Analytical study of different approaches for active control

of sound transmission through double walls

J. Pan and C. Bao
Department of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, The University of Western Australia, Nedlands,
WA 6907, Australia

~Received 30 April 1997; accepted for publication 12 December 1997!

Sound transmission through double plate structures into an enclosure and its active attenuation are
modeled and analyzed in this paper. Using the modal acoustic transfer impedance and mobility
matrices, the excitation and interaction in the double plate sound transmission system can be
described with clear physical significance. Three active control arrangements are considered for a
double wall sound transmission model. They are: ~1! to directly attenuate the room modes by using
one acoustic control source in the room; ~2! to control the sound radiation into the room using a
vibrational actuator on the radiating structure; and ~3! to block the noise transmission path by
inserting one acoustic control source within double wall partition. The analytical solution of the
system response is used to explain the mechanisms of attenuation associated with these three control
arrangements. The effectiveness and performance of the control system corresponding to each
arrangement are discussed. © 1998 Acoustical Society of America. @S0001-4966~98!00304-X#
PACS numbers: 43.50.Ki, 43.55.Rg @GD#

INTRODUCTION a vibrational control source on the radiating plate; and ~3! to

block the noise transmission path by inserting one acoustic
Active control of sound transmission through a single
control source between the double walls. Details of the pre-
plate has been the subject of several analytical and experi-
vious experimental investigation on active control of sound
mental investigations.1–5 Previous work in this area demon-
transmission through double plates has been reviewed in an
strated that noise transmission can be reduced by applying
accompanying experimental paper.8 The existing analytical
control forces on partition structures. After the examination
work9,10 related to active control of sound transmission
of the system performance before and after control, two in-
through double walls using acoustic control sources in the
teresting mechanisms involved in the active structural acous-
double wall cavity are largely for the demonstration of pos-
tic control ~ASAC! of sound transmission into a room1–3
sible noise reduction and the comparison with experimental
were discovered. Numerical and experimental results demon-
results. In their paper,9 Sas et al. also used experimental
strated that if the system response is dominated by a panel
modal analysis to observe the system modal response before
controlled mode ~where the transmitted energy is carried
and after control and used the mechanisms of fluid-structure
mainly by one dominating panel mode!, minimum potential
interaction of double panel structures to explain the experi-
energy is obtained by suppressing the panel-vibration ampli-
mental results.
tude of the controlling mode. If the system response is domi-
This paper presents a theoretical model for the analysis
nated by a room-controlled mode ~where energy is transmit-
and design of an actively controlled double wall system with
ted from several plate modes into one dominating room
all possible arrangement of control sources. Although the
mode!, the control force is used to adjust ~or rearrange! the
discussion considers one control source at a time, the model
plate-velocity distribution so that the radiated power from
allows for multiple control inputs and simultaneous use of
the plate into the room is reduced. In the latter case, there
different arrangements of control sources. By examining the
may be an increase in panel-vibration level. Similar mecha-
minimum acoustic potential energy in the room due to an
nisms were also observed in the ASAC of structural sound
optimal control input, the condition for achieving a signifi-
radiation into a free space.6 Further work on ASAC of sound
cant reduction of the potential energy was obtained. For each
transmission has discussed the selection of optimal actuator
control source arrangement, the examination of how to sat-
locations for the effective use of the two control mechanisms
isfy the condition enables the understanding of the control
in order to achieve the maximum sound transmission loss.7
mechanisms. Because the analysis uses the modal acoustic
Recently, active noise control has been used to increase
transfer impedance and mobility matrices to express the sys-
the sound transmission loss of double wall structures. As the
tem response, it is possible to reveal the control mechanisms
double wall sound transmission system has many subsystems
implied in the mathematical expressions of the conditions for
~two plates, one partition cavity, and a room!, several ar-
each arrangement.
rangements of control actuators can be selected for the same
purpose: minimization of acoustic potential energy in the
I. DESCRIPTION OF THE CONTROL SYSTEM
room. In this paper three control arrangements are consid-
ered. They are: ~1! to directly attenuate the sound pressure Figure 1 shows a double wall partition model, where an
field in the room using one acoustic control source in the incident sound wave p in , with elevation angle f and azimuth
room; ~2! to control the sound radiation into the room using angle u,

1916 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103 (4), April 1998 0001-4966/98/103(4)/1916/7/$10.00 © 1998 Acoustical Society of America 1916

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 84.88.136.149 On: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:57:03
 k 2 p ~ 2 ! 1¹ 2 p ~ 2 ! 52 j vr 0 (i q ~i 2 !
r
r

1 r 0v 2W ~ 2 !d ~ z r ! H W~ s ~ 2 ! ! , ~6!
where q i r 5Q i r d (rr 2ri r ) is the source strength of the i r th
control source in the room and H W ( s (2) ) is a spatial window
function specifying the geometrical area of plate 2.
In this analysis, the plate velocities n (1) 5 j v W (1) and
n 5 j v W (2) are expanded as
(2)

n ~ 1 ! 5 @ S~M11! #@ V~M11! # , ~7!

n ~ 2 ! 5 @ S~M22! #@ V~M22! # , ~8!

FIG. 1. A double wall model for the active control of sound transmission.
M1 # 5 @ V 1 ,V 2 ,...,V M 1 #
@ V(1) (1) (1) (1) T
where and @ S (1)
M1 #
5 @ S 1 ,S 2 ,...,S M # are, respectively, the modal amplitude
(1) (1) (1)
p in~ x,y,z;t ! 5A exp~ j v t2 j cos f kz 1
and modal shape vectors of the velocity in plate 1. The sound
2 j sin f cos u kx2 j sin f sin u ky ! , pressure in the cavity and room can be expressed in terms of
the cavity and room modes as well:
~1!
p ~ 1 ! 5 @ F ~N1 ! #@ P~N1 ! # , ~9!
excites the top plate ~plate 1!. The local coordinates of the 2 1

cavity and room in the Z direction are denoted respectively p ~ 2 ! 5 @ F ~N2 ! #@ P~N2 ! # , ~10!
as z c and z r . The displacement W (1) of plate 1 is described 2 2

by where @ PN(1)
1
# 5 @ P (1) (1) (1) T
1 , P 2 ,..., P N 1 # and @ F N(1)1 #
5 @ F (1) (1) (1)
1 ,F 2 ,...,F N 1 # are, respectively, the modal ampli-
2m 1 v 2 W ~ 1 ! 1D 1 ¹ 4 W ~ 1 ! 52p ~ 1 ! ~ z c 50 ! 1p ext , ~2!
tude and mode shape vectors of the sound field in the cavity.
where m 1 and D 1 are, respectively, the surface mass and Substituting Eqs. ~7!–~10! into Eqs. ~2! and ~4!–~6!, and
bending stiffness of plate 1. p ext is the external sound pres- using the orthogonal properties of the modal shape functions,
sure on plate 1, which includes the block sound pressure of we obtained the modal equations for each subsystem in ma-
the incident sound wave and the back reaction of the radiated trix form. For example, the modal amplitudes of the sound
sound waves. p (1) is the cavity sound pressure. As the effect pressure in the cavity are expressed as
of sound radiation on the plate vibration is negligible, we @ P~N11! # 5 @ Z ~A12! #@ V~M22! # 2 @ Z ~A11! #@ V~M11! # 1 @ Z ~M1 c! #@ VMc # . ~11!
have
@ Z A(1)1 # is the modal acoustic transfer impedance matrix (N 1
p ext52A exp~ 2 j sin f cos u kx2 j sin f sin u ky ! .
3M 1 ) from plate 1 to the cavity:

F G
~3!
1,1! ~ 1 ! 1,1!
B ~1,1 /xA ¯ B ~1,M / x ~A1 !
The sound pressure in the cavity is composed of contribu- 1 1 1

tions from the acoustical control sources in the cavity, and @ Z ~A11! # 5 r 0 c 0 ]  , ~12!
the vibration of plates 1 and 2: B ~N1,1,1! / x ~A1 ! !
B ~N1,1,M / x ~A1 !
1 N1 ¯ 1 1 N1

2 ~1!
k p 1¹ p 2 ~1!
52 j vr 0 (i q ~i 1 ! 2 r 0 v 2 @ W ~ 2 ! d ~ z c 2L z c !
c
where

E
c
1,1! 1,1!
1
2W ~ 1 ! d ~ z c !# , ~4! B ~I,J 5B ~J,I 5 S ~J1 ! F ~I 1 ! ~ z c 50 ! d s ~13!
Af Af

where q i(1) 5Q i(1) d (rc 2ri c ) is the source strength of the i c th is the modal coupling coefficient and
c c
control source in the cavity. L z c is the distance between the
M ~A1 !
x ~A1I! 5 j
I
two plates. 2
~ k A,I 1 j h A 1 l k A2 I 2k 2 ! . ~14!
The displacement of plate 2 is determined by following r 0 kA f 1

equation: In Eq. ~14!, M A(1) 5 r 0 L (1) (1)

1 AI V 0 is the cavity modal mass,
2m 2 v 2 W ~ 2 ! 1D 2 ¹ 4 W ~ 2 ! 5p ~ 1 ! ~ z c 5L z c ! 2p ~ 2 ! ~ z r 50 ! where V a (1)
is the cavity volume, L (1) Al 5(1/V 0 )
(1)

3 * V (1) @ F I # d v . k A 1 I and h A 1 I are, respectively, the modal

(1) 2
0
2!
1p ~con , ~5! wave number and loss factor of the Ith cavity mode. A f is the
surface area of the plates. The loss factors of the cavity
con5 ( i p2 F i p2 d ( s
where p (2) 2 s (2)
(2) (2)
i p2 ) is the pressure due to modes are related to the acoustical impedance of cavity
point control forces at locations s (2) i p2 of plate 2. p
(2)
is the walls. @ Z A(1) # in Eq. ~11! is the modal acoustic transfer im-
2
sound pressure in the room and is described by pedance (N 1 3M 2 ) from plate 2 to the cavity:

1917 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No. 4, April 1998 J. Pan and C. Bao: Double wall sound transmission control 1917

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 84.88.136.149 On: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:57:03
 F G
(1)
2,1! ~ 1 !
B ~1,1 /xA ¯
2,1!
B ~1,M / x ~A1 ! The velocity components of plate 1 are related to @ PN # and
1 1 1 1
external sound pressure:
@ Z ~A12! # 5 r 0 c 0 ]  , ~15!
B ~N2,1,1! / x ~A1 ! ¯
!
B ~N2,1,M / x ~A1 ! @ V~M11! # 52 @ Y ~P11! #@ P~N11! # 1 @ Y ~Mext1 ! #@ P~Mext1 ! # , ~25!
1 N 1 1 1 N1

where the coupling coefficients are where @ Y (1)

P 1 # is the modal acoustic transfer mobility matrix

E
(M 1 3N 1 ) from the cavity to plate 1:

F G
2,1! 2,1!
1
B ~I,J 5B ~J,I 5 S ~j 2 ! F ~I 1 ! ~ z c 5L z c ! d s . ~16! 1,1! ~ 1 ! 1,1! ~ 1 !
Af Af B ~1,1 /xP ¯ B ~1,N /xP
1 1 1
@ VMc # in Eq. ~11! is the control source vector (M c 31) in the 1
@ Y ~P11! # 52 ]  ,
cavity: r 0c 0
B ~M1,1,1! / x ~P1 ! ¯
!
B ~M1,1,N / x ~P1 !
1 M1 1 1 M1
@ VMc # 52 @ Q ~11 ! ,Q ~21 ! ,...,Q ~M1 c! # T /A f ~17! ~26!
and the corresponding modal acoustic transfer impedance where
matrix (N 1 3M c ) is

F G
M ~P1 !
F ~11 ! ~ r ~11 ! ! / x ~A1 ! ¯ F ~11 ! ~ r ~M1 ! ! / x ~A1 ! x ~P1j! 5 j
J
~ k 2P 1 J 1 j h P 1 J k 2P 1 J 2k 2 ! . ~27!
r 0 kA f
1 c 1

@ Z ~M1 C! # 5 r 0 c 0 ]  .
F ~N1 ! ~ r ~11 ! ! / x ~A1 ! F ~N1 ! ~ r ~M1 ! ! / x ~A1 ! In Eq. ~27!, M (1)
P j 5m 1 L P J A f is the modal mass of plate 1
(1)
¯
P J 5(1/A f ) * A f @ S j # d s . k P i j and h P 1 J are, respec-
where L (1)
1 N 1 1 c N1 (1) 2
~18!
tively, the modal ‘‘wave number’’ and loss factor of the Jth
The pressure in the room is obtained as mode of plate 1. The loss factors of the plate modes are
@ P~N22! # 52 @ Z ~A2 ! #@ V~M22! # 1 @ Z ~M2 r! #@ VMr # , ~19! related to the imaginary part of the complex Young’s modu-
lus.
where @ Z (2)
A # is the modal acoustic transfer impedance matrix The modal acoustic transfer mobility matrix (M 1
(N 2 3M 2 ) from plate 2 to the room:

F G
3M 1 ) from the external sound pressure to plate 1 is

F G
2,2! ~ 2 ! 2,2!
B ~1,1 /xA ¯ B ~1,M / x ~A2 ! 1/x ~P1 ! ¯ 0
1 2 1
1

@ Z ~A2 ! # 5 r 0 c 0 ]  ~20! 1
, @ Y ~Mext1 ! # 52 ]  . ~28!
B ~N2,2,1! / x ~A2 ! !
B ~N2,2,M / x ~A2 ! r 0c 0
2 N 2
¯ 2 2 N 2 0 ¯ 1/x ~P1 !
M 1

here
The modal pressure components due to the external sound
2,2!
B ~I,J 2,2!
5B ~J,I 5
1
Af
E Af
S ~J2 ! F ~I 2 ! ~ z r 50 ! d s ~ 2 ! , ~21!
pressure is expressed by an (M 1 31) vector:

@ P~Mext1 ! # 5 @ P ~1ext! , P ~2ext! ,..., P ~Mext1 ! # T , ~29!

and
where
M ~A2 !
x ~A21! 5 j
E
1
~ k 2A 2 I 1 j h A 2 I k A2 2 I 2k 2 ! . ~22! 1
r 0 kA f P ~Jext! 5 p extS ~J1 ! d s ~ 1 ! . ~30!
Af Af
In Eq. ~22!, M A(2) 5 r 0 L (2) (2)
is the room modal mass
AI V 0
1
where V 0 (2)
is the room volume, L (2) AI 5(1/V 0 )
(2)
The velocity in plate 2 is due to @ PN(1) (2)
# , @ PN # , and to the
1 2
3 * V (1) @ F I # d v , and k A 2 I and h A 2 I are, respectively, the
(2) 2
pressure from the vibration control actuators ( @ PN(2) # ) on the
0 p2
modal wave number and loss factor of the Ith room mode. panel surface:
@ Z (2)
M r # is the modal transfer impedance matrix (N 2
3M r ) from the acoustical control sources in the room to @ V~M22! # 5 @ Y ~P21! #@ P~N11! # 2 @ Y ~P22! #@ P~N22! # 1 @ Y ~Mc !2 ,M p2 #@ P~N2p2! # ,
(2)
@ PN #:

F G
2
~31!
F ~12 ! ~ r~12 ! ! / x ~A2 ! ¯ F ~12 ! ~ r~M2 ! ! / x ~A2 ! (M 2 3N 1 ) and
@ Y (2) (M 2 3N 2 ) are, respec-
@ Y (2)
1 r 1 where P1 # P2 #

@ Z ~M2 r! # 5 r 0 c 0 ]  tively, the modal acoustic transfer mobility matrices from the
cavity to plate 2 and from the room to plate 2:

F G
F ~N2 ! ~ r~12 ! ! / x ~A2 ! ¯ F ~N2 ! ~ r~M2 ! ! / x ~A2 !
2 N2 2 r N2
2,1! ~ 2 ! 2,1! ~ 2 !
~23! B ~1,1 /xP ¯ B ~1,N /xP
1 1 1
and the velocity vector (M r 31) of the acoustical control 1
@ Y ~P21! # 52 ]  ,
sources is r 0c 0
B ~M2,1,1! / x ~P2 ! ¯
!
B ~M2,1,N / x ~P2 !
@ VMr # 52 @ Q ~12 ! ,Q ~22 ! ,...,Q ~M2 r! # T /A f .
2 M 2 1 M
~24! 2 2
~32!

1918 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No. 4, April 1998 J. Pan and C. Bao: Double wall sound transmission control 1918

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 84.88.136.149 On: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:57:03
 F G
2,2! ~ 2 ! 2,2! ~ 2 !
B ~1,1 /xP ¯ B ~1,N /xP r 0c 0
1 2 1 Z ~I c ! 52 f ~I 2 ! ~ r ~c2 ! ! . ~39!
1 x ~AI2 !
@ Y ~P22! # 52 ]  ,
r 0c 0 (2)
B ~M2,2,1! / x ~P2 ! ¯
!
B ~M2,2,N / x ~P2 ! Because all the elements in @ PN # are orthogonal to each
2 M2 2 2 M2 2

~33! other in terms of their modal shape functions, the mechanism

involved in this arrangement is purely modal suppression
where ~i.e., by attenuating the amplitude of each individual ele-
ment!. It is well know that the total time-averaged acoustic
M ~P2 !
potential energy in the room:11
x ~P22!J 5 j
J
~ k 2P 2 J 1 j h P 2 J k 2P 2 J 2k 2 ! . ~34!
r 0 kA f
V ~02 !
(c) E ~p2 ! 5 $ ~ V ~rc ! ! H @ Z~Nc2! # H @ L ~N22! #@ Z~Nc2! # V ~rc !
@ Y F # is the modal acoustic transfer mobility matrix (M 2 4 r 0 c 20
3M p 2 ) from the control force on plate 2 top the velocity of
plate 2: 1 ~ V ~rc ! ! H @ Z~Nc! # H @ L ~N2 ! #@ P~Np! # 1 @ P~Np! # H @ L ~N2 ! #
2 2 2 2 2

1 3 @ Z~Nc! # V ~rc ! 1 @ P~Np ! # H @ L ~N2 ! #@ P~Np! # % ,

@ Y ~Mc !2 ,M p2 # 52 2 2 2 2
r 0c 0

F G
has a minimum value corresponding to an optimal control
S ~12 ! ~ s ~12 ! ! / x ~P2 ! ¯ S ~12 ! ~ s ~M2 ! ! / x ~P2 ! input (V (c)
r ) opt :
1 p2 1

3 ]  , ~ E ~p2 ! ! min
5 @ P~Np! # H @ L ~N2 ! #@ P~Np! #
S ~M2 ! ~ s ~12 ! ! x ~P2 ! ¯ S ~M2 ! ~ s ~M2 ! ! / x ~P2 ! V ~02 ! /4r 0 c 20 2 2 2
2 M2 2 p2 M 2

~35! u @ P~Np! # H @ L ~N2 ! #@ Z~Nc! # u 2

2 2 2
2 , ~40!
and @ PN(2)p2 # is the surface pressure vector due to point control @ Z~Nc2! # H @ L ~N22! #@ Z~Nc2! #
forces:
where @ L N(2) # is a diagonal normalization matrix of room
2
@ P~N2p2! # 5 @ F ~12 ! ,F ~22 ! ,...,F ~M2 p2
! T
# /A f . ~36! modes. Equation ~40! only presents the possible minimum
potential energy as a result of control. To achieve a large
reduction in the potential energy @i.e., (E (2)
p ) min /Ep →0#, the
(2)
II. ANALYSIS OF CONTROL MECHANISMS
following relationship needs to be satisfied:
Equations ~11!, ~19!, ~25!, and ~31! present 4 coupled
u @ P~Np! #@ L ~N2 ! #@ Z~Nc! # H u 2 > $ @ P~Np! #@ L ~N2 ! #@ P~Np! # H %$ @ Z~Nc! #
matrix equations from which the complete system response 2 2 2 2 2 2 2
(1) (2)
@ PN 1
# , @ PN 2
# , @ V(1) (2)
M1 # , and @ VM2 # can be determined. In ad- 3@ L ~N2 ! #@ Z~Nc! # H % . ~41!
2 2
dition, for any given cost function, the optimal feedforward
(2)
control law for the control inputs @ VMc # , @ VMr # , or @ PN # Mathematically, the above relationship is satisfied only if the
2 (p) (c)
can be obtained when cost function ~acoustic potential en- vectors @ PN # and @ ZN # are in proportion:
2 2
ergy in the room! is minimized. For the simplicity of analy-
@ P~Np2! # 5c @ Z~Nc2! # , ~42!
sis, only one control source is used at a time. However, the
results of the analysis will shed light on the performance and where c is a complex constant with velocity unit. Physically,
mechanisms of the control system with multiple control the satisfaction of Eq. ~42! requires similar excitation of all
sources. modes from the primary and control sources. Successful at-
A. Acoustic control source in room tenuation of low-frequency potential energy in a room by
placing a control point source near the primary point source
When only one acoustic source is used in the room to
is an example where Eq. ~42! is approximately satisfied.
control the transmitted sound field, Eq. ~19! can be expressed (c)
as However, in this analysis the elements in @ ZN # depend on
2
the mode shape functions evaluated at the control source
@ P~N22! # 5 @ P~Np2! # 1 @ Z~Nc2! # V ~rc ! , ~37! (p)
location, while that in @ PN # are due to the coupling between
2

(p) the room and plate modes. As a result, Eq. ~42! can only be
where the vector @ PN # is the modal components of the un- satisfied at those frequencies where the primary sound field
2
controlled sound pressure in the room due to primary bound- is dominated by a single room mode and the modal overlap
ary structural vibration: in the room is low. For this case, if the control source is
M2 located so as to excite the dominating mode only, Eq. ~42!
r 0c 0
P ~I p ! 52
x ~A22!I
(
J51
2,2! ~ 2 !
B ~I,J VJ ~38! will be approximately satisfied and large reduction of poten-
tial energy at this frequency is expected.
In practical rooms, only at very low frequencies is the
(c)
and @ ZN # is the impedance vector for the point sound source primary sound field dominated by a single mode and the
2
in the room: contribution of nonresonance modes small. Above this fre-

1919 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No. 4, April 1998 J. Pan and C. Bao: Double wall sound transmission control 1919

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 84.88.136.149 On: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:57:03
 (2) 21
M2 # 1 @ a M 2 #
5 @ V(P)
quency range, increases in modal density and damping often @ Y (c) (C)
M 2 ,M p2 # ( P s 2 ) opt) is significantly
make it difficult for control source to generate the required reduced, and so is the resultant total sound pressure.
modal components without exciting others. Numerical ~2! Equation ~48! can also be satisfied when the con-
results12 from the active control of sound radiation from a
M2 # 5 @ VM2 #
@ V(2) (P)
trolled plate velocity vector
steel panel into in a highly damped room show that a large 21
reduction of potential energy is only achieved at the very low 1 @ a (2)
M # @ Y (c) (C)
M ,M # ( P s ) opt is orthogonal with the
2 2 p2 2
frequencies. In the low-frequency range, the arrangement row vectors in @ Z (2) A # ~or is orthogonal with those row
with the acoustic control source near the radiating panel vectors corresponding to the dominating pressure com-
gives larger reduction than that with a control source located ponents in @ PN(2)
2
# !. For this case, the controlled plate ve-
at the far corner of the room. locity is not necessarily attenuated. The magnitude and
phase of each mode in plate 2 are rearranged such that
B. Control force applied to plate 2 the superimposed contribution of all the elements in
When only one point vibrational control actuator is ap- @ V(2)
M2 # to the sound pressure components in the room is
plied to plate 2 to control the transmitted sound field, Eq. significantly reduced.
~19! can be expressed as
Previous work suggested that the modal suppressing
@ P~N22! # 52 @ Z ~A2 ! # $ @ V~MP2! # 1 @ a ~M2 2! # 21 @ Y ~Mc !2 ,M p2 # P ~sC2 ! % , mechanism is effective when the transmitted energy is car-
~43! ried mainly by one dominating panel mode.1 On the other
hand, the modal rearrangement mechanism is associated with
where the primary velocity vector in plate 2 is the sound transmission into the room controlled modes
@ V~MP2! # 52 @ a ~M2 2! # 21 @ Y ~P21! #@ Z ~A11! #@ a ~M1 1! # 21 @ Y ~Mext1 ! #@ P~Mext1 ! # , where energy is transmitted from several plate modes. As
21
~44! @ a (2)
M 2# @ Y (c) (C)
M 2 ,M p2 # P s 2 is due to the point control force and

and P s(C) is pressure generated by the point control force at @ VM2 # is generated by the distributed sound field, Eq. ~49!
(P)

2
can be approximately satisfied at the frequencies where plate
plate 2.
2 is dominated by a single mode ~e.g., panel controlled
In Eq. ~44!, @ a (1)
M 1 # and @ a M 2 # are respectively (M 1
(2)
mode!. For this case, although the room sound pressure field
3M 1 ) and (M 2 3M 2 ) matrices: may consist of multiple components coupled with the domi-
@ a ~M1 1! # 5 @ I # 2 @ Y ~P11! #@ Z ~A11! # , ~45! nating plate mode, the effective suppression of the dominat-
ing plate mode will result in significant reduction of all the
@ a ~M2 2! # 5 @ I # 2 @ Y ~P21! #@ Z ~A12! # 2 @ Y ~P22! #@ Z ~A2 ! # 1 @ Y ~P21! #@ Z ~A11! # pressure components.
When the plate response is dominated by several modes
3@ a ~M1 ! # 21 @ Y ~P1 ! #@ Z ~A1 ! # ~46! and suppression of the response of these modes using a
1 1 2
single control force becomes impossible, the second mecha-
M 2 ,M p2 # in Eq. ~43! becomes a vector with its elements
@ Y (c) nism may be at work. The optimal control force will adjust
expressed as the magnitude and phase of each plate mode, such that the
1 sound pressure components due to the superimposed excita-
c!
Y ~I,1 52 S ~12 ! ~ s ~12 ! ! . ~47! tion of all the plate modes @ V(2) M 2 # through the modal acoustic
r 0 c 0 x ~p12 !
transfer impedance matrix @ Z (2) A # are suppressed.
Using a similar analysis as for the acoustical control in the
room, it can be shown that total reduction of the potential C. Acoustic control source in cavity
energy in the room can be achieved only if the following When only one acoustic actuator is used in the double
relationship is satisfied: wall cavity to control the transmitted sound field, the sound
@ Z ~A2 ! #@ V~MP2! # 5b @ Z ~A2 ! #@ a ~M2 2! # 21 @ Y ~Mc !2 ,M p2 # , ~48! pressure vector in the room can be expressed as:

where b is a complex constant. Although Eq. ~48! shows a @ P~N22! # 52 @ Z ~A2 ! #@ V~M2!2 # , ~50!
result similar to that shown in Eq. ~42!, it suggests that at- where
tenuation of the sound field in the room ~to reduce the mag-
(2)
nitudes of all elements in @ PN # ! by controlling the vibration @ V~M2!2 # 5 @ b ~N22! # 21 @ Y ~P21! #@ P~N11! # , ~51!
2
in plate 2 can be achieved by two mechanisms:
@ P~N11! # 52 @ b ~N11! # 21 $ @ Z ~A11! #@ Y ~Mext1 ! #@ P~Mext
1
!
#
~1! Equation ~48! can be satisfied if the control system is
arranged such that @ V(p) (2) 21
M2 # and @ a M 2 # @ Y (c)
M 2 ,M p2 # are in 2 @ Z ~M1 ! #@ VMc # % . ~52!
c
proportion. That is (1)
@ b N 1 # and @ b N(2)2 # are, respectively, (N 1 3N 1 ) and (N 2
@V~MP2! # 5b @ a ~M2 2! # 21 @ Y ~Mc !2 ,M p2 # . ~49! 3N 2 ) matrices

For this case, the optimal control force can be used to @ b ~N11! # 5 @ I # 2 @ Z ~A11! #@ Y ~P11! # 2 @ Z ~A12! #@ b ~N22! # 21 @ Y ~P21! # , ~53!
effectively suppress the modal amplitudes of in plate 2.
As a result, the source term in Eq. ~43! ~i.e., @ V(2) @ b ~N22! # 5 @ I # 2 @ Y ~P22! #@ Z ~A2 ! # . ~54!
M # 2

1920 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No. 4, April 1998 J. Pan and C. Bao: Double wall sound transmission control 1920

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 84.88.136.149 On: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:57:03
 Equation ~49! shows that the ‘‘source’’ of the room sound
pressure is the velocity of plate 2 ( @ V(2)M2 # ), while the
‘‘source’’ of the velocity components of plate 2 is sound
pressure in the cavity @see Eq. ~51!#.
It has been shown that a significant reduction of the
acoustic potential energy in the room requires primary sound
pressure components in the room to be proportional to that
due to the control sources:
@ Z ~A2 ! #@ b ~N22! # 21 @ Y ~P21! #@ b ~N11! # 21 @ Z ~A11! # ^ @ Y ~Mext1 ! #@ P~Mext
1
!
#&
5a @ Z ~A2 ! #@ b ~N2 ! # 21 @ Y ~P2 ! #@ b ~N1 ! # 21 @ Z ~M1 ! #@ VMc # ,
2 1 1 c
where a is a complex constant. Equation ~55! suggests that
the proportional condition can be realized by following three
possible mechanisms:
~1! The control system may be arranged such that the pri-
mary sound pressure components in the cavity,
@ b N(1)1 # 21 @ Z A(1)1 # ^ @ Y (ext)
M 1 #@ PM1 # &
(ext)
is proportional to
(1) 21
@ b N # @ Z M # . That is,
1
(1)
c satisfy the required proportional relationship with the pri-
@b~N11!#21@Z~A11!#^@Y ~Mext1 ! #@ P~Mext
1
!
# & 5a @ b ~N11! # 21 @ Z ~M1 r! # .
If the condition in Eq. ~56! can be satisfied, the sound
pressure in the cavity will be effectively suppressed. For
this case, the suppression of the sound pressure modal
response in the cavity results in a significant noise reduc-
tion in the room.
~2! The optimal volume velocity of the control source in the
cavity might be selected such that the controlled pressure
(1)
component vector in the cavity @ PN # is orthogonal to
1 in the coupling with a dominating room modes, the control
the corresponding row vectors in the modified modal
acoustic transfer mobility matrix @ b N 2 # 21 @ Y (2)
(2)
P 1 # . As a
result of the modal rearrangement of the cavity pressure
components ~for this case the pressure components may
not be reduced!, the magnitudes of the dominating
modes in plate 2 are effectively reduced, and so are the
sound pressure components in the room.
~3! The optimal volume velocity of the control source in the
cavity might be selected such that the controlled modal
component vector in plate 2 ~due to the excitation of the
controlled pressure components in the cavity! @ V(2) M2 # is
orthogonal to the row vectors in @ Z (2)
A # . For this case, the
controlled plate velocity may not necessarily be attenu-
ated. The magnitude and phase of each mode in plate 2
are rearranged by the control source in the cavity such
that the superimposed contribution by all the elements of
in @ V(2)
M2 # to the dominating sound pressure components
in the room is significantly reduced.
In both discussions of ~2! and ~3! above, the modal re-
arrangement mechanism was at work. However, for the
former case, the cavity sound pressure is rearranged directly
to give an attenuated velocity in plate 2. For the latter case,
the modal components in plate 2 are rearranged indirectly
through the rearrangement of the cavity pressure components
to obtain an attenuated sound pressure field in the room.
1921 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No. 4, April 1998
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 84.88.136.149 On: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:57:03
III. CONCLUSIONS
This paper presents a model for sound transmission
through double plate structures in such a way that the mecha-
nisms of the several different active control arrangements
can be analysed. For either acoustic control in the room, or
structural acoustic control on plate 2 or acoustic control in
the partition cavity, the condition for effective reduction of
acoustic potential energy in the room is that the primary and
secondary pressure vectors in the room are proportional as
described by Eqs. ~42!, ~48!, and ~55!. Using the optimal
control input, the system may choose different mechanisms
~55! to achieve the reduction of acoustic potential energy in the
room.
The analysis of the physical mechanisms involved in
each control arrangement shows:
~1! When the transmitted sound field in the room is di-
rectly controlled by using one acoustic control source in the
room, the suppression of the room modal response is the
only possible mechanism. It is difficult for the secondary
sound field generated by a point acoustic control source to
mary field generated by distributed structural vibration. Con-
trol can be achieved only at those frequencies where the
~56! primary sound field is dominated by a single room mode and
the control source can excite this mode without the strong
excitation of other modes.
~2! The sound pressure in the room can be attenuated
through the control of sound radiation into the room using a
vibrational control source on the radiating structure. The
control source may directly suppress the amplitude of the
dominating mode corresponding to the sound pressure field
in the room. However, when several plate modes participate
source will rearrange the magnitudes and phase of the plate
modes such that the superimposed sound radiation from the
plate to the room is significantly reduced. Because there are
two possible control mechanisms, it is expected that better
attenuation may be achieved than for the case of room con-
trol for which only one mechanism applies..
~3! The common understanding of the control of sound
transmission through double plates by inserting one acoustic
control source between the double wall cavity is based on the
fact that the low-frequency sound transmission is due to the
~0,0,0! cavity mode. If the cavity is relatively small, the
~0,0,0! mode may dominate a reasonably wide frequency
range. The suppression of this dominating acoustic mode in
the cavity will block the sound transmission path and there-
fore transmitted sound pressure will be reduced. The analysis
of this paper shows three possible mechanisms involved in
this control arrangement, one of which is suppression of the
cavity modal response. The other two mechanisms are ~1!
the direct rearrangement of the cavity sound pressure com-
ponents to minimise the amplitude of the dominating radiat-
ing modes in plate 2; ~2! the indirect rearrangement of the
modal components in plate 2 by adjusting the cavity pressure
components, such that the superimposed sound radiation into
the room is reduced. These two modal rearrangement mecha-
nisms may be accompanied by an increase of sound pressure
in the cavity. In addition, the three possible mechanisms may
J. Pan and C. Bao: Double wall sound transmission control 1921
 explain the improved performance of the control using this
arrangement9 relative to room or panel control.
Although previous numerical calculation and experi- 6
ments have shown the existence of the modal suppression
and modal rearrangement mechanisms, further study are
7
needed to investigate how to effectively use this knowledge
in the design of active control systems for sound transmis-
sion through double walls. 8
1
J. Pan, ‘‘A study of the active control of sound transmission through a
9
panel into a cavity,’’ J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 84, 182 ~1988!.
2 sound transmission through a double panel partition,’’ J. Sound Vib. 180,
J. Pan, C. H. Hansen, and D. A. Bies, ‘‘Active control of noise transmis-
sion through a panel into a cavity, I. Analytical study,’’ J. Acoust. Soc.
10
Am. 87, 2098–2108 ~1990!.
3
J. Pan and C. H. Hansen, ‘‘Active control of noise transmission through a
panel into a cavity, II. Experimental study,’’ J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 90, 11
1488–1492 ~1991!.
4 12
C. R. Fuller, ‘‘Active control of sound transmission/radiation from elastic
plates by vibration inputs: I. Analysis,’’ J. Sound Vib. 136, 1–15 ~1990!.
5
D. R. Thomas, P. A. Nelson, R. J. Pinnington, and S. J. Elliott, ‘‘Active
1922 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 103, No. 4, April 1998 J. Pan and C. Bao: Double wall sound transmission control
Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 84.88.136.149 On: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:57:03
control of sound transmission through stiff lightweight composite fuselage
constructions,’’ Proceeding of the 14th AIAA Aeroacoustics Conference
II, 552–560 ~1992!.
J. Pan, S. D. Snyder, C. H. Hansen, and C. R. Fuller, ‘‘Active control of
farfield sound radiated by a rectangular panel—A general analysis,’’ J.
Acoust. Soc. Am. 91, 2056–2066 ~1992!.
J. Pan and C. H. Hansen, ‘‘Active control of noise transmission through a
panel into a cavity, III. Effect of actuator location,’’ J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
90, 1493–1501 ~1991!.
C. Bao and J. Pan, ‘‘Experimental study of different approaches for active
control of sound transmission through double walls,’’ J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
102, 1664–1670 ~1997!.
P. Sas, C. Bao, F. Augusztinovicz, and W. Desmet, ‘‘Active control of
609–625 ~1995!.
L. Gagliardini and P. Bouvet, ‘‘DAP: the active controlled double wall,’’
Proc. Inter-Noise 93, 107–110 ~1993!.
P. A. Nelson and S. J. Elliott, Active Control of Sound ~Academic, New
York, 1992!.
J. Pan and C. Bao, ‘‘Active attenuation of noise transmission through
elastic partitions with high modal densities,’’ Proc. Inter-Noise 96, Liver-
pool, UK, III, pp. 1055–1060 ~1996!.
1922