See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/301439478

Future Acoustics of Electric-Vehicle

Conference Paper · November 2012

DOI: 10.4271/2012-36-0612

CITATIONS READS

2 1,791

1 author:

Klaus Genuit
HEAD acoustics GmbH
149 PUBLICATIONS   1,049 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Sound Quality View project

standardization of soundscape View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Klaus Genuit on 12 December 2017.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 2012-XX-XXXX

Future Acoustics of Electric-Vehicle

Klaus Genuit
HEAD acoustics GmbH, Ebertstr. 30a, 52134 Herzogenrath, Germany

Copyright © 2012 SAE International

ABSTRACT Numerous pilot studies are initiated by municipalities and

Since currently a technological shift from automobiles with
internal combustion engines now to electric vehicles occurs,
new challenges in vehicle acoustics must be met. Although,
one of the core duties of NVH engineers will still be the
prevention and treatment of disturbing noises, the targeted
creation of intended and designed sounds will gain in
importance significantly. This sound design task is no longer a
choice but a necessity. In the scope of hybrid and electric cars
a new kind of acoustic feedback must be created. Surely, the
simple electric motor sound, the “tram on wheels”, will not be
the final solution accepted by customers. Besides the
mandatory use of technical methods like transfer path analysis
enabling the reliable identification of the reasons for
acoustical problems by separation of sources and transfer
paths or binaural panel contribution analysis, investigations of
customer preferences on the basis of simulated and real test
drives will become more important. All in all, successful NVH
and sound design is only done within a chain of precisely fine-
tuned working steps and must not be interpreted as a purely
technical challenge. Also exterior noise of electric vehicles is
currently a hot topic. As audible warning signals are
recommended to avoid the danger of not hearing quiet
vehicles, the “side effects” of such intentions also need to be
evaluated. In this respect sustainable concepts and intelligent
solutions are needed, not precipitous actions defining the
introduction of improper acoustic alerting signals.
INTRODUCTION
Although the sales volume of electric vehicles is comparably
low, it is highly expected that hybrid and electric vehicles will
gain in significance in the near future. “Here is no doubt that
electric motors will eventually replace combustion engines,
the question remains how long it will take” [1]. To accelerate
the occurrence and spread of electric vehicles, the EU
demands in the white paper 2011 under the ten goals for a
competitive and resource efficient transport system to “halve
the use of ‘conventionally-fuelled’ cars in urban transport by
2030 and to phase them [ICE] out in cities by 2050”[2].
companies to identify the requirements for e-mobility and to
develop needed infrastructure (e. g. colognE-mobil, e-mobility
Berlin, e-mobility Baden-Württemberg, Eflott, Hyfleet: Cute).
attitude of car customer
manufactures reactions
E-Mobility governments
infrastructure
incentives
space at
price & reliability mega-cities
Figure 1: Key factors influencing the development of e-
mobility
It is important to face new constraints and requirements of
new technologies right from the beginning. Figure 1 lists
several aspects which influence the success of e-mobility in
the future. The interests and interplay of different actors,
whether policy, manufacturers or customers, affect the time
until e-mobility will gain high importance in private and
public transportation.
Also from the vibro-acoustic comfort perspective it is very
essential to face new conflicts and challenges. Complete new
drive concepts require a general rethinking. How to identify
and to develop vibro-acoustic comfort adequate for electric
vehicles? How to support the control of car via vibro-acoustic
feedback? How to convey brand characteristics with respect to
interior and exterior vehicle noise? Thus, it is imperative to
look into acoustical problems and conflicts and to find
solutions contributing to a success of new drive concepts.
Since experience and expert knowledge in the field of electric
vehicle sound design are not available yet, creativity,
innovation, audacity and visionary thinking are required,
especially for the issues “acoustics and NVH” of electric
vehicles [3].

Page 1 of 9
INTERIOR NOISE and right ear of a run-up with wide open throttle. The orders of
the engine and the transmission in the frequency range
between 500 and 2000 Hz can be recognized. However, the
Regarding the interior noise of an electric vehicle, the
specific prominence ratio analysis shows clearly the
introduction of an electric engine and avoidance of a
perceptual meaning of these orders. By means of a specific
combustion engine use offer new opportunities. However, the
prominence ratio analysis it is possible to detect prominent
development and conceptual orientation for the sound design
spectral (tonal) components in signals. The power output in a
of electric vehicles is still open. What sound elements should
band of critical bandwidth is determined around a defined
be noticeable, which sounds must be specially designed and
frequency. This is then related to the average power output in
which sounds must be avoided? Is it acoustically possible to
both of the neighboring critical bands [4]. It is really important
impart brand characteristics? Surely, the unchanged simple
to keep in mind that not the absolute sound pressure level of a
electric motor sound, the “tram on wheels”, will not be the
noise component is important, but its level in context of the
final design aim. In contrast to it, due to the favored
level of the neighboring noise or the general noise floor.
differentiation of brands, a certain acoustic image and
emotional bonding is needed.

