This study proposes sonic crystal green walls based on combined cylinder scatterers and vegetation. It has been known that the vegetation or greenery system is effective in dealing with environmental pollutants, while the cylinder scatterer arranged periodically, also known as a sonic crystal, is preferable owing to the capability of noise attenuation, light transmission, and air circulation simultaneously. Combining both components into a single noise abatement system is expected to provide acoustical and non-acoustical features for urban design, where such an approach maximizes the merit of each component. Moreover, the system is useful for advocating sustainability amid global warming issues. In this work, a numerical model is developed using finite element method (FEM), while experimental results are provided to validate the absorption and attenuation results. It is found that the sonic crystal can attain an attenuation of 13.5 dB around 1.6 kHz. Such a promising result is extended further to lower frequency under a specific configuration of scatterers corresponding to lattice distance and filling faction ratio parameters. Meanwhile, the vegetation can enhance overall attenuation at higher frequencies.
BenedictMMcMahonE. Green infrastructure: linking landscapes and communities. Washington, DC: Island Press, 2006.
2.
ElyMPitmanS. Green infrastructure: LIFE support for human habitats. The compelling evidence for incorporating nature into urban environments. Australia: Department of Environment, Water and Natural Resources, 2014.
3.
Bartesaghi KocCOsmondPPetersA. Towards a comprehensive green infrastructure typology: a systematic review of approaches, methods and typologies. Urban Ecosyst2017; 20(1): 15–35.
4.
RadićMBrković DodigMAuerT. Green facades and living walls—a review establishing the classification of construction types and mapping the benefits. Sustainability2019; 11(17): 4579.
5.
CookDIHaverbekeDFV. Suburban noise control with plant materials and solid barriers. In : Proceedings of the conference on metropolitan physical environment; Gen. Tech. Rep. NE-25, 1977. Upper Darby, PA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Northeastern Forest Experiment Station.
6.
KraghJ. Pilot study on railway noise attenuation by belts of trees. J Sound Vib1979; 66(3): 407–415.
7.
FangC-FLingD-L. Guidance for noise reduction provided by tree belts. Landsc Urban Plan2005; 71(1): 29–34.
8.
MedlAStanglRFlorinethF. Vertical greening systems – a review on recent technologies and research advancement. Build Environ2017; 125: 227–239.
9.
YanFShenJZhangW, et alA review of the application of green walls in the acoustic field. Build Acoust2022; 29(2): 295–313.
10.
FangC-FLingD-L. Investigation of the noise reduction provided by tree belts. Landsc Urban Plann2003; 63(4): 187–195.
11.
EmbletonTFW. Sound propagation in homogeneous deciduous and evergreen woods. J Acoust Soc Am1963; 35: 1119–1125.
12.
MartensMJMMichelsenA. Absorption of acoustic energy by plant leaves. J Acoust Soc Am1981; 69(1): 303–306.
13.
HoroshenkovKVKhanABenkreiraH, et alAcoustic characterization of porous substratum used in green noise control elements. In: Internoise, Osaka Japan, 2011.
14.
WongNHKwang TanAYTanPY, et alAcoustics evaluation of vertical greenery systems for building walls. Build Environ2010; 45(2): 411–420.
15.
TyagiVKumarKJainVK. A study of the spectral characteristics of traffic noise attenuation by vegetation belts in Delhi. Appl Acoust2006; 67(9): 926–935.
16.
BakkerJLugtenMTenpierikM. Applying vertical greening systems to reduce traffic noise in outdoor environments: overview of key design parameters and research methods. Build Acoust2023; 30(3): 315–338.
17.
CaiMZhongSWangH, et alStudy of the traffic noise source intensity emission model and the frequency characteristics for a wet asphalt road. Appl Acoust2017; 123: 55–63.
18.
ZhuX-FLauS-KLuZ, et al, Enhancement of sound absorption via vegetation with a metasurface substrate. Appl Acoust2020; 165: 107309.
19.
LauS-KZhuX-FLuZ. Enhancing the acoustic absorption of vegetation with embedded periodic metamaterials. Appl Acoust2021; 171: 107576.
20.
PrasetiyoISiharIBrahmanaF, et alEnhancing nonwoven fabric material sound absorption using embedded labyrinthine rigid structures. Appl Acoust2022; 195: 108852.
21.
