Next Article in Journal
Effects of Environmental Clutter on Synthesized Chiropteran Echolocation Signals in an Anechoic Chamber
Previous Article in Journal
Active Noise Control System Based on the Improved Equation Error Model
 
 
Article
Peer-Review Record

Wind Farm Noise—Modulation of the Amplitude

Acoustics 2021, 3(2), 364-390; https://doi.org/10.3390/acoustics3020025
by Steven Cooper
Reviewer 1: Anonymous
Reviewer 2: Anonymous
Acoustics 2021, 3(2), 364-390; https://doi.org/10.3390/acoustics3020025
Submission received: 30 April 2021 / Revised: 24 May 2021 / Accepted: 28 May 2021 / Published: 1 June 2021

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

The paper addresses the specifics of wind turbine noise and proposes that the term "amplitude modulation" commonly found in different regulatory documents be replaced with the "modulation of the amplitude". 

The term "amplitude" would be appropriate for the waveform of the sound pressure, and "modulation" in the technical sense is also described on waveforms.

I assume the author hopes that his suggestions will find their way into regulatory documents. The average user and enforcer of these regulations will probably stick to sound pressure level as the basis for all measurements. 

Personally, I would suggest the term "amplitude modulation" be replaced with "periodic fluctuation of the noise level" or something similar.

Given the frequency range of the blade pass frequency (around 1 Hz or so), the use of the term "fluctuation" would definitely be in order.

 

Specific remarks:

Line 240-244: repeated paragraph, identical to lines 223-227.

Figure 3: please correct "amplitute"

Lines 295-296: I do not understand this sentence. Please rephrase.

Lines 306-307: I do not understand the content in brackets. Please rephrase.

Lines 475-476: Please rephrase the sentence.

Line 614: The reference should be to Figure 17.

Figure 17: the caption should state "linear", not "A-weighted" spectra

Conclusion section: references to other literature should be moved to the Introduction section.

Lines 763-766: repeated paragraph, identical to lines 734-737

 

The manuscript should be carefully checked and corrected.   

Author Response

please see attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Reviewer 2 Report

Figure 2 the attenuation of the window is 6 dB, can the author enter the size of the windows?

Wondering if the effect of wind noise was considered? (See Iannace - building acoustics) 

What kind of microphone was used for low-frequency measurements?

Line 406 p. 13 because you write 31.625 instead of 31.6 Hz.

We must ask ourselves if dBA is a measure that gives information on wind noise nuisance?
Is there another criterion for measuring noise disturbance?

Is it possible to obtain a final criterion from the measured data to obtain the disturbance of the amplitude modulation?


What happens if the distance between source and receiver changes?
Does the noise disturbance increase in the house?

Author Response

please see the attachment

Author Response File: Author Response.docx

Back to TopTop