Prediction tools for airborne sound insulation

116 Pages·2006·2.12 MB·English

Prediction tools for
airborne sound insulation
-evaluation and application
Master’s Thesis in the Master’s programme in
Sound and Vibrations
Jason Esan Cambridge
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Division of Applied Acoustics
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Go(cid:127)teborg, Sweden
Master’s Thesis 2006:65

MASTER’S THESIS 2006:65
Prediction tools for
airborne sound insulation
-evaluation and application
Master’s Thesis in the Master’s programme in Sound and Vibrations
JASON ESAN CAMBRIDGE
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Division of Applied Acoustics
Vibroacoustics Group
CHALMERS UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY
Go(cid:127)teborg, Sweden 2006
Prediction tools for airborne sound insulation- evaluation and application.
c Jason Esan Cambridge, 2006
(cid:13)
Master’s Thesis 2006:65
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Division of Applied Acoustics
Vibroacoustics Group
Chalmers University of Technology
SE-41296 Go(cid:127)teborg
Sweden
Tel. [phone]
Cover: Transmission loss of a single panel in a di(cid:11)use (cid:12)eld.
Reproservice / Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Go(cid:127)teborg, Sweden 2006
Prediction tools for airborne sound insulation- evaluation and application.
Master’s Thesis in the Master’s programme in Sound and Vibration
Jason Esan Cambridge
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering
Division of Applied Acoustics
Vibroacoustics Group
Chalmers University of Technology
Abstract
In both building and room acoustics, the ability to predict how sound insulation will
a(cid:11)ect the sound level and quality in rooms is a crucial technique that is needed, that
saves both time and money. As a result, over the past couple decades many sound
insulation programs such as Insul, Bastian, ENC, Reduct and Win(cid:13)ag have been
designed to increase both the e(cid:14)ciency and accuracy of these predictions. Most,
if not all of these top quality programs on the market are based on very speci(cid:12)c
international standards (ISO), and/or other local national standards as well as the
theoretical pioneering works of authors such as Cremer, Maidanik and others. Con-
sequently, di(cid:11)erentsoundinsulationprogramsonthemarkethavedi(cid:11)erentfunctions
and are based on di(cid:11)erent theoretical approaches and assumptions. As a result, one
should be aware of the theoretical de(cid:12)nitions, assumptions, as well as the limitations
of the di(cid:11)erent programs if one desires to reproduce accurate results while using.
Part I of this document outlines some of the fundamental de(cid:12)nitions, assumptions
and theories that are used by some of these programs. While part II describes a
process of how these programs can be used while trying to design a silent room.
The results from this investigation show, that even though all of the programs are
based on well established theories the accuracy and the reliability of each program
varies. The programs are ranked according to their performance. From this, the
combination of Bastian and Insul together seemed to be the most reliable when
trying to model the sound insulation between two adjacent rooms. Two case studies
are presented. The (cid:12)rst validates the accuracy of using both Bastian and Insul in
combination with each other, while trying to predict the sound insulation between
two adjacent classrooms. While the second, shows the importance of understanding
the theoretical basis of these programs as the predictions made within Bastian are
manipulated in order to meet the standards required when converting an ordinary
classroom into a music room. The results show that it is possible to use these
programs when trying to design a silent room.
Keywords: Sound insulation, Silent room, Sound insulation programs, Bastian,
Win(cid:13)ag, Insul, ENC, Reduct.
iv
v
Acknowledgments
The completion of this thesis represents the end of a seven year journey which
began in 1999 when I left my country (Trinidad and Tobago) to pursue my desire to
study acoustics. This journey took me around the world (cid:12)rstly to America then to
Sweden. During whichtime I have missed some special eventswithin my family such
as my father’s 50th birthday as well as my Grandparents 50th wedding anniversary
celebrations. I have also made many new friend and received a new prospective of
life and for this I thank my Lord and Savior Jesus Christ for his guidance.
I will like to thank my father (Patrick Cambridge) who always believed in me, never
gave up and gave me all of the support that I needed. My grandparents (Cuthbert
and Mary James) who helped to set the foundation of my life. The Pascal family
(i.e my uncle Junior, auntie Monica, my cousins A(cid:12)ya and Akilah) who I lived
with during my teenage years. The Alexander family (i.e uncle Dexter and Auntie
Debbie) for all their support and making me feel at home while I was in America.
Also, to all my other family members who made the old African proverb true which
says that "it takes a village to raise a child".
IwillalsoliketothankWolfgangKroppmysupervisoratChalmers. MartinAlmgren
my supervisor at Ingemansson Technology AB for giving me the opportunity to do
my thesis within their company. Anders B So(cid:127)derborg at Ingemansson Technology
AB for all of the advice and data that I used during this the thesis. Finally I will
like to thank everyone at the acoustical department at Chalmers for the experience
that we had together.
Go(cid:127)teborg, June 9, 2006
JASON ESAN CAMBRIDGE
vi
CONTENTS
1 INTRODUCTION 1
1.1 Background .................................................. 1
1.2 Aim......................................................... 2
1.3 Method and Limitations ........................................ 2
1.4 Basic Theory-Airborne Sound insulation ........................... 2
I Analysis of various sound insulation software 6
2 Bastian 7
2.1 Bastian-Introduction ........................................... 7
2.2 Airborne sound insulation of monolithic walls ....................... 8
2.2.1 Monolithic wall calculation model .......................... 10
2.2.2 Radiation factor for forced waves .......................... 12
2.2.3 Radiation factor for free waves ............................ 13
2.2.4 Thick Walls ............................................ 16
2.2.5 Summary: Monolithic walls ............................... 17
2.3 General calculation model....................................... 18
2.4 Airborne sound insulation between rooms .......................... 20
2.5 Summary and Conclusions: Bastian............................... 27
3 Insul 30
3.1 Insul-Introduction ............................................. 30
3.2 Single Panels ................................................. 31
3.3 Double Panels ................................................ 33
3.4 Summary: Insul ............................................... 38
vii
viii CONTENTS
4 Reduct 40
4.1 Reduct-Introduction ........................................... 40
4.2 Reduct-Theoretical Basis ....................................... 40
4.3 Summary Reduct .............................................. 44
5 ENC 45
5.1 ENC-Introduction ............................................. 45
5.2 ENC-Single Panels............................................. 45
5.3 ENC-Double Panel............................................. 47
5.4 Summary:ENC ................................................ 48
6 Win(cid:13)ag 50
6.1 Win(cid:13)ag-Introduction ........................................... 50
6.2 Deviation of matrices used for thick walls .......................... 54
6.3 Summary: Win(cid:13)ag ............................................ 55
7 Program Comparisons 57
7.1 Program Comparisons-Introduction ............................... 57
7.2 Single Panels ................................................. 57
7.3 Double Walls ................................................. 59
7.4 Summary and Conclusion ....................................... 61
8 Case Study 1: Prediction and Measurement of Airborne Sound Insula-
tion in a Class room 62
8.1 Introduction .................................................. 62
8.2 Measurements ................................................ 62
8.3 Results ...................................................... 64
8.4 Conclusion ................................................... 66