PB222829

11111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111

WYLE LABORATORiES R~P'::>RT WP 73-5

A Study of Techniques to
Increase the Sound InslJlation '
of Building Elements

Prepared for:
Department of Ho./sing and Urban Development
Washington, D, C.
Under Contract H-1095

REPRODUCED BY, NJlI

u.s. Department of Commerce
National Technical Information Service
Springfield, Virginia 22161

Prepared by:
Ben H. Sharp
Wyle Laboratories Research Staff
128 Maryiand ~treet
EI Segundo, California 90245

June, 1973
 TCCHNICAL REPOIH ShHOARO T1TLf PAGE
-
3. R.ci,io"'·' Colo'''', No.

I
,.,..n' Ac(. ••• lo., No.

lr ., ,
I
1 \ ) ':l.. i
~
S. Rop.,f Do'.
A STUDY OF TECHNIQUES TO INCR EASE THE SOUND Junl!' 1973
....,
'. P.,..... ~o O'lon; 10hOll C.4.
INSULATION OF BUILOI;'lJG ElEMEN TS
h,-.:--.:--:~~--------- - _
l'. ..... rh.,(.1 6, P.,fo....,,,,. O"oniac,ilOl\ Ropo" Ho.
Ben H. Sharp

9. P."O,,,,inl O'llQl'li lolio" No",...,d Add •••• 10. Wo'~ U"ir No.
Wyle laboratories - Research St(Jff
128 Mary' ane Street 11. eo"r,OCl 0' r;.,on! No.
H-lO'~
EI Segundo, California 90245
13. Ty,o 0' R.po,' on" P",lo" Co... ,o"
12. S,...nlOrin, Alo"r,. No",.... d A.ddru.
FINAL f~EPORT
Department of Housing 8. Urbcm Cleve lopmenl June 1~69 - June 1973
451 - 7tll Street, S. W .
1-4. SponIO';"V "'\lO"cy Cad.
Washi ngton, D. C. 204 W
1---
15. 5VI'P:1"'."'Qry 1'0101 ••
----.-- ..--- ,-------- ----_ .

'-~_.
, f

The princi"les and techniq /l6s thot perta~n 10 the deSign of budding elememts provldl'lg high
.
values "If sound tra,'sminion loss at low cost are presented. A comprehensive discussion of the
principles of transmission loss for many di f~rent types of r-onstructi"ns is given und a series of
analytical expressions derived. The techniques developed for obtaining high values of trans-
mission Joss ore validated by ml;lons of 0 ~riss of laboratory f'ests conduc:'sd on experimental
and practical prototype constructiorls. The cost/eUectiveness of the practical constructions is
compar'Dd to that for existing constructiO"ls in common use today. It is shown that the trans-
mission loss of ,:,.,glo panels an~ multiple panel~ with ~ound bridges con be detem:in'td accuratelt
by means of a Stot of simple expressions. These expressions car. be applied directly to iLw opti ...
mum design of building elements providing high vahJes of transmission loss. From the standpoint
"f acoustical performance, cost and total mass, the practical prototype constructions devoloped
are '\uperior to constructic-.ns that are in conlmcn use today.

~:=--------
11. IC." Word,
--- .--.--------------.. 'r-:-:--~-~-- , - - _.._ - -
18. Dlillib"',~n ~IOIQ", ••• 1
._---._-----
ACOU5ij(_~ Availability is Unlimited. Docum"'nt may be
re Ieased to the C icod ngholJse for Fedp.ro I
Scientific and Technical Information, Spl"ngfi .. ld,
l Virginia 22151, for sal~ to the p:Jblic •

_9_u_S_n·:_:·_;~_':_s_:_~ _~_~_'·_(·_'._'_"
......... ,_,_,_on_o_r'_'I ,.~~~.~~, ., . . .. . , - - - - "~:;' ': -n;;.~ ~
Form DOT F 17CO.7 I~ oIi9'
 PREFACE

A program of the si2:e and level of effort pr€~.e.,ted herein WCiuld have
bean impossible without significant cr.mtribuHons by many indiv:duah.
Of all those who participated in the project, however, the author
wishes to give special acknowledgmenf j'o the r:.ontributions mode by
the late Mr" Robert Miller of HUD who nol' on, I overviewed the r:rogram
but of more significoncf', set the :~al whkh provided the impetuJ for its
succes$ful t;-:>mpletion. Special thanks also to Mr. Maury Erkill'J of HUD
for his direction anti patience in seeing the project through to its CO"l'l-
pletion.

Sincere appreciation is IJlso due Professor Lethar Cremer of fhe Tech-

nic':al University .:>f Berlin, who provided invaluable assistonce at the
onset of the program in discu~~ions on his most race'lt wori< and that of
his colleagues.

Various members of the Research Staff Colt Wylt: Laboratories provided

much of the support in the program. Jn p,,,rti cu Ior the author wi shes to
express his gratitude to Kenneth M. Eldmd for his guidrJllce and aid in
overcoming seemingly difficult probl~ms. Other rnemboers of the Wyle
Research Staff wh" provided siQnificant r:ontributions ~nvude John W.
Swing for hi:» long ar.d arduous work in managing the te!it program,
Fancher M. Murray for his worK on exteriO!' structure:s, and Louis C.
Suth~rland, Manager of the Research Stoff, for his (,;ootinual gu:dance
end enthusi asm.

ii
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTORY SUMMAPY

2.0 PRINCIPLES OF ~iOUND TR.ANSMISSION LOSS 3

2. 1 Single P'anel Structures. 3
L. 1 1 I:undc men ta I Con cepts
2.1 2 Fundelmer.tcl Expressions 4
2.1.3 Thin S'ng't; POllels . 5
2.1.4 Thic'r( Sin91~ ?anels 12
2. 1.5 Lcminated Panels . 16
2.1.6 Me,55-Loaded Ponels 18
tdp.ol Multiple Panei Str \cture~ 22
2.2.1 General Theory for MIJltip!e Panels 22
2.2 ,2 Trar.smi ssi on LI)ss of I.:leal Doubl e Pone IS 24
2.2.3 Transmission Loss of ideal Triple. 34
2.2.4
2.2.5
ComparLon of C.ol,ole and Triple Panels
Cavity Absarptior, in Multiple Panels of :=inite Si;:e,
"'37' '
,""

2.3 Sou:1d Bridges In Multiplr; Panels 44

2.3.1 (jeneral Theory 44
2.3.2 Experi menta I Veri fj cati on of Sound Bri dgi n9 Theorl . 52
2.3.3 Isolated Fcnf:ls 56
2.1.1 Summary of Design .v.nthvds . 63
2.4. I Desisn fx~ ressions _ 63
2.4.2 Special D~sign Methods 7~
1.4.3 STe D,:si 'jn IlIe·hod 79

3.0 DESleJt-J OF BUILDING t:LEMENTS FOR HlGH TRANSMISSION l.OSS 83

3.1 The 20 dB Requi mment .

Design Pmarfl(-tl!l s for the 20 dB Requirement d3

?mdiclJ: ReolizCltion of the 20 dB Req'Jirem~nt. 87
3.2 lienll:I,,'S of Bui ,din~ (omtrl'ctions Q6
3 . .2.1 Wind,'JW5 , 'M
3.) ~l 0001\ 9?
3.2.3 Floer ol"d Roof/Ceding SY5tems 101

iii
 3.3 Application of Principles to Prototype De~igns . 104
3.3. 1 Experi mental Prot"types. 101
3.3.2 Prart i co I Prototypes 143

4.0 EXTERNAL STRUCTURES 171

4.1 Shielding by Barriers 171

5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND Ri:COMMENDAiIONS . 181

RcFtRENCES 18:i

APPENDIX A - DETERMINATTON OF THE: TRANSM!SSIO~-J

IMPEDANCE OF A SINGLE PANEL . A-I

APPENDIX B - THE TRA!-..JSMISSJON LOSS OF A FINITE SINGLE

PANfL SUBJECT TO REVERBERAt-.lT SOUND FH:lD
EXCITATION. B-1

APPENDIX C _. THE TRANSMISSION LOS~ OF A Dl)UBLE PAI\lEL . C-l

AP?ENDIX D - THE TRAI'lSMISSION LOSS OF Po TRrPLE PANEL. D-l

APPENDIX E - THE DETERMINATION OF THE RATiO OF PANEl..

VELOCITIES FOR A DOUBLE PANfL
CONSTRUCTION. 1:-1

APPENDIX F - DERlV/\ nON OF THE EXPRESSIONS FOR THE ~l rc

DESI GN METHOD. F-l

IV
 LIST OF TABLES

Table

Measured Values cf Tronsmissir:m Loss (d3) for a Number of Con-

69
v'!ntionol Bu; Iding Materials

2 Minimum Wall Thickness for Double Walls of Different Materials 94

Req'Jired to Meet tIe 20 dB Requiremer,r at Differ'~nt ~requencies

3 A li"t of the Advantages and Disadvont,::;g.:>s of Various M'Jterials 1~

for use in Hi'3h Transmh~ion loss Constructiors

Experimental j'rototype rest Results 141

Matrix of Pos~ib'e Building E!emcnt~ and STC Ratings 144

6 Summary of ,'.\easlJred and PrC'di cted V'.llues of Trans",i>sion los~ for 166
the Practical Prototypes

I Description of Standard Constructions Included in figure 79 168

8 Octave BOl1d CC;1ter Frequenci es - Full and tiIodel Scale 172

9 Equivalent Full Scola Dimensions of Scurce-Receiver-r~lJrrier 1"14

Con fi gur"ti ons Te~ ted

v
 LIST OF AGURES

The Imaginary Part of the Trarlsmission Impedance of a Thin Panel for 6

Grazing Incidence (8 = lT/2) Showing the Effect of Coincidence

2 Measured and Calculated Values of the Transmissioll Loss of liS-inch 9

Hardboard

3 Measured and Calculated Values of the Transmission Loss Clf S/S-i.,ch 11

Gypsumboard

4 The Imaginary Port of t~e Transmissior, Impedance of (I Thick Panel ]A

"

for Grazing Incidence (8 - lT/2)

5 The Tr(lnsrrission Loss of a Hypothetical Paflel as 0 Function of Fre- 15

qlleney with the Ratio Fs (the Frequency at Which Shear Waves
[Iornir,ote) to Fe (the Critical Frequency) as Parameter

6 'jhe Memured Values of Tronsmissic"n Loss for a 6-inch Concrete Pan':! I 16

Comparecl to Values i>rt:dicted by Means of the T:·,jn and Thick t'l']nei
Theories

7 The Measure.:! Vollies of Transmission loss for a Si'~'Jle and Two 19

1/2-inch Spot laminated Shee·s of Gypsumboard

8 The Mea~ured Values of Transmission loss for n Single and Two 19

3/S-inch Spot Laminated SheeTs of Gypsumboard

9 Measured Values of the Tronsrr.i:ision Loss of" l/S-in-:h Fiber Glass 20

Pane I Ma~s l t..'Oded to 4 Ihs/ft 2 wi th Sand

10 Measured Vulue:. of the Trans,."ission Los~ of a 1/2-inc:1 PIYW':)I.d 21

Pane: Mcm Loaded to 4 Ihs/ft 2 with A~phalt Roofing Paper

The Elec.tr;cal Analog CirClJit Reprmentin~ a ,"~ultiple Plmel 23

(on st ru ct i on

12 Exac.t rOml f.')1 the Tronslnis~i()n Lo:;s of all Ideol ()I)uble Ponel 26

13 ,V.eusured Vnlves of the Tr'Jnsmissi"n Loss of n Doubll! Pant I Com- 29

pared to Valves Calculated by the ,l1pproximate Method

vi
 LIST OF FIGURES ••• continued

Page,
14 Measured and Calculated Values of the Transmission Loss of 5/0- 30
inch Gypsumboord

15 Normalized Reduction in Transmission Loss of an Ideal Double 32

Gypsumboard Panf'1 (17 = 0.01) at Frequencies Near the Critical
Frequencies of the Two Panels. The Farameter is the Ratio of t"e
Critical FrequPIl!:ies of the Pane'~

16 Normalized Reduction in Trommi,sion Loss of all Ideal Double 32

Gypsumboard Ponel (.r, =:: 0.1 ) at F~equencjes Near the Critical
Frequencies of ~f,e TNO Poneh. The Parometer is the Ratio of the
Critical Frequencies of the Ponels

17 The Effect of Varying ~hE' Panel Mass und Spacing on the lrammission 33
I.oss of an Ideal Double Panel

18 A Compar:son of the ',"ansmission Loss Provided by Double tmd Tripie 36

Ponel ConstnJctions of Equal Total Mas;, and Overull Thi ckness

19 Measured Values of the Tronsmissior, Loss of an 1!>OIated Double Panel 39

Comtruetion with and without Full-Layer C~vity Absorption. The
Construction Consists of 1/4" and 1/8" Hardlx)onJ with a Spacing o(
6-1/4 inches

20 Transmission Loss Values for an Ideal Double Panel with a Full Layer 40
Fiber GI ass Insulation Ikard cnd Fi ber G lass Batts

21 Measured Values of Transmi,s;on Loss of an ISlJlated Double Panel 41

ConstpJction with Perimetp.r Absorption. The Construction Consists
of 1/4" cmd l/B" Hardboard witf-. (J Spacing of 6- 1/4 inchps

22 Measured Voluf's of Transmission Loss of an holoh·d Double Pcnel 43

Coostrudlon with 0 2' x 2' Latfice in the Caviiy. rhc r:ollStructiol1
Comisls of 1/4" and l/B" Hardbor.Jrd with () SpocinO 'J( 6·- 1/4 inche~

2,3 Gtmerul form for the Transmi;sion Luss of 0 Double' P,mp.1 with 49
Sound Bri dges

vii
 LIST OF FIGURES ••• continued

24 The Increase' in Transmission Loss Tl M with Reference to the Mass 51

Law as a Function cf the Quantities (efc ) and (bfc ) for a
Oouble Panel with Sound Bridges

25 V'easured and CalculatecJ Values of rronsmis~ian Loss for a Double 53

Panel with a Number o~ Point Connections

26 Measured and CJIcL'loted Volue~ of Transmissior, LC'S$ far a DoublE'! .53

POrf I wi th a Li ne Connecti on Between the ra,,~1 s

27 Measured Values ot rronsrnission Loss fer (I Double Ponel with One 55

and Both Panel~ Mounted with Point Conncetinns

28 ."Aeasured and Calc:ultlted Values of Trommi',sj~H) Los'. for a Double :=5

Panel with One (jf the Panels Mounted with Point Conncetion~

29 Method of Providing a Puini Connc:";;oP to One Panel in u Double )7

Pon~1 Constructian

30 Measured Values of Transmission loss for a Double Panel with no 58

Connectiom end with Perimeier Conn~etions

31 Measured Values of Tronsmission Loss for a Doubl~ Panel with Both 5<.3
Penels Mounted with Point Connections on R'·silient B,.,se )trifi".

32 Measured Vulues of Trammission Loss for a DolJble Panel wit~. 0 60

Limited Number of Isaluted Point Connections

':31 M{,C1~ur"rl VallJe~ of Trammis~ion Lo~~ fOI (J Double Panel Construc.ticn 60

with Identical POlleb Both Mounted on holatfld Point Connt:!diom

:34 Measured Vall)l~< of TrlJFlSm:ssion Los~ for (J Daubl,! ronel (omtn-,c- CJ

tion with Dissimilar Pone!', MOIJllted on 150lotcd Point Cor,nl'ctiof1~

:Lr
) M('(l\IJl"d V(JII)E'~ of Tromrni;:,iol1 Lo", f'·,1 (J Douhl(' Ponel with on 6~)
l'iolntfln Line Connf~c:tirJn

11· Th(' General r Olnl of thl:' Tronsrni:,sion Los~ m (l ~unction or Frequency 66

fo' (J Thin Single Panel

vii i

hllilt c .' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -_ _ 5. •
 LIST OF FIG'jRES ••• continu",~

Figure Poge
37 The Generul Form of the Transmission Loss as n Function of Fre- 68
quency for a Double Panel with Sound Bridges

38 Relationship Between the Product mid and the Fundamental Double 70

Panel Resonant Frequency f
o
• ~ .. -
7'3
39 The General Form of the Transmission loss as ,) FlInetilm of Fre-
qL'ency for a Triple Panel with Sound Br:dges

40 Required Transrni.>sion loss C~,(Jrac:teri;tic for De~ign Example /6

41 STC Design Chort for a Dcuble Ponel 80

42 Minimum Design Requirf'mer'lt for oJ Multiple Panel Comtruc:ion 84

wi th Sound Bri dges to 50ti sfy the 20 dB Requi rement

Requirements for the t/lesse- m I and m / and Internal S~acing d 86

for a Double Ponel 10 Satisfy the 20 dB Requirement

44 Minimum Overall Thicknes~ as a Function of SiC Rating for a 90

Double Gypsumboard F.Jnel Construction Satisfying the 20 dB
Requirement

45 The MinimUITI Overall Thickness of a Do.;ble GypsumbotHd Panel 91

Construction f'rovidirq 0 Tmnsmission Loss 6 TL M dB in Excess
of the Co leu I otod Mrw> Law in the Ftequency Range I 25 H 7 to
4000 rlz

Minimuln Overall T'ljdJH~'" Dmin uf u Double FOilel Comtrudiun

Sothfying the 20 dB Requirer.. ent os Cl runction of MotE-Hi,' Demily

47 The STC Rating as 0 runet;ofl of Panel Spacing f, (] Doublf' Pon<" I

Comtruction with rCJn~ls of Equol Mcr·.~ S[1ti~fyinq l~l~ 20 dB
Rcqui rC'11E'nt

48 Colculoted Valu€!, of Tr(JI1~'iT1i~,:,i()n LO$~ for 1/8-inc.J, ond I ,4-~iflCf. 9)

Sculd () lass Panv Is

49 Measured Vulue'i of Trommissior'l Loss of a 1/4-inch All/minLIln

Sliding Clem W,ndl)w wit!, C()rvp,n'iona~ and Modif.l'd Seah

IX

..... _- ---~.....--_------------_.-..-----_._
......... __.............
 LIST OF FIGURES ••• C',()ntinu~\d

Figure Page
50 DiagrorT'! or Q MC"Jdified Seal for Sliding C·lass Windows 98

51 Measured Transmission Loss Value!; of a 1-·3/4-inch Solid Core Door 100

52 impact Noise Levels for a Conc.rete Floor with and without Carpets 103
(Data Normalized 1'0 on Absorption of 10 m2 .)

53 Impoc.l Noise l.evels for 0 Wood-Joist Floor with and without 103
Corp€' ' (Datq Normalized to an Absorpti,:>n of 10 m2 .)

;;4 Transmission Lo~s (if the Common Wall in the Wyle Transmission lOB
; ....
Loss F(Jci I ity

55 Tronsmis<ion Loss Value~ for Prototype A 111

56 Transmission Loss Vclues for Prototype B 113

57 Transmission Loss Values for Prototype C 1 J5

58 Transmission loss Values for Prototype D 1f7

59 Transm issi<- n Loss Vclues for Prototype E 119

60 Tronsm ission L.oss Values for Pl"ototype F 121

61 Transmission Loss Values for Prototype G J 23

62 Transm i 5si on Lo~s Va I ue~ for P~ototype H. 125

63 TrCln~'nission Loss end Impaf~1 >Joise I.evel Values for Prototype J 127

64 Transmission Loc~ and Jlr,pocl Noise Level Volues for Prototype K i 29

65 Trammission Loss Volut~s for Protol,pe K 131

66 TromrTIission Loss Valuer. for Prototype L. 133

67 Trr=m".,i~si'.>fl Loss Values for Prototype M 135

63 Trammisslon LossVnlues for Prutotype N 137

x
 LIST OF FIGURES .•. contir.ued

Page

Trammission Loss Volup~ for Protvtype 0 139

70 Transmission Loss Valuo'; ft>r Prototype I 149

71 Tron!.mission Loss Values for Prototype 2 151

72 Transrnission loss Values for Prctotype 3 153

73 Transmission Loss Values for Prototype 4 155

74 Transmission Loss Values lor Prototype 5 157

i'5 Tran~missiol1 loss VallJ~:; for Prol'otype .5 159

7b ,Transmission Loss Values fc.r Pro!otype ; 161

77 Transmission Loss und Impact Noise Level Values for Prototype 8 16:3

78 Tror,smi~:;!on Loss VGIIJes for Prototype Q

79 Cost versus STC Ratin:::! for Existing and New Wall Designs 169

80 The STC Rl.lting m a FU'letion of the Mass for Existing and Proto- 170
type Well Construdions

81 E,'<pedmental Curve ot I.',sertion Lo~s by a Sell1i-lnfinit~ ~jcreen in 171

FreE'! Spat:':e os a Functiop of the Parometer l'-l

82 Conf'lgurat;on for Barrier Meosuremellts _0 Full Scale 173

Dimensions

83 Sound Attenuoticll1 by Barrier Configurations 1 and 2 175

84 Sound AHenuation by Bllrrier Configurations 3 and 4 175

85 Sounrl Attt'!nuction by Configurations 5, 6 and 7 176

86 Sound Attenuation by Configuratiom 8 and 9 176

xi
 LIST OF FIGURES ••• continued

PaRe
Sound Attenuation by Configurations 10, 11 and 1L 177

88 Sound Attenuation by Conti gurations 13 and 14 177

89 Sound Attenuation by Configurations 15, 16 c..nd 17 178

Appendix E

E1 Equi·.. . olent EI ectri cal Ci rcuit for a Double Panel at Low El

Frequencies (X > > d)

E2 Equivalent Electrical Circuit for a /):IIJS'e Pant'l a~ High E3

Frequencies (X <f d)

E3 The General Form of the Transmissivn Loss of a Bridged Double E6

Panel

Appendix F

F1 The General Transmission Loss Characteristic of 0 DouLle Panel

with Saund Bridges Adjusted so as to Just Provide CI G;ven SiC:
Ruting --

xii
1.0 INTRODUCTORY SUMMARY

In recent years, significant advC!nces have been made in building technology .-

both in the design of building components and in building methods themselves.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has attempted to
coordi;"lote some of these technological advances in " major demonstration pro··
gram - OPERATION BREAKTHROUGH - which at the time of this writing is
still in progress. It is impattant, of course, that the technology in each of t~,e
many facet~ of the building process advance ot approximately the same rat~1
so that the structural and environmenh.: ci"Iarocteristics of a building system
are compatible within themselves. One of lhe many environmental character-
istics that must be considered is the sound insuior:on provided by the. various
bliilding elements. This aspect of the building sY$tem is fupldly assuming co
greater importance as people become more sensitive to the effects of noise
impact and learn that certain steps can be taken to av~id it. Unfortunatel!"
for tne past several years there have been few significant advances in the
thP.Ory and Fractice of soun':: in!>ulation, with the resuit that designs aFpearing
in modern acoustical handbooks differ I ittle from those of two decades ago.

HUD has responded to the ~eed f~r IJdditional reseJrch and deve/opr,lent by
instigating this program ....hich is designed tn study techniques of increasing
the sound insulation ~f buil:fing elements and I"wer the c05t. Included in the
program is a design goal requiring that the values of transmi~ion loss for the
constructions developed should exceed the vnlues calculated according to the
mass law by at least 20 dB in the frequency range 125 Hz tc 4000 Hz. This
unusual but in~r1guing goal was introduced infO the program by the :ate
Mr. Robert Miller of HUD, who by sa doing provided the nf:cessary challenge
which was required to develop new design mp.thods. Even with the knowledge
gained fror., this program, it is hard in retrospect to define an alternative goal
that would have inspired thp. SlJmE: level of effort and still be within the bounds
of poSS i biI i ty •

A cursory examinaf'ion of existing c()mmon constructions showed that none

liatisfied or even approached the requirements for the acoustical gool of this
program. Thf" transmission los. of some con5truct:ons approaches a value that
is 20 dB greater than the moss low at 0 few freqlJp.ncies. To achieve the goal
over the full frequency range I however I the new constructions requi red un
order of magn i tude increase in the transm i 5S i on loss val ues . Moreover ,it was
required that low-cost materials be used in the designs.

The theory avai labie at the time predi ded that the majority of existing con-
structions were capable of providing significantly greater values of transmission
loss tho:l tht>se measured ill the laboratory. It was therefore necessary to
examine and modi fy the basic theories so that more a':curate predict ion methods

-1-
could bE: developed. Chapter 2 of this report contains ':J comprehensive dis-
cussion of the principles of sound tran!,mission 1055 for many different typtts of
constructions. The discu:)sion covers the development of met'.ods which moke
signi fi cant increases in the transmission loss of simple and complex structures
p;)ssible. For cOlweniencel' this chapter concludes with a summary of the more
important expressions developed, together with a description of methods by
which constructions can be designed to meet specific acoustical requjr~ments.

To test the validity of the new exprc:.assions, a series of experimental prototyPf!s,

and later a ..eries of practical prototype construc~ions, w,~re designed, built
and tested. These proto~ypes cover til I the di fferent types of bui Iding elementa.
A rlisclJssion of the upplicatiOf' of the design requiremp.nts, the practical con-
~ti'oints invol"ed and the protCltype test results are contained il'l Chnpteor 3. It
is shc'Nr: that the "20 dB reqL.irement, II (JS the acoustical requi!'eme,~l ..... ;11 b€
referred t~, can be satisfied -' but not always in a manner that results :n a
procti'::al constructiC"', suited for wide use. However, the methods that had to
be developed to oc,lieve the goal werot~ sc..Iccessful!)' applied to obtain s•.,;b-
tantiol ;ncrec.scs in the tfansmission lo~s of more useful con':trv l,;·i on!' .

To comp:ete the ~rudy of r,oise reduction in ~uildings, Cl mf:!osurement program

was conducted to dt:-termine t~.e fea'iibi!ity of IHing outdoor barriers to redlJCf~
noise levels bolh inside and ou·5ide buildi:1gs. Method!> w~re examined for
redllcing thc~ noise levels in the immediate vicinity of a dwelling by the intro-
ductioo of various types d barriers. The effect of acwstic shielding by
buildings is also discus$ed.

Th~ principle conclusions from this study con be summarized as follows:

• The trallsmis$ion !GSS c1)uracteristics of practical comtructions co., be d,eter··

mined to a high degree of accuracy by means of G Sf~t of ~imple e ..·.pr~ssions.

• The design expressions can be applied directiy to ihe uptimurn design at'
building elements providing high values of tronsm:ssion loss.

• With careful design, the 20 dB r~quiremel"t con be achieved ;n a practic'11

nllJltiple panel construction; however, th;, is at the expense of high il1a~;s
or great thi ckness. COflsetjlJCl1t Iy I comtructi ons mt.:(:.I';ng the requ i rement
ere i i rni ted in use to hi gh noi se IevE' I orel)S.

• From the standpoint of transmission Ims perf"rrT'once, cost and totol mass,
the pradicul prototype conslruetiom c;eveloped in this program are superior
to comtiuctiom thol are in common me today.

-2-
·;t
,.,
~

-"
;

,...:

- 2.0 PRINCIPLES OF SOUND TRANSMISSION LOSS

r-

2. 1 SINGLE f'ANEl. STRUCrUHES

~

The! reql'irements of this program necessi tate on unrestri cted apprclOch to thp.
theory of sound transmisdon through panels in order to determine the principles
from which building construction~j exhibiling high values of transmission loss
can be designed for high effi:ierlc;! and low cost. According!yy Cl review of
the basic theory for a g,;~n£tol t)'pe of construction is in order and is presented
in this sectior,. Initially, the purpose of the discussion is to examine the
p;"oc~ss by whi ch s,:)und energy is transmitted from one area to another
through a general typt: of intervening structure. Later sections deal with
speci fic ty~s of construction and their optimization.

2 1. 1 ~Yl"1d~r~ntC11 Concepts

I" the generol context, it :5 (.;onvenient '0 imagine. a panel of :nfil1ite lateral
dime,,~ions situated in free space and subje'~":ld to at:oustic radiation in thli!
f(lrm of a plane wave produced by some un.jefined sClurce. If the panel is pe~­
fectly rigid, the ccousti c excitation produces no vibration, and all the incidMt
energy is reflected in the form ()f (I F'lane wave. A r,~al panel, !'owever, ;s
never rigid; hence a portion of the incident energy is transferred to it, causing
it to vibrate at a frequency identical to that of the excitatic;n. The re'llainder
of the energy is reflected as before. Since an airbr)rne sound wavte exci:es
vibrations in s'.Jch a ponel: reasoning based on the reciproci~y principle indi-
cates that a vibrating ponel will excite on airborne sound wave. As 0 r~sult,
a sound field wi!! be established on the far side of the panel from the jource.
The intensity of this soond field will be less than th~t of the sound fil!ld inci-
dent on the panel by virtue of the energy reflected a"d dissipated. This is the
basic mechani.;m by which sound el"\"Jrgy is trcnsmitted by all types of construc-
tiom. It is important to note that the energy is transml'tted by the pone I only
because it is exci ted into vibration.

Qualitatively, the process of sound trt']nsmission thrl)ugh (] puMI is fairly

straightforward. To calculate the transmission loss of a particular practic.al
comtruction, however, requires muen marc information on the makeup of the
construction together with 0 detailed understanding of its o-:oustical and mechan-
ical properties. Just how the estimates of transmi:.sion loss are obto;;'d for
various constructiOl" config·.'rations i~ described in the fallo..... ing sections.

-3-
2. 1.2 !=undamental Expressions

Some aspects in the calculation of the transmissior. Iou provided by a structure

are readi Iy nnalyzed in terms of a single general function that represents the
physico' propertie's of the structure. A conv~n;er.t function to use in this con-
tp.:d is "impedance, "0 term originot;ng in electdcal network theory. in the
present case, it :~; the mechanical iirlpedanclJ of the structure that is required,
relating the appli'eci force (or pressure) to the resultant velocity. In these
toms" the imped(;;:1ce af a structure b clefined cr' the ratio of the sound pressure
differential existing between The two faces of ~"'." >l:'ucture to its normal velocity.
This ddinitio'l is completely analogous to that ,'"' I,e electrical impedancE: of a
s)'stem, "afTtely, the ratio of 'Ioltage di fferentio; t·, current, w~ic\' ~ometimes
rrakes it possible to sin,plify the s"lution of ace. ::;01 rroblems by forming what
is know:l m Ol~ equivalent eledrkal ell cui t,

Using the concept of iiTr:.Jance, it can be :;hown either by classical methods

(Referv.'nce 1) (lr by U!ie "I ~he eq,dvolent electricrJI circ~uit (Reference 2) that
for a plane wove incident o~ on IJngle e
to the ncrmol of CJ structure of specifk
norrnal ilnp~conce ~', the ra~i() ef sound power tronsrniHed rNt) to that inci-
den! 0Ni) is given by the ~x?r<::;si.)i1:

-2
W
2pc-e
t 1 + Z cos
w-:-- (1)
I

whme Z moy bfl a complex q.. )antity a"d p (; is the characteristic in'pt:donce
of air. rhis rati.:> is sO'11etimes coiled the "transmissior coefficient" and givel1
thE: symbol ;. Since 'T i., ol'~ays less than unity, it is c\)nvenient to define
tnc transmission lo!>S provided by the panel in terms of its reciprecal. Further-
more, It i:; conventional to use (] 10~larithmic scale, \11 this way, th~ sound
transmission I~I~,' (TL) nf th ... rtlr.~1 is dt~f;rled 05:

n (2)

For a plr)'tc WCV€ incident '-~i' an angle 0, the transmission loss is given by:

TL8 - 20 log I
z cos P
1 ~ ~.':!. (3)

-4-
 If the sound is incident normal!y to the panel, the transmission Ims TLo is
given by:

. Z
no = 20 log -to 2jiC (30)

The fJeneral expression given 1n Equation (3) is !.uffkient to cakulate the

tram.mission loss of an)' structure with an overall sped fi c norm'oJl impedance Z.
The next stdp is to determine the impedance Z for various types of structures.

2.1.3 ~dn,.Single Panels

Th,!; simplest type of structure to consider is the single rlOnei whose thickness
is small compared to the wavelengt~ of I'he asso.::iated airborne and struchJre-
borne waves. To determine the impedanc.e of !Ouch a ponel, it is necessary ta
obtain a relationship betwf'en the sound pressure ac;tins on the panel and the
resultant veioc.;it,y. I~ it is aswmed for the m~"Imr,;r.t that the panel is of infinit~
lateral extent, this relationship can be obtained directly fr:>m the general wave
equation for bending waves in a plate. In the present co"texf, the te~m
"infinite in lateral extent" means infinite c~mpared to a wavele"gth, 50 that
this condition is effectivE'ly satisf.ed in pr.mels of finite dimensions at the higher
frequencies but not Ilecessorily at the IOIAtH frequencies.

The analytical procedure necessary to obtain an expression for the impedance

of a thin pon.::1 ;. contained in Appendix A. F luation (A-B) ef that Appendix
gives the expression for the panel impedt.ncl'! ...

z ' (4)

where

W ongulor frequency = 2 'IT f

m - mass of tL,e pon~d per unit area
B - bending stifJness of the ,x:nel
c -= velocity of sound in air
H .::: ongle of incidence ot tl-:e !ncldent plane sovnd wave

J = -r:'l
end 0 ti me dependence of ejwt is ossumed .

-5-
The impedance Z is con,posed of two imaginary term~ which{ due to their siJr.!:,
can be con:;idered to represent the inertia, I)r mas!>, and bending stiffrless of the
simple panel. Equation (4) shows that th!! impedance of the panel is d~termi:,ed
primarily by the mass at low frequencies, whereas at high fre-=1uen,,;es it is the
bending stiffness term that predor.linates. At some intermediate frequenc)',
It:nown as l'1'lE~ coincidence frequency, the two terms are equal in magnitude, and,
since they hove opposite signs, the impedance is zero. Thi:; ,:ondition is illus-
)ra~ed :n Figure 1.

3e"d i r,g Impedance

( -VI:. )

~..:... OJ
() U

tl
... C

o~....
.-
co ~.:.
_
01 C
o
.f.a..
r;

41
0 .~
~ /
,/;

f (Lc.\g) Freqliency
c

Figure The Imuginary Part of the Tram!'I1i~sion Impedance of a

Thin Pane! for Grazing Incidence (O TT/2) Showing
the Effeet of Coincidence

Cremer \A '"JS the tirst to st'Jdy this so-coiled coincidence effect (Reference 1)
and show ,ln t the conc.cllutioo 01 term~ occun at a frequency given t]pproxi-
rnat~ly by:

-6-
where

h the th ickness of the pone I

ro the density of the material

'""m
E - Young's Modulus of the p<";'el ri10terial

Qualitatively, the coincide:lce effect can bE understood when it is realized

that the simple t~leory for ;jeterminil"l~ the impedance is based on the assumption
that pure bending wave~ are excited in the pan~j. Unlike compressional sound
waves in air, which have a propagation velocity that is indepdndent of fre-
quency, the velocity of bending waves increcses with increclsing fr~quency. As
a re~ult, t~,er~~ is a frequency - the coincidence frequency - at which the troce
velocity of ;ound waves in air i~ p.1l'C11 to the velocity of bendir'9 waves in the
panel. A~ tilis frequency, ellergy is tramferred easi Iy from th~ airborne sound
wave to the ponel, resul .9 in a low transmission loss of the ponel.

The frequency at which coincidence occurs dep*mds on the arogle of incidence

of the sound wC.lves; therefore, the panel impedance is zero at a different fre-
quency for ever/ angle of j;-Icidence. The lowest frequency at which the effect
car. occur corres,'Jonds to scund waves incident at grazing angle to t~e panel.
This frequency is termed the "critical freqIP"!ncy" f and its volue is giv~n by
c
the expression:

c2
rc -- T;Fj (5 )

The value of the critic.al frequency :n<.;reoses with increfJSinr] material density
and decreases with increasing rrmel thickness and rnotel"inl stiffness.

T0 C'.ll..::ulute the transmission loss of a si'1gle thin panel, it is necessary to insert

Equoli.:m (4) into (3). 3y itself this i~ not sufficient becouSt! in the standcrd test
method for the measurement of transmission 1055 (Reference 3), it is oS5umed
thr]' all al1gles of incidence ore equally probable, whereas Equation (3) gives
the transmission loss for one angle only. Under d iffvse s':)Und field conditions,

-7-
it would seem nat'Jrai rei average the tra'"lsmissi'jn coefficient 1'6 over the range
o to 'IT /2. Unfortunately, this does not prod lice values that agree with those
measured in the lac."ratory under suppospdly the 5ame conditions. The reasont;
for the d iscrelxmcy are to Le found in the assumptions ;11ade w:th regard to the
characteristics of the sound fields on both side!'. of the panel, and the coup! inQ
between these fields and the finite sized panel. A detailed di<-:ussion of ~"e
di~crepan~"y, its causes and ~';'evious cHempts made to obtnin alternative solu-
tions, is contained in Appendix B. At r~'is point' J it is. sufficient to state that
at frequencies less than the critical trequency, the trant;mission loss TL m of
a single thin panel is given by the expression: (Reference 4)

(6 )

provided that wm .,> 3.6 pc. This is the familiar moss low, with the trclrls-
mission loss increasing at ~he rate of 6 dB for a doublin~ of eith~( the mass or
the frequen.:y. Equation (6) can also be rewritten in terms of the transmis~ior.
loss TL o for sound waves incident normally to the ponel:

H m
TL - 5 dB (60)
a

where

TL o 20 log (2 p:)
w

The transmission 1055 predicted ir this manner agrees well with measured values
of th .. transmission loss of single pan.,ls ot frequencies less thor" one-third of the
critico! frequency. An examplp. ':)f the agreement is shown in Figure 2 for 0
pone I 01 1/8- i rich hardbool d.

In considel irlg finit~ ~il'p.d pelle Is, It I~ necessary to in("lud' 'n add itinnrJ: terr,1
in thE: expressir:ll for the i1npedanc:e to ocr-aunt for the stiffness u',: the panel.
This stiffnu, term Zs i~. important only at low frequencies and for sound waves
at norma I inc idencp. is given opprox irnoh~ Iy by the f'xpressi on:

Z
5

-8-
 where

K -= 11" B. [_1 + _1 'JI~ (Reference 5)

2 2
0 b

and 0, b = dimensions of the panel.

Exominnt:on of Equation (4) with this addition sh"ws that the panel exhibits a
reSCYlance at a frequency f give~ by:
r

(7)

60 F r

a:'l
-0
..s 40 Cal eulated frorr
'"'B Equation (6)
.....J

8
~I

'"
E:
i~ 20-
f-
...IJ Valuf

4000 30"1.1

Figure ;1. tl\eOSU'f.d and (ok":lJted Vollle~ ,)f the Tran5mi<si~~r 1."'55 ""f
:/8-i;-v;h f~ordboord

9-
There o..e in fact a n\JrtlbtH of panel reSi:>nances at frequencies greater t:,an f r ;
however I these are not normally evident in the measur"d values of trons··
mission loss due to the effects of internal dar"ping.

Since both Equations (7) and (5) i"clude the bending stiffness term B, it i5 0
simple matter to show that the product of the low frequel~cy resonance f r with
the critit:al frequency Fc is given by:

f (8,
r

111 othlH words, the product is a functio'1 ~>nly of th~, dimMs:ons I)f t~e panel.
A~ C' re~ult, single panels having a hi9h .. dtieal frequency exhibit a low mas:-
stiffness rl':sooant frequency .md vice versa. t'Jormally. the magnitude ')f the
quantities C t1nd b en~ures thot this rf!~onance occurs (~t very low frequenci,:~ -
10 Hz is typical fo," lightweight pcolo!ls - so that the stift.,c~s term carl be ne~l­
lecreJ in dealing with large size b;Jildin~ elements.

At frequencies opprCXlching th~ critical frequency, the characteristics uf th,.

acoustic coupling between the sound field end the panel are diiferenj" from
those at lower frequencies, with the result thot Equation (6) is nc.. longer valid.
In this fr~quency range, the tronsmisliioll loss deviates below the p""dicted mO'iS
law values, exhibiting a minimum in the vicinity of the critical freqdency f '
c
At frequencies gr~ater than f c ' the transmission loss ;r1C'rease~ ond rna>' elo:l eed
the mass Ic.w vallJf:ls. The general characteri~tic~ for the transmission los~ of a
.ingle ponel are ~hown in Figure 3 tor a ponel of S/8-lnch 9ypsurnboard.

Existing sjm~le :n"thc,h fL'r r;reJictir.g t~ transmission loss of 'ingle panels at

frequencies in the vic.inity of and greater than thp. critical frequency prove to
De inaccurate, often giving vCJlues that are os 'l1lJch us 10 dB too low
(Re ference 6). fv\ore exhC1,;:~tiYe trt;otments - see Appendix ~ - (Ref.. renc.f's
1, 4) show dial 0 fair agreement with rnl'losurpd -esult~ is obto:n~d with ~he
followirlq .!)(prc~\ion, void 0niy ot frll.jUCflCil!'s grf'oler thon ihe u:tical
frequency:

2",
n TL o + 10 log
(
~- rI > f( (9)

-10-
 where T/ is the loss feletor "f the prmel, including th~ energy losses due to
radiation and dissipation at the perimeter of the panel. Using Equations (6)
and (9), the predicted transmission loss of r 5/tJ-inch gypsumboard ponel is
included in Figure 3 to dcmonstrott~ the good agreement with measured' "su Its
r)ver the mojo!' part of the frequenr.y rOr'lge.

To a firs! oprroxima~ion, the transmis'iion loss in the frequency re~lion betweer'l

1/2 f c ond f c can be obtained by des<..rib,ng a straight line between the tl'ans-
mis~ion lem values Tl. m (1/2f c ) and TLm(fc) for f·c 1/2fc and f ef rl'spectively,
as given by the expressi.:ms in Equation! (6) und (9).

--- CoincirJence

,.s 40
VI
VI
o
....J Cr::dcu lated
E1uation (6)
VI
VI

E
C
o
20
...
l-

o
4000 8000
frequency, H.7

Figure 3. f,'cosured end Calculated Volu.~~ of th •.~ Tron~rni5siof1 LOis of

) /p.-; n ch GYP:,ufT'hoord

Jt j., ..:!car that the cHecr .)~ coil:,idenu- ('l1use~ (J ~igniijca[1t reduetior, in the
transmission loss of ~J single ponto I over a (;ertnin frl·ql.ll'"nc-y rang,,:,. Inspection
of [quotion ('i) \hfJWS thot there me twn W(1Y~ hy wnich th(' ~iqnifif~'1n:e of the
·!ffect can be redl)c~rl'.

-11-
 • The use of an extremely stiff panel - one having a high value for the
Young's Modulus - so that thp. coincidence dip can be made to occur at
frequencie!> below the frequency range of interest. For reosons that will
become clear later, this is not normally a satisfactory solution.

• The use of an extremely limp panel, so that the coincidence dip will occur
at frequencies above the frequency range of interest. This is the approach
that is often taken ;;;hen consistent with the strur:turo!1 requirements.

In summury, .he acoustic behavior of thin single fXlnels is fairly well understcx.d.
It is possible to preaict the trammis!;i,:,~ ~0)5 by u'iing the expressions given in this
3ection. In th~ case ot panels w"lose thickness i:; not smal,i cornporcd to the
wave length, however, further refinements are required in the derivation of :'he
bending impedance.

2.1.4 Thick Single Panels.

If the thicknes~ of the panel is not small compared to the wavelength, them t~e
ass;jmptions made in tho:! derivation of the expresdon for the impedance of the
panel are not ... .:..~;c. The type of wave !'TIotion that is predominant in the pane!
at an)' given fr!:quency is the one that presents the !"west impedance to the
appPed sound fie'J. fxamination of the panel impeci.:mce, I]S given by Equa-
tion (4), shows thot the lerm representing the bending wave impedance assumes
high volue!> at high frequencie~. Therebre, as the frequency is increased, it
becomes more probable that the wave motior. wi II change from pure bending to
some other type that presents 0 lower impedance.

This change in the wave type is predicted by the theory for thick panels (see
Appendix A) which provides for a more exact representation of t"'" panE'l motion
than does the simple theory for thin panels. The theory shows quite clearly that
a change from bending to shearing wov~s occurs in c:; frequency range determined
by the physicol properties and thickness of the panel. Within this frequency
ran~e/. the overall impedance of the panel changes from one dominated by th~
bending impedance to one in which the shecrl'1g impedance is of prime
import.Jnce.

Al frequencies where the shear wave is predominant, the impedance of the

panel is given approximately by the cxpr~ssion (5e£; Appendix A):

Z "'" I (J rn - I f.J h w_ sin2 e (10)

2
"

-12-
where

IJ = shear modulus of panel material

h = panel t~ickness

Inspection of Equation (10) !.hows that the shear impedance has the some
dependence on frequency us doe~ the mass impedance.

Equation (10) in conjunction with (4) describ~s the impedance ,:>f the panel
over the fu II frp.quency ronge. If the change from bend ing to sheari n9 waves
~ccurs at a frequency greater tl1an the critical frequency, the terms in the
expression for the panel impedclnce cancel at the critical frequency -- see
Figure 4!a). At higher frequencies, where the change in wave type occur~,
the impedance of the panel increases at a much lower rate than that predi-;;ted
for thin pellels with pure bending waves. Thus, the transmission loss at these
frequencies will be less than that predicted by the theory for thin ponels.

If the change in wave type occurs at a frequency Ie::; than the critical fre-
quency, the CO!rlcidence effect wi II not occur at 4Jny frequency - see Figure 4(b).
Additionally, if the shear impedan=e is low, the ponel wi I! be moss-contro! led
over the full frequency range and the transmission loss will obey the mass law
as given ;n Equation (6).

The transmission loss of a hypothetical panel in w~ich the parameters have been
varied to represent the cases discussed above is illustrated in Figure 5. When
the c.;hange in wa-.,e type occurs at a frequency fs much greater than the crit-
ical frequency, i.e., f s » fc , the transmission loss vailles are the same as
those predicted by the theory for thin panels, except at the higher frequencies
where shearing C'f the panel reduces the ponel ;mPf!dance. lowtlr:ng the value
of fs resul~s in raising of the frequency at which coincidence occurs, i.e.,
the critical frequency is effectively' increased. When fs = f el coincidence
occ:Jrs at grazi'lg incidence at all lfequencie~ greot~r than f c ' with the result
thot contlnu":llly jow volues of tr("nsm"sion 105. ore obfained at higher frequen-
cies. If fs is reduced further, the transmission loss curve rapidly reverts to the
familiar muss law line.

For thE' mvjority of lightweight building materials, such as gypsumboard, ply-

wood, e~c., the change in wave typr; occurs at such a high frequency that the
effect is C\f minor coo<:ern. When it C0mes to considering more mossive ma~c­
rials (concrete is a good example), ti,e change in wove type may occur at
frequencies wp.1I within the frer'juency range of intere!.\·, and in the process
have 0 significant effect on the trJnsmission loss. The effect IS shown clearly
in Figure 6 for a 6-inch concrete panel. The theory for thick panels -

-13-
 Sheer Impedance
(-,ve) \
\
Bending Impedance -
(-ve)

0,1 N
or-
..'-

,-
o
Q)
l)
MC~5 Impedance
~
c ( +ve )
-'--0
0 \
~ Q)
\.
CI-
E
>..
5-
c-
.- Q)
Ol c:
o l)

-Eo..

f ('-'Jg) Frequency
s

//
Bending Impedance /

-
.1
. ...
N
'11
( -vt:! )-""'"
,

)/ /
/ //'
-_/-'~
.---:,,-- .'

~
o U
------_.//-~~,.- ~-~/'-'
~
o
5
""0 _...---- ,-
a.. Q) --~-- --/~ ..
Q.
~" E f'.Aass Impedance .......~.-.. ~-
0-
J--~\-
c-
,-Q)
OJ
o
C
0
~~ - I
I
I
- Shear Impedance

- E a.. :
I
I
(-ve )

I
I
I

f (Log) Frequency
c

(b) f < f
s c

Figure 4. The Imaginary Part of the Transmission Impedance of a Thi ck

Pane I for Grazing Incidence (8 c..: n/2)
-14-
~ee Appendix A - gives good agreement with measured results for i-he 6-inch
concrete ponei, except in the vicinity of the critical frequency, w~reas the
application of the theory for thi~ panels gives results that are substantially in
error. The effect of shear i~ r~presented by the difference between the two
prfldicted curves and results in the cor.crete panel exhibil'ing a transmission
loss anpro,dmotely 6 dB less than the (;aiculated mass law at frequencies
greater than the critical frequ«mcy. Thi'i reduction of 6 dB is comm()l1 to the
Mnjority of concrete and brick structures, and can be taken into occount at
frequencie!> above coincidenc~ by assuming the effective mass of the panel ;s
one-half that of the actual mass. The re~ult is ihot '.:oncrete and brick struc-
tures provide lower values of transmission loss t~on. would be expected for
th e i r mass,

I
",,'"
.,.."'"
"",
",'" "..-
'"
'"o ..... ",
· / " '• • • • • • • • • 1 • • " • • • • • • • • •
....J

./';'
'"
."

E
\
,.......'" 1'''

..'"o
t:

~-

f :> ;> f
s c
f f
----- s
.'
c
F ,~
f
" • • II • • • • • • • •
s c

(Log) Frequency

Figure' The Transmission Loss of a Hypothetical Panel as a

r-')nction of FreqLJency w;th the Ratio f. (the Fre-
quency at Which Shear Waves Dominat~) to f (the
Cr;~ical Ff'(~qucrlcy) os Parameter C

-15-
 100 ----------rj--r-'---.. . . ------~~ ...
Thin Panel
The':>rl'
80

.
III
III

~
o Mass loVi -
\
.::.
o 60 -
III
oil

E
."c
C
l-
i-

20 L.....J_.L-l.....J~~-..J.--l..~--J.1--l.....l.-.L.~........-L..~....L.......L...~..J-~
125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Frequency, Hz

Figure 6. The Meosurecl Values of Transmissi on Los~ for a 6-inch Concrete

Panel Compared to Values Predicted by Means of the Thin and
Thi ck Pnne I Theories

L. 1.5 Laminated Panels

To a great extent, the transmission loss of 'J single panel i~ determinf'd by ti,,,
mass of the panel; the greater the rnass or the thicker the panel for a given
material, the greater the transmission 1055 - except at frequencies near tbe
critical frequency. Since the value of the critical freqL1ency is inversely pro-
~ortional ta the thid:nes!l of the panel, any attempt to increase the transmis-
sion loss LT the panel b/ increasing its thickness automatically lowers the
critical frf:.'quency, perhL'ps into a frequency region of majo~ importancE!. /1.5
a resu It, thp. two most desirable properties fo~ any sing!e panel are hi gh rlensity

-16-

_ . _ - - - - - - - _ ._ . _ - - - - - - ~ - - ~ - - -
... - . . . ......-
~-------
and low stiffr~ss - prope,·ties that are normally incompatible in a single material.
In practice, building elements are required to exhibit a high sl'iffness at low or
zero freq:.J'.mcies ;n order to withstand lateral loads. Thus, thl~ ideal ponel would
exhibit C': stiffness that was high at low frequencies, reducing 'to a low value at
high fre~uenciE:s. SllCh a panel has been describe.:; by Kurze (Re~l:rence I) and
consists of a three-layer structure, the center layer of which exhibits a s'leorintJ
motion at the higher frequencies.

The same effect can be obtained by the use of laminatecl panels ir, which the
adhesive loyer is designed to shear ond provide a pane i i mpeJar, ':e iowe r than
the bending iml-'£'donce of the combination. At low frequencje~" the two pfJnel~
behave as though they were rigidly connected together, exhibi'ing a bending
stiffness eight times that of either panel alone (t l1e panels are assumed to be
identical). At high freque'1cies, the shearing effect of the adhesive layer
reduce~ t:1e bending stiffness of the combination to that of ~ach of the indi-
vidual pa'ieis. As a result, the critical frequency of the combination can be
increased by a factor of twc, witho..Jt affecting the low frequency sl iffness, ?r,l-
vided that shearing of the adhesive o,=curs at c, frequency less rhan the criticr..!
frpquency of the combination.

The choroderisti:-s of such a multi-·layer panl~1 are determined largely by the

properties and thicbess of the adhesive layer. It is possible to remov(' this
dependency by the technique of "spot" laminal ing, whereby the adhesivoe is
apRiled in ',mall d;screte I"Jmounlsol1 a square lattice over the surface of rhe
panels. The general charol,:teristics of such a multi-layer f>anel are the same
os those described above, with the exception that the two panels decouple and
move more or less independer'tly at a frequency determinp.d mainly by the rela-
tive spacing of ~he adheSive Sp,1tS. It is therefore possible to des:9n the
decoupling fr~quency by corree; choice of the aJhesive lattic,~ -.pacing, w,",ich
can b~ determined in the followir,g manner.

Jlle wavele!-:yth AB ~f bendi~19 Nuves on u panl' I at a fre-=ll'ency f is given

by the €)(pression:

c
(1 1)

where

c ~,'e velocity of sound in air, and

f ~he critical freq'Jer>cy of the panel.

c.

-17-
 In th" case of lamina~ed panels, fc is the critical frequency of the combination
In the absence of shearing.
I
If the two laminuted panels are identical and have
critical frequencies fe' then:

At low freque'1des, when the bending wavelength is much greater than the
adhesivE lat~i'::;l! spacing "a," the combination will ael' as a single panel
having un __ H~:.~; "" critical frequency of f c ' Decoupling of the two ponels
..... :jl b.·~,in to or-cur ot a frequ~ncy ..... here the bending wavelength is cc,mparable
to the ,tdhesive lattice spacing, i.e., when AB ~ a. Rearranging Equation (11)
gi ves the C'pprcx imate decoupl ing frequency fo os:

(12)

For example, if the two ponels are 1/2~inch gypsumboard (fc ~ 3000 Hz) nnd
the adhe!live lattice spacing is 2 feet, the decoupling frequency is of the order
of 210 Hz. This is considerably iess than the critical frequency F of the
c
cOlnbination, assuming no decoupling (i .e., 1500 Hz) so that the effective
critical frequency of ~he combination with sfY.lt laminations will be of the order
of 3000 Hz.

The effect of panel decoupling is de monstrated in Figure 7, whttl'e the measured

values of tr'lnsmission loss are given for two spot-Iamiflatl!d shet!h of 1/2-inch
9ypsumboard and for a single sheet of 1/2-inch gypsumboard. No reduction is
noted in the criticol frequency frolT' its value of approximately 3000 Hz. Sim-
ilar results are shown in Figure 8 for laminated 3/B-inch gypsumboard ponf!ls.
Common to both these tronHT,i"ion loss choracterilltics is a reduction in thl.
measured results in the region of 1000 Hz. The cause is unknown at this time,
but could possibly be the rl'!sult of a double ponel mass-spring-mass resonance
with a very small air gop between the twt') laminated panels (see Section 2.2.2).

2.1.6 f'.Aass-Loaded Panels

An nlternati'.'e approach ·0 the """obi,,,," of designing rene1s of high mass and

low sti ffness is the so-called mass-loading teehn ique. This involves the oddi-
tion of di~erete masses to a f~exible base panel in such a Wt2y that the stiffness
of the base panel is not substantially increased. The addition of any material

-18-
 Man Low - 1 II Gypsumboard

60
Mass Law - i/2" Gypsumboord
lID
"tl
..
....
g N\e>asurcd f 12" + 112 "
-oJ
Spot laminated \
C
0 40 Gyp~umboard \ •
...... til •
'E... • \~ 0 0 • o
.-.
c: • ./ 0
0
... • /0 0 o o
o
~~o
20 /~ ~'o \
/ \... N\easured 1/2" Gypsum:Jbard
_

oL-...J-..J.--..J.. .~...J--L..!-.L..1-J...!.....l.1_l.L-..l.J......l---lI.......I _...,:-1~_..I.1--,,-~.L

63 175 250 500 1000 2000 4001) 8000
f reqUf:: ',ey, Hz

Figure. 7, The Measured Values of Transi"ission Loss for a Single

and T,'f'c 1/2-inch 5p..:>t Laminate.1 Sheets of
Gypsumboard

80 i

MLHS l.aw - 3/8" Gyps'Jmboord ~\

"km Low - 3/4" Gypsumboord '"""'\ \\

60 - \

co " \
"tJ

....
~
)v.>
~
-J
\ t-kcl5urecJ 3/8" + 3/8" Spot / /'
C
40 -
Gyp~umboord~'~
0
';:;
... \ I.aminated •

.
.~

I-
...c:
~
\
\
y~//
. ~
./
" - / '
.. ...
,.. tit ..

20 -
~//; //'\ i
/'
/~ \.
-
/
f-IIemured 3 to" G yplumuocrrl
!
I
o , I ! I ! .L I--L-L
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 BJOO
Frequency, H 7.

Figure R. The Meosur('':i Values of Traf'lsmission Loss for a Single

and Two 3/8- in~h Spot laminated 5 heets of
GYFsumboard

-19-
in 'Jny form will, of course, increase the stiffness of the base panel 0; SU:"fl8
frequenc:i es. The de~i gner's task is to arrange for the increase in stiffness to
occur at frequencies greater than the critical frequency. In ether words, the
si ze of the di s-:rete masses must be Iess then the bandi n9 ...,ave! ength at the
eri ti cal fr~uency. H the maximum leterel cimension ot the di screte masses
i5 II i" this conditio" cal' be expmssl!d e~:

t <

where
c _. the velocity of sound in air
f,: ... I'h.,\ cri ti col frequency of the bose p Jne I•

J,." exam;)le of the ocousti cal performance of a punel looded with discrete
fTlos~es is shown ln Figure 9. The penel is a 1/0-inch fiber glass sheet kloded
t,') .4 Ib~/ft2 with J-inch squares of a mixture of so.,d and vibration-damping
.:ornpound (th9 compound being used in this case simply to hold the sand
Itogelher arid provide adh.,sion to the surfoce of the panel). The redul"'.tion in
transmissior,1 IO!is at the higher frequencies indicates that stiffening of the base
panel has occurred, probably elIe to insufficier.t spacing <1/2-inch) between
the squares of added material. Clearly, sp'.:lcing as well as size of the masses
is important in retaining the original stiffness of the ba~e ponel.

iIlO
"'0

.~
...
o
40
....J

..
E
2 20
o
..-'::

o I ! I I ! ! I , !I ! ! L ..J......J.-..'--...'......__.....
63 125 "-50 500 1000 2000 4000 8()f,()
~,.qu.f)cy 1Hz

Figure 9. Measured Values of the Transmission L05I of 0 1/8...

2
inch fiber Glass Panel Mnss Loaded to·4 Ibs/ft
with Sand

-20-
One of the prob!ems associated with mass-loading by means of discrete masses
concerns the amount of material that must be added. For example, if the dis-
crete masses are square and spaced apart by a distance t..'qual to their lateral
dimension, the added mas~ can be applied over only 25 percerlt of the panel
area. This means that the density of the added material must be high if the
moss of t~e bose panel - which normally will be of low mass if its critical fre-
quency is high - is to be substantially increased. For this reason, it is often
more efficient to providl'! complete coverage for the base panel using a limp
bl-it massive material such as sand. Sal1d is an almost perfect material for
sfJund-attenuating structures, embodying all the most desirable feotui"es - high
mass, low stiffness and high damping. The only rea:>on that it is not used mora
often in building construction r , is the difficulty of holding it in place. It is
pos5ible, however, to maintair. loose sand in contact with a bese panel by
means of contuin&f'S resembling egg carl'ons (s'!!e Sc':tion 3.3).

More convenient than sand for use a~ a continuous coverage is a flexihle sheet
of lead, I~ad-impregnated plastic, or something akin to asphalt roofing poper.
Due to cast, the latter is a particularly desirable mat~rial. The transmission
loss of a sheet of 1/2.. 1n~h plywood (J.5 Ibs/ft 2 ) loaded to 4 Ibs/ft 2 with three
sheets of asphalt roofing paper stapled to !'he plywood surface is shown in
Figure lO, compared with measured value:; for the plywood alone. The first
poini to be noticed is the viltlJal eliminatiC'''' of the coincidence effect due to
the high added mass and damping. The pl"edicted in.::reasE: in transmission 1"5s
is obtained ut the low frequencies, but a slipht deviatior. is noticed at high
frequencies due to a slight stiffening of \-h.: panel.

i i r ' ,--

/
8
...J

.~ .-
., • ~1.:--~
'
~,.,..//'-
..
..
'"
•E;
'6 20 , //
. -
\\
, \
\
\
'Measured-Loaded P:ywood
\-Mr:r;s law - Looded Ply",,,od-
,-
r-
~/- Mms L1W - 1/2" Plywc)oJ
~/

o1 ! L .... J-L..: I I I ~..L.1......1-~'....1'---1---"'-.11_.....'---"'-01'._

1

63 12.5 750 500 1000 2000 4000 8000

frequency, Hz

Figure 10. Measured Vulues of the Tran~missiun loss of a 1/2- inch Ply...
wood Panel lVIos.s Loaded to 4 Ibs/ft 1 with Asphalt Roofing
Paper

-21-
2.2 IDEAL MULTIPLE PANEL STRUCTURES

One method of obtaining higher values ot transmission loss than that available
from a single pane! is by the i"troduction of one or more odditioMI panels with
intervening airspaces. The multiple panel construction fl'Jrmed in I'his manner
is naturally more complex to anal)'ze ,hc~' the corresponding case for a single
panel because the transmission loss is dependent on ..J yi~ot~i" number of con-
struction poromE!ters. The acoustical characteristics of multiple ponels will be
examined in th;s section and expressions will be derived for the transmission
loss of double and triple panel constructions In vo .. ious frequency ranges. In
addition, a fairly complete study wi II be made on the effect of absorption In
the airspaces between the panel".

?o2. 1 ~eneral Theory for Multiple Panels

The simplest r.ase to consider is a nu."ber (N) of single, infinite panels

placed parallel to each other wit:: i t1tervening airspaces but no mec!1anic:ol
connections. It wi II be assumed fOI- the moment that there is acoustical absorp-
tion in ~he cavity, so that sound waves propagating in the airspaces in a direc-
t'on porlJllelto the panei faces are weii damped. This means tbat the airspocp.s
wi I' oct as stiffness elements at fr~qlJencies where the wavelength :s much
greater than the panel separations, the stiffness being that of the enclosed air.
n,,-, rnulti-panel structure can then be represented by the electrir.al Of'lalog
circuit usinG IUrT"ped parameters as shown in figure I 1, where the impedances
of the- individual ?anels are those given ir: Section 2.1.3. At high frequencies,
where the pI.lf'el separation is comparable to or grea~er thon a wavelength,
th~re is wove mot;on in the airspaces in a direction normal to the panel faces,
~md 50 distributed parameters have to be used in ':he representation.

With the assistance of the simple analog circuit of Fi!]ure 11, the general
characteristics of 0 multiple panel structlJre con be dei'ived. At low fre-
quencie~, lhe r.ircuit shows that (] combination of the impenances Zn and
Zn-i of two adjacent panels, together with the stiffness k n _ 1 of the inter-
vening air, will produce a resonance at a particular frequency. This will also
be true for all the r'-'maining po;rs of elements, so if ~here are N ponels in the
struct'Jre, there wi!1 be N-l resonOf'ces. In rhy~ical terms, these resonance'l
are produced hy tl,e action of the individuai pa(\el masses on the stif~ess of i'he
lJir in the air5pa,:es 0.,2 are cumrnonly rcff~rred to c:, ~he fundamental "rnass-
srrin!=j-mms" rc:;onances, or ~imply tl,e fundame'ltal resonanc~s. At frequencies
Ie-55 than the lowest fundamental resonant frequency, the motion of the structure
is mass-controlled prov:ded t~'at the individual ponels are mass-controlied. In

-22-
 - Zn_1
I zn -
I

k
n-I

i
_______________ i _
T, lol

~ _T
_L jw

Figure 11. Thp. Electrical An::Jlog Circuit Representing tJ

Muifple Panel Construction

Ihis region, the transmISSIOn loss obeys the mass law, the mass being that of
all the panels combined. The airspace has no effect on the transmission loss
in this frequency rcmge.

At tre~uencies greater thon the fundamental resononce~, the effect 1')/ the air
stiffness i5 to provide a trc.:,smiss;oo loss that increases very rapidly with fre-
quency. For a structure containing N panels, the rate of increase of trans-
mission loss ..... ith frequency is 6 (2N-l )dB per octave. This e)(pres~ion is
also valid for a single panel (i.e., N~- 1) where, it will be remembered,
the rate of increase is only odB per octave. In theory, then, high vohJ<!s of
t.-onsmissian las~ can b~ obtained in this frl;!quency region by the lise of mul-
ti pie panels.

At high fr~quencies, airborne resonances will be set up in the a;r~poces between

the ponels whenever any of thf: airspoce d;mensions ore numerically equal to on
integral number of half-wavelengths. This means that there will be an har-
monic series of airborne resonances for /'loch ponel seporotioo. Thv transmi~sion
loss curve i~ therefore characterized by a number of shari=' dips d~sc;endillg from
peaks that increasE! in valu~ at th~ rate 0/ 12 (N-l )dB per octave Far a stl1Jct l Jre
containing N ponels. Although this irregular bphavior is predicted hy the

-23-
 theory, 0 smalillmount of acoustical darrping in the airspaces is sufficient to
virtually eliminde the sharp dips from thl~ measured results, so that the meas-
ured transmission loss increases at the rate ~f 12(N - 1) dB per octave.

In ~ummary, the discussion of this section ha~ concerned a generol multiple

panel structure containing N panels. It ho~ shown thol high values of trans-
missi.)" !oss can be obtained at frequencies greater than the fundamental low
frequency resor'onces, the rate of increr.lse of transmission loss with frequency
increasing as the number of panels increases. There i~, of course, r; limit to
the number of ponels that can be j'1cluded ir, a structure. Practical ~roblem5
of complex ~upport ~ystems, high cost and increasing flool crea utilization
quickly set on upper limit. For these reasons, and ,,:,thers which will become
apparent, two particular cases are ,1f interesi, namely, d,.)ubl,., u'1d triple ponl:l
(;onstructiOl"l~•

2.2.2 Transmission Los5 of Ide.al Double Paflcis

---------,---------
Th(' eXf·,es;!On for ~he transmission coefficient Te of em infinite ideo! double
panel constructioo has been derived in the literature (Re','erence 8) us:ng
methor.'s that are extemions of that outlined in Section 2. 1 fo,' ~ir,gle ponel:;,
A mr·jif;cation of these methods hos been utilized (Reference 9) to arrive at
a ~o!ution fur the sound transmission coefficient of a multiple pone! construc-
tion that is valid for the general case of N ponels. From th;~ ~clution, the
trunsmission coefficient T for a single an~le uf incidence 8 con be obtained.

For 0 finite double panel construction that is excitf!d oy a reverberant sound

field, ~ necessary to employ modal method~ to determine the tronsmissiOiI

coe,(ficient. Suc-h methods involve many complicutions resul~ing from the
'lUmtrous coupling foctors between the 'Jirborne and structureborne modes. It
is therefore more con .... enient to take the solut;on for the infinite ponel lrans-
rr.issioll coefficient Ttl and m'Jke use of the reslJlts cotained for single panels
ir, Sect;o,., 2.1.3 ro detp.,mine the tronsmis~ion 1055 for e)(citatioll by 0 rever-
b(; ror t S ?lInd fi c Id .

faking th:s simpliFird approach, it i~ shown ill Appendix ( that th~ t(,:.nsrnissioo
Ims of a il'llte double punel cons-ruction, with obsorptinn in the ,:ovity, at fr~­
'luencies IO'Ycr thon t',t! critical frl'\guenq 'Jf either oonf.!1 is givr'l by the
€xpressiol, :

log 1+
wM
I () (11)
3.6 p::
(3.6 p ( f

-24-

...._---------,-------_
- 0trE eo-'*- ........._.._---_
S_-_ .._-----_.._-_-::- --_....__...
" nee, a _. ....1.......... En nbC
"

where

mJ, ml rna~s per uni~ 'Heo of the two panels

M rn I + mz := the tc,~f.ll mass per uni t '"J7ca of the construr..tion.

d - pane I separoti JI"l

The subscr;pt I indicates that the expression for the tron~mission ioss is valid
Foran ideal multip'e ponel, i.!".! or.e with no inter~anel connecticns. Equa-
tion (13) i; an expression for the transmission loss with ,he general charader-
istics CIS shown in Fig'Jre 12. The frequency regions of r.1ajor interest in this
figure are those where the transmission 105s of the construction is reduced by
resonances, There are two such re9iorlS, one at low r,equencies containing
tile fundamental panel resonc:nce r the other at the higher frequencies with
the cavity resonances. Knowing rhe freq',encil?s c.t which these two types of
resonances occur makes it possible to trar,slate from t~,e general chal'act~risti(:
shown in Figure 12 to the specific.. characteristics for any given construction
without the nee! for evaluatinR Equation (13).

Examinotior of Lql1otion (13) shows that at l'Jw frequer",cies, v/here the wave-
length>. is much greater ~:'''JII t~le pane! separation d, the transmission loss
becorr;"c, zero of t~f' fundamental resonanc.e freqUEncy f vvh;ch is gi'vc', by: o

f (14 )
c

where

2m 1m,
:h,,' efrective mass of the CO['1strucli'-:>f1 ( I!) )
m: 1m 2

Clearly,
, file fr~~,-,('nry
, F0 becomes lower a~ tLe cFFectivf' mms m Incremes,
An inspertion of Equati'.JI· (15) :.how c, that f"r a given tntol r,lOSS M, thl ('ffp(~~
live rnoss i~ qre()test wilen there i~ nil equal rli~trjbulion of rrlm~ betw~f.'n thf' two
penels. nHJ~, the optirl1UlTl df"i~1l for a (louble panel constrl)ctio'l of niv".',
total fTIn~~ i ~ (Jllto; 'len when tl,(' DI1r1r Is '1r2 ,-,I cLJlJrll ITln~s.

At frequencies much Ip-\~ than the r',ndnmental rc'onanrc, th€) airspoce between
the panels ho~ very lillie 111fluf'llc.e on the trcnsmi~si.,n !oss and the two panels
vibrate essentiall)' in phasl~ and with the SOlfle velority. From Equation (13),

-25-

..... ...
t_~ ...... ~ ..._....' --
 120 T-t I Ii i,rr- y"=y= i i i II r _.. -
.-j Il" r--
110
lJ!
//~
~ B Ibdr,
.

lCO

a:l
"1J
~
,-.. 80
VI
0
-J
1-
C
0

t
::l
E
VI 60
c
...0
t-

40 --

20

o
10
_ _....l.---I..I---.1-"-1..1..

1000
,
1 .Ll..l.L-_~l lllJ 10,000

Figure 1~. bact Fc'rrn for the Transrlission L05!1 ,A Or'

Ideol DOllble Ponel

-26-
it can be deduced that the transmission loss in this frequency range is given
approximately by the expres£ion:

It wM ->'> 3.6pc, then

HI 20 10 9 (_ w IV.:..-_) 20 log (N' :) - 33.5 dB (l6 )

I 3.6pc

Equation (16) is the expression for the mOjS law transmission 10~S of the con-
struction similar to that of Equation (6).

At frequencies greatf.!r than f ot but ;ti II not sL'fflcicnt!y high br the wave-
length to be comporabtp. to the pa1'lt'! separation, ~he second term in the i"ner
brackets of Equation (13) begins to dominote. In this freauency range, the
transmission loss i5 givE'n by the approximate expre~sjon:

(,) 2 m m
1 2
TL r 20 log ------
I ' [ 2
(.3.6pc)

TL I + TL 2 + 20 log (2 kcJ) (17)

where TL 1 and TL, or~ the transmissiorl losses of the two panels calculated
according to the mass law by I'!lf'ons of Egualion (6). The upper frequenr:y
limit f 1 of the frequency runge for which Equation (17) is valid will be derived
shortly. In this frequency runge, the transmiss!on loss Q; :. dOlJble panel
increases at the rote of 18dB per octave.

-27-
At frequencies greater than f £" where the wavelength becomes comparable
to and less than the pane! seporatjon d, the transmission loss i~ characterized
by an harmonic series of cavity ifJsona"lces occurring at frequencies given by:

f nc n-1,2,3 .... (18)

n -. 2d

Jt was noted earlier that the full effect of these cavity resonances wi II riot b,~
observed if there 1s absorption in the cavity. However, the general slope llf
the curve reduces horr; 18 to 12 dB per octave. Thus the transmi5sion loss in
this frequency region is given by Equation (13) with the maximum value for the
resonod term in porerlthesis inserted.

f > f (19)
~

where TL j
0110 fL 2 ora as defined before.

The exuct expres.ioo ~;v"en in Equ"tion (13) for the transmission loss of a
double panel cun therefore be opproximated by means of Equations (16), (17),
and (19) in the appropriate frequency regions. The vaiue of the limiting f~e­
quency f t can be determined by equating the expressions given in EquatlC'll'ls
(17) and (19), whereupon:

c.
f = = (20)
i, 211d

It is thu~ possible to predict the transmission I()ss of un ideai dcuole panel con-
struction, provided the inrlividuol panels obey t"'e moss I"w within the frequency
range of interest. The accuracy of the approxinlate prediction method is good,
as cor, be seen in Figure 13.

With the aid of the previous discussion and thp. upproximate expressions that
have been deri.,ed, it i~ now possible to examin~ the efffocts that coincidence
will have or, ~he t;onsmission loss of a double panel. rhe volues of the trans··
mission loss of each of the individual panels will, of course, deviate from that
calculated according to the mass low at frequen·.::ies in the vicinity of and
greeter than their c~itical frequencies (see Section 2. 1.3). As a result, the

-28-
 o Measured Values

60
CD Pred i ded from
·u
., Equations (16),
'"'"c (17) ( and (19)
~

c
":" 40
VI

'E'"
'"c
0
'-
l-

20

63 125 250 500 1000 ~'OOO 4000 8000

Frequency, Hz

Figure 13. Measured Values of the Transmission Loss of a Double

Panel Compared to Va lues Ca leu lated by the Approxi-
mate Method

(second) panel th.:Jt i~ not exposed directly to the sc;,;r.;e of noise will experi-
ence an increase in the level 0' ,::,xcitation at +-he criticnl frequency of the
first ponel. Similarl)', this second por.el ·... ill transmit energy readily at its
critical frequency, The jncrea~es in energy trnnsmitted by the two panels at
their critico: frequMcies are contained implicitly in their respective values
of transmission loss. tquations (17) and (19) indicate that the 1''110 panels act
independently in providing the overyll rransmission loss, Therefore, to a
first approxirT'otion, the effect of cOfncidence in the double panel t;(J.tstruction
cun be accounted for by taking the sum of the eHp.ct!. of coincidence ill the
transmission l05S of each of ~he indi..,icual ponels. As a result, it is p:)ssible

-29-
to u~e Equations (17) and (19), with t ,e '/clues of TL I and
1
2 takt.'n as the n
measured or calculated values ef the transmissicn loss for the individuf,d paneis
includina the effects of coincidE: nee.

This method of prediclion using the approxirr.o~e expressions is fairly accura!'e

even for the case where the two fXlnels are identical - se~ Figure 14. (In this
example, mechanicc: r.onnections between the two panels were minimized by'
locating the panels in the separate isolated rooms of the Transmission Loss
Fociiity. lt was necesslJfY to seal tne perimeter of the construction, and it is
felt that this is the rC-:lSon for the deviations between measured and predicted
vaiues in the region of 1000 Hz.) The predicted value;; were obtained by
inserting me{'l~ured values of ~ransmiss;ol" loss fer the individual pane'~ into
EquCltions (16), (17), and (19), Note that· the dip in the curve at thf! funda'·
mental ['to ;onance has been eliminated by the introduction of acoustical
absNption.

• Measured Values

Predicted from Equations

(16 ), ;17) and (19) end
60 measured values .,f TL
~

for individuol pC'1els

co .,//
-0
. /'\
'"'"0 /

---J /" "

c:
/
Mass
0 40 / "
//
I,ow
'"'" ~

E /
'"C / "
........ re-
0
-j 4"

20

)JJ
iC:- 5/8 C'YF'",mooa,d

01 I I !d I I I I .J. I l
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
~. p.quency, Hz.

Figure 14. Measured and Ca!culated Volues of the Transmi~siofl

Loss c,f SiR-inch Gypsumbocrd

-3D-

- _'ear ·0
If tl--e critical frequenci-.::s of the individual panels are identical, r~len a large
dip in the transmission loss curve is to be ex~cted. Jf they are significantly
different, then the transmission loss curve will exhibit tWQ ind1v;dual dips of
lesser magnitude, or simply a fiattenii"9 i" the region in ~"twf~en. For ail
intermediate conditions, the result will be a broad, shallow lip in the curve.
It is possible to gain more quantitative information of the effect of coincidenr'e
by computing ~he transmis!liun loss of a nurnbEoI' of double panel constructions in
which the individual ~nels ore given values of critical frequency that 'lory
over a wide range. The computed values can then be plotted to determine the
optimum ratio of criticnl frequencies for the two ponels for the least reduction
in transmiss:on less. Suc.h a plot is sllown in Figure 15 for panels of gypsum-
boord, where the values have been normalized for ease of comparison. The
ratio of the critical frcqucncie!l for the two panels consiclered ranges from 1 to
2.5. The frequency fmax in Fig'Jre 15 is the one-third octave bond center
freoll- ~,..:.y at which the maxtmum tra'1smisslon loss is ob~ained prior to the coin-
cider,ce dip. Sub!lequent frequencies are spcced at one-third octave intervals.

The results show. as expected, thor the acoustical performance of the Con-
structio:1 improves as the ratio of tht, critical frequencies of the two panels is
ir,,~rea~ed, !i WOUld appeor that a ru~io of 2 is adequate without introducing
a mductio'i ef more than 6dB from th~' value at fmax . The results, of course,
art. depende,t on the damping in the pone Is, the reduction being less for
higher vaLles of the dumping. In the case of gYPsUr'1bcord, the damping foetor
is in the a:-der of 0.01, L'Jt th i.~ can be increased by '.Ising laminated pone Is.
The rcr.luction in transmission loss at coincidence for the same series of panels,
witl, da'Tlping factG~" rhis time of 0.1, is shown in Figure 16.

One of the ad"anta~les of thp. appro,;(imote expressions given in Equations (16),

(17), a'lw (19) is that the effect of porametcr chunges on the Jronsmission loss
can be easi Iy c1etel'rr,ined. Th€ fJar'Jmeters of irr.portance ore the panel mosses
and separations. Examination of the three equati,:>ns shows that the effect of
varying the punel separation 011 the tran,rnission loss of a doubl~ pane! ,s:

• Zero for f " fond f· f

o l

• ProFo, ~iQnal t;) 20 :-..Ig (d) for f

o
f
p

where fo in this cose is the funr:lamcntal resonant frequenry with the new
value of d and f.c is the lir,·;.i"'9 frequ(~li::y with the original value of d. This
beha,.;or is iilustrotcd ir Figure 17(0). It is interesting to note that changing
rh(' flOflel sepor<J~ion has no effect on the transmission less of a double peine' at
frequencies greflter than f.t, although the value of f i itself is changed. Thus
fOI a clouble ponel with a spacing of 4 inches increasing the separation on Iy
increc..ses the tra''lSrnissioc loss at frequencies below 500 Hz.

-31-
 -10

'I .. 0.01

~
"\" \ ''U.
-----/:} D/ /
\ ~~~~~_'fT~ ;/.d/
.•

L~
0-----0

l
0----<1

0-'-'--';'

-2.0
6--42.5
1.0
1.1
1.7 ~, <1 /, Lr'- .
<3

..30 t-_~----'l~_+-u_Lr,-"~-~-J
~"] ~ x 'max
Nor_lind Frequency

Figure 15. Normalized Reduction in Tronsmi~sion I.oss of an Idef.11 Double Gypsumboard

Panel (t/:: 0.01) at Frequencies Near the Critical Frequencies of the Two
Panels. The Parameter is the Ratio ot the Critical Frequ"ncie5 of t!'le Panels

-10 r-----....---....---r
.....·--.----....----,
" .. O. I

....fi
o
~
"='f
~
i
.!: -10
'~

u
~

".
1
o ····-v
~·_--o
'-J
1.0
1.7
2.0
l .
I I I
1 2 10 2'1] 2' 22/] 2~(l x , _
Normalized rr~qu.ncy

Figure 16. Normalized RfI!duction in Tr']nsmission loss of all Ideal Double Gypsumboard
Panel tTl = 0.1) at Frequencies Near the Critical Frequencies of the Two
Fanels. The Parameter i~ the Rati,., of the Critical Frequencies of the Panels

-32-
 Increasing
. the Panel
VI
(; Spacing
-oJ
c:
o (c) Panel Spacing
."
VI

r:
VI
c:
c
.-
~

/'
,.-
Inc:reasing /'
,.-

the Ponel ... /'

Masses
Equally

VI
VI
.. (
I
I

o I
....! ( (b) Pan.:: I Masses
r.: (
o !
I

VI
VI /
E (
VI !
§ ./

"=L~ ... \~: Existing Panel Masses

f a : f.£

(Log) Frequency

Figure 17. The Effect of Varying the Ponel Moss and Spacing on the
Transmis~ion Loss of an Ideol DOlJble Pone!

-33-
 The effect on the transmission 1015 of changing the panel masses is more complex
since it depends em how the mass is distributed between the panels. If the
individual panel-. in a double panel constr!Jction are assumed to be identi ":01
(the optimum cC',nfigurotion for (] given total moss).. the effects or charging the
masse~ of both :,anels equally is:

• Proportional :" 20 log M for f < f

o

• Proportional to 40 log M for f > f

v

Thi~ ;s illustrated if Figure 17~b). At fre'1uP.ncies greater than f ' tht' effect
o
of doubling the mass of both panels is to increase the transmis~inn !oss by 12dB.

2.2.3 Transmission loss of Ideal Triple Panels

The pClssibility of obtaining transmission loss values 1"1 excess of the calculated

muss lew has bl'€n demon5trated in the discussion on d\,'Oublp, ponel constructions.
In on attempt to obtoin even greater values of tro;1Smhsio.1 hS5 from a cOnstruc-
lion, it is a natur':]l e..-!ension to study the acoustical charQcteri~tics of triple
panel~. The gene,cl principle~. are just the same es ~hose described in the
prt::vious sc:ctiop end, not surpris;ngly, the results prove to be remarkably simi-
lar. The exact expressior for the transmission loss of a tr:ple panel construction
with no mechanical connectio'1s between the ponels ;~ given in Appendix D.
Without repeating the ;nd:"iduoi steps involved, this eXClct expression Can be
simplified to provide strai~l;,t lir,e approximt' ions for tne transmission loss in
various frequency rar.ges in the same l11ann€1 as that described for the case of
double panels:

20 log (Mr) - ~13.5, dB f<

TL, t TL~ +- TL 3 t· 20 log (2kd 1 ) -I- 20 loq (:?kd 2 ) (21 )

f . f
i.

where

mass per unit area of the individual ponels

-34-
 d d; = pane~ separation!.
"
TL l ' TL;~, TL~ = n,easured or calculate~ transmission loss of the three
ponels, including t"',e effects of coincidence

f) = tl-:c lowesr cavity resor,ont frequency

f_, f+ - lower and higher fundamental r~sonances of the

construction.

1~ :5
shown in . .\ ppendix D that the optimum configurarior or a triple panel
construction of 'J g:ven totel ma5S and thickness is:

rr. J - m ,- 1/2 m 2 m

(22)

d co d" -- d
1 •

Under the~e cO'1.::iticns, thp. ft·.1damentol rp-sonr.Jnt frt"·-.~JeI16es arc givp.n by the
expres~ ions.

f ~. 1 ~}.6 p-~~-
T; (23)
I md

(24)

The general approximated characteri~tic: for the transf'1ission loss of a tripl~

pane! is shown in Figure 18 where it is compared to that for a double panel
construction of eq'Jal mass ond thicknp.sL With absorption material in both
cavities, th~ ~ffect of the fundamental 'esononcc\ on the Ira:1smission loss is
significantly reduced ~o that the moss 10'" is valid t't frequencies less than f+.
At frequenciE's greater thon the higher or the I"WO fundamental re~onanc:es f h
but less than f J..' the transmission loss in,.rcaso!s at th,: rate of 30 dB per octO'/e
as compared to 1,~dB per acatve for the clouble panel. in this frequency range,
the transmission loss increases by 18dB if the moss of the construction is
doubled.

-35-
 r------.------------.r--c-------"'-l

;~
,.I '" '"
Trip: t' Po ne I ./ '"
;' '"
/
;' '"
..
/
/

,
~
o
_I
Douhle Ponel
r
o
.-.-

:
I
I
'

i
l
_ _ _"
I
c

;
_ _ c.

f( ,
I
r
I
'

(t
c ' _._.

(Lag) FreqUEncy I H;
~--'

Figllr~~ 18. 1'-. Comparison of the Trar,smission L05s Provideo bl'

Double and Tri~l~ Panel (onstruc- t ir>n5 of Equal
To>,,1 'V\o~s (lnd Cv~rnll Thicknes\

-36-
,
!
I·

2.2.4 Comparison of Double and Triple Panels

At this p",ht. it is useful to oxomine thtt difference in acoustical performance

of the dolJble o~d tdple pan.,1 con'ltructions to detormine which of the twc is
most efficient in terms of trlJn~m;ssion los~ for a given totcl moss and thickness.
(It wi" be assumed thot the ~ame rnaturiol is UStlrl ill b':)t~t types of constructions,
!oo th~ thickness of the palle!" can he :~lr"~l'd i,l thi~, cornrarisan.)

One ef the most criti cal frequency regions to b,. com; dered in the d~\i gn of
the cor;struction occurs in the "it:init, or
~he fundamental panel resonance f '
o
Earlier in this chapter, it was shaWl; that the value of this resonrmt frequency
for both types of constructi,1I1 is proportional to l/-Jmd where m is C'fie-
half and ont':-quar~er the total rnos~ for the uouble Qnd triple ponels, respec-
tjve~y, and d is the ponel spacing (assuming on oo·;rnum confiRuration). 't
read; Iy follows that for a given totol man and thickness, tlC ~,igher CO C thp. two
resonances as~ocjoted with the triple panel is exactly twic;,e t~.at for the douSle
ponf':l, i.e., '+ : :2fo ' htroducing this relationship Int:) the a~socialed
equCltions Tor the double and triple ponels contoirlF.'d :n Se';tions 2.2.2 end
2.2.3 shows that the transmission lou provid~rl by the twel cor.structions is
equal at a frequency four tirnes th,e reS:lnOnf frequency for the doublf! ponel,
i.e., 4fo ' At thj~ frequE'ncy, the transmission loss is 24 HB greater thon ~he
calculated mas, low, assuming ideal cOr)di~jons whert! ther'! ore no mechanic-ol
c.onnections betwpen the indiv i d'.Ial ponel~. Thus, the doub:e porlel providfH
higher values of tr~n<;mission loss thor. the rripie panel at frequencies le1S than
4 fe' whereas the triple panel i; superior at frequencies greater tharl 4 fo '

The bosic acoustic theory for double panel constructions assumes thet the air
conttJ;nilOd in the cavity separating the panels acts as a stiffneu element at low
frequencies. This i."plie~ thot the air is unoble to escape from the cavity and
that :he sound pressure i~ constant aver the entire ccw:'y' volurTlc, The loterlJl
dimp.n~i::lns .?f practical double ponel constructions, however, are sufficiertly
lorge compared to a wavelength for standing acoustic Wr.lves, or modes, II) be
~el up in the cavity. Clearly, the ~,.,vity no longer can be represe"'~f!d OS a
~ilnple stiffness elr.ment in the freql'lr,cy range r.ontoininr.J such standing waves.
I~ i~ th!rdore natural to expect that the meusured values of transmis!oion loss
will (iiffcl from the val'Jt,s preclicted using thf' ~implc theory ~ ~hat is unless the
lotf'm: modes ore adeqlJat~ly clamped. In a ~inCjle 2 inch x ~ indl ~tud C;OI1~
5truc~ion of height 9 feet with stud~ 24 inches on center, the lowe~t mode of
, ibrotion occurs at approximately 63 H7 or well belo'.", the lowest frequency of
intf!rest (125 Hz in this shJdy). In this case the stiffness assumption is incorrect
over the campler~ frequency rU~lge.

-37-
This is only part of the problem, howAver. Jf there is little or no acousti c
absorption in the cavity, the Itanding waves may be d largE' amplitude
and may transmit considerahle E'rlergy to the panels. In fact, at the pressure
antinode~ in the cavity, the high values of sound pressure will produce an
eHect sir"ilar to that of dire~t mechanical connections. It would therefore be
expected that the resu Iti ng strong acousti cal coupl ing between the panel s ot
the natural frf'quencim of the cavity woulci significantly reduce the transmission
loss of C" double pUl1el construction. Furthermore, it is expected that the addi-
tion of I.1cous~ic()! obsorption to the cavity would reduce the amplitude of
standing waves or,d result in an increase in the transmission loss.

Much of the experimentnl work designed to study the effects of Cll:sorption has
been performed on dt'ublt! panel systems in which some fom. of mechanical
cC\fl"ection existed between the indi"idual pone Is. II is to be expected,
therefore .. that 5U'_:'1 interpanel coupling wCluid set an 'Jpper limit on the tran~~
mission loss thct could be obtained, Nevertheless, a few cf the results obtained
are valid since they ",ere obtained from experiments c.:"nducted on double panels
that were shown to be capable of providing g,'eater values of trarsmission loss by
the introduction of more absorptive material. Some of the more important con-
c!usions from previous work (References 10 and; 1) ere a5 follows:

• ThE position of a layer of ab~orption material in the cavity _. whether it

is cgainst the panel ;,urface or in tha center of the cavity - is not important.

• Variation of the flow resistunce of the material in the rang~ 10 to 70 rayls

per inch has little effect on the transmission loss.

• Th~· demity of the material has little efft~ct on the transmission IO~L
(Ho",l:'ver, if the density is very hi~lh, the material moy add rnass to one
of the two panels if it is attached and higher vCllues of tran~mis';on loss
moy be obtained.)

