Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Comparison of Road Traffic Noise Prediction Models: CoRTN, TNM, NMPB, ASJ RTN

  • Technical Note
  • Published:
Acoustics Australia Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Addendum to to this article was published on 01 December 2016

Abstract

This research investigates the prediction accuracy of Calculation of Road Traffic Noise (CoRTN), Traffic Noise Model version 2.5 (TNM), Acoustical Society of Japan-Road Traffic Noise (ASJ RTN) and Noise Propagation Computation Method Including Meteorological Effects (NMPB). A test case model was constructed to investigate the combination of ground effect and shielding in each methodology. The predictions for CoRTN are implausible, because predicted noise levels for soft ground are equal to hard ground in some locations. This anomaly was not present in predicted noise levels from TNM, ASJ RTN and NMPB for the same test case. Noise levels for a rural freeway and an urban freeway were predicted for each methodology and compared with noise monitoring results. CoRTN resulted in high over-prediction. TNM and NMPB produced similar results, with TNM predicting slightly higher on average and NMPB having the lowest standard deviation in the prediction error. ASJ RTN resulted in high under-prediction.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

References

  1. United Kingdom Department of the Environment: Calculation of Road Traffic Noise. (1988)

  2. US Federal Highway Administration: Traffic Noise Model version 2.5. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/noise/traffic_noise_model/tnm_v25/. (2004)

  3. Acoustical Society of Japan: Road Traffic Noise. https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article/ast/36/2/36_E152001/_article. (2013)

  4. Setra: NMPB 2008— Noise Propagation Method Including Meteorological Effects. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233515425. (2008)

  5. Saunders, R.E., Samuels, S.E., Leach, R., Hall, A.: An Evaluation of the U.K. DoE Traffic Noise Prediction Method (1983)

  6. Abbott, P.G., Nelson, P.M.: Converting UK traffic noise index \(\text{L}_{{\rm {A10, 18\,h}}}\) to EU noise indices for noise mapping (2002)

Download references

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by Arup and VicRoads.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Arup Acoustics, Sydney, Australia

    Simon de Lisle

Authors
  1. Simon de Lisle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Simon de Lisle.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

de Lisle, S. Comparison of Road Traffic Noise Prediction Models: CoRTN, TNM, NMPB, ASJ RTN. Acoust Aust 44, 409–413 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40857-016-0061-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40857-016-0061-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation