Archives of Acoustics Vol. 46, No. 3, pp. 531–537 (2021), doi: 10.24425/aoa.2021.

138145

Research Paper

Noise Abatement Approach Using Computer Simulation Model

for Urban Indian Road of a Tier-2 City

Dipeshkumar R. SONAVIYA∗ , Bhaven N. TANDEL

Civil Engineering Department, SVNIT

Surat, India
∗
Corresponding Author e-mail: [Link]@[Link]

(received October 6, 2020; accepted June 29, 2021 )

Noise pollution is a major problem nowadays. In urban context, road traffic is the main source of noise pol-
lution. People directly exposed to road traffic noise suffer from moderate to severe annoyance, headache, stress,
feeling of exhaustion, and reduced work performance efficiency. As the sources and severity of noise pollution
continue to grow, new approaches are needed to reduce the exposure. In this research, noise abatement has been
investigated using a computer simulation model (SoundPLAN essential 4.0). Noise maps were developed using
SoundPLAN essential 4.0 software. Noise maps are very beneficial to identify the impact of noise pollution.
Data required for mapping are noise data (LAeq ), road inventory data, geometric features of mapping area,
category wise traffic counts, category wise vehicle speed, meteorological data such as wind velocity, humidity,
temperature, air pressure. LAeq observed on all locations of the Central zone of Surat city was greater than
the prescribed central pollution control board (CPCB) limits during day time and night time. This paper is
focused on using acoustic software for the simulation and calculation methods of controlling the traffic noise.
According to the characteristics of traffic noise and the techniques of noise reduction, road traffic noise maps
were developed using SoundPLAN essential 4.0 software to predict the scope of road traffic noise. On this basis,
four reasonable noise control schemes were used to control noise, and the feasibility and application effect of
these control schemes can be verified by using the method of simulation modelling. The simulation results show
that LAeq is reduced by up to 5 dB(A). The excess noise can be efficiently reduced by using the corresponding
noise reduction methods.
Keywords: noise measurement; noise mapping; noise modelling; noise reduction; simulation.
Copyright © 2021 D.R. Sonaviya, B.N. Tandel
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International
(CC BY-SA 4.0 [Link] which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided that the article is properly cited, the use is non-commercial, and no modifications or adaptations are made.

1. Introduction Tandel, 2019a). Traffic noise becomes severe where

residential and commercial areas are built alongside
Noise pollution consistently ranks high on the list the main stream of traffic to fulfil the housing demands
of citizens’ concerns (Manojkumar et al., 2019). It is of communities (Golmohammadi et al., 2007). There
estimated that over half of population in urban areas are many conventional noise mitigation measures that
is exposed to unacceptable noise levels (Oguntunde have been proposed to tackle the road traffic noise
et al., 2019). Noise from road transport is the major problem over the past few decades (Prajapati, De-
source of this exposure (Lavanya et al., 2014). Ve- vani, 2017).
hicle noise regulation is important, especially in the In this research study, noise maps were developed.
light of growing traffic volumes and the proximity Data required for mapping are noise levels (LAeq ),
between transport infrastructure and residential ar- road inventory data, geometric features of mapping
eas (Jhanwar, 2016; Paszkowski, Sobiech, 2019). area, category wise traffic counts, category wise ve-
Every doubling of transport intensity increases noise hicle speed, meteorological data such as wind veloc-
levels by 3 dB(A). This research highlights the scale ity, humidity, temperature, air pressure (Sonaviya,
and scope of the traffic noise problem, which affects Tandel, 2019b). The noise maps can be useful at
a very substantial proportion of populace (Sonaviya, planning stages, or prior evaluation of action plans,
532 Archives of Acoustics – Volume 46, Number 3, 2021

