Basic Ground Flare Noise Propagation

BRYAN L. BECK, P.E.

Senior Flare Applications Engineer
UOP Callidus

Contents
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 3
Sound Basics............................................................................................................................................ 3
Figure 1: Hearing Loss vs. Age, Frequency, and Sex ............................................................................. 3
Figure 2: Sound Pressure Level (SPL) and Sound Pressure (Pa)1 ........................................................... 4
Figure 3: Equal Loudness Curves (Fletcher-Munson Curves) ................................................................ 5
Figure 4: A-Weighted Adjustments to Noise Measurement ................................................................. 6
Table 1: Permissible Noise Exposures.................................................................................................. 7
Noise Propagation ................................................................................................................................... 8
Directivity................................................................................................................................................ 9
Figure 5: Directivity Index at Stack Exit, Large Diameter Stack8 .......................................................... 10
Atmospheric Absorption........................................................................................................................ 10
Figure 6: Atmospheric Absorption vs. Frequency5 ............................................................................. 11
Figure 7: Vegetation Attenuation vs. Frequency7............................................................................... 12
Reflection .............................................................................................................................................. 12
Figure 8: Direct Path vs. Reflected Sound .......................................................................................... 13
Refraction ............................................................................................................................................. 13
Figure 9: Refraction of an Elevated Source ........................................................................................ 14
Barriers ................................................................................................................................................. 14
Figure 10: Ground Flare Sound Path with Solid Barrier ...................................................................... 15
Figure 11: Ground Flare Sound Path with High Air Flow Barrier ......................................................... 16
Figure 12: Transmission Loss Through Steel Plate9 ............................................................................ 16
Totally Enclosed Ground Flare (TEGF) Combustion Noise Testing ........................................................... 17
Figure 13: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare (TEGF) ............................................................................... 17
Figure 14: Digital Combustion Model, Typical Side-Fired Totally Enclosed Ground Flare (TEGF) ......... 18
Table 2: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare Measurement Points ............................................................ 19
Figure 15: Elevation View, Sound Measurement Points ..................................................................... 19
Figure 16: Plan View, Sound Measurement Points ............................................................................ 19
Table 2: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare Measurement Data .............................................................. 21
Figure 17: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare Noise Test, Steam Only...................................................... 22
Figure 18: Comparative Noise Profile, A-Weighted............................................................................ 23
1

Figure 19: Comparative Noise Profile, Unweighted ........................................................................... 24

Conclusions and Summary ..................................................................................................................... 25
References ............................................................................................................................................ 26

Introduction
In recent years, global demand for ground-based flare systems has increased greatly. Ground
flares have many advantages over a typical elevated flare, including reduced flame visibility and
greater smokeless capacity. These two features of ground flares are well-suited to usage in
populated or heavily industrialized areas where the visible flame and smoke production of an
elevated flare would have a significant impact on the surrounding community.
The noise principles presented in this paper are not new. This paper is an attempt to present
the basic principles of environmental noise in such a way that the flare operator can make an
informed decision regarding the flare technology selected.
Sound Basics
Sound is the result of a vibrating source generating a series of pressure waves in the air. Noise
is sound from any source that results in annoyance and/or hearing loss.1 The human ear is
extremely sensitive to these small pressure waves. The normal ear of a young person can
detect pressures as low as 20 Pa. This represents a ratio of 1:2 x 1010 to normal atmospheric
pressure.2 In other words, a pressure change of 0.000 000 02% is audible to the human ear at
certain frequencies.
The normal ear of a young person can hear all frequencies ranging from 20 Hz to 20,000 Hz.3 As
a person ages, the ability to hear higher frequencies gradually diminishes. Hearing loss at high
frequencies is more prevalent in men than women.

Figure 1: Hearing Loss vs. Age, Frequency, and Sex

[Harry F. Olson. Modern Sound Reproduction. Krieger Publishing Company, 1978]
Because the range of human hearing encompasses such a broad range, sound is normally
measured on a log-based scale known as the Decibel (dB) scale.
3

decibel = 10 Log(

Total acoustic energy is very difficult to measure; however, acoustic energy is proportional to
the square of the sound pressure.
decibel = 10 Log(

decibel = 20 Log(

This can be restated as:

The reference sound pressure (zero on the decibel scale) is set at 20 Pa.

