📞 Call us for a free consultation! 520–392–9486, 8am – 6pm / Log in or Sign up / Contact
logo for room acoustics forum showing a waveform within a circle and the title of the forum
Avatar
Please consider registering
Guest
Search
Forum Scope


Match



Forum Options



Minimum search word length is 3 characters - maximum search word length is 84 characters
Register Lost password?
sp_Feed sp_TopicIcon
online absorber calculator (acousticmodelling.com)
Avatar
Member
Members
Forum Posts: 1
Member Since:
July 27, 2018
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
1
July 27, 2018 - 4:54 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print sp_EditHistory

Hello everyone

I found an online calculator for several absorber types: http://www.acousticmodelling.com/

It claims to be capable of calculating the absorption -coefficient for multilayer absorbers. I am interested in porous absorption of low frequencies since it is the easiest to DIY. The materials I want to use are rock wool (6 kPa*s/m2 flow resistivity) and glass wool (5 kPa*s/m2 flow resistivity). So i did a little trial and error with this calculator and I came up with these parameters:

Layer 1: 120mm porous absorbent, 6000 Pa.s/m2
Layer 2: 540mm air
Layer 3: 240mm porous absorbent, 5000 Pa.s/m2
Layer 4: not used (Rigid backing)

Using the Allard & Champoux model for porous absorbers (which should be the most accurate from what I’ve read in several articles) I got a result that showed me an absorption coefficient of over 0.8 at 50 Hz, about 0.67 at 30 Hz, and 0.5 at 20 Hz (!). Of course this construction would require 90cm (35,5”) in depth, which is more than twice the depth of the ACDA -12, but could compete at LF absorption and would be a lot cheaper.

So my question is: Is this amount of LF-absorption even possible with porous absorbers (are there even references)?

Thank you for your time :)

Cheers
Matt

Avatar
Chief Acoustics Engineer
Forum Posts: 387
Member Since:
August 12, 2013
sp_UserOfflineSmall Offline
2
July 27, 2018 - 10:49 am
sp_Permalink sp_Print

M, No, porous absorbers are no match for diaphragmatic as your calculations illustrate.. With diaphragmatic, you get the most horsepower / cu.. ft. of any of the low-frequency absorption types.

Forum Timezone: America/Los_Angeles
Most Users Ever Online: 31
Currently Online:
1
Guest(s)
Currently Browsing this Page:
1 Guest(s)
Forum Stats:
Groups: 4
Forums: 10
Topics: 360
Posts: 996

 

Member Stats:
Guest Posters: 23
Members: 14402
Moderators: 0
Admins: 2
Administrators: admin, Dennis Foley
FREE ROOM ANALYSIS
Call Us 520–392–9486
100% Money Back Guarantee