BAP260.1 Practical Project

Abstract:
The aim of the present report is to relate the experiment conducted as part of the Bachelor of Audio Production BAP260 Creative Project II. The nature of the assignment being a scientific process leading to the achievement of a data comparison rather than a final and material product, the following report will provide an indepth development of the stages, concepts and procedures involved in the establishment of the project. The report has been conducted as a scientific paper; as such it concisely relates the process undertaken to several notions and knowledge associated to the field of study. The subsequent report that will also be submitted as part of the Creative Project II will therefore be devoted to the critical analysis and clarification of the science, concepts, theories and models addressed throughout the present document as well as supporting the choices made through the project.
Table of Content
Introduction
The creative project II is devoted to the science of Architectural Acoustics, especially the behaviour of the decay of sound in an enclosure. In the area of study, the decay of sound is commonly referred to the reverberation time or RT60, and is defined as the time required for a sound to decay by 60dB after interruption of the emitted signal. The reverberation time has been widely acknowledged for being a critical factor in the determination of the overall acoustic quality of an environment, as a result, numerous researches were conducted in order to investigate and predict its parameters (Kang & Neubauer 2001). The science of acoustics was first established by means of various experiments and theories which then extended to the practical measurements achievable as a result of the development of the technology. Nowadays, the reverberation time can be predicted by applying the so-called classic theories and their numerous revisions or measured in practical situation with the use of measuring equipment. However, each method seems to present its own limit of accuracy predominantly set by environmental factors (Everest, 2001). In that way, the assumptions on which the theories of reverberation time are based are not always fulfilled when applied to common environments while the practical measurements require a specific process in order to achieve results representative of the true behaviour of the sound field. As a consequence, it appears that a degree of discrepancy persists between the theoretical and practical approach of measuring the reverberation time. The aim of the project is therefore to evaluate the degree of divergence observed between the theory and practice of the reverberation time measurement methods when applied to enclosed spaces presenting distinct acoustic properties. In order to do so, three classic theories of reverberation time have been selected for their relevance in the field and the different assumptions on which they are derived. The Sabine, Eyring-Norris and Fitzroy theories will thus be applied and evaluated in conjunction to practical measurements conducted in the same enclosure. The test room will be subject to different configurations of sound absorption distribution in order to compare the theory and practice in distinct acoustic conditions commonly observed in diverse listening environments.
Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project
As a result, three room configurations will be assessed. The three selected theories will first be applied independently for each room configuration for later comparison to the practical measurements. The reverberation time of the three room configurations will then be measured by the impulse response method in order to establish a reverberation of reference for each configuration. The report is structured such as to firstly present the characteristics of the test room so as to better define the overall acoustics proprieties of the enclosure with regards to acoustic parameters susceptible to impact on the prediction and measurement of the reverberation time. A second part will be devoted to the theory of reverberation time where the three classic theories will first be exposed followed by the results obtained for each room configuration using the different equations. A first comparison will consequently take place between each theory in order to develop the patterns observed in the three room configurations. A third part will then proceed to investigate the process of reverberation time measurement by relating the requirement and procedure necessary to the achievement of the results, as well as presenting the experiment and the process undertaken to the establishment of a reverberation time of reference for each room configuration. The fourth and final part will support the analytical comparison between the results obtained by the theoretical and practical methods of determining the reverberation time in enclosed spaces.
Part I/ Data Collection

1/ Room description
The test room is situated at SAE Institute, Sydney, and currently serves as a live/tracking recording room, linked on both sides to two different control rooms. The room being situated on the first floor of an educational building located in the city centre, it appears that the concerns of sound isolation predominated over the acoustical properties within the room. In fact, partially due to the small size and to the materials construction, the room is quite dead with regards to acoustic parameters such as reverberation, that is, the average absorption of the room is relatively high and the sound thus tends to decay rather rapidly compared to spaces qualified as live where the sound undergoes numerous reflections against the rooms boundaries before dying away. Consequently, the space doesnt match the characteristics of a live room and could rather reflect an average listening environment such as bedrooms and living rooms of small size, which are often characterised by a non uniform distribution of sound absorption. The fact that the room currently set up as a recording space presents several particularities found in a good number of listening rooms enables to extend the scope of the project to a larger range of musical related environments rather than only dealing with small recording spaces.
a) Geometry
In spite of being of rectangular shape, the room presents a few unusual geometric aspects. First, the enclosure is not a perfect parallelogram as the length, width and height vary between different spots in the room. As such, the length fluctuates from 5.30 meters on the left end side to 5.34 meters on the right side. The width also extends from 3.87 meters at the entrance, to 3.95 at the far end. The room can be separated into two equal zones, with a height varying from 2.40 meters in the zone 1 to 2.42 meters in the zone two. These minor changes in dimension cannot be readily incorporated into the calculations; the length and width were thus averaged while the height of the room remained set to 2.40 meters which is the standard dimension in numerous Australian constructions. The pair of opposite walls east and west also presents some divergences, which should be taken into account. As such, it is necessary to divide each of these walls into three distinct sections as follow:
These subdivisions of surfaces allow a better representation of the geometry of the room with regards to the materials areas and the absorption distribution.
b) Materials
The room construction is rather common to such small scale recording space. The room is composed of an acoustic door made of aluminium and Perspex and two windows of same dimensions. The door and windows are all mounted with a timber frame. The ceiling includes two ventilating grills and an air conditioner. Regarding the other surfaces, the materials remain common to such locations and will be assessed later on. The main characteristic of the room is the presence of twenty-one removable acoustic panels dispersed over the four walls, with the addition of three fixed panels on the ceiling. The panels are clipped on two timber mountings fixed to the walls which should be taken into account in the theory computation. The majority of the panels are rectangular, with the exception of two square panels of 60 centimetres fitted on the south wall and three hexagon panels of 60 centimetres fixed to distinct parts of the ceiling. The presence of these removable panels enables to alter some acoustic parameters of the room, especially the reverberation time, and thus provides a good way to investigate the RT60 prediction methods for distinct acoustical conditions. The following tables list the absorption coefficients as well as describing the configuration of the materials present in the room: [ Extract from SAE Institute Perth Handout ] Walls All four walls are made of two 16mm plasterboards on 90mm timber studs with mineral wool in the cavity. 125 Hz 0.15 Floor Timber flooring on timber joists with 6mm carpet tile on rubber. 125 Hz 0.01 250 Hz 0.02 500 Hz 0.06 1000 Hz 0.15 2000 Hz 0.25 4000 Hz 0.45 250 Hz 0.10 500 Hz 0.06 1000 Hz 0.04 2000 Hz 0.04 4000 Hz 0.05
Ceiling Two 16mm plasterboards in suspended steel grid. 125 Hz 0.15 250 Hz 0.11 500 Hz 0.04 1000 Hz 0.04 2000 Hz 0.07 4000 Hz 0.08
Windows 6mm glass 125 Hz 0.10 Door Acoustic door, aluminium frame, double seals, absorbent in airspace. 125 Hz 0.35 Timber frames Both windows and the door are mounted with a 6.7 cm painted timber frame. 125 Hz 0.15 Acoustic panels All panels are perforated medium density fibreglass filled with glass wool blanket and mounted over a 2cm air space. 125 Hz 0.40 250 Hz 0.80 500 Hz 0.90 1000 Hz 0.85 2000 Hz 0.75 4000 Hz 0.80 250 Hz 0.11 500 Hz 0.10 1000 Hz 0.07 2000 Hz 0.06 4000 Hz 0.07 250 Hz 0.39 500 Hz 0.44 1000 Hz 0.49 2000 Hz 0.54 4000 Hz 0.57 250 Hz 0.06 500 Hz 0.04 1000 Hz 0.03 2000 Hz 0.02 4000 Hz 0.02
Ventilating grills 125 Hz 0.30 250 Hz 0.40 500 Hz 0.50 1000 Hz 0.50 2000 Hz 0.50 4000 Hz 0.40
Note on the absorption coefficients:

