets the ambient noise

November

Fig. 6. Monthly variation in Night equivalent level, Lnight for commercial areas in Delhi, Mumbai and Hyderabad in year 2013.

3.2. Zone wise analysis The 35 locations under study are categorized as 14 locations lying in commercial zone, 5 in Industrial, 7 in residential and 9 in silence zones. The past three years ambient noise levels have been analyzed for these areas for ascertaining the range of ambient noise levels rampant within each of these areas in seven major cities, and to ascertain the difference of (Lday Lnight) value exclusively for each area. The difference of (Lday Lnight) for all the zones in past three years (2011–2013) is considered with an objective of ascertaining the severity of night levels in comparison to the day levels. It can also be useful in future for the revision of the ambient noise standards of India.

October

August

Month

September

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

Thane

January

3.1.7. Chennai city The ambient noise levels have marginally increased in three years in Chennai city for all the sites under consideration. The maximum increase in Lday value since past three years is 1.4 dB(A), while that for Lnight is 2.8 dB(A). Some areas like Perambur and Triplicane experienced a decrease in the ambient noise levels. The Lday value has decreased maximum by 0.9 dB(A), while Lnight has decreased by 1.5 dB(A). The night levels, Lnight at Eye Hospital, T. Nagar and Triplicane area are very high as compared to the ambient noise standards. The Guindy industrial site marginally meets the ambient noise standards of all the sites under consideration.

L Day dB (A)

(A), while that for Lnight is 1.9 dB(A). Some areas like BTM, Nisarga Bhawan and Parisar Bhawan have experienced a decrease in the ambient noise levels since past three years. The Lday value has decreased maximum by 1.5 dB(A), while Lnight has decreased by 0.9 dB(A). The night levels, Lnight at BTM, Bengaluru are very high as compared to the ambient noise levels. It is observed that two locations namely, Peenya industrial site and Marathahalli commercial area meets the ambient noise standards.

L night dB (A)


Fig. 8. Monthly variation in Night equivalent level, Lnight for commercial areas in Chennai, Lucknow, Bengaluru and Kolkata in year 2013.

standard. The Lday levels varied from 57.3 dB(A) for Marathahalli area to 76.6 dB(A) for Punjagutta area, while the Lnight levels varied from 53.4 dB(A) for CPCB headquarters to 73.0 dB(A) for ITO area. Out of 14 commercial sites under consideration, only 4 sites meets the ambient noise standards. The average difference between (Lday Lnight) is 6.5 dB(A) as shown in Table 3 whereby the maximum difference of 10.7 dB(A) is observed for Perambur area and minimum difference of 0.6 dB(A) for ITO area. 3.2.2. Industrial zone Figs. 9 and 10 describe the monthly variation of day equivalent level and night equivalent level, Lday and Lnight in year 2013 for all the industrial sites under consideration. It can be observed from the Lday levels that the Guindy site requires immediate noise control measures. The Peeniya industrial site has the ambient noise levels well within the ambient noise standards. The monthly variation of Lday and Lnight is not so high except in case of Gol Park area and Peenya area. The Lday levels varied from 58.1 dB(A) for Peenya site to 75.2 dB(A) for Guindy site, while the Lnight levels varies from 53.1 dB(A) for Peenya site to 70.8 dB(A) for Guindy area. Interestingly, all the five sites meets the ambient noise standards, whereby the Guindy site marginally meets the ambient noise standards. The average difference between (Lday Lnight) is 5.2 dB(A), whereby the

26


Table 3 Variation of Lday and Lnight values and difference (Lday Lnight) values in dB(A) for different areas/zone in year 2013. Area code

Category of area/zone

A B C D

Industrial area Commercial area Residential area Silence zone

Lday Minimum

Maximum

Minimum

Maximum

Maximum

Average

Minimum

58.1 57.3 54.2 51.3

75.2 76.6 67.7 68.7

53.1 53.4 48.0 48.7

70.8 73.0 57.3 60.6

7.3 10.7 11.5 11.7

5.2 6.5 7.4 5.8

2.6 0.6 0.4 1.9

80

70

55

75 Peeniya

70 65

Guindy

60

Jeedimetla

55

Gol Park

50 Talkatora

December

November

October

September

Month

August

July

June

May

April

March

February

January

45

Fig. 10. Monthly variation in Night equivalent level, Lnight for industrial areas in seven cities in year 2013.

December

October

November

August

September

July

May

June

April

Bengaluru,BTM Nisarga Bhawan Triplicane Jublee Hills Patauli Indira Nagar

December

November

October

Month

September

August

July

June

May

April

Gomti Nagar

Fig. 12. Monthly variation in Night equivalent level, Lnight for residential areas in seven cities in year 2013.

75

Eye Hospital

70

Dilshad Garden DCE, Bawana

65

NSIT, Dwarka

60

Zoo SSKM Hospital

55

P.G.I

December

November

October

September

Month

August

July

June

Vashi Hospital

May

ASHP

45 April

50 January

3.2.4. Silence zone Figs. 13 and 14 describe the monthly variation of day equivalent level and night equivalent level, Lday and Lnight in year 2013 for sites under consideration lying in silence zone. It can be observed that Eye hospital, SSKM hospital, Vaishi hospital and Acworth hospital

L night dB (A)

3.2.3. Residential zone Figs. 11 and 12 describe the monthly variation of day equivalent level and night equivalent level, Lday and Lnight in year 2013 for residential sites under consideration. It can be observed that for Triplicane, BTM and Gomti nagar area, there is an immediate requirement of noise control measures. The monthly variation of Lday and Lnight values for Nisarga bhawan, Patauli and Indira nagar is very high. There is a high variability of night noise levels, Lnight observed in Patauli area in three months January, February and December, while the data for other months was not available due to some instrumentation problems. The Lday levels varied from 54.2 dB(A) for Indira nagar to 67.7 dB(A) for Triplicane, while the Lnight levels varied from 48.0 dB(A) for Nisarga bhawan to 57.3 dB (A) for Gomti nagar. Out of seven residential sites, no site meets the ambient noise standards. The average difference between (Lday Lnight) is observed to be 7.4 dB(A) whereby the maximum difference of 11.5 dB(A) is observed for Triplicane area and 0.4 dB (A) for Patauli area.

60 58 56 54 52 50 48 46 44 42 40 January

maximum difference of 7.3 dB(A) is observed for Talkatora area and minimum difference of 2.6 dB(A) for Kasba gole site.

Month

Fig. 11. Monthly variation in Day equivalent level, Lday for residential areas in seven cities in year 2013.

L day dB (A)

Fig. 9. Monthly variation in Day equivalent level, Lday for industrial areas in seven cities in year 2013.

Gomti Nagar

January

December

November

October

August

September

July

June

May

April

March

January

February

Month

Indira Nagar

50

Talkatora

50

Patauli

55

March

Gol Park

Jublee Hills

March

60

Triplicane

60

March

Jeedimetla

February

65

Nisarga Bhawan

February

Guindy

65

February

70

L day dB (A)

L day dB (A)

Bengaluru,BTM

Peeniya

75

L night dB (A)

(Lday Lnight)

Lnight

Fig. 13. Monthly variation in Day equivalent level, Lday for areas lying under silence zone across seven cities in year 2013.

have high ambient levels as compared to the standards and thus require immediate noise control measures. The monthly variation of Lday at Eye hospital and DTU site is ±5 dB(A). The monthly variation of Lnight at Eye hospital, SSKM hospital and PGI is high up to 6 dB(A). For DTU site, the monthly variation in Lnight is up to 10 dB (A). The Lday levels varied from 51.3 dB(A) for Dilshad garden to 68.7 dB(A) for Vaishi hospital, while the Lnight levels varied from 48.7 dB(A) for Zoo park to 60.6 dB(A) for ASHP area. The average difference between (Lday Lnight) is observed to be 5.8 dB(A), whereby the maximum difference of 11.7 dB(A) is observed for Vaishi hospital and minimum difference of 1.9 dB(A) for Dilshad garden site.

27

N. Garg et al. / Applied Acoustics 103 (2016) 20–29 65

Eye Hospital Dilshad Garden

L night dB (A)

60

DCE, Bawana

55

NSIT, Dwarka Zoo

50

SSKM Hospital P.G.I

45

ASHP Vashi Hospital

December

October

November

August

Month

September

July

May

June

April

March

January

February

40

Fig. 14. Monthly variation in Night equivalent level, Lnight for areas lying under silence zone across seven cities in year 2013.

9 8

Frequency (in %)

7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 5.5 6.0 6.5 7.0 7.5 8.0 8.5 9.0 9.5 10.0 10.5 11.0 11.5 12.0 12.5

0 (L day - L night) in dB Fig. 15. Histogram showing the difference of (Lday Lnight) in dB for three years across the seven major cities in India.

Thus, it can be observed that 9 sites out of 35 sites under consideration meets the ambient noise standards. The 9 sites include four commercial sites and five industrial sites. No site lying under residential and silence zone meets the ambient noise standards. This may also be attributed due to fact that no site can be exclusively classified as lying in the residential or silence zone except the hospital sites under consideration and as such a mixed category may be prevalent for some of these sites. It may be noted here that in case of relaxation of ambient noise standards by 5 dB(A) for Lday and 10 dB(A) for Lnight for some zones i.e. 70 dB(A) and 65 dB (A) for commercial zone, 60 dB(A) and 55 dB(A) for residential zone and 55 dB(A) and 50 dB(A) for the silence zone, 18 sites out of 35 sites qualify the ambient noise standards. The generally acceptable road traffic noise level, Lday for residential areas is recommended

by Federal-Provincial Advisory Committee [57] on Environmental and Occupational Health (1989) as 55 dB(A) and that for night, Lnight as 50 dB(A). In accordance with these criteria, only one residential location (Indira nagar) out of the seven considered locations meets the ambient noise standards considering the year 2013 annual average ambient sound levels. However, two residential locations namely Indira Nagar and Patauli meets the ambient noise standards considering the year 2011 and 2012 annual average ambient sound levels in accordance with these criteria. Thus, it suggests the need for re-formulation of ambient noise standards particularly for the areas lying in residential and silence zones. The European Commission (2006) presented the reported Lnight limit values for new residential areas by 10 member states within a range of 40–62 dB(A). The Lnight limit value could be a relatively high value but rigidly enforced, or a very low value with no legal binding whatsoever [58]. In terms of city wise analysis, only for Bengaluru and Kolkata city, two sites out of the five sites under consideration meets the ambient noise standards, while for the other cities namely Delhi, Chennai, Hyderabad, Lucknow and Mumbai, only one site out of the five sites under consideration meets the ambient noise standards. Fig. 15 shows the histogram showing the difference of (Lday Lnight) for three years across the major seven cities in India. The average difference of 6.4 dB(A) and maximum and minimum value of 12.5 dB(A) and 0.4 dB(A) were observed for the past three years. The analysis of (Lday Lnight) shows that 13.3% of the observations show a difference greater than 10 dB(A); 53.4% of observations show a difference between 5 to 10 dB(A) and 33.3% of the observations show a difference less than or equal to 5 dB(A). Table 4 discusses the frequency distribution of Lday and Lnight levels for all these sites under consideration. It can be observed that Lday levels varied from 60 to 70 dB (A) for 19 sites (54.3%). Higher levels of Lday (P70 dB(A)) are observed for 6 sites (17.1%). In case of night levels, 18 sites (51.4%) experience Lnight levels between 50 and 60 dB(A). Higher levels of Lnight (P65 dB(A)) are observed for 6 sites (17.1%). Out of the 35 locations, 18 locations have day–night average sound levels, Ldn between 55 and 65 dB(A), while 17 locations have Ldn greater than 65 dB(A). Exposure to high noise levels at certain areas observed in the present study is majorly attributed to the road traffic noise [59,60] and other intrusive noise sources such as noise from the loudspeakers, hawking, human conversation, electrical appliances, TV and music systems, generating sets, neighborhood, and festival celebrations. Thus, it is imperative to adopt various steps such as banning of heavy vehicles inside the town, integrated and efficient transport management system, installation of noise barriers around the silence zones, ban in the use of horns and loudspeakers, formulation of revised ambient noise standards, improving the green belt by planting trees, provision of buffer zones in front of the emerging buildings and creating awareness and attitude to care for the environment among all the stake holders [3,33,61–69]. Identification of noise hot spots and implementing the best practicable and economical option (BPEO) among the

Table 4 Frequency distribution of Lday and Lnight and Day–Night average sound levels, Ldn in dB(A) for seven major cities (35 sites) in year 2013. Variation of parameters, Lday, Lnight and Ldn

45 < Leq 6 50 dB(A) 50 < Leq 6 55 dB(A) 55 < Leq 6 60 dB(A) 60 < Leq 6 65 dB(A) 65 < Leq 6 70 dB(A) 70 < Leq 6 75 dB(A) 75 < Leq 6 80 dB(A)

Lday

Lnight

Ldn

No of sites

Percentage of noise monitoring locations

No of sites


No of sites


0 5 5 9 10 4 2

0 14.3 14.3 25.7 28.6 11.4 5.7

6 6 12 5 3 3 0

17.1 17.1 34.3 14.3 8.6 8.6 0

0 0 6 12 8 6 3

0 0 17.1 34.3 22.9 17.1 8.6

28


various alternatives to these hot spots is essentially required for achieving the targets. The success of noise abatement measures essentially requires a strategic noise abatement planning with formulation of noise abatement goal and special budgetary allocation for accomplishing the noise abatement goal in the next two decades [70]. 4. Conclusions The paper describes about the pilot project on the establishment of National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network (NANMN) across the seven major cities in India for continuous noise monitoring throughout the year. The annual average Lday and Lnight values observed for past three years are described. The experimental analysis shows that ambient noise levels have marginally increased since past three years in the 35 locations under study in which 14 locations are in commercial zone, 5 in Industrial, 7 in residential and 9 in silence zones. The sensitive sites under consideration have been judiciously selected based on the preliminary short-term noise monitoring surveys conducted by CPCB and State pollution control boards previously. The study shows that out of 35 sites under consideration across the seven major cities of India, the 9 sites including four commercial and five industrial meets the ambient noise standards. It can be observed that Lday levels varied from 60 to 70 dB(A) for 19 sites, while 18 sites experienced Lnight levels between 50 and 60 dB(A). The continuous monitoring since past three years shows that no site lying under residential and silence zone meets the ambient noise standards. These observations suggest the need for reformulation of ambient noise standards especially for residential and silence zones. Also, the mixed category zone is prevalent for some of these sites whereby it is very difficult to exclusively classify them accordingly as either lying in residential or silence zone or commercial or industrial zone. In terms of city wise analysis, only for Bengaluru and Kolkata city; two sites out of the five sites under consideration meets the ambient noise standards; while for the other cities namely Delhi, Chennai, Hyderabad, Lucknow and Mumbai, only one site out of the five sites under consideration meets the ambient noise standards. The analysis of (Lday Lnight) for all the zones in past three years (2011– 2013) reveals that 53.4% of observations show a difference between 5 to 10 dB(A) and 33.3% observations show a difference less than or equal to 5 dB(A). Thus, the present investigations can be instrumental in planning for noise abatement action plans and formulation of revised ambient noise standards. Further extension of the National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network (NANMN) covering 18 other major cities of India namely, Kanpur, Pune, Surat, Ahmedabad, Nagpur, Jaipur, Indore, Bhopal, Ludhiana, Guwahati, Dehradun, Thiruvananthpuram, Bhubhneswar, Patna, Gandhinagar, Ranchi, Amritsar and Raipur shall present a more comprehensive view of the overall ambient noise situation in India and planning for noise control measures. The most valuable step in this regard would be the development of noise maps for the major cities of India which shall be instrumental in planning and execution of a comprehensive noise abatement program with a definite noise abatement goal for controlling the noise pollution in India. Acknowledgements Authors are very thankful to the CPCB authorities for their permission to publish the present work. Authors also express there gratitude towards Director, CSIR-National Physical Laboratory, India and Head, ALSIM for their constant encouragement and support for the research work and allowing to publish the study. Authors also specially acknowledge the reports and manuals of M/s Geónica Earth Sciences, Spain; M/s SGS Weather and Environ-

mental Systems Pvt. Ltd., Delhi & NANMN Information brochure published by CPCB, India that has been used in the paper to describe the details of the instrumentation set up used for NANMN project. Author shall appreciate any corrections, suggestions or updates of information.