or determination of the most polluted areas (Arana observed in these zones. Since the total area of Surat
et al., 2013). Furthermore, with strategic noise maps city is very large to map, a small portion of urban ar-
developed in this study, an accurate assessment of the terial road stretches of the Central zone was selected
number of people exposed to below and above permis- and mapped.
sible noise standards is possible (Sonaviya, Tandel, Noise monitoring was done at 3 locations of the
2020). For existing affected areas, hotspots (red color Central zone of Surat city’s arterial roads, with traf-
in the noise maps), immediate suitable noise mitigation fic volume, traffic speed, and meteorological data.
strategies can be applied using proper traffic planning Measurements were carried out on Monday through
viz making one way lanes, prohibiting the entry of 3-W Friday, the working days. Field measurements have
(auto-rickshaws) or heavy vehicles. been taken by using the KIMO DB 300/2, auto-
matic sound level meter for 24-hour duration. Moni-
toring was divided in two parts as per CPCB guide-
2. Field study and data collection
lines, day time 6.00 am to 10.00 pm and night time
The area selected for noise mapping is Surat 10.00 pm to 6.00 am. Vehicles were divided into
city (tier-II city). The city covers an area of about five categories like: 2-wheelers (motorcycle, mopeds),
326.515 km2 and has the population of about 6.4 mil- 3-wheelers (auto rickshaw), 4-wheelers (cars), bus, and
lion as per 2016 estimation (Tandel, Macwan, 2017). truck (Central Pollution Control Board, 2000). The
There are seven zones in Surat city. These seven zones counts of number of vehicles that crossed the point
cover diversified activities of business, residence, com- of measurement from either direction on the road were
merce, and industry. A mixed type of traffic has been recorded by videography. The speeds were monitored
with a hand-held radar gun along with noise levels.
Figure 3 depicts the day time LAeq , of different lo-
cations of the Central zone during the working days
(Monday to Friday). From Fig. 3, it is clearly seen
that the highest LAeq observed was 74.5 dB(A) at B
location. The day time LAeq observed in all locations
of the Central zone was greater than the prescribed
CPCB limits during the time, which is 50 dB(A) for
the silence zone, 55 dB(A) for the residential area, and
65 dB(A) for the commercial area.

LAeq – Central zone

6.00 am to 10.00 pm
74.5

80

73.2
74

Fig. 1. Location map of Surat city. 75

70
65
LAeq [dB(A)]

60
55
50
45
40
35
A B C
Locations
LAeq Silent Zone
Residential zone Commercial Zone

Fig. [Link]
Map2: of
MapCentral zone
of Central zone of Surat
of Surat city withcity withlocations
monitoring monitoring Fig. 3. Central zone – day time LAeq values
locations. at all monitoring locations.

Table 1. Central zone noise level readings.

Day time LAeq (6.00 am to 10.00 pm) Night time LAeq (10.00 pm to 6.00 am)
Locations
LAeq Lmax Lmin L10 L50 L90 LAeq Lmax Lmin L10 L50 L90
A 74.0 105.2 44.1 76.4 69.9 65.4 66.6 95.0 37.6 69.1 57.8 41.6
B 74.5 103.7 48.1 75.7 68.7 61.6 62.4 103.4 35.0 63.6 45.6 38.6
C 73.2 113.9 43.5 72.9 67.4 61.8 64.7 101.2 41.0 65.1 49.2 42.5
 D.R. Sonaviya, B.N. Tandel – Noise Abatement Approach Using Computer Simulation Model. . . 533

Table 2. Central zone – day time traffic volume (6.00 am to 10.00 pm).
No. of vehicles Total number
Locations
2-wheeler 3-wheeler 4-wheeler Bus Truck of vehicles
A 23 370 6011 5276 246 183 35 086
B 25 567 6981 4902 156 98 37 704
C 29 560 8927 4501 74 45 43 107

Table 3. Central zone – night time traffic volume (10.00 pm to 6.00 am).
No. of vehicles Total number
Locations
2-wheeler 3-wheeler 4-wheeler Bus Truck of vehicles
A 3344 349 815 3 2 4513
B 783 97 167 1 2 1050
C 4368 539 1218 18 10 6153

Figure 4 depicts the night time LAeq of different lo- ing the day time. Table 3 shows that during the night
cations of the Central zone. Maximum LAeq observed time, 2-wheelers contribute 70–75%, 3-wheelers con-
was 66.6 dB(A) at A location. Minimum was recorded tribution is 8–10%, 4-wheelers contribution is around
as 62.4 dB(A) at location B at the night time, which 15–20%, and bus and truck contribute around 1% of
was greater than the prescribed CPCB limits during noise. The 2-wheeler and 4-wheeler frequencies were
the night time. All recorded LAeq values were above the higher during the night time compared to the day time,
prescribed CPCB limits. Tables 2 and 3 give the clas- which is the main reason for high levels of the night
sified as well as total traffic volume count (both direc- time noise.
tion) at all 3 locations of the Central zone for the day Tables 4 and 5 show vehicles speed of all 3 loca-
and night time respectively. tions of the Central zone for the day and night time
respectively. These tables depict the maximum and
LAeq – Central zone minimum speed of the categorised vehicles. 2-wheelers’
10.00 pm to 6.00 am average speed ranged between 32 and 36 km/h during
80 the day time and between 35 and 40 km/h during the
75 night time. Similarly, 3-wheelers’ average speed ranged
66.6

