| Client |
Owner
of an upscale
apartment complex |
 |
| Issues |
| • |
The
client
was
faced
with
installing
two
(2),
induced
draft,
closed
circuit,
evaporative
cooling
towers
to service
the
needs
of residents. |
|
| • |
An
acoustical
consultant
was
hired
to document
existing
noise
levels
in the
area
near
the
proposed
location
of the
coolers
and
review
the
mechanical
design
drawings
and
manufacturer’s
noise
data
for
the
two
evaporative
cooling
towers
to determine
the
expected
noise
levels
at the
property
line,
and
compare
this
to the
local
noise
laws.
|
|
|
|
| • |
It
was determined
that the current
ambient daytime
noise level barely
met the noise
ordinance for
a residential
zone at 60 dBA
and the existing
night-time ambient
sound level was
5 dBA above the
50 dBA night-time
ordinance for
the area. |
|
| • |
Without
acoustical treatment,
the noise level
from the cooling
towers would be
67 dBA at the
nearest resident.
The consultant
recommended the
use of a 2-sided,
sound barrier
wall system plus
variable frequency
drives on each
cooling tower
in order to meet
the local noise
ordinance. |
|
|
| Considerations |
| • |
Environmental
noise
issue |
| • |
Two
(2) induced-draft,
cooling
towers |
| • |
Upscale
condominium
complex |
| • |
Time
constraints |
| • |
Barrier
wall must
be free
standing |
| • |
Ability
of existing
building
structure
to support
the reaction
forces
imposed
at the
base plates
of the
barrier
wall structural
columns |
|
|
| Resolution |
The
Kinetics solution
introduced a 17
dBA noise reduction
which exceeded
the amount required
to bring the operating
cooling towers’
sound level equal
to the allowable,
night-time, ambient
noise levels.
The client was
pleased and the
system continues
to operate. |
Enoise
takes a
summer break
for a month!
There will
be no edition
of enoise
for the
four Wednesdays
of July
2010. We
shall return
on Wednesday
4 August
2010 with
four issues
for the
month. Have
a nice summer.
See you
then! |
|
|