It is important to note the limit of the absorption coefficients accuracy and availability. In fact, most available absorption coefficients are issued from acoustics literature and few manufacturer specifications. However, it is often difficult to obtain the exact coefficients for already built materials, and it inevitably involves a compromise between accuracy and availability. In that way, the thickness, the size and the configuration of the materials varies dramatically from one construction to another and it often involves substituting the actual design for the more available one. This will inevitably impact on the accuracy of the theories and therefore care must be taken in order to select the coefficients the most representative of the actual arrangement.
2/ Modal resonances
A valuable stage in the process of predicting a given acoustic parameter of a space is to evaluate the overall characteristic of the enclosure with regards to other acoustic parameters which could have an influence on the parameter under study. As it has been thoroughly developed in the literature, modal resonances can have a significant impact on the diffuseness of a sound field in an enclosure (Knudsen 1932; Mayo 1952; Louden 1971). In large numbers, resonant modes reduce the sound field fluctuations because the individual modal properties combine into a diffuse field with more or less constant properties (Nelson, 1992). In small numbers however, modal resonances can significantly alter the reverberation time magnitude on the enhanced frequencies, as well as creating a multiple slope curve due to different decay rates of the standing waves (Prokofieva, 2009). The decays at the modal frequencies are decay rates characteristic of individual modes, not the average condition of the room (Everest, 2001). In order to get accurate measurements, the room must be large enough so a great number of modes will overlap within the frequency band in which the decay observation is made (Schultz & Beranek 1962). Eighteen modes per 1/3-octave band is considered sufficient to define a diffuse field in a reverberant environment with consistently distributed absorption (Nelson, 1992). This high modal density, resulting in uniformity of distribution of sound energy and randomising of directions of propagation, is necessary for reverberation equations to apply. (Schultz & Beranek 1962) One of the first steps in order to evaluate the modal resonances of a room is to plot the room dimensions ratios on the Bolt chart which gives a range of room proportions producing the smoothest room characteristics at low frequencies in small rectangular rooms (Everest, 2001).
The Bolts ratio is defined as :
Where L, W, H : Length, Width, Height of the room (m)

Sm : Smallest dimension of the room (m)
For the room under study, the ratios become:

2.4 2.4
3.92 2.4
5.32 2.4
1 : 1.63 : 2.22
Extract from Master Handbook of Acoustics, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill.
As revealed on the chart, the room falls into the Bolt area which suggests a relatively smooth influence of modal resonances, as far as distribution of axial modal frequencies is concerned (Everest, 2001). In practice however, several other considerations have to be taken into account regarding the activity of modal resonances. As such, it is necessary to determine the frequency region dominated by modal resonances, that is, the region in between the lowest resonant frequency and the critical frequency above which diffraction and diffusion dominate (Neubauer, 2000). The lowest resonant frequency of a room is defined as:
1 =
Where C : speed of sound (m/s)
L : length of the room (m)
(1)
(Everest, 2001)
For the room under study, the lowest resonant frequency is:
1 =
344 25.32
= 32
The critical (also called Schroeder, crossover or cutoff) frequency is defined as:
= 1.5
Where C : the speed of sound (m/s)
MPF : the Mean Free Path (m).
(2)
(SAE Institute Handout)
The mean free path defined as the average distance sound travels between reflections is given by:
=
Where V : Volume of the room (3 )
S : Total surface area of the room ( )
2
(3)
(Everest, 2001)
For the room under study, the mean free path becomes:
4 50 = 2.33 86
Consequently, the critical frequency of the room is:
= 1.5
344 = 222 2.33
As a result, the modal resonances are expected to dominate the frequency region between 32 Hz and 222 Hz. It is important to evaluate this acoustic characteristic of the room in order to later relate the reverberation times, especially the decay slope, to the influence of modal resonances. With that regard, it is then necessary to determine the frequency of the modal resonances taking place within this region of the audio spectrum.
This is done by the use of the modal calculation given below:
=
Where C : Speed of sound (m/s)
L, W, H : Length, Width, and Height of the room
2 2
2 2
2 2
(4)
(Everest, 2001)
p, q, r : Integers serving to identify the room modes as Axial, Tangential and Oblique while also indicating the frequency of a given mode (1 for the fundamental, 2 for the second harmonics,3,4,...).
This calculation allows to identify each resonant frequency as well as the dimensions in which these standing waves occur. Being aware of these data will later enable to relate potential decay slope anomalies to these resonant frequencies. The modal resonances of the room were thus calculated up to the critical frequency and then plotted of the following graph with regards to their respective modal strength.
See Appendix for calculations
10
As it is expressed on the modal resonances plot, the main modal deficiencies susceptible to affect the measured reverberation time would be the axial mode isolation between 97 Hz and 130 Hz which corresponds to the 10th and 12th mode respectively with only one tangential mode in between. Another isolation takes place between 195 Hz and 215 Hz corresponding to the 21st and 22nd mode respectively. The degeneracy of axial modes occurring around 130 Hz could also have a significant effect on the decay shape. Further degeneracy occur in the region between 160Hz and 170Hz and around 215-220Hz but they can be considered as having a minor effect because involving tangential modes which only have half the modal strength of axial modes. It is necessary to be aware of such anomalies caused by modal resonances before undertaking the comparison between reverberation time theoretical and practical approach as the modal activities could have a significant effect on the interpretation of potential divergence occurring at low frequencies.
11
Part II/ Theory

1/ Sabine Reverberation Time
The reverberation time has for a long time been a purely theoretical approach firstly introduced and developed by Wallace Clement Sabine around 1900. Based on practical results, Sabine (1923) derived the empirical formulae that relates the reverberation time directly to the volume and inversely to the absorption of an enclosure. The Sabine reverberation time is given by the expression:
60 =
Where RT60 : Reverberation time (s)
V : Volume of the room ( ) A : Total absorption of the room (metric sabins).
3
0.161
(5)
(Everest, 2001)
The total absorption of a room is given by:
= .
Where S : Total surface area of the room (2 )
: Average absorption coefficient of the room
(6)
(Long, 2006)
The average absorption coefficient is expressed as:
=
Where 1 , 2 , : Surface area of the materials (2 )
1 . 1 +2 . 2 ++ .
(7)
(Long, 2006)
1 , 2 , : Absorption coefficient of the respective materials S : Total surface area of the room (2 )
Sabine derived his equation on the assumption of enclosures having a perfect diffuse sound field which implies, among other factors, highly uniform distribution of sound energy and random direction of propagation of the sound (Eyring, 1930). Joyce (1978) pointed out that diffuse sound field is a function of the enclosure shape as well as the absorption characteristics of the materials on its surfaces
12
2/ Eyring-Norris Reverberation Time

In 1930, Carl F. Eyring published a theory of reverberation time based on an idea that was attributed to R. F. Norris (cited in Long 2006). In his paper, Eyring (1930) pointed out that the Sabine formula couldnt be fulfilled where there is considerable room absorption. In that way, he described the Sabine reverberation time equation as being essentially applicable to live rooms. He presented a revised theory of the reverberation time based on the average distance sound travels between successive reflections and published the so-called Eyring-Norris reverberation time formula given by the expression:
60 =
S : Total surface are of the room ( ) : Average absorption coefficient
2
0.161 ln (1)
(8)
(Long, 2006)
Based on Sabines model, the Eyring approach assumes complete diffuseness. As Powell (1970) pointed out, Complete diffuseness here is taken in its broadest sense by Eyring, meaning that after a reflected wave leaves a surface, it has a probability of striking any given surface equal to the ratio of total surface area to the given surface area, including the one it just left. In that way, The Eyring-Norris equation assumes that all the surfaces are simultaneously impacted by the initial sound wave, and that successive simultaneous impacts, each diminished by the average room absorption coefficient, are separated by the mean free path (Beranek, 2006). Notes on Sabine and Eyring-Norris assumptions: As expressed, Sabine empirical theory is based on the assumption of a diffuse sound field. The Eyring-Norris theory is a revision of that model which still requires a sufficiently diffuse field to provide accurate results (Long, 2006). In many practical cases, the assumption of diffuse field conditions is not in agreement with the existing absorption distribution. As identified by Neubauer (2000), The sound field will be, in general, sufficiently diffuse if there are not large differences in the basic dimensions of the room, the walls are not parallel, the sound absorbing material is uniformly distributed, and most internal surfaces are divided into parts. In practice, almost all of these requirements are not fulfilled. As a consequence, numerous researches were conducted in order to revise the classic theories and to propose a model that can more accurately be applied to common enclosures characterised by a non uniform distribution of sound absorption.
13
3/ Fitzroy Reverberation Time

