MEMS Digital Microphone and Arduino Compatible Microcontroller: An Embedded System For Noise Monitoring

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.
net/publication/353342144
MEMS digital microphone and Arduino compatible microcontroller: an

embedded system for noise monitoring
Conference Paper · August 2021

DOI: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557
CITATION READS
1 625
3 authors:
Felipe Ramos de Mello William D'Andrea Fonseca

Universidade Federal de Santa Maria Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
11 PUBLICATIONS 2 CITATIONS 106 PUBLICATIONS 115 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE
Paulo Mareze
Universidade Federal de Santa Maria
74 PUBLICATIONS 144 CITATIONS
SEE PROFILE
Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:
Propagação e atenuação sonora em dutos e filtros acústicos. View project
TEORIA DE FILTRAGEM ÓTIMA APLICADA A REDUÇÃO DE RUÍDO EM SINAIS DE ÁUDIO View project
All content following this page was uploaded by William D'Andrea Fonseca on 05 October 2021.
The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

MEMS digital microphone and Arduino compatible microcontroller:
an embedded system for noise monitoring
Felipe Ramos de Mello1
Acoustical Engineering, Federal University of Santa Maria
Av. Roraima nº 1000, Cidade Universitária, Bairro Camobi, 97105-900, Santa Maria, RS, Brazil
William D’Andrea Fonseca2

Paulo Henrique Mareze3

ABSTRACT
Noise assessment and monitoring are essential parts of an acoustician’s work. They help to better
understand the environment and propose better solutions for noise control and urban noise management.
Traditionally, equipment used to carry out these tasks is standardized and often times is considered
expensive for the early career professional. This study has developed a high-quality (and cost-effective)
prototype for an embedded noise monitoring device based upon a digital I2S MEMS microphone and
an Arduino compatible microcontroller named Teensy. Its small size and low power consumption are
also advantages designed for the project. The system captures and processes sound in real-time and
computes A and C frequency-weighted equivalent sound levels, along with time-weighted instant levels
(with a logging interval of 125 ms). Part of the software handles the audio environment, while the
biquadratic IIR filters present in the Cortex Microcontroller library are responsible for the frequency-
and time-weightings — using floating-point for enhanced precision. The prototype performance
was compared against a Class 1 Sound Level Meter (SLM), rendering very similar results to tested
situations, proving a powerful and reliable tool. Improvements to the system and further testing will
be conducted to refine its functioning and characterization. Ultimately, the prototype demonstrated
promising performance, achieving LAeq values within a ±0.5 dB margin over the Class 1 SLM and
confirming its potential as a cost-effective solution for noise monitoring and assessment.
Keywords: Arduino, CMSIS, Inter IC-Sound, I2S, Teensy, Sound Level Meter, MEMS microphone, noise
monitoring.
PACS: 43.58.Fm, 43.50.Yw, 43.60.Qv, 07.07.Df, 43.38.Kb .

1
felipe.mello@eac.ufsm.br.
2
will.fonseca@eac.ufsm.br.
3
paulo.mareze@eac.ufsm.br.
‡
This is an extended version of the original paper.
§
Cite this article: F. R. Mello; W. D’A. Fonseca; P. H. Mareze. MEMS digital microphone and Arduino compatible
microcontroller: an embedded system for noise monitoring. In 50th International Congress and Exposition on Noise
Control Engineering — Internoise 2021, pages 1–12, Washington, DC, USA, Aug. 2021. doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 1 of 22

1. INTRODUCTION
The objective of this work is to create an embedded system focusing on sound pressure level (SPL)
and equivalent continuous sound level (Leq ) measurements. That is, the designed software is written as
firmware into the hardware, creating a prototype dedicated for this sole purpose. In consequence, the
direct application is sound/noise monitoring, i.e. measuring, processing, and storing levels according
to sound level meter (SLM) standards. To achieve this goal, instrumentation, programming, and digital
signal processing (DSP) develop essential roles. Several branches of acoustical engineering are put
to work together as a unity. The hardware includes a microphone, a processing unit, a storage device,
and a power source. Therefore, the DSP must be meticulously programmed to fulfill time-weighting,
frequency-weighting, and fractional octave filtering.
Microelectromechanical (MEMS) microphones have inspired a new way of thinking in using sound
recording devices. Its relatively low-cost, low-power consumption, and tiny size have enabled designs
from single prototypes to massive applications in the cellphone industry, for instance. Arduino is a
microcontroller unit (MCU). As such, its development boards and kits have brought up an easy way to
program hardware and produce virtually any type of electronic device. The combination of these two
can render unlimited options when dealing with sound, from toys to professional projects. Considering
the aforementioned, this study used the Teensy board — an Arduino compatible but with much more
muscle and add-ins — to build an SLM. Applications range from home monitoring through sound
security systems to urban mapping.
2. THEORY, HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE
This section addresses the principles of the pressure-related quantities tested within this study,
as well as a brief description of the employed hardware and basic knowledge on the programming
approach used. The authors also encourage further reading, such as Pierce [1] and Jacobsen & Juhl [2],
to get a better understanding of sound.
2.1. Sound pressure and Sound Pressure Level (SPL)

Sound pressure is created by fluctuations over the static pressure of the medium, commonly air
and water, for general acoustics. As a scalar quantity, it represents a series of different potentials that
yields particle velocity. Accordingly, sound intensity is produced as the product of sound pressure and
particle velocity and is equivalent to the power per unit area [3]. Considering the electroacoustical
analogy (impedance mode), sound pressure is analogous to voltage. As such, its effective value (or
RMS, root mean square) is adequate for the math involved, as a time-varying quantity.
The sound pressure level (SPL) is given by v
s u
!2 N
t
Z T
prms 1 1 X
q
SPL = 10 log10 dB (1) with prms = ⟨p2 (t)⟩t = p2 (t) dt = | p n |2 , (2)
p0 T 0 N n=1
in which p0 =20 µPa is the reference pressure (at 1 kHz), prms is the root mean square (rms) pressure,
T is the measuring period of time (or time-window in s), p(t) the instantaneous value of the sound
pressure (in Pa), and t is time (in s). Considering discrete values, N is the total number of measurements
taken and pn is the n-th pressure value. The symbol ⟨·⟩t designates the average over time, in this case
of a squared signal. SPL is the most well-known parameter when dealing with acoustics and part of the
acoustician’s daily life. This happens because sound pressure is the easiest quantity to access within
the topic (with a microphone, for instance). The physical meaning of any SPL is related to the acoustic
energy for a given time frame. Moreover, a decibel scale compacts the range of values and a reference
(ca. threshold of hearing @ 1 kHz) sets the 0 dB (SPL). Figure 1 (a) depicts the calculus in a visual
way. The reader may access a Matlab example code by clicking on the icon or searching for the
attached files in this pdf.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 2 of 22

(a) squaring averaging square root
time for T
domain
(a) RMS steps.

(b) Time series with fs Leq for a given TLeq
Level store + SPL store + processing cycle
processing cycle Leq SPL for a given TSPL Leq for a given TLeq
Time domain
(b) SPL vs. Leq .

Figure 1: (a) Steps to estimate the sound pressure level (SPL) out of a pressure measurement with a microphone.
(b) Time series with fs , SPL, and Leq measurement examples.
Depending on the nature of the sound being recorded, it is common to find time-averagings called
Fast (F, 125 ms), Slow (S, 1 s), and Impulse (I, 35 ms) applied to the SPL (see Section 4.1). These
kinds of averagings descend from the time in which SLMs were only analogic and used needles to
mark the measured values [4].
2.2. Equivalent Continuous Sound level (Leq)
The Equivalent Continuous Sound level (Leq ) is a measure of total energy (of sound fluctuating
level) over a certain time, presented as a unique value (in dB) [4]. Its calculus follows
 Z   N
  N

 1 T p2 (t)   1 X p2n   1 X
/10

Leq = 10 log10  dt (3) or Leq = 10 log10    = 10 log10   wn 10SPL n  , (4)
T 0 p20 2
N n=1 p0 N n=1 
where N is the total number of discrete measurements, SPLn is the n-th discrete sound pressure
level taken, and wn is the fraction of total time the SPLn is present. Usually, Leq is frequency C– or
A–weighted. In such cases, it is denoted as LCeq and LAeq , respectively (see Section 4.2).
If time-averaging is not involved, SPL and Leq are quite similar. The main difference would then
be that SPL has a short time average, while Leq is evaluated for longer periods, as noticeable in
Figure 1 (b).
2.3. Sound Level Meter (SLM)
The SLM is the most well-known device used to evaluate sound
in an objective way, analogous to the voltmeter for an electrician.
Its functionalities encompass SPL and Leq measurements for
different time- and frequency-weighting. Moreover, its results may
be delivered as global values or in fractional octave bands (over
frequency), see Section 4.3. The main international documents
that regulate the SLM are the standards IEC 61672:2013 –
Parts 1, 2, and 3 [5, 6]. Its accuracy, precision, and frequency
range of operation are defined and categorized as Class 1 and
Class 2, with the latter the least precise.
Usually, Class 1 SLM is costly due to the instrumentation and
hardware included. Well-known models (from this class) are from
the manufacturer Brüel & Kjær, for example, models Type 2240, Figure 2: SLM B&K Type 2240,
2270, and 2245 (from older to newer) [7], see Figure 2. Type 2270-S, and Type 2245 [7].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 3 of 22

2.4. Noise monitoring
Noise and noise pollution assessments are generally made using Leq measurements. For such tasks,
it is common to request that a technician assess the desired area using a sound level meter. Carrying
out this way involves the disadvantages of being expensive, time-consuming, and does not granulate1
time and space enough. To overcome these problems, innovation has trended towards the development
of autonomous wireless sensor networks for noise pollution monitoring. In general they are relatively
low-cost systems that can be deployed throughout the location of interest in order to measure sound
continuously and send data to a land server. For more information, see the references [8–10].
2.5. Microelectromechanical microphones (MEMS)

A microphone is a transducer that transforms acoustic pressure into an electric signal. This can
be accomplished either by electromagnetic induction (dynamic microphones), piezoelectric effect,
a capacitance variation (condenser microphones), or perturbations on a beam of light caused by
sound pressure waves (optical microphones). Microelectromechanical (MEMS) microphones are
manufactured using special semiconductor techniques which allow for the construction of very tiny
devices. They can be designed using any of the transduction principles aforementioned, with the vast
majority capacitive [11].
MEMS microphones can be either analog or digital. The former consist of a transducer element,
a conditioning circuit, and a pre-amplifier (see Figure 3 (a)). The latter encompass all the analog
blocks plus an analog-to-digital converter (ADC) and a digital interface (for communication). There
are three possible digital interfaces on commercially available microphones: Inter-IC Sound (I2 S),
Figure 3 (b); Pulse Density Modulated signals (PDM), Figure 3 (c); and Time-Division Multiplex
(TDM), Figure 3 (d).
PDM microphones transmit 1-bit signals with a high sampling frequency. They must be converted to
Pulse Code Modulation (PCM) for further processing. The majority of processors are unable to do this
in real-time, making it necessary to add an audio codec chip to the signal chain [12]. The I2 S format, in
contrast, has a built-in converter and transmits PCM audio through a serial port (using the I2 S protocol
[13]). Both I2 S and PDM formats allow for the transmission of two channels over a single data line.
Finally, TDM microphones send PCM audio through a serial port that allows for the transference of up
to 16 channels on a single data line.
Digital microphones dispense analog-to-digital converters, therefore they reduce both the size and
cost of the system. Furthermore, they are less susceptible to interference, making them more suitable
for applications where wifi, Bluetooth, or other wireless devices are near the microphone (e.g., on an
autonomous noise monitoring system, a cellphone, or a computer). In general, MEMS microphone
performance is stable over time (no sensitivity drifting). Its manufacturing process promotes a high
standardization, as well, resulting in closely matched devices (useful for beamforming and noise
suppression applications) [14].
2.6. Teensy 4.0 and Teensy Audio Library

