AFMG Network Forum
AFMG Network Forum Index -> EASE 4 -> Schroeder RT via Ray Impacts
Post new topic  Reply to topic View previous topic :: View next topic 
Schroeder RT via Ray Impacts
PostPosted: Wed Dec 21, 2005 8:58 pm Reply with quote
intercessor
Member
 
Joined: 29 Jun 2005
Posts: 11




Hi again,
I was using Ray Tracing w/ Impacts to get RT times on a couple different projects. What I keep coming up with is the Schroeder calculations keep coming up with extremely low times compared with Eyring and Sabine. I am talking about 3 to 4 seconds less. I have a couple questions, first what may I have configured wrong to come up with such a disparity and second, are probe calculations more accurate than using Local Decay Time in the mapping module? I have to add that on one of the projects I did a 20 order, 500k+ rays per speaker calculation.

Good day
View user's profile Send private message
PostPosted: Mon Jan 02, 2006 11:23 pm Reply with quote
Stefan
Member
 
Joined: 19 Apr 2005
Posts: 167
Location: Berlin, Germany




Hi,

first please note, that neither Raytracing Impacts nor Local Decay Time can take into account scattering factors. This is only possible when using the AURA module for EASE. Additionally, because the number of particles/rays is limited all raytracing methods suffer a decrease of detection density towards greater times (because the detection probability decreases the longer the particle is on its way).

In AURA this is compensated for, but in Raytracing Impacts you would have to use one of the tail generation functions to estimate the reverberant tail and add missing pulses. Unfortunately this procedure is not always straight-forward and should be used with care. Without the tail the energy density at the end of the simulated response is often too low and may lead to low RTs accordingly.

So if you are really interested in performing room-acoustic analysis you will have to look at AURA or other room-acoustic tools.

Regarding particle numbers, also here the "resolution rule" applies. You need to increase the number/resolution until nothing changes anymore. It is always recommendable for random-process based calculations to check a second run with identical parameters to get an idea of the errors involved.

Stefan
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail Visit poster's website
AFMG Network Forum Index -> EASE 4
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
All times are GMT  
Page 1 of 1  

  
  
 Post new topic  Reply to topic  


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2003 phpBB Group
Theme created by Vjacheslav Trushkin
Variation by CodeWeavers and AFMG