References [1] European Noise Directive. Assessment and management of environmental noise, 2002/49/EU. Off J Eur Commun; 2002. [2] Arana M, Martin RS, Salinar JC. People exposed to traffic noise in European agglomerations from noise maps. A critical review. Noise Mapp 2014;1:140–9. [3] Senthil Kumar G, Murugappan A. Analysis of urban transport noise level – a case study of Chidambaran town, Tamil Nadu. J Environ Sci, Comput Sci Eng Technol 2003;2:1185–95. [4] Zannin P, Coehlo A, Szeremetta B. Evaluation of noise pollution in urban parks. Environ Monit Assess 2006;118:423–33. [5] Murphy E, King EA, Rice HJ. Estimating human exposure to transport noise in central Dublin, Ireland. Environ Int 2009;35:298–302. [6] Seong JC, Park TH, Ko JH, Chang SI, Kim M, Holt JB, et al. Modeling of road traffic noise and estimated human exposure in Foulton County, Georgia, USA. Environ Int 2011;37:1336–41. [7] Skineer CJ, Grimwood CJ. The UK noise climate 1990–2001: population exposure and attitudes to environmental noise. Appl Acoust 2005;66:231–43. [8] Piccolo A, Plutino D, Cannistraro D. Evaluation and analysis of the environmental noise of Messina, Italy. Appl Acoust 2005;66:447–65. [9] Ramis J, Alba J, Garcia D, Hernandez F. Noise effects of reducing traffic flow in a Spannish city. Appl Acoust 2003;64:343–64. [10] Jamrah H, Omari AA, Sharabi R. Evaluation of traffic noise pollution in Amman, Jordan. Environ Monit Assess 2005;120:499–525. [11] Yilmaz H, Ozr S. Evaluation and analysis of environmental noise pollution in the city of Erzurum, Turkey. Int J Environ Pollut 2005;23:438–48. [12] Singh N, Daver SC. Noise pollution-sources, effects and control. J Hum Ecol (Delhi, India) 2004;16:181–7. [13] Li B, Tao S, Dawson RW. Evaluation and analysis of traffic noise from the urban main roads in Beijing. Appl Acoust 2002;63:1137–42. [14] Moriallas JMB, Escobar VG, Sierra JAM, Gomez RV, Carmona JT. A environmental noise study in the city of Caceres, Spain. Appl Acoust 2002;63:1061–70. [15] Zannin PHT, Diniz FB, Barbosa WA. Environmental noise pollution in the city of Curitiba, Brazil. Appl Acoust 2002;63:351–8. [16] Alberola J, Flindell H, Bullmore J. Variability in road traffic noise levels. Appl Acoust 2005;66:1180–95. [17] Olayanaka OS. Noise map: tool for abating noise pollution in urban areas. . [18] Björk EA. Community noise in different seasons in Kuopio, Finland. Appl Acoust 1994;42:137–50. [19] Tsai K-T, Lin M-D, Chen Y-H. Noise mapping in urban environments: a Taiwan study. Appl Acoust 2009;70:964–72. [20] Chakraborty D, Santra SC, Mukherjee A, Roy B, Das P. Status of road traffic noise in Calcutta metropolis, India. J Acoust Soc Am 1997;101:943–9. [21] Chakrabarty SK, Banerjee D. Monthly variation in night time noise levels at residential areas of Asansol city (India). J Envrion Sci Eng 2006;48:39–44. [22] Morillas JMB, Gajardo CP. Uncertainty evaluation of continuous noise mapping. Appl Acoust 2014;75:27–36. [23] Gaja E, Gimenez A, Sanchos S, Reig A. Sampling techniques for the estimation of the annual equivalent noise level under urban traffic conditions. Appl Acoust 2003;64:43–53. [24] Brambilla G, Fabio Lo Castro F, Cerniglia A, Verardi P. Accuracy of temporal samplings of environment noise to estimate the long-term Lden value. In: Internoise 2007, 28–31 August 2007, Istanbul, Turkey. [25] Garg N, Saxena TK, Maji S. Long-term versus short-term noise monitoring: strategies and implications in India. Noise Control Eng J 2015;63(1):26–35. January–February. [26] Schomer PD, De Vor RE, Kline WA. Sampling strategies for monitoring noise in the vicinity of airports. J Acoust Soc Am 1983;73:2041–50. [27] Öhrström E. Longitudinal surveys on effects of changes in road traffic noiseannoyance, activity disturbances, and psycho-social well-being. J Acoust Soc Am 2004;115:719–29. [28] Babisch WB, Beule B, Schust M, Kersten N, Ising H. Traffic noise and risk of myocardial infarction. Epidemiology 2005;16:33–40. [29] Babisch WB. Road traffic noise and cardiovascular risk. Noise Health 2008;10:27–33. [30] WHO-JRC. Burden of disease from environmental noise-quantification of healthy life years last in Europe. European Center for Environment and Health, JRC EU; 2011. [31] Ouis D. Annoyance from road traffic noise: a review. J Environ Psychol 2001;21:101–20. [32] La Torre G, Moscato U, La Torre F, Ballini P, Marchi S, Ricciardi W. Environmental noise exposure and population health: a cross-sectional study in the Province of Rome. J Public Health 2007;15:339–44. [33] Jamir L, Nongkyrnuh B, Gupta SK. Community noise pollution in urban India: need for public heath action. Indian J Commun Med 2014;39:8–12.