In 1959, Daniel Fitzroy empirically derived an equation through extensive tests in a large number of rooms, where distribution of sound absorption varies widely in uniformity (Neubauer & Kostek 2000). In his paper, Fitzroy (1959) stated that it is possible to take into consideration not only the physical, but also geometrical aspects of a sound field in an enclosure. In this way the sound field tends to settle into a pattern of simultaneous oscillation along a rectangular room with three major axes - vertical, transverse, and longitudinal. The solution appeared to lie in the relationship between the three possible decay rates occurring along these axes, each being influenced by the different average absorption normal to these axes, each rate being unique within its specific axis. In a rectangular room, one may consider three sets of parallel boundaries. If energy oscillates simultaneously between each pair of boundaries the average absorption in each pair would control sound waves travelling between that specific pair during the sound decay period (Neubauer & Kostek 2000). Since the sound field encounters the total area of the rooms boundaries, the three decay times obtained for each sets of boundaries represent a specific percentage of the total decay of the room. Fitzroy used the Eyring-Norris formula to determine the reverberation time peculiar to each pair of boundaries and controlled by their specific average absorption. Therefore, three calculations are made by means of the Eyring-Norris formula, each of them being calculated with different average absorption coefficients. Ratios relating each pair of boundary areas to the total surface area of the room are then established. Finally, the reverberation times obtained for each pair of boundary are added together and the resulting equation yield the reverberation time of the room. As a result, Fitzroy was the first to derive an empirical reverberation time equation which considers non-uniform distribution of sound absorption (Neubauer, 2000). The Fitzroy reverberation time is given by the expression:
60 = 0.161
ln (1 )
ln (1 )
ln (1 )
(9)
(Neubauer, 2000)
Where x, y, z : Total surface areas of a pair of opposite boundaries (2 )

S : Total surface area of the room (2 ) , , : Average absorption coefficient of a pair of opposite boundaries
14
4/ Predicted reverberation times

The following section will relate the results obtained in each room configuration as well as providing a first comparison and statement of the recurrent trends observed between the theories. The calculations were undertaken using the data included in the first part of the report. The aim of this project being to compare the degree of accuracy between reverberation time theory and practical measurement, it was a main concern to take into account as much as possible the actual configuration of the room at the time the measurement were made. However, a few materials had to be omitted into the calculation process due to inconsistence and unavailability of absorption coefficients. As such, the air conditioner, speaker holder, microphone and stand were neglected in all computations. All three equations were worked out using an excel spread sheet developed for the project and provided for each room configuration in the Appendix.
15
a) Room Configuration #1 Full

Room #1 - Sabine Reverberation Time Frequency (Hz) Sabine Reverberation Times (s) 125 0.39 250 0.29 500 0.29 1000 0.29 2000 0.29 4000 0.23
Room #1 - Eyring-Norris Reverberation Time Frequency (Hz) Eyring-Norris Reverberation Times (s) 125 0.34 250 0.24 500 0.24 1000 0.24 2000 0.24 4000 0.18
Room #1 - Fitzroy Reverberation Time Frequency (Hz) Fitzroy Reverberation Times (s) 125 0.46 250 0.35 500 0.35 1000 0.30 2000 0.26 4000 0.19
Reverberation Time Room #1
The Fitzroy equation predicts the longest reverberation time with an average of 0.32s while the Eyring-Norris equation gives the lowest values with an average of 0.25s. The closest values are observed between the Fitzroy and the Sabine equation with an average difference of 0.04s.
16
b) Room Configuration #2 Empty

The Fitzroy equation predicts again the longest reverberation time with an average of 0.84s. The Eyring-Norris equations stills provide the lowest values with an average of 0.25s. The closest values are this time given by the Sabine and Eyring-Norris equation with an average difference of 0.05s.
17
c) Room Configuration #3 Non Uniform

The longest reverberation times are obtained with the Sabine equation with an average of 0.38s, followed closely by the Fitzroy equation with an average of 0.37s. The largest degree of discrepancy is this time observed between the Sabine and Eyring-Norris equations with an average of 0.05s.
18
5/ Theory Comparison
The following tables summarize the reverberation times obtained with each equation as well as their degree of discrepancy for all three room configurations: Room #1 Frequency (Hz) Sabine RT60 (s) Sab-Ey Discrepancy (s) Eyring-Norris RT60 (s) Ey-Fitz Discrepancy (s) Fitzroy RT60 (s) Fitz-Sab Discrepancy (s) 125 0.39 0.05 0.34 0.11 0.46 0.06 250 0.29 0.05 0.24 0.11 0.35 0.06 500 0.29 0.05 0.24 0.11 0.35 0.06 1000 0.29 0.05 0.24 0.06 0.30 0.01 2000 0.29 0.05 0.24 0.02 0.26 0.03 4000 0.23 0.05 0.18 0.01 0.19 0.04 Average(s) 0.30 0.05 0.25 0.07 0.32 0.04 0.05 Room Average discrepancy (s) Room #2 Frequency (Hz) Sabine RT60 (s) Sab-Ey Discrepancy (s) Eyring-Norris RT60 (s) Ey-Fitz Discrepancy (s) Fitzroy RT60 (s) Fitz-Sab Discrepancy (s) 125 0.65 0.05 0.60 0.01 0.61 0.04 250 0.69 0.05 0.65 0.02 0.67 0.03 500 0.81 0.05 0.76 0.12 0.88 0.07 1000 0.74 0.05 0.70 0.35 1.05 0.31 2000 0.61 0.05 0.57 0.44 1.01 0.39 4000 0.44 0.05 0.39 0.41 0.80 0.36 Average(s) 0.66 0.05 0.61 0.23 0.84 0.20 0.16 Room Average discrepancy (s)
Room #3 Frequency (Hz) Sabine RT60 (s) Sab-Ey Discrepancy (s) Eyring-Norris RT60 (s) Ey-Fitz Discrepancy (s) Fitzroy RT60 (s) Fitz-Sab Discrepancy (s) 125 0.47 0.05 0.42 0.07 0.49 0.02 250 0.38 0.05 0.34 0.06 0.39 0.01 500 0.39 0.05 0.34 0.06 0.40 0.01 1000 0.39 0.05 0.34 0.02 0.36 0.03 2000 0.37 0.05 0.32 0.00 0.32 0.05 4000 0.29 0.05 0.24 0.00 0.25 0.05 Average(s) 0.38 0.05 0.33 0.03 0.37 0.03 0.04 Room Average discrepancy (s) Smallest Divergence Longest Reverberation Time Shortest Reverberation Time
19
According to the data listed above, we can summarise the following: The Eyring-Norris equation provides the lowest values of reverberation times in all three room configurations. In most cases, the Fitzroy equation predicts the longest reverberation time. As a general rule, the closest values are obtained between the Sabine and the Fitzroy equations while the largest differences are observed between the Fitzroy and Eyring-Norris equations. The theories tend to better agree in the first half of the frequency band. The biggest change in reverberation time from room configuration #1 to #2 is found with the Fitzroy equation with an average increase of 0.52s. The biggest change in reverberation time from room configuration #1 to #3 is equally found by using the Sabine and Eyring-Norris equation with an average increase of 0.09s. The biggest change in reverberation time from room configuration #2 to #3 is found by using the Fitzroy equation with an average decrease of 0.47s. The higher level of agreement between theories is found in room configuration #3 with an average discrepancy of 0.4s followed by room #1 with 0.5s. The higher degree of discrepancy between theories occurs in the room configuration #2 where the Fitzroy equation predicts on average 30% higher values than the Sabine and Eyring-Norris equations. A first global comparison between theories is important at this stage of the process in order to detect potential incoherence in the results wether due to incertitude in the collected data or the particularity of the space under test. In that sense, the large discrepancy observed in the room configuration #2 between the Fitzroy equation and the other two seems to be a peculiarity of this trial as no such trend has been observed in the other two configurations. Care must be consequently taken when comparing the results with the purpose of conclude on the overall degree of discrepancy between theories as the situation was peculiar to this configuration only and doesnt represent the overall trends observed. Taken as a whole however the theories seem to point in the same direction despite an average discrepancy of 0.08s between the reverberation times predicted.
20
PART III/ Practical measurements

