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

net/publication/344165381

A Good Practice Guide for Vibration Impact Assessment in the System of

Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) in Chile

Conference Paper · August 2020

CITATIONS READS

4 1,896

3 authors:

Nicolás Andrés Bastián Monarca Jorge P. Arenas

Universidad Austral de Chile
26 PUBLICATIONS 91 CITATIONS
161 PUBLICATIONS 2,007 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
SEE PROFILE

Camilo Padilla
Ministerio del Medio Ambiente
5 PUBLICATIONS 12 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Nicolás Andrés Bastián Monarca on 08 September 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

A Good Practice Guide for Vibration Impact Assessment in the
System of Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) in Chile

Nicolás A. Bastián-Monarca1
Acústica Austral, Medio Ambiente
Diego Portales 860, Puerto Montt, Chile

Jorge P. Arenas2
Instituto de Acústica, Universidad Austral de Chile.
PO Box 567, Valdivia, Chile.

Camilo Padilla3
Environmental Noise, Light Pollution and Odors Department
Ministry of Environment, Government of Chile
San Martín 73, Santiago, Chile.

ABSTRACT
Although Chile has set the limits to occupational exposure to vibration in the workplace,
there are no current standards on neither human exposure to nor building damage due to
environmental vibrations. It has been however a current practice to assess the vibration impacts
of major projects that are evaluated through the Chilean System of Environmental Impact
Assessment (SEIA) using international normative. In this context, the Chilean Environmental
Assessment Service (SEA), who oversees conducting environmental impact assessment
proceedings, has published in 2019 a methodological guidance for predicting and assessing the
noise and vibration impacts of projects proposed in the SEIA. In this sense, it has been usual to
look for guidance on the Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual of the Federal
Transit Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation. Nevertheless, this manual is
not always the best option to perform a correct vibration impact assessment. Thus, this paper
reports a review of the major environmental vibration standards, with recommendations for
use in practical cases for predicting and assessing vibration impacts of proposed projects.

1. INTRODUCTION

It is well known that environmental vibration assessments generally consider two main factors:
building damage risk and human response. These factors are linked because people's sensitivity to
vibration in a building can be exacerbated by their concern over damage to the building. The most

1
nbastian@acusticaustral.cl
2
jparenas@uach.cl
3
cpadilla@mma.gob.cl
prevalent sources of environmental vibration are associated with construction activities, blasting (for
construction or quarrying purposes), and transportation (i.e., road and rail traffic) [1].
This paper has been prompted by the fact that Chile has no current environmental vibration
standards. It has been, however, a current practice to assess the vibration impacts of major projects
that are evaluated using international normative through the Chilean System of Environmental Impact
Assessment (SEIA). In this context, the Chilean Environmental Assessment Service (SEA) that
oversees the environmental impact assessment proceedings, has published in 2019 a methodological
guidance for predicting and assessing the noise and vibration impacts of projects proposed in the
SEIA [2]. In this sense, it has been usual to look for guidance on the Transit Noise and Vibration
Impact Assessment Manual of the Federal Transit Administration of the U.S. Department of
Transportation (just FTA from this point forward) [3]. Nevertheless, this manual is not always the
best option to perform a correct vibration impact assessment. In addition, previous studies [4] have
concluded that the assessment problem is complex since contradictory recommendations can be
provided by the guidelines, both for human exposition and for the effects on structures. Therefore,
several relevant international vibrations standards have been reviewed. The criteria and
methodologies in these standards have been assessed to determine a current and practicable suite of
standards that may be recommended for adoption in Chile.

2. ENVIRONMENTAL VIBRATIONS STANDARDS

There are several standards concerning human response to vibration and building damage risk. In this
sense, the SEA defines the following standards for predicting and assessing the noise and vibration
impacts of those projects proposed in the SEIA.