N. Garg et al. / Applied Acoustics 103 (2016) 20–29 [34] Steele C. A critical review of some traffic noise prediction models. Appl Acoust 2014;62:271–87. [35] Garg N, Maji S. A critical review of principal traffic noise models: strategies and implications. Environ Impact Assess Rev 2014;46:68–81. [36] The noise pollution (regulation and control) rules. Ministry of Environment & Forests, India; 2000. . [37] Central Pollution Control Board. Annual report, 2011–12. p. 94–96. [38] National Ambient Noise Monitoring Network. Information brochure. Central Pollution Control Board, India; March, 2011. [39] Ambient noise level at forty locations in Delhi city. . [40] Graphical representation of Noise levels in and around Mumbai during 2011– 12. . [41] Annual report. Karnataka State Pollution Control Board, 2011–12. . [42] Ramchandraiah A. Environmental noise pollution study for Chennai city. . [43] Real time ambient noise levels in 7 metro cities during Deepawali, 2011–2014. . [44] Geónica Earth sciences Information brochure No. 9752.0005. Model 2000-NP, Sound Level processor-Analyzer. [45] Geónica Earth sciences Information brochure No. 9722.0088c. Noise Mapper, Environmental Noise monitoring system-Continuous surveillance with real time data. [46] www.geonica.com. [47] Telnet: the mother of all application protocols; May–June, 1998. p. 88–91. . [48] Transmission control protocol/internet protocol, simple mail transfer protocol, file transfer protocol. Global system for mobile communications, general packet radio services. . [49] Serial digital interface at 1200 baud. . [50] Complementary metal-oxide semiconductor. . [51] Ingress protection, IP-67. . [52] What are the differences among the cold, warm, and hot redundancy connection modes? . [53] Central Pollution Control Board. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt. of India. .

29

[54] U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Environmental Criteria and Standards, 24 CFR Part 51, V 12 July, 1979, amended by 49FR 880; 6 January, 1984. [55] Night time noise criteria and land use guidelines for the city of high point. Wyle report, WR03-04. Wyle Acoustic Group; 2003. . [56] Noise: facts and figures. World Health Organization; 2011. . [57] Federal-Provincial Advisory Committee on Environmental and Occupational Health, National Guidelines for Environmental Noise Control-Procedures and Concepts for the Drafting of Environmental Noise Regulations/By-laws in Canada, Minister of Supply and Services Canada, Ottawa, Ontario; 1989. [58] Night noise guidelines for Europe. WHO Regional Office for Europe report. . [59] Vijay R, Sharma A, Chakrabarti T, Gupta R. Assessment of honking impact on traffic noise in urban traffic environment of Nagpur, India. J Environ Health Sci Eng 2015;13(10):1–9. [60] Mohammadi G. An investigation of community response to urban traffic noise. Iran J Environ Health, Sci Eng 2009;6(2):137–42. [61] Pucher J, Korattyswaropam N, Mittal N, Ittyerah N. Urban transport crisis in India. Transp Policy 2005;12:185–98. [62] Garg N, Kumar A, Maji S. Significance and implications of airborne sound insulation criteria in building elements for traffic noise abatement. Appl Acoust 2013;74:1429–35. [63] Dintrans A, Préndez M. A method of assessing measures to reduce road traffic noise: a case study in Santiago, Chile. Appl Acoust 2013;74:1486–91. [64] Garg N, Sharma O. Design considerations of building elements for traffic and aircraft noise abatement. Indian J Pure Appl Phys 2011;49:437–50. [65] Naish D. A method of developing regional road traffic noise management strategies. Appl Acoust 2010;71:640–52. [66] Garg N, Sharma O, Maji S. Experimental investigations on sound insulation through single, double and triple window glazing for traffic noise abatement. J Sci Ind Res 2011;78:471–8. [67] Tyagi V, Kumar K, Jain VK. Road traffic noise attenuation by vegetation belts at some sites in the Tarai Region of India. Arch Acoust 2013;38:389–95. [68] Olayinka OS. Effective noise control measures and sustainable development in Nigeria. World J Environ Eng 2013;1:5–15. [69] Kihlman T, Kropp W, Lang W. Quieter cities of the future. Report of the CAETS Noise Control Technology Committee and the International Institute of Noise Control Engineering. . [70] Garg N, Sharma O, Mohanan V, Maji S. Passive noise control measures for traffic noise abatement in Delhi, India. J Scient Ind Res 2012;71:226–34.