Teensy is a family of Arduino compatible microcontrollers (MCU) developed by Paul J. Stoffregen
[15, 16]. For this project, Teensy 4.0 was chosen due to its low cost, low power consumption, high
computing power, and small size, per Figure 5 (c). Its main features include an ARM Cortex M7 at
600 MHz; floating-point math unit (64 bits and 32 bits, FPU); USB device (480 Mbit/sec) and USB
host (480 Mbit/sec); and two I2 S/TDM digital audio ports [15]. Observe Table 1 where different Teensy
and Arduino models are compared.
1
Granularity is the scale or level of detail present in a set of data.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 4 of 22

MEMS MEMS
TRANSDUCER
TRANSDUCER
FILTER FILTER
OUTPUT OUTPUT ADC ADC Serial Data Serial
ClockData Clock
AMPLIFIER AMPLIFIER OUTPUT OUTPUT
I2S I2S
SERIAL Serial Data Serial
SERIAL Output Data Output
MEMS MEMS PORT PORT
Word ClockWord Clock
POWER HARDWARE
POWER HARDWARE
TRANSDUCER
TRANSDUCER MANAGEMENT CONTROL CONTROL
MANAGEMENT
POWER POWER
VDD GND VDD GND
GND
VDD
GND
VDD
Figure1. Typical Analog
Figure MEMSAnalog
1. Typical Microphone
MEMSBlock Diagram
Microphone Block Diagram
Figure3. Typical
FigureI2S3.MEMS
Typical I2SMEMSMicrophone
Microphone Block Diagram
Block Diagram
(a) Analog MEMS microphone blockdiagram.
diagram 2
(a)MEMS
(a) Analog Analog MEMS microphone
microphone block block diagram. (b)(b)
I2S IMEMS
S MEMS
(b) MEMS microphone
I2Smicrophone
microphone blockdiagram.
block
block diagram. diagram
A lid
A lid is then is thenover
bonded bonded over theto
the laminate laminate
enclosetothe
enclose the
ICS-52000 ICS-52000
CLK CLK FILTER FILTER
AMPLIFIER AMPLIFIER PDM PDM ADC ADC SCK SCK
ADC ADC
MODULATOR MODULATOR
DATA DATA TDM TDM
SERIAL SD
SERIAL SD
MEMS MEMS
TRANSDUCERTRANSDUCER PORT PORT
WS WS
POWER POWER
CHANNEL CHANNEL POWER POWER
HARDWARE HARDWARE
MANAGEMENT SELECT
MANAGEMENT SELECT MANAGEMENTMANAGEMENT
CONTROL CONTROL WSO WSO
VDD GND VDDL/RGND

SELECT L/R SELECT VDD GND
VDD CONFIG
GND CONFIG
(c)
(c)PDM microphone
PDM MEMS
(c) PDM block
microphone
MEMS diagram
microphone
block diagram.
block diagram. (d)TDM
(d) TDM MEMS
(d) TDM microphone
microphone
MEMS microphone block
block diagram. diagram
block diagram.
Figure 3: Block diagrams for different types of MEMS microphones: analog, I2 S, PDM, and TDM [17].
Teensy MCUs come with a built-in and open-source library for audio processing (Teensy Audio
Library). As described on its website, the Teensy Audio Library is “a toolkit for building streaming
audio projects, featuring Polyphonic Playback, Recording, Synthesis, Analysis, Effects, Filtering, Mixing,
Multiple Simultaneous Inputs & Outputs, and Flexible Internal Signal Routing” [15]. All audio signals
circulating on Teensy have a 16-bit resolution, 44.1 kHz of sampling frequency, and stream while
Arduino sketches are running.
Table 1: Hardware comparison between the prototype used and other Teensy and Arduino boards.
Name Processor CPU Speed Storage Memory Direct memory access (DMA)
Teensy 4.0 NXP iMXRT10621,⋄ 600 MHz 2 MB (Flash Memory) 1 MB 32 channels

Teensy 4.1 NXP iMXRT10622,⋄ 600 MHz 8 MB (Flash Memory) 1 MB 32 channels
Teensy 3.6 NXP MK66FX1M03,⋄ 180 MHz 1 MB (Flash Memory) 256 KB 32 channels
Arduino Due AT91SAM3X8E 84 MHz 512 KB (Flash Memory) 96 KB (SRAM) 23 channels
Arduino Mega 2560 ATmega2560 16 MHz 256 KB (Flash Memory) 8 KB (SRAM) -
1,2 ARM Cortex-M7. 3 ARM Cortex-M4. ⋄ FPU = Floating Point Unit. Additional info can be found at PJRC store, Arduino.cc, Board db, and PDF .
The audio library is object-oriented. Therefore, objects are used to execute audio functions, such as
input receiving, signal filtering, and output streaming. Audio programs can be created using the Audio
System Design Tool [15], a graphic interface that allows users to generate a signal chain and export
it as an Arduino code. The design tool also offers a brief description and documentation of all audio
objects. Additionally, it is possible to program Teensy to run as a USB audio device, allowing the user
to send and receive audio data to and from a computer, which is useful for testing and prototyping.
An example is illustrated in Figure 4, where a signal from the computer is fed into Teensy via USB,
processed by an Infinite Impulse Response (IIR) filter, and sent back to the computer (the reader may
access an Arduino example code by clicking on the icon or searching for the attached files in
this pdf) .
As an open-source library, it is possible to write and develop new audio objects that integrate
seamlessly with the others. The objects are written in C++ language. Guidelines on how to write a new
one can be found on Teensy’s website [15].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 5 of 22

Figure 4: Example of an audio signal chain generated on Audio System Design Tool. The I2 S object is not used
but must be present to allow for audio updates and streaming.
3. PROTOTYPE
This section describes the prototype developed for sound monitoring. It is comprised of a Teensy
microcontroller, a digital I2 S MEMS microphone, an SD card module, a portable battery, and a simple
on/off switch. First, the technical specifications of the components and their interconnections are
characterized. Ultimately, the functionalities of the audio objects programmed for sound pressure level
calculations are explained.
3.1. Components
The prototype uses a digital I2 S MEMS microphone to capture sound. A Sipeed MSM261S4030H0
evaluation board was chosen due to its availability, low cost, and ease of connectivity with Teensy 4.0.
Its frequency response and picture can be found in Figures 5 (a) and (b), respectively, while its main
specifications are detailed in Table 2. Readers may listen to a recording example via the following
file (voice speech, acoustic guitar, and environmental noise).
Table 2: MEMS microphone Sipeed MSM261S4030H0 technical specifications [18].
Parameter Limits / Data Unit Condition
Min. Nom. Max.
Directivity Omnidirectional — —
Sensitivity -27 -26 -25 dB dBFS @ 1 kHz 1 Pa
Operation voltage 1.6 – 3.6 V —
Frequency range 100 – 10k Hz —
Signal-to-noise ratio — 57 — dB 20 kHz bandwidth, A-weighted
Total Harmonic Distortion — — 1 % 100 dB SPL @1 kHz, S = nom., Rload >2k
Acoustic Overload Point — 124 — dB SPL 10% THD @1 kHz, S = nom., Rload >2k
Maximum SPL 140 dB SPL —
A simple SD card Arduino module is used to store the measurements taken, per Figure 5 (d). The
module has seven pins, two of which are for power (GND, +3.3 V, and +5 V), two for control (CS and
SCK), and two for data transfer (MOSI and MISO). Teensy 4.0 controls both the microphone and SD
card module via serial connections. A 4400 mAh capacity USB mobile battery is used to power the
system, see Figure 5 (e).
3.2. Audio objects for sound pressure level calculations

Sound pressure level calculations are held by two objects designed to integrate the Teensy
Audio Library. They are AudioAnalyzeSoundLevelMeter and AudioAnalyzeOctaveBands. The first
evaluates time-weighted SPL and equivalent continuous SPL (Leq ), with frequency-weightings Z, A,
or C. The second evaluates Leq in one (1/1) or one-third (1/3) octave bands, with frequency-weightings Z,
A, or C, as well. They are configured using the following methods (some are common to both objects):
– setLogInterval(float): receives a value (in seconds) to configure the integration time for Leq
calculations and the rate at which the object returns data (e.g., setLogInterval(1.0f) set the
object to calculate and return a value every second) — common to both objects;
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 6 of 22

MSM261S4030H0 frequency response @ 94 dB SPL
20MSM261S4030H0 frequency response @ 94 dB SPL
20 Sensitivity (dB FS/PA)
Sensitivity (dB FS/PA)
10
10
0 0
-10 -10
-20 -20
100 100 200 200 500 5001k 1k 2k 2k 5k 5k
10k 10k
Frequency
Frequency (Hz) (Hz)
2
(a) MSM261S4030H0
(a) MSM261S4030H0
(a) MSM261S4030H0 I2S digital
II2 SS digital
digital MEMS
MEMS microphone
MEMS microphone (b) MSM261S4030H0
microphone (b) MSM261S4030H0I2S digital
(b) MSM261S4030H0 I2SMEMS I2microphone
digital SMEMS microphone
digital MEMS
frequency response.
frequency response. next to a 25
next mm
to adiameter
25 mm coin.
diameter coin.
frequency response. microphone next to a 25 mm diameter coin.
1.8 cm
3.1 cm
1.8 cm
3.1 cm
3.6 cm
3.6 cm 5.1 5.1
cmcm
(c) Teensy 4.0(c)dimensions.
Teensy 4.0 dimensions. (d)(d)
SD SDcard module
card module dimensions.
dimensions.
(c) Teensy 4.0 dimensions. (d) SD card module dimensions.
(e) pro
(e) H’Maston H'Maston
(e)
10000 promAh
10000
H'Maston mAh
proand and
10000 mAh and
Advansat (f) Components assembledassembled
(f)(f)Components
Components inside the prototype
assembled inside thecase.
inside prototype case.
the prototype
Advansat 4400 mAh
Advansat 4400power
mAh banks.
power banks.
4400 mAh power banks. case.
(g) Prototype fully assembled.

Figure 5: Frequency response of the(g) Prototype
Sipeed fullypictures
microphone, assembled.
of the prototype components, and the fully
assembled prototype.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 7 of 22