Table 1: Environmental vibrations standards for predicting and assessing the noise and
vibration impacts of projects proposed in the SEIA [2].
Vibration Human Building
Standard Country
source response damage
BS 5228-2 [5] United Kingdom Construction x x
BS 6472-2 [6] United Kingdom Blasting x
BS 7385-2 [7] United Kingdom Blasting x
United States of
FTA [3] Transit and construction x x
America
United States of
Caltrans [8] Transit and construction x x
America
Machinery (continuous
ANSI S3.29 [9] International x
vibration)
DIN 4150-2 [10] Germany All kind of sources x
DIN 4150-3 [11] Germany All kind of sources x
United States of
USBM RI 8507 [12] Blasting x
America
AS 2187-2 [13] Australia Blasting x x

Based on previous studies that have reviewed several international environmental vibrations
standards for their application in New Zealand [1] and the fact that in Chile it has been usual to use
the FTA [3], in this work the following standards are reviewed. It is important to highlight that
blasting standards were not studied.
• British Standard BS 5228:2009 [5].
• German Standard DIN 4150-3:2016 [11].
 • FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual [3].
• Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual [8].

2.1. BS 5228-2:2009
The British Standard BS 5228-2:2009 “Code of practice for noise and vibration control on
construction and open sites – part 2: Vibration” [5] is a comprehensive and voluminous standard
covering many aspects of prediction, measurement, assessment and control of vibration from
construction works.
In terms of vibration criteria, this standard contains references to and reiterates the criteria from
BS 6472-1:2008 (human response) [6] and BS 7385-1:1990 (building damage) [7].
However, Annex B of the Standard addresses the human and structural responses to construction
vibration and suggests that BS 6472 may not be appropriate. In this sense, the following tables show
the vibration criteria for both human and structural response to vibration.

Table 2: Guidance on the effects of vibration levels in terms of human perception and
disturbance [5].
Vibration level
Effect
(PPV) (mm/s)
Vibration might just be perceptible in the most sensitive situations for most
0.14 vibration frequencies associated with construction. At lower frequencies, people
are less sensitive to vibration
0.3 Vibration might just be perceptible in residential environments
It is likely that vibration of this level in residential environments will cause
1.0 complaint, but can be tolerated if prior warning and explanation has been given
to residents
Vibration is likely to be intolerable for any more than a very brief exposure to
10
this level

Table 3: Transient vibration guide values for cosmetic damage [5].

Peak component particle velocity (PPV) in
Type of building frequency range of predominant pulse
4 to 15 Hz 15 Hz and above
Reinforced or framed structures
50 mm/s at 4Hz and above
Industrial and heavy commercial buildings
Unreinforced or light framed structures* 15 mm/s at 4 Hz 20 mm/s at 15 Hz
increasing to 20 increasing to 50 mm/s at
Residential or light commercial buildings*
mm/s at 15 Hz 40 Hz and above
Note: Values referred to are at the base of the building.
* For this type of buildings at frequencies below 4Hz, a maximum displacement of 0.6 mm (zero to peak) is
not to be exceeded.

The use of PPV is a pragmatic approach to construction vibration assessment and the criteria in
Table 2 are considered suitable for the assessment of human response to construction vibration
effects. Furthermore, the criteria have a reasonable correlation with DIN 4150-3:2016 [11] in terms
of the level of expected concern regarding building damage.
It is noted that the primary issue relating to construction vibration is the damage to buildings and
although people may become concerned at levels above 1 mm/s (PPV), in the context of a project,
this effect can be managed through communication with concerned residents and other mitigation
strategies outlined in the project’s construction management plan.