ZhouYLiDLiY, et alPerfect acoustic absorption by subwavelength metaporous composite. Appl Phys Lett2019; 115(9): 093503.
22.
GuptaA. A review on sonic crystal, its applications and numerical analysis techniques. Acoust Phys2014; 60(2): 223–234.
23.
RadoszJ. Acoustic performance of noise barrier based on sonic crystals with resonant elements. Appl Acoust2019; 155: 492–499.
24.
Peiró-TorresMPRedondoJBravoJM, et alOpen noise barriers based on sonic crystals: advances in noise control in transport infrastructures. Transp Res Procedia2016; 18: 392–398.
25.
MohapatraKJenaDP. Numerical and experimental methods to measure the acoustic performance of sonic crystal noise barrier. Build Acoust2023; 30(3): 339–356.
26.
Peiró-TorresMPParrilla NavarroMJFerriM, et al, Sonic crystals acoustic screens and diffusers. Appl Acoust2019; 148: 399–408.
27.
OltuluOMamedovAMOzbayE. Band gap structure of elliptic rods in water for a 2D phononic crystal. Appl Phys A2017; 123(3): 1–6.
28.
Fuster-GarciaERomero-GarcíaVSánchez-PérezJV, et alTargeted band gap creation using mixed sonic crystal arrays including resonators and rigid scatterers. Appl Phys Lett2007; 90(24): 244104.
29.
Romero-GarcíaVKrynkinAGarcia-RaffiLM, et al, Multi-resonant scatterers in sonic crystals: locally multi-resonant acoustic metamaterial. J Sound Vib2013; 332(1): 184–198.
30.
Martínez-SalaRRubioCGarcía-RaffiLM, et alControl of noise by trees arranged like sonic crystals. J Sound Vib2006; 291(1): 100–106.
31.
Sanchez-DehesaJGarcia-ChocanoVMTorrentD, et alNoise control by sonic crystal barriers made of recycled materials. J Acoust Soc Am2011; 129(3): 1173–1183.
32.
CanAL’HostisAAumondP, et alThe future of urban sound environments: impacting mobility trends and insights for noise assessment and mitigation. Appl Acoust2020; 170: 107518-1 -107518-8.
33.
HaanC-HHongS-S. An analyses of the noise reduction effect of vegetation noise barrier using scaled model experiments. J Acoust Soc Korea2016; 35(3): 223–233.
34.
HongJYJeonJY, The effects of audio–visual factors on perceptions of environmental noise barrier performance. Landsc Urban Plann2014; 125: 28–37.
35.
FusaroGGaraiM. Acoustic requalification of an urban evolving site and design of a noise barrier: a case study at the Bologna engineering school. Appl Sci2024; 14(5): 1837.
36.
OwLFGhoshS. Urban cities and road traffic noise: reduction through vegetation. Appl Acoust2017; 120: 15–20.
37.
Van RenterghemT. Towards explaining the positive effect of vegetation on the perception of environmental noise. Urban For Urban Gree2019; 40: 133–144.
38.
LugtenMKaracaogluMWhiteK, et alImproving the soundscape quality of urban areas exposed to aircraft noise by adding moving water and vegetation. J Acoust Soc Am2018; 144(5): 2906–2917.
39.
GuptaALimKMChewCH. A quasi two-dimensional model for sound attenuation by the sonic crystals. J Acoust Soc Am2012; 132(4): 2909–2914.
40.
MikiY. Acoustical properties of porous materials-generalizations of empirical models. J Acoust Soc Jpn (E)1990; 11(1): 25–28.
D’AlessandroFAsdrubaliFMencarelliN. Experimental evaluation and modelling of the sound absorption properties of plants for indoor acoustic applications. Build Environ2015; 94: 913–923.
43.
ISO. 10534 acoustics – determination of sound absorption coefficient and impedance in impedance tubes in Part 2: transfer-function method, 1998.
44.
FletcherHMunsonWA. Loudness, its definition, measurement and calculation. J Acoust Soc Am1933; 5(2): 82–108.
45.
ISO. Standard 226 acoustics—normal equal-loudness-level contours, 2023.
46.
ThompsonDJonesC. 16 - noise and vibration from the wheel–rail interface. In: LewisROlofssonU (eds.) Wheel–rail interface handbook. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing, 2009, pp. 477–509.
