1 / 13

Pieter Schevenels , Lieven De Geetere, Nathalie Geebelen, Gerrit Vermeir, Bart Ingelaere

A comparison between the structure-borne sound generated by a low-frequency vibrating plate mounted on a light-weight structure and on a heavy-weight structure. Pieter Schevenels , Lieven De Geetere, Nathalie Geebelen, Gerrit Vermeir, Bart Ingelaere. Outline. Introduction Experimental setup

claude
Download Presentation

Pieter Schevenels , Lieven De Geetere, Nathalie Geebelen, Gerrit Vermeir, Bart Ingelaere

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. A comparison between the structure-borne sound generated by a low-frequency vibrating plate mounted on a light-weight structure and on a heavy-weight structure Pieter Schevenels, Lieven De Geetere, Nathalie Geebelen, Gerrit Vermeir, Bart Ingelaere

  2. Outline • Introduction • Experimental setup • Mobilities • Predicted and measured sound pressure levels • Conclusions A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  3. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities – Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions ? 1. Introduction ... • Background • Flow of power • Injection from source into structure • Distribution over structure • Radiation from structure into room • EN 12354-5 Installed power ... A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  4. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities – Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions ... Introduction ... • Background • Installed power (1D, single contact point) • Measuring F ... • Only in situ ... • Source and receiver ... • Measuring vsf ... • Reception plate method • (force source assumption) Source or receiver Equivalent velocity source Equivalent force source A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  5. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities – Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions ... Introduction • Background • Installed power (1D, three contact points) • Point mobilities Ykk and transfer mobilities Ykl • Matrix formulation → lots of variables to measure • Concept of effective mobilities • Incorporate all mobilities into one effective mobility YΣ • Assumptions about forces in different contact points • Equal • Random phase → A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  6. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities – Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions 2. Experimental setup ... • Vibrating plate • 24, 40 and 60 Hz • Amplitude: 3 mm • Reception plate • 2.0 x 2.8 m² • Thickness: 10 cm • Resiliently mounted A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  7. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities – Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions ... Experimental setup ... • Floor plates (resiliently mounted) • Wooden floor (3.0 x 3.0 m²) • Thickness: 25 cm • Fibreboard • 7 wooden joists with glass wool • 2 gypsum board plates • Concrete floor (2.0 x 2.0 m²) • Thickness: 10 cm • Floating floor (1.5 x 1.5 m²) • Thickness: 10 + 3 + 5 cm • Mineral wool layer • Light-density concrete plate A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  8. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities – Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions ... Experimental setup • Necessary data to predict SPL in lower room • Source characteristics • Airborne sound power level LWa • Structure-borne sound power level LWsn into reception plate • Plate characteristics • Mobility Y • Internal loss factor η • Airborne sound insulation R • Room characteristics • Reverberation time T • Volume V A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  9. Introduction – Experimental setup –Mobilities – Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions 3. Mobilities A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  10. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities –Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions 4. Predicted and measured SPLs ... • Wooden floor Operating frequency: 40 Hz →Force source assumption invalid at high mobility A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  11. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities –Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions ... Predicted and measured SPLs ... • Floating floor Operating frequency: 40 Hz →Force source assumption valid at low mobility A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  12. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities –Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions ... Predicted and measured SPLs • Concrete floor Operating frequency: 60 Hz Operating frequency: 40 Hz Operating frequency: 24 Hz → FSA seems to be dependent on operation frequency →FSA must be valid for all frequencies A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

  13. Introduction – Experimental setup – Mobilities –Predicted and measured SPLs – Conclusions 5. Conclusions • Reception plate method • Easy method • Fewer measurements • Relatively accurate predictions • Force source assumption • Possibly still good predictions when Ys is low • But bad predictions at all frequencies when operating frequency lies in a frequency band where Ys ≈ Yi → Black-box model of source invalid → Reaction forces do influence source behaviour A comparison between the structure-borne sound ... Pieter Schevenels et al.

More Related