2.2. DIN 4150-3:2016

The use of German Standard DIN 4150-3 “Structural vibration – Part 3: Effects of vibration on
structures” [11] adopts the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) metric and gives guidelines values which,
“when complied with, will not result in damage that will have an adverse effect on the structure’s
serviceability”.
The guideline values are different depending on the vibration source and are separated based on
short-term and long-term vibration. The standard defines short-term vibration as “vibration which
does not occur often enough to cause structural fatigue, and which does not produce resonance in the
structure being evaluated”. Long-term vibration is defined as all other types of vibration not covered
by the definition of short-term vibration.
In general, the short-term vibration definition would be applied to activities which follow the form
of a single shock followed by a period of rest such as blasting, drop hammer pile-driving (i.e., non-
vibratory), dynamic consolidation, etc. All other construction activities would be considered long-
term. Traffic may be categorized as either, depending on the nature of the vibration (i.e., vibration
from consistent (but rough) road surface may be long-term, whereas a road with a bump in the
pavement may generate a short-term vibration event).
The criteria for short-term and long-term vibration activities, as received by different building
types, are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4: Summary of Building Damage criteria in DIN 4150-3:2016 [11].

Short-term vibration Long-term vibration
Type of PPV (mm/s) at the foundation at a PPV (mm/s) at horizontal plane of highest
Structure Frequency of floor
1-10 Hz 10-50 Hz 50-100 Hz At any frequency At any frequency
Commercial,
20 20-40 40-50 40 10
Industrial
Residential,
5 5-15 15-20 15 5
School
Historic, Sensitive 3 3-8 8-10 8 2.5

The standard also contains criteria for buried pipework of different materials and the effects of
vibration on floor serviceability, as well as guidelines for measurement of vibration in buildings (i.e.,
placement and orientation of the transducers). It should be noted that these criteria are designed to
avoid superficial damage to buildings (i.e., cracking in plaster). Significantly greater limits would be
applied for damage to structural foundations.

2.3. FTA
The use of the “Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual” of the Federal Transit
Administration of the U.S. Department of Transportation [3] is common in Chile. Topics presented
in this manual include procedures for predicting and assessing noise and vibration impacts of
proposed transit projects for different stages of project development and different levels of analysis.
Additional topics include descriptions of noise and vibration mitigation measures, construction noise
and vibration, among others. This manual also adopts the Peak Particle Velocity (PPV) metric for
building damage and the Vibration Velocity Level (Lv) in VdB, with a RMS velocity amplitude of
reference vref of 1  10-6 in/s for human response.
The FTA vibration impact analysis process is a multi-step process used to evaluate a project for
potential vibration impacts. If the impact is determined, measures necessary to mitigate adverse
impacts are to be considered for incorporation into the project. It is not possible to describe in detail
the multi-step process used to evaluate a project, nevertheless, the impact criteria for the different
types of assessment are presented.

Table 5: Indoor Ground-Borne Vibration (GBV) and Ground-Borne Noise (GBN) Impact
Criteria for General Vibration Assessment [3].
GBV Impact Levels GBN Impact Levels
Land Use (VdB, re: 1 -inch/s) (dBA, re: 20  Pa)
Category Frequent Occasional Infrequent Frequent Occasional Infrequent
Events Events Events Events Events Events
Category 1 65 VdB* 65 VdB* 65 VdB* N/A** N/A** N/A**
Category 2 72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB 35 dBA 38 dBA 43 dBA
Category 3 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB 40 dBA 43 dBA 48 dBA
* This criterion limit is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as
optical microscopes. For equipment that is more sensitive, a Detailed Vibration Analysis must be performed.
** Vibration-sensitive equipment is generally not sensitive to ground-borne noise; however, the
manufacturer’s specifications should be reviewed for acoustic and vibration sensitivity.

Sensitive land use categories for vibration assessment are presented in Table 6. In addition, event
frequency definitions are the following:
• Frequent Events: More than 70 events per day (most rapid transit).
• Occasional Events: 30-70 events per day (most commuter trunk lines).
• Infrequent Events: Fewer than 30 events per day (most commuter rail branch lines).
The criteria for ground-borne vibration and noise for special land uses are also presented in Table 7.
There are also specific vibration impact criteria for Detailed Vibration Analysis, based in
international and industry standards [14, 15]. For more detail see section 6.2 of the Manual.
In addition, the Manual assesses potential damage effects from construction vibration for each
piece of equipment individually, according to Table 8.