Thele conclusions, whill: probably ~erfcdly valid, unfoPunoiely do not fuily

cxploin the action of the absorption motcriul in th .. cavity. To ob~ain a
weater understanding, it is necessary to consider the modal properties of the
lOlJ'lr1 field that i,,£>t up in the cavity clue to some external ocoustic l'x~ita­

lion rl'''~ ~ht:: COJpl;"g bClwl'Prl this ,;ound field and the porels.

Lxperimenral ev;rl':'o"l((' to support a modal coupling hypothesis has been

obtained by measuring the trar,smissiotl ICJSs of a double panE'l in which the
indil/;dual ponels were C(lrnrletely isolateJ. In tJ,e expt>riments, one panel
f)f the do,)b!E' pewsl C()f1~truction was plC"ced in the sClI';.:.;e room, the other in

-38-
 the receiving room, and the edges of the cavity were seal"!d. The panels
used were of I/B-inch and 1/4-inch hardboard, chosen so that the effects of
coincidence wt!re rBmoved from the frequency range of interest. The results of
the experiments are shown in Figuru 19. In the absence of absorption, curve
(c) of this fjgure shows ihut the s~rong acousti c coupling hetween ~he panels
results in almost a single panel performance at frequencies less than the fi~t
cavity resonance perpendicular to the plane of the panels (i.e., 1100 Hz).
At higher frequencies, the phaso of the sound pressure varies over the thick··
ness of ·he cavity and the ocoustic coupling is weaker. in this frequency
range, the ~ran:..mission loss is seen to increase and behave more like that
expected of a double panel, although the predicted values are not attained.
The introduction of a 2-inch layer of fiber glass insulation board (den~ity
3 Ibs/ft 3) across the entire cavity wiJth produces a remarkable improvement
in the transmission 10:'5 - sp.e curv~ (I.. ) of Figure J9- resulting in good agree-
ment between theory and exp,;,rirrient. W;th a 4-inch layer of fiber gloss in
the ccvity, the mass of tr.e absorption material is comparablf' to the mas.; of
the pr:mels, ""'hich explcins the additional increasf" in tronsmis);on Ims ever
and above thot predicted by the simpl~ theory - see c.... rve (a) of Fi9ure 19.

80 "'-"""""""""""'--"-""....--,--r,-"T'..,.........,--,...-~--r..,..-,.--r-"f"l
• 4' fu II LQ)'~r (0) I
o 2" full lay~r (b)
• •
•
60 - <) Non/! (e) • 6 ,,~ A A
..,-u C"kula'~d
",' E'luati<'>nl
B
...J
(16).117),119)
C
1 ~()

~
·f
'"
,~
70 ~ll La....

o _L-J -L......__.__L~_J.._.L ~-L.!-...k-'>'-~--"-<'''''''''~...A

63 I7S '} SO .soo 1000 2000 4000 8000
freqv~l)"'y, Hz

Fi'Jure i i. Mt!asurerJ Values or Itw Tron~rni~siCY1 LO!I§ of em holClted

Double Panel Construction with and w'thout Full-Lc'/er
Cavity Ab50rption. The Comtructio" Consists of 1 /4 "
ond 1/8" Hardboard with a Spacingof6-1/4 inc:hes

-. .,.,.'11II5 .. _ ...
_ .~ ..-n. .__m_
~_=
t
(-

It is nonnal, and less costly, to use foil-backed fiber glass batts in wall cavities
rather than the fiber gloss insulation board. As the density of the batts is lower
than that of the board, their effecti"eness in damping the cavity modes is
lower. Measured results of the 1ransmissior. los~ of the double hl.'rdboard panel
construction are given in Fi~ure 20 for the two types of absorption material in
the cavity. At low frequencies the values are essentially tne same ....,ithin
experimental error, but a reductiorl,e orde~ of 4 to 5 dB is noh.'d at fre-
quencies in excess of 500 Hz. It :oncluded that both types of mCiteriol
are equclly effective in damping frequency lateral cavity modes, but
thot the bafts arE" less efff::cti ve thon Ii e board in the frequency range where tf,e
I

higher order ccwity modes occur (i .e' l those perpendiculur to the surface of the
panels) due to thE: lower density one flow re5istance.

r) 2" Fiber Glass Board •

. ..
• 3-1/2" riber Gloss Batts
•
60
co
""D
, Predicted --_
"0on
.....J

c::
0 /0
'"
VI

f
,
\"

(
~

>--

20 ---

o
Fl'e'1uency, Hz

f i~Jl)rc ~)O. lwnsm i !>5lon Loss Values for (In Id(!o! Doul)lc Pant! with
a Full Loyer Fiber Glcss l,,~ulation Board and Fil1er Gloss
Batts

~ -40-
.,.

80
. - _ 6"

6------6 2' ,

60
a:l
""t

v,
..
V'
\~

C
L' 40
.,'"
E
'"c
0
l-
1-••

20

J~ 63 125
J
250
I
500
I
1000
Frequency, Hz
I
2000
I-J
4000
I
8000

Figure 2",. Measured Vf"Jlues of Transmission Loss of an Isolated Double

Panel Construction with Perirnc:ter Absorpti071. The Con-
struction Cons;sts of 1/4" and 1/8" Hardboard with 0
Spacing of 6-1/4"

,l,
I
i
•
If the modal coupling theory is correct, :t should b~ prw,ible to provide the
acoustic absorption solely at the periphery of the cavity. This s~,oul~, in fact,
be the 0r"ltirnum posj·ion for the placement ot the matHia!. Figure 21 shows
the result of ir,troducing layers of fiber gims (density 3 Ibs/ft J ), 2 inches and
6 inches thic'(, (Hound the periphery of the uNity. The following pui(,ts can
be noted concerning the results:

• The transmission loss at low flequencies increases as the thickness of the

absorbent material at the periphery i:; increased, The predicted values
are not attained, but it is reasonable to assume thClt they would be
approached more closely with thicker lay'~rs d material, i ,e., more
absor pt i ()n ,

-41-
e The slight dip in the curves at IOOO Hz c.:>rresponds to the first cavity
resonance perpendicular to the plane of the panels. This will be evident
since the damping at the periphery of the c.avity will not be fully effective
in damping this mode.

• At frequencies greoter than the first cavity resonance, the presence of

higher order cavity modes (again perpendicular to the plane of the panels)
reduces the overall values of transmission loss. However" the indi ... idudl
resonances are not noticeable.

• At the critical frequency of the 1/4-inch shE"et of hardboard (5000 Hz),

there is a mlJrked reduction in the measured values. Obviously, perimeter
absorption has little effect on the transmission loss at the critical frequency.

The principles ormodal coupling provide an interesting method by which the

tran~mission loss of double panels can be increased without tl,e use of absorp-
tion. If the cavity is Jivided into a large number of smaller cavitie~ by means
of 0 lattice network, the entrapped air will behove as a stiffness element up
to high frequenc!cs, i.e., up to the lateral modal freq\)encie~ of lhe individ-
ua! elements in the lottice. This is demonstrated in the measured results of
Figure 22, where the lattice dimension is 2 f~et squore. At low frequencies,
rhe measured result~ follow the predicted curve closely. The strong coupling
eff~ct of the first and second lateral modes of the lattice (in tlle 315 Hz: ond
630 Hz one-third octave bonds) is evident. The lottie," has very little effect
at high frequencies. If the luttice dimensions were 6 inches rather than 2
feet, it is anticipated that the predicted results would bf! approached at all
frequencies up to 1000 Hz without the use of ony absorption material.

The concllJsion that can be drawn is that the modo! coupling tr.eory appears to
be val id. The use of peri pheral absorption alone apparently is not sufficient
ro attain tr,e possible high values of tran~mission loss at the higher frequencies.
Dividing the cavity into smaller individual cavities, whil.e providing good
results a~ 10''''' frequencies, agoin has simi lor limitations at high frequencie5.
At this point, it is interesting to return to the slated conclusions obtained
from previous experimental work. These, it will be remembered, showed that
the in fluence of thE'! density o'ld flow resistance of the absorption material on
fhe transmission loss was negligible. This result is understandable when it is
real izecJ that of major importance is the damping experienced by sound waves
traveling paraliel ann nol perpendicular tc the surface of the panels. With a
full lateral layer of ,"aterial in the cavity, the damping will always be I,igh
(unless the density or flow resistance of the material is vuy low indeed) since
the complete propagcJtion path is through the material.

-42-
 80 ..,-, "t i

II 2' X 2' lattice

G No Absorprion
60
ce
""C
..
'"0
III

c
0 40 --
'"..,..
E
'"c
~
...0
£0 -

.....""{

o r-...I-/
........
63
--L~-...l.
-....I.

125 250 500

~ - JIL. . "j- L.-.lol-l. L._~.J
.....-'-.....J,_...&..........

Frequenc,,-, Hz
I-"-........
....

1000 2000 4000

J
. .....
8000

Figure 22. Measured Values of Transrnis:;ion Loss of on Isolated

Double Panel Constructio~' with 0 2' x 2' Lattice in
~he Ct:)vlty. The Construct;on Consist~ of 1/4" and
1/8" Hardbc:arrl ·"",ith a c)Pccing of 6-1/4"

In double panels where the pt-onel separotion is smull - ,;oy, !ess thnn 6 inches -
it has been found (Reference 11) that the position of rhe material (assuming it
is a full late~ol la)'er) is not critical. for panel separation~ greater than this,
as for example in floor/ceiling constructions, rhe lot'~rai modes in the cavity
may not be adequately damped if the material is attached to one of the panels.
It i!:. preferable ill such coses to incline the materia! across the cavity wherever
this is possiLIt:.

-43-
2.3 SOUND BRIDGES IN MULTIPLE PANELS

One of the major assumptions in the previous analysis of double panel structures
is that the two individual panels are completely isolated fr~m one another.
This mean~ that the on Iy path of energy transfer between the two p"'nels is an
airborne path. In practice, it is necessary to have some form of connection
between the ponels to provide the added stiffness for the construction to
withstand lateral loads. These connections usually take the form of wooden
or metal studs in building structures Clid metal ribs and stringers in aerospace
structures. The:r effect is to provide an additional transmission path in
paralle! to the airborne path previously considered, with the result tha~
acolJstic radiotior, from the structure is increased and the transmission io!.s
correspondingly reduced. It is not usually possible to eliminate these inter-
panel connections, or "sound bridges" as they are called, and so il is nec.essary
in th<> design of multiple panel structures to be able to determine the effect that
they have on the ~ran5mission loss.

2. j. 1 General Theory

There are basically two types of ;"terpenel connections. Dna of t:,ese, the
iirH' r_onnection, is commonly found in building constructinns in the form of
wooden or metal studs in whi ch the two ponels are cO:inected along a I;r,e or
a ~erie~ of lines. The other, which is not so common, is the point connl~ction
ond c"n,;s~s of a connection or a number of connections having a small ~r05S­
sectional area that approximates to a point. The method (hat will be 'Jsed to
Jetermine the reduction in transmission loss of a double panel due to Ihe inser-
tion of a number of ~uch sound bridges is to add t.::>gether the acoustic power
radi ated by the action of the bridges arid that rad iated by the ideal isolated
panel. The resuit will then be comparee with the power radiated in the
absence of ~ound bridgt:s.

,:onsider a double panel constriJction that is subject to acoustic eXCitation

from an unidentified noise source, The ponel not exposed directly to the
noise source wi I! be exposed to the sound field creared in the cavity between
the two panels. If the resultant r;ns velocity of this second ponel is v 2 '
then the sound powet VIp mdiated due 10 the forced response of the panel at
frp.ouenr.ies less than Ihe critical frequency is given by the: expr.?~sion:

(25)

-44-
where S is the oree of the panel. This expression also hr.)lds for frequencies
greater than the critical frequency for both free and forced wave radiation.
To the power Wp' must be uddcd the power radi,]ted by the action of the
sound bridges which are assumed to conflec~ the rY.~ pone Is. It has been shown
by Heckl (Rcferencf! 12) that the s.,und power WB r,]dioted by a panel aj
frequencies less thor, the critical frequerlcy, when excited by 0 mechanical
force such as that provided by the action of the sound bridges, is given by the
expre~;si on:

(26 )

where v i~ the rms velocity of the area over .....hich the force is acting, and
)( is gi ven by:

8 :;
;~ ;., for a poi i1 t force
:", c:

I
TT
(27)
')
<-

"([
t ;\ for a line force

where

:\ c --- the criTical wovelength of the panel (eire)

.t the lengrh of the I ine over wh ich the force acts.

A c.omparison of tqu::;::uns (25) and (26) shows that the quantity )t has the
oirnensions of on area and can be considered to be the effective (Jreo of radia-
tion from either the point or line force. If the point fore'=! acts over a small
blJt finite area A then as long as the lateral linear dimensions of this area
ore much smaller thon the bending wavelength on t~e panel, Equation (26)
(;an be rewritten approx' (,dely os:

W
B
---0 pc X ( 1 ! ~~ ')\ \,2 (28)
, \ 2
\ ~1\8

-45-
 r .=

As .= wavel£l1glh of bending waves on the panel.

,\Iso,){ is independent of frequency, which at first may seem to be a strCJ!1ge

result. Howev~r, at frequencies iess then the critical frequency, the area of
I-he pane! which is not in the ;mmediate vicinity of the discrete point or line
forces experiences free wave motion fr"m which the sound power radiation is
~mall. TIle only substant:ol radiation comes from the areo of the fr>rce its,elf
from the forced waVE:s. The si ze of this effective area of radiotion will de~~re(,]se
with frequency, but ~he ",.,wer radiated per unit area will increase with fre-
quency, so that tr.e total radiation will rf'nlain constant. Sinc~ the size of the
radi::Jting '.lrea increases a~ I'he frequency is decreased, ;t is possible for OV'M-
lappinq to occur between deformali'Jlls produced on the ponel by neighboring
point fcrces. It (:an b~ shown (F<efen~nce 13) that the effective radius of tht!
racJiot;ng cret' ie, AB /4 Wheff.' )., B is lhe wavelength of benrling woves on
the Fanf"l. For ~he individual p::>int Forces tu be independent of each other.
~ht' 'ipacing lie IImus: be grFloter than AS/?' Using th(, relationship given In
t quation (11), ti,is criterion cun be t.xpr(:~sed CiS:

(2SI )
4e ? rc

For example, if th", p.:mel i.: i/2-i<1c.h gypsumboard with a cri!ical frequency
of 3()OO Hz, the forces can be considered to be ind3pendent at ell fre1uencies
greoter than 27 Hz for a point spacing of '} feet <

With these considerations, ihe total power 'NT radiated hy the s~cond panel
when r « AB is given by:

Wr, WIYI
rJ B

pc S v} (~) ] (30)

-46-
 where n is the number of point or line fl')rces acting on the panel. Comparing
Equations (30) and (25) gives the result that the decrease TL
B in transmission
loss of the double pane I construction due to the introduction of the sound
bridges is given b)':

= 10 log (1 + 0) (31.1

where

The overt'll I ~rons!Tlissii)n loss TL of a bridged double par,el is then given by

the expr~ssj on:

(32)

where Tl. i~ lhe tran5mi,,~~on loss uf an ieeal double par, i with no CO'1nec-
l
tions, as given by the exact expressio:1 in Equation (13) or 1,12' approximate
expressions in Equation~ (16), (17), and (19). To calculate the reduction in
tronsrYIi~sion 1055 it is necessary to determini:': the velocity ratic. v to v2 ,
which ,~ the ratio 0;" the panel velocity ur the position where the line or p<:",int
force acts, to the velocity of the panel at 0 point well removed from this
position. To a first opproximati"n, it can be assumed that:

• The vehcity of the first panel (thot exposed to the :;ound field) IS
unaffected by the introduchon or
tht: point or line cOllnection.

• The velocity of th~ ~econd pan"" I at the position where the point or line
force acts is the san-e (J5 the velocity of the fil"!-t panel (assumed constant
over its surface), I,'~"

-47-

- ~- -_.-------~.- --- ... ~----_._-- ...

_.-._-----------~-_
':With these assumption~, it con be shown (see Appendix E) that the velocity
ratio is given by:

v
= 1.8pc
(33)

f > f £,

where f t is uiven by Equation (20).

UI,der conditions where the ~econd term in thp. brackets of Equ(l~ion (31) is
much greater than unity, thE: rate of ir'\r.rease of TL B (the detraction in trans-
mission loss) with frequency is 12 dB pe~ octave for f < f t and 6 dB per
octave for f > ft. Thp. transmiss ion l"5S of an idea I dOL.:b Ie po!1£ I i!1creases
at a rate of i8 dB per ':lctove and 12 dB per octav~ in the two frequency
ranges, respectively. rhu~. the transmission loss ;)f a double panel v.ith
sound bridges will j~lcreo5c at a rate of only 6 dB per octave over the entire
frequency range whf're the translT1is~,ion loss is governed by the bridges:-'"T'h8
curve will thus be parallel yo the mass !aw line.

At lower frequencies, whe:'l the vclue of the second term (0) in Equation (31) is
less thon or comparable to unity, the slope of the curve ..... ; II vary betwec:n the
limits 18 dB and 6 dB per octave. Thus, the general form of the transmission
Ion for (J bridged double panel is as illustrated in Figure 23. The frequfincy
at which ihe sound bridges begin to determine the transmission loss is ca'led
the "bridging" frequency fB w~; ch for the case where the two panels a 'e of
eqJol rr,c~~ is given b~:

1/2
f
BP
f
0 (>:~~- ) for poin· connections

(34)

. I,'.

f BL f
0
(.g+--)
. A
r:
f'r linf: connectiQf1s

-48-
where

e 7 = the area (in square feet) associated with each point connection

f - fundoillentr:lI resonance l..; the double panel

o
b the l>PC'dn9 (., le~t) between the Ihe connections.

The more ge'1erai case where the d:stribution of mass between ~he ponels is not
even is discussed in Appf!ndix E.

---~-~--_.-_------
---'I

12 dB per
octQve

6 dB
18 dB per octave
J'I
pc r oc to 'Ie
~
....J
c::
o
'"'"
F.
'"c::
o'-
~

Mass Law
6 dO per octave

(
f)

figure 23. General f'Jrm fOl the lronsfJ1is~ion Loss of a Double

Panel w; th Sound Bridges

-49-
5 ince, the curve of t~e brldg~d transmi!ision loss as CI function of frequency is
parallel to the mO:iS low line, CI convenient met"'od for specifying the transmis-
sion 1055 is in terms u~ the increase Ii TlM in transmission loss over and abc-,vl!!
that predich-ti by thl'! 1.1055 law for the entire structure. It is 0 fairly simpl~
matter to show (r.ee Appendix E) that the value of 6. TL M can be oblailll~.::!
(rof'(' ·he fol!owing expressions:

For point connections (to one panel only) -

'111 \
6. TL co 20 log (e f ) +- /'0 'ell ( ---- ) - 55, dB
M c - r,~ 1 \- rn~
, "

""'- 20 109 (e f c) - 61, dA fo; 111

1
- m
2

;:or I:ne connedioo!-

,I '11

n Tl,VI ( --
+
1
'11
.', j
- 28, dB
\ '11 1 2 ;
\

d& (36)

wheie

e -- point io'jic!: spacing in ~e€.t

b : :. !ine stud separation in feet

- mass per unit area of the panel suppor~eci by point connections

f critical frequency of par'el supported by point cool1l:!ctions or,

c
in ti,e case of line connections, the highest critical frequency
of rhe two.

It mu~,t
be recognized, however, thot Equations (3.'5) and (36) do ('lot account
for the .:ffects ot coinr.idence in either of the two ponels. Thus, the 'Tlethod
of adding the quantity Ii TLM to thp. calculatr.d moss low transmission loss
TLM in order to obtain the overall tror:smission lo~s of the bridged double panel
is valid only when the critical frequencies of both panels are either outsidl'l the

·so-
.
L
~

frequenc)' range of interest or staggE'red sufficienl':Y in value (see Section 2.2.2)

for their individual effects to be reduced. Otherwise, it is necessary to compute
the reduction Tl B in transmission loss as a result of the sound bridges and sub-
tract thi~ from the tr'Jnsmission loss of the ideal dOuble panel, calculated frOI'1
Equations (16), (17), a~,d (19).

Whichl!ver method of cc/c.;ul.,tion is required, hr.."J'Nfwer, the expressions givf'!fl

in EquCJtions (35) and (36) give an irldication 05 to thf.~ required design param-
eters for un optimum double panel construction inr:orporating sound bridges.
Not ~lJrrrisingly, it is found that the transmission loss increases C$ th~ number
and/or length of the interpane; conr"lec;tions is reduced anel as thi: critic-al fre-
qlJency (or f1exibi lity) of ~he panels is incremed.

The volu.: of ~TLM is plotted in FiglJre 24 as a function of th,: co,.,~tr;Jction

rararneters efe and bfc,' In I') prac'ical constructioll, i' is to be E"lo',oected
that ihe poin: lattice (assumed squore) spacing lie" norry;al:y will Le equol to
the <,Iud spacing lib '. Figure 24 therF;forc shov/s that a vai;Je nf ~ TlM equal
h' 10 dB can be obtained wjr~, a panel seven tiffles less flexible if it is mounted
on points than jf ii' is mounted c.onv€l1til,:onolly 011 line st;Jds.

Point
Bridges
20 (p. f )
c
co
-0
c
'-
:~
/
-' 10 -
1-
'1

/
.'
,
/
/' /
0 _ ....._.L...! j j..J LL---L__.-...--.l.-""-...............
1 10 20 ~;O lOOx lOJ

If'f ) c'r ihf ) ,,., ft/~; ~

c (.

Figure /4. The Increase ir. Tran\mi!>sion Loss Hili with R~ference
to the Ma~s Law as C1 Function of the CJuontities (p.f )
and (Sf) for a Double Pconel wi th SOLJnJ Bridges C
c.

-51-
2.3.2 Experimer'tal Verificari·)f1 of Sound Bridging Theory

A series of experiments was designed to check the validity of the abo"e expres-
sions. A double panel consisting of two sheets of SIB-inch gyp~umboard was
placed in the transmission loss t'3sting facility. As before, the panels were
located in separate rooms, p.nsuring that no mechanical connections existed.
A layer of 2-inch fiber glass (density 3 Ibs/ft 3 ) was placed in the ca"ity t
provide obsorpt;on. The trr.Jnsmission loss of the double panel wcs measured,
the meo:;uremcnt we:. then repeated with t:le addition of ontl, three, and nine
?oint connections uetween the ponels. The point connections used were made
of wood and hOt' a cross-sectional area of 4 square inches. These connections
were pk..::ed (")(1 (1 ~quclle !ari i:e \Nlth a spacing of 2 feet. The area of the con-
nections was nne-tenth of the rr.diating area of the pan~1 at 1000 Hz, and
cOLdd therefore be neglect~r~ :n considering the effecti >Ie radiating area. The
results of the measurements arc shown in Figure 25, where they are compored
with computed results usi"g Equations (16), (17), (19), (31)1 (32), and (33).
The c.gree,l1ent is good, even at frequencies approaching Clna above the critical
frequenc)'. This perhaps is surprising, since the eXFressions ale supposedly
valid ani>, at frequencies below the critic.:!1 frequency. In any event, it .... 'ould
appear that the predic.ted effect~ of point bridging in double panels are con-
firmed by the measurements - at least for this ideal laboralory (;'Jse.

The experiment was repeated with a I;ne connection rt.!placing the points. Yhe
line connection consisted of an 8-foot long wooden ~~'~d, 2 inches x ~ inche~,
which was screwed firmly to both panels along ii·: len9th. The measured results
and the predicted values are shown in Figure 26. It CO" be !'!!en thr.t tIre pre··
diction method gives values that are approximately 3 aB too low. This dis-
r.:re~ncy can be explained by rememberin9 that in the theo!"'/, the introluctrOfl
of the connection is assLlmed to have no effect on the motion of the pane:
direr.;~ly expr>sed to the .icUlld excitation. With pCl;nt connections, this i, (J
reasonable msumptiorl which is justif:~d to a ciHtnin extent by the gOOrl agree-
ment 0btained betwccll predictf:rl nru rr,~a:'lrel.' ,esl)Its. The continuolJ' line
connection, however, wi! I ('>'ert an influ~ncl~ (')n the motion of the fir<;t
panel, due portly to jt~ mo,"s (lPd portly to the r~oclion of the second ront'>l.
Since the~~ ort' rather inc.Jetermillotc ql:Opl itie~ irl (1n already opproxi~n;,,~e
theory, on empirical C(')rr.~ctiol' to fqllCltion'. {'Jl~ and (36) rn(i/ be nf'cessory
to obtain prec.:icted reslllt1 for line connectil'n·.

To see if the ahove results applieu l:quolly well to practical structures, furtht:!r
experimcn~, were ca"ducted on a ~ingle woo.:J sl'Jd partition built :n the test
~'=l:;ility. rhe material applied to ~oth sides at the studs was SiS-inch gypsum-
board. fhe studs wer~ mounted 24 inches on center. rhe results of the
mpmLlI~w>nt', are ~h()wn in FiW"P 27. The three curves in thi~ figur~ are:

-52-
 80 r-.,....,~~-,......,fr--I""" ...,.-...~~~
_.- .....

60
:=:rj
.... --,

cc.
">:)
~

'"
....8
c:
0 ·w ..
'"
·e'"
..-'"
c:
0

U~I~
20 -, VI C_O<';.'

" ~I'I' c,1'J""".,....-d

o L~~'---l--l.'_""""--I.'-..L.'--'----L---L'~-J.l-J..l ~
63 125 750 500 1000 2000
-..l.1 I ....J1"--"--1--'
......
4000 8000
Fr8quency, Hz

Fil:jure 25. Measured and Calcu lated Values of Trai1smission Loss for a
Double Panel witn a Number ::-f Point Connections

80 ......,-~-..,... ......__ --r_-..-_.. . .-. . . . ,. .__ j ...... f-....--.-r..-...r--...-·-

/
/ .
_ .. - t'~{) ccmnl!cti OilS "\ \ I
/ I
/ \ /
,/
/
I

l·'·'~ osu reel

I
60 , I
'-'
I
a:l I I
"U
.
'"
1)
...... I
I

..
I . I

. •

/~'""
----~
.-.-J••
•

-----~
•

\
I
~
c 40 I
I
/'
::l ,/
F I
P,,,diclprl . . '
..
~

~
•
10 ..

o'-......-"--"--"--J..-..-Jo-J~.L.. • .l.l....,-J,__l~.I.~..-J.I........._~................... !

63 125 250 500 1000 /000 4000 8000

Frequenc>" Hz

Fisure 26. Meosured ald Calculated Values of Transmission Loss for n

Double Punel with 0 Line Connection Between the Panels

-53-
., The vakes of transmission loss for the basic structure

• The modified structure with one of the panels mounted on points 24 inches
nn center

• The modified structure with both panels mounted on points 24 inches on

cen ter

The points consisted of 1 inch )i 1 inch x 1/4-inch pieces of plywood nailed

tf) the ~tudsi the ponel(s) \'I.'ere subsequently nailed to the plywood points. The
;-igure also depicts the predicted volues for the line and point connections. The
agret;mer,t between predicted and measured re~ults is good for poin: connectioos,
but a discref:ancy is nC'ticecJ ;n the case of the Iine connections. The rensor. for
this l1dditiona l discrepa;lcy is the same as :hat discussed earlier regard;n2 line
connections. In this case, however, the presence of many wooden studs is most
likel} TO significantly affect the validity of the theory. As a re~ult, it woulcJ
appear tnat the empirical correctior' factor that has to be applied to Equatlor;.
(31) and (36) for I :ne connectio"s :.hould be 5 dB to account for ly~ical prac-
tical coostructions. The prcctical version of Equation (36) thus becomes:

10 109 rb f ) - 29 rl B (37)
c

Note that in both case; tf--e accuracy of the theory at frequencies approaching
coincidence is le!s than in the Freviou!, more ideal structures, as is to be
expected.

The increase In transmission lo~s produced b, mounting just one of the ponc:s
on point connections is in tf,e orde~ ,)f 5 dB over a fairl:.' wide frequency range.
Of partindlJr interest is the small inrrens(. I:n the order of 1 rlR) i" tran~mission
loss prod Jced by introducing point connections on both 5ide~ of the wood studs.
It appea's that this is on lInneces~ary complication.

The cxperimf'" were [cpeurLd ,)~il1g !he some ,.yond stlld system os before, out
with 3/8-i'1 - vrsumb0urd mounted 0'1 aile side and .'l/8-ipch gypsumboard
on the other. rhe re<LJlh ,)f the l1eosuremf'nts arc given in r-igure 28. The
ogreemen~ between fhe predicted and memured v'Jlues is good at frequenc:n
'owe~ thon the critical frequency for both ~he point l'n<1 line connections, if
the 5 dB p.mpirical correction is Gpplied 10 ~hf' Inlter. Again, little or no
significcwt increase in valu~s wels obtained by mounting both punel~ on point
ccmnections. Examination of Equation (34) shows tha~ the value of fOp .-
the bridging frequency -- and hen ') the transmission loss, increases as t:,e

-54-

--~---- --------------
 80 : i , f i 'T I ir
. - ...... liM Conn.crier. aorh Sid., (2""g.~.)
PrE'dicte~'
- Point
0----0 lin. and Poi", Con".;'"Otll (.104 -a.c.)
Connecti om

60 ./
./
-
clO
-0
.
'"
'"
0
-'
Predicted -
c
0
.;;; 40, ~ Man law
'f'"
'"c0
~

20

o l-............... 1 .L-J..!- ' -

.J-1--'-_,....'--J,.I--'--'-....' ---"---'-....L- 1.-1
1-....'........""""'-......
.....

6:1 125 250 500 1000 :'800 4000 8000

F,'cqlJency, Hz

Fig'ire 27. Measured Values of Transm~ssior Loss for a Double Ponel with
Ont; and Both Panels Mounted with Point Connections

60
<D
-0

'"
..
~
B
c
0
...,..., 40
E
...,
r-
r-
j+9t-1 4'
1:
~-

70 ..
Li_
C':".....,.C'f.",., -, -- ''J''''
-- I, ......
I - C>JlV'I.rli"...,\

,,,,. \.. J/8'

• GY~·l.tlrnb,JtO(d

o ....J. l ,_ ... 1 --'---'-....11........................1~--J._-Io.--'-........- - ' - - - ' -..................

, .....
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
frequenc" Hz

Figiire 28. Measured and Calculated Values of Tronsmission Loss

for a DouL'le Panel with One of the Panels Mounted
with Point Connections

-55-
 critical frequency is increased. It therefore follows that the panel having the
highest critical frequency, i.e., the rnore fiexible pr.lnel of the two, shculd be
attached by means of point conm ctions.

The expressions given in EquaHons (35) and (37) show that in the freqL,ency
regi em domi nated by the sound bri dges, the; "crease in transmi s5i on loss fc.'r the
above two constructions obtained I)}-. attachi ng one of the panels on point con-
nections is given by:

(38)

wherp. it is assumed that the lille study spacing b is equal to the point spoci'1g
e. The additional 5 dB is hcluded CiS the empirical correction factor for j'he
lina connection colclliatioo. Evaluation of this expression gives increases of
5 dB and 7 dB for the SIB-inch ar.d 3/B-inch gypsumboard panels, resf'ectively,
wh: ch agrees very well with the measui,t>d increases shown in Figures 27 Cind
28,

In summary, it can be stat!':d that the simplified theory d:scussed above pro-
vides reslJits that are a considerable improvement over those obtained using
prediction methods previously available. The accuracy of the preciicted
results is high at frequencies less than thp. cl"itiCCiI frequency. At frequencies
in the vicinity of and greater than the critical frequency, ~he theory is no
longer strictly valid. Hcwev<::r, it is interesting that the predici'ed results in
this frequency region are conservative (i.e., 10"'1) at worst and often agree
surprisingly well with those measured. It is useful to take advantage of this
unexpected outcome, but extreme caution natura~lf must be taL-en in inter-
preting the results in the frequency region above coincidence.

2.3.3 Isolated Panels

The preceding discussion has demonsrratecJ the ben:erits of poi'1t connection',

between the panels of a double pan':! I ~tructure. The C"cnneetions used ;:1
the ~EHies of measUl'ements were solid in the sen~e that thL two opposite
faces that connected directly to the panels moved ;r. phme and had essentially
the same velocity. It is to be expected that the introduction of a resilient
connection between ihe panels and the corlnections would lessen the amount
o~ energy transferred from one panel to another, and hence increase the o ...'er-
all transmission loss" An examination of equation (31) supports this idea,
since the rleC:rf~use in transmission loss depends on the velocity ratio between
the two ends of the connoectic,n.

-56-
In practiced constructions, it is not feasible to connect the panels together by
means of a resilient elerller~t such 05 a spring, becall3e of the requirements for
a support system. Neither is it feasible to employ ~imple point connections in
the fonr. of a rod, since the support system needs to be cttached firmly to the
bose plate or fl'Jor to be of on)' practic::l1 use. It is p,)ssible, however, to
oStoin the point c{)Mection and the isolated point connection by th~ method
i II u~~trated ill Figure 29. Th i ~ i I! ustrcl"i on shows that the norma I stud system
is sti II be;ng used, but that the pane Is are attached to points protruding from
it. Such c ~ys;em is ii!<ely to be ocoustico:ly superior to one contaIning con-
nectIons in the form of rods due to the additional 11105S inTroduced by the line
studs. In ad:li<ion, it is a simple motter to introt!uce (j resilient maTerial
b~twet:;n the pone I and dIe poi'nts.

WO::Jden S'ud

Method of Pro\, Iding a

Point Connect:on to One ~- r;oint
Panel in a [)oL,ble Ponei
Connection
Cono;truction

- Supported P'Jnel

Sound bridging between the two panels of a double wall construction occurs
not only through the vertical studs, but alsc.' throur~h the top and bottom plates.
it is to be expected that the transmission of energy through the plates wi II be
less (pl;:r unit length, so,') than that through the studs, since the plates are
sup/=osed Iy connected firmly to the floor and cci I i'19, respect ively. Neverthe"
less, it can result in an appreciable decrease in the transmission loss. This is
demonstrllted in Figure 30 fc:-,r the case of a double SiS-inch gypsumboarJ wall
mounted on a 2·inch x 4-inch wood perimeter in the test facility (total panel
dimensions 10 feet x 8 feet), with a 2-inch loyer of ab~orption in the cavity.
It is to be noticed th!l~ the effect of the perimeter is to reduce the tronsmi$sion
 00 ...,....,....,..-~~.---r....,.--,......,.._-,....,..._~,-- .....

00

//
//
40
/'
~/
//

"//
20

o_ ..........-.....1.--"_.......,.......I.......,_,"--o'.....J......
63 125 250 500 1000
1.......
. ' ...... 1 ---.' --,01......
2000
..J_·
4000
I I
;J8000
Freque"r:y I ~'Z

Filjure 30. Ikosurcd Values of Trof,smlssloll Loss tOI a Doubie

Panel with nc Connecti0n~ and with Perimeter
Connections

60
....,
IQ

.
...
S
-J
c:
.~ 40
::I
E

u·,·
'"c
c
.=
70 - t.J/11 0-0",_

1II'G~,"""'"

0-"",--...'....'-"ol_.....l..
f,J 125 250
- .Io,~!. -.&.!
............,-...1-..,
500 1000 2000
,~,.........wooI . . .I I" ".,j' '-I~J
......I .......I......Io!......!.......I.....
8000
Froquency, Hz

Figure 31. Measured Values of Transf'1ission Loss for a Double

Panel with Both Panels Mounted with Point
Connections an Resi Iient Base Strips

-58-
loss by a,l1ounts up 10 8 dB at some frequencies. In a practical construction,
the vertical portion of the perimeter inrrc.duced into the test assembly is just
anothe,. vertical stud. In this respect, the abovl test is not truly represenra-
~ive. On a simple length basis, however, the odcitional bridging b},
the ,-efti cal portions of the peri meter accounts for only 2 to 3 dB OT the
lotal decrease in transmission loss. which may be considered as fairly
insignificant.

Th(! i~portance of sound bridging by way of rhe top and bottom plates in a
practical double wall construction depends, of course, or, the amount of
bridging ~hat is provided by thp. ~tud support systerr'" which in turn depends
on the way the individual panels are ottached to the studs. In CJ conventional
construction, with tht~ panels nailed or screwed directly to the studs, the
amOU!lt of energy transmitted b; means of the plates wi II be small compared
!o that transmitted through the studs. The concept of attaching the panels to
the studs with point connec.tions, lever, wi II resuli in a ~ign i F cant reduc-
tion in the importance of the studs cs a transmission path. This applies e'1ua~ Iy
w~11 to the plates since the panels can also be connected to them by point
connections. Consequently, ine only path oj: concern, other than that through
the p.,int connections, is through the Ihe whe ..e tl,e pcnel~ l:ont'lct th~ floor.
A reduction of the amount of energy transmil,ted by way of thh F::Jth c(Jn be
obtained by supporting the panel on c thin layer of resilien· ~aterial. The
effect of this measure on the overall transmis~ion loss depends on the critico'.
frequency of .he panel that is being suppor~ed. For ~xample, the increase ;n
tronsmis~ion loss for the ca~e of a SIB-inch gypsumboord panel construction,
with point connections due to the addition of a neoprene resilient base su>,~l()rt
for both panels, is shown in Figure 31 to be 1 or 2 dB over much of t,e fre-
q\J~ncy range. The ber)efit of providing the resi lient base ~upport for j~<1 nne
e.f the ponels is presumably less thon this. Similar experimenrs with a 3/8-
inch gypsumboard panel showed less irT'ploveme.... t (i f any), ns would be
E:xpected with the :ncreased value of the critical freq'Jency. The benefits of
thi~, form of isolation increase in the freque'lcy region near and (Jbove the
critical frequency ot the panel that i~, isolated,

It is to be expected that the optillum application of a resilient isolator material

would be at the point~ where thE: rene1s are attached to the studs, Accordingly,
the simple experime.,t described ir. the previous ser.tian tl-oat was conducted to
determine the effect of nine point conr,ecrions bE'twe~~. two otherwise uncon-
nected 5/8-inch gyp~umboard panels wa~ extended to include the effect of
isolating the point connections to a certain degree by means of the insertion
I)f a 1/4-i"ch lai'er of resi' ient PVC foam I'ape. The measured increase in
the ttansmission loss of the ponel resulting from the insertion of "isolators" is
evident over the complete frequency range, as can be seen in Figure 32. It

-59-
 80 ,......,..'T"""T"'T"'... f .,..,."""=r....,.....,.~r-r-,....,....,..'T""'T"""T""T"9"'..,....,
, .....

0 - - - 0 • IooIDl"" ""'''' e-c" ...

--_.~ I "-I", e-.c,I...

60

.
~
.~ 40
::;

20

o'"-...........~I I~"'--....-..,.1_.1.--.'.....I.....".,_"---....
....... ! ........'.......'.......'--"'......' _ L~l
63 125 25::' 500 1000 2000 4000 9(1(10
frequoncy, Hz

Figure 32. Measured Values of Tran~nlission Loss for a Double Panel

with a Limited Number of Isolated Point ConnectiCYls

•._ ('ol~' <:-'I k s.....

c:>--o ". llh , _ " e - o l.., .....
......- Strip - 0... II.. c...1y
-_. ". ....... wl'" So ...... ~ ...1.'.....
60
IlO

.
"'0

g
...J
c:
.~ 40
.~
E
'"
~
~ j

2~

o "-"""-......~~.....................L.....L......I---I_....j--J--.-...~I ...,L,I_~. ~I......1_'...,L,~I......L!.-II--<II.....

63 125 2~0 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Frequency, Hz

:':igure 33. M.easured Va"Jes of Transmi:lsion loss for a Double PO!'lel

Corutruction with Identkal Panels Both Mounted 011
lsolot~d Paint COf"In~ctions
 is a significant increase 01 mediL;m frequencies; perhaps most interesting of all,
the addition of the isolators substC'lntiolly reduces the effect of c()inciden~e.
For compari::on, the transmission loss of the double wall with just one solid
point connection is also included in Figure 32. The stud-isolator-panel sys-
tem ex.hibits a re~onance phenomenon in the 1000 Hz frequency repion that
results in a reduction of the c'/crall transmission los!. However, at fi"equencie!>
neer and above the criti cal frequency r it appear: thar the introdudion of the
isolators has the effect of reducing the sound power radiated by Cl factor of
approximately 9, i.e., increasing the transmission loss by appro>.1mately lOdB.

In a practic..,i c:()ns~rlJction, the effect of introdIJr:ir~g C1 r'~~ree of isolation

between the panels and ~he point connectors is less than that obtained in Iohe
above E;xperimentol tests. This is illustrated in Figure 33 where one of two
SiB-inch gypwmboard panels has resilient base and point stud supports
f1oc':lled on a 2-foot x 2-r-oot square lattice}. The redur.tion in transmission
less caused by placing screws firmly through the ~tud isolators also is shown
in this f;f:jure. Wi~h this comtru("1 ion, there are obviolJsly benefits from Doth
sl'Jd CJnd base i,;,;Ic., -~)n.

Similar measurements conductE:d with 3lB-inch gypsumbolJrd replacing the

isolated SiB-inch ponel indicated that the introduction of a re~ilient bose
~upport hod no sign i ficant effect on the measured values of transmission loss.
Figure 34 shows, however, that there is a significant incr~ase in transmission
loss as a result of introducing resi lient point !>tud supports, particularly in the
critical frequency region. Again, the acoustical performance is slightly
impaired in the 1600 to 2000 Hz region due to what appears to be a reSOMnce
phenomenon. It is in'ere~ting to compare the measured results usinl3 the point
isolators with values of the transmission loss predicted by Equation (35), neg-
!fcting the effects of coincidence in the pane.',. Normally, significant
errors are introduced by neglecting coincidence, but with the introduction
f)f isolation between the point supports and the panel, the agreement between
the '1pproxirnate theory and measurements is fairly good. In Figure 34, the
apprfl'(imate theory - which does not ac~ount for the effect of the isolators-
i::, conservative in the mid-frequency range.

The reduction in the transmission loss of a double pane I due to trw i'1troduction
of a line connection between the two porlels has already been disclJssed C1nd is
shown in Figure 26. The effect of resilie'1tly isoiating a line conn~ction from
nr:(' nf the ~wo panels by means of 0 compl~te loyer uf 1/4-inch f'Ve foam is

shown in Figure 35. It is interestin£ to note that the resultant va lues of trans-
mission loss arc only slightly superior to those for a cO'1ventional steel stud of
equal length, co.'firming the existing beliefS regordin9 the beneflt5 of steel
studs for noise control purposes.

-61-

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _... .. .. ..... P'

 Prediction for -\
. - . - . liM ConnectiQlf'l' Iott-. Sid..
~oint Connections ~,
0 - - - 0 Line ~ Poin. Connec,iOft.
/-
0 - - - 0 Iu Above, with lIolated 'oin' Con".c,iON

60
IIlQ

.....
"'0

0
-'
c
...0 40
'f...'"

~
c
...0 ,.c- r
....,." ~Oj"''''
Ccrt .... ctlOtW ~oIClt.d .
20 COl'mCelll".

518' 318"
Gypo......board

63 125 250

Figure 34. Measured ValoJes of Transmission Loss for a Double Panel

Construction with Dissimilar Panels Mounted on Isolated
Point Connections

~---c .' Molal s•..d

60 -
en

.0..
.J
-0

...J
C
0
..,..,
'~

~
L
E' --1.c'_ I I

C="'C'i~'t·~;·':d
20
/~
-SI8'GYJ'O'~
CI":lr"'1.ctll'W1l

j
o'-..........J-......L.~..-l-J~i-I -J.,.-.J,I--,I-J''-.L.
1 .-.1. 1_ 4,1......,........ 1 , ~......I_
LL.-...-"".-.1'..-...
63 125 '250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Frequ(!ncy, Hz

Figure 35. Measured Values of Transmission Loss for n Doublp.

Panel with an Jsolar':!d Line Coonection

-62-

OM
 On the basis of the thl:!C'rY and the experimental results described above, the
f'ollowing general conclusions can be made concerning the partial isolation of
wlJlI panels from their support system:

• The introduction of a resi Iient mount at the base of a panel is beneficial

only for the cme when the panel has a low value for the critical frequency.
In the experiments condllcted, base resilience ceased to hCJve any significant
effect on the (verall transmission loss when the critical frequency of the panel
was in the OrdE'j of or greater than 3000 Hz.

• The isolation 0: point connec.tions results in a .o;ignificant increase in the

transmission 105;, the increment depending upon the criTical frequency of
the punel, and beillg espec:oli: noticeable at and above the critical
frequency.

2.4 SUMMARY OF DESIGN filE THODS

The acoustic principles that have been discussed and presented 'n the prect!ding
sections form :l comprehensive basis for the design of ~ound attenuating struc-
tures using single 01· multiple panel CO:1structions. In the course of the discus-
sions, (] series of expressions hav~ been derived with which the transmission
loss of many types of construction can be determined. The majority of these
expressions are simple in form and providp. values of transmission loss thot ore
generally in good a9reement with measured values.

In the process of designing new types of construction to meet specific acoustical

goals, there is a dE:fin ite requirement for a standurcJ method of approach thot
makes proper use of the correct express:ons for each particular case. Moreover,
it is necessary to consider tradcoffs between pararnerers so that the final design
provides good performance 01 low C05t within specified constraint!>. This sec-
tion is designed to fulfill these requiremenb - first, by rest::Jting the relevant
expressiol'ls devell)ped in the preceding sections, ,Jnd :;ccond, by indicating how
these exoressions may be used to arrive at optimum de~igns for specific sound
insulation re~uirE;ments.

2.4. 1 Design Expressiol'lS

The expressions derived in thl'! preceding chaptef'"' con be divided convcnit;ntly

into the categories of single and multiple panels. They are r"?pented here for
use in 'he discu!,sions em the optimum desig'l of sound attenuating structures
and fl)- r.onvenil!nct~ in future references. The symbols used in this section are
as fv i low'.:

-63-
0, b 2iri'ensions of panel (ft)

b s poci ng of line studs (ft)

c v'elocity of sound in air.:=: 1128 (ft/sec)

d separation of panels in (J double panel construction (fr)

d 1 ' d2 separation of panels in a triple panel construction (ft)

~ YOIJng's Modulus (lbs/ft/sec 2 )

e square root of area associated with a point connedion, or the

lattice spacing constant if square (ft)

f frequen cy (H z)

fB bridging frequency (Hz)

Fe critlc'Jl fre1uency (Hz)

fL limiting frequency for single panel (Hz)

f;. limiting freqllency for double panel (Hz)

f fundamental c.Jouhle ponel resona"lce (Hz)

o
fr fundamental single panel resor,ance (Hz)

h thickness of panel (inches)

k wave number:.... 2 TI flc (ft- 1 )

log logarithm to the bose 10
2
M total mass of multiple pond per unit area f1bs/rt )

m maSs of panel per unit area (Ibs/ft 2 )

rnl, m2, n1 J mass of panels 1,2 and 3 per unit area (Ib$/ft2)
'll' effective rn~s of double panEd for determining fo (llJs/lt i I
TL(f) transmission Inss "f construction a~ a frequency f (dB)

HI (f), transrrission Irm for pmel:, i, '2, ctr. at (J frequcr'cy ( (dB)

H;:(f), etc
TlB(f) reduction in transmission l(l~~ r,t a frequencY' f for a r.louble
ponel duf.· to sound hridges (dB)

transmission loss '.Jt Q frequency ()f a multiple panel with no

interponel connections (dB)
TI In transmission loss L:t a frequency f according to tht! moss law (dB)
I ....
m ,·/

--64-
 inCf£:ase i,.. rransmission loss over that c:alculated according to
the mess lOW (dB)

1/ loss factor of panel (dimensionless)

AB wavelength of bending waves (ft)

P der'"ity of uir =: 0,0745 ,!bs/ft3)

density of panel material (Ibs/ft 2)

Expressio,s in which the di'llensions are stott;d hove been determined using .the
£:>Dt, pOll~cis, seconds system of units. fo convert from the foot, pou;;d!>,
seconds syster'l to the ~l system of units, the following factors can be used:

1 Ib 0.454 kg
ft 0.3048 m
inch 0.0254 r,'

1 Ib/ft 2 4.88 kg/rn 2

1 Ib/ft3 16.0 ky/m J

a. Single Panel

The single panel IS dE.'fine~ as a homogeneou!> panel having no cavities.

The transmission loss characteri~tic of a single panel can be divided intc
two frequency ranges where the ratio of limiting frequency is. given apprmd-
mately by the expression;

(39)

This IS equivalent to the CO'lditj'Hl ,\(3 ( {-:~-) h - Sec Append iy A.

The trcnsmi!ision loss of (J thin single panel Cti a function of frequen(";y is

i Ilustrate.-:l in Figure :36.

-65-
co
"·n ~
tvIoss
\,- 6 dB <
....."0 -6dBPer ~ 9 dB Per
c Octave -,7 Octave
0

''<y
.',
lI'I

E=
lI'I
c:
0
~,

,.-

I I
--l f
r
J
I

1;) f c
L_
fe
- ..........

(Log) Frequen cy, Hz

Figure 36. The C~nC:'rol Form of the TrC'l1smission Loss as 0 Function

of Freqv, ncy for a Thin Single Ponel

The !ransmi~sion loss charoctt ristic con be divided into frequenc~' ranges
where the limiting frequencies'1re given by the expression~:

(40)

U"\JO ill' : m'/ enouCJ0 ~0 be of Ii tt I(' con cc 1',1.

f (41)
c

-66-
 At a given frequency, the transmission loss is given by:

f
TLm(f) 4-
40 log (f) dB f < f
r

1
• 1L(f) Tlm(f) f
r
<" f. J fe; (42)

T~'m (f) ~. 10 log ( 2 n

n ~-)
c
+ 5, dB fc

where

• TL
m
(f) 20loq(rnfl - J3,~j, dB (43)

To 0 first aprrox I mr:lti(";n , the tran:..mis~ion 10:'5 in the frequency reg'Iun

between 1/7 fc and f c cap b~~ ohained Ly descrioin9 a straight line
between the transmi~siol1 loss value~ lL m (I/2 Fe) ami TL(·c) for
f ' 1/2 Fe or,d fe' re5pfoctivcly, (1' given I,y the expressions in Equation
(42) .

Measured vol"e~ of IIII~ troJ1SII,i~<inn los" frf ,1'1'''(' cnl1VentiOllol huilding

'n f] II:' r; ..J I, ::J! l.: ~ I, ~) wei I n i 0 bI(. I,

h, Double POJ1(' I

nie dOIJfJII' fJonel i- d, fir,:J m C'~I1~.· tin~J "f tWI' ~ir':jle panpis (of (Iny
thickness) witf, Or) :,'oIerv •.' 1;119 oirspnce or CQvity, It is assulr1e(rtf;~;Ttherc
j~.;; ~ull layer ()~ rU .• (lrp';'~1l rnn>priul ot leo5t C<jUU: to .1-1/~' indl fib!'l
un

glass bolts - in tlw cavil y , i ',ere ITIr:J}' ("so be ,rl,;~ho:lica! 'C()nnp.diom or

sound br:dges between th~ two poJ"'e h .

-67-
The transmission loss of a double panel with ~ound bridges as a function of
frequency is i Ilu~1 ruted in Figure 37.

/
~dB Per
iI \ Octave

.
'.fl
V>
18 dB Per
~I !
Do TLM Mass
o (Jctave
-l
L-J Law
c
~ , d8 1)-/ I
I
t -

1---
~ __JL.- l _--j rl

..
fo fn f
1
Ihg) ~requencYI Hz

The General Farm of t!le Transmission loss os a

Function of Frequency for a Double Panel with
Sound Bridges

Ihe trcnsnli~sion Ims choraeterist:c can be divided in~o frequenc.y ranges

when' the limiting freC]uencic', are given by the expressions:

,..-----
t
{J
.J 1,6 fl c; (see Figure :i8) (44)
rTl ~

," ~ r I i Ill,
I
II! I f..! Ie Of
'7\1 Tn-

-68-
 TABLE 1
f\'~ASlj,~r:D VALUES OF TRANSMISSION lOSS (dB) FOR A NUMBER OF
CONVENTIONAL BUILDING MATeRIALS
r Cr.,:c~;

l_C"'o>t~"c'O"
1'." G'r?'lU,...C:J~
1~;;1 <'.::':"Y'"
J 6,)0() I
IX

7 I i
200

12
250

I~
31~
1~
~OO
'7
500

19 I 2' 2J 25 27
1600

I 2a I1 3')
I 2000 12500

I 32
I 3150 I ~OO(I I 5000
--1
133 37 25

J. '8" G y;:- , .onboor~ ,:; A,OOC' 10 I 12 I" ll16 j17 19 1I 2J jl 26 I 27 29 30 112 33 19 25 28

1 '2. Gy~vl'l"'[;,()]. of : J J,l~ 1 I] !, ~ ,; 18:I 20 n II u I 25
7 I ;7 128 31 32 I 33 1 29 ~S 27 31

I ".~ i ~ ! '85 Ij ?(l.S I 22.511 2.,~ 126.51\18

! I
33 II

5 8" G,:-c,~.. ""n:l ;: "j 1. SOC!

I '
I'j
,
1295,,;1
I
J:l 3J.5 I
I
J.4 30.5 I 25.5 29 33 35.S

'Lc",";ne,uy,o." e: Ie' 'i,O<JC J3 I, 5 !' I! 9 20 I n ; u I 2", I 27 29, 3 I 32 J.4 I 35 36 37 37

I
33
, I I I I
1 ' •• ar"'d •• ~
iii
I

I
i

c ,po. ...,,,,,,rd I I I

~'.J,'T::!10P.,",:·:1 ~~f .1.1"1 j r~ i 9 I; ; I;:;

, I !' I '!
i? 5 117 28 12 0 3I I J? !I 3J J.4 I' 35.5 36.5/ 37 36.5 33.5 36 ,,;
II ,,;
G
a-"d' 2
yp"....... ooard
;
:I
I
I 'I I
I·
. ' I I
i 1 I
I
•J ~olTl.j .e ~, • I I i ,

:.
... 7';.:r-1i.. ',6 2, ).)<' '7' !;'
11;5127 129131 33 \33,5135135,5
I !!
35 \35.51:.< ,J.4
I~2 J,.I
1
36 (.0

II
'5
b. • ' 2" ond :,'8"
I . I
, I

II)
'llI u ",boor"
-0 , : \ I II !.
L']'T!'''''J"..",..,n of 7 .' ~oO ,)
f

I 15 I I r
I

I
1

I 35 I 35 I
I I
! 38 I~o )1 39
"I , ~3 47

,..
29 J1 33 ,35 J,.I 36
e", ' '2' =:l
~~ u~boo""
5,''!'!· ,~

I II I iI i I I I !I 1
I
, ..
:1. ;f(l 'I'
I :!, I

II "8" Ho"'boc<d

i 4" H"rdt: '-'ti

0' ,
,
IJ,OCt.l

~.I'OOO 1,
j
:!
' j
7

2
I
1
I
;. 4
Q j; ~. 5 12, J i 14 I 18 I: 9 I; I I 22. 5
,I
I' 15
I 17
I
20
I
" I ,5
I 23 I
I'
75
I
I 27
23.5 i 26

29! 32
'
I 27.5 I 29

'33,5 I 35
32

36
J.4.5 I 36.5

36,5 I 37
36.5

35
I
~ . R.,,,forc.d
=:mCI"'!"h!
.... :.'4. .. "JO :>4 \

:
35 1:l6 38 I 37 J6 3a I]' I, 1I I ~ 3
i i ,
46 I~
I
9 I 51
I
,'5' SoC 56 I 58 59

4.'·~a'i,f,="ced ollII ... .!i!"'=- 11) J::' :~, ! ~2 I,; I H ~3 !~3 I 46 I 50 I ~3 5~ 155 57 59 I 60 64 I 00 68
C.,,,cr-- e
I I Ii' ! I I
I" I" I"
i , I
1. ,fOlC~.j
39 i" I" '"! 5'; i ".5 58 i 60 "16-4 6-4
4
;Q
j t-
!c ",cr..'. L
... "tl , 200
168 I 70 (,6
--L I I l i i ,
,iJS""oO' ram;""ofl~" - U"' .,.., ::..""' •• .."
i.2}S~." iOl"l~'''''I'J'i'''':I - 2.... ~ '::":-c;'.

:.r.'." ,.,of .,,-. .

~-n ;-"C Octove Bend .,t"I" "'ic.~ the cr''';CiJ: lTequen.::y Ii.,.
~~Aut..m.ng a ti"':'Y 0' Cor.CI/'~". of iU !ift,/ft . ;~i' ...,;11 Vf!IJI"Y ac(.on:tin~.") , .... oggrega".
I
 rn'd (Ibs/ft?· inches)

2 5 10 20 50 100

1-~I~~~t[W~~~¥~~"
300 200 100 50 30
f0 (Hz)

Figure 38. Relationsnip Between ~i1C Product rn'd and the

Fundamental Double Ponel f?esonant Frequcn,:y f
o

(45)

dB for point bridges

spaced e fe€' aport
on one pane I on " (46)

10 '09 ; b f c) - 29, dB for linp. bridges

~poced b fpet aport'

for 1~1 1

c
(47)
I ,
L;d

, ('Tp-'
c' \T1

\) ---r'
f (48)
c h-r,

-70-
At a given frequency, the trt;lnsmissior, loss is given by:

I < ~2 f
c
~f0r eithel .)onei)
r
----~------_ .. --

TL(f)

f 6. Tl
M

Note: TIle expression given 'f· l.'luaf ." :·l C j ~(l!rly ar·CIJrote for all fre-
quencies if isolators are i"ser" rI e; e I _ ~)'" - , ... '1 2.:J. 3 .

1
(fnr either panl': I
2 c

At frequencies opprooC"hing or 9reo~e;· tho'] tl.t::: :~itiral frequency of the

panel mounted on points or lines, the Fnllow:I\(; t,xpressions [Tlllst be taken
with discretion.

TUf) (50)

where

r. r
o

r (51 )
o

and TL I U), TL I (0 C'1n be memurerl cr calculated vollies of transmission

loss.

-71-
For point connections to ~ panel only:

+ 40 log (f) - 17.5, dB f < f< f

o t

(52)

201 09 (.:: ) +20 log(f) +27.5, dB f > f

t

m2 = mens of panel on point cCWlneetioM. For line connections:

2 d2
10 log(:2f ) + J,O log (f) - 44, B f < f : f
0 1
c

TL (f) --
1
\ (53)
B

10 log hh )
('"' + 20 log (f) + 1, dB f> f
t J

TlM(f) - 20 log (Mf) - 33.5, dB

where M = m I ·to m.l

CAUTION: .- The trammission loss of a double Fanel t calculated by t~.

- method described above, in some CCII8I may not be obtained
in practical 'inr,tollations because of' flanking transmission
throul:J'" odjr,;ir Ir,g elements.

For desigrl purposes, t:quati.Jn (49) can be CCfT'binl!Kl with Equation (46) to
give an expression for parameter requiremen/'s for f "> fe:

M e f c'· 1 r. 'I
on t I 09 -
+ 94.5J
[Tl(f) 20 . for pc,jnt connections (55)

-72-
 • emtl'1 09 [Tl(f) +62.5 J for line connections (56)
f2 1D

c. Triple Panel

The triple j.>anel is defined as consisting of three single pallels (of any
thickness) with two intervening airspaces or cC/v;ties. It is assumed
thOt there is a full layer of absorption material - at least ~qut]1 to 3-112
inch fibe· glass botts - in each cavity. There may also be mechCl"lical
connec'ions or sound bridges between I he indi vidual panels.

The transmiss;on loss of a triple perlel as a function of frequency is i:lus-

tratF.ld in Figure 39.

6 dB Per
Octave

18 dB Per
.. Octave

.....~
l"
.......

.~ ~
E
...c
I-
...o
---- I
I .•
1
f-t
--
fB
.' ( ~.

(Log) Frequency, Hz

r-igurf' 39. The General Form of the Transrr'jssioo Loss as a

Fundlon of Frequp.nc:y lor a Triple Panel with
Sound B, idge~

-73-
The transmission lou lL1(f) of a triple panei with no sound bridges is
given by the expression:

Tl,(f) + Tl 2(f) + TLJ(f} (57)

+ 40 IC,Jlfd) - 78, dB

f :;. f;,

TLM(f) := 20' og (M f) - 33.5, dB (58)

where M = In) + m 2 + m3

~'
1
.- r; (5'})
f+ (See Figure 38)
"' d)
1
where 1T1 1 = nl
J =i m2

and dl -- d 1 = d

(S ee AppE'nd ix 0 for other configurc+ions.)

f
t
-
.
(.

lI";d
.: (60)

The transmission loss of a triple panel r:onstruction with sou!"ld bridges depemds
on the configuration of the bridges. If they ~rf! in line, as illll~trated in
Figl're 39, then at frequencies less than the critical frequency of all the three
pon,ls, the transmission 10'.5 of the construction is given approximatp.ly by
Equution (49), where TLI(f/, TlM(f) and A TLM are given in E'1.Jations (57),

-74~
 (58) and (46). At frequencies greater than the critical frequency of any
of the panels, the expression for the trC!nsmission loss becomes too com-
plex to be of practical use ahhough it is possible to make conservative
estimates.

CAUTION: - The transmission loss of a triple I'mel calculated by the

method described above may not be obtained in practical
installations because of nanking transmission through
adjoining elements.

2.4.2 Special Of.fsign Methods

The expressions gi"en in the preceding section are sufficient fOf' the design of
a construction that is required to :5atisfy a sp6cific transmission loss requirl3ment.
In mcrlY cases where the requirement is not severe, a simple single panel may
suff:c:e, provided, of course, the moss required to achieve the transmission loss
is not too high. If a practical single panel does not provide sufficient trcrls-
mission lou, a brief review of the HUD Noise Control Guide (Reference 14)
or tho prototype~ given in Sectiorl 3.3 will show if there is any existing con-
struction that will IOtilfy the reCJIirement. If both of these approacMs fail to
come up with 0 desirable construction 0( if the N1.:'!Uirement itself is for a con-
struction having low COlt ~/or high tr~lImiuion 10;$, then it is neceslCll'y to
desi~ a construction by meons of the expressi""s in the preceding section.

AJ an example, suppose the transmi.ion lou requirement shown in Figure 40

is required for atl intemal load-bearing wall cor.druction. To define a con-
struction that wi II satisfy this ~quirement, the steps in the calculation are as
follows:

1. Draw a straight line with ~ slope of 6 dB per octave rangentiai to the

required transmiuion lOll characteristics. See Figure 40.

2. Note the vnlue of the transmission loss given by this line at a certain
frequency .- say, 1000 Hz for convenience - and in~ert tne value into
Equation (43) to determine the rr.ass of the single panel that would provide
the straight line characterIstic. In this case, Tl M at 1000 Hz is eqUCI: to
58 dB; hence a mess of 38 Ibs/ft2 is required.

3. DeterfTIine the feasibi lity of using a single panel of man 38 Ibs/ft2 to

SQ"isfy the requirement. Such a high moss can be obtained only by using
Cf,)"crete or mosOllry walls which invariobly exhibit low values for the
critical frequen~y. For examplti, a 3-inch concrete panel of moss 36 lus/ft
2

~,
-75-
 80

6 dB Per Octave
18 dB Pt~r

a::l
60
Octave
-- -- ----t- - - ---- ----.- -- -----'-
"'C

on
..
.....
0
.....I

C
Required
0
...... dO Transmission loss
Characteristi c
E
...
c
~
...0 1I
Moss Low
20

i
I f _ ;::,,; 7? Hz
; ,,'
oI II! '-1_"",~~,1
! ................ ! ....L I , I IJ
63 12:, 2.50 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Freque-.cy, Hz

Figure 40. Required Transmission loss Characteristic for Design

Example

hOi n critic!"'l frequency of apprQlCimately 400 Hz. At frequenci. ~.r

thon 400 Hz, the concrete panel will provide a tran_i.ion loal appt~l­
mately 6 dB Ie" than that calculated accordin~ to the mau icrw -
Equotiorl (43). Thnt is, ih effective '"'an i" Of'e,·half of it-J actual ",au.
Thus, a 6-inch concrete panel of mt1IS n
IbI/ft 2 is requi,.d to sotilfy
il,e tronsmiuion lOIS req.Jirerrre-nt shown in Figure 40. Examination of the
me~ur.. d vc. lues of trms",ission lou for a 6-inch concret. panel (II given
in Figt..re I) show that this panel would in fact satisfy the re~irePlent. If
the 6-;,,-:h panel is too moujve or undesirable for other ,"easom, it is
necenary to consider a double panel construction.

4. Consider t:,e possibility of a double. pan" I with line connections, i.e.,

a common wooden or metal stud wal!. Jnsert the value of the required

-76-
 transmission loss (58 dB) at a given frequency (1000 Hz) in Equation (56)
2
to determine the required value of the quantity M b fc . In this case, thp,
minimum requirement is given by:

(Ins 2/ft/:-.ec)

If the stud ~fXlcing b is token as 2 feet, the requirement becomes:

5
= 5.5 x '0

Using gypsumboord, it :s possible to obtain values of the criticr.J1 frequency

in the ran3e 2500 Hz for S/8-inch thickness to 6000 Hz for 1/4-inch thick-
ness. Taking a medim v"lue of 4000 Hz (3/8-inch gypsumboard), thp.
minimum requirement for tLe ~oloi mass of the construction, excludin~ trle
studs, is then:

5. (oruide; the possibi Iity or a double fA.",el with one at ~he panels mounted
on point connections. ~epe.:Jting the ~eneral mett.od d~cribed in (4.),
but this time using Equation (55), 5hows thot fOf a ponel having a critical
frequency of 4000 Hz mounted on point!. with 0 lattice spacing of 2 feel
the minimum reql,irement fOf th4!o t.1ttll mass nf the construction, eycluding
the studs. is:

Ti,is is significantly len than the 12 Ibs/ft 2 fp.quired with the same panel
moun ted directly to the studs. The remainder of this .,xomple therflfore
assumes the presence of point connections for the panel of critical fre-
quer-cy 4000 Hz, although the method for the case of line connections is
exoc t Iy the same.

-77-
 2
6. Calcuillte the transmission loss for the totol mass of 5.3 Ibs/ft according
to EqU1ltion (43) and insert the mass law line onto the diagram - see
Figure 40.

7. Draw 0 straight line with a slope of 18 dB per octave tangential to the

required transmission loss curve as shown in Figure 40.

8. Determin~ the frequency fo at which the mass law line intersects the
line at 18 dB/octave. In this case fe ~ 72 Hz.

9. Using Equation (44) determir/e the spacing d of the t'o\'O panels in a double
2
panel constr'Jction with each pale I of mass 1/2 x 5.3 Ibs/ft (tI-le optimum
condition) for the frequency fo to be 72 Hz. In this case d = 7.5 inches.

It would appear from this result that the requiremll!nt would be satisfied by
8-inch wooden stu.:Js (actual dimensions 7.5 inches) wil'~l 5/8 inch gypsum-
board (m = 2.6 Ibs/ftl) mounted on both sides. HO"Never, the crit; col fre-
quency of 5/8-inch gypsumbaard is 2500 Hz, wf,ich is well be~aw the req~ired
value of 4000 Hz. The criti cal frequency cc.n be raised :'y u~ing 3/8-inch
gypsumboard (flf = 4000 Hz); l,owever, since the mass of this material is only
1.5 Ibs/ft 2 , It IS necessary to use two laminated paneis. Checkiny back
through the cclr;ulotions shows that this comb:nation of materials with a spacing
of 5-1/2 inches in place of 7.5 inchtos would provide a value of HO Hz for fo '
which is close to that required. To obtain an increase i:I the transmissiorl in the
vicinity of the c.ritical frequency of the two FXJnels, the point connection can
consist of 1/4 II xl" xl" squaros of PVC foam tape through which the laminated
panel :5 nulled. Thus the final construction is as follows:

2" X 6 I' wooden studs, 24" on ~.enter; 5/8" gypsumboard

nailed to one side; on the other ~id", two laminated palels
of 3/8" gypsumboord mounted or· roint cOf"nections 24 II on
conter. Fiber glau batt. (3-1/' ") to be illc ".,dAd in the
cavity.

Thl~ c:rJn~truction is ont: of the prototypes that was !'nted in the program - se0
the (esults for prototype 2. It is interesting to cOI~re the tutal mnss of thi~
construction (5.6 Ibs/ft 2 excluding studs) to thot of the ~ingl. pu:'le' with
equivalent performance cn Ibs/ft 2 ).

The desigl m"thlY.i described above is baaeci on the simplified expreuio.1" given
in S.ction 2.4. 1, without considering the ~ffect of coincidence on the inc-jj-
vidual pone Is. On completion of this approximate method, the transmission
I~s of the final construction can be checked more accurately by using

-78-
 Equations (49) and (50) in the appropriate frequency ranges. In some cases,
iterative calculations may be necessary to obtain ~he required characteristic
within stated parameter constraints.

2.4.3 STC Oesig" ME:thod

The parameters that dete:rlTl:ne the trammission 1055 of a double wall can be
varied independently to provide almost any ocou;tical characteristic that may
b~ desired. Practical limitations on the ~izE' and weight of th~ construction
hellJ to set bourds on the degree of variation possible in each of the pcrCiil~
eter"! but the optimum configuration for a specific: application con still be
obtained only by means of iterotive calcu/CJtions (see Section 2.4.2}. C1eari/.
it would be of value to cornbirlE the independent porC'lmeters ir, the form of an
expi"ession or ::hart 50 that the effects ()f perturbations of anyone parameter
could oe reodil~1 ob~erv~d. It is pO~5ible to do this in terms of the STC rating_

To determine the STC rating of a coo!>truction (Reference 15), the SIC weight-
;ng coMour is superimposed upon tIle measLl~d values of transmission lo~ and
a,~justred 50 that ~he sum of tIle deficiencies (i.e., deviatior"'s of the trar:smission
los~ values below the STC weighting contour) does n:Jt exceed 32 dB, wit:, the
additional constraint that "10 single deficiency exceeds 8 dB. With thE' contour
odjusted to its highest value that meets these requirements, the STC rating of
tt--e construction corresponds to the value of the transmission loss in dB given by
ihe weighting contour ot a frequency of 500 Hz.

The general form of the transrnissi on less curve for a d,:,uble panel wi til bridginfj
as a function of frp.quency is characterized by 0 slope of 18 dB pr.r octave a~
the low frcqllencje~ and 6 dB per odo\/e ot higher frequencies, neglecting for
thl! moment the effects of coinciJence. The cho'lgeovl'r between th.~ two dis-
tinct slopes occurs at the bridging frequency f~. Since the shope 01 the curve
i\ well defined, it is possible to determine its.) TC rating in terms of t~e
important parameters of the construction. The derivation of the cxpre~sions
necesJory for this to be accomplished is r.ontoined in Appendix F. Jr is -:T5S'Jmt"d
in this deri·.... ution that the maximum allowabl€' deviation or 8 dB i! takron CJt
125 H7. The re~ults :,ave been sill1plifie~ and incorporated in~o the rlesign
rhnrh shown in Figures 41 (0) and (6) for cases involviny point connections to
one panel and line connections to both paneh respectivt'lly. This chart contains
two sets of rliagooal lines which provide information on thE! required valur- of
ihe parameters such that th·.> portions of thl;! transmissi nn loss curve both above
and bet"w tf-e bridging frequen';y fa are compatible with a given STC rati ng.
The solid lines have the panel mass m (assumed equally distributed between
the panels) and the separation d as absci~so and ordinote, respectively, with
S TC rating OS thf! paramctflr, and represent the criterion for the portion of the

-79-
~
.r
.!

j (0) Point Conn~r:~ions

f
. J (b) Line Connections

j
}

10

Figure.1. STC Design Cha~ for a Double Panel

-8D-
transmission loss curve at frequencies less than fB. ror example, Figure 41 (a)
shows that a mass of :1.5 Ibs/ft 2 and a panel separation of 3.5 inches art:
roquired to complete the requirement at low frequencii?s for an S TC rating or
':>5. To achhve the ra';'ly, I,u....... e'ler, the dashed lines which ~l("ve the prod/lct
e f c as parameter ir,dicr:te that a minimum value of ~ f c = 7070 is requ:red.
Thus the two !iets of curves on the chart are u~ed to Jetermiili.-) the dpsip, 1aram-
eters for a double pane! in tre low and high frequency rc.m:;}e!i. It is of ecorse
necessary to e.,sure thct the criti cal fr~'luencje~ of the ~wo panels ore eith~r
sufficiemly h:gh or spaced sufflcit:ntly far apa~t - see Figures 15 nnd 16 --- so
as not to affect the ~TC rut:ng.

H,e STC rating of the ~onstrudion i~ dependent '),1 the transf~i$sio(j loss ':J!
12:> Hz, so on}' ~erturbati()ns in the product 'md" will directly affect the
ratin~ in a manner that can be deiermined frClrr, the chort. The chart dues not
give the dirccl STC rating for a cons:ruction where the quentity "e fe" is
i ncompatible ..... it~l The same rating as that giver' by the product "mel" _ It is
difficult to stale an exact r,lethod for calculating th,.: char,ge in STC rating
Jue to ~I)ch a condition; i" general, hOl.vever, j,' cor. be ossumeJ that the reduc-
tion (~STC) in thp. rating i~ given appr,y;j,w.Jtely by the e)(pres~ic:.n·

t.. STC 20 loq

where

(ef c \lC the value of the fJrodud rcquir£d to he corllpotil_)lt>

will. tlw produ-;t "rr,d" in ~;i .. :"r, :.J $~'~''-il,c STC ratinu
le.q., 7070 in thl' I,~• .,mplc qiven above)

If' the value 01 tho= product aclJoll." uspd in the design of

,c c 'DI-~,
the construct ioo .

oe'auoe the src rating as determined fro'1' the d,a~' of FiglJres 41(0) and (b) ore
dependent nn the tr('lr~s...,i 55i 0" I ass of thE con5tructi on at 125 H7, it;', not poss;bl e
to increase the ratillg by increasing the value (If the product "c fo:: ".

-81-
 3.0 DESIGN OF BUILDING ELU/£NTS FOR HIGH TRANSMISSION LOSS

3. 1 THE 20 dB REQUIREMENT

As defined in the contract ~tatement of work, the acoustical goal for th~ bui Id-
ing elements to be designed in this study is that tne transmission loss must exceed
the calculated mass law values by at least 20 dB in the frequency range 125 Hz
to 4000 Hz. In addition, it is required that the elements perform satisfactori!y
with respect to the environment and be lower in cost (per STC valwe) than other
constructions presently known. A cur~ory l~xamination of the acoustkal require-
ment indicated that existing techniques in the theory and practice of sound
transmission loss were insufficient for the design task. Foe example, the require-
ment - which will be referred to simply as the "20 dB r~quirement" in till future
discussions - is not satisfied by any of the common construction types such as
those listed in the HUD Noise Control Guide (Reference 14). Additionally, (.J
fairly in;ensiv€ search has shown that ncwhere In the main published literature
is there m~ntion of a construction soti~fying the reqt:irement over ~he entire
frequency range 125 Hz to 4000 Hz. As a result,o it was necessary to return to
the fundamentals of sound transmission loss to develop ne ...... techniques by which
the 20 dB requirement could be satisfied. The resuit-s of this study are SUf'l-·
marLzed in Section 2.4.

This section contains an examination of the design parameters r,~cessary to

satisfy the 20 dB requirement and a discussion on the practical realization of
these parameters.

3. 1. 1 Design Paromerers for the 20 d~ Requirement

Single panels alone cannot be used to satisfy the 20 dB requirement since their
trunsmission loss exceeds the mass low only at frequencies below the natural
panel resonance ond above the critical frequency. It is therefoie rlece-.sary to
consider double and triple panel constructions.

Section 2.2.4 shows that for a given total mass and thick'less, th~ double p<.n~1
provides a greater transmission loss at low hequencies thon the tripl~ panel.
The transmissio" loss of the two types of constructions are equal at a frequency
(4 fo ) which is four times the fundarr.ental rE-sonant frequency of rhe double
panel, where the value is 24 dB in excess of the mass law. The double panel
is therefore sl ightly superior to the triple panel in achieving the 20 dB requi re·-
ment at the lowest frequency of interest. At frequencies greater th~n 4fo ' the
transmission loss of the triple panel is great~r tho,... ~h'lt of the double panel,
provided there are no mechanical connection, between the indi . . idL'ai po~els.
When the cost and complexity of the slJpport system r-equi red for a triple panel

Preceding page blank

-83-

.... - .. - • , AT -,
• - ==5, __
 consl'l1Jction are also taken ir\to account, however, it turns out that doulle
panels pl'Ovi de the most cost-effecti va method of achi evi n9 the 20 dB requi re-
mAnt. If more than 20 dB in excess of the ,'lass law is necessary, it might be
r:eces!tary tC' !lse a triple panel construct:oo.

The minimum design for 0 multit,!e panel construction that just satisfies the
20 dB req'Jirement is depicted in FiglJre 42.

\ Double Ponel -- 18 dB/Octave

". I Triple Ponel - 30 dB/Octove
6 dBI
Octave y ....
\ \ ~=-
./"
\ .....- 6TL 20 dB
\.~ M
\ , __ ,.. ,.,r
I l"-1
,,~61'
/'

" ~~ I .,.- -
-
\

! -'~
..
l,-,/\-.. ~-
....,---, Mass law TL (f)
M
I I 6 dB/Octave
! I
I I
I I
I I
I I
f
I +fa ." 125 ~z
o
(Log) Freq:"ency

Figure 42. Minimum Design Requirement fer a Multiple Panel Construction

with Sound Bridges to Satisfy tht' ~~O dB R.:ql1irement

..,84-
It L 'leClb",ary in the design to arrange for the fundamental panel re~'Onance (or
resc,nC;lC l~ :", the case of more than two panels) to occur at a !>ufficif.~ntly low
freQlJErnt:l ~ .hot the transmission loss is 20 dB greater thon the calculated mass
law at 125 (1--. Equations (14) and (17) of Section 2.2.2 can b\':! rearrange'! tc
show tlll'Jt t~\3 increase Ii. TLM in the transmission loss over or,j above that
predici"Ld by the mr.m low is obtained at a frequency fli.TL ' where:
M

(61 )

and
p -= 140 for a double panel
80 fl." a triple ~ .mel

and f for the trirle p'J.1el is tak'~n os tht: higher of the two f\Jf!damenfG~ re50-
nanc~s (f ).
+
Inserting the vallJes of ll.TL and fD.TL
into Equotion (61) shows that the
M
M
requirement for tr.,; fundamental r'!sanor"\t freque,1c)' fo is:

40 Hz far '1 double panel

170 Hz for a tripl€ -cmel

The corresponding values for the product "rr:d" or", given by Equation (44) 05:

65 (lbs/ft 2 ) ins. For a dOIJble panel

(62)
md;.> 21
(lbs/f~2) in~. for a triple panel
1

The obev"=! d'-!sign figures are the minimum o! lowable to satisfy the 20 dB requi re-
ment cmd appiy in the case of optimum laSS di~tril,ution between the parlels,
namely:

n: -- m for (J douLle rXJnel

m 2m - m for a triple panel

-85-
and the panel spacings (d) in the triple panel configuration are eql,;ol. Other
combinations of panel masses for specific: panel spacings or" shown in Figure 43
for a double panel c:onstnJction. The ~pacin05 given in this figure refer ~o the
actua: (rath"r tho" the :-'-l"jinal) dimfln;ions of commonly iJsed wooden studs. it
should be noted that with an B-inch wooden stud (actual d:mension 7.5 inches),
each panel is requirEld to have 0 mass of 8.7 II:-s/ft 2 to satisfy the 20 dB re~uire­
ment. Alternati vely, the panel masses could be 30 Ibs/ft z and 5 Ibs/ft 2 for the
same spacing which, although less efficient in tenTIs of total mass, may be more
feasible using common building materials. Note that with a 7.5-inch Sopoc:1ng r
the minimum mass for either of the panels is in the order of 4.5 Ibs/ft 2 •

100 ------~ ....--- '~.,...,..,.,.......,.~r_- i " I i}:t

/ -
Minrmum ,/
50 Total
Mass

...o 5.5"

~ 5 7.5"

-9.5"
1 1.5"

Curv•• Dr"7Wn for the COl"Idlti on

2 m'd = 65 (lbs/ft 2 inc he,.)
\Nh.".
2m, mr
, m' " ' - - -
/ i m. + m,
--L.,_-'--~--l.j -'-L.L1Ll-.._,~'--_.L.1 ._~..I-~.LJ,..J.-I
/

2 S 10 20 50 100
Mass of Panel m?, Ibs/tt 7

Figure 43. Hequirements for the MassM m 1 t,nd m 2 and Internal Spacing d
for a Doublft Pan,,1 to S'.:lt isfy 'ne 20 dB Rl'Xlu irement

-86-
 A~ higher freque"cies, iI' is necessary to maintain the value of ~TLM at 20 dB
by correct choice of panels and support system;. If one of the two panels is
mounted on poii1t supports, then the value of the quantity ATL M is given by:

= 20 log (e f ) - 61 dB (63)
c

where

e -- tre square root of the panel area associat.!d with each oolnt
support

f = the critical frequency of the ponel mounted on tne ':)oint studs ..

c

Again, it is assumed that the masses of th:e two panels are equal; otherwise, the
Ir'lore ~ancral expression ~iven in Equation (35) must be used.

In~ertlng the condition that 6TL is €'qual to 20 dB resul~ in a requiremen~ for

M
the product ef , namel;:
c

ef '. 11,20(' (ft;'sec\ (64)

c

If the point connedions are lor.ated en a 2-foot square lattice, the critical
frequency of the supoorted ponel must be at leost 5600 Hz tor the construct on
to soti sfy the 20 dB requ; rement.

3. J.2 Practical Realiz'Jtion ot' the 20 dB Requirement

The rlesign of a double panel construction acr:o~dinJ to the reqlli rements stat~-d
in tquatiom (62) and (64) will ensure that the transmission 1055 will exceed the
moss law values by 20 dB at frequenci es WMter thon 125 Hz. Th~ cost of such
a construction wiil be de~ermined partly by the materials used. It is frequentl)'
convenient for both panels to be of th<1 ~ame material so IJS to minimize the
nlJm:JI'H of technique~ involved in the cc,nstruction. In this case, for a given
materi 01, the materi 01 cost wi II be dependent on ttle mass or thi ckness c,f the
pallels, which shoull l th~refore be us light and thin as pos~ible. The overall
cc·;t 0150 is dependent on the floor area taken up by the construction, indic.ating
that t~e overall thickness ~hould be m ~mall os po~~ible. These two require-
ments ar~ mutuall,' incomplJtible ',vith the r~uireme.lts give, in Equat;on (62).
It is therefore worthwhil6 to study mo"e closely the practical combinations 0;

-8i-
panel mass and separation that wi II satisfy the 20 dB requiren.ent in order to
de~ermine the optimum configuration in terms of acoustic ptfrformance and cost.

For a ~iven total ma~, the optimum configuration for a double panel cr l!:truc-
tion i. obtained when the mass".s of the two panels ore equal. fquatic,rl (62)
shows that panels of high r.tOss are required if a smail panel $ep~ration is chose'n.
For a gi\ldn material, however, aH increase in moss is accompanied by a corres-
ponding increase in panel thickness, which to rom'" extent negates t'~e useful·
ness of choosing a small separatio l. Continuing this argument, it can be shown
thar thftre is a minifTIvm overall thickness with which the 20 dB requirement
(or any g€r,erai XdB requirement) can he met u:r;il19 () givpn .1laterial. This
minimurn thickness can [--() determined by expressing the overall thickness D
fror a double ponel as;

2m
D - d +-- (6.1)
Pm
where

m - moss per unit area of each of thfl two panels

Pm ::: donsity of the mot~I'i(11 of the panels
d ::: pelnel separation

Combining the requirement of E:quation (62) with (65) results in the expre~sion:

5.5 + 2m feet (66)

D
rn An

where m is e :<preued hl Ibs/ft 2 and qn is In Ibs/ft ~. Tbe min i mum va I ue of

the overall c. Jrlstruction thickness [) is g":en by:

6.6
D
"11 r,
-
'V--- feet (67)
Pm

. . . here

:n - L7 -..p;" Ibs/ft Z (68)

-88-
and

(68a)

5 inee the ddin iti"n of the 2') dB requ;rer"ent is in term:; of the calculuted m"S!:
law over the entire frequenc~' range 125 Hz to 400C Hz, it is clear that the
~ransrr.i!.5.lon loss of a structure just Jotisfying the re1uirement is irnplicity
dependent on the mass of the structure. For a given total moss, therefore,
both the transmission Ie-55 ..::md the 5i"C ratin3 are c.:ompletely defined. MNe-
over, rhe ~ransmissi/)n loss curve will he parallel to the mass low line, as it
will be in lmy bddged double punel construction. It is ea~,jly shown that for
a twnsmission less characteristic that follcws the moss low, the num~ricol vl]lue
of the 'He rating i~ given by the cxprc~sion:

STC: (69)

where Tl (500) '- thf' m<)~s 1(1W transmission ioss at 500 :-h..
M

In the present case, ~he t"~nsmi5sion 1055 of the constn:ction is 20 dB in excess

of the mass low. TherE"for~-, the STC of the constl'uct;on STC can be expre\scJ
c
as:

- ,W log (m) + :j 0 (70)

wheff~ m i!. thli moss (in Ib~/tt?) of each ('If the two ponel~ in thE:' con~trvction.
Combining (66, cmrl (70) reslIlh in all cxpr~ssion relat:np the STC to ~hc o .... eroll
·hickness for a construe:tior. meetinn the 20 dB reql,ire"·.~'nt. The only p(;mme~er
ill this relationship is the dp-nsity Pm of ~~IP. il1fJterial 0; the ponelL

-89-
For the case of gypsum board panels, wl,ich have 0 density of approximatp,l,.
4R Ibs/ft\ thE' relationship is plotted in Fi9UI'~44. The miflimum o vera Ii
thickness of a double wall with gypsum board pa.1els meetinp th.'! 20 dR reqlli re-
ment is slightly less than 11.5 inches. At thi<; thicknes~r the STC looting for
the construction is approximQ~ely 72. For all other combinations of ponel rr.ass
and spaci/lg - keepins: the product c.:onstant - the overal! thickness i'i greater
than 1'.5 inches. The minimum thickness c.f course w;::
be less thon 11.5 in:~,e<;
if the LO ciB requirem'~nt is chonged to a requirement for only 15 dB or 10 ciB
qreo'er thfJr'l the mass law.

30
r-
'J> C I'r,~urn:.:\oafd ('-lnel· \Jnly
Q)
..£
U
c
\
I
~
25

\
c
.-c'.'
~
..
J

'"c-
o
u
, ..
0
2()

~
....
E
0
~
~
C

.-...
_'I:
1"-' I
_C
>-.

c...
M<,,,
Decreasing -
\ '
i Mass
-Increasing
Q)
>
0 '~
E 10
:J

.-E
L"

~~

s I
50 60 70 80 90
S l( ;~(11 i nq

Figu'c 4~. f\.\inirTlIJrT' Overall ihickne!\~ 1)5 a Function of STC Rating

fer a Double Gypsumboa, d PeJnt!l Construction Satisfy,ng
~"e 20 dB Requirement '

-90-
The minimum thicknesCl f"r a ooJble pone I construction satisfying any general
increment above the mass law can be determined from Figure 45, for the case
where the two p<,mels or'! of gypsvmboard. If the maximum allowable thick-
ness of the construction is set at 8 inches, for instance, tnen it is not possible
to o~tain a value of ATL M greater than 14 dB.

25 ------r----r-'--r--r--l-.,.-,'T""-r----r---~I

~l£~.m_f:_Jo_o~d_f'a.n_e_1s _O_~

20 __ .. _... __2~_ d~ ~~o~_i r.::::,-:!:n! ._.. __

1
'0
<0
~
15 r-'-'-'
~
-'
~

-=1 10

.5

o ~--- Jo-_.....J......-....Jl~...4---"I--Illo...--l-4.. ........_

2 .. 6 8 1\ 20
Minimum Overall Thickneu 0 . , irlthes
m'n

Figura 45. The Minimum Overall Thicknl!ss of Double G,'p5umhoard (J

POIH!I Comt~lJction Providillg a Transmission Loss ,'TL".~ dB

in Excess of the Calculated Mass Lnw in thp. i=rec:\.!ency
Range l?5 Hz to 4000 HT

-)1-
Jt is possible that a thickness of 1'.5 inches is too great for a practical wall
constnJction, although it would be satisfactory for floor anei roof-ceiling5. The
parameter involved in the determinafon of the mini~um thickness is the moterial
density; therefore, it is useful to study the relationship between these t..,.. o
quantities in the hope that the use of alternative materials may result in a more
practical construction. The relatiomhip between the overall thicknes~ and the
material density is plotted in Figure 46, with parti culor points all the curve
correspo,~ding to specific materials.

14
~ Wood
\ ./
12 \ / / Gypsumboard
v,
CI! "
-!:
U \. / LightNeigf,t Plaster
c::
10 ,,(
,-
c::
E

''''./r
Cl
" " ' / Sand
t':l
QJ 8
c::
-Y Concrete
U

"
~
f-
.s
.
c
~ Alur"inum .j
/"'-.."',
>
o
4 ~.~
E
:l
E
/.
/ ----.I "--'".......
,
Stee' I

o 1--_.J_..J.I_I~...l-~1 -J...l.........
~ ..J.l ...._ _ ~_ _I.... • ._.l.._.J._ -'-~-+-I
20 50 100 700 500 1000
Dtmity Pm.Jf Pnnp.1

Figel,,, 4(J. MinirTlLm Overall lhickness lJ mill or a Double Ponf'1

(Clns'lUction Satisfying thl!' 70 dB Requirt!'mfln' a~ 0
Function of Material [)(lnsity

-92-
The constructions of leust total thickne!i:j are associlJt.,d with the most expensive
materials, namely, lead, steel CJnd aluminum. Concrete is not particularly
expen);ve, but is has a low value for the critical frequency in the thickness
suitable for practical use. This means that IJny sound bridges betwp.en the
panels would greatly reduce the transmission Ion - see Section 2.3. Sand
would be an idaal motorial to use due to its low cost and stiffness, but the
rather sever~ problem of containing it in the form required reduces its useful-
nflss. Lightweight ploste:- suffers fro,." similar problems as concrete, ;1C1meIYr the
loVi value fr)r coirddence. For this material, the required ponel thick~ess
woulcl be almost 2.5 inches, according to Figure; 46 and Equotion (680), As a
result, it appear::; thllt there are no low cost materials well Gl,olified to provide
the 20 dB acoustic requirement in 0 double wall construction of practical
dimensiom.

A $imilar colc:ul"tion for the (.ose of a triple w'111 c;omtn)r:tinn ,hows that the
minimum ~otol thic;kness consisttmt witlo C"1chievir:g the L'(\ dB reqlliremimt is
givl!'n by:

feei

wf,~re

0.93 'Vf1.n Ibs/f.. 7

In other words, tho minimum Ihkkness and nuoci:Jtel! mass are greater than that
for a double wall construction. Thus the triple woll does not oHM uny benefit-;
in reducing the overed I minimum thicknen.

Approaching the problem from a diff",rent >,j(lwfY.lint, tht" besl m,llnriol that
could be used is gypsumbolJrd, based on c~t/pt'rf"rml1nce. As stct':!d e~.!r1 ier,
th", cv~rnll thick"e~s of,=, double woP (;on~trl)t:lior) Ihot m~eh file 70 dB roquire-
ment at freqL.erlcies grflCJter ihan 125 Hz is oppro)(jmotely 11 •.1i inches. The only
WO)' of reducing this thickness ~o a proclicol \oulue is to rEdu)' th~, requirt!rnent
on the lower frequency bound. For e)(nrnple, if the lower bound is allowed to
bl!! inl:reased from 125 Hz to :£00 Hz, the overoll thicknes~ A the (,("n~trlJr:tion
is reducod hy a foe,tor of 1.6 to 7,1 inches, which is more r~(uonohl", - H!'~
Table 7.

-93-
 TABl.E 2

MINIML'M WALL THICKNESS FOR DOUBLE WAllS OF DIfFERENT MATERIALS

REQUIRED TO MEET THE 20 dB REQUIREMENT AT DIFfERENT FREQUENCIES

MI,imum Wall Thick,." " I"ch•• fa' ~

Material
Density
(I bs/ft3) 160 til.
--
20 dB Requirement ot and .6.bov.,:
125 Hz 200 H;i;
.-9.8
rimuer 40 12.~ 7.8

Gl'psu'n Board 48 11.4 8. S

, 7. )

lighrweight rla~ter 6.~ '1.9 7.7 6.2

Sor,d 100 1.9 6 • .l" .4.9

I

Corlcrell' 140 6.7 5.7 4.2

A 11)~li nlJrT! 180 5,9 4.6 3.7

S/l"el 450 3.7 L.'J 2.3

Lead 700 3.0 2.3 1• S'

_ _ ..--J

Relaxing the frlKluency con.traint in Ihis manne' does not afff'lct the STC ra1'in~
to any significant extent becuuse the only reduction in transmission loss occur~
ot one or two of the lowet,/ frequencies, Changinc the lower bound from
125 Hz to 200 Hz results in a reduction of only one point in th(ll rating, Further
relaxation, however, reo.lces the rating br four poinh for every ~ucceeding
1/3 octClva increase in the lower bound frtoquency.

In cOllcluciir,g this sec:tion, it can be ~tatf'd that the 20 dB requirement con be

met with careful de:,ign comiderotiom usin~ hoth double and triple woll LC)r.··
~tructi()ns. HowevDr, for construction'. tha~ will meet ~he approval of the
building industry in terms of totul thickness und weight, it is necessary to relox
the constrainrs (In the! frequency ronCe! over which Ihe 20 dB rt~uir'!'mont :5
achieved. Since the Irar.smis~ion loss of such (1 construction is de'erminod com-
plllltely by the tolal mms, and since the mos~, cannrA be small 10 comply with the
minimunl :"'ouirp.rnenl for the product "rnd" with 0> small 0 sepo.ation us possibll:',

-94-
 the ~TC rating of a "2C dB" constructi,)n will invariably be! high. For the
gypsumboard con~trllctionl' the STC rating is 72 at the minimum overall thick-
ness of 11.5 inches. This i~ extremely high whpn compared to the rating of 55-
60 recommended by F~ for Grade j instanations. In general, if i!; not possible
to obtain much IClwer ST~ rafings for 20 dB const~'uctions without large panel
~eparations which allov! corresponding I>, lower panel mO~5es. This is clearly
demonstrated in Figure 47 whi.-;h i< a plot of the STC rat;~g of a double w',1!
construc:ted a~ rj function of the pane! sf:paration (whi"h, of cour~e, is les::, than
the overall thi cl<-ness) •

Ar. a result I the procti c:al r.:wl izotion of tne 20 dB requirement is a construction
the' ...ill find an e)(~rem(;!:, limited opplicatio:l in the building industry b~cause
of ,size or weignt. However, the principles involver' ,ro, f'le dE)sign can be
uSf,d to design more usdful :-;cm~ructi')n5 to meet a ~J='ecific acoustical require-
ment less than 20 dn ir, ~xc'?s;, ,jf the calculated me.s low.

,,
d
I
I
I
~
Ji! 75
u
v,
l-

70 CUY'le Drow" for the (onditlon

'i.
mId '" 6-' Ihs / ft inches

r'1"
/

65

60 -~--_._ ...._ - , - - ! - - ~_.....L.-..__!~._-_i_..L.-l...-I-J _

2 o1,~ 8 10
f-'unel ':if!D~"C1(ion D, :,.,CI)'!lS

FigLJro:: 47. Thl~ SlC r~qting '1< (i :-,_:nctir:"l or Pa~',()l Spacinq for Cl Double
Ponel (C.l[15'flJdl?n with Poneh of Equal Man ~atis~yir'9 the
20 df.i Requirement

-95-

~---
_------
. -------
~-
-.................
-- .
........
3.2 ELEMENTS OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTIONS

Much of the preceding discussion on the principles of' sound transmission loss
and on tho! acoustical gnal to be sat.isfied in this study has been directed
primar;ly towards the acoustic performance of wall~. However, the I:,asic
theoretical an':f practir:al principles are completely genera Ii they can be
applied to all typ~s of building el~ments, and indeed to all :ypes of structures
where high values of sound attenuation are re':Juirecl. Of interest in this study
ore the various elements of building construction which include windows, doors,
floor/ceilings and roof/ceilings, as well os walls. Each uf these elem6nts per-
forms a specific fu~ction in the overall building system, and as such is subject
to spncific practical constraints in its consrruction. l~ is the purpose of this
section to briefly review the functional constroints imposed or. each of the
ol'her major elemanh and to examine techniques fer obtaining optimum acous-
tical ?8rformance within these constraint!.

3.2. J Windows

The primary functions of windows, if ventilation is provided by a:terraative

means, ere to provide natural lighting and to provide ~he t:)ccupaflrs of the
dwell ing with an external vi~w. Both of the~e fUf.ctioM require ~hat the
window be constructed of :J tro"spore.nr materia! such as gloss or Qcryi ic..
Typically, the glass i~.stollea in residential windows is ~ither single strength
(thickness 3/32-inch), double strength (thick"ess 1/8· inch) or o(:cusional'y
l/4-inch piote. The calculated transmbsion loss va:ues fnr panels of l/B-lnch
and l/4-inch glass are shown in Figure 48.

60 I "T" I ii' I ' i ·'r-'--I'" ! I I

--1/4"9 Iau
-_.-.- I/B" glass

-
-
Calculated Val'Je~
E'luation (42)

O~...-l.............l.I--/,-.I.~1- 1-1......
j- ' ...IIL......II.--',-..I.I.........~.-.I.......--:-"':-i·....."""":":"'I~
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Frequency, Hz

Figure 48. Calculated Values o~ Transmission Loss for

J/A-inch and 1/4· inch Sealed Gloss Ponels

-96-
As would be expected, the thicker panel provides the greatest hansmission loss
at low frequencies. At high freq'Jencies, however, there is little to choose
between the two. The effect of coincidence in the V4-inch panel is evident
at the top end of the frequency range most impc ..tant for speech communication.
Any further increase in the thickness of the glass is l:ndesirable::, since the
critical frequency is lowered to a value weH within this important frequency
range. As a result, the greatest thickness of gloss that can be used in window
assemblies is probably in the order of l/4-inc;,.

If the window is operable, the trammission loss is normally less than that of the
sealed '~ersion shown in Figure 48 due to leakage of 'iound between the moving
parts and the frame. Typical values of transmission loss for a 'itandard alurninur.")
sliding glass window with 1/4-inch glass panels are shown in Figur~ 49. The
redu.:.tion in transmission loss in the frequency range 1000 Hz to 2000 Hz :s a
result of sound leakage and not coi"cidence. The critical frequency of the
glass panel in this case is 2400 Hz. The weatherstrippine that is included in
operable windows reduces the leakage of sound but its condition usually
deteriorates fairly rapidly with use, thus limiting its usefulness.

A more effective and durable seal tho: COrl be appl ied .0 the perimeter of the
moving section is shown in Figure 50. The seal con<;ists of a mete l chonnp.i con-
taining a strip uf fairl) dense feam or soft neoprene. If the window is in con-
stant use, the materi;]1 ;n the channel should not C:ll1tact the frame and should
be of the foam variety to provide absorption in the channel thus fOrr"1pd. If
the Window i'i rarely opened, it is possible to obtain a better seal with neopr:me
that contacts the frame. The effect of such a seal, q the transmission los:; of a
standard aluminum sliding glas'i window is shown in Fiqure 49. The improvement
'n perforrnance over the unsealed window is evident over the ell.ire frequeflc)'
range and is In the order of 10 dB :n the rang€'! 1000 Hz to 2000 Hz.

lhe results of Sections 2.2 and 2.:- indic;ate that u double window ':ar. be
designed to provide higher values of transmission loss than n single winnow,
provided thot precautions are taken ~o reduce sOl)nd bridging betwef>r1 ~he glrm
panels, If the maximum placticul thickness of the two ponels is taken a, 1/4-
inch and the maximum possible separatiOll as 8 inches, the lowest fundamental
resonance w,11 occur at a frpquenc.y (fa) of 62 fL. In the absenr:e of sound
bridges, the tr''lnsmission lo~ will exceed the values calculated l,ccC'rding to
the mass law by 20 dB at a frequency of 195 H7.. Thus, it appears that a
practical window systern cannot be cJe)i~ned to satisfy the 2(. dB raqui,ement at
frequencies as low as 125 Hz. It is possible to increase the sepa:-otion of the
glass panels if the wall is sufficiently thick cr if one of the panels is allowed
to protrude from j·he exterior w:JII, i.e., a blJy window. However, since the
reduction in the value of f is proportional to 1/VCf, a ~pocin9 of almcst
o

-97-
 1/4" Aluminum Slidir"(; Glass Window with:

~ ~bdified Seah (see Figure 50)

60
A-.:I> C"nvenlionol Secis
CIC

/;/
-c
.. /'
'"'"0
••.1
C-.
0

"'
~.

'E
'"t)c
40
Mr- OW
~oy
.=
~V
-4·....tr~ /'"

20 - 4' 'A.~
0- _~

./

o ,-_~L-..I...!.---..ll_.J..I-""_'~'~I.....L.!.......-..1..-;.'-.-I--I"'"--'I"'-.l.-.......I.-......-I-....- I -..........,
1

6~J 125 250 500 1000 2COa 8000

Frequency, H"

Figurf" 49. Measured Values of Transmission Loss of a 1/4-''1ch

Aluminum SI;ding Glass Window with C0nver,tional
and fv\odified Seals

FoC'rn or
I'J ecprenp.
Or;gi,1ol /"
Seal
Weotherstr; pp j.".,;

-- Gloss Pcnpl

Figure 50. Diagrcm of 0 "'odified Sf:cl for Slidir.g

Gluss Windvws

-98-
 20 inches is required in conjunction with 1/4-inch gI0:;5 panels to satisfy the
20 dB requirement at the low frequencies.

At higher frequencies, the transmission loss of a dnuble window is detennined

by the sound briaging between the two glass panels, which ir", turn depends
upon the method used to mount the gloss panels and the typE: of w':l11 in which
they are mounted. Jf the wat I is solid, then it is necessary to mount the glass
panels in soft neoprene gaskets so as to provlde partial isolation. This is not
necessary if the panels are mounted in separate walls which are partially
isolated from each other. The presence of sound bridges is one more t'~son
for limitir"g the thickness of the glass in order for the critical frequency to
remein high. It is, however, benefkial for the two ponels to be of different
thickness iO that the critical frequencies ore staggered - see Section 2.2.2.

The functionol ,equir'!ment5 of a window do not allow full coverage of acoustic

ObiOrpt;on materiel! in the airspace be~ween the ponflls. As a result, the
material nlust be placed at the internol perimeter of the window. The result~ of
Sp.ctit"n 2.2.5 indicate that perimeter absorption is not as effective os the full
coverage in damping the cavity modes, ~o the maximum transmission loss can-
not be obtained. This is true ove; the mojor pa~ of the frequenc)t' range above
the fundamental rescnan~ of the construction. Ncturally, higher values of
transrT'iuion loss con be obtained by increasing the thickness of the pedmeter
obsorp"'ion.

Since the lateral dimensions of a typical window are normally less than the
height of the accompanying wall, the stiffness of the air in the window cavity
can be reduced by orronging for the perimeter to be unsealed, that is, hC"'ing
the window cavity open directly into the wull cavity. In this IT,anner~ the
fundamental resonant frequency can be reducf1d. It is important, however, to
ensure thot the rundam'!ntal re~nQnce does net hC'Ie the same frequency as
the f.,mdamento! lateral ca .... ity modp.s.

3.2.2 Doors

Since the primnry function of a door :s t':) provine a meat's of l""ry one exit Yo
the dwelling, it has to be operable and mu!,t be light enoug:l ;0 that it can b,
usen eosily by young and old alike. Mo:;t doors presently ore- limited, hy fl,c
avai lobi! ity of operatin::l hardware such as handles at'd locks, to a maximum
thickness of about 2 inches; however, there ;~ no rem...,;, why thi~ obstccle can-
not be overcome in the future.

Th! majority 0" doors in common use today are either of the hollow core or solid
core type, the former beinr res'ric!~cl normt]IIy to) internal use. The solid cor~

-99-
door is typically 1·3/4 inch~i in thickness, constructed of comF'ressed wood
shavings and has a fairly low value for the critical frequency. The transmission
Ion of such (] door with neoprene bulb seals ill shown in Figure 51. At high
frequencies, the honsmission rises more slowly with frequl!ncy than would be
expec~ed due ro IflOkage of sound through the seals. Th,. acoustic performance
shown in Figure 5'/ is probably the best tha. can be obtained from a SOl id core
door in u pra:ticcl insta!lation. Most othe" tYf)es of seal configurations will
result if"! lower values of ;'ransmiss;on ios.:..

80 ..........,..""'..,-...
, ~,...,.-,.-.....-,\-....
, -".....,.--r! -'~..........,......,.-~.,.. ........,.....

1</4" Solid Core with

DOI.".f

NE'oprene ~ulb E~~c Seal

60
~
""tJ
~

'"(3
...J
c.:
0 40
'"'"
E
'"c
0
~

t-

20 . .. \
\_- ;i,cosu ~ed

STe 29 I'
o ~..I.-.1-_J..-,L..1-..1..--'- 1 1 .~~ -"""I"""","""",,-~I_
63 125 2 ~O 500 1000 :WOO 4000 8000
f requflncy, H l

Figure 51. Measured Transmissic·n Lou Vollies of (.

1-3/~·-inLh 5 )Iid Carl; Door

-100-
There are two main methods by which the rr.<1ximum transmission loss can be
abt:Jine.d from a 5tructure, such us a door, where tnere are severe I imitations
on thickness and mas.~. The fjr~! is b't the appli~ation of the double panel
techniql~e. The second is to use a sar.dwkh type ponf'!1 that has the propert;~s
of a double ponel o",er a certain frequenci range. This behavior can be
obtained by uc;ing a ma!>sive though porous mclerial, such as cemented wood
shavinGS, onto which two facing layers are app'i,.d -, one rigidiy, on"! resil-
ient!y. The porlJ'.IS center layp.r successfully simulfJtes u cavity with absorp-
tion and provides added moss. The transmissiO.i 1,m from this ~tructure can
be made to equa! N exceed the calculated MOS', law over a nlojor part of the
fr"quency range of interest - see ')oP.ction 3.3.

Since the area taken '..if' by 0 door (or a window) is uwall~' I"mly a snl..:JII per-
,-enrage ot the total wall area, it is not necessary for the acoustic performance
l.,f the door to equal tha~ of the wall for optimu;i1 results. For example, if the
door ari!<l is 10 percent of the woll area, the transmission loss of the door can
be 5 or 6 dB less than that of the '1/::!iI while still :-etaining a composite value
essentially equai to that of the wall. Howeve:, for an STC 60 wall, this con-
stroint requires a door providing en STC 55 rating which could be obtained
o:lly with a foirly cumberS(l'Tle structure. One method d obtaining additional
oHcn'Jotion is to provide f; short foyer wil·h a 180-degi"e.~ bend that is lir~ed
with an acoustical absorbent material similar to 0 lined duct. This addition
would be capable of prov:ding an additional 5 to 10 dB, particularly at tht'
medium and high frequencies.

The design principles described above for walls are also applicable to floor,!
cei/ir\t' and roof/cp.i1ing cor.structiO:ls, exc.ept that different functional and
loadi"s requirements have to be considered. For exampl~, the! floor has to be
rigid enou!Jh to withstand live and dead ioads without too much deformation.
In oc,dition, the ceiling can be neither too "nassive no" too flexible or it wi!!
sag IInder ils own weight.

It .... ould appear that one of the odvClntagfjs of floor/ceiling system, from nn
tJ

acoustic point "f view, is that the lorge allowable separation !:>etweeon the
flO'" and ceilin!, (up to 18 inches or morp) should 0lL.1W nigh values of trai1S-
mhsion loss to h,~ obtoi"f:!d. Ullforlunatcly, th is is the case only at 10 .....
fn:qucnc:ics. At higl~""r frPfJl.6lCif:tS, the necE'SSity to provide closely spucecJ
CCl7'lnecto~ between the ceil ing and the floor (joists which are commonly
16 inches on I:fmter) introduces a wbstantial sound hridging that negot(!S the
"ffect of the large cavity. It ~'S therefore difficult to achieve the 20 dB
req\.:irement with such systems unluss 0 resiliently suspp.nded or sepCl atcly

-101-
supported ceiling is used. 'ih;s is excellent proof that high values of trans-
mission loss c.re not necessarily obtained by incorporating large J:'anel separa-
tlam.

A!> wi rh walls, it is desirable to ha ....e u massive flf:lJ<ible ceil ing in (1 floor/

ceiling system. However, the ~ractical difficulties of installing s'Jch a
ceiling preclude the use of some of the panels thot are satisfactory for walls.
An alternative method of achieving the required properties is to install the
base t-' .... mel, which may be fll;xible, to the ceiling joists and to subsequen:!y
apply 1/4 to 1/'2-inch of sand pugging fl'am'Jbo'le.

The previous discu~sjon of do!sign principles ha; been conceme-::l primarily \'fith
the problem of c.onstructions that are subject t!) excitation frorn airbome sound
waves. In the case of floor/ceil ing c.on~tructions, there also f:!)dsts the p,"oblem
of impact excitation 5uc:h as would be obtained from footfalls, dropping
objects, etc.. This is a different type of excitation ir. that the area impacted
:s usually guite ;;mall and the forces involved quite lorge, when compared to
airborne excitation. Impacts are also charc.:cterized by being cf short duration
retner thon af a continuous nature.

The prc~)erties required of a floor/ceilin!;J '.:onstruction, as for as in:pact

excitatioo is concerned, are 5imilar to th()$e required for c.irborne f.'xcitation.
For example, the mo~e massi'le the floor !he grenter in general will be the
impact insLiation. However, the rosi lie'1ce of thp floor su. face, ""hid, is cf
little or no importance in dderminin:l the cirbornc transmissir:>n loss, is
extremely import:mt i:1 redu:ing the ir'"';' t energy that is transmitted to thl!:
base floor. The transfer of s,")und or vibiatio,101 e~ergy fro.'Tl the floor to the
ceiling is agair es!'entially the ~ame as in a double wa!i -Nith sound bridges.
Consequently, many well designed double panel structures would exhibit
propertib similar to those re~'Jired of f1oor/r:eilin~~ systems if 0 resilil:'nt loyer
wa:, adden to the imp'lcted surface_

The impact irl5.ulat;on provided by c; floor can be increase~ by adding (I

"floating floor. " This consists of u fairly massive slob that is separated frem
the main floor by a resilient material such as rubber pods or rigid fiber glass.
Although substantial increases in the il,sulotion can be obtai~ed by this
method, thf: addeJ slab mt;st be fairly massive so as to keep the frequency r,t
Which the fioati"9 system resonates ~o as Iowa value as pouil:d:-. Howev~r,
substantial improvements in the impac~ noise roti ng of the basic floor/cei ling
stl'ucture can be obtuined by the cddith., of (J carpet and under-pad. Figures
5:2 or,n 53 show the reduction in impact soun-i pressure level that can btl
obtClined frnm a reinforced c.oncrflte floor Gild a typical wooden joist floor,
respectively, by the uddHion of f;arpeting.

-102-
 i 00 ,...."I·-r-~..,!'-ri-"",""T'j""T'j-r"'j..,... -..,.....,.....,.....,-,...,....r-,....,,.....,,.....,-,-......
~::a.
~
! 90
<II:l
~

9000

Fi~ure 52. Jmp'Oct Noise L~vels for c. Concrete Flo('lr Wi'h olld Without
Cmpet. (Data Norm,:<l ize,:l 10 on Ab5()rption (,f) (' ',1 2 -
Re Ferp.nce 14.)
100 r""""T"'",...,......
, "'-'-r T • T-r-ri"""""""""'-'" -r'"J~'. I

~
~ V1",1 ....It~ T.l_
0----<:' ........ 100"l c.,.,., ~
Z
:t """'"""'"
-----~
:;I
("I

!! 80
~
~"CJ3
~

FiglJre 53, Impact Noise Levels far a Wood-Joist Floor WLh and With-
out Carpet. (Data Normal ized to an Absurption of 1O:TI 2 -
Reference 14.)

-103-
 In the past, carpets have been co,nsidered more a luxury item rhon a part of
\~he construction, particularly in low-cost housing_ One reasor, that they have
not been specified as part of the construction is that they huvi') tended to
dt,teriorate quickly in places with heavy traffic flow. Today, however 1 man-
made fiber carpets with an appn.·.priate undor-pod are capable of supporting
100111' traft1c for 15 to 20 year3 without undue wear. In view of their remark-
abl~' properties at reducing impact noise both in the source and receiving
rooms, it would seem appropriute to consider carpets as part of the building
construction itself. In doing sc., it ;s possible to redu=~e tha complexity and
hence thE cest of floor/ ce il ing ~ ystems.

APPLICATION OF PRINCIPI.ES TO PROTOTYPE O;::~IGNS

lhe main ("lbjective of +his study wa.. to design '.md test building el~ments
having higher values of troT"Smission loss and n lewer cost than that avai !able
from existing element... Some of the princip:es which make the de~ign of such
improved building elements possibla have b'~e" summarized in Se-:ti.:Jn 2.4.
n,ese principles and nssociated ~~ign rfIetnods have been used t~ design: (1)
a series of experimentai prototyQes with which the prir,ciples could be ver:fied,
and (2) c ~erie~ of final p~totype~ whicJl, with few rnodificatioi-'~, could be
cc,'1sidereci a~ practical constructions. The designs ane acou~tic perfonnance
of these experimental and final prototY~)'!J are contained in this ~'!ction.

3.3.' Experimenl'al ~~ototype,s_

Th'! purpo~e of designing and testing 0 series of experimental prototypes .....as to

put into practice the idem and principlp.s that hod bl!en enlargt"d upon Of
developed in the analyticui an.:l initiol testing program:,. Some of the principles
which were considered to be vo'Orth}' of further study h(lc.: already ~een validated
to n certoi n extpnt in tests C'..>ndueted on what can he call ed "I aboratcry" con-
~Irueti()ns -- .:omhuctioils in which no attempt wm mad,; to consjier practicul
constraints. Howevar, it NOS necessary to combine sor.,e of the princip!cs in a
~ingle construction 10 ,:etermine the "'!Jlues of trall;mi"sion loss ,hc,1 could be
obtained with optimum, though still partially ide/Jlized, designs. It was not
intender! that the expe"l'imf'lntol prototypes sbuuld be fully practical; but rather,
Iht'y shou Id be dp.c.i ylll,:d wi th "reason(lbl fl' c:,'lnstro i 11 ts"

The mllin obJective~ of the experimental prctotype test program can be sum-
marized lJ\ fullows,

• To verify th,~ transmission loss theoril!'~ nnd design pr-ocedures fc.r ~"mi­
practical rr,ultiple ponel c.... nstrucliom with sound brido(~~,

-'0,(-
• To examine the feasibility of achieving the 20 dB requireme'1t in a con-
struction wi ~h reo'iOnable constraints.

• Te determine the maximum values of transmission loss that could be

obtain1!d in a construction y,ith r~"~nable constraints.

• To determine th~ feasibility of using laminated and mass-Ioadt!o ponel~

in multiple panel constructions, and to develop semi-practical me~hods
for the configun:tion and construction of stich panels.

• To apply the principles and design rr.ethods to a~! types ot uu:jdi'19

elements including walls (internal, e)(;-()rtlol, lorJ~eoring and non··!ood-
bearing), floor/c:ellings, ioof/ceiiings, windows (sGoied and operable)
and .ioor;.

• To determ; ne the combi "otic.,s or m'Jteri 015 mo~t sui ted to .:onstrudions
design~d according 10 the method.. outlined in St:!,;tion 2.4.

• To determine the increase in transmission loss that ccm be obtained by

modifying existing comtrvction types.

For 0 single ponel to provide high values of tra,.,sm;s~icn loss economi r;ally, the
most ci~i rable propc:rti e;; are c.s follows.

• High mass or density

• Lew stiHness

• Low cost

An examination of the advontage:; and dis'luvantages of exi'iting mat'!lriols in

this context -- see Table 3 - shows that the most promising types are gypSUrT'-
board, ~ardbr>ard, plywood and c:;oncrete, although not nec.essari ly in thi~ .
order. The remaining types of materiol\ exhibit some desirable propertie$ but
in general orc not at all comparable to the four mentioned obvvc, unius5 so~e
particular combination of acoustic::]! and fJ11\'ironmentul r:riteria hC'i to be
satisried.

One possible appr'Oach to the de5j~(1 of the experimental prototyp"9~ would he

to uttempt to satisfy the 20 dB re':tl.lir"ment in every COSf!J. This was not the
approach token, howe·ver, fo, tho following rl'!(]SOns. firsl, t~<: discuuion ir'
Sect:on 3.1 ~hows quite clearly that a construction satisfying the 20 dB require.
ment over the complete frequency ran~e 125 Hz to 4000 Hz is either too thick

-lOS..

_4 •
 TABLE 3
A LIST OF THE ADVANTAGES AND DISADVANTAGES
OF VARIOUS MATE RIALS FOR USE IN HIGH
TRANSMISSION LOSS CONS TRUCTIONS

M.aterial Type Advantages Disodvantages

Metals' • High Mass • Expensive

• Low Stiffness in Typical , Poor The rmo I Ins,", IOtf)fS

Thi cknesses
• Possi~le Corrosion
____ u

- --
G'y'p!-u01boord • Variety of Masses and • Fragi Ie in small
Crilical Frequencies Thickne~e~
Availobl~

• Inexpensive

_.- • Good Fire R"s!SranCf

,,-
- ----
Hardboord • Flp.xiblo - Good for e Poor Fire Resi.tol1ce
N\os:. Load in3 but con be Treated

.•
Inex pens i"..p-
."
Plnsti cs • Flexible - Good for • l.OW Moss
Mass Load i n9
• Fxoensive

• Puor Fire Resistance

..
Concrete • High Moss • High Stiffness

• Can be Molded to
any 5hol>e

• Inexpensive

Plywood
" Fle)(:l.Jle in Thinnt'r • Poor Fi re Rtlsistonce
1ypes but con be Treated
• Good ~or Mass Load i ng • More Expensivf! t!,on ,
G ypsu",b'.>0 rd or
HIJrr:lboard _J
_'06_

..... __.__
_~ ~ ~ ""'-__ *._.-.... M - . ._ ___~ _ .1IIl"__
or too expensive, and provide~ such inordinately high values I)f transmission
loss that its a!,plications are very limited. Second, it is impossible to achieve
the 20 dB requirement over the complflte frequf.lllcy range with a practical
window unit due to ~he limitations on glass thickness and spacing. Therefore,
the cOlT,bination of a we!! and window cannot be made to meet the 20 dB
requirement; in oth.,r words, the wall is over-designed for the window.

As a rdsult of these cC)(lstrainls, only a limited number of prototypes were designp.d

te. ,atdy the 20 dB re,=!uirement; these were termed Type I prototypes. The
remainder (Type II prototy?t's) y'ere dflsigned to provide a transmission loss that
was equal 10 or slightly better than that required by FHA for Grade I c.onstruc··
tions. The majority of these building elements, with the exception of windows
ond doors, were designed to provide on STC rating in the range of 60 to 65.
Th~ w:l'!do'N was de~igned to provide an STC rating of 55. For tvpical areas of
glazing (say 20 percent of the wall ar~o), I'he combir1ation of such a window
with a ,....oli of STC 60 wouid result in an overall rating in the order of 58, which
is fairly respectable. It shculd b'! mentioned, however, that the mel'hod of
s,:ecdying the trClnsmis~ion loss characteristics of on exterior wall by its STC
rating :s not a good OM bec:alls~ the rating is based on a typical intema! noise
environment anrl there is sometimes a great differenr.e between tl1e frequency
:,t>ectra of thE' indoor and outdoor noise environment. Therefore, it is recom-
mended that external walls be desig"1ec! for a ~rtic,Jlar lo.:ation and not be
defined by en S TC ret; n9.

The experimental prototypes were tA'ited in the Trunsmiss.ion L.oss Facility

at Wyle laborat-:rie~. This faci lity consists of two reverberation rooms of
ideontical dimensions, each having Cl volume cA 6400 cubic feet (lSI cubic
metel'l\). One of the rooms (the source room) is constr Jcted of damped
~teel pam-Is and is mount~d dir~ctly onto a concrete base. The other
room (the receiving room) b ccnstructed of gypsurnboard and plywood
lominlJtions and is mounted on four air springs, one at each corner.
Other than the inrlirecr and Isolated coupliflg through the concrete hase,
thEre are flO connection~ between the two rooms. The l'veral: transmission
Ims of th£ wall separating t~ ... two rooms i~ shown in Figure 54.

Since huth source and Icreiving rooms are identi..-al i,.. ~hl1pf! and s.ize, the
natural modes in the t..... o roonl) "Ire ~ssentially the same and will h!H1d to
couple via the test pone!. As a res.lJl~. it is e)(p-ected that lower valves (If
transmission lou wo.>uld be ",ensured in this lo r ility than in on@ hovinll

107
 120P-"'.,...,.-_,....,....-_......~,..-, ......_··~r----....... -r-----
Measured ~---4I
100 .... ,
/ '\
Values "- ..-fi ..
'" i-/
a'} "

....
'"0

is
...J
C
.,)'
0 80 /
'"'"

/
E
'"c
~
f-
Mass Law
\\ //
60

, , •
I
I
/
/
L:
/

40 I L. I I I
6:1 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
rrequency, Hz
fiiJllrr:- :'4. Trnmrnjs~ion Loss of the (ommon WfJlI if I th,.
Wyll" Transmission LO$\ Facility

-108-

L-- _
 dissimilar rooms, especially at the low frequencies. This is, In fact, what
has been found - the fami Iior flatten ing of the tronsmi ssi on loss curve for a
si,~gle pont I at low frequencies is nor observed fr"nt measurements in this
facl lity, and the theoretical mass !aw is ubeyed as sr',own in Fig'Jres 2 and
3. Thus the values of transmission loss and STC ratings given in this report
are probC'bly lower than those that would be memured in many other
foci lities. --

Detai 15 on the construction of the e)(perimental prototypes are to be found

in the followil1g pages, together with the Illeasured valup.s of rransmission
loss and brief comments on the overall acoustic performance. Induded in
the d~tails for the wall constructions are t!;E estim(lted in-place (,st fig.Has
'Jiven in dollars lJer square foot of SUI face area, The~e COst5 do riot include
finishing I)nd havp. been determined from the 1971-72 edition of th~ National
Construction Esti,l1otor (Referenc:e 16) as for as this is appl icoble. Because
the:e ()nsl'f:.Jcti ons are experimental, the costs must be considered
approximate.

_~r'::,toty·pes Bui Id ing t lement

----------
A -- H Walls

.J FloC'r/C~i Iin95

K L Roof/Cei I ing~
M Doo(s

1'..1 .- 0 Windows

-109-

- t = • • . n t
i-!
.f

PROTOTYPE A - WALL

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
2" X 4" wooden studs, 16" on centers staggered, 8" ..:in centers flttached to
2 11 x 6" woo':len pllJtes at bO!le and top. On one side, 5/8" gypsum wall-
board (m I) mounted on 1/4" xl" xl" double-sided adhedve backed PVC
foam tope square 24" on center vertically. On the other side, two :;heets
of 1/2" gypsum wall be ard (m 2) spot-I am i noted on a 12" square Iatti ce
mounted on J/4" x J" x 1"'double-sided adhesi'/g backed PVC foam tope
24" on center vertically. ~II fiber glass insulation hung between the "tud:,.

f'.A.RAMETER VALUES:
M 8.5Ibs/ft 2
m1 = 2.6Ibs/ft/; 4.0Ibs/ft 2
f C1 2500 Hz; f 3000 Hz
C2
D d 6.0 inches
e 1.6 ft

STC RA TiN G: 57

COMMENTS:
This construction contains a conventional staggered wooden stud s~'stem
and standard materials. Hov/ever, i~ includes resilient point-nlounting
and a lominated pel!el on one of the sides. The STC r'lTing of 57 i5 a
considerable improvement over that of cpproximatel)' 46 for h,e con.-en·-
tional staggered stud construction (see Protorype H).

APPRG~~JMATE COS7: $i.45/ft?

-110-
,
~.

,-vCf"""... T,..
7 F""'l!I_"'"J
~'8 GYl"UI'T·"'GlI~d

~':'
L-' 1 ' 1'1 Co........ G,,,,,....,,"-"

80

•
"Aeosured ",
\ a •
60 \ • • •
a • '" •
• / .... .. / '
".
co
-c •
. •
/'-

'"....0
._J
•
"./
c
0
II'>

'"
40 {;

,/
~/
E
'"
c
• ~~
".-/ -- Mass Law
...
0
I- .//
20 Y
STC 57
a
63 125 250 500 1000 2000
Frequency, Hz

Figure 55. Tran!a:ni'5ion Loss Values for Prototype A

-111-
 PROTOTYPE B - WALL

CO NSTRUCTION DETAILS:
2" '< 8" wooden ~tuds, 24" on centers, attached to 211 x 8 11 wooden pi ates at
bose and top. On one side, 1/2 11 plywood mass-loaded to 4 Ibs/ft 2 nailed to
1/4 11 x J" X 111 plywood square!;, 24" on centers vertically. On the other side,
1/4" tempered hardboard mass-loaded to 4 Ibs/ft 2 mounted and screwed
through 1/4" x 111 x J" squares of double-sided adhesive backed PVC foam
tape, 24 11 on centers vertically. Mass-loading in both cases achieved by
stapling layers :Jf asphalt rQ(".fing paper to the base panel. 2" fiber gloss
insulotion batt:; hung between the stUQs.

PARAMETER VALUES:
M - 9.2 Ibs/ft 2
m, = 4 Ibs/ft 2 ; :Tl~ .4 Ibs/ft 2

fe 1 = 1800 Hz; f _.- 4000 rlz

C.2
D ~ 9 inches; d ~ 8 inches
e _. 2 ft

src RA TIN G: 67 (with screws)

COMMENTS:
This COr'lstruction was dHsigned to test the ccncept of mass-I..,oding and
resilient point connections. The method ')f loadiny ;s therefo,e not nec:es-
!oarily practical for fj~ld constnjctions. The r"easurcd values of transmission
loss exceed those predi~ted. Thi!'- is probably due to :... u.:,curac:ies ;" deter-
mining the critical frequency d" The looded paneI-;. rt will be noticed I'hat
the construction meet~ the 20 dfl req,)irement r.Jt 011 frt:.qu8ncies groate; than
200 Hz.

APPROXIMATE COST: $2. (:O/ft 7

- J 12-

__ ....... • -._
.... - . . .. . . -&nr .+i« Br- ...
· d''''......._ _..........
"......__
_
~
~
~
~
_
~
_
~
~
.
~
"
-
-
.
.
.
.
.
.
-
~
~
_
H
*
_
f
f
:
f
t
!
 " ..L,,,::.__
~=
'''-'liI lcn
'J
-,.,,-
ltd'+l

l
~-e:~~J' ~l
J'
~ I
I
I
J
I ~ K....,dbC$l-d ,o ... l.......,

II"'w"l f . - r....
7.11 1o'rr>Qd_ ),utl

•
'!l
'r..;

VI
.,
80 Measured --\

to •
\,
~y
~/
.... .. . --,"- ..
......

'"0 g~/
....J
Predicred·..·., • .....~-:',.~ / /"
C
0
'.tl
60 - ,
,/~
., ,.~
\ ·-Mass Law ,-/
VI

E '.../ ,/
.- /'
'"c / L20dB /'"
...0
I-
~,. /'
40 , /'
"
./
",/
..r'"\,' - Mass LCJw

// STC 6/
.... '

20 L I J I I ~...L~.l 1_
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 BOOO
Frequency, HI

Figure 56.lrcnsmission I.oss Values for Prototyp~ E!

-113-

__ _ _ _' - . _ - .---..0.- __ ..... . __ ..

~
~
_
.
-
~-

PROTOTYPE C - WALL

CONSTRUCiION DETAILS:
Two sets of 2" x 4" wooden studs, 24" on center::, attached to double 2" x 4"
wooden plates at base and top spaced 1/2" apart. On the outer lIides,
mounted on 1/4" x 111 x 1" double-sided adhesive backed PVC foam to~e
squares, 24" on centers vertically, sheets of 1/2" and 3/8" gypsum wallboard
s;'lQt-laminated. In the center. mounted on s,,1 id point supports, consisting of
1/4 11 x 2" x 1~ 1/2 11 plywood, 24 11 on centers vertically, sheets of 5/8",
1/2 11 and 5/8" gypsum wallboard spot,.lnminated on a 24 11 square lattice. 2"
fiber glass insulation bath hung bet"",een the stud:. in each cavity.

PARAM~TER VALUES:

M - 16.7 ibs/ft 2
m1 mJ - 3.6 Ibs/ft 2; 7,2lbs/ft 2
.' f ~ 2500 Hz
C2 C3
D =.: 11.-5'!lches. I
u, d, - 5 inches
e ~ fI

STC RA iii~G: 76

COM;v·,ENTS:
This triple panel con:;truction is not wei I-suited for norn,,:'!1 use due to its largE
overall thickness, although the acou~tic performance - STC 76 - is high,
whi ch ,,,eans th.,t it could be of use in special condition:.. '(he construction
was designed to obtain the maximum trammission loss possible within
"reasonable" design constraints. The ti'ansmission lo~s ex.:eeds 20 dB greater
than the calculated mass law in rhe frequency range abov~ 125 Hz, arid
30 dB greater than the moss low over the fr ~1IJp.nc>· rang'! 3 b Hz to 3150 Hz.
I" ..... as necessary to (.')rrect tIle measured valllc~ of transmission loss at the low
freq'Jencies sir;cf! tiley afJpronc~'f!d the facility limit.

A?PROXIMA fE COST:

--114-
 • N( f _ r.,.
~ "2" +),'1" ~,,,,,.d G)'~ .. Wallb,*d
11' F,bert!' .. hll'
, 1~ •• - w ~ ~"ct1

'Ii-'" In- .. ,,'I"

~i""""G.".....
_.I!h-e

80
co
""0
..
III
\I'l
0
--l
c:
0 60
III

I
III

E
III
c:
0
~

~-

40

51C 76
..........1~_'-....I '"-...,-I'I..-II"'---l~,.......I--"--l'--tJ'-"''''''''!--IoI_--,,~J_I
20 1 _
63 125 250 500 1000 2000 ·4000 8000
Frequency, Hz

Figure 57. Tr'lnsmission Loss Values for Prototype C

- JJ 5-

---._-
 PROTCfVPE D - WALL

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
2" x 8" wooden studs, 24" on centers attached to 2" y. 8" wooden plotel at
bas3 and top. On one side, she..,ts of '1/2 11 , 3/8", 1/2/1 and 3/8" gypsum
wallboard, spot-Iamino\'ed on a 24" square lottice, mounted on 1/~1I dotJble-
sided adhesiv., backed PVC foam tope, 24" on c.nt~rs vertically. On the
other side, sheets of 5/8";, '1/2 11 and 5/8" gypsum wollboard, spot-laminated
on a 24" square lattice, m,,"'Untf,d on 1/4 1' x 2" X 1-l/2~1 plywood points, 24"
on centers vertically. 2" fiber gloss inwl(ltion botts hung between the stud".

PARAMETER VALUES:
M = 16. 7 I bs/ft ?
m, -' 7.0 Ibs/ft 7 ; m2 = 7.2 Ibs/ft 2
f e1 ~ 3000 Hz; f e2 ~ 2500 Hz
[j - 11.5 i i"lches; d ,- S i I1ches
e- 2 ft

STC RATING: 69

COMMENTS:
Thi~ double panel constr..Jction has the ~ame total moss 05 that of the triple
panel in Prototype C. It is 2 inches less in cveroll thickness an.:f e~hibits on
STC rating that is 7 points lower. The main reason for this difference is the
lower values of transmission loss in the! rni d-frequency region. This support!.
the previous contention that triple- ponel constructioros are superior to the
dOllble panel types (for silid!ar moss and thickness) at mediur'1 and high
f"equencies (see Section 2.2). Agoin, this pallel is su1tnble for use in
special conditions. It is t('l be not"d that the STC rating of 69 for an overall
{'hickness of 11.5 inches does not quite fMof the analytical criterion for the
20 dB r-equirement - see Section 3. i ,.2 - and this feet is vel':fjf!d by the meas-
ured results.

APPROXIMATE COST: ~1.85/ft2

-116-
 ...- -'----- --
'---,~"'-"'(~'-""",
'}" F'bc'1iiI1c< • ." ..
, I ... · ,~··lfJ···lIl"l8f'lINl-..:l G,,......,..

·f""":";·~~Pt ·
. -. . ===x::::;
I
"II -I''] ,9."l_'...... ·
'~f~ ... Wall~
·l·'.I,·'w~SIYllI

80
a:l
."
.
'"..,.0
.-l
C
0 60
'","
E
'"c
...0
I-

40

STC 69
20 ~~-.J._L_~, ... ...l...,~~-'-...I-..I.-..I......J
L--l-.I.--L.......JIl..--l-.L.......I-J--J..-A-L....l...
63 1L5 250 500 lOCO 2000 8000
F,equency, Hz

F; gu rc SR. Tran5m i 15 i on Loss Va IUe!i for Proto type D

.....
~-----,,"'_ _-
 P~()TOTYPE E - \',ALL

CONSTRUCTION DETAJLS:
4" reinforced c<:)"c,rete penel, together with 1/2'; plywood ~heet ma~s­
'ooded to 4 Ibs/ft 2 by meuns of loose sand coi1ta!!led in "e~g ,:orton n type
cOlltoin\"rs. rlYW'Xid sheet mounted on point sllpport~ of di, 'fJn.hrIS 2" .~
,A", 24" on centeis, with 1/4" do.... ble-sided odh6~iy~ backfk P\,.'C foam
tope. 2" fiter gloss inslJlation botts hvn3 b~tw3ttn ~he point :.iuds.

PARAMETER VAl liES:

M .- 52 Ib/ft 2

"'" .:~ Ibs/ft

m, 48 Ibs/h<:; 2
rn2

Fc:: .- 200 ~7.; f c.,

_L
1elJa Hz
D- JO.~I;nche~; d -- 6 inches

e 2 ft

The li'athod of r"105~-bJd;ng used in thj~ ronstruction was inclurled as an

1.J':tern!'Jt t" utilize the beneii,:iol pro~elt:es of bose sand, i.e., higl, mass
and low stitfness. The m.eaS'/ed vdues or trcmsn~issior. loss are affected by
what appears to be resonances L; the mlJ:,s-load-ed ranel and a lock of low
frequency absorption ~ (,!though fh~ STC i ~ 5ubst rmti 01.

APPROXIMII.TE COST: $2.00/ft 2

- J18-
 'i
)
.'

".

80 -
to
t.l I
..
I
I
,0
~'l
.)

~
-J
c
(l
, ,
60~- x \.
,.
oJ

,-"
r~

""c
...C
I \
"
1- "

,\.
40 M eG~u'l:::a -
4 Jnr.h C,:,ncreto:

SlC 72 i
20 L.ojL.!_ ~-L~-J...""''''''''''--i.l_~-l
125 250 SOU
......i,-",-...I
1000
_.L -l.l.......-..IL.l_'_J.J
2000 4000 soon
rreq':'!ncy, H 7.
 PROTOTYPE F -- WALL

CONST~.UCTION DElA!LS:
2 P reinforced conc~ete pone! (ml) with 2" x 8" 'NCloden c;tud'.( 24'; or. ·.~enters
attached with nails to simulate concrete rib... On tl,e other side 1/2 11 plywo(ld
(rrt~_l mos5-inoded to 4 Ibs/ft 2 by ~tapling three i oyers of llSphalt roofing paper
(0. Q Ibs/h 2 each layer) ottached by means of 1/4" x 1" .'< 111 doublc-': ded oj··
;,esive t-Clckeu PVC fourT. tope square: 24 11 01' C'3nters verticrJ!ly. 2-' f;b~r glass
insulation bath hung between rhe stud~.

PARAMEHR VALUES:
M - 28 !b5/ft'l
n~ I -.
n lbs/ft 2;
l.J _.
fe 1 -4UO ~ I.L.,
•
l",. ~
18;)(' Hz
-<
l) 10.5 1'1'+'<;:';

e ~ ) fl<)p~

COMMENTS:
This construct;..,,., is si,nilar in cc.sis to tho: of Prototype E with the exception that
the meth"J of rnaSS-IOCidi% is diff~r~nt and that 2;' co~crete is utilized irt aloct"
of4" concrete. Cor,'paring thE'! meosL'I"!o re3Ldts of transmission 11155 for Ihe i\-ll')
prototypes shows that the low freq, Mel r1erf"rmancp. approoches the p,"edicted
v~,lues r~ore closely for this con~tructiort using 2
11
conr.;rete, ulthough the absolute
Y(J'"e~ for the 4" concr@'l'e are comporoble ~r higher, At high frequencie~., thE"
rnefJs,.'rp-d rMu:ts ~or Prototype F exceed those predkted, probably fJ!> G result of
the P\t': foom iSC'k.:ors, th~ effect of which j., nor incllded in the predic.tion
rnerrlod. T!1f~ 1TJ\~a;UI'~Ll results do 1101 satisfy the 20 d13 requiremp.nt, bl.t at
Iff'quf!nr:it's 8r~(1kr th..,r; 200 Hz. t!-,e,J ure 20 dB 'Jr in:;,re in exce~~ of the '{a!ue~
of tr(J,,~mi~s;on 10.:15 for Th~ 2 inr:h ':oncretcl.

-120-
 , 1'" p·wr.Pt::rd_ 50' ....

;
1,7·"l""........ ,
I,l•."llIlIloettl
,.,.n.1~lOlNPI.'
-.JI
-------
",",(._1.",.

J
I

c-
O
j
F'
V
t'
o
l-
I- \ .l
.to
.. .to ..
.to
I
.to \
.to .," \. ?red i ctecJ
40 ..
L " CO'1crete

i-r"!lquer,::->,. Hz

Fig;·re SO. Ironsmissiorl I.ms 'lalue~ for h~tof /r"~ F

-121-
 P~OTOTYPE G - WAll.

CONSTRUCTION DETA.ILS:
2" x 8" wooden studs, 24" on centers; atto~heo !'o 2" x 8" WOOdE" rlatt>~ u f
base and top. Or~ both sid!'!5, 1/0" fiber I3loli! Sh~6~S boded to 4 Ibs/ft 2 wit!·
j" ).; 1" s':1uares Clf u mixture CIt ~Qlld C1nd 0 commerciall /' cv:·.i1ablf! vibration
d,]rnping material (tt',is be;ng used ~i.nply to hold ~he sorl:! in p!!1~e) mou"tp.d Or"!
'1/4" x \,. X I" squares ':If douhl&-5id"d nc!hl'lsive bacKed rve loom trlJ,>e 24"
Of; C~~lter5 ,'t'lrticallf. i" fiber g!(':lj ir;SIJlotioil b'1th hung betwe':HI ttl0 ~t',";~.

PARAMETER VALUI:::':
M .. 10 'b~/ft 2
rn 1 .. l' " -4 I bs/H ?
f .. 1 f e ;- -' 6DOO (w;th nu rr.(!~-!t')Gr.iin9J

D ..

f: ~
2 fce~

STC RA Tr I'JG: 60

COMV,ENTS:
A d;fferont type d mass-IO<Jd;nQ is utililed in this cLlllstr'jction and 0PfJeo~ to
hove beoen \uccl;)ssful. ;he agrl'!ament bet .... p.ftn measurud and r:alculal~d r(~~IJlt~
;.. good over mo!\t .:>f the trequency r'JI'ge. Si,,:e 'he critical froc;uL'ncies of Lotll
pOilels are T,igh t the eH"c' of rhe isolators on tl;~ tror,'.r,'issio,1 loss j. sr:,ull; henc.e
~hey are !lot required. F,)" pructicnl purp(lst'~, howev~r, II l'h",aper bose moteri()1
i~ r~quire(!.

-122-
 60
~
"0
..,
'"'"0
....J
c
0
ul

'"
lOr
E
'"c0
I-
...
20 -
STC 60

o~..4_~-<-...1~J--l........I_......L"""_-J,I--.lI--l---l---lI~~l• ..l-~~~--"......I-..I
125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Frequency, Hz

Figure 61. TI(]r1','T1i,sion Lcs~ Values :()1 Pr0totype G

-123-
 PROTOTYPE H - WALL

CONSTRUCTION DETA!lS:
2'1 X 4" wooden !:tuds, 32;1 on centers, stcggerao 16" on centers atrached to
2" x 6" wooden piatl'!s ot b"se ar.d top. On both :-'ides, 5/8 11 gypsui'lI.'IOlIboord
"an~d oJ~ 24" em cente, to studs. 2" fiber g!lJ~s ino;ulction beth hung betvreen
!l;uds.

PARA,\\ETER VALUES:

fT; 1 .•. m L = 2.6 Ibs/h -;.

rC2 = :L50C H.!
o c: 6.15 inches;

COi\'\MFNT S:
Ti1is stagger'ed stud cor.slrurtion ;5 fuid;. ~ypical of C1 standard construction, witf,
the exception that the studs are on :32" rather than 16" centers The STC rating
of 43 is !ow fer th~ co:urruction and is completoely determined b~! the tr,lnsmissiot'
lo:~ ot the critical frequency of 2500 Hz af which the rnoximuln a;!c,wable de.... iation
of 8 dB IS tcken. An incr",ase 01 only n fe ...' dB ill thi!i freC!ue'"lc/ region rai~es tIle
STC rating to its more usual value of 46.

APPROXIMATE cosr: $1 "2~/ft(

··124-
 ~_c_~ _",_
F1 t'4..;.'"_'._'-'_" .._-.-J

'"a'"
v-
•..J
c:
:)
".
v,
1:.,
c
...o
I-

CJ ....LJ.--"-.Iol_•..:.~~. _L.~. l __ L L 1
63 125 250 500 1000

r-;gur._' 62. TrOr)~m;~s,l)n Loss Values for P(otoiype H

-;25-
,
"
PROTOTYPE I - FLOOR/CEILING

CONSTRUCT/ON DETA{LS~
2" ~ 1\)" y,.or:den jo;s~, 24 1' 011 (,enhm, on on'~ side of which is noiled 1/2"
plywooo. Spot lorninateJ to the ply'vooci ((.j~ 12" I)n cente,'"!;) ere s~eets of
1/8" plyw?.:>d and 5/8" gypsum wollbvurd w~,ich in turn ....re spot laminated ot
pc\;nt~ 2.4" on centers. On the other side;. sh~et!) of 5/8" ~nd 1/2" 9yp:>t;m
wollbol)rd I simi lorly Icrninated, core m;)unfed on 1/4" x 1" xl" squares of
d;:,uhie sided ~dh~:,;ve bocked PVC foom tape. 2" fiber (~Iass in$u'a'iOl~ h"H:i
are hung diagonally b~tween till' Jo!sh.

PARA~l\[rER VAI.UES.
M - 12 Ib"/ft l
l
ITlI "" 5,3 Ibs/ft ; (11 _.
4.6 Ibs/f~7
f .-. 1400 H~; F -::
250P Hz
el Ci
D -, 12.6 inc: hes; r; 1J i r1: h... s
e - 2 feet

STC RATING: 62
~
He PArING: 49 I,' ,;:t
. h v;ny,
. , ~ i IE'-~ j
I

CO,'.WCNTS·
ii,

Tlti~ ;1(JC'lr/c~iling ce;ns~ructjo') j" of fairly conventionol d£siqn win) 0 few

mociificr.JtL"ns such os !ominClted fioor clld ceilL19 panels nnd pot!!t ;"ol:l'~ion
~:,Ir the c~i:ing. In i;~ tt:Stc": form, It is r.mH~ipoted t~lat the ceilin;j ~l;spen!>ion
'rlculd not be Cldequote, but could b~ improved hy t\'l~thoJs di~r:LIS'ied f:'1rlip.r
"
The S7C fating is h;gh but the He rating i~ di~l,pr"intingiy 10'1", ')! ~e,-,.!.t ~/ith
the vin!,' flc..cr cov~rin!d .
.,

gf-' • tstn.
- fAM'-_ a-a e. rt eft
d " tt"
 -~

..
;

an '" "'---'"f,-.,.-r--r--,.-.,.t-.,"T'~..,lr---ir--~~"\"r....,.'--r"i:-I,......,fro-"~1~1 .~.

60 -

."
.~

f... ·

STC 62
-l
!
I I .L,.;.-L,J
4000 f!()(!n

r~:-l
lie ~'5
I

-~
--i

,-.
_r
,- sr,~. \

J~_w~I. . L.1~.-Lj~J 1_J.~.J \. LI~. J.I~. . l. . -. . JI_- J~~J

6J '25 '250
.....'-\-,1.....
500
......
1
1000 2000 4000
.....
8000

figur-! 63, Trl'lr1srr:i'ision Loss and Impclct Noise lev~l ValLJe~ for
Prototype J
'. '27-

t M_' eAZt'cM - .. ... wh-. rd -.e-t......:l

 P:'~OTOTYPE ,J - HOO~~/CEILING

2" X '~I" wooden joists,_ 24~' 011 cent~rs, acting CIS (j sirnu:olod subfloor systfirr't
on one ~id.l of which ;z. 2" r~inforc;ed concrel's. ~ ~he othf:r !iide, 1/4 I' hard-
t,-,ord l'rlOSS loode.d with CXiphalt foding PO""! to appro.w:imctely 4 Ib~/ftZ :nwnh;d
~)fl )/d J1)( 1" x ) " S'l~lOrc~ of Gbuble ~icied rJd')f~!iive ba(;h~J, 'J'y'( foum tope.
J'
L
I t·
.,
ber .
l4iOS.~
.msulallr.wl
, ' baff's or~ htJng d. I' b h ..
"':J~()',a ~y e·w~l!'" t ~ JOiStS.

PARAMETE\l VAlUE$:
I~': -- 32 Ibs/ft z
7
". ::: ~4 1~/ff 2. :;1 £ - :t , ~:-/~I/f~

\:...,;
- 1100 : ~ 7.;
-
fro', = 4000 h~
r',
u .,
1.0.25 inr: he~ • 0, -" 16 ind'l%
t; -= 2 f~et

lle RA TINe. 59 (with vinyl on cork)

60 (w i (I, carpet)
73 (w! th c~rpet and foam pod)

COMMENTS:
11,e n1eusured ,,(]Iue~ of trOl'I~'nissi(\fl loss excE'ed t~c prt'dic;~l~d \'cl.·~s nt 'Tlediutr
ond hi3h frequencies., The rcas~ for th~ fairly large discil~pOf~cit.'~ C'; the h;g,~,
frequenc.ies are not fully und~fStood. At low fl'eqIJencies, th.e meo!>uled vnlues
(JH~:lo~e t':l the trammls!ion lo~ of thE) flJcility, cmd sc the neces,;ory correctiflf'~
!;pr:!ud~d in the r,raph)orf! probahly int]v;urate. j'hi~ portly e'l(pkJil"\5 ~h(' ,'egcti'le
d:sl:rl:lJ='rJncie~ ;,1 this ran~. It is intNesting to note that the rnr·ceJction of a
-::orp~t nlC'r,e elves nt;-~ significantl}. r~dur:e th" impact noise levl;ll:;, but that ~
(o(J:n ~ad 1)'lJernerJth the c(Jrret dct!s result in a subtontiol redlJdiol1.

-128--

--- -------------.-~-~
1It...
......
;f
t

1 •

" J • l~ '>,.~ ,io""1iI

~lBoacJ
WCJ1oJot, I') ,"
L..-._ _ F.~ ~.Jb1"1:'Vr~

20 ...~-I. l_,.L.L.._J.. J..--I.J..-"~I_II._~ol-l- J-.....'--1.1--\,--\,,_.1

.......
68 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000

,)1)
-'Ii ,1 ,I I....,..~:

'1i,,·,1 Tiles
":>
'.\I ~ and'Ccrk
-J

...
0) lIe 59
:>
.... 50 1/4"
..
'"
I)

Q..C'I
Hylon Carp~t
"U
c~ lIe 60
c: '-,
::I Z
51 :t
-cO
eN 40
co
l;
...
I)
1/4" Nylon
1)1:0
> "U
c.orpet and
....0i,J c:
.-
Underlxd \. \
0 lie 73
'0

.r:
t-
~

30 '\ \,
I

0
c
eu
\
20
63 125 250 500 1000 8000
Frequency, Hz

Figure 64. Transmission Loss ol'ld Impact Noise Level VOIU~5 for
Prototype .J

-'29-

.~
 -_._ _-_._-----
PROTOTYi)f; K
...
ROOF/CEILING

CONSTRUCTION DETAII.S:
2" x 10" wo"dtln joists, 30"~n centers, on ""a side of wh1ch is 2" fE'intor::ed
concrete (ml)' On thfJ C'ther sider a !jghtw~ight steel channel is nailed P':)l'~~
perldicularly to the main joist dire-:tion, to which is rr'olmted 1/2'1 i:;lr,d 5/[l"
gypsum wallboo;,~ (m2) spo!'-olaminated at 24" on (,enh~i", h,' merJrlS of U4" x I"
x 1'1 squares of double-sided adhesive backed PVC foom rape, 24" 01' :::e'iters.
2" fiber glass insulation ba~ts art: hung diagonally between the jo:sts.

PARA,'v\ETER VALUE5~

M - 30 !bs/f~ 2
ml - 24 Ibs/h 2; rn.., = 4.6Ibs/ft2
fe 1 -. 400 Hz; f - 2500 Hz
c:.!
D - ~ 5 ~ ·,<:~es; f: .- l? i n':"hos

e _. 2 feet

STC PATING: 69

COMMENTS:
The effec.y of coint:idence in the 2" c.onGr':'tf3 roof i,l t~.i5 CO'Hi7lJc~i(Jn is evident
at 400 HZ'. It resl)l~ in more substantial red:x.tion in hmsmisshn 'o~s iii this
freC!ueney region th.,n wos ohservecl in the p("e\ficu~ orr)tcltyp~ (J) because ~he
ceiling pahel ir, this corjstructior, is less flexibi,:!.~.~'jin, ~he predicted results
foil belo\' thm.e measured •• This is partly Jtle I.J the resilient connecrions
between tL,e ceiling panel and the joists.

-130-
 I,----'-'-------~
'It. lCl!"" ,,,,.
,,'OJ' .....
',i ~ ,,) """ad," Jr .• 1. ~ .... ,

I
10' "';
I ~ ,.el·· " 'ur,

I
r .....

"L17" -~~ r • .. •
,Tt:~" r';t "'--::--'--:'r':!~ 0 I

~i ,--~~-~-~-r~.~-~~:,'::~y~~C
l·II" .... 'wt
flV( '0,)'" ' ....
;;......
~t·,~II:I'O"l".J
--J

1(j(/r-.,....,...-r-.,-,.-.,....,....,...,.~,....,.... ..........,.. . .-,.....,....,,--,.....

. .'"""'T'"
Mass Law + 20 dB 'l

80(--
r:Q

~
<:l
'.
'h
,~

0 ~
.. _I
I
60~-
C
0
'"
V> !
F- I
~
a
l-
f-

40

Low
STC 69

63 1£5
I
250
I J
SCI)
I
1000
Frequency 1Hz
1
2000
I
4000
J
8OCO

Figurp. 65. frr.msmis5lon Loss Values for Prototype K

-131-
 PI~OTOTYPE L - ROGF/CEIlING

CONSTRUCTIor-..' n::-fAH.S:
2" X 10" ·...·c,oden sl'uJs, 24" On centers, on one of Y'hlch is nailed 1/2" plywood
mass-loaded to 4.2 !bs/ft 2 (m 1) with asphalt roofing paper. On the other side,
two sheets of 5/8" gypsum wallbo~rd ('"2) spot-laminated at ?oints 24" on centers,
mour.ted to the joists with 1/4:' x 1" X 1" squares of double-iided adhesive bClCk~d
PVC foam tape, 2" fiber gloss bntts were hung diagonall,' betwcel' ~he joist,>.

PARAMETER V/.. I.UES:

M == 1L S il.J5/h 2
111 1 =- 4 . k" 1bS/ 'f t ~;} iYl, -- 5.6 Ibs/ft2
f C! -. 2COO H7.; f .. 2500 Hz
c2
r-,-, 1~ i r,,;~ ba~;
- d 9.5 inc:hes
e 2 feet

r: OMMEi'l; S~
;f,~ ugreemer,t between the measured Clr'Jd o?orcximate pradicted result!> for this
(..onstn'c~ion
is good. it is interesHng to r.o~p. thot the effect "Jf cni ncidence at
2500 Hz for the gypsum wallbvl'lrd ;5 nC";' I':viclPnt indicating the value ':I f the PVC
isolators. in addition, th~ cpproxi'lme ·)t~a~lht 1>1<' ~lelrlOJ h, pre0ict,ng the
Irommission loss is fairi)' OC:'i.lrlJte.

-132-
 ;:1" :, ~ .::::,
ii
__:.1.._____
--1------ -
_
~:::OJ
J:::C:::_ _ J"
------
r?\j-r",,=- ... r,,1l'I
~ . r lll"'" 'f i r'vrr.,,""

------.- ..... ollt ..l1,j

loor~' f

,- ),C 6.1

80,-'
.,...
III
Pre c! ;r: tr;, d
o
.-J

C
o 6C -

E
VI
L

~
...
l:'

FiC;l')r(' 66. 1((1n~nliHiJfl I ,~~ \'uiul"s for Prototypl"

··13,1-
CONSTRUC1ION DE'fAllS:
2" 'jectur'"1 (ml) (cement(~d wood shavl'lgs), one side (,7 which has bonded TU it
(Jlayer of 5/8" gypsum wallboard (mz) a"d 1/4" hardboard (m3)' On the oth.,r
!ide, 1/8" hordboard (m .. ) mounted on 1/8" x 1 11 x 1" :;quelres of double sided
~dhesi'",e backed PVC fOl1""J tope 12" on ceonters vertically and horizon;·C1lly.
The frame ~olls!sted of 2'1 x 2" lumber, to v.'hich the gypsum wallboard and the-
1/8" hardboard w-;,rft m~iled.

:'.\ 8lbs/ft2
rn i :... 3 Ibs/ ~'t .i ; 'rJ ; ;.6Ibs/ft 2
m:l 1,4 'b ../f!' rT,/, 0.7 ILs/ft 2
f" l~:r' kn '~W'I) f r;;; 2500 Hz
'. ,
f .- '! 0, aDO dz
c~

COI'Mv\E1-..!TS:
Of rrlojo. i,li'erest :'1 thi~, ,:onstnrction is the le'-h'rTl ,Vl-,;(,~, is a porous material
~(,r: 'lcorH.:e provides bt'th moss ond obsorF,ti(Ir., With the 1/S" hardboClrd '>paced
UWO,/ from th~ h~cturn, (1 dou!Jle pane" chal1v.. ter;3t i .: is .)bt,:lln~d v,:thout the

r1f'('d irA ~l]rW:'t ~wpty l.ovi·ie:o. that are WQHt':h:/ of ~F(I(f".

 ~<ii1
<» <

~
' c,:;:;;/;;//' 'C ,f' ,; ~ ~
t::',:,/// , ,//, / , L'//, //- •

f¥~t/;c;,/~~
_ !:.£·~u,t,

... I, _

i . r.", ...
PO. j,..., ... ,c, ..

I II I' .... "bue,-

.... _ .._--
T

'.....'eusureJ
Prc.'ll'~>tJl:! M
60 ( ~~r:~,,"e(l\
....... , J I

,1.l
-0
..
.....
"'
C
....J r ..
.
C
a ACI
.....
.....
.
./
r: I ~/ .-.

."
~,

c"" ,-:'1/:' t. ~ ... "

(j

1-" j, ..-4;;;;'/' '\ .. •

I~,"
::0
I
- ......./"'•.. , tMc:~ur('d Sol id
.~:ore COOl
(ror cornp"rlsor,)

() t._L L __ .'_L~_'-L .~_L, 500 ll)OO

._.. ..l-"-..
2000
_:...-,_~.jJ
4C'C " 8000

-135-

- • r = ttt e r . PPM C
 CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
1/4" (m]) and 3/16" (m2) plate g!aS5 pClnel~ mouflt~J 8" aport ir' two sides of an
isolcted f high transmission loss wall system (STC 69). The perimeter of the assembly
WCJ5 effectively sealed without introQ'.Jc.ir",g sig"ificant sound bridges and 2" fiber
9 1'.]ss insldation bOl]rd was placed around the p"rimeter.

PARAMETER VALuES:
til 5. 7 IbS/ft~

ml -= 3.3 Ibs/Ft '; n12 2.4 Ibs/ft 2

fe -= 2400 Hz; f - .j200Hz
·1 ei
D 8.4 inches; o .q inches

S1 C f~ Tl t'V): 54

The neeri for corrlpiex or'ld co~tl)l perim.~tt'!r ~o~~cts is portialiy eliminoteJ Ly
p;acing the two glass parl el .. in sepurate poi1,~ls cf a high ~~~JI1~1T issiotl jouble
p-::,1'!1 constn.:r.tion. At high frequ6:ncif'~, weoter than 300 f;z, thp- trammi~si()n
jew. i determined b}' th.~ 1cgree ,..,f irc,!otior, bel"wee~, the j'HO panels of the Ncdl
ar~J by the lock of 'J full l':lyer af cb50rplion in the air~po':"e.

-136-

......... _- - ........... -ee ••

- - ... " .n
 .,
1----
:~~Vj -~,j-

-~Ji-i .
I ""'" \. " ~ -. II
_________•.-__J
',.""." ,.' '0

Bar'l ........
I
.,.......ul'-or-~ .........,~~_..,.~

I
60 -. -~
cD
-r:,

r
~

,,'
/
... ./
./
II~
.. .,.
_J ///

(', 4() -
./
-- _J
,

'"
v,

E
c
0
.0

L.
/
,/
I
.......

20 -

h (~quency', Hz

.
-
•

-1J7-
 PROTOTYPE 0 V{JNDOW (C2!ERABL~)

CONSTRue nol'! DETAILS;

1/4" (mj) and 3/16" (r:i2) plate glau panels nl..;lunted in standard OI~I"linuITt slidi"9
window rranll'!~ 8" apart in two side~ of a" isolated, high transmission 10:05 waH system
(STC 69,. The perirnater of the assembly was effectively sen1ed without intrcdt.r:ing
significal'lt sOL!nd bridges, and 2" fiber glass insulation boaru wes placed around
thf.: perimeter. Metal channels containin9 !,eorrene !'eals W2r,~ ~crewed to Ihe
per!r!';eter of the m-:.vable section of each wi~,dow.

PAPJ\METEP. VALUES:
M = 5.7 ilbs/fr 2

""1 -- 3.3 !b:>/ff 7; 'TIl - :;:.4Ibs/ft'

fc 1 2400 Hz; f co 2 3200 Hz

D 8. 4 inch~s d .- 8 il"lches

STC RATIt~G: 50

COMMH-JT5:
The ",Heet of the neo~)(ene edge seals is evident in the frequency region near
1500 Hz. The 5 TC ratir'9 of 50 i:: just 4 points lower than for 0 seored doublE
window - see Prototyp€! N.

·138-
 [-'---'-----'~.-.:~--' . "l
i =~==~ '.L rL~~'=~~, i
'I: " _._, - - if', ',' .." 1--- _.:
: _ _ ~-.J,'L.. !
l ' , ... __ " ,_ ..... _.

r:
a
'",n

STC .50

I I J...
2000 4000 SOlX')

~igllr? t,'l.i r:Jrl~r'1is~,i()n 1.0~S Valu('~ for Prototype ()

·'139-
b. Summary of ~.'(perimental Prototype Resul~

In order to preser.t the results in 0 simplified summary form, the perfor-

mance of the various prototypes has beer. :'ated in tf:rTnS of two single
numbers, a combination of which indicates whether or not a particular
constnJdio/1 achieved the geals pi"esented in the contract, One of the
c1os.siFi<.(ltior;~ used is the familiar STC method. In i1f~orly every case,
howevp.r, the determining factor ;1'\ the classification of the n1p-()sured
results for the prototype!; usinog this method is the va!u~ ot i 25 H,;. ThuJl,
the STC figure for these ~~{OtotypE'" is purely 0 leI'/,' frequency cio~sific(1t;o(l.
In order to obtain a dossifr catio"1 of the constructions in terms of the
measured pE'rfcmTloncp. results ot high frequencies, it 'NOS decirled to us,",
the SIt (Speech I",terferen-:e Level) method. The SIL fig ..m~ j.; the nur;le r i-
cal overage of the mecsured transmi~sion i",ss '/olues in the 500, 1 aoo ond
2JOO Hz w:r(Jve ba"ds. A combinotion of the two methods of classifi-
cation enubles a ;:it"or pkturc to be obtained for the: ov~~al; perfnrmance
of t"'e prnto.ypt! c:o:1~tructiom,

The r~su't~ of the pmtotype teSTS are conden.ed i.., Tab!c 4. to lilustrnte the
f"lH)st ;"portant feotures. Thi, tuble briefly describes the basic construc-
tion of t~,e vario'J!> proloY)'"es; if i'1c.:!L.dcs the mass end th~ 3ing!e-f;gure
m!!thods of c1cmiiying the performcnce, Additiona">', there are thre~
c(llum,,~ that rei otf; to tf-.e goa! of the c::mtrac t • The fourtn column shows
the percentcge ~ f) of thE' 16 measured f requ~nci es at whi ch the measu red
re'iulh attain or exceed the 20 d~ requirement, The siJCi"h column shcw~
the nitfe-rence in dB (6 STem) between the STC figur"" for tf-.e mea~~~'ed
'Ialues of tronsmission Ims nnd the STC figure for th~ c<Jlculoted ma!~ low
line. The final co:umn is similar, EX.C:'~pt thfJt dif~erencf.ls in the.'! SIL
figures ore presented.

A. study of ~he 6 )il.:.... ur,ci I.i Sit cokJnlns present, [~ pichJrp 0; t~w
II f rn
rc!ni'ion~:l;p ex:ding beh.'Ieen the low ,md high freq:.Jensy result~. It is
revealing to com[\ore the figur~s for the prototypes with ·ho~e for the
stundaro type uf staggered ~.~ud wall (Prototype H). The STC roti ng of tI,e
I"tt~r is lower than the normal rneasurt~d rutins of npproximately 46,
primorily due to the large dip in ~ronsrn;ssion los~ at the eritrcal frequency
of the panels. [·or the F'U":IO!.e elf cO"lporison{ hcwevl?r, c~"lsistency is
nil'Jintuined b)' tnkin8 tl:c ~TC ratin:-:I or the sto"dGrrJ construdi()(, 05 43.
~~otc tt"jt the lI'lod:fieo str:Jggered stud w,.,11 (Pmtotype A) hm )i~!nificantly
greatt:·r performance tho,' that of th!! slenderd, 14 dB i" STC and 18 dB in
51!. trunsmi~s;oi1 I 'JS~,

-140-
,, ,

TARLE 4

EXPERIMENTAL PROTOTYPE TESr RESULTS

I
11
f(%)_l STC 1\5
I SIL1-
rc m I TL ~5jL
n,
!
i
~
I I
38
I 5J II oJ }'
I
I
.'
!
I
B. PI> l'Icc-..:I/looded
horclb~,d do~blc
8 - 3/4 !l 94 I 'il i4 Ie /'

woli I
i
13 - I: 2 100 i 1,_\ ~'9 ili 33
I,
D Double gYP5lim~ 16.7 11 - 1/2 94 ! 69 2? 74 26
board (Iominored
E. 4" ct')'lCrptc/loode:l 52 ]0 - 1// 15 76
plywood Double
wIJII

F. 2" conc:rt:le/lcod..d 26 10 - 1/2 '16 It) Ie

plywood double
""nil
i7 16

-141 -
 The ovp.rage vol UE"S of h 5Te", a"d l\ SI ~n for the woll prototype~
(excluding Prototype F) 'Jre 20 dB and 23 dB; respectively, to the nearest
d~ • Th i s indicates that the c,:>ntrad 90cl of the 20 dB requ i rement ,
tlveraged over ~he complete frequency range, has been euentiul.y achieved.
Iii CJ si."i1or manlier, the results of the other Inajar struclural elements, roofl
,:eiling and floor/ceiling, give avefC'ges ot about 19 end 20 d8, respectiveiy.
It shouid be emphas;zed, howevtlr, thnt these single-number figures of
Iransmission 10';;$ represent ~nly an opproxlinote mp.thorl f"r c1msifying the
results.

The re51,11s of the tests on tleE' Type :l protoi/pes demonstrate that Type !I
pcrfoliTlOnCe (i .e., heHel- I'~on FHA Grtlde n is generully obtained, ;n ~omt~
cases, ; tis exceeded" The r,"SI} It:; l)~ th~ test~ conclucte r; on construct i ?"s
predictej to be ot T},p~ I (i.I?., 20 dB better than tl1oss'.Jw) ole varied.
BecClu~e of the low frequency tJnomaly" ir. the test resllll~, which reduced
the observed values of tr'~nsrnissj'..:.n Im~ at low frequen(,'j.:;s, th~ values
cbtained in this freqllen~y r(dnge do not meE:t tho:! "20 d'3 .. equirt~rnent." A~
high fre'luencies, mmt of the T1pe i cons~ruetiom canto; ',;.19 C().'lcr~'e do no!
rnei!t rile requiremE-nt" fhe re(i~On fo·- This reduceci p?d"(;,r~,ance relative to
mass low is i;,c presence of th£:;o; nc,: Je,nce and sht!cri 119 effects in tht:
concrete ?cnel::. which redllce the sill~le pone! t'Clnsrr.is~ioro !tH'; to 5 to
10 dB below the maS$ Iaw over mcst of t'-'e fre~ue~cy range. In (ollI (.ases,
the performance of the pr.:>totypes cO!ltaining concrete CJveraged 20 dO, or
more, greater thon the transmission Ims of the concrete por,el alone which
provided nlo~t of the mass of the prototype. Despite this defect, the
abcolute vallJ~s of !'TC and SIL transmission loss for the prototypes co"-
taining COllcrete are very good and $hould encourage ut;lizalion of the~'!
"'lew desigm in future conshudion.

He ",'oi" concllisions 1-0 be drawn fl"Qm the re.wlts or ,the experill"i~ntol

p:otcJ~ype ~esh can be surr.muri zed a~ fol low;,:

rne transmission loss of the dividing wall beME'en the sc'U"ce and receiving room
deteriorated in the one-third o~tave bonos ce"tered on 100 Hz and 160 Hz by O~
much as 4 dB. The defect was subs~quently investigated and ccrrected at the end
of the experi rnE.n~ol prototype te~to;.

-IIiL'-
 " The methods of predicting the transmissicn loss of mulh,...le panel cr,o,n-
strUt~tiOll!: with sound bri dges 05 detoi led in Section 2.4 provid-e vc,:ues
Jhat are in }'air agreement Y.'ith measured value!;. With the exception
of some of the constnJctions containing concrete ponels, the pre-
dicted results are norma!ly conservative estimates of the maasu:ed per-
formance. This is partly because the true effect of wall isoloto''S is
underest imated in the theoretic 01 predi ctions.

• The concepts of ~pot-Iaminating and mass-loacin3 single panels

appea~ to be satisfactory methods of obtaining higher mosses without
significantly increasing the stiffnf!ss of the pO,'I€:Is. More ref;n~d
methods may be required for the fabrication 0/: mass-loaded prmels.

o The 20 dB requi remen:' can be sari sfi ed; in fact, an exces' (If 30 dB
grp.oter than the mas' low at frequencies abo\'c 315Hz W'J5 obtained
with the triple p;:mel of Pr~totype C. The 2C dB lequiremfnt was not
qu;te satisfied in the double panel of Prototype 0, perhaps due to the
low frequency p 'blem ir1 the Tronsm!~sion Loss Facility.

" Tire techniques cf point-mounting and spot-laminating ('an be appiied

1'0 exi~ting CQns"luctiom to provide a substanti(,i increoe :n the
acoustic performance.

" The re~~ It:; from tl-,e tests conducted on Prototype B i-Jdi cote that it, s
possible to r"ui! or screw through the Foint isolat:)rs without reducing
the vallJe~ of transmission loss by mol'€' rhan, a fe'..., JB. j'his is an
;mpo·tont result, m one of the ma:!. ~easons thet ,omo of lhe experi-
mental proto;ypes a'e rot fully pract:cal ,~ to b" found in thl:! method
of mO"Jr,ti ng the panel s.

J.3.2 ~_~:tical Proto~ype~

The results gained from thE' f.','<pp.rimenl'ol protol'Ype tests provided valuoble
indications of the applicability of the theory fO the desi9n of building elements.
To Pllt the theory into lise for the design of prac:~i(.1)1 constructions, it was
decid~d tc selcc.t gOCJls thlJt in.:lt1ded .'Iot only very hi9h v.-dues of trammission
loss but uLli() rnodero~e values ot low cost. Three ranges of STC values were
c:omidererl- namely, 40-50, 50-60 (Jnd 60-70·- For each of the b'Jilding ele-
rnen~s, as shown in th.~ mc.trix of Tabl~ j. The S rc range 50-60 covers that
rCQI.';red for FHA Grode I and Grade II comtructiClm. A fCJurth category is
irlcluned in Tuble 5 for constructions meeting the 20 dB rfK1uirement.

-143-

1.-.__._. ----------
 TABLE 5

MATRIX OF POSSIBLE BUILDING ELEMEI'-JTS

AND 5Te RATINGS
-
r BI.!i1din~
ElelYlcrlt "o-so S0-60
src Rothg
!lD-iJ 20 dB

'Il/erior Wall (45) -- ---

-
Partv Wall --- (55j
--
(70)
._-----
Exterior 'Nc,11

---
-_.--t.- (66) (1,7) (64)

~
Floor/Ceiling (66)
"_..J_ . ..
.----
Vv 1,~dClw (.55)

Door W~} -- ---

- .1- I
.J
It shoulrl be noted tha~ some I,)f the elements of th~ matrix prcsel"\ted in Tabie 5
have beerl deleted. These combinati-:>n5 of consl'n.Jction type and STC rating
are considered to be of less i,..terest und hence have been excluded rrom
further study. For the ~ojority of the remaining combinaiions, there exists
the possibility of the building element being loodbeoring or non-loadbearing
ar,d of either conventionul or new constroJetion, whether this be represented by
the choice of new materials "r by construction techni"1ues. This, of course,
lead'> to a "ery lar~~' number of combinations from which eight finol con-
srructior.s "'fife selected. Tl10se selscted include at least one f'lement from
each type, with the exception of a roof/cei ling whkh was excluoed because
of :ts obviolJS similarity in many rt~S~)'~cts to both on exterior ~·..:II and l) floor/
cei ling das/'gn.

The approach t'J the ~e/@ction was twofold. First~ it WC$ decidAd to hcltJde
one or more sy~tems that woul d meet the 20 dB reqtJi rement ot frequend es in
e}(ce~s of 200 H:r rathtH' than 125 Hz, so that the overull dimensions CQul~ be
kept within reasonable limit~. The obvious choices for this requirem~nt were
a part)' wall and or. exterior waH. nil'! purty ·w.mll WO!, dosigned to (>rovide an
Src. rating cf 7e, whi.,;h is 10 to ;5 gruoter than that recommended by FHA
for Grade 1 comtn.Jctions. 1I wouLf ~herefore provide substantially grcot~r
sound imulotiol"l betw~n dwelling units t"an is presently o....ailable at com-
purablE' weight Clnd cost. The ex:erior wa: I was designE'd 1'0 prov~ de an STC of
65, which ...., ould be well suited to an airport environment.

-144-
Second, as cost is of major concern, it was oocided to include a system Ihat
provided an STC value consishmt with or excE'eding FHA Grade I or II require-
ments at low cost. This was preferred over systems that pro',ided higher trans-
mission los!>, even though the cost per STC va:ue for these was cc;m-
parable to or less than that for the one selected. Consequently, 0 party wall
providing an STC rating of approximateiy 55 was included. In addition, an
interior dwelling wall or simple ccastru.::tion having an STC rating of 45 was
designed. This is a higher rating rhon normally associateei with this type of
wall and is obtained at ~ fairly low cost.

Also included in rhe selections for testing were two exterior walls designed for
high extelnal noise environment (STC 62 and 67 without meeting the 20 dB
requirement) and a floor/ceiling design suited for low-rise bu ildings (STC 63).
Fino!ly, a window with an STC rating of 54 and a door of STC rating 43 were
included to be testdd in combination with two of the walls.

a. Materiai Considerations

The materials thct were used in the prototype constructions w~re limited
mainly to S}'Psumboord, concrete, hardboard and plyw00d. The thickness
of thes~ mat~r1als was chosen for the specific applicction. Each of these
materiols, of course, could have been replaced with any other material,
provided the physical properties of the replacement were identical to
tholle of the original. Thus the prototype cOClstructions contained OOlly a
few of the mQny combinations of materials that could have been used.

It wi II be noti ced that extensi ve use has b"en made of the lami noting "r
mass-loading technique to increase the moss of a panel without sul.:-
stantially changir"g the stiffness. Since both methods achieve essentially
simi lor results, it is of interest to disclJss the rationale for the choi CEo of
one over another. LOfI'linating is a method used to conn"ct together two
or three flexible panels of a given material, using discrete spots or points
of adhesive. Since it would seem to be wasteful in time and mO:1ey to
laminate more than two or three such panlJls, it is generally not practical
to increase the rnoss of the composite panel to more than two or thrf!e times
the ma~)s of each constit~eFlt ponel. Moss-loading on the other hand, in-
volves the ndriition of 0 series of discrf.'te masses to a flexible base panel,
~IJch as hardboard, that rTI::Jy b~ of low mms and contribu~e nothing to the
composite panel other th':Jn its fle)('bility. It is an'icipa~ed that i'hi~
fabrication technique would be carried out ir, a facto,y. The material
used to load the bose panel would ide"lIy be inexpensive - IJ good example
h loose sand. The cost of moss-loading a panel would therefore not df'pend
greatly on the additional moss rsquired; consequently, increases in moss in

-145-
the order of {our "r five times the original ba~e panel could be C'btained
at a reasonable cost more efficiently t;lon by u'ii"9 laminations.

It is difficult to estimate the- relative cost of ponels fab!"icated by these

two techniques becallse of the unknown tooling expen~es that would be
involved. However, inspection of the cheaper building materials indicates
that gypsumboard JXInels are extremely anenable to beil'Yd laminated,
wherea~ hardboard or plywood (which are less massive than gypsumbaord in
their r.1Ore. common thick..1esses) would require mass-loaded configuratiom..
The low cost of gypsum board compared to other materials tends to in~icate
that laminated gypsumboard would be the cheaper of the two met'hods r
provided only small inc"'!oses in maSli are required. For larger r'osses,
moss-loading woulJ ~ \_:.>ably be more cost/(:ffectivc:.

At this point, ; \ .::~d is in order conceming the designs and costs of t~Il,~
prorotype constructi o,.s. Incorporated in these constructi ons a~e several
techniques or i.lateri 015 that are not us~d in common bui Id:ng practice:
today. The methods of uti Ii zi ng the techni qiJeS and the materi 01:> :hosen
ore cC'1Si der"'!d to be reasonably procti co! ana cost/effecti ve. Because
they hove not b~en extensively tried out in the prac.:tical conf;nP.s of
bJilding sites, however, and sinc.a the designs hove not been thorougrdy
reviewed by all the various types of engineers and tradesmen who n,oy
eventually be involved in their usage, i~ is premuture to state f'hat they
are the best method in each case. Such::J statement could be made only
after several years of experien{;1: with application of the new concepts.
it can be anticipated that many, if not all, of the techniques would under-
go substantial changes before the final constructions actually appeared at
th" building site. The some is true for the estimated costs of the COI1-
structil)n5. Without a full knowledge 0' thE'! finol dt:tail'i, these factors
cnn bo based only on assumption. Mucn work remains for industry to
further develop means of fully uti Ii zing and manuttAcfuring the d~ions
that ore presented in this report.

One of the mos~ important requirements that a building element must rreet
c.oncerns it! residance to fire. Most buildi"g cedes require the USI) of non-
combustible materials for alt but interior wellis and l"ortitions. The
materials that constitute the proposed COlIs~rlJctions ar~ Iilainly ~lPsum­
boord, concrete ond tempered hardboard, the first two of which ure non-
cC'fTlbustible. A~ for as hardboard is concemed, recel,t developm.Jnts
appear to hove rendered the materia: non-C(lmbustib~e. rhe fire resistance
prvperties of a bui Iding eltfment depend not ,)nl)' on the materials u58d for
the panels, !Jut also on the method of suppor", i.e., the framing. With·,
out conductiny afire te!:. on lI!od'! of the pro!>osed constructions, it i.

-146-
 difficult to sta1'~ what the fire resistance properties will be. It appears
that the state-of-the-art in this field does not allow accurate estimates
to be mode. in the case of non-loacJbearing constructions, it is antici-
pated that thp. fire resistance requirements will be met. The onl}'
remaining question may be with loadbearing consl'rucl'ions with PVC fOllm
isolators, or th'9ir equivalent, included in the method of fost~ni"g.
Howevei, since the panels -:lre nailed through such isolators, (J failure of
the isolator should not affect the structural integrit), of the construction.
In conclusion, it is cOllSidered i'hot the majority of the proposed con~
~tructions can be expected to r:>rovide adequate nre prokcticn.

b. Design and Measured Result.~

Full descriptions of th" eight practical prototype constructicns ,c:re giver. !I"l
this :)ection I0gether with the! r acousti cal perfoi1'l1cnces. hcluded in the
construction details arf~ the estimated in-place cost figures given in dollars
per squa;'e foot of surfClce arec:. These-'cos"ts"'"dO not include finishing and
have been determined using the 1971-72 edi~jon C'f thp. N'ltionrJl Con-
~truction Estimator (Reference 16) os fur as :-hi$ is (J~F,1 i cable. In cases
where the material or type of construction is uncommon to pre:;ent building
t~chnology, attempts h\J'.Je been modoe with the u~sistance "f an expp.rienced
architect to obtain 0 realistic estimate. Costs me based on the rT'a~eriol
and lobo!' rates applicahle in the Los Angeles area in 1971-72, which is
fairly typical of the rates in other large c:ties acro!i5 the notion. In the
srl1aller cities the costs ma}' be somewhat lower.
j

The elernents represented in the protofype cons: ructions are as follows:

Bui Iding fl ernent

Interior 'Nail
.,
2, J Party Wall
c
4, J, 7 fxterinl Wol I
6 Windo ...,

8 Floor/Ceiling
'J Do~r

-14" -
 PROTOTYPE 1 --INTERNAL 'vVALL

CCH~STRUCTION DETAILS:
2" X 4" wooden studs, 24" On centers, attached to 2" )( 4" 'NOOOe(j plates ct
base and top. On ol"!~ side, 1/2" gYP~ll"l wallbocrd (m,) nailed tc) sfuds.
Oil the clther side, 1/2" sypsurn w:.llboord (rr'.) ,Y,iile.d thro",gfl :/4" xl" :,(
1" squares of PVC fC,(J~n ~opP. :~ ,. V:' . filH" gl~ss hOt~5 h'JrJg betw~e'l 1-h!"
studs.

ESTJMA JED CO'3T: $ L OO/ft~

PARAMETER VAUJES;
fI,~ :~ 4. '2 Ibs/ft~

t 3000 H,i
('

D , 4-7/8 inches;
e 2 L~et

,he aqreement t-et'Neen calculoied :md r,leamred le~ult~ :~ good over th~
r.omplere freqJer"lc.j rQnC1~. Th~ jTC 1'11tirlg of 45 i~ g.--,od fe-r '_III internal w'JI:
,-,nei apprnache~ that for a ~tC"ndolo ~tClqgel'eJ ~tLJc.i ....d I v,lth 5/8- i llch gypSUf"l-
LC-(JI'1j ~,al1i~I\r ""hich is hoth more rr J5! 'Ive and more cr)~tl'; (~ee E~:oe~:lI'e"tC'i
H

Prot"typl" H).

-148-
 r---------~ ,>" -, ,

•• ,', ••• '. I

,. .". -,,~U~ ':_<~; :; ,

# -_._---
':<!. 1. 1• 1 L Ji-_ _

,
~'_~:
r
~
• ''1 ...
_

"'~I,
I .1., I,
---..--.
'

r. I,. T..... ',j

80 ........--._-..,..--.-~·. .I -i--.... T.......,...""'!""-""': -r1-.r-'''''r--'---Tj

-,0
"0

'J)
oJ)
n
60 .-

/1
---.J

c
0 40
,,.,
.~

E-
oJ)

c
~
~

20

o
Ft f:; lU" ,'If" ) ' , III

-149"
 PROTOT,(P~
... - 2 - PARTY WALL..

CONSHUCTlON DETAILS:
2" .1\ 6" wooden stl.lcis, 24" 011 cldntel"$, attached io 2" x 6" weoden plate:; at
;he b.'::so? and top. On erie side. 5/9 11 gypsum wallbourd (rn 1 ) nailed 24" on
ce"t~1"!> vart;c"lly. On th,· o;her side. two sheet~ of :1/8" ~:ypsum w-Jllboord
(m~; Z:p<l~ larrllnoted 12" on centers nolled to studs through ) /~" x 1" X 1"
squares of ~\VC ~oam 2.6." Ofl certer,s. :1-1/2" fiber glass batts hut-; between
~he studs.

P,ARA;\M.:HR VALUES:
.~~ - 7 Ih~/h'
rJ
1
3.0 Ins/tt'
f ,:, {GOO Hz
C

0 .')--1/2 inche:;
e ) fe.:; f

S(( I~A rINC,· .:Y1

COMMEI'ITS:
I h t~ (jgreocm,~n t ['~t Wr'!G;' CiJ leu l:Jtpd and f'wClslJred rcslJ 11·5 ·5 (Jga i n r;ood, pxr.~pl
CJt FI~r;llencip.s neol -hI' critic-al frequencv. This COmiTl! ~ion is ...mll suired for
u parry wrJI!, bo~h ;;1 I.-'rrm r~f STr rntin0 vd (;O~I.
 -------1
r . ~'. - I
I
I

,-;-,....,-..,--,.,...-,-·rC·-,,-····....-,-r-r-;-1

60 -- + ./'
/'
.
,. "
i

,.0
,-
V>
v.
.~ rJ
--.J

C
G
.- 40
."
-0

~
,-
V'

..u
"-
20 -

') L--,-'.. . . . _'---I.L_

63 125
 PROTOTYPE 3 - PAP.l'f WALL

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
2" reinforced concrete ranel (fIl,) on each side of ""nich are s....·" of 2- )/2"
strel studs, 24" on centeno aHoched to 2-1/2" ~tee' channe r . ,.. t b'.::se mid
top. On each side, two sheets of 1/4 1' gypsum wallboard (m,) spot lam~nate:J,
1:-"1 e'l cer.tfJr$r screVJed through 1/4" x 1'1 squares of PVC f(',;~m tap~r at j)Oints
24" on cer,ters vertical i)'. 3-·1/2 fiber gluss bOlts hung between o;tuds in. each
Cl1v ~ r,',

EsnMATED C():J1: $'2. 181fT'

Pf\.RlJ/,ETF.R vALUES:

"I - ~j Ib$/ft'
rn, 22 Ibs/ft 7 , '11 L Ibs/ft'
f c:, "- ~30 H"L,; f "~,' ,. 5000 H:;L
l

L' 8 :(\:~hes; d L-l/2 inches

r; 2 feei

qC RA;'l/\.JG. 72

Hil'; tripl~ po,..':! I cOrls~ruction ...... \.15 de-siJned ~o satisft th~ 2~) dB requirement
at frequencies greatel thnn 7.00 Hz. The h;gh STC rating and hw cost make
it a l!5eful construction for seporoting area~ nf h igh noi~e level to I iving or
5hJdy; rig rooms.

-152-
 100 r rur r1"il--~'~"'"-"'I-""""'"T',....,.,--,.....,..-...,......I-~~! ·....~~..,.r-l
Me':.lsured --
\

80
MOS5 Lmv-
1-::'0 dB -1

~
r:t:J
U
,
'"
'"0
_oJ

c 6~)
0
'"'"
E
'"L
0
1..,
1
~

'--- Mass La w
40

STC 7?
i
20 ...J..\ I.! ,- l._.J,_ J.. J J _L"--!-..L J
250 500 1000 7000 4000 8000
Frequency, Hz

figurr;: I?~ ~ransrnission Lm~ \jalues ler PrLltot;r,c :~

"153-
 PROTCHYPE 4·- EXTEKNAL WALL

CONSTRUCTiON DETAILS;
2" fP.'idorced concrete: p'Jnf':I (m 1 i with 2-1/2" ~t€ei studs. 24" en centp.N.
attact,eti to 2- J/2" st{~el chal1nels ot ba~~ ::md ~op. On the other sil~e, hw,
she-ets of 1/4" 9YpSl'IT' wallboard (m2) spot lorn;nntea 12" on (.ente,~ r sr.re",'ed
through 1/4" y. 1" xi'; squares or PVC foam tare ot po;r.t~ 2t.'t" on ccni'~rs
ver~ically. 3-1/2" fiber g:as:, b"t~s hung bE.-,twe~., the steel o;tud:::,

f.'!~R.L:i\MJTf.R VALUES:
'j,., I b~/f~?

n Ibs/ft'; rn ?

,,~ 630 Hz; .:5000 Hz

- 5 : :r;hf.'~; d

S1C RA TJ t-JG: .<,4

C(JMMH-JTS:
This constructiorl provide; (J higl~ STC rating ot !l)W cost Jr~d is extremely tn:~, .-
O1''\:y .": :ncl,es ove,'ol i. Appl ico~;(m~, ,ndude exterior ClnJ party walls. Of oil
~ht'! pl'ototypt>s lis~ed, :' is probably the constrdction wirh the widest range 01
appl icat ions.

-154-
·'...

r-- - ------:-.~.-- - I
I ,:.;L~_~~...;: __: ".t-'~-'--'---'---:~ !
I."'-~m
1<='_'
", .'-_.' .'.
=<£C.
;;;J:J..
:', • • • • •
r.. . . !
".

I ' "" ., •
I

i C~} --I""'...,..""I--,-..,-,.-r--r-.--,.....,....,.....,......,......,........------....----
~ i 4 1

'\' Predicl~d

f(' --.

I
110
·u

!
,-
I) .('I
n.

I
r
I
40~- \.. Mass Law

It·
STC 64
I
70l l-L I L...._...I_--'--'l,~-l.-, -Jl.........~l.,--L ......................
! .......~_LL.. J
t3 125 250 500 1000 2000 4000 8000
Fre'1uency, Hz

r:iqWf; ~'J. Tron~mis~ion loss \!rlllJPS fof' Protctype 4

-155-
 PROTOTYPE 5 - EXTERIOR WAll

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
2" reinforced, modular concrete wall (m\), 4 1 wide, with t~'o sheets of 1/4"
gypsum wallbo(:.rd (m~), spot laminoted at points 12" on cer_te~, nailed
through 1/4" xl" X I" squares of PVC foam tope 24" on c~nters. 3-1/2 'I
fiber gloss bafts hung il1 the cavity.

ESTIMATED COST: I '

$1.59lft<

PARA:\~ETER VALUES:

M - 26 Ibs/tt '
- 22 Ibs/Ft?; In =- 2 IbS/ft
~

fc ...::< 630 Hz; f co ;:;j

5000 Hz.
J

D .::: 8-3/4 inches; d -- 6 inches

e -- 2 feet

STC RATING: 63

COMMENTS:
The measured results generally are lowel thun those prec1icted at all but the.-
f-,ic1hest frequencies due to coincidence effects in the 2-nch concrete - in
the region of 500 to 630 Hz.. Since the cavity p~rimeter in th is case is bounded
byconcrete ribs with high sound reflection coefficients, the low v(Jlues nf trons-
n~ission lo:s 1"1{'1)1 bf" dlJE' nlso to insufficient absorption in the cavity.

-156-
 II ! I
~ >f r-:-::~~~0.
- ,- .• - ~
I
.. , , _.....JI. ... L_','l,;!V- _\"'\),,"'Ut..l"""''''''''';)'_~

.. 1 F'MrIlICH "'"
, 1 • -,', ~I"""_ ('rp.tu ... ~ .. lIr:oam

IOOr-
1
I T
'T '

\' Predicted
\
80

.
'"
'"o
~

:5 60
'"'"
E

..'"
C
C
I-

40

STC 63
2° 63 125 250
1--,-_J-
i -.1-
1._J..1-"- ..!-.I.--J,J---l...-L1--L.--L.-.l.i.....--L.--L.1--l---i.
500 1000 2000
.......,-i,-J.'_I
L
4O<iO 8000

Figure 74, frc1nsrnission Loss Values tor Prototyp£. 5

-157-
 .
PROTOTYPE 6 - W!NDOW

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
3/16" (md and 1/4" (m~) plate gloss pooels mounted in metai channf'lls 8"
apart in two walls of on isolated, high transmission loss wall system (Proto-
type 5, STC 63). Th'! perimetel of the auembly opened into the cavity of
the wall which contained 3- 1/2" fiber glass batts.

ESTIMATED COST:
Unknown - wi II d~pend large:y on the cost of (J ~)r~ciicol type ClfFrame.

PARAMETER VALUES:
M _.
5.7Ibs/fY
ml = 1.4 Ibs/ft 7 m, -. J.J h...... /f, '\'

fe 1 = 3200 Hz f
( "
= 24-00 rlz
D - 8-7/16 inc:hes d a inches
STe RI~ lING: 61 in combin,]tion with /00 wai I of Pnt()~y,'-~ r1

COMMfNTS:
The STC of 61 for the combination of exterior ..... tdl and ..... indow i~ weil suited
(or high external noise erv!ronmenrs.. Sinc~ rhp. gloss ponel~ an' IOCJted in
partially isoiated wei I~,. thole is no ~e.qui;"~mcnt for complex gr)sl-:el·~.

-158-

- -< « ?fit eft

 1----
,

100 . -......-~...-~,...--~,....,--rr-..,..-r--..,......,...-r-...,....,.....,......,... ...

80
CJ:l
---0

'"
v
()
.-J

C
c' 60
V1
V1

E
V1
c-
o
'-
......

40

STC 61

20 __.....~~~-J.--...J ...-.. l L~L..-l-!.-l.....J. __I_.....l""""M"""'"",-'"

63 125 250 .'100 1000 2000 4000 8000
~-reauE'rjcy, Hz

-"r:
) .

-15'")-

li......- ~ ~ _ -- .t+
 PROTOTYPE 7 - EXTERNAL WALL

CONSTRUCTION DETAILS:
6" steel studs, 24" on cer.ters, with 0.025" pref:nished steel siding riveted
on one side a"d sprayed with stucco (m I) to a depth of 1". On the other
side, 1/4" tempered hardbomd ma!;s lond~d tJ 4lbdft' nai:ea through
1/4" xl" x 1 II 5quores -:-f PVC foam ·opp.. (jt point~ 24" on center~ \ferti-
cally. The hlJrdboard was IOCJd,~d with loose sand cur,tcined in a plC5tic
sheet -:ontaining a mC'ltrix uf p.r1c!osed pockets. 3-1/2" fiber Sloss f:lJlt-
hung between the stUGs.

ESTIMATED COST:

~'ARAME TER '//.. LUES:

M IS Ib~/ft2
9 !bdft t '11 ( 4 I bS;;'~?
f 630 Hz f ei :,GCO Hz
Cl

D 6-1/4 inches J 5 indites

;, Feet

STC RATING: ()]

COMMENTS:
This construcli(,n N(J~ on attempt to (Jc.hi( If:: the 20 riB r(;quil'.'rTit.nl at fre-
quencies great~r thar1 200 Hz. Th~ :',o;r' rp.c.-!Y1 f"r its foi lutf:' to do S0
i~ the effect of coincidence at 610 rll. fhf' tr(]r'l~m;~sion las' is, of course /
\'fell in excess uf 20 dB greater than t!.t:: ~n"!asur(':J I,'oiue~, fnr If,,- :;jucco
(,lone, whid, provides mmt of the toto: n1m:..

-:60-
 loor i . ,. r r

80~
5 TC 6 j
Calculated
EquatiC!I' (116)-
\

I~
'"""":)

"
L'

_S
C
0 60 -
.v'en_.
v,
c
,(1
l-

-10

/
1/ ,./f"

?O 1,..¥_..:-...~,,-.l . _~..J...-L....L--L.-L..~ ...1...J-.-._~I~__L.-~"""''''''''''''~

63 1IS 250 500 1000 2000 4000 BOO\)
Fre~lJel)cy, H7

-1 ti -
 PROTOTYPE 8 - J:'LOOR/CEIUNG
-~--------------

CONS TRUCTION DeTAILS:

2" X 12" wooden floor joists with a floor (m 1 ) of 5/8" pl)twood (rai1ecl) ClrlO
resi lie..,t layer of 1/2" fiber gloss in~ulation board on top of which :s floaten
(] f1()or of 1/2" plywood nailed to 7/8" x 7/8" woed stripping, 16" on
centers, with loose sand in the c-ov:ty ~pCJc.e frJrmed. On the ceiling. sid~ ..
two sheets of 1/4" gypsum wolihoa~d 1m .. ) 2' in widtl" spot lominatf":d at
points 12" on centers, ~UC!I ;I,ot d'Jri",~ ildal:di:'t°l (jcil~ Oi'l;; driven through
on I:,: 0nt: layer of the lamirlnr~. The no;;'. wp:<. c;r;'!p.1l tfY(lligh 1/4" x :" x I"
~'l'JOH:~;; :>f PVC foam tope. 3-1/2" fio<,~ ql(J"s ~·(]tt~ hung dic~onally bf'~we~r:
~h" j(j;:'~.

1? Ih/fr'
1
rn I L Ibs/h

f c? 1)1)00 Hz
;4-1/2 inche:; -·ll··l/,r'1cl,eo;
,. '1.6 fe~t

ST( RATlI'I(;;: ,:..]

-=. O~/,ML r,Jr s:

Thi~ C:'ifl',trlldion again rll'mOI"i~trot.. s the ber!(·fih c";f 0 cor;x-' nr(~.II\derpaJ
i" ,£',-1lJC;qg irnpocf 'wis;: le'n:I~, The trc) .. srnj~-5;(W I(J~; vaillc, .~'~(~·"i ~)n nl
l

W\~utf'f than 'he mClS'i :f]...., c,' '11: fref~'Jf.:nci(~:, ahov," 2'/) II .....

-162-
 10o_----- i
• l.", .. "

. ""'l'" P,.,,,,I

, • '. .'. .'~ d,

•
VI
VI
o
....J
C
(;

f-=
VI
c:: /
{1

.
/
'-
~.

/
, • , M[J~5 Low
~o - /

/'~

Il~:///
::'0 [-1......... 1_...-.l...-.....l.. ~"'\.l.--.l.! -..o.~1
1 ----.....
src 65
..II~__'___.a..I__"___l..__'_1 _
I
63 175 250 SOU leoo 2000 4000 BOOO
I reqll~nC"YI H?
/(Jr- I 1~1·: r

W
/~ Base Floo;

60~
':>
iu
__...I lIe 50
17.)
L.

..
-)

_0
~,

~,

0.-
r"-

0
c:,
r;
1/-)

0
(
<)
<'Cl ('I
:1
C-'
'iO -
-~ ,
'"
11 V
T'

\
U
c:
t._J ._-
I tl 'r'J','lm (0111"1
r;
,- ,111,j LJnr<i'rpl1rJ
t-
;---
J
lIe (,4
\
,-<U
0 \.:.
W L_J ,_,---'-. . .II--._l-..II---o..-..I-_J.....·'\ ._L
61 17') 750 S,JO I')~)() 1'01'0 .-1 (JOO
Frf'ql)e,'_:y, H!

-16J-
 PR 0 T0 TY PE 9 - D or j R

CONS TRIJCTION DE TI\ILS;

Lamination of' 1/4 " tempered hardboarrl (rn 1)' 1/;" g}'fJSurn wallboard ,rr, 7)
and 1" (';c,rr:ented ... ~ood ..havings (rnJ} (Tectum) in " wooden perimetel rrarn~,
with 1/8" tem?ered hard!:JclC1rd (m~) mounted C'1l 1/1" 'I( 1" x 1 II ~qUN~S ()f
PVC foorT1 tape. C0rT1rHes~ed n~opr~me grJ~kets Installp.d on the 0C',-'" r~orrl':'

ESTIMATED COST: (Unknuw~, )

PARAME TE f\ VALUE:.5:
M ~ ,S :bs/ft~
2
r l~ : 1.4 Ibdtt
tn, 1, .) Ib~'/hl

Sf( RATINC 4()

lhis con'tr"c.tio.l urC'JiJe~ llP STC rating ~reat~~r than thoJl of the! e,<~ri­
mentol Pr'1I'otype 1'1\ ,,,,,hich ir,'plie~ that either that the sec.ls -Nue mi.:rf,
eHie. iC1nt or th~,t I he cnr·~truetion method V'a!· superior. The riJti ng c:f tU.
is guod fOI Q sir"lgle dc)()r, oi1d could be effer:,.i·/,.Iy incremed b), the odc!i-
tion of a foyer. A~ ~uch thf' cl'\(Jr WOJlrl be well suited f0r f;;<terr':1
npo!icatir,n,
 ..... " ..
~
'-
...r====;
I •__ = ~ pe=' =--"

80
T 1
1
\

() (.~

co

vo
I • It
.'r >
.J I•
• •
r

v'
4 () t-i
.-
v'
(. "
:..J
~

~-

:' ()

I ~
,,,. L-L.-,-._L.
,_ L __ ..l-L...L. ! ! --.l ~.~_j.~.
f'j I~)<' ;'')() 'j,';() :noc; !nOO 40no 80 1
! rl'·1tJI·~r)'Y, H:

,; 1_ ., f '1 l
.;
".

c, Su~nmary of Pr~.cti c.;I Prototype Resu Its

Measured and predi cted resul ts of trClnsmi ssior 'I')SS for the practi cal proto-
types are presented in Table 6 in terms of the '. C rating and the trans-
mission loss in the speech interference range of frequencies. The first
point to be noticed is the generally good agreement between the mea!lured
C'nd predicted vl)lues. Prototype 2, a triple panel construction, cs
'lnsigned ~uccessfully meets the 20 dB requirement at all frequencies in
.e range 200 Hz to 4000 Hz, with an overall thickness of only 8 inches.
The other wall desi gned to m~et th~ 20 dB ff;qui rement, Prototype 7,
failed to do s:) because of t~e effect of coinr.idence in the concretE, ~o:1l?l.
From thi~ ond previous results on ~~~ panel strlJctures, if I)pp~ors that
the 20 dB requirement cannot be satisfied if one of the panels is of cor,-
cr~tE:, even though the overall transn,ission los5 is more than 20 dB in
ex(.p.ss of the transmission loss -:)f tile <::oncrete ponel.

MUI? : nteresti ng, however, are Prototypes 2 and 4. Prototype 2 is a load-

bearing party wall c.f extremely simple de$ign with an STC rating of 54
and 0 mass of only 7 lbs/ft z. Prototype 4 could be either a party or
e>terior wall, proviciing an STC rating of 64 with an overall thickness 0'-
only 5 inches. In both cases the '::osts are low.

TABLE 6

SUMMARY OF MEA~URED AND PRED ICTED VALUE:S OF TRANSMISS JON

LOSS FOR THE PRACTICAL ~OTOTYPES

, 1. Ir,l~r,()r 'N'.I11 4.2 .( - 1/0 un 45 045 50 50 I

2. ParlyWoll 7.0 7-1/B '.21 55 504 54 56
3. Porty wc;:1 17 8 2.18 70 n I 75 I :'7
04. ["trri"r't/fJll ;'S 5 11.34 66 64 ,1(1 fJ

5. ~""ri,~rWcl' 26 8-.;.'4
1
1.5? !JI 63 61 I U I

61 I ~ I
~,
I ~3 I
_~_1; J
'TrtJI~n'iBion lou of co"'drl,,/ion in th ... frt'qul'ncy renol' 1"0'11 imporlall' for spce~h i,../er-
fl'rl'!"C:~, i.e ... Ih .. NIO"" bunds centt'red,n 500, 1000 (lnd 2000 H~.

-166-
Prototype 1 i~ Of, excellent ;,lerior wall configuration wi th a mass of
only 4.2 Ibs/ft 2 and on STC roting of 45, which is similar to that for a
(,'ommor. staggered stud wall with 5/8-i nch gypsumboard - see Prototype H.

The wall and window ccrnbinntio:l C'f Prototype 6 provides an STC rating
of 61 which is .,nly 2 F-cinls !ess I'han I'hat of ~he wall alone. Note that
the effect of placing the two glass ponel!: :n the twc portiai I), isolated
walls result~ in optil'liur.1 perfomlOnce of the window vnit withcut the need
for resilient gaskeh. The door of Pro.otype ? gave on STC rating of 46
with the addition of good qual ity vinyi bulb seals.

Finally, the f!oo/ceiHr.~ configuration, Prototype 8, with ~tondord

woodtm joists and a floor loeded '....ith sand, provides an Impact Insulation
Class (lJ() of 50 with no c:o\'f'~ing. The addition of on indoor/outdoor
type carpet with on integrol rubber und:;r-pCld improve~ the l)C roting to
Q •... alue 0; 64" empha,i:.-;ing o"ce again the valu.., of including the carpel

as part of the strvcturp..

To see hr)w the!>e pr\Jctica! prLlTot;tpes conlpare with existing C'':''iI5tNct'cn~

(sed Table 7), the estimated cosh have: been plotted against the STC
I utin9 in Figu.e '19 for both types. The method for estimaHng the costs
was the some for both types of ':;onstrvctions. The general trend is clear;
the cost/effectiveness of the prototypes is superior to that of existing
constn.lction5 and improves relatively as the STC increases. In particular,
it appears that STC ratings in the rafl~e 60-70 con be obta:ned at a
significant reduction in cost from those structures in common use today.

An alternative method of comparing the prototype consl'r.Jcticn; with

existing types is to plot the STC rating against the total mas of the Ct'ln-
~truction - ~ee fi~l;e 80. Again, the dot,· for existing com, vctions has
been token from the HUD Noise Control Gui de (Reference 14; Three
nedJd ir f'\S -em he rr,aJe from Figure 80, nlJlTle Ii' =

• It is possible ....;th the new meth'lds to obtain STC ratings ~I;table for
internal walls -- see Prototype 1 - with a signiiico'1t reduction i,.
m05S from that of existing constructiom.

• High values of the STC rating - (,TC 60-70 -- C(1n be obtai:1ed with-
out excessive su~foce mass and with rf;osonoble overall wall th;ckn~$!.

• The STC rot:ng of the proctical const -uctiom increosp.> at a rate

approximately equal to 6 points for (J doubling of the moss. The
rating thu~ tallows the slope of the mas.~ 'ow, but is 10 to 12 points
gre~Jter than th~ STC rol'ing accorcling tc.l the mms cof 0 structure.

-167-
 TABLE 7

DEsc~:nION OF STANDARD COl'ISTRUCTIONS

INCLUDED IN rlGURE 79

l! Mc~s·
••
~t',_JO_....._ _. ~::iPtion ~~-bs-l-ft-l_)-II-~--II---4
s/ft
:TC 1
__
a 9" ihick brick wall witl, 1/2" plastel both sides. 100 57 2.52
b I DoulJle well of 4-1/2" brick lelll/es "llpalated by 2" air cavity -
no ries. I/!" plas/er on exposed surfoces.
100
54 L.n

C! Hollow dnd<!.r bl,;cks 4" x 8" x 16" with 5/B" ,onded gypsum
plaster both sid(.
36 46 1.33

I
I I
d
6" thi c.k concr,=te we-II wi th 1/1" plaster both Ii des,
5/13" gypwrnhoard and 1/2' solJlid-deadeni "9 board on both
BO 53 1.97

e Ii del of 2" x 4" wood .tu~, Iii in-;hes on center, two

10 50 1.62
seporott' 2" x 4" woc.d plates, noor and ceiling, spac~ 2"
opert .
f 5/8" ~rPwmboard c.n both sides of stogger.~ 2" x 4" wood studs,
16 inchlls on center. 0,.. loyer 2-1/2" foil-bockf'.td fiber gl.m 6.2 ..3 1.25
in cavity.
5/8" gyp~boord on both sides of common 2" To 04" woad studs,
9 7.2 J5 0.87
16 inches on center.
h 1/2" wood fiberboard and 1/2" sanCed gypsum plaster on hoth
12.6 <.2 I.-«l
sides d common 2" x 4" wood studs, 16 inr;hes on center.
3/B" gypsum lath and 1/2" sanded plCl'tel' on both ,id8' of
15 At J. 12
2" x -'" ,1IOOd IhJ.', r6 rnches on cen,er.
Double \ 'III with 4-1/2" thick bride leeves, 6" cavity (r'Kl ties)
120 1-2 2.90
\.. it~, 1/1" plaster on ,~ wood woolslalx mort"r.d to each wall.

.1:
k Double wull, 3-5/8" metul chanr-e I studs :14" O.c. wit+, two
iaye" of SIB" gypsum wollboord l\7I'Ii.,atrd. 1-1/2" Minerel II, S 1.80

1
!_ _:~~elt in cayity.
•
Inclusive of studs .
• ~__ L__ _

••
lobort.ltOf"Y data I'om Refp.mnc" .4 with the exception of conltruction f which
it " Wyle meOOlJremllnl
_ _ _ _ _ _• • • ,...l

-!68-
 3.00
0 Existing Wall uesigns (See T-:rb!e 7)
--'--------"1
o·J
• Pl"'lctical Prototype
Designs
Ob

00
2.50

- • Experimental
Prototype Desigrl~ ~
0 :J
c
u..
...IV bJi
•
a '2.00 8E
:)
[J Od
1/".
...IV Ok o.
0-
l: IIf
0 Oe -5
0
Q 1.50
Oh -A
.c-
....
'"f) Of
Oc ••
U OJ °2

1.00 .1
Og

J- _
1
0.50
30 40 <;0 60 Ie) 80
:;l( Ro!ing

Figure n. CO\t venus S Te Rating for E~j~ting and

New Wall Desigm

-169-
 gO
• existing Co'u;r!Jc·ions
OC
~ Practical Prototypes

9~~
~
o h?er;mento l iJrototypes 83
70 r 00 OF
,__________- - -
12 I d8
08

Trend of
~; !'.;au
lOW',
w Practical SK
\ II
Prototypes
/...---
~ • •• • ~.-;
• • •
:»
c
~50 Ii
•
I

'-J
o
v
~
..... ,
.1 ~
•
. •
• ••
•
•
"•
•

---~:
I

.. ,•
!
40 •
I! ~

•
• .:"
• • •
30 • •
• •
~ Standard Staggftred STud
. ~ r~.-l/ Wall Construction
,
20 I I I J ,

5 10 20 2 50 100
Me" of Construction, Ibs/ft

Figule 80. The STC Rating as a Function of the Moss for

E~isting and Prototype Wall COI1~tructions
4.0 eXTERNAL STRUCTURES

Increasing the transmission luiS of the f!xterior walls i:; only one method of
r~ducing noise levels in residences. A barner around a building or at spec:ific
locations around ~ b~Jilding can 015,' redlJce internal r10isft levels; of greater
importarice, however, i~ may also retllce the levels in the immediate outdoor
meas around the building, thus improvi,"'9 the local outooor nois'3 environment.
The results of a recent study (Reference )7) on the f8\Jsibility of soundproofing
hcmes near airports, gave ..:m indicatiot, ~hct if the local extemal noise levels
exc"Jed a certain vclue - opproximctaly 80 dB (SIL) in this case - r,o amount
of acoustical treatment to the building could rr.ake it satisfactory for living
because the external levels are ·00 high. The possibilit/ of using external
oorriers thus required furth", investigati~.

4. l ShJtlDll-JG BY ~RRIE~S

,-", !'"view of the publis'led literature ~how~ ~hat the inse,tion loss of barri~rs -
the difff:(,mce in dB between noise levels before and af~er the introduction of
the barr:"r - has been treated both experimentally and theoretically
(Refer/,nces 18, 19, and 20). Figure 81 (Reference 18) show!. experimental
dat':1 ,'aken on a semi-ir,finire :.creen in free space.

30 rm,/~
25

r-----.--.-----.., .

/
10

o .....1 _---J1..... - L_ _ " - - I .•.:-

.... t I I I 1
-0, , o O. I ] 5 10 20 50 100

N • 211~

Figur ' 81. Experimental ClJrve ('If Insertion Loss by a Semi-Infinite Screen
in Free Space as a Function of the °ororr'9ter 1"
(Refereflce 18)

-171 -
The horizontal scale is logarithmic in the (e·gion cof the nondirne:''H'ional di~tonce
,
parameter N > 1, but is altered to 011.:>'11/ a strai3nt line to pass through zero
to negative numbers c.f N. The condition fl)!' t-J = 0 e)l:~t~ when the
source, receiver and top of the barrier lie on a ~tl"oi9ht lil1p., TM theoretical
values of insertion loss given in Figure 31 are for the c:c.ndition where the
source and receiver are s:tuated in free space" I~ IS to bt": i"xpected that the
values will differ somewhat if reflections ITom t'he ground plane are taken into
account" The curve of insertion loss wi th fTequ,~ncy thtln exhibits maxima and
minima due to the efF..cts of interferer.ce betw..:lI~~n th~ direct and refl~cted paths.
In addition, if a barrier is situated close to the wall ef a building, reflections
fran: Ihis wall will reduce the t;ffective i,,~crtiorl ioss of the oorr:el"

A rT'eosuremf!nt progri:Jm was conducted to .'!valuate the acousti c performance

of b-.,r~;cn iocated close to large reflecting sur.:uces" The measurements were
taken using (] 1:6 scale model of a barrier with I] :'i~jd reflecting ground plane"
In SOrT'I,~ ca!i~S, the vertical bo~rier was modified to ind ude a 45 or 9C-degree
overhanJ. The effect of bock reflect;OflS from (] ser.onu barrier (i "e., hou~e
\Yall) was also studied. An t>lectrostotic' l.peoker was used w: th (] reverse horn
floring dlwm to (] l-inr.h oper.ing to approximate 0 point source of sound" The
me(]sur('rTler,t~ were token 'Jsing one-third c<:tave b<:mds of ror-dam noise centered
on the frequ~ncie:s given in Tobie 8.

TABLE: 8

OCTAVE BANi) CENTER FREQUEI"CltS -

FULL AND MODEL SCAlf

Model Scale '''PfJrax;mat.. full Scale

One- Third Octave Bond One-Tni rd 0ctove Bond
Center Frequency (Hz) Center Fre<1"""lcy (Hz)

2,500 400
4,000 630
6,300 1,000
10,000 t ,600
!6,OOO 2,500
'------
2.5,000 &-..
4,000 l

-172-
 The height of the rece;ving microphone above the ground corresponded to
3.5 feet in the fuJI scale dimensions. This value remained constant I'hrough-
out the series of measurements. figure 82 is a diagram of :J typical T,1easure-
ment configuration showing the loeatlon, of the barrier (with overhang) and
the rear reflect; n9 surface.

1t.f1eeting
Noise Source

r- -L---- "A' ----------- --r~-- 17' -

SUMac'!!

I e~
,
I ')..
0.5' to 2-4' I ./'
, ~~-
I Iord.r --~ -..___ " 1
-... 3.!l'

L i 'If '1' 1/7/ '! '7 '/'7 '/ '( f!iT7T7-:'-:I"'P.,..,.....-r+r1'7l',."..,.-,.~r-y'T'

R.eei"in~ Mir.rophone

Figure 82. Configuration for Barrier Meosuremenn -

Full Scole Dimens:ons

Table 9 shows the full scale dimensions of the conf'iguroti')ns that were tested.
The receiving microphone was used to IUrve)l the area between th~ barrier and
the reflecting surface to deterrr.ine the variation in ooi56 luvel. For 0 given
configuration, typical variations at various ree.iver locat:om were in the
order of ±2 dB. This amount of variation was observod for conditions with
and without the reo' reflector. A standard receiwr loc;ution was then chosen
5 feet in full scale to 'he rear of the burrier.

The rewlts of the mt'!osurem.,nh are show-. ~n Figures 83 through 89. In each
cal.e, the data is presented to ~ow the insertion loss provided by the barri"r
·,."ith and without the feur reflectir,g surfaces.

-173-
 TABLE 9

EQUIVALENT FULL SCALE DIMENSIONS OF

SOURCE-l(ECEIVER-BARRIER CONFIGURATIONS TESTED

--- ~

-
Height i" reet Overhang
Confi gurcti on Front Rear Angle Length
Number Sourc.e Receiver Barri er Barri er e Feet
- ...... _--
1 .5 3.5 tl - - -
2 .5 3.5 6 24 .. -
3 8 3.5 (, - -
4 8 3.5 6 2A - -
5 8 3.5 8 - - -
6 B 3.5 B B - -
I 8 3.5 - B - -
I
B .5 3.5 8 - 4:t l:
9 .5 I 3.5 B 24 45
c ..)

1O
II
B
f)
I 3.5
3.5
B
8
-
8
4sO
45°
I 6
6
12 8 3.15 8 24 45° 6
13 24 3.5 B - 4{J .s
0
14 24 3.5 8 24 45 6
15 t; 3.5 8 - 9('° 6
0
16 B 3.5 13 8 90 (;

3.~
17
-.-l 8
- ~
8
-
24 90° 6

-174-
.'. :?O .-

Fi8ure g3.
!
3 10
Sound AHe,1uat i on by Bmrier
:. Corfigulotions 1 and?
i
6
.:::
~\ource Heigrr .:: O.S fed
I
o~

L b:J

10

•
"
]
Figure 84. ~ '0
i
AttenlJotiNl by Barrier I
~
Configurations 3 o,ld 4.

,I
~

')olJrcc Heigh~ 0 fcct

l..L-..._L~~ .L"-J...J. , I ! ! I ',-,_ ~

., 12$ }~ :100 10il\ ~ooo .v.IiJO " (,(,(,
'-"CY. ,~.

(I}
0-'-0
7J
.'
,7-'
CtJln(j~U(''I';~11 J

-175-
 rigui'e 85.

50u-jd Attenuoti"n by
C o'lfigc'rotions 5, 6 and
7. )OUlCe HE.'ight =: f~r.:;t a

J7t;-r G-,"8'~.~1
0-'")8' II!) :!t. _. ,
/ / " " , ~
Conf'ig.Jrction .5 C~'ia:.Jrt1tion 6 Co,.,tiQuration 7

~~-.-..,-r- -o-r~"T" I~.,....-r'f ~'j"""""""""

/

.....
Figure 86.

J
Sound Attenuation bl
C:onf;~lurotions B (lflcl9.
).,urce H.~ight 0.':] teet
0'-

_L~ '-'-......... j~.L I , L...l.....L-...e-.L_--oI-.-i.-__

IU 17 ~ ] 50 !oOO 1000 JtO) 4f)(J/1 81-)')
F..-q.-..;y, H.

1.,
l:
'~ 6'
,...... .., I'
"/
r~~"r.~.H'OttOfl 8
,/
';L:T/ .
-176-
...
"~.
-'
Jrp. 87.
~ !O -
i ~ounu /~tte('u(]tion 8/
Ccr.figu·atiol1S 10, ] i
and 12. Sourcp.
Height 3 fep.t

T7h?~
9' 0---0

Lon'l: ",HIll" 1')

6' ,

8Lt
/ / ' tJ
8'
/ .
'<il

Ca,,'ig'Jrat,t)n 1'::'
.4'

-......,.---. -r-~,_,--T- --rl

....,
20 -~,
j
S iO
i

JOIJnG I\tiPfluution by ]
(' onfiqurol i'Jm l~! (l"r! 0 -
14. (,OUfC(' ~ieiq~"
/4 f.;pl
I
L-l.~ I I I ~. ~_L~......J.~_~ ..L_.......... -L-,-l. ..L
63 1B 250 YJO 'v'-~) l(lUli "".nJ AO())
F,.qU40"<Y. II.

r.
~

-177-
..
"'-'

c
c
~I SUu,,(~ I,,-trenuaj,jon b~"
Cor,.lguraticn5 15, ;6
I Clnd 11. Souu'c
I
o Height- 8 f~et

'1
_l~_ ~_.l..,
Ll i :.£ 5
•... J. -,--,_.J..
t '~._' 500
~ 1._-LJ._~~1-_ ~-Ll
__ ...
\("); mc·u .:.r ,)l,J
..
,1:.."00

• TIll: calculated values of insertion los5 for the barrier nre similar to tile
meCJsurcd vnlues for each configurotion except ot tre4uE:ncies ;:,tfected
hy l>ltNfe(l:.:,,~e between the tlirc,:t 'lrId reflected pothL Tllest! dis-
crepancies ure caused b,,' the presence at tt-e ground olnnp. which is " .... t
rnn5irler~.1 ill rhe g",JUflCj plon~ ;rt oc1uces rnCl.<irno
tht, simrtlc theory.
w·rJ ..,ir,::T'() in tll'-" in~('r'i,~n los~ oJt freqL'€~r::ies where the r<;!f1ec.'io fl o; orr.
f)ut-of-phm e and in-phase, rp.spectively. The magni tude of the (ffp(:t
incrcm.!s as the height Clf tl--e sourcE' above thp. gr.:>uf1d inr:teOH'j,

• The presence of the r"!CJr rci"lp.c.tor redl/ees th" in'Nt!O'" Ims pfOvideL- J,
the I,arrier 010'11-' ~.)' i tv t3 dB.

• H,e ins":rticn loss dCCier:,es os the h:~igh' of the rear re 'ec.~in~J SlldfJcP'<,
incr('o~ps. Thf'r~ will, ot ('OlJ(Sf!, IJe a limiting height obove
which no
fudher reduction;'; obtained. In thE' _~I.lSe uf ~ingle sfory dwelling;, the

-178-
 maximum height of the reflecting wall is approximate:y 10 feet, so the
data for 8-foot reflecting surfaces is applicable. For high-rise buildings
with balconies, the insertion loss is small unless the length of the balcony
is considerably greater than its height. AI' low frequenci\!s, th.; effect of
a rear reflector was negative in some cases so that the noise level
increased rather than decreased as a result of introducing the barrier.

e The insertion loss for a!1 cor_figurations decreases markedly as the height
of source above the ground increases. As a result, (l borrier affords
little protection from the noise of passing aircraft.

• With the source 8 feet above the ground and 4 feet (full scale) f,oIT' the
burrier, computed and measured values of the insertion loss for configura-
tions *10 and #15 (see Table 9) are both V~ty simi lor to the computed
values for a barrier t~f height 14 feet. Thu~, there appears to be little
justification for ,-he lJse of an inclined barrier or overhang such as
illu~trated in Figure 87.

In summary, a barrier located near 0 building can provide a ~ignifican' reduction

in external noise lev,~ls, provided that the source is close to the ground, In all
ca~es, the reductiol1 will be less than that obtained without the rear refll~cting
surbce. However, the effect of reflections from this surface co be ·~duced by
I

tht! application of an outdoor absorption material suel. as cemented wood shavings.

Thus, it is possible to imp"ovc the outdoor noi~ environment and in so doing
per~ops increase the satisfaction that can be obt\lined by improved noi!e reduc-
tion provided by the bui Iding structure.

-179-
5.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The principles and techniques that pertain to the design of building elements
providing high values of ~ransmission loss ~ave been presented. Not I'JII the
techniques are new; some are developments of ex~sting methods, a'ld some
have been usfld quite extensively in the past. These techniques have been
validated by means of a series of laboratory tests conducted on experimental
and practical prototype constructions. The cost/effectiveness of the practical
constructions has b6en compctred to that for 6xistlng constructions in common
lIse ~oday.

The principle conclusions fron. ~his study are as follows:

• The transmission 10$5 choracterisric5 of single panels and multiple panels

with sound bridges can be determined accurately by means of a set of
simple expressions - see Section 2.4.

• The design expressions given in Section 2.4 can be applied directly to

the optimum design of building elements providing high values of trans~
rl:ission loss.

• With careful design, the 20 dB requirement can be achieved in a

pmctical multiple panel construction; however this is at the expense of
high melSs or great thickness. Consequently, condructions meeting the
requirement are limited in use 10 higL noise level areas.

• From the standpoint of transmission loss performance, cost and total mass,
the practical prototype constructions developed in this program are
superior to constructions that I'lre in common use today.

Perhaps one of the major outputs of thi:; program however is a fuller understand-
ing of the process of sound transmission through structures. It is always possible
to refine this knowledge, but, since the real world of bl,ilding design requires
advances in technology which can provide adequate and improved sound insula-
tion between dwellings at a :easonable. CGst, at this time it is probably more
important to assess the perforrrance ot the improved constructions under field
conditions.

As a result, it is recommended that somf' of the constructions described in thh

report should be incorporated in a bui Iding demonstration program so that their
acoustical characteristics can be compared to those of existing constructions.
At the same tiMe, the structural and fire resistance properties of the new con-
structions should be examined, and modifications rl~ade if necessary.

Preceding page blank

-181 •.
":ome ..,.; she ;C'ns~n·cti .)l,S Je~..:ribed and tested in this prog. Jm make ~se of
mc.;·erlal~ or material combinations that are not commercially available at the
prb~.'t 'i,..41. Particular caies in point include mass-loaded and laminated
pa~leis- lilt. methods of utilizing these two techniques in the constructions
tested are c."n:,idered to be realistic and cost/effective, but because they have
not ot.el, ·r:ed out in field imtallations, H is prem~ture to state that these are
the b~~" :lle~hods. The ph)'$ical properties req.:irecJ of the component materials
have been (.xamined in the main body of the re:,ort and can be considered as
performance requi rements for future desi gns. It remains for industry to develop
new material$ end material configurations SCI ·hat the perf/)rmoncG requi rements
can be met at low cost.

FincH)', the simple expressions ~hat hove been developed to describe !'he trom-
mi s5ion loss characteristics of buildin" structurb"i Clre extremely amenable fcr
inclusion in a computer program that could be used to design constmctions to
specific performance requirements. For exomple, the input of parameters such
as mo~imum allowable mass, overall thickness, roquired STC rating or preferred
materials could be sufficient for such a program to define edtemative structvres.
Alternatively, the reverse procedul'A. (;OlJld also b-e adopted, and the STC raling
or required mass determined given ",~~rtain material constraints. A versatile com-
puter progrc,m such as this might prOl/e involuable to HUD as an aid to designers
and builrl~~ in the design of all types of constructions, from high-rise apartments
dow,.. to ~lngle family residence5. tv\oreover, it need not necessarily b!! a com-
plex program reGu;ring sophisticated computer facilities.

-182-
I .,
,~ ~

REFE~ENCES

1. Cremer, L., Akustisc~ ~., Vol. 7, p 81. 1942.

2. Sharp, Ben t-I., "Transl'" .,ior, nf Sc:;nJ Ihrough Structures - 8o~ic Prindpl~, "
Training Cour~e in Acn: "i', r. '~nvironments and S~r\lctural :tesponse, Goddard
Space Flight Center, NP.~ t: I 1970.

3. AS TN• .itandard Reco':l. ~l'l~1od Practice for laboratory Met1Surernent of Airborne

Sovnr: T",nsrr,issi",," L'1;.5 nf r~ i1dirlg Partitions, E 90-70, ASH/\ Standards,
Part 1<1: ~'~"':'r!?!mb:,! 1~ ,0.

4. Josse, R. and ~mure, C., W(ransmission Du Son Par Une Parai SilTlple,"
Acustico, YIJI. 14, pp 266-280, 1964.

5. Leissa, Arthur W., "Vibration of Plotes," NASA SP-160, Notional Aero-

naulic~. uncSpace Administration, Wash., D.C., 1969

6 S~aip, ,~, H. and Beauchamp, J. W., "The Effect of Damping Treatments on

tht: Transmissioo Loss of Pane!s," Conference on the Damping of Yibrations,
louvuin, Belgium, 1967.

7. Kurtze, G. and Watten, B. G., "New Wall Design for High Transmission Loss
or High Damping." J. ACI')ust. Soc. Am., Vol. 31, Nc. 6, June 1959.

8. LondonI' A., ''Tron~mission of Reverberant Sound Thrc.ugh Double Walls,"

Blireau ,;)f Standards Journal, Resear~h Paper RP 2058, Vol. 44, January 1950.

If. Sharp, B.ti. and Beauchamp, JoW., "The Transmission Loss of Multilayer
S~rvctllres, "J. Sound Vib., Yol. 9, No o 3, pp 383-392, 19690

10. Udey, W.A., et 01., "The Use of Absorbent Material in Double-LeofWcil

Const,..;c~ions,"J.SoundVlb., Vol. 9, 1-..10.1, pp 90-96,1969.

11. Sabine, H.J., ''Uses of Glos$ Fiber Insulation for Sound Contro! in Re~ident:ol
Constructiofl," Presented at (J Symposium.xl Household NClise, 80th Meeting
of the Acoustical Society of America, Houston, Texus, Ncvember 1970.

12. Heckl, M o, Acustico 9, p ~/8 (1959).

13. Cremer, L. and Heckl, M., Kmperschall, Springer-Verlag, Bc:!in, 191"-,;'.

-193-
14. Berendt, R.D., Winzer, G.E., and Burroughs, C.rL, "A Guide to i~irbomt!
Impact, and Structure Borne Noise - Control in Mu!tifnmily Dweli;ngs, II
FT /T5-24, U.S. Dept. of He'using & Urban Development, Wash., D. C.,
September 1967.

15. ASTM Tentative Claslii fication for Determination of Sound Transmissicn Clou,
E413-70T, Ameri can Society for Testi.19 c' d Materials, Standards Part 14,
Noverr.ber 1970.

16. National Co.,struction E~timotor, Eighh '!nth Edition, Craftsman Book Co.,
lOS"Angeres, Ca., 1975-71.
17. "Final Report on the Home Soundproofing Projeci for the Los Angelt"s Depart-
ment of Airports," Wyle Loborr.Jtories Consulting Report WCR lo-l, 1970.

18. Maekowa, Z., "Noi,;~ Reduc.Hon by Sc.rt!\'J!n of Finite Si2'e," Memoirs of the
Focultyof EngineNing, Kobe Univ., No. 12, 1966.

19. Kurze, U.I. alld Anderson, G.S., "Sound Attenucti.,)n by Barriers," Applied
Acoustics, Vol. 4, p 35, 1971.

7.0. Scholes, W.E., Solvidge, A.C., and -~:r~!ln,', J.W., "Field Pe::rformance oto
Noise Barrier,"J. SoundVib. V::Jl. 16, N,O, ~t, pp627-642, 1971.

-184-

• • • zetn r
• Of'
 APPENDIX A
DETERMINATION OF THE T/{ANciMISSION IMPEDANCE
OF A SII':GLE PANEL

Consider an infinite panel situated in the plane z = 0 with thE: coordinates of any
poi"t designated by (X, y). The eqlJation for bending wa...·es Oil the panel, including
tj,e effects of :;hear and rotary inertia, can be wl'itten as follows (Reference A n:

(~ 1)

where
2?
\)2 -=: the l,oplacion operator +
, 2
oy

p ::: densit; of panel material

m

h _. pane I thi cknes~

IJ- shear modulus of panel rooteriol

B = bending stiffn~ss of poroe!

6p = sound pressure diffl;!rential across the panel

~ paMI Jisplacement

h wi I bej cssume~; that the panel is subject to excitotion by on incident 3ir'lIsoidol

plonl~ acoustic: , .J .... t: of the fOl'm:

p(x,y,z) p F(x, y,:.:) (AI'

o

A-I
where

F (x , y, z) ~ ex p [ - j k x sin 8 cos ¢ - j k 'f 5; 1". e 5i n ¢ - j k z cos 8 J

k ~ wove number = lol / c

c = velo;:ity of sound in air

9,~ -- angles of elevation and 'Jzimuth rf:,>pectively

A~ 0 result of thi5 drivin9 force, the ve lor. ity of the pQl1el ~ i II be of the form:

u(x,y) - u F(x,y,O) (A3)

o

SilT,ilarly, the acoustic pre:>1lHP di;;'sl.::ntial exist:ng between the slJrfoc.es or the panel
wi i I ~'e of the form.

L\ p (x , y .. 0) -: ~ Po F(x I y , 0 ) (A4)

IJlld I'he panel velocity (~(Jn t-e ....Ir;t~en as:

(A5)

lnseding Equotions (A3), (A4) ond U... 5) into (A 1) and pufoPlling the operrJti~n:; w:th
the coperator 7'1 result-.,; ill the f)Xpres5ion :

I P h2~, 2(
~--"' l-'~
£) k ] lip .-• hJ 2 2
"'n ~ BIe JI" fl m
I Bk 4 lin
• • 1'1' ." 1].
.,,1 4
I" .. ' ...
---"1'- -
I '
q - (...,-,,-
I t ~.
) '" k Fl +
fo'
,'-
- fl
'.,
" ..
\ 0
J /1
!J " l fJ
6.?o

(A6)

A-2
 T';.

'i'
'f

~
{j
!
1
j
The specific trummissi()n impedance Z ef the pone I is defined (see Section 2. 1) as the
.•f
ratio of acoustic pressure cJifferential between the faces to the normell panel veloc.ity, "
i.e. ;

IIp
o
z = u
a

Rearrangi, J the terms in Equa~ion (Ab) thus gives CJrl expression for the impedmce Z
os :

(A7)

where

B-

E .. Young's Modulus for th lllel material

r; ". i~~on'~ Ratio

If the thidne5~ h of the panel is muc!, sr~oller tIl/oil' ~J wO·IE'.lengt·" then:

w h <.. <:.

and I:: qua; ion (I-' 7) car, b~ npproxilrloted '::>y thl;' exprc!,sion:

3
..,
,- 'I
./
~l PIn
I
1 -
Bw
--

C
•
~In
• A n
"
(A8)

which is thf~ familiar expression for the tronsmisslon impedor.ce of a thin p<.mel.

'. A-3
Retum:ng to the more general expression of Equation (A7), the denominator is dom-
inated by the first two terms except at very low values of 9 where a minimum is
e'l(hibited. Hl')wever, at low valul'ls of 9 the second term is very small. Therefore,
the deno:r.inator can bp. approximated by neglecting the third term. In th~ numerator,
the second term in the right-hanJ brucket is much less in value than the fir'$~ again,
except at low angles of incidence. However, low angles of incidence are of major
imoortancE: only at frequencies below coincidenCf'ii at these frequencies, the
right-hand bracket can be ignored in r.:ompari son to the moss term in the left-ha:ld
braclc:et. As a result, it is possible to neglect the second term in the right-hond
bracket. With these appro:l(imations, it is possible to express Equation (A7) to a
got:\d approximation for the generIJI case as:

Bw sin4 e
3
-----
Zc_·~wph-J
c oC (,LA 9)
J m
I- Bw~ si n2_§.
f.I c 2 h

j wp h + (A 10)
m

where ZB is th~ l.Jending wove impedance

nnrl can be shown to be the sheor wove irn!>edcJnce.

L\ltho~gn thi~ rp.sult is oppr01<imate, it :) useful since it provides a qUI I·tnh .... e insight
Illn the mechanis,,, of sound transmission through thick ponels. As presented In
Fquatiol (A9), the impedance consists of {1 mass term in series with the parallel co:n·
binat:,.,,-, of bendir,y and shemir.g .'1ove impeda.'lCeL The rotio of the bendi"9 to :iheClr-
ir'g !<'cve impeda.'lces i~ maximum for grazing incidenr:fl and i~ given ~s:

A-4
..

(A 11)

Thus) for panels in the frequency range where the thickness is r'1vch smaller than a
wavelength r thl';; ~p.nding impedance is smaller than the shearing impedance" Since
the two am effectively in parallel to one another, the bending impedance pr"domin~tes.
This will occvr for all pan81s at low frequencies and for thin panels at high frequencies.
Under these conditi,ons, the panel impedance wi" be as g:ven in Equation (AS). Con-
versely, ill the frequency range where the thickness is much greater than the wavelength,
the shearin£ impedonc-e will ;,redominat~.

txornination of Equations (A 10) ':lnd (A 11) ~how~ thet tor the parall,,1 combina~ion of
bending al.d she'Jr impedances to be withi" 10 percent - approximately 1 dB in terms
of the tromrnission loss at freql..encies above coincidence! - of the value of the bendina
impedance.' "Ione, the condi~ion

>.. > ( 7.7 ) h

B r=cr (A 12)

must be satis':ied, wh~re AB is the wavelength of bcr.din:-, wO'les on the pon' I Thus,
f.)r ':onerel'e (cr <== 0.15), shearing effects will become evident at freqllencie .. ,here
the bennintl wtlvelength beuJmes less than the quantity 9h. The conditiOfi give" in
EqlJation (/I 12) can be restated ;n tprms of a limiting freql'E'ncy ~L' above which
,Ileoring NO'/e. preJominate and below which bending wove~ predominate. This
! ;rniting freQlJenry is gi len by the expression:

rhis v;:Jlue fo· th'l" limiting fr~quen"y agrees well with measllred resuits for conuete
panel, - s"e \:igure 6. At frequencies greater than fL' the tronsmission impedance of the
panel Ni II be:

A-5
 ~.hw .. in2e
z ;'~j
jWP m h w. J
c2

::::
j <oJ" m h [ 1 - ( :' )',;n' e] (A 13)

N'lCre c
S
c:: (j,J/p m)1 / 2 is the v~locity of ~hear waves on t:,e panel. The expressio:l
!=liven in Equation (A 13) i.,dicates that the panel impedo.1ce will be zero for a single
angle of incidp-nce As given by;

as - arcsin
( C
C,' ) (A 14)
.,

If L~_ then As is irrla9inary and the imperlance will bl. nonzero for ail angles
uf incidence. Also, the CO:ldition c, < c implies tL,'Jt the cha:lge from bp.ndinq to
':,eor:ng wn"es occurs or a frequency less thon the critical freqlJency; hence coin-
cidence cannot occur. ThiS is therefore the epti'num coodttiort. If C . c, not I)'-dy
s
will (;oincid~nce occur, but 0 zero ""ill bfJ evident at an angle 8; given by
Equation (A 14), so !hat the transmission loss for thick pan~ls at freGuencies ~relJter
than the critical frequency does not increase with freq~enr;y as rapidly as that for a
"hin panel.

With l·he l,~l' ,t the expressions derived in this Appendi~ il is rossihlc to E'-..;tf'nd the
vnlidity of the simplE' thco~y of transmission loss-os reorf'senterl by f4uotion (A8)-
to hi ~hcr frcquer'cies where the c.·onel thi ckr.ess is cornporable to the structureborne
wavelength. There are however additional wave types - such as Rayleigh wuves
,..,here the Vf'lociti.·s of the two faces of the panel are pot the somp. - n'Jt considerp'r1
j'l the above treatment that moy limit thl;' validity of the e)(pre~siom when the panel
th:r.krc5~ qi(!otly cxc.eerls the wavelength (Rcfewnce A 2).

~[FFRENC[S

I I. Mirlrlli!l, R. D., '1nfluence 01 Rotary II1P!tio rmrl '~h,.or 'J11 ~lpXllrol M"tinn ,,1
r:lJ~tic. PIOIf:'-., ",J. Appl. MI~ch" Vol. 18, pp 31-38,1951.

1\ (~l'mer, L.,"Bemerkllng lur /\usbreitlJnq von Biegewelll'll 1'1 Stnbcll unn rlntlpI1,'
7. anqf'w. Math. Mech. ~d. 21, Nr. 5, October 1943.

A-6
 APPENDIX B
THE TRANSMISSION lOSS OF A FINITE SINGLE PANEL SUB...'l.( T
TO REVERBERANT SOUND FIELD EXClTATlON

The normal method of deriving an expression for the lransmission coefficient 1'G of a
single panel is to consider a plano wave inciden~ ta the panel at a given angiE!,
whereupon u-.ing the concept of imp..,dance, the expression given in Equation (1) Clln
be obtained. To det6rmind the trunsmission coefficient for excitation by a rever-
verant sound field, it is assumed rhat all angles of incidence are equally probable
and that the average value of the coefficient i~ given by integ"(1tin~ ie 'liulliplied
by 011 appropriatt: .'feighting foetor over all angles in the rCl~'ge 0 to n/2. Wh'!n
the tr"nsmi~!'ion los;; is obtained by imerting the result ef the integration into
Equation (2), it is found that the result is usually about 3 dB I()wer ~han the Illeosured
valu~s. The agreement between the calculated and measurer, resul t: can be i mprovf!u
by arbitrarily limiting the integr':1tion range from 0 to fI~ (~J., < n/7.) w~lere 81 is
chost"n simply so that the agreement IS good. It is fOlmd that different laboratories
require different values of e.z for the calculated results 10 'Jgree with th..>se mea5ured
e
i" the' lboratory. The vol ues of i used by vl"Jri Ol s work!'r. ronyp.s from 7ao up to
c
dS • lhc. explanation tha~ is usually given to justify this empiriccd correcti:m is that
the sound field in a reverberation chamber is not totallv t.i;fuse and that linle sound
energy j~ incidenr to the panel at graLing angles ()f incidellr.c However, thue
appears 10 be no experi mental justi fi cation for this msumrtion.

The problem of the ongle of incirle:-,ce occurs again 'Nhen con_iocrin!l the traI1smj~.;jon
I"ss of a double pOnel. At loy: frcl:iuC'!ncies ir J double panel, tho:! rnasses of the two
panels combinl?' with the stiffness.F th, oir trapped in the cavity to produce
a resonancE'. For a plane sound waw~ incIdent at en tl"gle B, the frequency f at
O
which this resonance occurs is given by the eXp"E'ssh",:

(B 1)

where m j~ the m~s of thfl r_mel~ . o>Sl/rned p.Clual --. ond d i\ !he panel ~pacin~.
It is important to note thot ~I,e value of the resonant fr~quenc:y is dependent on thf!
'1"gl(' of incidence of the sound waves. This rtlf!ans that th~re is a differeni "... sonant
r.·l!quenc.y for every angle of ir·c.idence. Si"c~ the trcmsrr.ission lun of a d()lJhl~ p<lllel
is low oj' thp. frequency of this re~ooonce, it would oe expected thot low 'I"Jlues wOl)ld
be obtained at all frequencie5; in fad, t!1is is the result obtained if the integrati':>n
is caned out. Thi'i i\ not born out bl meoswed re'iults. even when there

B- )
~.

is little or no absorption in the cavity, the transrr.!ssion loss does not fall below values
given by the mus~ law.

It would therefore ':Jppear t!,at there Ilre some incor.siste"cies in the simpl" th~ory of
sound transmission loss which can be eliminated OIltl'f in the case of single panels by
the opplkation of an err.piricai ~orrection factor. The simpl"! theory does, of course,
t,j~·.sume that tha parlels are of inFi~1te laterol dimensIons. At low frequencies, the
majority of panels tesl'ed in trQnsmi$si'()I'l loss facqities are not .... ery large compared
to the bending wavelength, therefore they cannot be considered as infinite. In this
C(JS(. the resooant frequ~ncies or modes of the panel and the coupling of the incidence
~ound wuves ~o these rr,odes must be tc!bm into considerotiOll.

Th", tr smission of sO'Jnd through a finite singie panel has been treC"ted in the pub-
I1sher i'erature (References BOJ. 132). In Re ference B1, a classical approach i~
adopted hy considering a plane wcve incident to 0 pane! in a baffle; the solution
is obtnined in matrix form. In Reference 82, the paroe/ is taken to be the common
wat! between two reverberation chambers. The solution is determined by evaluating
the coupling between the sound fields in both rooms and the ponel. An approximation
in this, solution is that the sound pressure on the incident side of the panel is much
greater than that on the receiving side. Presumably thE' solut;on i5 valid on Iy for
par1(.ls of !!igh transmission loss, although how high has yet to be t:jetermined. At
h:~lJenci\es b,~ low the criti cal frequency, both methodll give simi lor results. In this
f~'equency range, n,,: major portion of sound energy is transmitted by forced vibra-
tion of the peine I rather than by resonance vibration. It also turns out that the major
trcnsmissio o 's from sound energy that is inci~ent at small CIlgles to the normal of the
panel. The! expression for the transmission loss given in Refere'lce 82 \s

Tt.(w) - 20 log (~)

, pc, - 10 log rl43 + "In
1 (2f)]
j;t (82)

when~ Ii f is the bandwidth of the iloise ~,ignal used for testing. If ene-third oc~O"e
~CJnds of noise ore util;7.~dl then E1Uotion (B2) becomes:

TL(IJ) '. 20 log (ii~c ) f f

c
iB 3)

Thus the "effective" mass of a single panel for f)~ovjding s,')Und tronsrniuion Iali at
.. frequ!!ncies below the critical ITequency IS a factor ')f 1.8 less tMn the nctual mals .

8-2
At frequencies greater than the critical frequency, the transmission loss is quite
dependent on the ir.temal losses in the panel. In this frequency range, the tran ..-
mission loss is given by the expression - see Reference 82:

TL(l.l) -. 20 10
g (~)
2pc
+ 10 log (2'7
11
~)
We
f> f c (B4)

where 1'1 is the loss factor for the pc.nel material. This expressior, is identical to
that derived by Cremer (Reference 83).

The expressions given in Equations (83) and (84) give values of transmission loss that
a!:lree well with the measured values - see Figure 3. Equation (83) is valid only at
frequencies less than approximately one-half the critical frequency (1/2 fc)' At
frequendes between 1/2 f e and f c resonance transmissiO"l Ollsumes a greater
importance in determining the transmission loss and analytical expressions do not
seem to give good agreement with the measured results. Unti I more ar-curate expre!,-
sions are available, an approximate method that can be used to predic:t the trans-
mission loss in this frequency range i~ to de!;cribe a straight line betw(:en the value
of transmission loss at the frequency 1/2 fe (Equation B3) and the value at the fre-
quency Fc (Equatio;, 84). It should be noted that this is only approximate.

REFERENC[S

81. Sewell, t.C., "Transmission of ReverLerant Sound Through a Single-leaf

Par:ition Surrounded by an Infinite Rigid Baffle," J. Sound Vib., Voi. 12,
Noo 1, pp 21-32, 1970.

82. Josse, R. and lamure, C., "Tran~lTlissjon Du Son Por Une Paroi Simpie,"
Acustica, Vol. 14, pp267-280, '/964.

B3. ':re·ner, l., Akustische Z., V:lI. 7/ p 81,1942.

B-3
 APPENDIX (
TH E TRANSMISSION LOSS OF A DOUBLE PANEL

Starting with the fCHlliliar expression for the transmission coefficient of on infinite
double pallel, this Appendix contains a derivation of the transmission loss of a finite
double panel when excited by 0 revetberant sound field. In this derivation, use is
made of the results for single panels discussed in Section 2. 1.3.

The transmission coefficient r for a sound wave incident at '-n anlle H to the rtor-
mal of an ;l1fi"ite dL'uble paneris given by the expression (R~I'{tt:n:e (1).

re := 1 1 + (X + X)
I 2
+ X X (1 _ e - j
I 2\
a, -
I
7 (( 1)

where
Z
I , 2
~:os e
X
I, 2

Z -- tran.mission impedances of panels I and 2

I, 2

a - 2k d .cos e
K = 2!fVc

d panel separation

At low frequencies, where the wavelengrh of sound is much greater than the panel sp.para-
tion d, Equation ((1) cor, be written as:

_2
((2)

,'\t frequencies I:-(~Iow the critiol frequerlcy, the impedance of the panels is given by:

1 -. j (,u m (C3\
I, 2 I, 2

where mi and m 1 ore the masses of tile two panels, In this freque;,cy range, Equation
((2) con be written as:

(-1
Preceding page blank
 -2

T
B
= 1 + cosB ((4)

Ti,e expression given in Equation (C4) is exactly similar to that ,;! Equation (3). The
double panel acts a~ (J single pnnel of mass (m 1 + m 2 ). In Section 2. 1.3 and Appen-
dix B, it is shown that the transmission loss of a finite single panel excited by a rev"r-
berant sound field is given by the expression of Equation (6). I.,
the same way, the
transmi~5iQ" less of a fil"'ite double panel at very low frdquen.:ies is gh"en by tne expres-
sion:

(C5)

where M :=: m\ + m 2

At higher frequencies, b:Jt stiH under rhe conditj,,)~ that the wavelength is less thon the
panel separation ,:,;, t;,?'exr:':Jnenticl term in Equation (C 1) can be expressed as:

-j a
e -ja

In this frequency range, the th ird term of Equation (C 1) fClpidly assumes major importance
and the transmission coefficient is given as:

(C6)

~lnd

(-2
 EqlJa~!on (':.7) indicates that the trarb.'tniuion loss of thft ~uhle panel construction il
equal to the SUrfl of the transmission 1(»,81 of the two component panels plus - or more
usually minus - Cl contribution for the effect of the cavity. The contributions from
the two panels to the total transmission lo'U are therfJforr: effectively independent.
Taking into account that for the transmission of sound ot frequencies beiow the criti~al
frequency, the most important angles 6 are those up?roaching normal inc;idence,
i.e.,6 =: 0, the transmission loss in this frequency j'onge is given by the expression:

or TL -.; Tl + TL + 20 log (2 k d) (C9)

I Z

where 'iLl and Tl a~e the transmission losses of thf'! single parlels 1 aod 2.
z
At frequencies where the w:Jvelength is equal to or smaller than !'he ponel se,xJrotion,
Equation (C 1) indicates the presence of on harmonic series of cavity resonances, the
first of which occurs at a frequency f1 given by:

c
fI = IT

The effect of these resona'1ces can be greatly dimlnishecl by the addition of .:Jbsorption
rnaterial in the cavity. Thus, to a first approximatirJn, the cavity resonances can be
ignored and the tronsminion less in this region dehrmined by allowing the bracket
containing the exponential term in Equation (C 1) to as.sume ih maximum value. In this
manner, with the third term of Equation (C}) dominating the expreuion, the trans.1'lission
coefficient for the double ponel at frequencies where the wavelength is small comparod
with the panel spacing is given by the expression:

(C 10)

(-3

__ ,_.... t)
t •• 3m' nt t FM .n
M
 By the method described above, the trar,smission loss for a double panel of finite size
subject to a reverberant sound field is therefore given as:

:..Jm 1 )
TL -= 20 log ( 3.6pc, + 20 log
(wm
3.6~C,
) + 6 dB (C 11)

or TL = Tl + Tl .J. 6 dB (C 1~)
1 Z

Examination of Equations (C 1), (C5), and (C8) show that the overall expressior, at any
frequency for ,-hI' trcnltmission coefficient ~or a finite double panel is given by:

(1 - e
-Zkd~12t
,I ~ (C 13)
I

•• 1
and thoe trC'nsmission los~ by TL = 10 log (T ).

REFE~ENCES

(1. London, Alb~rt, "Transmission of Reverberant Sound Through DouLI£: Vlalls, "
Bureau of Standards Journal, Wash., D.C., RP 2058, Vol. 44, pp 71-88, 1950.

~ "- -"· rt ~ --Lo ."" _

 ~

THE TRANSMISSION lOSS OF A TRIPLE PANEL

APPENDIX C iI
(

Storting with the expression for the tronsmiuion co~fficient of on infinite tripl,.. ponel,
this Appendix contains 0 deriv...Jtion of the transmission 1055 d a finite triple pan~1
excited by a reverbe.-ant sound field. The derivation proceeds along the ~ame linp.,~ os
described in Appendix C.

A motrix solution has been f:stobii)h.:d for the transmission coeffi( iC'lt T for a con-
struction containing N infinite PL',els - sef" Referen{;e D1. The e)(pre!O~ion for the
tran'Smission coefficient T for an angl .. of incidenc~ e is given as:
A

'T
'n
t,
I
/1 ~ ( XI • X , ,x) + XX[I ,I I 1
- e
- jerI 1 f X X
? J [I - (",
- j ()'
' 2
"1
J
oJ
I
-2
r
)1 -jO,] [ 1 - e - j 0,]
+ X)( [I - e
I )
- j (0' -+ 0
\ 2 J of X X X'j
I 2 II - e

w~ere

Z cos B
Ii')
X -- .__-!.... !. .. _a _

I, 2, ~ 7- f)C

:-: tronsmic;siorl impedance .)f IJonels 1, 2 and 3

::.- 2k d! R
0, , l ,7 COS

..: cavity dimensions

k = wave number 2"f/c

At extremely '~vV frf't':1u~ncies, when k d 1 ond k d] oro IT!lJl..:h less than 'Jnity, [qut1tion
( Dl ) ber;om~s:

r- 2

1",
t..
~ 1 .~ (X 1 + X2 + XJI
-2
= 11 + (Zl + Z + Z ) CO$ ! (D2)
2 ) 2f,c

0-1
 If, us IS usual, this frequency range lies wall below the critkal frequency, then the
impecs',Jl"\ce of thn individual pant'ls will be dominated by the mfJss. The"efore,
Equation (02) c~n be written as~

T
e = [1 ,. f <f (D3)

The tron~mission loss for a finite triple p:lnt~1 c'-:Jn be obtained in the monner dis~us~ed
i" Section 2. L 3 and Appenc.Jix C, by inspection of the result :.,( a single penel. The
tror;5mission loss is given by'

TI .
__
10 log II
i.
+ (~---
M)~ 1 (D4)
3.t,pc t
.J

With .Li:· "(>:peating the operutions involved-tnt'.y car. be determined by 6xamination of

PPI=·t:;ldix C·- th~ transmission l('lss of the triple panel at higher fmquencies, bt1t still
ur.der the condition {hat the wavelength is gfeater them the panel separations, is given
by tr,l"! expression:

w m1 ... w m, ) ( (iJ mJ )
TL .~ 20 log ( ~--) + 20 lo~" "-, + 20 log ~3~-
".6oc. ,J.u tJC .6 pc

+ 20 log (2kd,) + 20 log (2k~,) (D5~

Or Tl ~ TL I + TL + TL + 20 log (2 k d[ ) + 20 log (2 k d, ) (06)

z

where rL , , TL , and TL J ore the transmiuion los~ v-:Jlues for the panels 1, 2, and 3.

At higher frequencil!s, where the 'Novel.e:1gth is e'lual to or ~,moller than the panel
sf:paro~io", the transmission lo~s of 0 finite \fiple panel is given by (see Appendix C):

TL ~ TL I + TL , + TL J + 12, dB (D7)
~.

0-2
~
,:' t
{
'1'
:~-

7he expression for the transmi!'sion loss of a triple panel as given by Equation (D 5) is
approximate in the frequency regi"n of the two low frequency re$onances. The mora
exact expression is given irj Equ-:Jtion (D 1), wnich can be used tc> deterrnine the
optimum configuration of panel masses and separations, At low frequencies, when
the acoustic '¥ave!ergth is much less than the panel separations, .l1e qUI;2"tities In
the square brad:et~ of Equation (D 1) can be approximated os follows:

.n this low frequenc.y region, it is uSIJ:d for the transmission impedance Z of the
p(lnels to be dominated by the 17'~:'~ r'JQC"tance j w m, so that the effec! of reverberant
sound field e~dration Cfln be token int,') accoun' by introducing the fae:,)r 1.C _. see
Appendix B. With t~.ese simplifications, the eJ<pression for T cnn "e ~et equa! to
zen.: to determine the values of the two ~ow freqt;('ney resonances f+ and f_.

The resulting expression is complicated because there are rive voriobles in'H,lved-
the ma~ses of the three Danels cmo:i the ' ..... 0 e':l',ity dimp.nsiom. EX(lmining the results
ubtair'l2U fOI doubl~ panel conHn;ctions, it svem'i iogiccl that euch of the cavity
dimensi,)(ls should ba as large ~:; possible, w ~hat ihe fundarnentcl resonances are as
:(I',~ O~ pos~ible for 0 ~iven o\,/.Holl thicklle)s. The only way that th:s co:'. be achieved
;~ for the two cavity dimemdons to be eq',oi, i.!C., d I ~ cit =: U, t~ven thCl·gh the
h;gh freq~lenc.y cavity resonon:ei in the two cavities wili vCI.' Ii' at the some frequenc-:c:!s.
:n a si."i lor I'I'lanner, ii, ~'I!emS logical for the triple par.el cor struet: on \'0 be symmt:.r-
rlcal about tht' center p':J",el, i.e., ml = m], So as to achieve the lowf'st p'~.;sible
vuiues for the fur:da'nenl~d l'eson!1nces for 0 given total mass. Thvs, the optimum
conflguratlof'\ for :h~ low(')~t fundt.lmentai resonant frequenr:ies is ob"j,'eri with the
folhwing relorionship~:
'-

"
....
--,.

nl, 1T1] m
... (08)

~ d} d2 d

Jq this wcy the expre~sion fN the fundornenta! rr;sonanl frequencies can oe 'Jifnplified
as follows:

0-3
 f+
1
-- 2i Jl.~c' (~ + 1)
(D9)

'- --
1
21T
[I.apc'
' md

where r

Furthermore, for a given total Mass and overall dimension, it is easy to show t!lat
the lowe~t value of the freljuency 1+ is obtained when p --~ 2.

REFERENCES

Dl. Sharp, B.h.S. and 8eauch~mp, J.W., "The Transmission Loss l)f Multil"yer
StnJ<:tures,"J. SoundVib., Vol. 9, No.3, pp383-392, 1969.

D-4
 APilE 1\10 IX E
THE DETE~MINA nON OF THE RATIO OF PANE L VE LOCITIES
i,
i
•t
FOR A DOUBLE PANEL CONSTRUCTION

This Appendix contains the derivation of the expression for the veiocity ratio of the
two panels in a double panel construction. The rlJt:o is required so that the reduction
in the lransmission loss of a double panel constluctlon with soupd bridges can be
determined. Simple expressior'l~ for rhe reduction in transmis~ion are subsequently
developed.

Consider a doubla panel construction consisti"9 of poncl~ with maSses m 1 and m?

separated by a d .stance d. At low frequencies where the walle length of sound waves
in air is much greeter than the panel separation d, the constructior. can be conven-
iently representE:d bi' its electrical analog circuit for the purpose of analysis. In this
anolctj, the mas; C'f each panel is onologous to an inductance element, and the stiff-
ness of the a;r~FI~ce i~ represented by a capacitive element. In keeping with the
discussion of Seo:ti:.m 2.1 a",cj Appendix B, the finite siz~ of the p.:anels will be token
into a(;count by assuming that th~ masses of the panels are reduced from their ahsolute
va Iue by the factor 1.8.

The clectri cal a~alog circuit for a double panel construction is i Ilu~trated in Figure E1
,'(her.. the individual elements are repr<!sented in term!. "f the specific impedance.

j wml
1.8 IT
__Jl'1IL
~-----"" -~l

______~_-=-- . ._ _ __ " .~_~~_=:/ J

Figure E 1. EquivfJlent Electrical Cir<:uit for a Double
Panel c.' Low Frequencies (A> ~ d)

E-l
Analysis of the circuit will show that the ratio of ~he velocities of the two panels 10;
give;1 by:

(,J m2
pC+j--
1.8
:::
---

(E 1)

1
where f i~ th~ fundamen~al r'l:sonant frequenC}'
o h
for the double ponel cor.struction. By definition ~ the second term in Equaticn (l: 1) is
much smaller than up;ty r,nd hp.nce can be ignored, with thp. result that the Equatir'l
::an bl~ rewritten <:is:

Equation (E2) indicates that the velocity rotio approac\'l':ls unity at rrequllncie', m'ich
!C5S than f ' In this frequency range the two panels vibrate in phose and with tr p
o
~ome '/elocity. At r:equencies much grE'!"lter thew, f , th~ velocity ratil) i~ np.~ativf'
'lnd largf>, inrlicating that the two pnnp.ls ore vibratfng 180 degrees out of ph(1~{' on.\
,h"t the velocity of the second panfil is n,';ch loss than that of the first. In this fre··
quen c y range:

w' m1 d
f CJ --- f
1. 8p c 1

E-2
wr.ere the upper limiting frequency f,q, is given by the expression:

c
2nd

At freqvencie~ greClrer than f where the ac..oustic wavel~ngth is comparoble to the

separation of the panels, the ~quivalent r.ircuit and the resulting velocity ratio givt!n
above are no longer vol id. Inspection of the straight-I ine approxir'1ation to the trans-
mission loss churC'lcteristics of a double panel - see Equations (16), (P), and (19)-
shows that the tran~mission loss of a douhle porel witn no sound br;dg/~s increases at a
rC1te Of 18 d8 per octr.1Ve at frequenc ies between f0 and f i' cw:l 12 dB ~r octave at
frequencies greater than f;.. ihis represents a C'hans~ frn~n a trlJn~mission loss that is
prop<'lr~;onQl to :he ~iy.th pow~r of thf; frequency (f t ) to one proportional tc the fourth
power ot the frequency (f4). Clearl,.., the frequency dependence of the mass terms-
proportional to the sq'J(lroe of the frequency .- cannot hove changed, ~o thllt tht: harm
replacing the cavity stiffness in Hlis rpgion must be independent of frequency. Accord-
ingly, the electrical onclog circuit is as illustrated in Figurt' E2,with the ir"pedance
Z ,epre~pnting the COl, i ty clement.

j""ml jW~l
IT T8
___.n-rt1L-__... _ . ~ L__
----.....
tJc

,
"I ~~

Fi9ure E2. Lquivalcnt £.Ienricol Circuit for n Doublp

Pane: ot High Frequencies p. cJ)

E-3
The ratio of the velocities v; and v; can be written os:

Vi
I I WnI? )2
(F4 )
Vi
2
+\T:BL

At the freque"cy f i' by ~efinjt:on,

Vi
I
'- .)~ )
( I:

Irr~erting Equal;,'lJs (E 1) and (t4) :nto (E5) (Jnd solving for R gi'/e~ the result thnt:

z ., pc

The '1eloLity ratio or frequenf':ies greot~r than f? i~ therefore givf:n oy the e)fprf:J~i'·)!1:

- A +

i( I..) In,' 3.6 ilL

E-4
-
The expressions given in Equat!ons (E3) and (E6) can then be inserted into Equation (31)
to calculate the transmission kss of a double panel with sound bridges in the frequency
ranges f o < f < fLand f ::.- ft. The square of the panel velocity ratio is propor-
tional to f4 at frequencies IfI~s them f t and to f2 at frequencies greater t~af1 ft.
At frequencie:: ~reater than fe.' when the velocity ratio rapidly becomes much great~r
thcoll unity, ~h.,;;; re.:luction TLe in the transmission loss of a double panel ccnstruction
with ~:.~nd bridges is - see Equation (3 i)

TL B ~
10 log fJ

TL B -= 20 log
(V1 \
+ r:onstant
,V; )

Thus the reduct;C':l TLI3 increases ot a rate of

12 dB/octave f .-' f ~ f
I) /..

,S dB/oc'(ave

The transmission loss of thE'! unbridged double panel from which the valuf!s of TL B have
~o be subtracted to give tht.: transmission loss of the bridged construction increase~ a'
a rate of i 8 dB per octave and 12 dB per octave at frequencies les~ than and greater
than f t r(;~pcctively. As C'1 result, tre transmission loss of a bridged double ponE!
increases at a rote of 6 dB per octa\'~ at 011 frequencies.

The gene:al form of the transmission loss of a bridged double panel is i I iustroted in
Figure E3. The discontinuity at the frequ~ncy fa - termed tht~ bridging frequency-
show~ in this figl.re is a slrai9ht lin'::' approximation ~o the mo~e gr::Kl~G! :ransition
befween the. two slopes that is exhibited in rractice. Tn determine the valuE:' of the
frequency : ~ it is necessory to rp.tUrr1 tc the more exar.t expression for the reduction
in transmisS';otl lo:.s tlu'<! to bridging, rJUIH:'I':

-;-'3 c 1010 9 Ii + 6)

E-5
 Trallsm:ssion Loss
D"!tl!rmined
by S:ound
8rid!~es

fl
o
(Log) Frequency, Hz

Figure E3. The General Form of the Tronsrl1ission Loss ot a

Bridged Double Panel
where

n )(
o-
s
)( =: the radialiun factor for point or line force ex(.itatior,1 as given by
Equat ion (27)

The freqJenc> f con be determined by inserting th"! ex~rl~ssion for the vel()cit~ ratio)
B
at frequencies less thoi' f t as given in Equation (E3), and ollowinQ C to ,"".!$Su'ne the
value unity. 8y this method,

E-6
 nx
o --
s (f-)
o

or
( S _)1/4 (E7)
,n )(

Equatior: (E7) can be further simplified by introducin:; the expressions for ~.. Two
cases are of L1terest:

a. Point Conned ions

(E quati on (27))

• (E8;

where ,f = S/n is the t.'ffective lattice spac:ng constant for the fX>int C~~:1nec-
tions. For tne optimum d.,uble panel configuration where m 1 ::: 111 2 •

S:nl.:e the transmis::ion loss curve 01 frequencies greoter than fB1' is paroll~1 tt'
the mass low - assur,~in8 that the moti,m of the two individual pane:s ;s ( t,ntrolll1-::1
by the moss - a convenient way of describing the acoustic:al performaro;:~ j~ b),
means of the quantity l1 TLM, which is the ("Imount in dB thnf the transmission
loss ex:eeds the mass low value. In this case, with reference to I:quation (17),
!\ TLM is given by the expres<ion:

E-i
 m 2 m
= 20 log [Co)2 )m :2kd] - 20 log (3(,.)6 ) (E9)
(3.6pcY . pc

With the value of f inserted, Equation (E9) reouces to the expression:

BP

• !J. TL. I-= f20\log

j
'
(e f e ) + 20 log
.
(.~--
+ m) ',TI2
) - 55 dB (E 10)

o (E 11)

b. Line Connections

2
)( = J!A (Eqllatic.l (27))
;"l c

• f
Al
-- f
a [~
2).. V
/
mj
.J-
m2
)'1'/'
,
0- 12)
C .J

wherp. b :-: Sin; is the rnutu,)i sp,)ci 'l~ of t>'pi cal vertical wooden or metal
studs of length i..

For t~ case where In 1 'm I:

(E: 13)

In :J similar manner to that described cbove fo\ point cDr,neetions, it C'::1n be

shown that:
m '
• 6 TL
M -.- 10 log (b f)
c
+ 20 11)0
~
(~ __l -- -)
rn 1 ... If.;
_?CJ dr) (E 14)

f-8
~
f,'

~ :;.

~
~:,

~-.

~ 15)

A question arises ot this point as to w,",ich valuC) of t.~111 critical frequency must be
inserted into the above e,<pressions if ~h~ constl"uction contains panels of differing
critical frequencies. In the case of both point and Pne connect:c...s, the assuMption
is mad"J that the motion ('If tl'.e panel exposed direc~ly to the source of sound is
unaffected by tlw pre:;eM~ \)f any connections. In other wor':is, the connections are
considered to be mas!il~ss and to move with the ~ame velocity os the first panel. How-
ever, if the I'wa pan'~ls hove differer.t values for the Cl itk/:J1 frequ~ncy, th;~ assump-
tion appears to conflict wi'ih the orincipie of reciprocity, which states that the
tronsmission loss must be the sar(.e ....hichever side is cxpose:d directly to the sound
Sl)urce. The r~~~,>:~ fN the confl ict i!> evident since the connect ions Dp.tween the
panels do have 0,'1 impeding eHec:: on the motion of the first pone I, and the velocity
of the connectio, is less lnan that of this panel. These two effects can only incrf.'Clse
the tr\Jnsmission loss of the 5t r uctur:;! and as a result it is cO'isidered satisfactory to
select the highest vuluE. of the criti..:al frequ~ncies Of the two panels 1'0 insert into
the al,ove expression!> for transrT"ission lo~;s. However, if the point cOl1nections to one
of the pone:c; are merely point plCljectjon~ from the familiar linE' connections to the
o+her fXlnel, then the e,idcal frequency that has to be inSErted in the above expres-
sion!> is tbut for the panel supFJorted by the points.

E-Y
~i
;.'"

~r
l'

APPENDIX F
DERIVATION OF THE EXPRESSIONS FOR THE STC DESIGN METHOD

This Appendix contains the derivation of the expressions by which the STC ratinr~ of
a double pmel construction can be d~fined in terlTl:i of its important parameters.

To determine the STC rating at ~ construction, the STC we~ghting contour is super-
:mposed upon the measured values of transmission loss and odju~ted ~o that the sum of
the deficiencje~, (i.e., deviations of the transmission loss values below the STC
weighting cont'JUr) does r,ot exceed 32 dB, with the additional constraint that no
single deficiency ~xceeds 8 dB. With th~ contour adju'Sted to it:. highest value that
meets these re[~'Jirerr·~n.s, the STC rating of the comtruction corre~pont.ls to the '(alue
of the transm;~sion fOSS in dEs given by the weighting ccn~our at a freq'Jency of 500 Hz"

The general fo,m of the transmission loss curve for a doublE' nanel ,,,lith sound bridges
as a function of frequency is characterized by a slope lit" 18 dB per octave at the low
frequendes and 6 dB ~r octave ot the hiyner freq'Jencies, neglecting for the mc.)rT1ent
tne effects of coincidence. The changeover between the two distinc;' slopes occurs at
tha bridging frequency fa. Since the STe weigh. ing contour also hCls a standardized
form, it is possib!e to adjust the general transmission I~s cl,aracteris-ric of thE" double
panel to its highest value such thot it just meets the requirements for the STC rating
method. This is demonstrated in Figure Fl where both ths standa,.d ~,TC conhlUr and
the general trans~is5ion loss charactui!'otic are shown.

r-r' I I , i i l " t " , I t i l ' - .1-'"

, ... dB _,...- .,.--
18 dB ." 0., Octa.." \.-'"

.. r P/«O<f'~~~=-
~

R
.'
20
dB
/
I. ~.ighling
C""ICl<"
0: I
":II /" Doubl. Pan.1 -I
"i -,-_ TrolUmiui_ Lou

...! Charact.ri.tic

&.-.I-.h.-....I... .L-l_ J ! I I ! ~.~~L-I..~~

63 125 250 500 1000 ,000 .cooo 8000
F,equ."cy, HK

Figure Fl. The Geneml Transmission Loss Characteristic of a Double

Panel with Sound Bridges Adjusted 50 as to Just Provide a
Givfln STC Rating -

F-l PrlcediRg pigi blink

 The maximum allowable deficiency of 8 dB is taken at 125 Hz, which then sets the
location of the 18 dB per octave characteristic preciiely. The 6 dB per octave c~"r-'
octeristic is then insertsd so that the sum of the deficiencies is as cl05e as possible to
~l2 (in this; case it is 29). The transmission I~ characteri3tic thus derived is the
minimum that corresponds to the STC rating given by th~ location of the contour.

Re,ferring to Figure Fl, the differenr.e in dB between the ordinate values of th~ STC
contour tJt 125 Hz and 500 Hz is given by:

l (500) - l (125) - 16 dB

For the tron!:rnission loss characteristic:

TL (i25~ - TL.~ (125) + TL 1 (1;::5) ~ 20 log ('25d) - 39 (F2)

where d is the spucing ~f the' panels. The tn:msmission loss ~haracteristk has been
adjusted (sue obove) sl,ich thot

L (125) - TL (25) = 8 (F3)

Sull5tituting the vol'}es of I. i12S) ond TL (125) giv~'n in [qU(]tio:~s (Fl) and (F2), and
remembering that the STC rating is ~ql;a' to the valUe! of L (500)

STC -= n_] (125) + Tl, (125) + 20 log (125d) - 15, de

Inserting the expr~'5sion fc)r Tl i emJ 11.] given by Equotion (53), it cun I.e shO\yri
thr.Jt

(F4)

wh'4!r,e rTl
1r '11 2 are tLe: (Tl0s'eS ,~ the two panflb, and d is the panei sepl)rction.

F-2

_ .- dr' - . -e $ 7 tn ••
• 71 • •
,
'";....
:r'

r..~-

This expression effectively describes the relationship of the 18 dB per nrTl1ve !->Ortion
of the trcnsmission loss characteristic to the STC contour for this particular minimum
condition. To complete the design method, a re.lationship is required between the
STC contour and the transmission loss characteristic at the: higher fre~uencies (i.e.,
the 6 dB per octave portion). R.3ferring again to Figurfl :=1, it can be deduced that:

STC = TL (500) + 2

= Tl
M
(500) + Ii Tl
M
+ 2

Thus

For (I particular configuration of the c.onstruction, the vCilue of ~he quantity 6. TL!v\
can 'Je written as (see F~',,']tion (35)):

= 20 jog (e f )
c
+ ,:0 log (_:~
+ m
"'I
'J
2
- 55, dB

Ejjrr,;noting 6 TLf"I\ frc7T1 the above two expressions Iflads to the eql'ality:

"
-= ant, cp,J (STC'" -_.
32.5) Ibsift /sec (F5)
20

The expression given in (F4) and (F5) can now be lJsed to relate the various construc.-
tion parameters to the STC rating, It is difficult, however, to retain the individuality
d the pone I masses m, and "'2 in the overall rp.lationship. Therefore, it is a$Sumed
that ml:': m2 =. mO.e.,theoptimumdistributionofmoss).

A design chart for a double pClnel construction w'rh point connecti ons to one panel,
based on the above expressions, is shown in Figur'~ 41 (0).

F-3
1
A similar derivation for a doublt' panel with line connedions results in a design
exrression ~imilar to that given In Equation {F5):

(F6)

A design' chart for the ~'rammission loss of a double panel with line connections is
shown in Fir;,1ure 41 (b).

F-4