It is very important to consider in the early development

phases that due to the reduced masking by a relative loud
combustion engine, new noise conflicts have to be faced. The
reduction of tire-road noise will become increasingly
important to benefit from the low electric driving noise.
Moreover, noises caused by slip-stick effects must be avoided,
since these low-level phenomena will even become more
prominent and annoying in quiet cars. Due to the increasing
reduction of the sound pressure level in the passenger cabin,
the sound pressure level itself will become less and less
important as an acoustic indicator. Instead of the SPL,
psychoacoustic parameters, which are closely linked to the
sound quality perception, have to be applied as target values.

Figure 3: Top: Interior noise spectrogram of an acceleration

Figure 2: Top: Interior noise spectrogram of a run-up with
WOT of an EV (left: left ear, right: right ear); Bottom:
Specific Prominence Ratio Analysis [4] of a run-up with
WOT of an EV
Figure 2 shows that for the identification of relevant noise
phenomena advanced psychoacoustic analysis methods are
required. The top diagrams display the spectrograms of the left
Page 2 of 9
with high load on a road of an EV (left: left ear, right: right
ear); Middle: Specific Prominence Ratio Analysis [4] of the
EV interior noise; Bottom: Spectrogram (zoom) of the EV
interior noise
Figure 3 illustrates the interior noise of an electric vehicle for
the driving condition “acceleration with high load” on a real
road. In contrast to the EV 1, see figure 2, the perceivable
acoustical contribution of the engine and transmission is
lower. However, the power inverter emits high frequency
noise into the passenger cabin, which is clearly audible.
Although the total level of the power inverter orders is
relatively low, this noise is not masked (see fig. 3) and thus is
clearly noticeable. These high frequency components can
cause high annoyance, although they do not contribute to the
overall sound pressure level at all.
Hybrid electric vehicles cause new challenges as well, since
the operating noises of the electric drive and the operating
behavior of the combustion engine, for example a sudden start
or shut off, occur, and drivers are not familiar to such noise
patterns and perceivable vibrations, which could then provoke
complaints.
Figure 4: Left: Interior noise spectrogram of run-up 0-50
km/h of a HEV showing whine noise, inverter noise, engine
start at 7.5 s and roughness increase at 11 s; right: Steering
wheel vibration (vertical direction) of HEV [5]
Figure 4 displays the vibro-acoustical properties of a hybrid
electric vehicle; the left diagram shows the measurement of a
run-up from 0 to 50 km/h, which was measured on a four-
wheel chassis dynamometer. It can be clearly seen in the
diagram that the electric drive operates at first and during
acceleration the combustion engine begins to operate. In the
figure it is observable that an annoying noise around 7 kHz
occurs, which is caused by the power inverter. Moreover, at
7.5 s the combustion engine starter noise can be perceived. At
11 s an increase of the engine roughness in the range of 300 to
500 Hz is observed due to the load taken over by the
combustion engine. Before, the whine noise (500 - 2000 Hz)
of the electric engine can clearly be heard. On the right side,
the corresponding steering wheel vibration in vertical direction
is shown. It can be seen that the sudden start of the
combustion engine at 7.5 s can be felt at the steering wheel.
Interior Sound Design
Sound Quality means the adequacy [4] or suitability [5] of a
sound attached to the technical object emitting it. But, what is
a suitable sound for a new technology like an electric vehicle?
It requires rethinking, creativity and the performance of test
drives, where the acceptance of sounds regarding adequacy
and sound quality is investigated, to determine and realize
target sounds.
Page 3 of 9
Sound Development Trends For The Electric Vehicle
Meeting Traditional New Sounds
Authenticity
Sound Expectations Starting from Scratch
Preservation of Generation of sounds Creation of new
electric drive comparable to sounds suitable for
sound combustion engines electric cars
Development of interior sounds taking into account
sound quality, acoustical feedback, brand image
Figure 5: Potential sound design trends for electric vehicles
Different sound design trends are still in discussion. Figure 5
shows schematically the possible sound design directions with
respect to interior noise of electric vehicles. One way to go
would be to deliberately preserve the typical sound of electric
engine, which could be called the “authenticity concept”. The
driver should acoustically recognize the technology and drive
concept. In addition to it, the adding of specific tones for
creating harmonies and consonance together with existing
noise components could also be an intended development
target. This could be understood as a “musical concept”.
Another development direction could be the creation of
complete new sounds without any „reference“ to the occurring
sounds. But, in this case available experiences could be used
and by means of new sounds certain associations could be
stimulated. This concept could be named with “analogy
concept”.
It is highly expected that different manufacturers will follow
different design concepts trying to fulfill the specific
expectations of their target groups. But, it is clear that still
unwanted sound elements have to be eliminated (conventional
troubleshooting) or have to be masked in a target-oriented
way.
It can be also concluded, that successful NVH and sound
design is only done within a chain of precisely fine-tuned,
interdependent working steps and should not be interpreted as
a purely technical challenge. These tasks are very complex
and can only be performed with qualified experts, innovative
tools and interdisciplinary thinking as well as by considering
the wishes of the target groups at early development stages.
EXTERIOR NOISE Constant Speed 10 km/h. Level vs. Time L/dB(A)[SPL]
70
First, it has to be stated that the investigation of vehicle 60
exterior noise caused by electric or hybrid driving is relatively
new and has not been reported in literature adequately. 50