1/ The theory behind the practice
A common practice for reverberation time measurement is to excite the enclosure with a sound source which is then switched off. A microphone captures the resultant decay which is recorded for later analysis. The decay is then plotted on a logarithm scale of amplitude versus time and the curve is approximated by a straight line using linear regression. The slope of the recorded decay curve is subsequently estimated, yielding the reverberation time (Guzina, 1984). By definition, the evaluation of RT60 requires to be made over a 60 dB decay range. In practice however, this condition is rarely fulfilled due to background noise which requires using a high level sound source sufficiently above the noise floor (Schultz & Beranek 1962). The ISO standard 3382 (1997) requires to set a noise margin of 10 dB in order to minimise noise residues in the tail of the decay to be measured. Consequently, the reverberation time has to be measured over smaller windows than 60dB, with the extrapolated RT60 then being calculated, rather than actually measured. The type of the definition from which the slope of the decay curve is calculated depends on the difference between the background noise level and the sound source level. The RT 60 parameter can then be calculated using three definitions: EDT, RT20 and RT30. The ISO 3382 standard (1997) prescribes EDT (Early Time Decay) measurement to be made over the first 5 dB decrease, RT 20 measurement over the regression range of -5 to -25 dB and RT30 over the -5 to -35 dB range. Once the EDT, RT20 or RT30 is calculated, it is a simple mater or extrapolation in order to determine RT 60. Since 20dB is one third of 60dB, the decay time over this 20dB window would be 1\3 of the total RT60 (RT60= 12 EDT or 2 RT30). Another aspect of the acoustic measurements is the need to repeat the measurements several times in order to obtain a better statistical picture of the behaviour of the sound field in the room (Everest, 2001). The repetition of the experiment under the same conditions resulting in different decay curves is due to the randomness of the excitation signal, not any changes in the characteristics of the enclosure (Shroeder, 1964). The uncertainty arising from these fluctuations in the decay curves is minimized by recording several decays and averaging the reverberation times of the individual curves. Five or more decays are sufficient to provide satisfying statistical accuracy (D'Antonio & Eger 1986).
21
Another source of fluctuation in the decay shape also arises for different sound source and microphone positions, as such, it is requires to record several decays for different combination of sound source and microphone positions (Guzina, 1982). For each combination of microphone and loudspeaker positions, an ensemble averaging procedure should be used, involving the superposition of several repeated excitations of the room to obtain a single decay curve from which the reverberation time can be evaluated (Nordtest, 1985). Such an ensemble averaging should be made by averaging the instantaneous mean-square pressure values. Preferably, the ensemble averaging should also be extended to include all the source and microphone positions (ISO 3382 standard, 1997). If the difference between the reverberation times or noise levels measured for two positions in the same room exceeds 10%, they cannot be averaged (Prokofieva, 2009). If an ensemble averaging is made in each combination of microphone and loudspeaker positions, the overall reverberation time of the room is given by the arithmetic mean of the total number of reverberation time measurements (Nordest, 1985). By averaging over a sufficient number of measurements made in the same frequency band and with the same microphone and loudspeaker position, the problem of insufficient accuracy and reproducibility of the results, especially at low frequencies, can be overcome (Guzina, 1984). Measurements are usually made in narrow bands (octave or 1/3 octave), rather than broadband (20Hz to 20KHz) in order to obtain a steady and dependable indication of the average acoustical effects taking place within that particular slice of the spectrum (Everest, 2001). Octave and 1/3 octave filters are thus used partly to form the necessary selectivity when broadband excitation is used and partly to improve the signal-to-noise ratio (Schultz & Beranek 1962).
22
2/ Sound source
One of the main requirements is that the sound sources used to excite the enclosure must have enough energy throughout the spectrum to ensure decays sufficiently above the background noise to give the required accuracy (Everest, 2001). The sound sources used for RT60 measurement fall into two categories: Steady state and impulse sound sources. Steady state sources use random noise (white or pink noise) reproduced through a loudspeaker while impulse sound source consists of exciting and capturing the impulse response of a room. Only impulse source will be used in the project, thus the steady state measurement method wont be elaborated in this report. Impulse sound sources were and sometimes still are under the form of electrical spark discharges, pistols firing blanks, pricked balloons and even small canons (Everest, 2001). Nowadays, The most commonly used excitation signals are deterministic, wide-band signals known as: MLS (maximum-length sequence) and IRS (inverse repeated sequence), which use pseudorandom white noise Time-stretched pulses and SineSweep, which use time varying frequency signals. These sound sources are defined as non-impulsive excitation signals (Nelson, 1992). Thus, a deconvolution process is required in order to extract the impulse response from the recorded signal. In order to do so, a known input signal is generated and the system output is measured. The recorded signal is then mathematically compared with the generated signal and the impulse response of the room can be extracted (Stan, Embrechts & Archambeau 2002). This category of impulse sources offers some advantages over the mechanically produced impulses (Cann & Lyon1979): Significantly more energy can be fed into the room, improving the signal to noise ratio. The monitoring and recording levels can be more easily and precisely set. It is less likely to overload the recording medium as these sources dont fluctuate as much as impulsive noise.
23
Sine sweeps
The sine sweeps are sinusoids that have their instantaneous frequency varying in the time. Sweeps can be linear or logarithmic. Logarithmic sweep exhibits a pink spectrum, that is, its amplitude decays at a rate of 3dB/octave. It means that the signal has the same energy per octave. The frequency values double in time at a fixed rate (Ueda, Kon & Iazzetta 2005). In practice a silence of sufficient duration is added at the end of the SineSweep signal in order to recover the tail of the impulse response (Guzina, 1982). To minimize the influence of the transients introduced by the measurement system and appearing at the beginning and end of the emission of the excitation signal, the ends of the SineSweep signal are exponentially attenuated (exponential growth at the beginning and exponential decrease at the end) (Stan, Embrechts & Archambeau 2002). The sine sweep technique allows to set the initial and final frequency (usually from 20Hz to 20KHz), the sweep duration and the duration of silences inserted after each sweep.
Sound source requirements

