Original Article

Determining and Comparison of Sound Absorption Coefficients using Small Reverberation Chamber and Test Tube Methods

Abstract

Sound absorbing materials have been widely used to decrease hazardous noise in indoor and outdoor environments. In the present study, we designed and constructed an experimental laboratory-scale chamber to measure the sound absorption coefficients of porous materials in comparison with the measurements of the test tube method. The main reason was to design and construct a small chamber to enable testing of acoustic material samples in small dimensions allowing easy and rapid testing of acoustic materials. The acoustic chamber method was based on the formation of reverberation field of the acoustic waves across testing chamber locations, but differences in sound pressure throughout the chamber may result in measurement errors. Therefore, the chamber was constructed with a volume of 2.85 m3, wall reflectors, and a rotating sound source was designed to ensure a diffusive field. The tests were conducted with samples of 12.4m2 installed on interior surfaces of the chamber. Sound absorption coefficients of acoustic polyethylene and polyurethane absorbents were measured across the central frequencies of the octave band. Sound absorption coefficients under reverberant random incidence and normal incidence were related to the sound frequency. The chamber method predicted higher sound absorption coefficients compared to the coefficients obtained by the tube test method for all tested porous materials. Based on the results of the proposed small chamber, it can be concluded that sound absorption coefficients measurement of samples in an environment was more similar to real situations.  

1. Paschalidou K, Kassomenos P, Chonianaki F. Strategic Noise Maps and Action Plans for the reduction of population exposure in a Mediterranean port city. Sci Total Environ. 2019; 654: 144-153.
2. Razavi H, Ramezanifar E, Bagherzadeh J. An economic policy for noise control in industry using genetic algorithm. Saf Sci. 2014; 65: 79-85.
3. Kouhnavard B, Abbasi A, Najimi MR, Jebali A. Sound Absorbents and Using New Technologies inthem; A Systematic Review. Beyhagh. 2015; 20 (3-34): 51-61. [In Persian].

4. Sung G, Kim JW, and Kim JH. Fabrication of polyurethane composite foams with magnesium hydroxide filler for improved sound absorption. J Ind Eng Chem. 2016; 44: 99-104.
5. Maccà I, Scapellato ML, Carrieri M, Maso S, Trevisan A, Bartolucci GB. High-frequency hearing thresholds: effects of age, occupational ultrasound and noise exposure. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2015; 88(2): 197-211.
6. Taban E, Khavanin A, Jafari AJ, Faridan M, Tabrizi AK. Experimental and mathematical survey of sound absorption performance of date palm fibers. Heliyon. 2019; 5(6): e01977.
7. Vitkauskaite G, Grubliauskas R. Perforated sound-absorbing constructions acoustic performance test and noise modeling. Energy Procedia. 2018; 147: 288-294.
8. Peng L, Song B, Wang J, Wang D. Mechanic and acoustic properties of the sound-absorbing material made from natural fiber and polyester. Adv Mater Sci Eng. 2015; 2015: 5.
9. Bai P, Yang X, Shen X, Zhang X, Li Z, Yin Q, Jiang G, Yang F. Sound absorption performance of the acoustic absorber fabricated by compression and microperforation of the porous metal. Mater Des. 2019; 167:107637.
10. Aliabadi M, Golmohammadi R, Oliae M, Shahidi R. Study of noise absorption characteristics for current building materials applied in industrial and office rooms. J Occup Hyg Eng. 2016; 3(3): 32-39. [In Persian]

11. Echeverria CA, Pahlevani F, Handoko W, Jiang C, Doolan C, Sahajwalla V. Engineered hybrid fibre reinforced composites for sound absorption building applications. Resour Conservat Recycl. 2019; 143: 1-14.
12. McGrory M, Cirac DC, Gaussen O, Cabrera D, Engineers G, editors. Sound absorption coefficient measurement: re-examining the relationship between impedance tube and reverberant room methods. In: Proceedings of acoustics, vol. 2012.
13. Yuvaraj L, Vijay G, Jeyanthi S. Study of sound absorption properties on rigid polyurethane foams using FEA. Indian J Sci Tech. 2016; 9: 33.
14. Kierzkowski M, Law H, Cotterill J. Benefits of Reduced-size Reverberation Room Testing. Proc. Acoustics 2017, Perth, Australia, 2017.
15. Drabek, P. Comparison of two internationally recognized methods for determining the sound absorption coefficient. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences, Crete, Greece, 14–17 July 2017; Volume 125, pp. 1–4.
16. Drabek P, Zálešák M. Reverberation chamber and its verification for acoustic measurements. In MATEC Web of Conferences 20th International Conference on Circuits, Systems, Communications and Computers (CSCC 2016). EDP Sciences, (2016). 17. Carlisle EJ, Hooker RJ. Small chamber reverberant absorption Measurement. Proceedings of ACOUSTICS, 2004.
18. Abdollahi Baghban S, Khorasai M. Flexible Acoustic Polyurethane Foam: An Overview of Physical Structure and Chemical Properties. Polymerization. 2018; 8(1): 90-100.
19. Hernández D, Liu E, Huang J, Liu Y. Design and Construction of a Small Reverberation Chamber Applied to Absorption and Scattering Acoustic Measurements. Adv Mater Res. 2015; 1077: 197-202.
20. Tormos R, Alba Fernández J, Bertó Carbó L, Gregori A. Small-sized reverberation chamber for the measurement of sound absorption. Mater. Constr. 2017; 67(328): 1-9.
21. Rasa A. Development of a small-scale reverberation room. Proc Acoustics; 2016; 1-10.
22. Jeong C-H. Non-uniform sound intensity distributions when measuring absorption coefficients in reverberation chambers using a phased beam tracing. J Acoust Soc Am. 2010; 127(6): 3560-3568.
23. Wang Y, Zhang C, Ren L, Ichchou M, Galland MA, Bareille O. Influences of rice hull in polyurethane foam on its sound absorption characteristics. Polymer Compos. 2013; 34(11): 1847-1855.
24. Tiuc A-E, Vermeşan H, Gabor T, Vasile O. Improved sound absorption properties of polyurethane foam mixed with textile waste. Energy Procedia. 2016; 85: 559-565.
25. Chen S, Jiang Y, Chen J, Wang D. The effects of various additive components on the sound absorption performances of polyurethane foams. Adv Mater Sci Eng. 2015; 2015: 9.
26. Del Rey R, Alba J, Bertó L, Gregori A. Small-sized reverberation chamber for the measurement of sound absorption. Materiales de Construcción. 2017; 67(328):139.
Files
IssueVol 13 No 4 (2021) QRcode
SectionOriginal Article(s)
Published2021-12-30
DOI https://doi.org/10.18502/ijoh.v13i4.8426
Keywords
Noise Acoustics Materials Testing Absorbent Sound Absorption Diffusive Chamber
Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
1.
Dehdashi A, Malekmohamadi A, Ghaeini G. Determining and Comparison of Sound Absorption Coefficients using Small Reverberation Chamber and Test Tube Methods. Int J Occup Hyg. 2021;13(4):324-336.