It is known that electric vehicles possess the potential to EV: 50.5 dB(A)[SPL] 40
reduce exterior noise due to the replacement of the internal ICE (1st gear): 53.9 dB(A)[SPL]
30
combustion engine by an electric engine. Moreover, it is very
0 2 4 t/s 6 8 10
clear that the reduction of tire-road noise becomes
increasingly important to benefit from the low electric driving Constant Speed 20 km/h. Level vs. Time L/dB(A)[SPL]
noise. However, it is not clear to what extent the noise 70
annoyance can be reduced due to the new vehicle exterior
60
noises of electric vehicles. The noise annoyance potential of
hybrid and electric cars must be investigated to estimate
50
reliably the benefit regarding reduced noise annoyance.
EV: 56.3 dB(A)[SPL]
ICE (1st gear): 60.8 dB(A)[SPL] 40
Vehicle Exterior Noise ICE (2nd gear): 56.3 dB(A)[SPL]
30
0 1 2 3 4 t/s 5 6 7 8 9
Several publications (e.g. [8]) deal with the change of the
pass-by noise level due to the electrification of the drive Constant Speed 30 km/h. Level vs. Time L/dB(A)[SPL]
compared to conventional vehicles powered by a combustion 70
engine (see figure 6).
60

50
EV: 60.8 dB(A)[SPL]
ICE (2nd gear): 61.0 dB(A)[SPL] 40
ICE (3rd gear): 60.8 dB(A)[SPL]
30
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 t/s 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5

Figure 7: Comparison of pass-by noise levels of a FIAT 500

Figure 6: Noise reduction of hybrid and electric passenger
cars compared to conventional passenger cars [8]
The different studies mostly consider sound pressure levels
only, which is not a suitable acoustic indicator with respect to
perceived loudness and annoyance.
In this chapter a short investigation of the character of new
exterior noises beyond simple sound pressure level
comparisons is presented. Firstly, figure 7 confirmed the
estimated sound pressure level difference trends between
electric and combustion equipped vehicles shown in figure 6
[8]. At best, the pass-by noise of an electric vehicle could be a
few dB lower than a comparable ICE vehicle. Moreover, the
comparison of pass-by noise levels shows with respect to the
investigated vehicle (a Fiat 500 equipped with combustion and
an electric engine with identical tires) that in the speed range
around 30 km/h the level difference is already negligible, at
least for constant speed driving conditions.
powered by an internal combustion engine (ICE) and an
electric engine (EV) (both with same tires); Level (A-
weighted) vs. time (left channel of artificial head
measurement)
It is widely accepted that psychoacoustic measures offer better
agreement with subjective sensation than conventional A-
weighted and unweighted sound pressure levels and spectra do
[9]. For example, the psychoacoustic parameter loudness
correlates much better with the human perception of volume
than any sound pressure level indicator [10]. Figure 8
illustrates the difference in loudness for the very slow speed
range. It can be recognized that the EV is around 30% quieter
(bottom diagram) than the comparable ICE vehicle. However,
this is only achievable for very slow speed situations [11].
Moreover, it has to be pointed out that besides the impression
of loudness, other psychoacoustic properties influence the
perceived quality (pleasantness and unpleasantness
respectively) of pass-by events. For example figure 9 shows
that the EV pass-by could be even slightly sharper than the
comparable ICE vehicle, since due to the power converter
high frequency noise is emitted.

Page 4 of 9
 Constant Speed 10 km/h. Loudness vs. T. (DIN 45631/A1) N/soneGF
20
EV: N5=8.66soneGF
ICE: N5=12.4soneGF
0 2 4 t/s 6 8
Constant Speed 10 km/h. Loudness (relative) vs. time
EV (left channel)
ICE (left channel)
0 2 4 t/s 6 8
Figure 8: Comparison of a FIAT 500 powered by an internal
combustion engine (ICE) and an electric engine (EV) (both
with same tires); Top: Loudness (according to DIN
45631/A1) vs. time, bottom: Loudness (relative) vs. time, (left
channel of artificial head measurement)
Constant Speed 10 km/h. Sharpness vs. T. (DIN45692) S/acum
2 prevention of crashes including the general demand for
EV: 1.33 acum
ICE (1st gear): 1.20 acum
0 1 2 3 4 t/s 6 7
Figure 9: Comparison of a FIAT 500 powered by an internal
combustion engine (ICE) and an electric engine (EV) (both
with same tires); Sharpness (according to DIN 45692) vs.
time (left channel of artificial head measurement)
The acoustical contributions of power converter regarding the
vehicle exterior noise are displayed in figure 10. The cut at
11.46 kHz shows the prominent component, which clearly
exceeds the noise floor observable in the cut a 1.7s diagram.
Although such high frequency components do not have an
effect on the overall sound pressure level, they can be clearly
recognized. Such noticeable high frequency contributions
attract attention leading to higher annoyance.
Page 5 of 9
15
10
5
0
10
%
100
80
Figure 10: FIAT 500 powered by an electric engine (EV);
60 Cut at 11.46 kHz (top left), Cut at 1.7s (top right) and FFT
40 vs. time (bottom) (left channel of artificial head
measurement)
20
10 Implementation of Additional Sounds
Different surveys have presumably shown the increased risk
of accidents for pedestrians and cyclists with respect to
collisions with quiet vehicles. For example, a report from the
American NHTSA [12] concluded that hybrid electric vehicles
(HEVs) have a higher incidence rate of pedestrian and
bicyclist crashes than do internal combustion engine vehicles
(ICEs) in certain vehicle maneuvers. This caused a lively
discussion about acoustical warning systems for the
1.5 acoustical warning signals for quiet vehicles to alert blind and
visually-impaired persons.
1
Although, Sandberg et al. [13] have shown that the NHTSA
study lacks a few methodological and interpretational
0.5
accuracies, the politicians are already in favor of acoustical
0
alerting signals and first regulation proposals come under
8 9
scrutiny.
One important question concerns the labeling of a potential
acoustic signal added to the exterior noise of a quiet vehicle.
Should the signal inform or warn the pedestrian about the
existence of a quiet vehicle in the direct surrounding area? A
warning signal announces something imminent, impeding or
the presence of danger. Does a pedestrian really need to know
about the danger and hazard he/she is in, or does the person
need the information about the vehicle’s presence and its
current operating condition. The pedestrian will not only know
that there is danger, but he/she needs information about speed,
position, distance, direction of moving of the quiet vehicle.
The generated information provides knowledge about the
particular situation. Although the discussion about warning or
informing pedestrian of the presence of quiet cars is not
finished yet, it is clear that a potential signal creation, if really
inevitable, must adequately reflect the intended purpose of the
stimulus.
Warning Signals and Their Acoustical
Consequences
An emitted warning signal “[…] shall allow the pedestrian to
reasonably detect a nearby electric or hybrid vehicle in critical
operating scenarios including […] constant speed,
accelerating, or decelerating” [14]. The general conflict, which
is often neglected in the discussion of an adequate warning
signal, is that in everyday-life numerous vehicles are present
in the general hum of a city (background noise). Thus, the
investigation of an adequate warning signal considering the
relevant driving conditions has also to reflect the typical
ambient conditions and superposition effects of many
vehicles.
It is highly expected that the production of sounds should be
easy, since the built-in loudspeakers have to be low-prized
ones to save costs. This technical constraint limits further the
development and implementation of adequate signals. One
opportunity would be to use small sizes of the speakers, which
fit into the bumper. Then by installing several loudspeakers
the application of beamforming is conceivable to realize a
controlled, direction-dependent radiation of the potential
warning signal and to increase the level in front of the vehicle.