Table 6: Land Use Categories for General Vibration Assessment Impact Criteria [3].
Land Use Land Use
Description of Land Use Category
Category Type
This category includes special-use facilities that are extremely
sensitive to vibration and noise that are not included in the categories
Special below and require special consideration. However, if the building will
-
Buildings rarely be occupied when the source of vibration (e.g., the train) is
operating, there is no need to evaluate for impact. Examples of these
facilities include concert hall, TV and recording studios, and theatres
This category includes buildings where vibration levels would
interfere with operations within the building. Examples include
buildings where vibration-sensitive research and manufacturing* is
conducted, hospitals with vibration-sensitive equipment, and
High universities conducting physical research operations.
1
Sensitivity Equipment moderately sensitive to vibration, such as high-resolution
lithographic equipment, optical microscopes, and electron
microscopes with vibration isolation systems are included in this
category**. For equipment that is more sensitive, a Detailed Vibration
Analysis must be conducted.
This category includes all residential land use and buildings where
2 Residential
people normally sleep, such as hotels and hospitals.
 Land Use Land Use
Description of Land Use Category
Category Type
This category includes institutions and offices that have vibration-
sensitive equipment and have the potential for activity interference
such as schools, churches, doctors’ offices. Commercial or industrial
3 Institutional
locations including office buildings are not included in this category
unless there is vibration-sensitive activity or equipment within the
building.
* Manufacturing of computer chips is an example of a vibration-sensitive process.
** Standard optical microscopes can be impacted at vibration levels below the threshold of human annoyance.

Table 7: Indoor Ground-Borne Vibration (GBV) and Ground-Borne Noise (GBN) for Special
Buildings [3].
GBV Impact Levels GBN Impact Levels
Type of (VdB, re: 1 -inch/s) (dBA, re: 20 Pa)
Building or Occasional or Occasional or
Frequent Frequent
Room Infrequent Infrequent
Events Events
Events Events
Concert halls 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA
TV studios 65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA
Recording
65 VdB 65 VdB 25 dBA 25 dBA
studios
Auditoriums 72 VdB 80 VdB 30 dBA 38 dBA
Theatres 72 VdB 80 VdB 35 dBA 43 dBA

Table 8: Construction Vibration Damage Criteria [3].

PPV
Building/Structural Category Approximate Lv*
(inch/s)
I. Reinforced-concrete, steel or timber (no plaster) 0.5 102
II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98
III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 94
IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 90
*RMS velocity in decibels, VdB, reference: 1 -inch/s.

Also, the FTA has a practical approach to evaluate transit and rail vibration with the Vibration
Screening Procedure. Figure 1 show a flow chart of the process.

2.4. CALTRANS
The transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual [8] provides practical guidance
to Caltrans engineers, planners, and consultants who must address vibration issues associated with
the construction, operation, and maintenance of California Department of Transportation (just
Caltrans from this point forward) projects. The guidance and procedures provided in this manual
should be treated as screening tools for assessing the potential for adverse effects related to human
perception and structural damage. Based in different studies [16-19], The following table show the
guideline vibration damage potential threshold criteria and guideline vibration annoyance potential
criteria
 Figure 1: Flow chart of the vibration screening process described by the FTA [3].

Table 9: Guideline for vibration damage potential threshold and the annoyance potential
criteria [8].
Maximum PPV (inch/s)
Transient Continuous/frequent
Structure and condition
sources Intermittent sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient
0.12 0.08
monuments
Fragile buildings 0.2 0.1
Historic and some old buildings 0.5 0.25
Older residential structures 0.5 0.3
New residential structures 1.0 0.5
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.0 0.5
Human response
Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly perceptible 0.9 0.10
Severe 2.0 0.4
Note: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls.
Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-
and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.

3. PREDICTION OF VIBRATION LEVELS

The prediction of vibration levels is fundamental for the projects that are evaluated through the
Chilean System of Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA). In this sense, Caltrans [8] gives a
complete set of equations for different types of construction equipment related to Damage Assessment
and also it is more realistic for predict potential impacts of vibration because it has different values
bases on soil type. Thus, Caltrans method is presented in this work.
3.1. Damage assessment
A wide variety of impact and vibratory pile driving hammers are used for driving or extracting
various types of piles. Commonly used types of pile drivers are Drop hammer, Pneumatic hammer,
Diesel hammer, Hydraulic hammer, and Vibratory pile driver.
The rated energies of most pile drivers are in the range of about 20,000-300,000 foot-pounds (ft-
lb). One exceptionally large driver, the Vulcan 6300, has rated energy of 1,800,000 ft-lb. Smaller
drivers have rated energies as low as 300 ft-lb [20].
For vibration amplitudes produced by impact pile drivers, an extensive review of the available
literature [3, 18−25] and information provided by manufacturers [26−29] indicates that the PPV from
impact pile drivers can be estimated by the following equation:
0.5
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝐼𝑚𝑝𝑎𝑐𝑡 𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝐷𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟 = 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑅𝑒𝑓 (25⁄𝐷)𝑛 (𝐸𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑝 ⁄𝐸𝑅𝑒𝑓 ) (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ/𝑠), (1)
where:
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 0.65 inch/s for a reference pile driver at 25 ft.
𝐷 = distance from pile driver to the receiver (ft).
𝑛 = 1.1 is a value related to the vibration attenuation rate through the ground.
𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 36000 ft-lb (rated energy of reference pile driver).
𝐸𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑝 = rated energy of impact pile driver (ft-lb).
Literature indicates that the value of “n” is generally in the range 1−1.5. The suggested value for
n is 1.1. The use of values greater than 1.1 would likely result in the overestimation of amplitudes at
distances closer than 25 ft and would be slightly conservative at distances beyond 25 ft. However, the
values of “n” are based on soil type classification, according to Table 11.
On the other hand, based on review of the available literature [18, 22−24] and the information
provided by ICE [27−29], vibration amplitudes produced by vibratory pile drivers can be estimated
by the following equation:
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑉𝑖𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑦 𝑃𝑖𝑙𝑒 𝐷𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟 = 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑅𝑒𝑓 (25⁄𝐷)𝑛 (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ/𝑠), (2)
where:
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 0.65 inch/s for a reference pile driver at 25 ft,
𝐷 = distance from pile driver to the receiver (ft),
𝑛 = 1.1 is a value related to the vibration attenuation rate through the ground.

Table 11: Measured and Suggested “n” Values Based on Soil Class [8].
Value of “n” Suggested
Soil
Description of Soil Material measured Value of
Class
[30] “n”
Weak or soft soils: loose soils, dry or partially
saturated peat and muck, mud, loose beach sand, and
Data not
I dune sand, recently plowed ground, soft spongy forest 1.4
available
or jungle floor, organic soils, topsoil (shovel penetrates
easily).
Competent soils: most sands, sandy clays, silty clays,
II 1.5 1.3
gravel, silts, weathered rock (can dig with shovel).
 Value of “n” Suggested
Soil
Description of Soil Material measured Value of
Class
[30] “n”
Hard soils: dense compacted sand, dry consolidated
III clay, consolidated glacial till, some exposed rock 1.1 1.1
(cannot dig with shovel, need pick to break up).
Hard, competent rock: bedrock, freshly exposed hard Data not
IV 1.0
rock (difficult to break with hammer). available