64.7

70 between 30 and 35 km/h during the day time and 30

62.4

65
and 40 km/h during the night time. The average speed
LAeq [dB(A)]

60
of 4-wheelers was in the range of 30–40 km/h during
55
50
the day time and of 35–45 km/h during the night time.
45 The average speed of buses and trucks ranged between
40 35 and 45 km/h during the day and night time.
35
A B C
Table 4. Central zone – day time avg. speed
Locations
(6.00 am to 10.00 pm).
LAeq Silent Zone
Average speed of vehicle [km/h]
Residential zone Commercial Zone Locations
Fig. 4. Central zone – night time LAeq values 2-wheeler 3-wheeler 4-wheeler Bus Truck
at all monitoring locations. A 32.17 29.72 35.16 35.71 34.12
B 34.50 32.05 37.62 38.04 36.18
The traffic volume composition for the day and C 35.87 36.12 38.72 37.87 37.80
night time at different locations of the Central zone
was evaluated from the classified vehicular count data.
Table 2 and 3 depict the composition of all categories Table 5. Central zone – night time avg. speed
(10.00 pm to 6.00 am).
of vehicles during the day and night time of the Central
zone. Average speed of vehicle [km/h]
Locations
In the Central zone, the 2-wheeler frequency was 2-wheeler 3-wheeler 4-wheeler Bus Truck
higher during the day time. Table 2 demonstrates that A 38.40 34.19 38.32 39.32 39.58
2-wheelers contribute 65–70%, 3-wheelers contribution
B 38.51 35.25 39.14 40.19 39.40
17–21%, 4-wheelers contribution is around 10–15%,
C 38.77 38.02 40.70 39.87 40.21
and bus and truck contribute around 2% of noise dur-
534 Archives of Acoustics – Volume 46, Number 3, 2021

Table 6. Meteorology data.

Humidity Air pressure Wind velocity Temperature
Month
[%] [mb] [km/h] [○ C]
January, 2018 67 1014.5 8.0 31.2
February, 2018 64 1014.8 8.0 33.4

Noise propagation is affected by meteorological

data, parameters like wind velocity, temperature, air
pressure; humidity, that were collected from Indian
Meteorological Department. These meteorological data
also become one of the input parameters for Sound-
PLAN software. Table 6 depicts monthly average
data such as temperature, humidity, air pressure, and
wind velocity of Surat city. Noise monitoring was
done in the month of January, 2018, and February,
2018.

3. Noise mapping process

and simulation
[Link]
5. Day
5: Daytime noise
time noise map map of zone
of Central theusing
Central
RLS-90 zone
Noise mapping has been done using computer simu- using RLS-90.
lation model (SoundPLAN essential 4.0). Professional
calculation software (SoundPLAN software) is based
on a closed calculation algorithm (Wolniewicz, Za-
gubień, 2015). This software can also consider ele-
ments that affect the dispersion of noise like buildings,
shape of the land, capacity of an area to absorb noise
(cultivated fields) or to reflect noise (concrete areas or
water surface). They also take into account the obsta-
cles in the area, which can be: barriers, the shape and
the acoustical characteristics of the terrain, and meteo-
rological conditions (Cerdá et al., 2013). To develop
a noise map, country-wise road calculation models
such as RLS-90 from Germany, CoRTN:88 from U.K,
NMPB:2008 from France, TNM2.5 from U.S., etc., are
available in SoundPLAN essential 4.0 software. Among [Link]
6. Night
6: Night time noise
time noise map
map of ofzone
Central theusing
Central
RLS-90 zone
all these noise models, RLS-90 is useful to develop road using RLS-90.
traffic noise maps because this noise model has urban
road inventory features (Sonaviya, Tandel, 2020).
Table 7 depicts predicted noise level values. SoundPLAN essential 4.0 can predict noise value at
any point on the map.
In order to solve the problem of noise pollution,
Table 7. Predicted LAeq−SoundPLAN
the experimental and simulation methods are used to
(Central zone).
study the noise reduction performance with different
Predicted LAeq prohibited categories of vehicles. To reduce noise, dif-
Locations
Day time Night time ferent scenarios were adopted in SoundPLAN essential
A 64.8 62.9 4.0 software. In scenario 1 two-wheelers are not consid-
B 64.9 58.9 ered as input parameter in SoundPLAN essential 4.0.
Similarly, in scenarios 2, 3, and 4, three-wheelers, four-
C 62.8 61.5
wheelers and heavy vehicles are not considered as in-
put parameters in SoundPLAN. Tables 8 and 9 depict
Figures 5 and 6 depict the noise maps of the Cen- the day time and night time LAeq values with different
tral zone using RLS-90 model. Roads show the emis- scenarios given by SoundPLAN software. From Figs 7
sion line where noise was generated by vehicles, which to 13, it is observed that if we band vehicles category-
means that vehicles are the main source of noise. wise, the LAeq is reduced by up to 5 dB(A).
 D.R. Sonaviya, B.N. Tandel – Noise Abatement Approach Using Computer Simulation Model. . . 535