– setFreqWeighting(int): configures the frequency-weighting used for calculations. The
options are Z_WEIGHTING, A_WEIGHTING, and C_WEIGHTING — common to both objects;
– setSensitivity(float): receives a calibration factor that adjusts the sensitivity of the system;
– setTimeWeighting(float): configures the time-weighting used for SPL calculations. The
options are FAST and SLOW (specific to AudioAnalyzeSoundLevelMeter object); and
– setFractionalOctaveBands(int): sets the fractional octave bands used for calculations. The
options are ONE_OCTAVE and THIRD_OCTAVE (specific to AudioAnalyzeOctaveBands object).
All data inside the objects are evaluated using floating-point precision (32 bits), ensuring adequate
math steps. Filtering is accomplished by Infinite Impulse Response filters (IIR) implemented using built-
in functions from the Cortex Microcontroller Software Interface Standard DSP library for Cortex-M
processors (CMSIS [19]) and coefficients previously calculated in Matlab. The objects are placed
inside an Arduino sketch and can be used in parallel, which makes the system extremely versatile and
easy to use.
4. ALGORITHM VALIDATION
This section describes the tests conducted to validate the sound level meter algorithms. In all tests,
an appropriate digital signal was applied to Teensy through a USB connection, and sound pressure
levels were retrieved via serial communication (Serial.println()) for further plotting and analysis.
The process is the gray-box method, i.e. activation and response, as observed in the signal chain in
Figure 6 (a).
The procedure and acceptance limits described in IEC 61672:2013 (Parts 1 and 2) were used to
evaluate the time- and frequency-weighting filters [5, 6]. Moreover, ANSI/ASA S1.11-2014 (Part 1),
IEC 61260:1-2014, and IEC 61260:2-2016 standardized methods were used to evaluate one- and
one-third octave band-pass filters [20, 21], as seen in Figure 6 (b).
Computer Teensy 4.0
USB output PCM USB input
audio
USB input SPL values USB output

(serial communication)
(a) Signal flow for the gray-box method.

Sound
Inside Teensy
time-weighting
MEMS
microphone freq.-weighting
ADC
Fast or Slow Leq

PCM/I2S
audio Z, A or C RMS, Max or Peak
1/1 or 1/3 oct Level

octave ﬁlters
Teensy 4.0 SD card
(b) Designed SLM workflow.

Figure 6: (a) Signal chain used for all electrical-procedural tests. (b) SLM processing steps.
4.1. Time-weighting filters (Fast & Slow)

According to IEC 61672-1, a steady 4 kHz sinusoidal signal followed by sudden silence must be
used to evaluate the decay rates of time-weighting filters. The design goals for decay rates of Fast and
Slow time-weightings are 34.7 dB/s and 4.3 dB/s, respectively, with acceptance limits of +3.8 dB/s
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 8 of 22

and -3.5 dB/s for Fast, and +0.8 dB/s and -0.7 dB/s for Slow. For this test, a 30-second digital signal
(10 seconds for the sine wave and 20 seconds of silence) was generated on Matlab and applied to
Teensy via USB. The microcontroller was configured to assess time-weighted sound pressure levels
and return a value every 2.9 milliseconds, which corresponds to approximately 128 samples per log.
The curves and decay rates for each filter are presented in Figure 7. It is possible to notice that the
filters implemented are working properly, with the subsequent decays observed exactly as the standard.
Decay curves for Fast and Slow time-weightings

100
SPL [dB ref. 20 µPa]
4 kHz sine wave

90 SPL Fast
SPL Slow
80 Fast decay rate: 34.7 dB/s
Slow decay rate: 4.3 dB/s
70
60
0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
Time [s]
Figure 7: Decay curves for time-weighing filters and rates Slow and Fast).
4.2. Frequency-weighting filters (A & C)

Section 9.5 of the standard IEC 61672-2 describes two methods for the evaluation of frequency-
weighting filters using electrical signals. In this work, the second method was used. The test consists of
inserting a series of steady sinusoidal signals with the same amplitude and within the 10 Hz to 20 kHz
frequency range into the device. Frequency increments of one-twelfth octave were used, resulting in a
total of 133 test frequencies.
The microcontroller was configured to return time-averaged equivalent sound pressure level (SPL)
every 0.1 seconds. Subsequently, the SPL levels for each frequency were averaged and normalized by
the 1 kHz SPL value. Finally, the values were plotted along with the Class 1 design goals, defined in
Table 3 of the IEC 61672-2. The tests were conducted for both A and C frequency-weightings. Figure 8
shows that the filters are working as expected, within the Class 1 mask. For the record, the Z-weighting
means zero (or not any) weighting, which would render a flat line on zero along the full frequency rage.
A-weighting filter validation according to C-weighting filter validation according to

IEC 61672-1 Class 1 acceptance limits IEC 61672-1 Class 1 acceptance limits
0 Teensy
Class 1 Mask 0
[dB ref. 1 @ 1 kHz]
[dB ref. 1 @ 1 kHz]

Normalized level
Normalized level
-20
-10
-40
-20
-60 -30
Teensy
Class 1 Mask
-80 -40
101 102 103 104 101 102 103 104
Frequency [Hz] Frequency [Hz]
(a) A frequency-weighting validation. (b) C frequency-weighting validation.
Figure 8: Frequency response of the Frequency-weighting filters and Class 1 acceptance limits.
4.3. Octave and fractional octave band filters

Considering that the algorithms implemented in Teensy only return SPL values, the method described
in IEC 61260:2-20162 was used to validate the one- and one-third octaves band-pass filters. The
procedure consists of applying a series of constant sinusoidal signals to each filter and then measuring
2
Section 7.2.1.4, analogous to the one in Annex D of previous ANSI S1.11:2004 (R2009) standard.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 9 of 22

