Sort by
Quantifying the effect of flanking sound transmission on sound insulation and speech privacy metrics

In modern commercial office design, sustainable building codes and quality standards often demand certain levels of sound insulation to ensure sufficient speech privacy or freedom from distraction for the occupants. Missing from the minimum requirements of these documents, however, is guidance on eliminating flanking weaknesses that repeatedly and significantly degrade the experienced speech privacy. This paper presents case studies of common acoustical weaknesses found between closed offices and meeting rooms. Through the use of sound intensity measurements and acoustical imagery, the sound power of each weakness is calculated and shown relative to the sound power of the separating partition. By comparing these results to partitions without these weaknesses, the effective reduction in speech privacy is demonstrated using the ASTC, NIC, and SPC metrics. Weaknesses examined and ranked include, open ceiling plenums, lack of or ineffective door seals, door closure pressure, continuous door frames, façade mullions and transoms, interior windows and their frames, lack of acoustical sealant, uninterrupted gypsum on side walls, common door frames at the edges of partitions, modular and operable walls and their junctions, continuous heating elements, thin continuous floor toppings, and ventilation duct crosstalk.

Relevant
Comparing testing methodologies of speech privacy class in closed offices

Speech privacy is a principal research area in speech communication. The term "speech privacy" is generally interpreted a condition where speech cannot be readily understood by, but may be audible to, an unintended listener. The need to prevent sound from intruding into adjacent spaces in both closed and open-plan settings is a concern in various office buildings. Speech privacy is essentially a function of the signal-to-noise ratio, comprising the noise reduction between source and receiver positions, and the masking effective of background noise. Speech Privacy Class (SPC) is one of the commonly used metrics for speech privacy assessment in closed plan offices in North America. However, there is a reluctance to use SPC between closed rooms due to laborious testing requirements as per ASTM E2638; there is a supposed preference to use either Speech Privacy Potential (SPP) based on simpler NIC testing, or to use Articulation Index (AI) despite the AI being created solely for testing open-plan settings. The ASTM E2638-10 standard SPC testing procedure does not assume a diffuse field in the receiving space but rather evaluates the performance at each potential eavesdropping location on the basis that there may be an intentional listener. Thus, to better apply the SPC to unintended listening and speech privacy in typical commercial spaces, the goal is to compare the current methodology as per ASTM E2638-10 with alternative sampling methods considering the talker location and unintended listening positions outside the source room.

Relevant
Evaluation of the uniformity of sound-masking systems in an open-plan office

Many open-plan offices adopt an electronic sound masking system in order to reduce distraction from background noises, primarily intruding speech. Sound masking systems should uniformly generate a masking sound over the entire office area to homogenize the speech privacy whilst minimising occupant perception of the masking sound. This study evaluates the spatial uniformity of the masking sound field in an example open-plan office, where the masking system was set up to represent supposedly optimal installation conditions; 1-speaker zones, individually-calibration of each zone to match the specified curve precisely, and smaller zones than typically specified. Sound level measurements performed as per ASTM E1573-18 were made at each workstation, as well as every 0.6 m across the office, for a total of 117 measurements. Measurement results show that tolerance of ± 0.5 dB for the overall A-weighted level is only achievable at 61% of measurement locations, whilst ± 1 dB is achievable at 99% of locations. For one-third-octave band sound pressure levels between 250 Hz and 4 kHz, ± 2 dB is achieved only 55% of the time, and tolerance of ± 3.5 dB is required to achieve 95% compliance with the specified curve. By using calibrated computer simulations, the study also examined parameters that can influence spatial uniformity in open-plan offices. It was found that the number of sound masking loudspeakers, partition height, and the scattering and absorption coefficient of the ceiling all affect the uniformity of the masking sound. Speech intelligibility was assessed by calculating the Articulation Index (AI) to determine an acceptable tolerance for masking sound variation. Increasing the number of loudspeakers was the most effective way to improve the uniformity of the masking sound. The AI results suggest ± 2 dB, when including octave band sound pressure levels, is a minimum required tolerance for a sound masking sound field in an open office to provide AI values within ± 0.1 of the targeted value across the office area.

Open Access
Relevant
The spatial uniformity of an electronic sound masking system in an open-plan space

An electronic sound-masking system reduces workers' distractions in open-plan spaces by utilizing an artificial broadband sound. The artificial sound should raise a background noise level spectrum to the targeted masking sound level uniformly over the entire area.Uneven distribution of the masking sound levels can cause unnecessary loud background noise or inefficient sound masking performance at the same time and in different locations. The ASTM E 1573-18 standard provides a procedure to quantify the uniformity of the masking sound but does not specify any acceptable degree of uniformity. Thus, this study aims to investigate the uniformity of the masking sound field in an open-plan space under varying room acoustic conditions. The acoustic measurement was carried out in an open-plan office with a measurement grid of 0.6 m. The spatial variation of the sound pressure levels was calculated with the measured one-third-octave band SPLs from 250 Hz to 4 kHz. The study also employed computer-aided acoustic simulation to find key design parameters, impacting the uniformity of the masking sound. The results show that the number of loudspeakers, a partition height, scattering, and absorption coefficients can significantly influence the spatial uniformity and speech privacy within the space. Finally, the results proposed an acceptable variation of the masking sound field by examining the Articulation Index (AI) change in the space.

Relevant