Skip to main content
. 2017 Jul 7;2017(7):CD006396. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006396.pub4

6. Results case studies ‐ acoustic panels and curtains.

Acoustic panels and curtains
Noise source Intervention Follow‐up Initial noise level Noise level after Dose before Dose after Reference ID
Production noise Door not reported 85 dB 79 dB     Morata 2015
Blast furnace Control rooms were redesigned in order to improve acoustical condition: installation of a UPVC window with vacuumed double‐layered glass 80 x 80 cm and double wall for entrance by 90° rotate plus a 2.0 × 1.2 m steel door without glass not reported 80 dB 52.6 dB     Golmohammadi 2014
Blast furnace In rest room wall facing to the furnace was made from the armed concrete with a thickness of 20 cm, length of 9 m, and height of 3 m and was located in the entrance by 90° rotate not reported 86.1 dB 58.4 dB    
Blast furnace Control room and rest room redesigned to improve acoustical condition not reported     236% (unspecified) 130% (unspecified)
Product impact on multi‐head weigher Fitted flexible PVC curtains not reported 92 dB 88 dB     HSE 2013
Packaging lines Fitted acoustic baffles to ceiling not reported Above 90 dB below 90 dB    
Noise from hearing protection zones affecting quieter areas Erected acoustic panels and automatic doors between hearing protection zones and quieter areas not reported Above 90 dB below 85 dB    
Filler pump Improved efficiency of pump and added acoustic hood not reported 96 dB 86 dB    
Compressed air in bottle transportation Acoustic side panels fitted not reported 85–86 dB 73 dB    
Product impact on hoppers Flexible PVC curtains fitted not reported Above 90 dB 83 dB    
  Number of cases: 10 mean before mean after mean reduction  
noise level dB 88.3 77.2 11.1  
Dose % (unspecified) 236 130 106