In order to measure room acoustical parameters in compliance with the ISO 3382 standard (1997), an omnidirectional sound source should be used. Three different source positions shall be used. One of these positions shall be in a corner. By aiming the loudspeaker into a corner of the room (especially in smaller rooms), all resonant modes are excited, because all modes terminate in the corners (Everest, 2001). The sound source positions should be at least 2 meters apart (Nordtest, 1985). The power of the electrical noise signal fed to the loudspeaker shall remain the same during all the excitations (Nordtest, 1985).
24
3/ Microphone
The microphone should be as small as possible and preferably have the maximum dimension of 13 mm. The smaller the microphone, the less its directional effects, using a small microphone is considered best for essentially uniform sensitivity to sound arriving from all angles (Everest, 2001). The microphone should be positioned on a tripod, usually at ear height for a listening room, or microphone height for a room used for recording. When the room volume is less than 250 m3, three microphone positions are required for each source position. In larger rooms three more positions shall be added. The positions shall be evenly distributed in the room (Schultz & Beranek 1963). The ISO 3382 standard (1997) prescribes three or four source positions in most cases. The microphone positions should be located at least /2 apart, where is the wavelength of sound for the centre frequency of the frequency band of interest. Only one microphone should be used at a time. The microphones should be at least 0,5 m from any absorber or diffuser and at least 2 m from the sound source (Nordtest, 1985). Variations of the decay slope can sometimes be observed and is often caused by sources of absorption or reflection in close proximity to the measurement point. This is a major source of variation when patches of reflective or absorptive material are greater than a wavelength in size and situated less than a wavelength away. Because of the relatively high sound absorption coefficients typical of common listening spaces, it is often the case that the direct field of a loudspeaker dominates throughout nearly the entire enclosure. As Nelson (1992) expressed, the standard equation for the critical distance Dc may be used as an estimation of the extent of the direct field. For studies of the reflected sound field the direct field is essentially "noise" which obscures the reflected sound field. In order to avoid such interference, classical methods for measuring reverberation time instruct that the measurement points should be situated several times the critical distance away from the sound source (Guzina, 1982). If a standoff of at least twice the critical distance cannot be maintained between source and measurement point, special precautions and/or analysis will probably be necessary to remove the influence of the direct field from the reflected wave signature (Schultz & Beranek 1963).
25
The critical distance is given by the expression:
= 2
C : Speed of sound (m/s)
60
(10)
(Nelson, 1992)
4/ Requirements
The measurements were undertaken with the use of two different acoustic measurement softwares offering roughly the same capabilities. The fact of conducting every measurement with both software for each room configurations, microphone and sound source positions allows a first range of comparison in order to avoid any aberrant figures. As such, it is possible to verify if potential fluctuations occurring between several decays within a measuring set and between each configuration of microphone and sound source positions are of the same nature. As a result of such process, it is possible to evaluate whether these fluctuations are due to variations of the acoustic properties of the room at different locations or result from difference in computational processing of the two softwares. The first software is AcMus, an open source software based on a java plug-in framework. The software was developed in cooperation with different departments of the University of Sao Paulo, Brazil with for aim to provide an open-source extensible software for estimation, measurement, analysis, and simulation of rooms especially designed for musical performance (Ueda, Kon & Iazzetta, 2005). The second software is ETF5, developed by Acoustisoft in 1996 as a Loudspeaker and Room Acoustics Analysis Program. The program was one of the first software-based measurement programs intended to turn an ordinary multimedia PC into a proquality measurement too l (Everest, 2001). Both softwares make use of the impulse response in order to extract the acoustic parameters of the room, as such they enable the use of MLS and Sine sweep as excitation signals. They also both undertake the same process in order to extract the impulse response of the room. The operator connects a test microphone and microphone preamplifier to one of the computers sound card input. One of the interface output channels is then connected to the sound system. The output channel sends the signal back to the second interface input. This signal is taken as a reference to sync the signal that is recorded by the microphones. Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project 26
In this way, the program can subtract any response anomalies caused by the sound card so that what remains is actually caused by the system under test (Everest, 2001). A test signal is then played from the sound cards first output through the sound system and is simultaneously recorded through the sound cards inputs and stored as a wave file on the computer for analysis. The impulse response is finally obtained by comparing both recording signals (the actual room recording and the reference signal) and applying the deconvolution process (Ueda, Kon & Iazzetta, 2005). The software automatically processes the recording and then generates an impulse response of the system being measured, which is stored in the computer for post-processing. Therefore, all acoustic parameters can be analysed in post-processing after the measurements take place. Once the impulse response is obtained, the softwares generate the Energy Time Curve (or Energy Delay Curve) by using the Schroeder Integration method according to the ISO 3392 standard (D'Antonio, 1986). The reverberation time is finally obtained by applying a linear least square fit to the Schroeder integration over a specified time interval (Everest, 2001). In this way, both softwares allow to determine the reverberation time from the definition of RT20, RT30 and EDT (AcMus only), depending on the available dynamic range for analysis.
27
5/ Measurement Process
The measurements were undertaken using a logarithm sine sweep as excitation signal. The initial frequency was set to 20 Hz and the final frequency to 20 KHz with a total duration of 6 seconds. The level of the excitation signal remained the same for both softwares and for every measurement. The final value of reverberation time was obtained from the extrapolation of RT20. Three sound source positions were used. The position 1 was located in the corner of walls east and north. The position 2 was placed centred and 0.80m away from the north wall. The position 3 was located in the corner of walls west and north. The positions were spaced 1.90m away from each other. For all three positions, the speaker was elevated at 1.30 m from the floor. Four microphone positions were used. The position A, B, C were separated by 1m from each other and between 0.85 and 1 meter from the nearest reflective and absorptive surfaces. The position D was the closest to the sound source while still being more than the critical distance away (the critical distance was estimated from the lowest reverberation time obtained in the theoretical part of the project). The microphone, positioned on a stand, was elevated 1,58m from the floor. Five decays were captured for each combination of sound source/microphone positions.
Equipment MacBook Pro laptop Digidesign MBox2 Mini audio interface Phonic MU 1722X mixer (served as microphone preamplifier and monitoring system for output and input levels) Genelec 1030A active monitor (directional speaker) Behringer ECM8000 omnidirectional microphone
28
The following picture represents the set up of the measurement process:
The measurement process undertaken for each room configuration is summarized below:
Room #
Sound Source 1 Sound Source 2 Sound Source 3
AcMus
Microphone A Microphone B Microphone C Microphone D
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5
ETF5
Microphone A Microphone B Microphone C Microphone D
As expressed above, the number of decays required amount to 120 for one room configuration. With the same process occurring in three room configurations, the total number of decays rises to 360. The experiment was conducted from 9pm to 2am in order to avoid as much background noise level as practically possible. The room temperature was 21.4 C. Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project 29
Averaging Process:
The averaging process required to establish a final reverberation time for each room configuration took place as follow: For both softwares: -Averaging of the reverberation times obtained for all five decays in each combination of sound source/microphone positions. - Averaging of the reverberation time obtained for all four microphone positions in each sound source positions. - Averaging of the reverberation time obtained for all three sound source positions. The final reverberation time of the room was obtained by averaging the results obtained with both softwares. The following section relates the results obtained for each room configuration.
30
Room Configuration #1 - Full
The room was left in its usual arrangement with all 21 acoustic panels mounted. Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project 31
1/ Room #1 - AcMus Software
AcMus RT 60 (s) Frequency(Hz) 125 250 500 1000 0.26 2000 0.22 4000 0.21 0.85 0.62 0.36
AcMus Reverberation Time Room #1
2/ Room #1 - ETF5 Software
ETF 5 RT 60 (s) Frequency(Hz) 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 0.33 0.29 0.27 0.83 0.66 0.35
ETF 5 Reverberation Time Room #1
32
3/ Room #1 - Reverberation Time

Reverberation Time Room #1 (s) Frequency(Hz) 125 0.84 250 0.64 500 0.36 1000 0.29 2000 0.25 4000 0.24
As expressed, the reverberation times obtained with both softwares show good conformity in the first half of the frequency bands with an average difference of 0.02s while the second half presents a larger divergence of approximately 0.07s.
33
Room Configuration #2 - Empty
All the 21 acoustic panels were removed, only the three fixed panels remained on the ceiling.
34
1/ Room #2 AcMus Software

AcMus RT 60 (s) Frequency(Hz) 125 1.14 250 1.42 500 1.23 1000 2000 4000 0.81 0.65 0.63
2/ Room #2 ETF5 Software