Figure 2: Sound Pressure Level (SPL) and Sound Pressure (Pa) 1

As the decibel scale is a logarithmic scale, the rules for adding logarithms must be followed
when adding the sound pressure level (SPL) of two sources. For example, if you have two 85 dB
sources side-by-side, the total SPL is 88 dBa. The formula for adding multiple sources in decibel
units is:

= 10

10(

The human ear is not equally sensitive across the entire audible spectrum. At typical office
volume, the ear is significantly more sensitive to sound in the region from 2,000 to 5,000 Hz
than at other frequencies as is shown in the following graph.

Figure 3: Equal Loudness Curves (Fletcher-Munson Curves)

(R. Nave. Equal Loudness Curves hyperphisics.phy-astr.gsu.edu. Retrieved July 12, 2013, from
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/sound/eqloud.html)
In order to compensate for variations in sensitivity across the audible spectrum, a weighting
factor is normally applied to SPL measurements taken in industrial environments. The most
common is A weighting. Measurements adjusted by the A weighting are normally referred
to in units of dBA. By using A-weighting to adjust SPL measurement, the resulting
measurement more accurately reflects the response of the human ear.

Figure 4: A-Weighted Adjustments to Noise Measurement

In order to limit hearing damage in the United States, the US Occupational Health and Safety
Administration (OSHA) has issued regulations concerning noise exposure in the workplace.
These regulations establish dose limits based on sound pressure level vs. exposure time.
Similar regulations exist in other countries. The OSHA standard effectively limits long term
personnel noise exposure to <90 dBA.

Table 1: Permissible Noise Exposures

(29 CFR 1910.95(b)(2) Table G-16)
Duration per Day, Hours

Sound Level dBA Slow

Response

90

92

95

97

100

102

105

110

or Less

115

The total noise dose for an individual can be calculated using the equation:

For this equation, Ci is the actual time exposed to each dB level and Ti is the actual time
exposed at each noise level. In addition to the maximum limits, a dose in excess of 50% will be
placed in a hearing conservation program. For example, exposure to 90 dBA in excess of four
hours would exceed 50% dose and would require a hearing conservation program for the
employee. There are several employer requirements associated with a hearing conservation
program, including a requirement for annual employee audiograms provided free of charge by
the employer.
Additional studies have shown that continuous noise exposure to 70 dBA or less over a fortyyear working life would produce virtually no hearing loss. Exposure to 75 dBa or less for eight

hours per day over a forty-year working life was found to be acceptable. Both criteria are very
restrictive and have not been incorporated into OSHA regulations. 4
Flare specifications are often written that require flares to operate at 85 dBa or less at the
maximum rate. For an elevated flare designed for emergency service, designing the flare for 85
dBA or less at the maximum emergency rate might result in greatly increased flare cost for very
little value. First, an emergency flare will only operate at high rates for short periods of time.
Second, the radiant heat generated by an emergency flare at high waste gas flow rates will
generally force personnel to evacuate the area long before noise damage occurs. However,
efforts to reduce the noise profile of a flare system at sustained rates could provide more
environmental benefit for the cost incurred.
Noise Propagation
Noise propagation in an industrial environment is affected by geometrical spreading,
atmospheric refraction, attenuation and reflection due to barriers, atmospheric absorption, and
attenuation from intervening vegetation.5 The noise field emitted from a flare is generally split
into two fields: far field and near field. In the far field, the noise source is normally modeled as
point source. The point source approximation is often applied to elevated flare tip because the
elevated tip will usually be a significant distance from a measuring location.
Noise propagation from a point source undergoes spherical spreading. During spherical
spreading the sound pressure is proportional to the area of the sphere. Therefore, for each
doubling in distance from the point source the sound pressure level will be reduced by 6 dB.6
Sound calculations in the near field will be much more difficult. In the near field, there may be
multiple noise sources or a large noise source spread over some distance.6 Noise propagation is
not spherical in the near field. For example, if a noise monitor were mounted on an elevated
platform near a flare tip, noise would not appear to be spreading spherically. Instead, the noise
would be emitted from multiple locations, including:
Jet noise at the flare exit
Combustion noise along the length of the flame
Jet noise from assist steam
For flare equipment near field noise is extremely difficult to calculate. For elevated flares near
field noise calculations are normally not of concern. Anyone standing in the near field of an
elevated flare would likely be injured by the flame long before the noise because a safety
concern.

