1887
banner image
No data available.
Please log in to see this content.
You have no subscription access to this content.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Optimum absorption and aperture parameters for realistic coupled volume spaces determined from computational analysis and subjective testing results
Rent:
Rent this article for
USD
10.1121/1.3268604
/content/asa/journal/jasa/127/1/10.1121/1.3268604
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/127/1/10.1121/1.3268604

Figures

Image of FIG. 1.
FIG. 1.

A representative decay outline exhibiting a double slope, where is shown by the solid line and by the dashed line.

Image of FIG. 2.
FIG. 2.

(a) Plan view, (b) cross section, and (c) transverse cross section of the virtual hall with the secondary volume shaded in light gray and aperture doors in dark gray. Source position (s) is designated with a circle and receivers (R1–R3) are marked by squares.

Image of FIG. 3.
FIG. 3.

T30/T15 and LDT/T10 data for the 25 virtual hall configurations

Image of FIG. 4.
FIG. 4.

Plot of energy decay curves for absorption ratio 0.04 across seven aperture sizes.

Image of FIG. 5.
FIG. 5.

Decay ratio and data for the 25 virtual hall configurations. Decay ratio equals 1 and equals 0 when only one slope has been detected by the Bayesian analysis.

Image of FIG. 6.
FIG. 6.

A plot of number of dimensions versus stress. The stress value for dimension 1 is below 0.15, with a small amount of change in stress as number of dimensions is increased, indicating dimension 1 is the correct dimension.

Image of FIG. 7.
FIG. 7.

Plot of relative subjective preference versus LDT/T10 data with a second-order polynomial trendline and correlation value. Higher subjective preference values indicate greater preference by listeners.

Image of FIG. 8.
FIG. 8.

Plot of LDT/T10 data versus relative MDS preference values for 17 configurations of virtual hall. Higher subjective preference values indicate greater preference by listeners.

Image of FIG. 9.
FIG. 9.

Recommended design guideline flow charts for coupled volume concert halls with (a) large volume ratio, (b) medium volume ratio, and (c) small volume ratio.

Tables

Generic image for table
TABLE I.

Architectural parameters and calculated volume ratio of the complex coupled volume system concert hall.

Generic image for table
TABLE II.

Four levels of absorption ratio used in the virtual hall configurations.

Generic image for table
TABLE III.

Seven levels of aperture size used in the virtual hall configurations.

Generic image for table
TABLE IV.

Source and receiver coordinates for complex coupled volume system computer model configurations.

Generic image for table
TABLE V.

Architectural parameter values of the 17 configurations used in the subjective testing with corresponding alpha-numeric labeling system.

Generic image for table
TABLE VI.

Four levels of preference with the corresponding virtual hall configurations and architectural parameters

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/asa/journal/jasa/127/1/10.1121/1.3268604
2010-01-05
2014-04-16
Loading

Full text loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
752b84549af89a08dbdd7fdb8b9568b5 journal.articlezxybnytfddd
Scitation: Optimum absorption and aperture parameters for realistic coupled volume spaces determined from computational analysis and subjective testing results
http://aip.metastore.ingenta.com/content/asa/journal/jasa/127/1/10.1121/1.3268604
10.1121/1.3268604
SEARCH_EXPAND_ITEM