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.
The full text of this article is not currently available.
Physical and numerical constraints in source modeling for finite difference simulation of room acousticsa)
1. J. G. Tolan and J. B. Schneider, “Locally conformal method for acoustic finite-difference time-domain modeling of rigid surfaces,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 114, 2575–2581 (2003).
2. K. Kowalczyk and M. van Walstijn, “Modeling frequency-dependent boundaries as digital impedance filters in FDTD and K-DWM room acoustics simulations,” J. Audio Eng. Soc. 56, 569–583 (2008).
3. J. Häggblad and B. Engquist, “Consistent modeling of boundaries in acoustic finite-difference time-domain simulations,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 132, 1303–1310 (2012).
4. S. Bilbao, “Modeling of complex geometries and boundary conditions in finite difference/finite volume time domain room acoustics simulation,” IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech, Lang. Process. 21, 1524–1533 (2013).
7. L. Savioja, “Real-time 3D finite-difference time-domain simulation of low- and midfrequency room acoustics,” in 13th Int. Conf on Digital Audio Effects (2010).
8. J. Sheaffer and B. Fazenda, “FDTD/K-DWM simulation of 3D room acoustics on general purpose graphics hardware,” in Proc. of the Institute of Acoustics (2010), Vol. 32.
9. C. Webb and S. Bilbao, “Computing room acoustics with CUDA - 3D FDTD schemes with boundary losses and viscosity,” in Proc. IEEE Int. Conf. on Acoustics, Speech and Sig. Proc., Prague (2011).
10. K. Yee, “Numerical solution of initial boundary value problems involving Maxwell's equations in isotropic media,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 14, 302–307 (1966).
11. A. Taflove and S. Hagness, Computational Electrodynamics (Artech House, Boston, MA, 2000), pp. 175–224.
12. S. Gedney, Introduction to the Finite-difference Time-domain (FDTD) Method for Electromagnetics (Morgan & Claypool Publishers, San Rafael, CA, 2011), pp. 75–99.
13. D. Botteldooren, “Finite-difference time-domain simulation of low-frequency room acoustic problems,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 98, 3302–3308 (1995).
14. M. Karjalainen and C. Erkut, “Digital waveguides versus finite difference structures: Equivalence and mixed modeling,” EURASIP J. Appl. Signal Process. 2004, 978–989 (2004).
15. H. Hacihabiboglu, B. Gunel, and A. Kondoz, “Time-domain simulation of directive sources in 3-D digital waveguide mesh-based acoustical models,” IEEE Trans. Audio, Speech, Lang. Process. 16, 934–946 (2008).
16. T. Lokki, A. Southern, S. Siltanen, and L. Savioja, “Acoustics of epidaurus studies with room acoustics modelling methods,” Acta Acust. Acust. 99, 40–47 (2013).
17. D. Buechler, D. Roper, C. Durney, and D. Christensen, “Modeling sources in the FDTD formulation and their use in quantifying source and boundary condition errors,” IEEE Trans. Microwave Theory Tech. 43, 810–814 (1995).
18. J. Schneider, C. Wagner, and O. Ramahi, “Implementation of transparent sources in FDTD simulations,” IEEE Trans. Antennas Propag. 46, 1159–1168 (1998).
19. J. Schneider, C. Wagner, and S. Broschat, “Implementation of transparent sources embedded in acoustic finite-difference time-domain grids,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 103, 136–142 (1998).
20. J. Redondo, R. Picó, B. Roig, and M. Avis, “Time domain simulation of sound diffusers using finite-difference schemes,” Acta Acust. Acust. 93, 611–622 (2007).
21. H. Jeong and Y. Lam, “Source implementation to eliminate low-frequency artifacts in finite difference time domain room acoustic simulation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 131, 258–268 (2012).
22. P. Morse and K. Ingard, Theoretical Acoustics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986), p. 241.
23. J. Strikwerda, Finite Difference Schemes and Partial Differential Equations (SIAM, Philadelphia, PA, 2004), p. 34.
24. J. Botts and L. Savioja, “Integrating finite difference schemes for scalar and vector wave equations,” in IEEE Int. Conf. Acoust., Speech, Signal Processing (2013).
25. M. R. Schroeder, “Integrated-impulse method measuring sound decay without using impulses,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 66, 497–500 (1979).
26. S. Müller and P. Massarani, “Transfer-function measurement with sweeps,” J. Audio Eng. Soc. 49, 443–471 (2001).
27. R. San Martín and M. Arana, “Uncertainties caused by source directivity in room-acoustic investigations,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123, EL133–EL138 (2008).
28. P. Morse and K. Ingard, Theoretical Acoustics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986), p. 310.
29. A. Southern, D. Murphy, T. Lokki, and L. Savioja, “The perceptual effects of dispersion error on room acoustic model auralization,” in Proc. Forum Acusticum, Aalborg, Denmark (2011), pp. 1553–1558.
30. J. Botts, A. Bockman, and N. Xiang, “On the selection and implementation of sources for finite-difference methods,” in Proceedings of 20th International Congress on Acoustics (2010).
33. X. Yuan, D. Borup, J. Wiskin, M. Berggren, and S. Johnson, “Simulation of acoustic wave propagation in dispersive media with relaxation losses by using FDTD method with PML absorbing boundary condition,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 46, 14–23 (1999).
34. D. K. Wilson, S. L. Collier, V. E. Ostashev, D. F. Aldridge, N. P. Symons, and D. Marlin, “Time-domain modeling of the acoustic impedance of porous surfaces,” Acta Acust. Acust. 92(6), 965–975 (2006).
36. I. Khan and R. Ohba, “Explicit formulas for coefficients of maximally flat FIR low/highpass digital filters,” Electron. Lett. 36, 1918–1919 (2000).
37. J. Smith, Introduction to Digital Filters: with Audio Applications (W3K Publishing, Stanford, CA, 2008), p. 272.
38. P. Morse and K. Ingard, Theoretical Acoustics (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1986), p. 315.
39. R. J. Matheson, “Multichannel low frequency room simulation with properly modeled source terms-multiple equalization comparison,” in Audio Engineering Society Convention (2008), p. 125.
41. J. Escolano, J. J. López, and B. Pueo, “Directive sources in acoustic discrete-time domain simulations based on directivity diagrams,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121, EL256–EL262 (2007).
Article metrics loading...
In finite difference time domain simulation of room acoustics,source functions are subject to various constraints. These depend on the way sources are injected into the grid and on the chosen parameters of the numerical scheme being used. This paper addresses the issue of selecting and designing sources for finite difference simulation, by first reviewing associated aims and constraints, and evaluating existing sourcemodels against these criteria. The process of exciting a model is generalized by introducing a system of three cascaded filters, respectively, characterizing the driving pulse, the source mechanics, and the injection of the resulting source function into the grid. It is shown that hard, soft, and transparent sources can be seen as special cases within this unified approach. Starting from the mechanics of a small pulsating sphere, a parametric sourcemodel is formulated by specifying suitable filters. This physically constrained sourcemodel is numerically consistent, does not scatter incoming waves, and is free from zero- and low-frequency artifacts. Simulation results are employed for comparison with existing source formulations in terms of meeting the spectral and temporal requirements on the outward propagating wave.
Full text loading...
Most read this month