CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s

DE LA SALLE LIPA

COLLEGE OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY AND ENGINEERING

ELECTRONICS ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT

BROADCASTING AND ACCOUSTICS

ECELEC3

SY 2019-2020

SUBMITTED BY:

BALDOVINO, SETH ADRIEL R.

DE GUZMAN, FRITZ KENNETH R.

LONTOC, ANGELO U.

MAGALONA, JAY-AR V.

MAGLINAO, LARA CARMELA C.

TOREJA, RAZELLE JOY

T5B – BS ECE

SUBMITTED TO:

ENGR. DUWI ISCALA

COURSE INSTRUCTOR

September 9, 2019
CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s

COMPUTATION OF REVERBERATION TIME USING SABINE’S FORMULA

Sabine’s Formula:

V/Se in m, RT60 in seconds

V/Se in feet, RT60 in seconds

Where: V is the volume of the room and S the effective area

e

Se  a1S1  a2 S2  a3 S3  ...
Si surface area for a type of surface
ai absorption coefficient for this surface

Absorption Coefficients of Materials

CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s

To compute for the reverberation time of the NEXUS Laboratory, the effective area
should be calculated first. The absorption coefficient and surface area of the materials
present in the room must also be considered for an accurate result. For the values of
absorption coefficient, the frequency to be used is 125 Hertz since it is the average voice
speech of a typical adult. The absorption coefficient considered for computations are
given below:

Glass Window 0.3

Mat 0.02
Tiles 0.02
Concrete 0.1

Effective Area:

Se = a1S1+ a2S2+ a3S3+…+ anSn

Materials:

1. Glass window: S1 = 9.7536m x 1.2446m =12.1393

a1 = 0.3
2. 4 Double Glass doors: S2 = 2.1336m x 3.556m = 7.5871 * 4= 30.3483
a2 = 0.3
3. 3 Single Glass doors: S3 = 2.1336m x 1.778m= 3.7935 * 3= 11.3806
a3 = 0.3
4. Mat: S4 = 9.84 m x 7.91 m = 77.8344
a4 = 0.02
5. Tiles S5 = 14 m x 17 m = 238
a5 = 0.02
6. Concrete Wall S6 = 2(17 m x 3m) + 2(14m x 3m) = 186
a6 = 0.1
CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s

Solution:

Se = a1S1+ a2S2+ a3S3+ a4S4+ a5S5+ a6S6

Se = 0.3(12.1393) + 0.3(30.3483) + 0.3(11.3806) + 0.02(77.8344)

+ 0.02(238) + 0.1(186)
Se = 41.0771 square meters

Volume of the room:

Length of room: 14 meters

Width of room: 17 meters

Altitude of room: 3 meters

Solution:

Volume= length x width x altitude

V = 14 m x 17 m x 3 m

V = 714 cubic meters

Reverberation time of the room using Sabine’s Formula:

RT60 = 0.16 s m-1 V/ Se

RT60 = 0.16 s m-1 x 714 m3/ 41.0771 m2

RT60 = 2.7811 seconds

CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s

Analysis of the Acoustic Performance inside NEXUS Laboratory

Upon inspection of the NEXUS Laboratory located at the 3 rd and 4th floor of the
Diokno building, there are some things observed by the group. The room is 14 meters by
17 meters and the height from the floor to the ceiling is 3 meters. From the
measurements, the seminar area has a perimeter of 62 meters and an area of 238 square
meters. Considering the altitude of the ceilings, the room is said to have a volume of 714
cubic meters.

In measuring the acoustic performance of a given room, a good reverberation time

must be considered. Rooms that are good for both speech and music typically have
reverberation times between 1.5 and 2 seconds. More or less than that time frame
produces ill quality to the sound heard. Given such, the group has computed for the
reverberation time in the NEXUS Laboratory. Given the computed volume, the group also
take into account the surface areas of the materials inside the laboratory. Each material
CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s

has a specific coefficient, and these coefficients are multiplied to the area of the material
to compute for the Effective Surface Area. Upon computing for the needed parameters,
Sabine’s Formula was utilized to determine the reverberation time.

The computations garnered by the group equated to 2.7811 seconds which is

greater than the ideal value of 2 seconds. As this exceeds the upper limit, it means that
the sound emitted takes a longer time to decay or die down. As the speaker is emitting
new sounds, it clashes with the remaining sound prior as it has not yet faded away. The
condition outputs garble sounds that are not easy to comprehend by listeners. This is the
main reason why the acoustic experience inside NEXUS is in a bad condition.

Meanwhile through visual inspection, the group noticed that the ceiling for NEXUS
is not yet fully furnished and there are lots of edges and division. Part of the reason why
the reception of sound in this area is bad, is because of the unfinished ceilings. The
multiple edges of the ceilings allows sound waves to vibrate erratically making them bump
against each other instead of a smooth flowing propagation.

In addition, the acoustic property of the place is not that good due to the echo
produced in every noise made. The reflection of the sound will increase with the use of a
microphone and speaker therefore making it a place not suitable for talks or seminars.
The placement of speakers also contributes as there is an uneven setup of the sound
system. Two speakers are placed on the left wing of the area whilst only is setup on the
other side. This unevenness contributes to the ill quality of sound as the amplitude of
sound waves vary from left wing to right wing.

Lastly, the material which the NEXUS laboratory is constructed contributes the
overall acoustic experience inside. It is noted that the floor is not yet fully covered as well
as some parts are patched with wood elements while some parts of the flooring are in
concrete. The unevenness of the material in the flooring again contributes to uneven
reflections of sound waves. Furthermore, there are some parts of the flooring with a mat
cover. Instead of allowing sound waves to be transmitted, these soft materials absorb the
CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s

said acoustic elements. The main area for seminar or talks is covered with tiles. Yes, it
may be visually appealing but the tile is a hard material and it has a property of allowing
sound to reflect therefore causing echo. The materials of the walls are uneven as well.
The back part of NEXUS laboratory situates glass panes while the right side was made
with some form of wood/plastic material while the left side is mainly concrete. The
differences in material contributes to the varying reflection patterns as sound tend to
reflect differently for a given material.

Overall, all of these factors add impact to the acoustic property of the laboratory.
The material, overall area, placement of sound system and even the architecture of the
given area are important aspects to consider when analyzing the acoustic performance
in a given area.

Conclusion:

Overall, the data gathered and the computed parameters suggest that NEXUS Laboratory
exceeds the reverberation time for an ideal room by 0.78 seconds. This timeframe
exceeded contributes to the bad quality of sound propagation in the room. The materials
inside the room in consonance with the size of the room does not complement each other
effectively. Moreover, the construction, undone finishing of both the ceilings and floors
and uneven placement of materials could have contributed to the unpleasant quality of
sound.

Recommendations:
CI TE

2.0
U nle a shing Possibilit ie s