Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Applied Acoustics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apacoust
A R T I C L E I N F O A B S T R A C T
Keywords: Electroacoustic absorbers represent an interesting solution for low-frequency sound absorption in rooms. These
Sound absorption systems simply consist of closed-box electrodynamic loudspeakers, whose acoustic impedance at the diaphragm
Acoustic impedance control is judiciously adjusted by connecting a passive or active electrical control circuit. This paper presents a method
Electrodynamic loudspeaker for designing different electroacoustic absorber systems constituted of simple electrical and mechanical com-
Performance optimisation
ponents that are coupled to a primary loudspeaker, resulting in multi-degree-of-freedom resonators. Each system
Electrical shunt
is optimised to maximise the sound absorption performance with respect to different metrics. Experimental
evaluations in an impedance tube confirm the model accuracy and method efficiency for achieving low-fre-
quency sound absorption.
⁎
Corresponding author.
E-mail address: etienne.rivet@epfl.ch (E. Rivet).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2017.10.019
Received 30 March 2017; Received in revised form 3 October 2017; Accepted 10 October 2017
Available online 24 November 2017
0003-682X/ © 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
the sound absorption performance through the definitions of the spe- sound absorption coefficient α (ω) are defined as
cific acoustic impedance, as well as the corresponding sound reflection
Zs (ω)−ρc
coefficient and sound absorption coefficient. Then, different systems of r (ω) = and α (ω) = 1−|r (ω)|2
Zs (ω) + ρc (5)
electrical and mechanical resonators coupled to the primary closed-box
loudspeaker are studied, and the sound absorption performance of each In the following, three different systems of electroacoustic absorber
system is optimised with respect to specific objective functions. Finally, are investigated:
an experimental evaluation of these systems and a discussion on the
measured sound absorption performance are given. • System A: the loudspeaker is coupled to an electrical resonator.
2. Acoustic impedance of multi-degree-of-freedom electroacoustic
• System B: the primary loudspeaker is coupled to a secondary loud-
speaker, where an electrical resistance is connected at its terminals,
absorbers which is denoted the “mechanical resonator”.
U (ω) = Ze (ω) I (ω)−BlV (ω) (2) The equivalent acoustic circuit of the closed-box loudspeaker con-
nected to this electrical resonator (system A) is illustrated in Fig. 3,
where Ze (ω) = jωLe + R e is the blocked electrical impedance of the where Q (ω) = Sd V (ω) is the volume flow. Combining Eq. (6) with Eqs.
voice coil, Zms (ω) = jωMms + Rms + 1/(jωCms ) is the mechanical im- (1) and (2) gives the expression of the specific acoustic impedance of
pedance of the loudspeaker, Cab = Vb/(ρc 2) is the acoustic compliance of system B as
the enclosure, ρ is the density of the medium and c is the speed of
sound. Zms (ω) Sd ZmeA (ω)
Z sA (ω) = + +
The specific acoustic impedance is defined as the complex ratio of Sd jωCab Sd (8)
the sound pressure Pf (ω) at the front face of the diaphragm to the
where
diaphragm velocity V (ω) . When the loudspeaker is left open circuit,
namely the case where no electrical current I (ω) circulates through the (Bl)2
ZmeA (ω) = 1
voice coil, this quantity is directly derived from Eqs. (1) and (2) as jω (Le + Ll ) + R e + Rl + jωCl (9)
Z (ω) Sd
Zs (ω) = ms + corresponds to the equivalent mechanical impedance of the electrical
Sd jωCab (3)
resonator in series with the electrical impedance of the loudspeaker.
The corresponding resonance frequency is equal to The corresponding resonance frequency of the electrical resonator is
1
f0 =
Cms Cab
2π Mms
Sd2Cms + Cab (4)
Under normal incidence, the sound reflection coefficient r (ω) and Sd Pr
Sd Pf + I
V Rl
U Ll
Cl
-
110
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
ωCl ⎠
⎟
Zms1 (ω) Sd1 (Bl 1)2 ZmeB (ω)
− ⎝ Z sB (ω) = + + +
⎡ 1 ⎞ ⎤
2 Sd1 jωCab1 Sd1 (Ze1 (ω) + Rl1 ) Sd1 (17)
Sd ⎢ (R e + Rl)2 + ⎛ω (Le + Ll) −
ωCl ⎠ ⎥
⎜ ⎟
⎣ ⎝ ⎦ (12)
where
For the reactive part, if the values of inductance Ll and capacitance 2
Cl are well chosen, the electrical resonator can partly decrease both
mass and stiffness of the closed-box loudspeaker over a certain fre- ZmeB (ω) = −
( Sd1 Sd2
jωCab1 )
Sd2 2 (Bl 2)2
quency range. Zms2 (ω) + jω ( 1
Cab1
+
1
Cab2 )+ Ze2 (ω) + Rl2 (18)
2.3. Loudspeaker coupled to a mechanical resonator corresponds to the equivalent mechanical impedance of the mechanical
resonator. Just like the force factor Bl for system A, the coupling
The main motivation of the method presented in this paper is to be coefficient Sd1 Sd2/ Cab1 plays a crucial part for the sound absorption
able to mimic, and possibly improve, the sound absorption performance performance of this system. The choice of values for both surface areas
of system A, where the primary loudspeaker is coupled to the electrical and volume of enclosure between both loudspeakers are thus important
resonator, by coupling the primary loudspeaker with a “mechanical for the coupling.
resonator”. Thanks to the resonant behaviour of the loudspeaker, sev-
eral loudspeakers in boxes may be stacked to increase the order of the 2.4. Loudspeaker coupled to an electromechanical resonator
resonant system as well as the sound absorption bandwidth. Shunt re-
sistors are connected to the loudspeakers terminals to adjust the The primary loudspeaker might also be coupled to a combination of
acoustic resistances of the diaphragms. System B is constituted of two two (or more) resonators of different types to improve the sound ab-
loudspeakers, whose parameters are denoted by indices i = [1,2] in sorption bandwidth. Here, the series RLC electrical network substitutes
Fig. 4. Each loudspeaker is connected to a shunt resistor Rli and loaded for the shunt resistor connected to the secondary loudspeaker terminals
in a closed box. In this configuration, the secondary closed-box loud- (that is the mechanical resonator), as illustrated in Fig. 6. This sub-
speaker system (shaded area) is called here the “mechanical resonator”. system denoted “electromechanical resonator” becomes a two-DOF re-
Within each of the two volumes Vb1 and Vb2 of the enclosures, the sound sonator.
The equivalent acoustic circuit of the primary loudspeaker coupled
to the electromechanical resonator (system C) is illustrated in Fig. 7.
Substituting an electrical impedance Zl2 for the electrical resistance Rl2
in Eq. (18) gives the expression of the specific acoustic impedance
Sd1 Pr1 I1 Sd2 Pr2 I2 Zms1 (ω) Sd1 (Bl 1)2 ZmeC (ω)
Sd1 Pf1 + Sd2 Pf2 + Z sC (ω) = + + +
Sd1 jωCab1 Sd1 (Ze1 (ω) + Rl1 ) Sd1 (19)
V1 V2
U 1 Rl1 U 2 Rl where
2
2
- -
ZmeC (ω) = −
( Sd1 Sd2
jωCab1 )
Sd2 2 2
Zms2 (ω) + jω ( 1
Cab1
+
1
Cab2 )+ (Bl 2)
Ze2 (ω) + Zl2 (ω) (20)
corresponds to the equivalent mechanical impedance of the
Fig. 4. System B: the primary loudspeaker is coupled to a secondary loudspeaker. Both
loudspeakers are connected to shunt resistors and loaded in closed boxes. 1
B1 l1 and B2 l2 are noted Bl1 and Bl2 respectively to avoid numerous subscripts.
111
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
112
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
Table 2
Values of the fixed and optimised parameters and corresponding sound absorption per-
100 8 formance indicators according to the objective function A .
80 Fix. Vb1 3
(dm ) 2.14 2.14 –
6
Optimised Parameters Vb1 (dm3) – – 2.14
Sd2 (cm2)
Mms 2 (g)
70 Rl1 (Ω ) −0.1 ∞ ∞
5 Ll1 (mH) 9.0 – –
60 Cl1 ( μ F) 99.3 – –
4 Vb2 (dm3) – 1.2 1.3
50
Rl2 (Ω ) – 0.9 −0.1
3 Ll2 (mH) – – 11.5
40
Cl2 ( μ F) – – 109.2
113
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
114
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
Fig. 11. Real and imaginary parts of the specific acoustic impedance of the electroacoustic absorber computed in the case of (a) system A, (b) system B, and (c) system C after
optimisation.
configurations used for the measurements were the same as those not changed for system B. The volumes taken by the loudspeakers in the
presented in Section 3.3. First, the primary loudspeaker was connected boxes were taken into account in the design of the prototype, to get
to a series electrical RLC network in a closed box of volume equivalent volumes very close to the values reported in Table 2. For the
Vb = 2.17 dm3. Then the primary loudspeaker was coupled to a sec- series RLC networks used for systems A and C, as the resistive parts of
ondary loudspeaker, in a layout of closed boxes of volumes inductances and capacitances have non-zero values, a current inversion
Vb1 = 2.17 dm3 and Vb2 = 1.34 dm3, which almost correspond to the op- negative impedance converter, including two resistors R and a resistor
timal values for system C presented in Section 3. The volume Vb2 was Rn as illustrated in Fig. 12, was used. The resistive value of the networks
Fig. 12. Schematic of the experimental setup for system C when the primary loudspeaker is coupled to the electromechanical resonator.
