|
|
Hello,
I have the following comments:
1. A resolution of 200'000 particles is not really what we consider "quite big", especially in such a case.
2. Scattering coefficients shall not chan ... |
|
|
|
|
Hello,
You need to add listener seats first.
Regards, |
|
|
|
|
Hello,
I may add that Beranek found that more accurate results can be obtained, when audience is treated just like other surfaces with a given absorption coefficient.
To take into account, the three ... |
|
|
|
|
in the other example it is against a wall and the sound is going THRU the material and bouncing on the hard surface and exiting back thru the material again....
Hello Ron,
Do you believe that this p ... |
|
|
|
|
Jim,
Yes, it is true that most manufacturers describe the absorption of such products in terms of "Sabins per baffle". My point was how to import this into what EASE can correctly interpret. That i ... |
|
|
|
|
Let me explain. These baffles are measured in a reverberation chamber hanging in free space. The RT is measured both with and without the panel and then using Sabine's formula, (a = .05(V/RT)) the n ... |
|
|
|
|
Hi Peter,
Most of currently available absorption data of materials describes the random-incidence coefficient measured under a given set of conditions during the measurement, such as termination behi ... |
|
|
|
|
Hi,
1. The difference between the two control times is the arrival time of the direct sound at the listener's seat.
2. For your second question, I will try to explain the issue as far as I understan ... |
|
|
| Page 1 of 1 |
All times are GMT |
|
AFMG Network Forum
Forum: