Urban sound environment quality comprehensive assessment method

Abstract

This invention discloses a comprehensive assessment and evaluation method for sound environment quality, which consists of two parts: a "one-vote veto" assessment mechanism and a (sub)index assignment evaluation mechanism. The final assessment and evaluation system is based on index assignment, forming a "5+(2)x" assessment and evaluation system, which includes four steps: (1) Collect relevant data of the area to be evaluated, including functional area sound environment monitoring data, road traffic sound environment monitoring data, regional sound environment monitoring data, and noise complaint and petition case data, etc.; (2) First, determine whether the pre-set "one-vote veto" condition is met. If so, the assessment result is determined to be unqualified, and the evaluation index is assigned a value of 0; (3) If the "one-vote veto" condition is not triggered, based on the collected data, calculate five sub-indices: functional area sound environment compliance index DBI, road traffic sound environment intensity index JTI, regional sound environment standard index QYI, noise cross-influence intensity index JCI, and complaint and petition handling index XFI; (4) Take the arithmetic mean of each sub-indice and use it as the index evaluation result, which is defined as the sound environment quality index NQI. This invention integrates several aspects, including routine acoustic environment monitoring data, application of acoustic environment quality standard limits, demonstration of noise pollution prevention and control effectiveness, and public perception of noise impact. It can more scientifically and accurately evaluate the acoustic environment quality, improve public participation, sense of gain, and acceptance, and, based on the principle of monitoring serving management, provide data support and decision support for noise pollution prevention and control and acoustic environment quality improvement.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This invention belongs to the field of environmental monitoring and evaluation technology, specifically relating to a comprehensive assessment and evaluation method for reflecting the quality of urban acoustic environment. Background Technology

[0002] With the inclusion of "noise environment quality" as a core indicator in the national pollution prevention and control campaign, and the explicit setting of a binding target of "achieving a compliance rate of over 85% for nighttime noise environment monitoring in functional zones," the noise environment has become an environmental element of equal importance to air, water, and soil. Meanwhile, the "Noise Pollution Prevention and Control Law of the People's Republic of China" strengthens the legal requirement that local governments at all levels bear overall responsibility for noise environment quality, proposing the establishment of a "noise pollution prevention and control target responsibility system and assessment and evaluation system."

[0003] However, existing standards and specifications for environmental noise quality monitoring (such as GB 3096-2008 and HJ 640-2012) were published a long time ago, resulting in overlapping content, contradictions, and a lack of systematicity. Current evaluations mainly rely on single indicators such as "functional zone compliance rate" and "average equivalent sound level," which are insufficient to comprehensively depict the spatial and temporal distribution of the noise environment, the impact on public exposure, and public subjective feelings, lacking a comprehensive index similar to the Air Quality Index (AQI). Furthermore, existing assessment methods do not effectively incorporate key management performance indicators such as the implementation of noise pollution prevention and control measures and public satisfaction, making it difficult for assessment results to fully reflect the effectiveness of local government governance.

[0004] Therefore, there is an urgent need to establish a scientific, comprehensive, and operable method for assessing and evaluating the acoustic environment quality that integrates objective monitoring data with subjective management effectiveness. Summary of the Invention

[0005] This invention addresses the shortcomings of existing technologies by providing a comprehensive assessment and evaluation method for urban acoustic environment quality. It aims to achieve a coordinated and unified approach to acoustic environment quality characterization, noise intensity level evaluation, and public perception, providing technical support for refined acoustic environment management and the assessment of local governance effectiveness.

[0006] The technical solution adopted in this invention is as follows:

[0007] A comprehensive assessment method for urban sound environment quality consists of two parts: a "one-vote veto" assessment mechanism and a (score) index assignment assessment mechanism. Ultimately, it forms an assessment system with an index assignment value ranging from 0 to 100, creating a "5+(2)x" assessment system. The method includes the following steps:

[0008] Step 1: Determine the scope of the area to be evaluated and collect relevant data for the area to be evaluated.

[0009] Step 2: First, determine whether one or two pre-set "one-vote veto" conditions are met. If so, the assessment result is deemed unqualified and the index evaluation score is 0, which is the "(2)x" part in the "5+(2)x" assessment evaluation mode.

[0010] Step 3: If no veto is triggered, based on the above data, calculate the functional area sound environment compliance index DBI, road traffic sound environment intensity index JTI, regional sound environment standard index QYI, noise cross-influence intensity index JCI and complaint handling index XFI respectively, which is the "5" part of the "5+(2)x" assessment and evaluation model.

[0011] Step 4: Calculate the (weighted) arithmetic mean of each sub-index and use it as the index evaluation result, defining it as the Noise Environmental Quality Index (NQI).

[0012] The data collected in step 1 includes monitoring data on the acoustic environment of functional areas, road traffic acoustic environment, and regional acoustic environment, as well as noise complaint and petition data. The monitoring data should come from relevant functional departments.

[0013] The "one-vote veto" conditions described in step 2 should focus on assessment requirements, management needs, and public perception, and set one or two conditions, such as the compliance rate of nighttime sound environment monitoring in functional areas and the rate of repeated complaints.

[0014] The functional area acoustic environment compliance index (DBI) mentioned in step 3 is calculated using the following formula: Where i represents the evaluation period, such as month, quarter, year, etc., determined according to the assessment cycle; C 昼，i C 夜，i The compliance rates of daytime and nighttime acoustic environment monitoring (number of monitoring points) in functional areas during the evaluation period i are respectively. If automatic monitoring is used, the data should come from the automatic monitoring data platform of acoustic environment of functional areas at or above the level of the area to be evaluated. If manual monitoring is used, the data should be the compliance rate of monitoring points, and meet the requirements of quality management and quality control, and ensure the traceability of the data.

[0015] The formula for calculating the Road Traffic Noise Intensity Index (JTI) mentioned in step 3 is as follows: Where L eqd For the daytime monitoring results of the points, L eqn For the nighttime monitoring results of the points, l n L is the length of the trunk line where the point is located, N is the number of points, and the formula represents L. eqdBetween 66 and 76 decibels, L eqn The calculation method is between 56 and 66 decibels, such as L. eqd >76 decibels, L eqn If the value is greater than 66 dB, then the value is 0; if Leqd < 66 dB or Leqn < 56 dB, then the value is 100.

[0016] A JTI (Road Traffic Noise Intensity Index) score of 80 or above corresponds to Level 1 road traffic noise intensity and is rated "Good"; a JTI score of 60-80 corresponds to Level 2 and is rated "Fairly Good"; a JTI score of 40-60 corresponds to Level 3 and is rated "Average"; a JTI score of 20-40 corresponds to Level 4 and is rated "Poor"; and a JTI score below 20 corresponds to Level 5 and is rated "Poor".

[0017] Compared with the Road Traffic Noise Intensity Index, the Road Traffic Sound Environment Intensity Index (JTI) has the following advantages: First, the evaluation is more refined, evolving from the original five-level evaluation to a percentage-based scoring evaluation, resulting in more significant differences in evaluation results; Second, it reduces the weight of points with extremely high or low equivalent sound levels that represent longer trunk lines on the evaluation results, thus preventing the occurrence of single monitoring anomalies significantly affecting the average level.

[0018] The formula for calculating the regional acoustic environment standard index QYI mentioned in step 3 is as follows: Where L eqd For the daytime monitoring results of the points, L eqn For the nighttime monitoring results of the monitoring points, the formula represents L. eqd (or L) eqn The calculation method is between (standard limit - 10 dB) and the standard limit, such as L. eqd (or L) eqn ) > L 限值 Then assign the value 0, L eqd (or L) eqn ) < (L 限值 If the value is -10dB, then the value is assigned to 100.

[0019] Unlike the Road Traffic Noise Environment Intensity Index (JTI), the Regional Noise Environment Standard Index (QYI) abandons the approach of benchmarking against the overall level of regional environmental noise. This is because its point layout is similar to that of functional area noise environment monitoring, and the monitoring point information and data include functional area categories and influencing noise sources. It has the attributes and effectiveness of standard limit evaluation, and can be mutually verified with the Functional Area Noise Environment Compliance Index (DBI) and the Noise Cross-Impact Intensity Index (JCI), thus providing more accurate and efficient services for noise pollution prevention and sound environment quality management.

[0020] The formula for calculating the noise cross-influence intensity index (JCI) in step 3 is as follows: Where n is the number of monitoring points, k is the number of monitoring points in a specific acoustic environment functional area affected by road traffic noise, industrial noise, or construction noise, and L k To correspond to the average equivalent sound level of the sound source, and only when L k Greater than the regional average equivalent sound level The time is included in the calculation.

[0021] The Cross-Impact Intensity Index (JCI) primarily characterizes the impact of non-local noise sources such as traffic, industrial, and construction noise on specific acoustic environment functional zones (typically Class 0, Class 1, and Class 2 zones, which encompass all or part of noise-sensitive buildings). Combined with the delineation of concentrated noise-sensitive building areas and the prevention and control measures implemented around them, it can, to some extent, reflect the adequacy of noise pollution prevention and control efforts and the effectiveness of acoustic environment functional zone delineation. In the future, with the further development of automatic source identification technology for automatic acoustic environment monitoring in functional zones, and the improvement of accuracy and effectiveness, this index can also be expanded from regional acoustic environment monitoring to automatic acoustic environment monitoring in functional zones.

[0022] The formula for calculating the complaint and petition handling index (XFI) mentioned in step 3 is as follows: Where n is the total number of noise-related petitions received, b is the number of cases concluded, and c is the number of repeated petitions.

[0023] The Complaints and Petitions Handling Index (XFI) characterizes the efficiency and satisfaction of handling noise-related complaints, reflecting the public's direct perception of local noise pollution prevention and control efforts. It is a crucial component of a sound environment quality assessment method that integrates monitoring data, management effectiveness, and public perception. In practical applications, different weights can be introduced for the number of closed cases and the number of repeat complaints, depending on assessment requirements and management needs.

[0024] Step 4 involves taking the (weighted) arithmetic average of each sub-index to obtain the acoustic environmental quality index (NQI). According to management needs, a weighted average can be calculated for each sub-index involved in the calculation.

[0025] Compared with existing evaluation methods, the present invention has the following advantages:

[0026] (1) Comprehensiveness: It integrates the compliance rate of functional areas, road traffic noise intensity, overall regional noise level, cross-influence of multiple noises and the effectiveness of handling public complaints, thus solving the limitations of existing single-indicator evaluation.

[0027] (2) Combining subjective and objective factors: It includes both objective sound environment index based on on-site measurement and petition case handling index, reflecting the public's subjective feelings and objective management performance, and the evaluation results are more comprehensive.

[0028] (3) Clear policy orientation: Introducing indicators such as the nighttime compliance rate and the rate of repeated petitions as veto indicators, directly aligning with the goals of the national pollution prevention and control campaign and the requirements of the "Noise Pollution Prevention and Control Law of the People's Republic of China", providing a rigid tool for local government assessment.

[0029] (4) Intuitive and easy to use: Each sub-index is normalized to a score of 0-100 and can be combined into an average index, similar to the Air Quality Index (AQI), which is easy for the public to understand and for decision-makers to use. Attached Figure Description

[0030] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of the steps of the method of the present invention. Detailed Implementation

[0031] The specific implementation steps of the method of the present invention will be further described below with reference to the accompanying drawings and data.

[0032] Table 1. Compliance Rate of Acoustic Environment Monitoring (Site Numbers) in a Certain Area over the Past Five Years Daytime 81.6% 95.6% 93.4% 91.9% 93.3% at night 52.6% 72.8% 69.1% 72.1% 81.7%

[0033] Table 2. Monitoring results of road traffic noise environment in a certain area over the past five years

[0034] Table 3. Regional acoustic environment monitoring results within a certain area over the past five years (total of 117 monitoring points; only partial data is shown below).

[0035] Table 4. Handling of noise-related petitions in a certain area over the past five years Case closed 19994 25157 24048 23193 27535 duplicate cases 32 42 47 39 29 Total number of cases 20236 25348 24379 23500 27732

[0036] Collect and organize the above data, and calculate relevant data for "one-vote veto" indicators such as the compliance rate of nighttime functional area sound environment monitoring (number of times) and the proportion of repeated petitions.

[0037] The requirements for the "one-vote veto" indicators for each year are confirmed. It is assumed that there are two "one-vote veto" indicators, namely the compliance rate of nighttime functional area sound environment monitoring (number of times) and the proportion of repeated petitions. The specific indicator requirements are shown in Table 5.

[0038] Table 5. Requirements for "Veto" Indicators in a Certain Region over the Past Five Years Nighttime functional area acoustic environment monitoring (number of monitoring points) compliance rate ＞60% ＞65% ＞70% ＞75% ＞80% percentage of repeated petitions ＜5‰ ＜5‰ ＜5‰ ＜5‰ ＜5‰

[0039] Substituting the relevant indicators into the above indicator requirements for comparison, the indicator of the proportion of repeated petitions did not trigger the "one-vote veto" mechanism, but the indicator of the compliance rate of nighttime functional area sound environment monitoring (points) in the first, third and fourth years all triggered the "one-vote veto" mechanism.

[0040] In principle, sub-index calculations are not required for the first, third, and fourth years due to triggering the "one-vote veto" mechanism. However, to facilitate investigation of the reasons for the changes and local decision-making, subsequent sub-index calculations will still cover all five years.

[0041] Substitute the data from Table 1 into the functional area acoustic environment compliance index (DBI) described in step 3 and calculate using the following formula: The DBI sub-index for the past five years was obtained (Table 9).

[0042] Substitute the data from Table 2 into the following formula: JTI data from various points over the past five years n (Table 6).

[0043] Table 6. Locations of Road Traffic Noise Environment Monitoring Points in a Certain Area over the Past Five Years (JTI) n

[0044] Substituting the data from Table 6 into the calculation formula for the Road Traffic Noise Intensity Index (JTI) described in step 3, we get: The JTI sub-index for the past five years was obtained (Table 9).

[0045] Substitute the data from Table 3 into the following formula: QYI at various locations over the past five yearsn (Table 7).

[0046] Table 7. Locations of acoustic environment monitoring points (QYI) in a specific area over the past five years. n result

[0047] Substituting the data from Table 7 into the calculation formula for the regional acoustic environment standard index QYI described in step 3, we get: The QYI sub-indexes for each location over the past five years were obtained (Table 9).

[0048] Table 3 shows the average equivalent sound level (L) at the traffic noise monitoring points. a Average equivalent sound level (L) at industrial noise impact monitoring points b The average equivalent sound level L at the monitoring points affected by construction noise c and the regional average equivalent sound level Comparison, such as less than No corresponding grid quantity statistics are made, and no index calculations are included. At the same time, the number of noise points a, b, and c of traffic, industrial, and construction noise in specific acoustic environment functional areas (Class 0, Class 1, and Class 2 areas) are counted (Table 8).

[0049] Table 8. JCI Index data for a specific region over the past five years ("-" indicates L for that year) k Less than Or there is no such noise effect, L k (k is not included in subsequent calculations)

[0050] Substituting the data from Table 8 into the calculation formula for the Noise Cross-Influence Intensity Index (JCI) described in step 3, we get: The JCI sub-indexes for each location over the past five years were obtained (Table 9).

[0051] Substituting the data from Table 4 into the calculation formula for the Complaint and Petition Handling Index (XFI) described in step 3, we get: The XFI sub-indexes for each location over the past five years were obtained (Table 9).

[0052] Table 9. Sub-indices and NQI indices within a certain region over the past five years (gray data represents the actual NQI, which is 0 due to the "one-vote veto" mechanism).

Claims

1. A comprehensive assessment and evaluation method for urban acoustic environment quality, characterized in that... It consists of two parts: a "one-vote veto" assessment mechanism and a (point) index assignment evaluation mechanism. The final result is an assessment and evaluation system with an index assignment value ranging from 0 to 100, forming a "5+(2)x" assessment and evaluation system, which includes the following steps: (1) Collect relevant data of the area to be evaluated, including functional area acoustic environment monitoring data, road traffic acoustic environment monitoring data, regional acoustic environment monitoring data and noise complaint and petition case data, etc. (2) First, determine whether the pre-set "one-vote veto" condition is met. If so, the assessment result is determined to be unqualified and the evaluation index is assigned a value of 0. (3) If the "one-vote veto" condition is not triggered, based on the collected data, calculate the functional area sound environment compliance index DBI, road traffic sound environment intensity index JTI, regional sound environment standard index QYI, noise cross-influence intensity index JCI and complaint handling index XFI respectively. (4) Take the (weighted) arithmetic average of each sub-index and use it as the index evaluation result, which is defined as the sound environment quality index NQI.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Based on the requirements of the superior competent department of the area to be evaluated and the management needs of the local people's government, one or two "veto" indicators are set in terms of the compliance rate of nighttime functional area sound environment monitoring and / or the handling of petitions.

3. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the functional area acoustic environment compliance index (DBI) is as follows: Where i represents the evaluation period, such as month, quarter, year, etc.; C 昼，i C 夜，i The compliance rates of daytime and nighttime acoustic environment monitoring (number of monitoring points) in functional areas during the evaluation period i are respectively.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the Road Traffic Noise Intensity Index (JTI) is as follows: Where L eqd For the daytime monitoring results of the points, L eqn For the nighttime monitoring results of the points, l n L is the length of the trunk line where the point is located, N is the number of points, and the formula represents L. eqd Between 66 and 76 decibels, L eqn The calculation method is between 56 and 66 decibels, such as L. eqd >76 decibels, L eqn If the value is greater than 66 dB, then the value is 0; if Leqd < 66 dB or Leqn < 56 dB, then the value is 100.

5. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the regional acoustic environment standard index QYI is as follows: Where L eqd For the daytime monitoring results of the points, L eqn For the nighttime monitoring results of the monitoring points, the formula represents L. eqd (or L) eqn The calculation method is between (standard limit - 10 dB) and the standard limit, such as L. eqd (or L) eqn ) > L 限值 Then assign the value 0, L eqd (or L) eqn ) < (L 限值 If the value is -10dB, then the value is assigned to 100.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the noise cross-influence intensity index (JCI) is as follows: Where n is the number of monitoring points, k is the number of monitoring points in a specific functional area affected by road traffic noise, industrial noise, or construction noise, and L k To correspond to the average equivalent sound level of the sound source, and only when L k Greater than the regional average equivalent sound level The time is included in the calculation.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the complaint and petition handling index (XFI) is as follows: Where n is the total number of noise-related petitions received, b is the number of cases concluded, and c is the number of repeated petitions.

8. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The formula for calculating the unweighted Environmental Quality Index (NQI) for complaints is as follows: 。 9. A city acoustic environment quality index evaluation and assessment system for implementing the method of any one of claims 1 to 8, characterized in that, include: (1) Data acquisition mechanism, used to acquire data on acoustic environment quality monitoring and data on noise complaints and petitions, etc.; (2) The "one-vote veto" mechanism is used to determine whether the nighttime compliance rate and / or repeat petition rate meet the preset requirements; (3) Index calculation mechanism, used to calculate the five sub-indices: DBI, JTI, QYI, JCI, and XFI; (4) Comprehensive evaluation mechanism, which is used to output the sound environment quality index (NQI) as the assessment result based on the sub-indices and the veto judgment results. According to management needs, the weighted average of each sub-indice involved in the calculation can be calculated.

Images