#artificial sounds

SITC & Artificial Sounds presents..

PUCE MARY @ SHIBGBS in TORONTO june 17,2015

Today, we implement headphones to hear artificial sound; we turn on the TV to see what isn't so is it really unimaginable to think we may one day have artificial smell, feelings or tastes? Isn't this the only thing that tells us we are awake and conscious rather than dreaming? What if it can be faked more than it already is? Who can prove that which we now live in isn't fake?

Following on from my previous post about EU legislation potentially requiring electric cars to make artificial sounds, the Department for Transport has released a report which assesses the perceived safety risk from electric vehicles to visually impaired pedestrians.

I think the key findings of the report are as follows:

“The results of the practical measurements indicate that quiet ICE [internal combustion engine] vehicles generate comparable noise levels to E/HE [electric/hybrid electric] vehicles and furthermore, do not show any great distinction from E/HE vehicles in terms of spectral characteristics.”

The report rightly identifies that quietness is a problem common to both electric cars and some internal combustion engine cars, and that a noise level value is required to define ‘quiet’ irrespective of the vehicle type.

“Whilst the concerns of organisations associated with the vision-impaired are acknowledged, the results of the current study suggest that whilst there may be a potential risk to vision-impaired pedestrians from E/HE vehicles, particularly in urban environments, the scale of the problem is currently very small.”

However, the potential risk to visually-impaired pedestrians clearly increases when combined with the risk posed by quiet ICE vehicles, and may therefore warrant action. Various recommendations are presented in the report, but in terms of artificial sounds:

“The use of such added sounds should assist vision-impaired pedestrians in assessing the position of the vehicle, the direction of travel and the speed and behaviour. The sounds must be discernible under a wide range of background conditions, from quiet rural locations to busy urban environments as well as under adverse environmental conditions when wind/rain noise can potentially mask the noise of approaching traffic.”

“Careful consideration will be required if ‘added sound’ is to be used to improve the audibility of quiet vehicles. This will need to take into account the environments under which the vehicle is being used, the low speeds and the differing levels of background noise that might have to be overcome to prevent masking the audibility of the vehicle. This therefore makes moves to impose minimum noise limits on vehicles challenging.”

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration in the USA have recently announced they'll be evaluating new regulations designed to help pedestrians more easily detect quieter vehicles such as electric or hybrid cars, thereby improving road safety. The potential for similar legislation to be made by the EU was reported in the UK news in May.

Three things stand out to me about this issue:

1. Lethal?

“Electric and hydrogen fuel vehicles are inherently quiet. The sound of the tyres on the road is noisier than the engine and this could prove lethal at slow speeds for pedestrians and cyclists.”

BBC News

At speeds higher than 20 mph tyre noise is loud enough to make a vehicle heard, so although quieter vehicles might be more dangerous at slow speeds, I’m not sure the risk of death is as high as the article makes out. Consider too that the message from the government is ‘Speed Kills’.

2. What's that sound?

If the research by the EU commission concludes that quieter vehicles actually do increase the risk to pedestrian safety, then the likely solution will be a mandated introduction of forward facing speakers, built into electric and hybrid cars, to project artificial sounds.

“Each manufacturer may be permitted to provide its own “signature tune”, with the regulation simply setting a minimum volume to prevent pedestrians, cyclists and especially blind people from stepping into the path of battery-powered cars.”

Times Online

This suggests that there won’t be a generic electric car sound; instead each manufacturer will select a sound to match their brand and enhance the market appeal of their vehicles. Various sounds are being considered (see the BBC video for examples), and although a UFO style noise might be brilliant fun, upon hearing the low thrum of a spaceship I’d probably be more likely to look to the skies than the road... in other words, I think the sound should be intuitively attributable to a car. In fact for this very reason, the equivalent Japanese commission looking into this issue specifies a range of sounds that electric vehicles should NOT make, such as insects, waves or the wind.

You can evaluate the sounds made by the Elvin vehicle featured in the BBC video here.

3. Pump up the volume?

I also think that the EU legislation should go further than simply setting a minimum volume for the artificial sounds. I think the legislation should ensure that the artificial sounds help pedestrians and other road users:

Identify that the sound is coming from a vehicle (this is especially important for guide dog users, as the dogs are trained to react to the noises of vehicles).

Detect only a moving vehicle and not a stationary one (for example waiting at traffic lights).

Locate a vehicle in relation to them, and determine which direction it is travelling in.

Determine if a vehicle is speeding up or slowing down.