Minneapolis, Minnesota

NOISE-CON 2005
2005 October 17-19

Study of Noise Transmission from an Air Compressor

Subhro Nathak, Anand Puranik, Jeff Schut and Mohan D. Rao.
Michigan Technological University, Houghton, MI 49931, USA.
ssnathak@mtu.edu

1. INTRODUCTION
From 1997-1999, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) commissioned studies
specifically targeted at the construction occupation. These studies estimate that construction workers
are exposed to hazardous levels of noise and are therefore susceptible to hearing damage on a daily
basis [1, 2]. Also, these studies show that merely 15-30% of these workers use regular hearing
protection. Many workers do not use these precautions due to the fact that they feel the protection
can interfere with communication and are not very effective. In order to address the growing concern
of hearing impairment amongst the construction workers, the U.S. Department of Health and Human
Services has identified hearing loss in construction workers as a targeted research area. To counter
this issue in a proactive manner, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), has
been sponsoring undergraduate student projects that deal with noise reduction from various power
tools and construction equipments. The previous projects involved the study of noise transmission
from a table saw [3], electric router [4], pneumatic nail gun [5], impact wrench [6] and range of
other tools that can be accessed on the website of NIOSH [7].

This paper is the part of the above mentioned undergraduate student project and discusses the
reduction of noise from a Porter Cable four gallon, 135 psi air compressor, shown in Figure 1. This
is a typical air compressor indicative of those found not only on construction work sites but also in
home workshops. The compressor operates much like a small internal combustion engine having a
piston rod, a cylinder sleeve and valve head. The piston rod is driven by a G.E. two pole, 3450 RPM,
capacitor start induction motor, through an eccentric bearing [8]. To hold the compressed air, the
compressor has an air tank. A pressure gauge monitors the pressure in the tanks and shuts the motor
off upon reaching a certain pressure level.

The objectives of the research were to identify and rank the major sources of noise, implement
possible noise control measures and test their effectiveness by comparing the Sound Pressure Level
(SPL) measurements of the prototype with the baseline measurements.

2. TEST SET-UP AND EQUIPMENT

Several tests were conducted to determine the main source of noise and to verify the effectiveness of
the various noise control measures. All experimental testing referenced within this paper was done in
a reverberant chamber, in the Mechanical Engineering – Engineering Mechanics Department at
Michigan Technological University.
Noise Transmission from Porter-Cable Air Compressor Nathak, Puranik, Schut & Rao

The data acquisition system used to acquire all necessary data is shown in the Figure 2. The
01dB proprietary software used to record and analyze the data, was the DBFA32 program, version
4.532.
Before taking a measurement, the background noise was measured to ensure that the noise level
in each 1/3rd octave band was at least 10 dB below the measured sound pressure level. During the
test, the operator in the reverberant chamber holding the microphone, moved throughout the
chamber to acquire data in as many locations as possible. Another operator recorded the
measurements, outside the chamber, using 01 dB Symphonie set up. The data were recorded for 10
seconds. After each test run, the tanks on the compressor were drained off and the compressor was
allowed to cool for five minutes.

3. SOURCES OF NOISE GENERATION

To determine the main sources of noise, the audio signal for the complete air compressor in running
condition was recorded as mentioned in Section 2. Narrow band analysis, including One-Third
Octave and One-Twelfth Octave Band analysis of this signal was done, to determine both the sound
pressure and sound power levels.

A. One-Twelfth Octave Band Analysis

One-Twelfth Octave band analysis of the signal from the complete air compressor was done. The
SPL levels and the corresponding frequency values as shown in Figure 3 were used to further
pinpoint the actual sources of noise. The Table 1 shows the top three SPL values and their
corresponding frequencies. This was developed in order to converge upon the main cause of the
noise.

B. Sound Power measurement

Using the SPL values, the sound power levels were calculated for the air compressor using the
reverberant field Method [9]. In this method, an ILG fan with known power levels was used as a
known source. Since the environment was reverberant, the sound power was calculated using the
following equation (1), [10]:
Lw=Lp+10 log(a/4) (1)
where a= Room Absorption in m . The average ‘a’ of the reverberation room used was around 6 m2 .
2

The overall sound power of the compressor was about 103 dB.