the relative attenuation of each one. The frequency of the i-th test signal ( fi ) is related to the center
frequency of the analyzed filter by h ii
fi / fm = G1/(bS ) (5)
where fm is the filter midband frequency, G is the octave ratio (G10 = 103/10 was used), b is the
bandwidth designator (1 for one octave and 3 for one-third octave), and S is the number of test
frequencies per filter.
A Matlab code was written to automate the measurements. The test signals were 2 seconds long,
and a total of 49 test frequencies were used for each band-pass filter. The results for all the bands
are illustrated in Figures 9 and 10. They show that all filters comply with the standard for Class 1
performance (Class 2 and old Class 0 are also depicted for the sake of comparison).
To test the stability of the filters, the 16 Hz to 63 Hz and 1 kHz frequency 1/3-bands were evaluated
30 times each. Figure 11 depicts the mean together with the respective confidence interval for 99.73%
(shaded areas). It is possible to notice that approaches used in the project rendered high precision (i.e.
the dispersion is almost null) while maintaining its values within the Class 1 mask requirements.
Frequency response foroctave
1/1 octave band-pass 1/1 octave
1/1 octave filter validation:
filter validation: fm = 1 kHz
fm = 1 kHz
Frequency response for 1/1 band-pass filtersfilters
0 0 0 0
Normalized Level [dB ref. 1]
Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
Filter response
Filter response
-15 -15 -15 -15 Class 0 mask
Class 0 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 2 mask
Class 2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
102 102 103 103 104 104
562 562 750 750 1000 1000 1334 1334 1778 1778
Frequency [Hz] [Hz] Frequency [Hz] [Hz]
Frequency
Frequency
(b) Class
(b) 1Class
validation of 1/1 octave
1 validation filter filter
of 1/1 octave
(a) All 1/1 octave
(a) All filters
1/1 octave plotted
filters together.
plotted together.
(a) All 1/1 octave filters plotted together. (b) Class 1 validation
with mid-band
with ofof1/1
frequency
mid-band octave
of 1 kHz.filter with
1 kHz.
frequency
mid-band frequency of 1 kHz.
1/1 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm15.5
= 15.5
Hz Hz 1/1 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm31.5
= 31.5
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response FilterFilter
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask -15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
9 9 12 12 16 16 21 21 28 28 18 18 24 24 32 32 42 42 56 56
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(c) (c)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/1
of 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter (d) (d)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/1
of 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter
(c) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-band of
mid-band 1/1 octave
frequency
frequency
of 15.5filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 15.5 (d) Class
with 1mid-band
with validation
mid-band of 1/1
frequency
frequency octave
of 31.5
of 31.5 filter with
Hz.Hz.
mid-band frequency of 15.5 Hz. mid-band frequency of 31.5 Hz.
1/1 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm62.5
= 62.5
Hz Hz 1/1 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm125
= 125
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
35 35 47 47 63 63 83 83 111 111 70 70 94 94 125 125 167 167 222 222
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(e) (e)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/1
of 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter (f) (f)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/1
of 1/1
octave
octave
filter
filter
(e) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-band of
mid-band 1/1 octave
frequency
frequency
of 62.5filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 62.5 (f) Class
with1mid-band
validation
with mid-band of 1/1
frequency
frequency octave
of 125
of 125 filter with
Hz.Hz.
mid-band frequency of 62.5 Hz. mid-band frequency of 125 Hz.
Figure 9: Frequency response of the Sipeed microphone, pictures of the prototype components, and the fully
assembled prototype [1/2].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 10 of 22

1/1 octave
1/1 octave
filter validation:
filter validation:
fm = 250
fmHz
= 250 Hz 1/1 octave
1/1 octave
filter validation:
filter validation:
fm = 500
fmHz
= 500 Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
Filter response
Filter response Filter response
Filter response
-15 -15 Class 0 mask
Class 0 mask -15 -15 Class 0 mask
Class 0 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 1 mask Class 1 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 2 mask
Class 2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
141 141 187 187 250 250 333 333 445 445 281 281 375 375 500 500 667 667 889 889
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz] [Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz] [Hz]
(g) Class
(g) 1Class
validation
1 validation
of 1/1 of
octave
1/1 octave
filter filter (h) Class
(h) 1Class
validation
1 validation
of 1/1 of
octave
1/1 octave
filter filter
(g) Class 1 with
validation
mid-bandof 1/1frequency
with mid-band octave
frequency filter
of 250of
Hz. with
250 Hz. (h) Class 1 validation
with mid-band
with mid-band
frequencyofof1/1
frequency octave
500of 500 Hz.filter with
Hz.
mid-band frequency of 250 Hz. mid-band frequency of 500 Hz.
1/1 octave filter validation: f = 2 kHz 1/1 octave filter validation: fm = 4 kHz
1/1 octave filter validation: fm = 2 kHzm 1/1 octave filter validation: fm = 4 kHz
0 0

0 0

-5 -5
-5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
Filter response
Filter response Filter response Filter response
-15 -15 Class 0 maskClass 0 mask -15 -15 Class 0 mask Class 0 mask
Class 1 maskClass 1 mask Class 1 mask Class 1 mask
Class 2 maskClass 2 mask Class 2 mask Class 2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
1125 11251500 15002000 2000
2667 2667
3557 3557 2249 2249
3000 3000
4000 4000
5334 5334
7113 7113
FrequencyFrequency
[Hz] [Hz] Frequency [Hz]
Frequency [Hz]
(i) Class(i)1 Class 1 validation
validation of 1/1filter
of 1/1 octave octave filter (j) Class 1ofvalidation
(j) Class 1 validation 1/1 octaveoffilter
1/1 octave filter
(i) Class 1with
validation
mid-band of 1/1frequency
frequency
with mid-band octave filter
of 2 kHz.of with
2 kHz. (j) Class
with 1 validation
mid-band
withfrequency 4of 1/1 octave
mid-bandoffrequency
kHz. of 4 kHz.filter with
mid-band frequency of 2 kHz. mid-band frequency of 4 kHz.
1/1 octave
1/1 octave
filter validation:
filter validation:
fm = 8 kHz
fm = 8 kHz 1/1 octave
1/1 octave
filter validation:
filter validation:
fm = 16fm
kHz
= 16 kHz
0 0 0 0
-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
Filter response
Filter response Filter response
Filter response
-15 -15 Class 0 mask
Class 0 mask -15 -15 Class 0 mask
Class 0 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 2 mask
Class 2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
4499 4499 5999 5999 8000 8000 10668 1066814226 14226 8997 8997 11998 1199816000 1600021336 2133628452 28452
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz] [Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz] [Hz]
(k) Class
(k) 1Class
validation
1 validation
of 1/1 of
octave
1/1 octave
filter filter (l) Class
(l) 1Class
validation
1 validation
of 1/1 of
octave
1/1 octave
filter filter
(k) Class 1 validation
with mid-band offrequency
with mid-band1/1frequency
octave filter
of 8 kHz. with
of 8 kHz. (l) Class 1 validation
with mid-band
with mid-band
frequencyofof1/1
frequency octave
16 kHz.
Figure 9: Frequency response of the Sipeed microphone, pictures of the prototype components, and the fully
assembled prototype [2/2].
Frequency
Frequency
response
response
for 1/3 for
octave
1/3 octave
band-pass
band-pass
filters filters 1/3 octave
1/3 octave
filter validation:
filter validation:
fm = 1 kHz
fm = 1 kHz
0 0 0 0
-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
Filter response
Filter response
-15 -15 -15 -15 Class 0 mask
Class 0 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 2 mask
Class 2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
102 102 103 103 104 104 794 794 1000 1000 1259 1259
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz] [Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz] [Hz]
(b) Class
(b) 1Class
validation
1 validation
of 1/3 of
octave
1/3 octave
filter filter
(a) All (a)
1/3Alloctave
(a)
1/3All
octave
1/3 octave
filtersplotted
filters filters
plottedplotted
together.
together.
together. (b) Class 1 validation
with mid-band
with mid-band ofof1/3
frequency
frequency octave
1 kHz.
mid-band frequency of 1 kHz.
Figure 10: Frequency responses and validations according to ANSI/IEC masks for 1/3-octave band-pass filters
[1/5].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 11 of 22

1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm15.5
= 15.5
Hz Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm20= Hz
20 Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
12 12 16 16 20 20 16 16 20 20 25 25
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(c) (c)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (d) (d)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(c) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-band of
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency
of 15.5filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 15.5 (d) Class
with1mid-band
validation
frequency
frequency octave
of 20 Hz.Hz.filter with
of 20
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm25= Hz
25 Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm31.5
= 31.5
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
20 20 25 25 31 31 25 25 32 32 40 40
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(e) (e)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (f) (f)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(e) Class 1 with
validation
with
mid-bandoffrequency
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency of filter
of 25 Hz.Hz.with
25 (f) Class
with 1mid-band
withvalidation
mid-band of 1/3
frequency
frequency octave
of 31.5
of 31.5 filter with
Hz.Hz.
mid-band frequency of 25 Hz. mid-band frequency of 31.5 Hz.
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm40= Hz
40 Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm50= Hz
50 Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
32 32 40 40 50 50 40 40 50 50 63 63
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(g) (g)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (h) (h)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(g) Class 1 with
validation
with
mid-bandoffrequency
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency of filter
of 40 Hz.Hz.with
40 (h) Class
with1mid-band
validation
frequency
frequency octave
of 50 Hz.Hz.filter with
of 50
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm62.5
= 62.5
Hz Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm80= Hz
80 Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
50 50 63 63 79 79 64 64 80 80 101 101
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(i) Class
(i) Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (j) Class
(j) Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(i) Class 1 with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency filter
of 62.5 Hz.Hz.with
of 62.5 (j) Class 1mid-band
with validation
frequency of octave
frequency 80 Hz.Hz.filter with
of 80
[2/5].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 12 of 22

1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm100
= 100
Hz Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm125
= 125
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
79 79 100 100 126 126 99 99 125 125 157 157
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(k) (k)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (l) Class
(l) Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(k) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency
of 100filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 100 (l) Class
with1mid-band
validation
frequency
frequency octave
of 125
of 125 filter with
Hz.Hz.
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm155
= 155
Hz Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm200
= 200
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
123 123 155 155 195 195 159 159 200 200 252 252
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(m)(m)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (n) (n)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(m) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-band of
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency
of 155 filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 155 (n) Class
with 1mid-band
withvalidation
mid-band of 1/3
frequency
frequency octave
of 200
of Hz.Hz.filter with
200
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm250
= 250
Hz Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm315
= 315
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
199 199 250 250 315 315 250 250 315 315 397 397
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(o) (o)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (p) (p)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(o) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency
of 250filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 250 (p) Class
with 1mid-band
withvalidation
mid-band of 1/3
frequency
frequency octave
of 315
of Hz.Hz.filter with
315
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm400
= 400
Hz Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm500
= 500
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
318 318 400 400 504 504 397 397 500 500 629 629
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(q) (q)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (r) (r)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(q) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency
of 400filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 400 (r) Class
with1mid-band
validation
frequency
frequency octave
of 500
of 500 filter with
Hz.Hz.
[3/5].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 13 of 22

1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm630
= 630
Hz Hz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm800
= 800
Hz Hz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
500 500 630 630 793 793 635 635 800 800 10071007
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(s) (s)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (t) Class
(t) Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(s) Class 1 with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency
of 630filter
Hz.Hz.with
of 630 (t) Class
with1mid-band
validation
frequency
frequency octave
of 800
of 800 filter with
Hz.Hz.
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm1.25
= 1.25
kHzkHz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm1.6
= 1.6
kHzkHz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
993 993 12501250 15741574 12711271 16001600 20142014
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(u) (u)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (v) (v)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(u) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-band of frequency
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency of 1.25 filter
of 1.25
kHz. with
kHz. (v) Class
with 1mid-band
with validation
mid-band of 1/3
frequency
frequency octave
of 1.6
of 1.6
kHz. filter with
kHz.
mid-band frequency of 1.25 kHz. mid-band frequency of 1.6 kHz.
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm2 =kHz
2 kHz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm2.5
= 2.5
kHzkHz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
15891589 20002000 25182518 19861986 25002500 31473147
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(w)(w)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (x) (x)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(w) Class 1 with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency 2filter
of 2ofkHz.kHz. with (x) Class
with 1mid-band
with validation
mid-band of 1/3
frequency
frequency octave
of 2.5
of 2.5
kHz. filter with
kHz.
mid-band frequency of 2 kHz. mid-band frequency of 2.5 kHz.
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm3.15
= 3.15
kHzkHz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm4 =kHz
4 kHz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
25022502 31503150 39663966 31773177 40004000 50365036
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(y) (y)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (z) (z)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(y) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-band of frequency
mid-band 1/3 octave
of 3.15
kHz. with
kHz. (z) Class
with1mid-band
validation
frequency of 4octave
frequency 4 kHz.filter with
ofkHz.
mid-band frequency of 3.15 kHz. mid-band frequency of 4 kHz.
[4/5].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 14 of 22