However, in case only loudspeakers with a very limited
operating range and quality are used, the sound quality of any
radiated sound will be comparably low.
To warn pedestrians with acoustic signals it is possible by
using very different signals. The UNECE defines that certain
kinds of sounds are not allowed to implement in vehicles as
alert signals, such as siren, horn, chime, bell, emergency
vehicle sounds, alarm sounds (fire, theft, smoke alarms),
melodious sounds, animal and insect sounds [15].
Figure 11: Warning signal concepts; Left: Pitch-shifting
concept (change of pitch with constant modulation), right:
Envelope modification concept (change of modulation
frequency with constant pitch)
In principle, two general signal development concepts are
conceivable. First, a concept could be to work with multi-sinus
noises, where the change of speed of the vehicle is related to a
change of frequency of the sinuses. This basic idea is usually
called the “pitch-shifting approach”, which is displayed in
figure 11 on the left side. A disadvantage could be that
disharmonies can occur due to the permanent change of
Page 6 of 9
relationship of the different tones in the warning signal. An
advantage could be that this slightly reminds listeners of the
combustion engine noise.
In contrast to it and another conceptual way to go, in case the
implementation of warning signals is inevitable, would be to
apply a concept of “envelope modification” as illustrated in
figure 11 on the right. Here the basis is a multi-sinus and an
envelope changes in dependency of speed and for example by
load. The advantage of such an approach is that the general
character of the warning signal (constant pitch) remains stable,
whereas only the modulation rate due to the change of the
envelope varies.
5km/h 5km/h
10km/h 10km/h
Figure 12: Warning signals emitted while driving with
constant speed (top: 5 km/h, bottom: 10 km/h); Left: Pitch-
shifting concept, right: Envelope modification concept
Figure 12 schematically demonstrates the change of signals
with speed for the driving situation constant speed. It is
assumed that in case of the envelope modulation concept the
respective speed of the vehicle can be associated easier only
by listening to the warning signal due to the faster “beat”. The
pitch shifting approach has the disadvantage that a certain
pitch is not automatically associated to speed and it could be
more difficult for pedestrians to reliably estimate the speed.
Such aspects must be considered in order to develop most
adequate warning signals.
As mentioned above, the discussion about adequate warning
signals frequently lacks the consideration of superposition
effects. In order to investigate adequately potential
superposition effects created by acoustic warning signals, a
synthesizer technology was applied. Within the European
research project CityHush “Acoustically green road vehicles
and city areas” [16] a traffic noise synthesizer technology
(TNS) combining measurements with simulation was
developed. Here, a traffic micro-simulation provides detailed
data about the traffic situation and the interaction of vehicles.
Then the synthesizer technology uses this information and
simulates the emission of each vehicle. Using the developed
TNS technique the impact of potential warning sounds on the
resulting overall noise and on the noise annoyance can be
studied as well. More information about this technology can
be found in [17].
To study in principle the effect of introducing warnings
signals, first two basic vehicle warning sounds were created.
The first warning signal is composed by a set of two sine
orders. The second warning signal consists of synthesized
Gauss impulses, which are looped. This leads to an impulsive
sound which shows many orders (harmonics) in the frequency
domain. In both cases the frequencies of the synthesized
signals are linked to the engine speed, whereas in idle
condition no warning sound is synthesized. The following
scenario is considered in figure 13: A few cars stand at a
traffic light at 0 m for a few seconds. Then, after the traffic
light indicates green, the vehicles accelerate and drive along
the considered road section from left to right (distance of
40 m). The scenario lasts 20 seconds. In figure 13 the resulting
loudness maps (left) and the determined roughness maps
(right) of the investigated scenario are displayed.
Figure 13: Traffic light situation (cars stand at 0 m and after
a few seconds accelerate), the maps left display loudness (N5)
and on the right roughness (Rave); top: electric vehicles;
middle: electric vehicles with warning signal 1 (two orders),