35
Room #2 Reverberation Time

This time the results show better agreement in the second half of the frequency bands with an average 0.04s divergence against 0.13s for the first half. The AcMus software provides the highest values for all the frequency bands. The reverberation time presents the particularity of a sudden rise at 250Hz which hasnt been observed in the previous room configuration.
36
Room Configuration #3 Non Uniform
The third room configurations consists of producing a non uniform distribution of sound absorption as much as possible by placing the acoustic panels opposite to the reflective surfaces and removing the panels present on these surfaces. As a result, the South and East walls were uncovered while the North and West walls were left with the acoustic panels on.
37
Room #3 - AcMus Software

AcMus RT 60 (s) Frequency(Hz) 125 250 500 1000 0.33 2000 0.25 4000 0.25 0.93 0.72 0.50
Room #3 - ETF5 Software

38
Room #3 - Reverberation Time

This third room configuration offers the best conformity between the results obtained with both softwares with an average difference of 0.03s throughout the frequency band.
39
6/ Practice Comparison
The first step in the analysis and comparison of the practical results was to evaluate the degree of difference between values obtained with different sound source and microphone positions. It is then important to investigate if these discrepancies are of same nature in all room configurations and for both softwares. Another important aspect is to trace any pattern that could be observed in the impulse response recorded and being potentially related to a specific sound source and microphone position, or a combination of both. This sort of phenomenon could easily translate the relation of the sound source/microphone position to a specific acoustic aspect of the room such as modal resonance or comb filtering and could consequently affect the true estimation of the decay rate. A first evaluation was thus undertaken over the impulse responses recorded at various sound source and microphones positions in the three room configurations. After inspection, a persisting difference was noticed in the model of the impulse response captured by the microphone position D for every sound source positions and room configurations. In this microphone position, all impulses present a distinct slope following the direct sound which could appear to be caused by the ringing of the loudspeaker usually associated with its volume or port resonance (Nelson, 1992). The microphone position D being the closest to the sound source, it may be the most prone to capture the ringing of the speaker. This phenomenon however didnt affect the reading of the decay rate and the microphone position was consequently included in the averaging process. After further examination, the average difference between the values of reverberation time obtained with the three sound source positions was found to be 0.04 seconds for both softwares and in all three room configurations. The difference between the four microphone positions observed in all three room configurations was larger with the use of ETF5 which provided an average discrepancy of 0.08s compared to the results obtained with AcMus which gave an average of 0.05s of difference between the positions. This first evaluation of the results is required in order to evaluate the degree of accuracy of the acoustic measurement device. The rather close results obtained between sound source and microphone positions as well as the repeatability of the divergence of same nature observed in the three room configurations and by using two different softwares provide a strong basis for the establishment of a reverberation time of reference for each room configuration. As a consequence, it is fairly accurate to take the average value of the combination of sound source and microphone positions independently for each software used. Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project 40
Once the reverberation times of reference are established for each software, it is then requires to evaluate the degree of discrepancy between each ones in order to determine is the average of the two will provide enough accuracy so as to establish reverberation times of reference representative of the overall behaviour of the sound field in each room configuration. The results obtained with the two software show fairly good conformity with an average difference of 7% and 9% in room configuration #3 and #2 respectively despite a bigger divergence observed in the configuration #1 with 13% on average. A similarity in the pattern of the results were observed in room configuration #1 and #3 where the software ETF5 provides the highest value for the second half of the frequency bands as well as at 250Hz with an average of 0.04s longer reverberation times measured. This trend doesnt occur in room configuration #2 where the AcMus software gives the longest reverberation times throughout the entire frequency range. The several divergences observed between the results obtained with the different softwares and to a lesser extent between the microphone and sound source positions may be due to several independent causes. First the randomness of the time at which the excitation signal is switched on and off implies a constant variation of room resonances between each decay captured (Schultz & Beranek, 1963). This agitation of room modes will tends to alter the measured reverberation times in the lowest frequency bands to a greater extent than the upper bands as modal resonances will increase with frequency and thus provide better distribution and modal smoothing (Louden, 1971). This rationalization is in agreement with the results obtained as the discrepancies between sound source and microphone positions appear larger in the first half of the frequency band. Another possibility lies in the difference between processing and averaging methods used by the softwares. Although both softwares uses the Fast Hadamard Transform in order to extract the impulse response and the Schroeder Integration method for calculating the decay rate, a few parameters differ from one another such as the gate time which sets the interval on which the linear least squares fit takes place. As a result, slight divergence in the determination of reverberation time can arise from the same impulse response analysed through different softwares.
41
As a general rule however, the low average divergence between values obtained with the different softwares and the persisting nature of these differences observed in two room configurations allow to average the results between softwares while still preserving the main characteristic observed between the reverberation times measured in each set. In that way, the decay slope and reverberation curve obtained after averaging the results obtained for both softwares still provide the same information given by each set of measurement while at the same time presenting an overall picture of the sound field in the room rather than only a characteristic attributed to on a given position and/or software property. As a result, the final reverberation times obtained in each room configuration can serve as strong basis for later comparison to the theory.
42
PART IV/ Analytical Comparison