C. Motor Speed and Piston Assembly

The motor shaft rotates at a speed of 3450 RPM i.e. 57.5 Hz. The rotary motion of the shaft is then
converted into reciprocating motion of the piston within the cylinder sleeve, through an eccentric
bearing, at the same frequency. Since the peak was observed at the frequency of 57 Hz, it was
concluded that the major source was either the motor or the reciprocating piston in the compression
assembly.

D. Comparative Study
To determine the exact source, the motor along with the piston assembly, was disconnected from the
mounting panel. The audio signal for this set up was recorded for further analysis. It was observed
that the SPL values in the 1/3rd octave band had a little or no variation from the values obtained for
the complete air compressor. Further, the piston assembly was disassembled from the motor, to

Noise-Con 2005, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 17-19, 2005

Noise Transmission from Porter-Cable Air Compressor Nathak, Puranik, Schut & Rao

record the noise generated from the motor. It was found that there was a significant reduction in the
Sound Pressure levels as shown in Figure 4, thereby, eliminating motor as a major source of noise.
Hence it was concluded that, the piston assembly was the main contributor for the noise
generation. Also, the fact that, the noise levels changed little when the motor along with the piston
assembly was disconnected from the panel showed that the contribution of the structural noise was
very less as compared to the airborne noise. This is also evident from the recorded peaks at higher
frequencies in the 1/12th octave band analysis.

4. NOISE CONTROL TREATMENTS

A. Possible Noise Control Techniques

Upon finding that the main source of noise originates from the piston assembly, several concepts
were developed to damp, isolate, re-route noise in this area.

1. Cork Gasket
The gasket made of cork is shown in Figure 5. The implementation of the cork gasket between the
cylinder sleeve and the housing was done to isolate and damp the vibrations generated by the piston.
This yielded little or no change in the overall SPL.

2. Nylon Compression Ring

Further investigation yielded the manufacture of a new compression ring made using nylon material.
The new ring had a slightly smaller diameter than that of the Original Equipment Manufacturer
(OEM) ring, creating slight less friction between it and the cylinder sleeve. The ring is shown in
Figure 6. The implementation of the nylon compression ring also yielded no significant decrease in
the overall SPL.

3. Silencer
A concept that was implemented and was successful at reducing overall SPL was a “silencer” that
redirected the cooling exhaust flow from the back of the piston assembly. This “silencer” as shown
in the Figure 7, directs the air along the top of the motor before finally exiting at the back of the
motor into the ground. The silencer consisted of thin press-board lined with fiberglass material,
shown in Figure 8(a), to absorb noise as the air moved along the path of the silencer. The initial
design of the silencer resulted in a 3dB reduction in overall SPL. This reduction was a step in the
right direction and lead to the implementation of a full enclosure of the piston assembly along with a
modified inlet shroud.

B. Final Implemented Solution

1. Enclosure
Using the concept of a silencer for the exhaust flow from the back of the piston assembly, a sizeable
noise reduction of approximately 3 dB was obtained. The next step to further reduce the noise
emitted was to build an enclosure around the piston assembly of the compressor. This was done to
mainly reduce the peak obtained at 57Hz and the higher frequency peaks due to airborne noise.

Noise-Con 2005, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 17-19, 2005

Noise Transmission from Porter-Cable Air Compressor Nathak, Puranik, Schut & Rao

2. Air path
For the effective implementation of an enclosure, the redirection of the cooling air from the fan was
necessary. The initial construction of the fan shroud was such that it would take in the air axially and
direct the air out from the top.

In order to use an enclosure and provide adequate cooling, the air path needed to be slightly
altered. Figure 7 shows the new redirected airflow path which draws the air in through the same
location as the original shroud. The air is then drawn over the cylinder head and finally exits
through the opening at the far side of the motor.