Table 8. Prohibited vehicles during the day time LAeq .

Scenario 4
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
(heavy vehicles Overall
LAeq (2-w prohibited) (3-w prohibited) (4-w prohibited)
Location prohibited) reduction
[dB(A)] LAeq LAeq LAeq
LAeq [dB(A)]
[dB(A)] [dB(A)] [dB(A)]
[dB(A)]
A 64.8 61.7 60.6 60.8 61.9 up to 5 dB(A)
B 64.9 60.9 60.5 60.3 60.7 up to 5 dB(A)
C 62.8 59.3 59.3 58.7 59.2 up to 5 dB(A)

Table 9. Prohibited vehicles during the night time LAeq .

Scenario 4
Scenario 1 Scenario 2 Scenario 3
(heavy vehicles Overall
LAeq (2-w prohibited) (3-w prohibited) (4-w prohibited)
Location prohibited) reduction
[dB(A)] LAeq LAeq LAeq
LAeq [dB(A)]
[dB(A)] [dB(A)] [dB(A)]
[dB(A)]
A 62.9 60.1 61.1 61.5 61.6 up to 2 dB(A)
B 58.9 56.9 57.2 57.8 57.6 up to 2 dB(A)
C 61.5 59.0 60.8 60.3 60.7 up to 2 dB(A)

Fig. 7. Scenario 1, 2-wheelers

Figure 7: Scenario-1 prohibited
2-Wheelers at day time.
prohibited daytime Fig. 9. Scenario 3, 4-wheelers prohibited at day time.
Figure 9: Scenario-3 4-Wheelers prohibited daytime

Fig. 8. Scenario 2, 3-wheelers prohibited at day time.

Figure 8: Scenario-2 3-Wheelers prohibited daytime Fig. 10. Scenario 4, heavy vehicles prohibited at day time.
Figure 10: Scenario-4 Heavy vehicles prohibited daytime
536 Archives of Acoustics – Volume 46, Number 3, 2021

4. Results and discussion

From Tables 8 and 9 it is observed that in sce-
nario 1, if 2-wheelers are prohibited, the day time LAeq
is predicted as 61.7 dB(A) and night time LAeq is pre-
dicted as 60.1 dB(A) at location A. At locations B
and C, it is predicted as 60.9 dB(A) and 59.3 dB(A) at
day time and 56.9 dB(A) and 59.0 dB(A) at night time.
In scenario 2, if 3-wheelers are prohibited, the daytime
LAeq is predicted as 60.6 dB(A) and night time LAeq
is observed as 57.2 dB(A). At locations B and C, it is
predicted as 60.5 dB(A) and 59.3 dB(A) at day time
and 57.2 dB(A) and 60.8 dB(A) at night time.
Fig. 11. Scenario 1, 2-wheelers In scenario 3, if 4-wheelers are prohibited, the day
Figure 11: Scenario-1 2-Wheelersprohibited at night time.
prohibited nighttime
time LAeq is predicted as 60.8 dB(A) and night time
LAeq is predicted as 61.5. At locations B and C, it is
predicted as 60.3 dB(A) and 58.7 dB(A) at day time
and 57.8 dB(A) and 60.3 dB(A) at night time. In sce-
nario 4, if heavy wheelers are prohibited, the day time
LAeq is predicted as 61.9 dB(A) and night time LAeq
is predicted as 61.6 dB(A). At locations B and C, it is
predicted as 60.7 dB(A) and 59.2 dB(A) at day time
and 57.6 dB(A) and 60.7 dB(A) at night time.