Once all the reference values of reverberation times have been established and that all three theories have been applied in every room configurations, the main objective of the project can be assessed, that is determining the degree of discrepancy between the reverberation time predicted by the selected theories and measured in-situ. The comparison will first take place in each room configuration in order to relate the degree of accuracy of the theories to the acoustic conditions peculiar to a given environment.
1/ Room Configuration #1 Full
Reverberation Times
As easily perceived, the biggest difference between the theories and practice arises for the first two frequency bands where the Sabine, Eyring-Norris and Fitzroy equations produce an average error percentage of 54%, 61% and 46% respectively. Nevertheless, the theories appear to fairly agree with the practice for the second half of the frequency band with an average error percentage of 3%, 16% and 6% for the Sabine, Eyring-Norris and Fitzroy equations respectively.
43
The degrees of error between theories and practical measurement are summarized below: Frequency (Hz) Sabine Eyring-Norris Fitzroy 125 53% 59% 46% 250 54% 62% 46% 500 19% 33% 1% 1000 2% 19% 2% 2000 13% 7% 2% 4000 2% 24% 21%
Highest degree of error Lowest degree of error As expressed, the Fitzroy equation provides the closest value throughout most of the frequency bands even though the 46% of error for the first two bands remain a too large amount to statistical comply with the measurements. It is noteworthy that the Eyring-Norris equation provides the highest degree of error throughout most of the frequency bands with an average of 34% compared to 24% and 20% for the Sabine and Fitzroy equations respectively. The average absorption coefficient of the room being estimated to 0.32 on average, the EyringNorris equation according to the literature would tend to provide more accurate results than the Sabine equation which requires a maximum average absorption of 0.2 on average in order to better suit the assumptions on which the theory is based (Long, 2006). The large difference in average absorption between the more reflective surfaces containing the windows and door and their respective opposite surface recovered with acoustic panel generates a highly non uniform sound field which seems to better be taken into account by the Fitzroy equation. As a result, the Fitzroy equation provides the closest results to the practical measurement, especially in the frequency bands between 500Hz and 2000Hz with an average discrepancy of 2%.
44
2/ Room Configuration #2 Empty
Reverberation Times
The discrepancy at low frequencies persists with both Sabine and Fitzroy equations providing a 39% average error for the first half of the frequency bands and Eyring-Norris giving an average of 43%. The second half of the frequency band presents good conformity of the results between the Sabine equation and the measurement up to 2000Hz with 0.02s of difference but the difference rises to 0.19s in the last band.
Error Percentage
Frequency (Hz) Sabine Eyring-Norris Fitzroy 125 38% 43% 42% 250 50% 54% 52% 500 29% 33% 23% 1000 3% 9% 37% 2000 3% 11% 59% 4000 30% 38% 27%
Highest degree of error Lowest degree of error
45
The Sabine equation appears to provide the closest values to the measurement with an average error percentage of 26% compared to 31% for the Eyring-Norris and 40% for the Fitzroy equation. Despite the fact that the Fitzroy equation presents the lowest percentages of error throughout most of the frequency bands compared to the Eyring-Norris equation, the average of the error percentage appears to be larger for the Fitzroy equation which is due to the large difference observed for the 1000Hz and 2000Hz bands compared to the measurement. This point out the limit of accuracy when averaging the degree of error throughout the entire frequency bands in order to deduce the statistical divergence of the theory compared to the practice. As a result, it appears more correct to divide the frequency bands in two half and assess the degree of discrepancy occurring between theory and practice within a particular slice of the spectrum. The overall pictures will then give better statistical results representative of a specific segment of the audio spectrum rather than a broadband generalisation. As such, the results obtained with the Fitzroy equation appear closer to the measurement than the Eyring-Norris equation in the first three bands despite the fact that the later equation provides an overall better agreement to the practice than the former. These results however still provides considerable divergence in the first half of the frequency bands compared to the measurement and as a consequence do not constitute an accurate basis for predicting the reverberation times at low frequencies. It is nevertheless interesting to observe that the Sabine equation provides the better agreement with the practical measurement, especially in the 1000Hz and 2000Hz octave bands. The room average absorption being estimated to 0.15 on average, this situation suits the assumptions on which the theory is verified. Moreover, the configuration #2 is the one that presents the better agreement to the assumption of uniform distribution of sound absorption as much as it was practically possible. In this sense, the ceiling was the only surface mounted with acoustic panels and as such offered a better symmetrical distribution of absorption with regards to the large absorption provided by the carpet flooring. The walls were left bare which may have diminish the non homogenous reflection and absorption of sound between the surfaces containing reflective materials (such as windows and door) and their opposite surfaces which are mounted with acoustic panels in the other two room configuration. In that way, this room configuration appeared the one suiting the best the assumptions of uniform distribution of sound absorption made by all three theories; all this related to the scale of the project.
46
3/ Room Configuration #3 Non Uniform
Reverberation Times
The theories persist to provide notable divergence in the low frequency range notably in the first two bands with an average error of 47% for the Sabine and Fitzroy equations and 54% for the Eyring-Norris. The last three frequency bands present much less divergence with an average error of 21% for the Sabine, 14% for the Eyring-Norris, and 11% for the Fitzroy equation. As displayed in the table below, the Fitzroy equation provides the least degree of error throughout most of the frequency bands.
Error percentage
Frequency (Hz) Sabine Eyring-Norris Fitzroy 125 48% 53% 46% 250 47% 54% 46% 500 17% 28% 16% 1000 13% 1% 3% 2000 39% 21% 21% 4000 13% 7% 5%
Highest degree of error Lowest degree of error
47
It is interesting to put in relation the establishment of these results to the assumption on which each theory is derived. As expressed earlier, all three theories have for common basis the assumption of a relatively diffuse sound field and homogenous propagation of sound energy. The aim of the room configuration #3 was to establish an as non uniform distribution of sound absorption as practically possible so as to diverge from the acoustic properties required by the theories in order to provide accurate results. This configuration involves significant difference in the average absorption between surfaces and this consequently impacts on the validity of the theory. In fact, the three classic theories under study differentiate themselves from one another by the way the average absorption of a room is taken into account. The Sabine and Eyring-Norris theories assume an equal average absorption for all surfaces (Beranek, 2006) while the Fitzroy equations takes into account the geometry of the room with regards to sound distribution; thus the divergences in average absorptions between the surfaces along the lateral, transversal and longitudinal axes of the room are accounted for in the Fitzroy equation. As a result, and as verified in this room configuration, the Fitzroy theory tends to better approximate the reverberation time in environment characterised by non uniform distribution of sound absorption. Despite the overall high degree of discrepancy between theory and practice, the Fitzroy equation provides on average of 10% less error than the other two equations. The Sabine equation presents severe divergence in the upper frequency bands with average error of 20% compared to 10% obtained with the other two theories. This observation in a way translates the limit of the Sabine theory when applied to environment with significantly non uniform distribution of sound absorption. The Fitzroy equation due to its assumption of different average absorption for each pair of parallel boundaries nevertheless provides the less error. The divergences observed between the theoretical values and practical measurements of reverberation time have been assessed for the three room configurations representing different acoustic environments. However, the alteration of the acoustic properties of one given space by the only change in the amount of absorption and its distribution is unfortunately somewhat unrepresentative of the acoustical divergence that could undergo a sound field from a large living space to a small absorbent one. As a consequence the tendencies observed between theory and practice cannot establish a general deduction verified in diverse acoustic environments, but rather are a peculiarity of the room under investigation and of the project. The room however being rather common to such locations, the assumptions concluded upon the completion of the project may nonetheless be applicable to environments of the same scale and function, and presenting similar acoustic properties. Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project 48
Overall Analysis
After repetition of the investigation of reverberation time prediction methods in an enclosed space presenting different configuration of absorption distribution, the overall evaluation of the degree of discrepancy between theory and practice can finally take place. As it has been observed in each room configuration, the major source of divergence between the values predicted with the theory and the practical measurement arises in the low frequency bands. For every room configurations, an average discrepancy of 40% occur in the first three frequency bands where the theory predicts on average 0.45s lower reverberation times than practically measured. These large divergences observed at low frequencies for each equation compared to the practice may be an indication of the limit of the accuracy of the theory when applied to small spaces. In this sense, the assumption of all three theories regarding a diffuse sound field is often unfounded in such environment where the influence of modal resonances dominates the low frequency spectrum (Knudsen, 1932). As it has been evaluated earlier, the modal resonances of the room are expected to dominate from 32Hz up to the Schroeder frequency of 222Hz. According to the modal resonance chart, only twelves modes reside between the fundamental resonant frequency and the first octave band of 125Hz and only thirteen more modes up to the critical frequency. These rather small numbers of modal frequencies between octave bands imply a quite uneven distribution of modal energy throughout the first two octave bands and as a result may impact the homogeneity of the sound field in the lower frequency range. The various isolations and degeneracy detected in this interval are indication of modal anomalies susceptible to affect the decay trace of the measured reverberation time. The practice requires taking multiple averaging of the behaviour of sound at different points in the room in order to overcome the limit of strong dependence of the decay rate to modal resonance activity (Schultz & Beranek 1963). The results obtained with the theory however remain in the domain of the prediction and it is partially the reason why the estimation of the room resonances is required in order to evaluate the point from which the nature of the results obtained begins to depart from the influence of modal resonance. Although the effect of modal resonance is expected to diminish around the second octave band, the theory tends to better agree with the practical measurement from the third frequency band, especially in the room configuration #1 and #3. A reasonably fair conformity of the results is then maintained throughout the rest of the spectrum.
49
The lowest discrepancy between theory and practice is equally observed in room configuration #1 and #3 with 27% while the second configuration provides an average error of 32%. The configuration #2 also surprisingly presents the highest level of discrepancy observed between theories and between measurements made with the different softwares. No particular reason can be advanced to justify this trend. Another aspect of the analytical comparison between theory and practice could be to evaluate the degree of similarity between the changes observed for different room configurations. In this sense, a difference of 0.50s is observed between the reverberation time measured in room #1 and #2; that is the full and empty configuration. It is interesting to note that the Fitzroy equation predicts an average increase of 0.52s while both Sabine and Eyring-Norris predict a 0.36s increase only. The Fitzroy equation therefore follows closely the trend observed with the measurements. The change in reverberation time from room configuration #1 to #3 is evaluated to be 0.06s by measurement and again the Fitzroy equation falls very closely with a prediction of 0.05s compared to 0.09s found with the Sabine and Eyring-Norris equation. From room configuration #2 to #3 the change is expected to be 0.44s according to the measured reverberation times, Fitzroy this time predicting 0.47s and the Sabine and EyringNorris equations 0.28s. This closer look to the degree of discrepancy observed between the anticipating changes in reverberation time from one room configuration to another predicted by the theory and by the practical measurements enables to perceive another limit of the accuracy of the prediction methods. It has consequently been expressed than the results obtained with the Fitzroy equation are once more the most in agreement with the practical measurements. An important point has to be made regarding the accuracy of the absorption coefficients used in the equations. As expressed earlier, a compromise between accuracy and availability inevitably took place in order to establish the average absorption for each material. The divergence in size and thickness of the materials as well as their disposition in the room is an important factor of disparity in the determination of the true level of absorption provided by a given material. In this sense the absorption will increase with air gaps and perforated materials depending on the space and dimensions and these discrepancies are not often specified in the available absorption coefficients publication. As a result, various degree of error can rapidly be introduced in the calculations and the final results can be severely altered from the true value of reverberation time. This appears to be one of the main limits of the theory.
50
Summary
Three of the classic theories of reverberation time have been applied to the same room for different configurations of sound absorption distribution. The reverberation times have been measured in-situ for each room configuration by the capture of the impulse response using a sine sweep test signal and by recording several decays at different microphones and sound source positions with the use of two different acoustic measurement softwares. The practical measurements were first compared at different scales in order to evaluate the degree of discrepancy introduced between different measuring positions in the room and for different acoustic measurement software. A good conformity of the results and the repeatability of the trends observed in each room configuration enabled a strong basis for establishing a reverberation time of reference in each room configuration in an attempt to later compare these values to the results predicted with the theory. The main aim of the project could finally be assessed, that is determining the level of accuracy of the classical reverberation time theories when applied to enclosed spaces presenting diverse sound field properties governed by a change the distribution of sound absorption. The largest divergence between predicted and measured values was commonly observed in the first half of the octave bands with theories providing an average of 40% discrepancy compared to practical measurements. The theories provided nevertheless truthful results in the second half of the octave bands with an average discrepancy of 15% with the practice. After evaluation of the modal activity of the room, it appears that the activity of modal resonance dominate in the first two frequency bands and thus the condition of homogeneous distribution of sound energy required by the theories is not fulfilled within that particular range of the spectrum. As a consequence, the estimation of reverberation time at low frequencies remains affected by the influence of modal resonances which is not taken into account in the theories assumption of diffuse sound field. Another aspect impacting on the assumption of diffuse sound field is the variation of absorption between the room surfaces which implies that the decay rate will be partially governed by the average absorption encountered during the sound propagation. In this case, the Fitzroy equation was found to give the closest statistical estimation of the reverberation time compared to the practical measurement and as such, the recognition of the Fitzroy theory to better take into account the absorption distribution of a room was verified. The Sabine equation provided the less discrepancy in the room configuration having the lowest average absorption and thus complies with the assumption of which the theorys accuracy is acknowledged. The Eyring-Norris theory however didnt provide any recurrent figure and as a result no statistical deduction can be carried out regarding its accuracy in distinct acoustic environments. As a conclusive statement, the theory of reverberation time appears to be limited to an approximate method of predicting the overall trend that the decay of sound is susceptible to undertake according to the acoustic propriety of the space under test.
51
References
Beranek, LL 2006, Analysis of Sabine and Eyring equations and their application to concert hall audience and chair absorption, 2 June 2006, Cambridge. Beranek, LL 2008, Concert hall acoustics, Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, Vol. 56, no. 8, August 2008, Cambridge. Cann, RG & Lyon RH 1979, Acoustical impulse response of interior spaces, the Audio Engineering Society, Vol. 27, No. 12, December. Journal of
D'Antonio , P 1986, T60- how do I measure thee, let me count the ways, in the 81st Convention, Audio Engineering Society, 12-16 November, Los Angeles. Everest, FA 2001, The Master Handbook of Acoustics, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill, New York. Eyring , CF 1930, Reverberation time in dead rooms, Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, Vol. 1, January, Melville. Fitzroy, D 1959, Reverberation formulae which seems to be more accurate with non-uniform distribution of absorption, Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, Vol. 31. Guzina, B 1982, Measurement of reverberation time using different signal sources, in the 71th Convention, 25 March, Audio Engineering Society, Montreux. Guzina, B 1984, Measurement of reverberation time using a microproceesor audio analyzer, in the 75th Convention, Audio Engineering Society, 27-30 March, Paris. Joyce, WB 1978 Exact effect of surface roughness on the reverberation time of a uniformly absorbing spherical enclosure, Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, Vol 65, Melville. Kanga, J & Neubauer, RO 2001, Predicting reverberation time: comparison between analytic formulae and computer simulation, in the 17th International Congress on Acoustics, Audio Engineering Society, Rome. Knudsen, VO 1932, Resonances in small rooms, Journal of the Acoustic Society of America, July. Long, M 2006, Architectural acoustics (applications of modern acoustics), Elsevier, Oxford. Louden, MM 1971, Dimension ratios of rectangular rooms with good distribution of eigentones, Acustica, Vol. 24. Mayo, CG 1952, Standing-wave patterns in studio acoustics', Acustica, Vol.2, no.2. Nelson, DA 1992, Impulse response of very small rooms, in the 93rd Convention, 1-4 October, Audio Engineering Society, San Francisco. Neubauer, RO 1999, Prediction of reverberation time in rectangular room using a modifiedfitzroy equation, in the 8th International Symposium on Sound Engineering and Mastering, 9-11 September, Gdansk, Poland.
52
Neubauer, RO 2000, Estimation of reverberation time in rectangular rooms with nonuniformly distributed absorption using a modified fitzroy equation, in the Seventh International Congress on sound and vibration, 4-7 July 2000, Germany. Nordtest 1985, Rooms: reverberation time, NT Acou 053, approved 1985-05. Powell, JG 1970, Choosing a formula for calculating the absorption coefficient from reverberation chamber measurements, Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, Vol. 18, No. 6, California. Prokofieva, E 2009, Selection of loudspeaker positions for reverberation time and sound field measurements, in the 126th Convention, 710 May 2009, Audio Engineering Society, Munich, Germany. Sabine, WC 1923, Collected papers on acoustics, Harvard University Press, New York. Schultz, TJ & Beranek, B 1962, How would you measure the reverberation time, in the 14th annual meeting of the Audio Engineering Society, 15-19 October 1962, Cambridge. Schultz, TJ & Beranek, B 1963, Problems in the measurement of reverberation time, Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, Vol. 11, No. 4, Cambridge. Stan, G, Embrechts, J & Archambeau D 2002, Comparison of different impulse response measurement techniques, Journal of the Audio Engineering Society, Vol. 50, No. 4, April, 2002. Ueda, LK, Kon,F & Iazzetta, F 2005, An open-source platform for musical room acoustics research, in the 2005 Congress and Exposition on Noise Control Engineering, 7-10 August 2005, Rio de Janeiro.
53

BAP260.1 Practical Project

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

BAP260.1 Practical Project

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Abstract:

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Part I/ Data Collection

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Note on the absorption coefficients:

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

The Bolts ratio is defined as :

Where L, W, H : Length, Width, Height of the room (m)

For the room under study, the ratios become:

Extract from Master Handbook of Acoustics, 4th edn, McGraw-Hill.

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Consequently, the critical frequency of the room is:

344 = 222 2.33

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

This is done by the use of the modal calculation given below:

See Appendix for calculations

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Part II/ Theory

The total absorption of a room is given by:

The average absorption coefficient is expressed as:

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

2/ Eyring-Norris Reverberation Time

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

3/ Fitzroy Reverberation Time

Where x, y, z : Total surface areas of a pair of opposite boundaries (2 )

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

4/ Predicted reverberation times

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

a) Room Configuration #1 Full

Reverberation Time Room #1

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

b) Room Configuration #2 Empty

Reverberation Time Room #2

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

c) Room Configuration #3 Non Uniform

Reverberation Time Room #3

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

PART III/ Practical measurements

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Sound source requirements

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

The critical distance is given by the expression:

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

The following picture represents the set up of the measurement process:

Microphone A Microphone B Microphone C Microphone D

Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays

Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays

Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays Decays

Microphone A Microphone B Microphone C Microphone D

Clement Bresson - SAE Institute - BAP260.1 Practical Project

Room Configuration #1 - Full

1/ Room #1 - AcMus Software