bottom: electric vehicles with warning signal 2 (Gauss
impulses)
The noise of full electric cars (top) and electric cars with two
warning signals are considered (middle, bottom). The loudness
maps show the expected results, since the warning signals do
not heavily influence the overall loudness. The loudness does
not change a lot over the considered scenarios. However, the
vehicles with the warning signal 2 create due to superposition
effects a very rough traffic noise, which is more attention
attracting as well as annoying than the other scenarios. This
simple example shows that a cacophony of warning sounds
can negatively contribute to the perceived annoyance of traffic
Page 7 of 9
noise, even in case the overall SPL or loudness is not greatly
influenced [18]. Therefore, the introduction of potential
warning signals for the protection of visually impaired persons
must also consider the resulting noise and noise annoyance.
Figure 14 shows the spectrograms of the noise of different
road traffic scenarios. Here, four vehicles pass by a virtual
listener, which stands close to a junction. The different cars
accelerate and decelerate due to the junction and right over left
priority. This scenario can be considered as a traffic calming
zone, since the vehicles drive relatively slow. This scenario
was again synthesized with the developed TNS technique and
the scenarios “only ICE vehicles”, “only tire noise (ideal EV
noise)”, and “EVs with warning signals” were created. Figure
14 displays the resulting spectra of the created traffic noise
scenarios. It can be recognized that the virtually added
warning signals lead to a slight increase of loudness (N5=15.5
sone) compared to the “tire-noise only” scenario (N5=13.6
sone). But, the loudness of these scenarios does not reach the
loudness level of the generated scenario with vehicles
powered by internal combustion engines only (N5=19.2 sone).
However, it has to be mentioned that it is frequently proposed
to create (in maximum) a sound level for an electric vehicle
with warning signal comparable to a similar vehicle of the
same category equipped with an ICE operating under the same
conditions. Thus, the total loudness of the third scenario could
even reach in principle the loudness level of the ICE vehicle
scenario.
Figure 14: Simulations of a micro-traffic simulation (traffic
calming zone with four vehicles) from left to right: only ICE
vehicles, only tire noise (ideal EV noise), EV with a
commercial warning signal; FFT vs. time
Moreover, figure 15 illustrates the possible annoyance
potential of the warning signal road traffic scenario. The
applied Relative Approach Analysis [19] can be interpreted in
this context as an indicator for noise annoyance, since it is an
approach for quantifying perceivable noise patterns regarding
the frequency and time domain. The Relative Approach
analysis has been proven in prior investigations to detect
specific, obtrusive, attention-attracting noise features [20].
This analysis simulates the ability of the human hearing to
adapt to stationary sounds and to react on the other hand to
variations and patterns in the time and frequency structure of a
sound. The traffic noise caused by conventional drives
concepts leads to noise with high Relative Approach values,
which means that a lot of perceivable patterns occur in this
scenario attracting attention and presumably leading to
annoyance. However, it is also clearly observable that by
adding warning signals in addition to the existing vehicle
exterior noise of an electric vehicle an increase of perceivable
noise patterns results (see fig. 15). This means that besides an
enhanced pedestrian safety, an increase of attention attraction
and possibly noise annoyance is caused at the same time. Any
kind of warning sound development must consider the overall
community noise impact as well, intending to increase noise
annoyance as little as possible due to the introduced alert
sounds.
Figure 15: Simulations of a micro-traffic simulation (traffic
calming zone with four vehicles) from left to right: only ICE
vehicles, only tire noise (ideal EV noise), EV with a
commercial warning signal; Relative Approach Analysis vs.
time [19]
Warning signals should not conflict with the endeavors to
reduce noise exposure and noise annoyance caused by road
traffic noise. In particular, with respect to the creation and
preservation of quiet zones in cities possible noise problems
related to potential warning sounds must be discussed and be
avoided right from the beginning. Different alternative
solutions are conceivable (such as additional devices for
