Enhancing maximum measurable sound reduction index using sound intensity method and strong receiving room absorption.
The sound intensity method is usually recommended instead of the pressure method in the presence of strong flanking transmission. Especially when small and/or heavy specimens are tested, the flanking often causes problems in laboratories practicing only the pressure method. The purpose of this study was to determine experimentally the difference between the maximum sound reduction indices obtained by the intensity method, RI,max, and by the pressure method, Rmax. In addition, the influence of adding room absorption to the receiving room was studied. The experiments were carried out in an ordinary two-room test laboratory. The exact value of RI,max was estimated by applying a fitting equation to the measured data points. The fitting equation involved the dependence of the pressure-intensity indicator on measured acoustical parameters. In an empty receiving room, the difference between RI,max and Rmax was 4-15 dB, depending on frequency. When the average reverberation time was reduced from 3.5 to 0.6 s, the values of RI,max increased by 2-10 dB compared to the results in the empty room. Thus, it is possible to measure wall structures having 9-22 dB better sound reduction index using the intensity method than with the pressure method. This facilitates the measurements of small and/or heavy specimens in the presence of flanking. Moreover, when new laboratories are designed, the intensity method is an alternative to the pressure method which presupposes expensive isolation structures between the rooms.
Hongisto
V
V
Turku Regional Institute of Occupational Health, Laboratory of Ventilation and Acoustics, Finland. valtteri.hongisto@occuphealth.fi
Lindgren
M
M
Keränen
J
J
D002028:Building Codes; D003252:Construction Materials; D004779:Environment Design; D006801:Humans; D008962:Models, Theoretical; D009622:Noise / Q000517:prevention & control*; D013018:Sound Spectrography