INTRODUCTION

In planning the new Father Bender Community Center expansion for the Good Shepherd
Church, there are a variety of acoustical properties that must be considered to ensure maximum
owner and occupant satisfaction. For example, due to the various geometries and surface finishes
given in the architectural designs, sound reverberations will persist for different time intervals in
each room. These reverberations can either enhance or distort the intended sound depending on
the context of the space. In this report, three rooms will be presented and analyzed for the
appropriateness of their reverberation times: a small Classroom, a mid-size Gathering Space, and
a Parish Hall.
An analysis of the properties of each room reveals the scope of this report. As shown in
the architectural drawings, all three rooms are clad with primarily hard surfaces. Since hard
surfaces tend to reflect more sound than they absorb, the current reverberation times of each
room are expected to be higher than desirable. Regarding the uses of these spaces, the Parish
Hall has been specified for choral music purposes, and both the Classroom and the Gathering
Space have been specified for speech purposes. Choral music achieves a suitable sound with
high amounts of reverberation. However, speech requires distinction of individual syllables and
thus necessitates a lower amount of reverberation. As a result, the Classroom and Gathering
Space are expected to need a lower reverberation time than the Parish Hall.
Taking this information in addition to various formulas and experimental data, a more
detailed analysis of each room will be presented in this report. First, design targets for optimal
reverberation time of each room will be presented. Next, predicted reverberation times for the
three spaces with the finishes as given in the architectural designs will be quantified. Lastly, for
rooms where predicted values are far from design target values, recommendations for changes to
surface finishes will be made.

BACKGROUND
As stated previously, the acoustical property being analyzed in this report is reverberation
time. As sound travels through a room, it will persist for a period of time after it has been
emitted. This sound persistence is due to the numerous paths a sound can take from source to
receiver. The shortest path, which connects source and receiver in a straight line, yields direct
sound. Other paths, however, may lead toward various surfaces in the room. After interacting
with these surfaces, part of the sound will be reflected back toward the receiver, creating
successive repetitions following the direct sound. These successive repetitions, known as
reverberations, decrease in energy content in a relatively linear manner over time. The time it
takes for the sound power level to decrease by 60 dB is known as reverberation time (Vigeant 3).
For a typical room, an appropriate amount of reverberation is desirable. Since individual
reflections are not perceptible to the human auditory system, an appropriate amount of
reverberation can reinforce non-amplified music and speech (Vigeant 4). To predict the
reverberation time in a room, two important factors must be considered: room absorption and
geometry. The latter includes both volume and surface area. These values are then arranged in
one of the following two reverberation time equations. The first, Sabine [Eqn. 1], is used for very
reflective rooms with a room absorption coefficient less than 0.20. The second, Norris-Eyring
[Eqn. 2], is used for absorptive rooms with a room absorption coefficient greater than or equal to
0.20.
Eqn. 1
Eqn. 2

V = volume of room
ST = Total surface area of room
aa = Air attenuation constant
B = 0.16 (for metric), 0.049 (for imperial)

Once the original value for reverberation time has been determined, adjustments can be
made to the room materials to achieve the desired amount of reverberation. Altering materials in

a space changes the average room absorption coefficient and ultimately affects reverberation
time. For example, to lower the reverberation time in a given room, an acoustically soft material
such as carpet may replace an acoustically hard material such as tile, or vice versa. Other
materials specifically manufactured for their acoustical properties, known as sound absorbers,
can also be placed on walls and ceilings to increase the average room absorption coefficient and
decrease the reverberation time. For the rooms in this report, two types of sound absorbers will
be used: porous and panel absorbers.
With porous absorbers, sound strikes the surface of the material and causes the air
particles inside small chambers within the material to vibrate. As the air particles vibrate, they
collide with the walls of these chambers, and some of their energy is lost during the collision due
to friction. Examples of porous absorbers include ceiling tiles, office partitions, and wall panels.
In general, increasing the thickness of a porous absorber increases the amount of absorption.
With panel absorbers, sound strikes a solid, unperforated panel and sets the entire panel
in motion. An air space set behind the panel provides dampening to the system and absorbs the
energy of the sound wave. Unlike porous absorbers, panel absorbers are typically effective for a
specific frequency, known as the resonant frequency. However, by adding absorptive material to
the cavity behind the panel, the effectiveness of the absorber can be extended to a wider range of
frequencies.
In order to meet the design goals and achieve appropriate reverberation times for each
room, a variety of these sound absorbers and other materials will be implemented. Where
possible, details regarding the manufacturing of these materials, including product name and
size, will be given. For more common materials, such as carpet or concrete block, the generally
accepted values for absorption coefficients will be used.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

In determining the design goals for optimal reverberation time of each room, the
have been specified for speech purposes, their optimal reverberation time will lie closest to the

t the calculated room volume of the

space. The final values for the design targets are summarized in the table below [Table 1].
Table 1. Optimal Reverberation Time for Classroom, Gathering Space, and Parish Hall.