groups at risk, fleet intelligence (using Car2Car
communication), driver warning systems, context dependent
signal radiation), which would reduce the disadvantages of
radiating warning signals without any need assessment and
risk analysis.
Page 8 of 9
SUMMARY/CONCLUSIONS
Due to the expected electrification of passenger cars the
acoustic engineers are already beginning to face a revolution
in the field of vehicle acoustics. After more than 125 years of
continuous development and successive optimization of the
conventional combustion engine, now new drive concepts are
arising which cause completely new acoustical conflicts and
require completely new approaches and engineering solutions.
Although trends in the acoustical design of electric vehicles
are still unclear, it is obvious that the perceived quality
effecting the customer satisfaction and brand loyalty will gain
in importance. The vibro-acoustic comfort will remain a very
important development aspect influencing the perceived
product quality, although the general noise floor in electric
vehicles will be lower compared to conventional drive
concepts. Vehicle acoustics, sound design and NVH will
become even more imperative, whether for vehicles with a
combustion engine or for electric vehicles.
To meet the new challenges and tasks in the field of acoustic
comfort, advanced psychoacoustic analyses must be developed
to determine sensational phenomena adequately and make
them measurable at least to a certain extent. The mentioned
development tasks concern the interior as well as exterior
noise of vehicles with alternative drives.
REFERENCES
1. S. Bickerstaffe, “Electric dreams” in: Automotive
Engineer, July-August 2010, page 36-37, 2010.
2. EU White paper 2011: Roadmap to a Single European
Transport Area - Towards a competitive and resource
efficient transport system, 2011.
3. K. Genuit, A. Fiebig, “Vehicle Acoustics and Sound
Design in the Course of Time”, Automobiltechnische
Zeitschrift (ATZ), August, 2011.
4. M. Nobile, G. Bienvenue, “Procedure for determining the
prominence ratio of discrete tones in noise emissions”,
Noise-Con 1991, Tarrytown, New York, USA, 1991.
5. K. Genuit, “Particular Importance of Psychoacoustics for
Sound Design of Quiet Vehicles”, Internoise 2011, Osaka,
Japan, 2011.
6. J. Blauert, U. Jekosch, “Sound-quality evaluation – a
multi-layered problem”, Acustica & Acta Acustica 83,
Hirzel Verlag, 747-753, 1997.
7. R. Guski, “Psychological methods for evaluationg sound
quality and assessing acoustic information”, Acustica &
Acta Acustica 83, Hirzel Verlag, 765-774, 1997.
8. E.N.G. Verheijen, J. Jabben, “Effect of electric cars on
traffic noise and safety”, RIVM Letter Report, 2010.
9. W. R. Bray, “Behavior of psychoacoustic measurements
with time-varying signals”, Noise-Con 2007, Reno,
Nevada, USA, 2007.
10. K. Genuit, “The importance of psychoacoustics in the
USA – A personal view”, Internoise 2012, New York,
NY, USA, 2012.
11. K. Genuit, A. Fiebig, “Warning signals for quiet vehicles
– The conflict between noise and safety”, Automotive
Acoustics Conference, 1. International ATZ-Conference
with Autoneum, Zurich, Switzerland, 2011.
12. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), Dot HS 811204: Incidence of pedestrian and
bicyclist crashes by hybrid electric passenger cars,
Technical Report, September 2009, USA, 2009.
13. U. Sandberg, L. Goubert, P. Mioduszewski, “Are vehicles
driven in electric mode so quiet that they need acoustic
warning signals”, ICA 2010, Sydney, Australia, 2010.
14. Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act of 2010 (S. 841),
USA, 2010.
15. QRTV-1: Terms of Reference and Rules of Procedure for
the GRB informal group on Quiet Road Transport
Vehicles (QRTV). QRTV-01-02-e, ECE/WP29/GRB,
Geneva, Switzerland, 2010.
16. EU Research Project, “Acoustically Green Road Vehicles
and City Areas (CityHush)”, SCP8-GA-2009-233655,
2010-2012.
17. R. Sottek, A. Fiebig, S. Guidati, P. Marla, B. Philippen,
“Measuring and analyzing road traffic noise”, Euronoise
2012, Prague, Czech Republic, 2012.
18. A. Fiebig, P. Marla, “Auralization and psychoacoustic
analysis of virtual road traffic scenarios”, Proceedings of
the Institute of Acoustics & Belgium Acoustical Society,
Noise in the Built Environment, Ghent, Belgium, 2010.
19. K. Genuit, “Objective evaluation of acoustic quality based
on a relative approach”, Inter-Noise 1996, Proceedings,
Liverpool, UK, 1996.
20. A. Fiebig, S. Guidati, A. Goehrke, “The psychoacoustic
evaluation of traffic noise”, NAG, DAGA 2009,
Rotterdam, Netherlands, 2009.

CONTACT INFORMATION
Klaus.Genuit@HEAD-acoustics.de

Page 9 of 9

View publication stats