3. Materials and Manufacturing

For the effective implementation of the enclosure around the piston assembly, the use of various
materials for barrier and absorption was important due to the fact that the noise was primarily
airborne.
The process of building the enclosure is as listed below:
• Basic Enclosure: Plywood was used as a Barrier material. The interior of the enclosure was
lined with acoustic foam with hard rubber backing as shown in Figure 8(b) & 8(c).
• Expanding foam and caulk was used to seal any leaks, thereby ensuring a complete leak
proof enclosure.
• Due to the large leakage of sound resulting from the fan intake port, it was necessary to
completely remove the fan shroud from the compressor. Also, the concept of implementing a
silencer was used here. The length of the path for the air intake into the fan was increased,
via a 4’’ PVC pipe, which was lined with acoustic foam material with a hard rubber backing.

C. SPL measurements and comparative data

After the construction of the enclosure, SPL measurements were conducted. A comparative study, as
shown in Figure 9, was done from the sound pressure levels obtained from the compressor with the
silencer and that with the enclosure integrated with the silencer.

5. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION

The overall SPL with the implementation of the silencer was 98 dB and that with the complete
enclosure inclusive of the silencer was found to be about 94 dB. Hence, the overall noise level of the
air compressor was reduced by a significant amount with this treatment. The overall noise level of
the compressor (90dBA), is however, still high enough to be considered hazardous by OSHA
standards. The testing showed that the noise was mainly air-borne and was generated from the piston
assembly.
The use of nylon material as a compression ring was found to be unsuitable to withstand the
high temperatures generated within the cylinder and also the reduced diameter resulted in leakage
within the cylinder. However, a compression ring with lower stiffness, having the capacity to
withstand the high temperatures and having an optimum diameter would result in reduced friction.
Some concepts not implemented include a new piston with the rod and piston as two separate
pieces, adding a harmonic balancer to the crank and motor mounts with more damping. Though
these particular concepts were not tested within the scope of this project, these are recommended for
future work.

Noise-Con 2005, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 17-19, 2005

Noise Transmission from Porter-Cable Air Compressor Nathak, Puranik, Schut & Rao

To reduce the noise from air compressor to non hazardous levels, below 85 dBA, the
compressor would have to go through an extensive redesign. Hence, the enclosure with the
integrated silencer was the best possible alternative to lower the overall noise level of the air
compressor while still providing a significant noise reduction.

6. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The division of Applied Research and Technology of the National Institute for Occupational Safety
and Health (NIOSH) sponsored this project, with Chuck Hayden serving as the technical monitor.
Thanks are due to Tim Kapelanski, Lee Wells and Aaron Messenger who participated in this study.

REFERENCES
1. Alice H. Suter, “Construction Noise: Exposure, Effects, and the Potential for Remediation; A Review and
Analysis”. 2002. ElCosh. 14 April, 2005. <http://www.cdc.gov/elcosh/docs/d0100/d000054/d000054.html>
2. Daniel Ortiz. “Trainer Course in Construction Noise”. Georgia Institute of Technology, Professional Education.
14 April, 2005. <http://www.pe.gatech.edu/conted/servlet/edu.gatech.conted.course.ViewCourseDetails?
COURSE_ID=503>
3. M. J. Spruit, M.D. Rao,et al., “Noise Transmission Study of a Table Saw,” Proceedings of Noise-Con 2003,
June 2003, Cleveland, OH.
4. J. LaLonde, R.L. Pruse and M.D. Rao, “Study and Reduction of Noise from an Electric Router,” Proceedings of
Noise-Con 2004, July 2004, Baltimore, Maryland.
5. D.Hicks, K. Vu and M. D. Rao, “Study of Noise transmission from a Nail Gun,” Proceedings of Noise-Con
2003, June 2003, Cleveland, OH.
6. J. Markeino, R.Pruse, and M. D. Rao, “Study of Noise Transmission from an Impact Wrench,” Proceedings of
Noise-Con 2004, July 2004, Baltimore, MD.
7. NIOSH. “Workplace Solutions: College student Presentations”. NIOSH. 31 June, 2005.
<http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/noise/collegeStudents/studentpresentations.html >
8. “135 PSI, 4 Gal. Oil Free Side Stack”. 2005. Porter Cable. 14 April, 2004.
<http://www.porter-cable.com/index.asp?e=547&p=2583>
9. Mohan Rao, “Sound Power Estimation Equations”. 2005. Michigan Technological University. 18 April,
2005.<http://www.me.mtu.edu/courses/meem4704/soundpower.pdf>
10. H.A. Evensen, M.D. Rao, “Supplemental Notes to MEEM 4704 Acoustics and Noise Control” Houghton, MI:
Michigan Technological University, 2004.