In addition, the vibration produced by hydraulic breakers can be estimated by the following
formula:
0.5
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝐻𝑦𝑑𝑟𝑎𝑢𝑙𝑖𝑐 𝑏𝑟𝑒𝑎𝑘𝑒𝑟𝑠 = 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑅𝑒𝑓 (25⁄𝐷)𝑛 (𝐸𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑝 ⁄𝐸𝑅𝑒𝑓 ) (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ/𝑠), (3)
where:
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 0.24 inch/s for a reference pile driver at 25 ft,
𝐷 = distance from pile driver to the receiver (ft),
𝑛 = 1.1 is a value related to the vibration attenuation rate through the ground,
𝐸𝑟𝑒𝑓 = 5000 ft-lb (rated energy of reference hydraulic breaker),
𝐸𝑒𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑝 = rated energy of hydraulic breaker (ft-lb).
The suggested value for “n” is 1.1 for both Eqs. (2) and (3). If desired, and if soil information is
available, the value of “n” may be changed to reflect the soil type classification.
The vibration produced by other construction equipment can also be estimated by the following
formula:
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝐸𝑞𝑢𝑖𝑝𝑚𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑅𝑒𝑓 (25⁄𝐷)𝑛 (𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ/𝑠), (4)
where:
𝑃𝑃𝑉𝑟𝑒𝑓 = reference PPV at 25 ft (inch/s),
𝐷 = distance from pile driver to the receiver (ft),
𝑛 = 1.1 is a value related to the vibration attenuation rate through the ground.
Related to data of PPV of equipment, the FTA [3] provide a reasonable estimate for a wide range
of soil conditions [21, 23, 24, 31].
It is important to highlight that FTA uses Eq. (4) to apply the propagation adjustment to the source
reference level to account for the distance from the equipment to the receiver with an “n” value of
1.5. The equation is based on point sources with normal propagation conditions [3].
In addition, BS 5228-2 gives a summary of historic case history data on vibration levels measured
during different construction activities. In this sense, this base has 170 different types of equipment
with PPV data (in fact they can be used in the equations presented before), so it is much more
complete than the data given by FTA [3]. For more detail see Annex C of BS 5228-2 [5].

Table 12: Vibration Source Levels for Construction Equipment [3].

PPV at 25 ft Approximate
Equipment
(inch/s) Lv* at 25 ft
upper range 1.518 112
Pile Driver (impact)
typical 0.644 104
upper range 0.734 105
Pile Driver (sonic)
typical 0.17 93
Clam shovel drop (slurry wall) 0.202 94
Hydromill (slurry wall) in soil 0.008 66
 PPV at 25 ft Approximate
Equipment
(inch/s) Lv* at 25 ft
in rock 0.017 75
Vibratory Roller 0.21 94
Hoe Ram 0.089 87
Large bulldozer 0.089 87
Caisson drilling 0.089 87
Loaded trucks 0.076 86
Jackhammer 0.035 79
Small bulldozer 0.003 58
*RMS velocity in decibels, VdB, reference: 1 -inch/s
Note: The approximate RMS vibration velocity levels were calculated from the PPV limits using a crest
factor of 4, representing a PPV-rms difference of 12 dB. This crest factor it is the same that Caltrans use for
random ground vibration such as vibration from trains. For vibration from pile driving and other impact
sources, the crest factor cannot be readily defined because it depends on the averaging time of the RMS
measurement [8].

3.2. Annoyance assessment

Based on the guidelines of the FTA [3], assess for annoyance for each piece of equipment
individually. Ground-borne vibration associated with human annoyance is related to RMS velocity
levels, expressed in VdB. The vibration level (Lv) can be estimated using the following formula:
𝐷
𝐿𝑣 = 𝐿𝑣𝑟𝑒𝑓 − 30 log (25), (5)
where:
𝐿𝑣 = the RMS velocity level adjusted for distance (VdB),
𝐿𝑣𝑟𝑒𝑓 = the source reference vibration level at 25 ft (VdB),
𝐷 = distance from the source to the receiver (ft).
It is important to highlight that DIN 4150-1 [32] gives equations to estimate the amplitude of the
vibration velocity. However, it is more practical the methods given by FTA [3] and Caltrans [8]
because they also included data of vibrations levels of different types of equipment. Thus, FTA and
Caltrans equations were presented in this work.
Also, BS 5228-2 [5] gives empirical predictors for ground-borne vibration arising from
mechanized construction works. These formulas are much more complex than the formulas given by
Caltrans and further analysis is needed to do a comparative analysis between predictions vibration
levels with BS 5228-2 and Caltrans.

4. GUIDE FOR VIBRATION IMPACT ASSESSMENT IN THE SEIA IN CHILE

Related to the vibration impact criteria and prediction of vibration levels, the use of the following
standards is recommended:
• FTA for human response to traffic and rail vibration.
• British Standard BS 5228:2009 and Caltrans for human response and building damage risk to
construction vibration.
• German Standard DIN 4150-3:2016 as vibration impact criteria for building damage risk
relating to all vibration sources.
• In case that a project has fragile historic buildings has receivers, it is recommended to use
Caltrans or DIN 4150-3:2016 for building damage risk, because these standards are stricter than BS
5228:2009 for that kind of building.
 It is also important to highlight that BS 5228:2009 and FTA has data of PPV levels of different
types of construction equipment, so they help predict vibration levels of construction sites. Moreover,
Caltrans prediction method uses the same crest factor has FTA, so it is easy to use de data of FTA
with the method of Caltrans for predicting vibration levels.

5. CONCLUSIONS

Four different standards were studied for their application to Projects that are evaluated through
the Chilean System of Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA). A few recommendations for use
in practical cases for predicting and assessing vibration impacts have been proposed. In this sense,
the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual is recommended for assessing and
predicting vibration impact criteria for human response to traffic and rail vibration. The British
Standard BS 5228:2009 and Caltrans are recommended for assessing and predicting vibration impact
criteria for both human response and building damage risk to construction work while the German
Standard DIN 4150-3 is recommended for all kind of sources when only the assessment of the
building damage risk is needed. Future challenges include 1) a comparative analysis of the predicted
vibration levels between BS 5228-2 and Caltrans, 2) on-site vibration measurements to examine
which recommendations (FTA or BS 5228-2) are more suitable to the reality of Chile, and 3) a
comparative analysis of predicted and measured vibration levels during construction works.

6. REFERENCES

[1] Whitlock, J., “A Review of the Adoption of International Vibration Standards in New Zealand”,
New Zealand Acoustics 24/2, 2011.
[2] Servicio de Evaluación Ambiental (SEA), “Guía Para la Predicción y Evaluación de Impactos por
Ruido y Vibración en el SEIA”, Gobierno de Chile, 2019.
[3] U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Transit Administration (FTA), “Transit Noise and
Vibration Impact Assessment Manual”, FTA Report No. 0123, 2018.
[4] G. Kouroussis, C. Conti and O. Verlinden, “Building vibrations induced by human activities: a
benchmark of existing standards”, Mechanics & Industry 15, 345-353, 2014.
[5] British Standards Institute (BSI), “BS 5228-2:2009 Code of practice for noise and vibration
control on construction and open sites – Part 2: Vibration”, 2009.
[6] British Standards Institute (BSI), “BS 6472-1:2008 “Guide to evaluation of human exposure to
vibration in buildings – Part 1: Vibration sources other than blasting”, 2008.
[7] British Standards Institute (BSI), “BS 7385-1:1990 Evaluation and measurement for vibration in
buildings – Part 1. Guide for measurement of vibration and evaluation of their effects on buildings”,
1990.
[8] California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), “Transportation and Construction Vibration
Guidance Manual”, Report No CT-HWANP-RT-20-365.01.01, 2020.
[9] American National Standard Institute (ANSI), “ANSI S3.29-1983 (R2001) American National
Standard Guide to the Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration in Buildings”, 2001.
[10] Deutsches Institute für Normung (DIN), “DIN 4150-2:1999 Structural vibration – Part 2: Human
exposure to vibration in buildings”, 1999.
[11] Deutsches Institute für Normung (DIN), “DIN 4150-3:2016 Structural Vibration – Part 3: Effects
of vibration on structures”, 2016.
[12] U.S. Bureau of Mines (USBM), “Report of Investigation (RI) 8507 Structure Response and
Damage Produced by Ground Vibration from Surface Mine Blasting”, Washington, D.C., 1980.
[13] Australia Standards (AS), “AS 2187-2:2006 Explosives – Storage and use – Part 2: Use of
explosives”, 2006.
[14] U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Railroad Administration, “High-Speed Ground
Transportation Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment”, DOT/FRA/ORD-12/15, 2012.
 [15] J.T. Nelson, H.J. Saurenman and G.P. Wilson, “Handbook of Urban Rail Noise and Vibration
Control”, Prepared under contract to U.S./DOT Transportation Systems Center, Report No. UMTA-
MA-06-0099-82-2, 1982.
[16] Reiher, H. and F.J. Meister, “The effects of vibration on people” Forshung auf dem Gebeite der
Ingenieurwesens 2 (2), 1931.
[17] Whiffen, A.C., “A survey of traffic-induced vibrations (Report LR419”, Crowthorne, Berkshire,
England: United Kingdom Department of Environment, Road Research Laboratory, 1971.
[18] J.F. Wiss, “Vibration during construction operations”, Journal of the Geotechnical Division 100
(CO3):239-246, 1974.
[19] C.H. Dowding, “Construction vibrations”, Prentice-Hall. Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1996.
[20] R.D. Woods, “Dynamic effects of pile installations on adjacent structures (Synthesis of Highway
Practice 253)”, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, 1997.
[21] D.J. Martin, “Ground vibrations from impact pile driving during road construction
(Supplementary Report 544)”, London: United Kingdom Department of Environment, Department
of Transport, Transport and Research Road Laboratory, 1980.
[22] W.C. Wood and J.R. Theissen, “Variations in adjacent structures due to pile driving”, Pages 83-
107 in H.W. Hunt (ed), Geopile Conference 82: San Francisco, 1982.
[23] J.F. Wiss, “Damage effects of pile driving vibration”, Pages 14-20 in Structural Construction:
Five Reports (Highway Research Record 155), Washington, DC, 1967.
[24] J.F. Wiss, “Construction vibrations: state-of-the-art”, Journal of the Geotechnical Division
107(GT2):167-181, 1981.
[25] C.J. Schexnayder and J.E. Ernzen, “Mitigation of nighttime construction noise, vibration, and
other nuisances (Synthesis of Highway Practice 218)”, Washington, DC: National Academy Press,
1999.
[26] M. Preston, “Information provided by American Piledriving, Inc”, 2002.
[27] R.S. Morris, “Surface vibration measurements for vibratory pile drivers”, Tests conducted by
International Construction Equipment (ICE), 1991.
[28] R.S. Morris, “Letter dated June 20”, 1996
[29] R.S. Morris, “Letter dated April 2”, 1997.
[30] R.S. Woods and L.P. Jedele, “Energy-attenuation relationships from construction vibrations”,
Pages 187-202 in G. Gazetas and E.T. Selig (eds.), Vibration Problems in Geotechnical Engineering:
Proceedings of a Symposium, Sponsored by the Geotechnical Engineering Division, in conjunction
with the American Society of Civil Engineers Convention, Detroit, MI, 1985.
[31] U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, “Highway Construction
Noise Handbook”, FHWA-HEP-06-015, 2006.
[32] Deutsches Institute für Normung (DIN), “DIN 4150-1:2001 Structural Vibration – Part 1:
Prediction of vibration parameters”, 2001.

View publication stats