115
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
4.3. Discussion
For the three systems, the measurements are consistent with the
corresponding simulations. Slight differences are observed on the spe-
cific acoustic impedance and sound absorption coefficient. These dif-
ferences can be attributed to imperfections in the model parameter of
both loudspeakers and to the approximation of the volumes of the boxes
and the volumes taken by the loudspeakers. The general trend is con-
firmed and these slight discrepancies do not contradict the results
presented in this paper.
For system A, when the closed-box loudspeaker is coupled to the
electrical resonator, the sound absorption performance is improved
relative to the basic configuration, when the system is in open circuit.
Note that the performance indicators remain the same whatever the
value of the volume, providing that the value of the inductance Ll (or
capacitance Cl ) is tuned. Even though the measured values of in-
ductances and capacitances are different from the ones indicated by the
manufacturers, the resonance frequency f0A (Eq. (10)) can easily be
matched to that of the closed-box loudspeaker f0 (Eq. (4)).
Systems B and C are more difficult to tune without an optimisation
process, because of the strong interaction effects of the parameters on
the specific acoustic impedance of both systems as seen in Eqs.
(17)–(20) respectively. When one parameter value is modified, the
sound absorption performance of systems B and C is less predictable
than for system A. The coupling coefficient Sd1 Sd2/ Cab1 in Eqs. (18) and
(20), depending on both effective diaphragm surface areas and above
all the volume Vb1 between the loudspeakers when these are fixed, plays
a crucial part for the sound absorption capabilities. Here, the volume Vb1
is chosen to be the same for the three systems, and consequently, the
centre frequency fc is lower for systems B and C relative to system A.
For systems A and C, a negative impedance converter was used to
compensate the resistive part of inductances and capacitances. Because
of the negative value of the resistance Rl1 in the experimental realisation
Fig. 13. (a) Bode plot of the measured specific acoustic impedance and (b) measured of systems A and C, these systems are not considered as purely passive,
corresponding sound absorption coefficient of the experimental realisation of systems A, since an active electrical power is supplied to the system. Thus, the
B, and C, based on the optimisation results with the objective function A . main advantage of the design of system B is to imitate the sound ab-
sorption performance of system A, without requiring any additional
was adjusted to those of the optimal resistances Rl1 and Rl2 given in electrical power. In response, the total volume is larger.
Table 2. The main criterion of both objective functions is based on the
threshold value of minimal efficient sound absorption, the ideal case
being the matching of the specific acoustic resistance at the primary
4.2. Acoustic impedance and sound absorption measurements diaphragm with that of the air. Note that the bandwidth of efficient
sound absorption of such a system is inversely proportional to its
The performance of each system in terms of measured specific acoustic resistance.
116
E. Rivet et al. Applied Acoustics 132 (2018) 109–117
5. Conclusion small room acoustics. In: Audio engineering society convention, vol. 94. Audio
Engineering Society; 1993.
[4] Frommhold W, Fuchs H, Sheng S. Acoustic performance of membrane absorbers. J
The method presented in this paper aims at designing efficient low- Sound Vib 1994;170(5):621–36.
frequency multi-degree-of-freedom electroacoustic absorbers through [5] Yu G, Li D, Cheng L. Effect of internal resistance of a helmholtz resonator on
acoustic energy reduction in enclosures. J Acoust Soc Am 2008;124(6):3534–43.
coupled resonators. First, an appropriate electrical shunt, such as the [6] Fahy F, Schofield C. A note on the interaction between a helmholtz resonator and an
series resistance - inductance - capacitance network, can be connected acoustic mode of an enclosure. J Sound Vib 1980;72(3):365–78.
to the loudspeaker terminals, resulting in a two-DOF resonator. [7] Doria A. Control of acoustic vibrations of an enclosure by means of multiple re-
sonators. J Sound Vib 1995;181(4):673–85.
Stacking loudspeakers in closed boxes points out that the order of the [8] Xu M, Selamet A, Kim H. Dual helmholtz resonator. Appl Acoust 2010;71(9):822–9.
system increases in the same manner with an equivalent sound ab- [9] Guan C, Jiao Z. Modeling and optimal design of 3 degrees of freedom helmholtz
sorption performance without requiring any additional electrical resonator in hydraulic system. Chin J Aeronaut 2012;25(5):776–83.
[10] Cummings A. The effects of a resonator array on the sound field in a cavity. J Sound
power. The primary loudspeaker may also be coupled to a combination
Vib 1992;154(1):25–44.
of the two previous resonators, resulting in a three-DOF resonator. [11] Li D, Cheng L. Acoustically coupled model of an enclosure and a helmholtz re-
Parametric optimisations were carried out by maximising the sound sonator array. J Sound Vib 2007;305(1):272–88.
absorption coefficient over a frequency range as large as possible. [12] Maa D-Y. Potential of microperforated panel absorber. J Acoust Soc Am
1998;104(5):2861–6.
Experimental evaluations confirmed the performance improvement of [13] Gai X-L, Xing T, Li X-H, Zhang B, Wang W-J. Sound absorption of microperforated
the three systems in the low-frequency range by using conventional panel mounted with helmholtz resonators. Appl Acoust 2016;114:260–5.
components. [14] Zhao X-D, Yu Y-J, Wu Y-J. Improving low-frequency sound absorption of micro-
perforated panel absorbers by using mechanical impedance plate combined with
The performance of the proposed systems could be improved by helmholtz resonators. Appl Acoust 2016;114(9):92–8.
adding perforated panels or multi-layered elements, so as to absorb at [15] Li D, Chang D, Liu B. Enhancing the low frequency sound absorption of a perforated
mid and high frequencies as well. In this study, commercial loudspea- panel by parallel-arranged extended tubes. Appl Acoust 2016;102:126–32.
[16] Rivet E, Karkar S, Lissek H. Broadband low-frequency electroacoustic absorbers
kers were chosen for the sake of simplicity of the optimisation process. through hybrid sensor-/shunt-based impedance control. IEEE Trans Control Syst
As their model parameters are limited by physical and technological Technol 2017;25(1):63–72.
constraints, and are initially intended for sound generation, the study [17] Boulandet R, Rivet E, Lissek H. Sensorless electroacoustic absorbers through syn-
thesized impedance control for damping low-frequency modes in cavities. Acta
was only focused on the optimisation of the closed-box volumes and
Acust United Acust 2016;102(4):696–704. 9.
electrical shunt networks. A further stage of optimisation could consist [18] Rivet E, Karkar S, Lissek H, Thorsen TN, Adam V. Experimental assessment of low-
in designing specific transducers adapted for sound absorption appli- frequency electroacoustic absorbers for modal equalization in actual listening
rooms. In: Audio engineering society convention, vol. 140; 2016.
cations.
[19] Boulandet R, Lissek H. Optimization of electroacoustic absorbers by means of de-
signed experiments. Appl Acoust 2010;71(9):830–42.
Acknowledgment [20] Fleming AJ, et al. Control of resonant acoustic sound fields by electrical shunting of
a loudspeaker. IEEE Trans Control Syst Technol 2007;15(4):689–703.
[21] Lissek H, Boulandet R, Rivet E. Optimization of electric shunt resonant circuits for
This research was supported by the Swiss Commission for electroacoustic absorbers. In: Acoustics 2012, Nantes, France; 2012.
Technology and Innovation (CTI) under grant agreement no 14220.1 [22] Liu F, Horowitz S, Nishida T, Cattafesta L, Sheplak M. A multiple degree of freedom
PFNM-NM. electromechanical helmholtz resonator a. J Acoust Soc Am 2007;122(1):291–301.
[23] Chang D, Liu B, Li X. An electromechanical low frequency panel sound absorber. J
Acoust Soc Am 2010;128(2):639–45.
References [24] Lagarias JC, Reeds JA, Wright MH, Wright PE. Convergence properties of the nel-
der–mead simplex method in low dimensions. SIAM J Optim 1998;9(1):112–47.
[25] I. 10534-2-1998. Acoustics - determination of sound absorption coefficient and
[1] Kuttruff H. Room acoustics. 5th ed. Spon Press; 2009.
impedance in impedance tubes - part 2: Transfer-function method. Tech rep.
[2] Cox TJ, D’Antonio P. Acoustic absorbers and diffusers: theory, design and appli-
Internation Standard Organization, Geneva, Switzerland; 1998.
cation. 2nd ed. Taylor and Francis; 2009.
[3] Voetmann J, Klinkby J. Review of the low-frequency absorber and its application to
117