Noise-Con 2005, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 17-19, 2005

Noise Transmission from Porter-Cable Air Compressor Nathak, Puranik, Schut & Rao

Microphone
Cable Processor Box Microphone
Cable
Preamplifier

PMCIA Card
Microphon
Windshield

Figure 1: The Compressor used in this Study Figure 2: Data Acquisition System
100

90

80
SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB)

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0
13 5
16 9
19 9
5
29
24
56
31
59
48
11
62
17
96
23
24
34

11 2
8
9
3
2
6
7
6
4
3
5
2
8
6
45
54
64
77
91

64
84
46
58
9
10
12
15
18
21
25
30
36
43
51
61
72
86
10
12
14
17
20
24
29
34
41
48
58
69
82
97

FREQUENCY (Hz)

Figure 3: Sound Pressure level of Complete Air Compressor- 1/12 Octave Band Analysis

Table 1: Rankings of Sound Pressure Levels-1/12 Octave Band Analysis

Ranking Frequency(Hz) SPL (dB) Source

1 57 91.1 Piston/Motor shaft
2 459 90.4 8th harmonic of the motor speed
3 1091 89.3 High Frequency air borne noise

Noise-Con 2005, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 17-19, 2005

 Noise Transmission from Porter-Cable Air Compressor Nathak, Puranik, Schut & Rao

ORIGINAL COMPRESSOR SPL (dB)

MOTOR ONLY WITHOUT PISTON ASSEMBLY MOUNTED NOT ON PANEL (dB)
MOTOR WITH PISTON AND CYLINDER SLEEVE ASSEMBLY MOUNTED NOT ON PANEL (dB)
120

100
SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB)

80

60

40

20

0
) A)
0 0 0 0 n
20 25 .5 40 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 000 250 600 000 500 150 000 000 300 000 00 50 00 00 (Li dB
31 1 1 1 2 2 3 4 5 6 8 10 12 16 20 L L (
SP SP
ll
FREQUENCY (Hz) ra all
ve ver
O O

Figure 4: Source Identification- A Comparative Study

Table 2: SPL for Major Sources

Original Compressor SPL (dB) Motor Only (dB) Motor with Piston Assembly (dB)

Overall (Lin) 101.5 71 100.6

Overall (dBA) 100.3 68.8 92.7

Silencer Enclosure

Figure 5: Cork Gasket Figure 6: Nylon

Compression Ring

Figure 7: Silencer and Enclosure

Noise-Con 2005, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 17-19, 2005

Noise Transmission from Porter-Cable Air Compressor Nathak, Puranik, Schut & Rao

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 8: (a) Fiber Glass. (b) Quarter-inch acoustic foam with rubber backing. (c) Half-inch acoustic
foam with rubber backing.

ORIGINAL COMPRESSOR SPL (dB) COMPRESSOR WITH SILENCER (dB)

COMPRESSOR WITH ENCLOSURE AND SILENCER (dB)
120

100
SOUND PRESSURE LEVEL (dB)

80

60

40

20

)
L in)
12 0

16 0
0
ra SP 00
00

50

00

00

00

50

00

00

00

10 0
.5

0
20

25

40

50

63

80

BA
00

50

00
10

12

16

20

25

31

40

50

63

80

0
31

SP (L
0
10

12

16

20

25

31

40

50

63

80

(d
O rall 20
L

FREQUENCY (Hz)
ll
ve
ve
O

Figure 9: Solutions for Noise Reduction-A Comparative Study

Table 3: Overall SPL, Loudness and Loudness Level

Original Compressor Compressor with Compressor with

exhaust shroud complete enclosure
Overall (Lin) 101.5 98 94.3
Overall (dBA) 100.3 94.5 89.3
Loudness (Sone) 130 87 48.7
Loudness level (Phon) 111 105 96

Noise-Con 2005, Minneapolis, Minnesota, October 17-19, 2005