5. Conclusion
Recently, disputes and complaints are increasing
Fig. 12. Scenario 2, 3-wheelers prohibited at night time.
Figure 12: Scenario-2 3-Wheelers prohibited nighttime
because of the noise caused by traffic. However, pas-
sive noise control is limited in mitigating noise levels.
Therefore, a traffic management method to supplement
the limitations of passive noise control is required. In
this research, an active traffic management model was
suggested, and a simulation to assess the applicability
of active noise control was conducted. In simulations,
noise was found to have reduced. The simulation re-
sults show that LAeq is reduced by up to 5 dB(A).
This research is expected to provide the opportunity to
change the noise management paradigm. Also, the pro-
posed noise management strategies can be used as a ba-
sis for managing noise induced by heterogeneous traf-
fic conditions. It is essential to conduct further more
Fig. 13. Scenario 3, 4-wheelers
4-Wheelersprohibited at night time.
Figure 13: Scenario-3 prohibited nighttime
variations of simulations for achieving more substantial
results.

References
1. Arana M.R.S., Nagore I., Pérez D. (2013), Main
results of strategic noise maps and action plans in
Navarre (Spain), Environmental Monitoring and As-
sessment, 185(6): 4951–4957, doi: 10.1007/s10661-012-
2916-2.
2. Central Pollution Control Board (2000), Noise pollu-
tion regulation in India.
3. Cerdá S., Lacatis R., Gimenez A. (2013), On ab-
sorption and scattering coefficient effects in modellisa-
Fig. 14. Scenario 4-m heavy vehicles prohibited at night
Figure 14: Scenario-4 Heavy vehicles prohibited nighttime
tion software, Acoustics Australia, 41(2): 151–155.
time.
 D.R. Sonaviya, B.N. Tandel – Noise Abatement Approach Using Computer Simulation Model. . . 537

4. Golmohammadi R., Abbaspour M., Nassiri P., 10. Prajapati P., Devani A.N. (2017), Review pa-
Mahjub H. (2007), Road traffic noise model, Journal per on noise reduction using different techniques,
of Research in Health Sciences, 7(1): 13–7, [Link] International Research Journal of Engineering and
[Link]/pubmed/23343866. Technology (IRJET), 4(3): 522–524, [Link]
archives/V4/i3/[Link].
5. Jhanwar D. (2016), Noise pollution: a review, Journal
of Environment Pollution and Human Health, 4(3): 72– 11. Sonaviya D.R., Tandel B.N. (2019a), 2-D noise
77, doi: 10.12691/jephh-4-3-3. maps for tier-2 city urban Indian roads, Noise Map-
ping, 6(1): 1–7, doi: 10.1515/noise-2019-0001.
6. Lavanya C., Dhankar R., Chhikara S. (2014), 12. Sonaviya D.R., Tandel B.N. (2019b), A review on
Noise Pollution: an Overview, International Journal of GIS based approach for road traffic noise mapping, In-
Current Research, 6(5): 6536–6543. dian Journal of Science and Technology, 12(14): 1–6,
doi: 10.17485/ijst/2019/v12i14/132481.
7. Manojkumar N., Basha K., Srimuruganandam B.
(2019), Assessment, prediction and mapping of noise 13. Sonaviya D.R., Tandel B.N. (2020), Integrated
levels in Vellore City, India, Noise Mapping, 6(1): 38– road traffic noise mapping in urban Indian context,
51, doi: 10.1515/noise-2019-0004 Noise Mapping, 7(1): 99–113, doi: 10.1515/noise-2020-
0009.
8. Oguntunde P.E., Okagbue H.I., Oguntunde O.A.,
14. Tandel B.N., Macwan J.E.M. (2017), Road traffic
Odetunmibi O.O. (2019), Public health in Ota
noise exposure and hearing impairment among traf-
Metropolis, Access Macedonian Journal of Medical Sci-
fic policemen in Surat, Western India, Journal of The
ences, 7(8): 1391, doi: 10.3889/oamjms.2019.234
Institution of Engineers (India): Series A, 98(1–2):
9. Paszkowski W., Sobiech M. (2019), The modeling 101–105, doi: 10.1007/s40030-017-0210-6.
of the acoustic condition of urban environment using 15. Wolniewicz K., Zagubień A. (2015), Verifying traf-
noise annoyance assessment, Environmental Modeling fic noise analysis calculation models, Polish Jour-
and Assessment, 24(3): 319–330, doi: 10.1007/s10666- nal of Environmental Studies, 24(6): 2767–2772, doi:
018-9643-1. 10.15244/pjoes/58962.