Figure 1. Calculated Reverberation Times for Classroom, Gathering Space, and Parish Hall.

Calculation of the original reverberation time of each individual space allowed for better
insight into how each room could be modified to meet these criteria. Beginning with the
Classroom, the original reverberation time was calculated using the surface finishes [Table 2],
the total volume (7855.21 ft3), and the overall surface area (2711.04 ft2). The design target for
the Classroom was 0.5 seconds for 500 Hz and 1000 Hz [Table 1]. As shown in the table below,
the calculated values were close to the design target, and modifications only needed to be made
for 250 Hz and 500 Hz [Table 3]. In order to meet the design target for all frequency bands, the
proposed design replaced Expanko rubber floor tile with parquet on counterfloor for all floor
areas and gypsum walls with plaster decorative panels for the south and north walls.
Table 2. Surface finishes and absorption coefficients in all rooms (Mehta 407-11).

Table 3. Original reverberation times for Classroom, Gathering Space, and Parish Hall.

In the Gathering Space, more modification was required. The original reverberation time
for the Gathering Space was calculated using the absorption coefficients of the surface finishes
within the room [Table 2], the volume of the space (88763 ft3), and the total surface area (12856
ft2) of the room. For 500 Hz and 1000 Hz, the reverberation time was 1.03 seconds. The
calculated values [Table 3] were much higher than the design goal. In order to meet the design
goal, four different modifications were considered for this room [Table 4].
Table 4. Summary of design alternatives for Gathering Space.

Ultimately, the alternative design created by Scanlon was chosen for the final design.
This design minimized adding more surface area through acoustical clouds and bass traps, and
the calculated reverberation time came very close to the optimal reverberation time. The chosen
design changed a large portion of the upper east and west walls to Woodtrends wood panels in
order to absorb more low frequency. An area of 320 ft2 of Whisperwave clouds was added to the
space to absorb high amounts of 4000 Hz sound. Parquet on counterfloor replaced all floor
materials to balance reverberation time at all frequencies. Data sheets of all materials used in
alternative designs are included in the Appendix of this report.
Unlike the former rooms, the Parish Hall required more reflective materials to increase
the reverberation time. The original reverberation time for the Parish Hall was calculated using

the surface finishes in the hall [Table 2], the total volume (42205 ft3), and the overall surface
area (11083 ft2). The design target for the room was 1.97 seconds for 500 Hz and 1000 Hz [Table
3]. The calculated reverberation time was expected to be high due to the presence of hard
surfaces. However, the carpet and acoustical tiling contributed a large amount of absorption and
actually decreased the reverberation time below its optimal level. The proposed design replaced
the carpet floor with a hard rubber sheet and the acoustical ceiling with hard plaster. A complete
comparison of target and proposed design reverberation times for each room can be found below
[Table 5][Figure 2].
Table 5. Target and proposed reverberation times for all rooms.

Figure 2. Target and proposed reverberation times for all rooms.

SUMMARY
In summary, three rooms in the new Father Bender Community Center expansion for the
Good Shepherd Church - a Classroom, a Gathering Space, and a Parish Hall - were analyzed in
this report for the appropriateness of their reverberation time. In this report, values used for the
calculation of reverberation time, including room dimensions and absorption coefficients, were
obtained from the architectural drawings and Appendix H of the Architectural Acoustics
textbook, respectively. Target reverberation times we

imal Reverberation

A comparison of the calculated values and the target values for each of the spaces
revealed that all three spaces required modification. The Classroom was closest to its optimal
values but still required a lower reverberation time. The proposed design replaced all floor areas
and added new materials to the south and north walls. The Gathering Space was further from its
optimal values and also required a lower reverberation time. The proposed design changed a
large portion of the upper east and west walls, added baffles, and replaced all floor area. The
Parish Hall was furthest from its optimal values and required a higher reverberation time. The
proposed design replaced the carpet floor with a hard rubber sheet and the acoustical ceiling with
hard plaster.