The near field noise is much more important for a ground flare. A ground flare has numerous
noise emitters, reflectors, and absorbers during normal operation. The staged nature of a
typical ground flare results in different noise emitter configurations as burners are placed into
and removed from service. A location that measures 85 dBA may be just a few feet from a
location that measures 3 dBA higher or lower.
Ground flare specifications are often written requiring sound pressure limits at one meter from
the equipment. This is within the near field zone of most large ground flares. Additionally,
most ground flare radiant barriers are constructed to allow combustion air to flow through the
barrier. A barrier that is designed to maximize air flow is going to have reduced impact on noise
flow and can produced localized areas of elevated noise. The area around a ground flare will
not normally be occupied during heavy flaring. It is recommended that ground flare noise
measurements are recorded at least ten meters from the fence to minimize localized effects.
If there are numerous reflective surfaces within the far field a reverberant field may result. An
example of a reverberant field would be a flare noise measurement inside a tank farm. In the
reverberant field the sound does not spread spherically and instead reflects back upon the
measurement point. For each doubling of distance inside a reverberant area the sound
pressure will drop 3 dBA due to spreading and reflection.6
Directivity
Directivity is a measure of the variation of a sources sound radiation with direction. It varies
with the angular position around the source and the frequency being measured. Directivity has
a strong influence on the jet noise component of high velocity flare tips and steam assist
systems. Directivity can result in noise reductions of 10 dBA or greater at frequencies higher
than 1,000 Hz.

Figure 5: Directivity Index at Stack Exit, Large Diameter Stack8

Atmospheric Absorption
Air is not a perfect transmitter of sound. As sound energy passes through the air it is absorbed
by the gasses that make up the atmosphere. The absorption of sound is particularly
pronounced at high frequencies but is almost negligible at low frequencies.

10

Figure 6: Atmospheric Absorption vs. Frequency5

Ground cover and trees also serve to attenuate noise. The noise is attenuated by reflection and
absorption of the leaves. While vegetation is normally limited inside an industrial facility,
vegetation is often left as a visual screen between an industrial facility and surrounding
residential areas. Vegetation provides very good attenuation of high frequency noise but its
impact on low frequency noise is limited. Deciduous trees provide an insignificant amount of
noise reduction during the winter months.
The graph below is a sample plot of vegetation attenuation versus frequency. Actual
vegetation attenuation will vary widely based on the type, thickness, and height of the
vegetation.7

11

Figure 7: Vegetation Attenuation vs. Frequency7

Reflection
Sound waves will reflect from hard surfaces. Different surfaces reflect noise differently.
Surfaces such as grass or snow tend to absorb more sound and reflect less than surfaces such as
gravel or water.
An observer close to the ground could receive both direct path sound waves and reflected
sound waves from the ground. However, this rarely doubles the amount of sound received
because the reflected sound wave is rarely perfectly in phase with the direct path sound wave.
Under certain conditions, the reflected sound wave will be near 180 out-of-phase with the
direct path sound wave, resulting in partial cancellation of the direct path noise near grade. In
the United States and Canada the regulatory receiver height is 1.5 meters, which means the
receiver could be in the cancellation zone. In Europe, the regulatory receiver height is 4
meters, which means the receiver will always be above a potential noise cancellation zone.5

12

Figure 8: Direct Path vs. Reflected Sound

Refraction
The speed of sound (a) in dry air at 0 C and one atmosphere is 330 meters per second. The
speed of sound in air is proportional to the square root of the temperature.10

Sound waves will travel in a straight line in a homogenous atmosphere. In an outdoor industrial
environment the atmosphere is rarely homogenous. There will normally be wind, temperature,
and humidity variations across a given vertical column of air. As sound passes through these
variations, the local speed of sound will vary, resulting in curving of the sound propagation
path.
The following figure represents a flat location with solar heating of the ground. Solar heating
results in higher temperatures near grade causing the sound to curve upwards. The lower arc is
the limiting arc and just grazes the ground before curving upwards. The curvature of the arc
creates a shadow zone in which flare noise is only audible through diffraction or reflection from
adjacent structures.5

13

Figure 9: Refraction of an Elevated Source

A problematic case is a negative temperature inversion in which the temperature increases
with increasing elevation. During temperature inversion conditions, the flare sound path curves
downward towards grade. Under ideal conditions, the noise reflects upward from grade and
curves back towards grade. This is particularly noticeable over water and other flat, hard
surfaces. The sound cannot escape upwards and only spreads over two dimensions rather than
three. This results in noise propagation over extremely long distances. This effect is not limited
to temperature inversions. Wind at high elevations can also refract sound downward. 5
Barriers
Any large and dense object that blocks the path of a sound wave is considered a barrier.5
Some examples include a concrete wall, a tank, a building, or a solid radiation barrier around a
rectangular ground flare. These barriers create a shadow zone. Sound does not have a direct
path into the shadow zone and must enter the zone by diffraction around the barrier,
diffraction over the barrier, or transmission through the barrier. Dense barriers are typically
defined has having a mass per unit area of 20 kg/m2 or greater excluding framing. A dense
barrier will have transmission loss in excess of 25 dB at 500 Hz. 5 For engineering purposes
direct sound transmission through the dense barrier can be ignored.
The amount of attenuation due to diffraction over a barrier is primarily determined by the
Fresnel number.
=
14

In this equation, N = Fresnel Number, z = increase in path link due the barrier, and is the
wavelength of the sound to be considered. Taller intervening barriers result in longer path
lengths, increasing the noise attenuation. Low frequency sound has a longer wavelength than
high frequency sound and is less impacted by intervening barriers.

Figure 10: Ground Flare Sound Path with Solid Barrier

The figure above is a simplified version of the sound propagation path over a rectangular
ground flare radiation barrier. In a large rectangular ground flare, large amounts of combustion
air are required for adequate destruction of the waste gas and to maintain acceptable
temperatures within the unit. The radiation barrier is normally designed to allow some air to
flow under and through the fence, reducing the effectiveness of the barrier for noise blockage.
Most ground radiation barriers are designed to be as lightweight as possible to reduce
materials costs. A typical ground flare radiation barrier would have a complex surface pattern
and a mass per unit area of 15-25 kg/m2 excluding structural bracing. Although the openings in
the fence reduce barrier attenuation, the barrier does reflect the sound and attenuate the
sound via transmission losses, particularly at high frequencies.

15

Figure 11: Ground Flare Sound Path with High Air Flow Barrier

Figure 12: Transmission Loss Through Steel Plate9

16

Totally Enclosed Ground Flare (TEGF) Combustion Noise Testing

UOP Callidus designs, manufactures, and installs cylindrical enclosed-flame flares. They are
marketed as Totally Enclosed Ground Flares (TEGFs). Major components of a TEGF normally
include:
Self-supporting, refractory-lined, open top combustion cylinder.
Stainless steel high stability burner system. The burners may be side fired or bottom
fired.
Lower combustion air windows at the bottom of the cylinder. The majority of the
combustion air is drawn into the unit via natural draft in the combustion cylinder.
Lower wind fence. The lower wind fence blocks crosswind through the unit, protects
the surroundings from direct radiation from the flame, and reduces medium and highfrequency jet noise.
Staging control system. The staging control system matches the numbers of burners on
service with the system demand.
Continuous burner pilots.
Burner smokeless assist system. At low firing rates, small amounts steam, air, or assist
gas is normally injected into the flame to promote mixing and eliminate smoke. At high
firing rates the assist system is not normally needed for smokeless operation.
Access ladders, platforms, and sampling points as required.

Figure 13: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare (TEGF)

17

Figure 14: Digital Combustion Model, Typical Side-Fired Totally Enclosed Ground Flare (TEGF)

UOP Callidus was requested to participate in the site noise acceptance testing for a TEGF. The
unit was a steam assisted unit. The early-stage burners had a steam injection system that
injected steam into the flame bundle. Steam injection forces air into the flame bundle,
ensuring existing sufficient oxygen for combustion is available within the flame. Without
sufficient oxygen, the free carbon is emitted as smoke. The steam system was noise-tested
without combustion up to 2.5 Bar.
UOP Callidus coordinated with the customer and a third-party noise testing service to conduct
sound testing. Noise data was taken at four different locations around the flare as is shown in
the following tables and figures.

18

Table 2: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare Measurement Points

Distance

Elevation

Measurement Point 1

43m from Centerline

50m

Measurement Point 2

43m from Centerline

7m

Measurement Point 3

43m from Centerline

7m

Measurement Point 4

180m from Centerline

7m

Figure 15: Elevation View, Sound Measurement Points

Figure 16: Plan View, Sound Measurement Points

All measurements were A-weighted SPL measurements. Background noise was the first
measurement. Subsequent A-weighted noise measurements were performed in the steamonly condition and at multiple waste gas flow rates.
19

With a known background level, SPL was calculated for each sampled case. MP1 was found to
be the loudest location despite being further from the burners than MP2 or MP3. Possible
explanations include:
Directivity effects on the flow and combustion noise at the stack exit.
Heavy refraction of the burner jet noise and combustion noise.
o Upward velocity of the combustion products would tend to refract the noise
upwards
o Higher temperatures between the burners would cause the burner jet noise to
refract upward as it traveled laterally across the unit.
Less noise diffusion of the noise exiting the upper portion of the stack. Noise from the
lower portion of the stack would be required to propagate through a more tortuous
path through the combustion windows, past the burners and piping, and over the wind
fence.

20

Table 2: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare Measurement Data

Waste Gas (tons/hr)
-

Steam
(tons/hr)
-

MP1 MP2 MP3 MP4

70

64

63

61

28

78.2

74.0

72.2

61

78.0

73.0

72.2

61

19.5

77.4

72.0

72.0

61

26.5
72.5
82
96
107
Burners Forced
Unstable
With Steam Injection
20 tons/hr Waste Gas
Burners at Stability Limit
100 tons/hr Waste Gas
Burners at Stability Limit
100 tons/hr Waste Gas

7
9.5
11
12
15
Not Recorded

78.0
79.6
79.8
80.3
80.1
85.4

71.5
73.0
72.5
72.5
72.0
-

72.8
74.2
73.4
72.8
72.9
85.5

62
65
62.5
63.5
63
74

Not Recorded

83.4

80.5

Not Recorded

81.0

76.5

Background
Measurement
2.5 Bar Steam
Pressure
Steam Only
2.0 Bar Steam
Pressure
Steam Only
1.5 Bar Steam
Pressure
Steam Only

Strong Vibrations
and Oscillations

Three steam system noise tests were performed at various flow rates. Steam system noise was
much less than background noise levels below 500 Hz.
Background noise was found to be inconsequential for all combustion measurements.

21

Figure 17: Totally Enclosed Ground Flare Noise Test, Steam Only
The most noteworthy portion of the combustion data plot is the noise impact of flame
instability. When the flame was purposely driven unstable through excess steam injection, the
burners would oscillate between lit and unlit at 34 to 39 Hz, creating a heavy resonance effect
in the combustion cylinder. Even though the waste gas flow rate was relatively low, the noise
level was very loud in the 31.5 Hz frequency band. The high noise was easily corrected by
reducing the steam flow to the burners until the burners became stable.
Two additional data sets were added to the combustion data plots. The first is the API 537
combustion noise spectrum data set. The API 537 noise spectrum is based on the original work
by T.J. Smith and J. K. Kilham. Noise Generation by Open Turbulent Flames, The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America, Volume 35, Number 5. May 1963. The original noise spectrum
research was based on very small flame jets 9.5mm (0.375) in diameter and smaller. It
correlates well above 500 Hz, but does not appear to correlate well at lower frequencies.
The second data set is a typical jet engine backblast noise spectrum.11 Far more research has
been done regarding jet engine backblast than has been done on continuous flaring. The Aweighted jet noise spectrum also does not closely correlate with the ground flare noise
spectrum.
22

Note that the test measurements were A-weighted. Most governmental industrial hygiene
regulations are based on A-weighting; therefore, most noise specifications and equipment
guarantees are based on A-weighting.

Figure 18: Comparative Noise Profile, A-Weighted

For comparison purposes, the combustion data was replotted with the A-weighting removed.
The jet noise profile now appears more similar to the enclosed flare noise profile. It is also
apparent that the combustion noise is very loud below 500 Hz, particularly when the flare is
driven unstable.
Low frequency noise emitted from flares will have no direct health impact on the surrounding
community. Because the human ear is relatively insensitive to low frequency vibration the low
frequency noise required to cause hearing damage is unrealistically high at any significant
distance from the flare. However, low frequency noise can have indirect impacts on
community health. The most common complaint regarding low frequency noise in the vicinity
of airports is rattle of building elements and household items.11 In many cases, airports have
performed extensive modifications to residential housing around the runway. Modifications
included window replacement with multiple-pane windows, increased weather stripping
23

around doors and windows to stop rattle, and additional attic insulation. Cost is typically in the
range of $15,000 to $30,000 per house.11

Figure 19: Comparative Noise Profile, Unweighted

This raises an important point. There arent many actions that can be done to reduce low
frequency noise in residential areas around flare systems. The first solution and most obvious
solution would be to flare less. The second solution is driven by the results of the steam
instability test. The flare burner assist gas system must be operated correctly. If the flare is
operated incorrectly the system will produce extreme low frequency noise.
A third solution would be burner design; however, there are physical limitations regarding what
can be accomplished via burner design. Consider a modern commercial jet engine. Millions of
dollars of dedicated research and development are expended for each new jet engine design to
minimize the low frequency rumble. Even with such a massive expenditure, airports are paying
for attic insulation in surrounding homes because the low frequency noise still exists. Even a
medium-sized rectangular ground flare (500,000 kg/hr) burns more fuel at emergency rates
than dozens of fully-loaded Boeing 777s at takeoff.
Many low frequency noise reduction solutions have been tried at airports:
24

Trees and shrubs are ineffective noise attenuators at low frequencies.

Air absorption is minimal for low frequency noise.
Barriers close the source (such as a flare radiant barrier) are ineffective as low frequency
noise simply diffuses over or through the barrier.
Barriers can be effective if placed close to the receiver. For example, a 15 foot barrier
located within 50-100 of a residence provides some low frequency attenuation within
the shadow.
One possible solution would be residential-scale active noise cancellation. Active noise
cancellation is commonly used in stereo headsets for travelers. Active noise cancellation works
by generating a sound signal that is out of phase with the sound signal from a noise source. By
overlaying two waves that are out of phase, the noise signal is reduced or eliminated. This
technology is commonly used in noise-cancelling headphones.
Conclusions and Summary
As is shown in the aforementioned data set, properly operating flare systems can produce a
significant amount of low-frequency combustion noise. Current industry references might
underestimate the amount of low-frequency noise produced. It is well established that low
frequency noise can travel extremely long distances with much less attenuation than high
frequency noise. Airport and traffic studies have demonstrated that low frequency noise will
not produce hearing damage, but it can result in significant quality of life issues in the
surrounding community. When placing a ground flare within a residential area, the impact of
low frequency noise upon residential areas should be closely evaluated.

25

References
1. Patrick N. Breysse and Peter S. J. Lees, Noise, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health,
2006
2. Leo L. Beranek, Basic Acoustical Quantities: Levels and Decibels in Istvan L. Ver and
Leo L. Beranke (Ed.), Noise and Vibration Control Engineering Principles and
Applications, Wiley, New Jersey, 2006
3. Sebastian Haskel and David Sygoda. Biology, A Contemporary Approach. New York:
Amsco, 1996
4. Suzanne D. Smith, Charles W. Nixon, and Henning E. Von Gierke, Damage Risk Criteria
for Hearing and Human Body Vibration in Istvan L. Ver and Leo L. Beranke (Ed.), Noise
and Vibration Control Engineering Principles and Applications, Wiley, New Jersey, 2006
5. Ulrich J. Kurze and Grant S. Anderson, Outdoor Sound Propagation in Istvan L. Ver and
Leo L. Beranke (Ed.), Noise and Vibration Control Engineering Principles and
Applications, Wiley, New Jersey, 2006
6. William W. Lang, George C. Maling, Jr., Matthew A. Nobile, and Jiri Tichy,
Determination of Sound Power Levels and Directivity of Noise Sources in Istvan L. Ver
and Leo L. Beranke (Ed.), Noise and Vibration Control Engineering Principles and
Applications, Wiley, New Jersey, 2006
7. C. M. Kalansuriya, A. S. Pannila, and D. U. J. Sonnadara, Effect of roadside vegetation on
the reduction of traffic noise levels, Proceeding of the Technical Sessions 25, 1-6,
Institute of Physics Sri Lanka, 2009
8. Martin Hirschorn, Noise Control Reference Handbook, 1989 Edition. Industrial
Acoustics Company, 1989
9. Istan L. Ver, Interaction of Sound Waves with Solid Surfaces in Istvan L. Ver and Leo L.
Beranke (Ed.), Noise and Vibration Control Engineering Principles and Applications,
Wiley, New Jersey, 2006
10. Michael R. Lindeburg, Mechanical Engineering Reference Manual, Twelfth Edition. PPI
Belmont, California. 2006
11. Ben H. Sharp, Yuri A. Gurovich, and William W. Albee, Status of Low-Frequency Aircraft
Noise Research and Mitigation, Wyle Acoustics Group, Arlington, Virginia, 2001
12. N. D. Narasimhan, Predict flare noise, Hydrocarbon Processing, April 1986
13. T. J. B. Smith and J. K. Kilham, Noise Generation by Open Turbulent Flames, The
Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Volume 35 Number 5, May 1963
14. American National Standards Institute/American Petroleum Institute, Flare Details for
General Refinery and Petrochemical Service, ANSI/API Standard 537 Second Edition,
Washington, D.C., December 2008

26