1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm5 =kHz
5 kHz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm6.35
= 6.35
kHzkHz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
39723972 50005000 62956295 50445044 63506350 79947994
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(aa)(aa)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (bb)(bb)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(aa) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency 5filter
of 5ofkHz.kHz. with (ab) Class
with 1 mid-band
with validation
mid-band of of
frequency 1/36.35
frequency ofoctave
6.35
kHz. filter with
kHz.
mid-band frequency of 5 kHz. mid-band frequency of 6.35 kHz.
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm8 =kHz
8 kHz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm10= kHz
10 kHz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
63556355 80008000 10071
10071 79437943 10000
10000 12589
12589
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(cc)(cc)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (dd)(dd)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(ac) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-bandof
mid-band 1/3 octave
frequency
frequency 8filter
of 8ofkHz.kHz. with (ad) Class
with 1 validation
with
mid-band
mid-band of 1/3
frequency
frequency ofoctave
of 10 10 kHz.filter with
kHz.
1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm12.5
= 12.5
kHzkHz 1/3 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
validation:
validation:
fm =fm16= kHz
16 kHz
0 0 0 0

-5 -5 -5 -5
-10 -10 -10 -10
FilterFilter
response
response
response
-15 -15 ClassClass
0 mask0 mask
ClassClass
1 mask1 mask
ClassClass
2 mask2 mask
-20 -20 -20 -20
99299929 12500
12500 15737
15737 12709
12709 16000
16000 20143
20143
Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz] Frequency
Frequency
[Hz][Hz]
(ee)(ee)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter (ff)(ff)
Class
Class
1 validation
1 validation
of 1/3
of 1/3
octave
octave
filter
filter
(ae) Class 1with
validation
with
mid-band offrequency
mid-band 1/3 octave
of 12.5 kHz.with
kHz. (af) Class
with 1 validation
with
mid-band
mid-band of 1/3
frequency
frequency octave
of 16
kHz.
mid-band frequency of 12.5 kHz. mid-band frequency of 16 kHz.
1/3 octave filter validation: fm = 20 kHz
0
-5
-10
Filter response
-15 Class 0 mask
Class 1 mask
Class 2 mask
-20
15887 20000 25179
Frequency [Hz]
(gg) Class 1 validation of 1/3 octave filter
(ag) Class 1 validation of with
1/3 octave
mid-bandfilter withofmid-band
frequency 20 kHz. frequency of 20 kHz.
[5/5].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 15 of 22

1/3 Octave-band tests (30 runs): mean and confidence interval for 99.73% 1/3 Octave-band tests (30 runs): mean and confidence interval for 99.73%
0.5 0.5

0.0 0.0
-0.5 -0.5
-1.0 -1.0
-1.5 -1.5
-2.0 -2.0
1 kHz
-2.5 -2.5 Class 1 mask
Class 2 mask
-3.0 -3.0
16 20 25 32 40 50 63 80 850 875 900 925 950 975 1000 1025 1050 1075 1100 1125 1150
Frequency [Hz] Frequency [Hz]
(ah) 1/3-octave bands: {15 – 63} Hz. (ai) 1/3-octave band: 1 kHz.
Figure 11: 1/3 Octave bands test with 30 runs: mean and confidence intervals (shaded area) for 99.73%.
5. PERFORMANCE TESTS
This section describes the tests conducted to evaluate prototype performance. Initially, the system’s
power consumption was measured and used to calculate the battery capacity necessary for one week of
continuous operation. As a second step, the CPU consumption by the program was estimated using a
built-in function from Teensy Audio Library. To follow, a comparison was carried out against the B&K
Class 1 SLM Type 2240, evaluating SPL and Leq , considering acoustic testing. Finally, the prototype
was assembled and used for noise monitoring over long periods (30 minutes, 1 hour, and 8 hours). Four
distinct soundscapes were considered. From the field tested cases the device proved to be stable and
reliable.
5.1. Power and CPU consumption
A USB digital power meter with a precision of 0.01 V and 0.01 A (USB digital tester J7-C) was
used to verify the power consumption of the system. All measurements were held with the prototype
connected to a computer with five minutes duration and five different configurations. Teensy was set to
run at 600 MHz and 150 MHz, and an estimation of the CPU consumption was calculated using the
Audio Library built-in function AudioProcessorUsageMax(). The results in Table 3 show that Teensy
maintains around the same consumption for all configurations.
With a clock speed of 150 MHz, it is possible to reduce the current consumption to 40 mA while
still running the firmware. This setup was considered in order to estimate the battery capacity required
to power the system during an entire week. The formula C = xT was used, where C is the battery
capacity (mAh), x the current drawn (mA), and T the intended period in hours. Considering that a
week has around 168 hours and including a 20% margin, the device draws 40 mA and the battery
capacity should be at least 8000 mAh.
Table 3: Power consumption and CPU load of the system for five configurations.
Configuration @ 600 MHz Voltage (V) Current (mA) Load resistance (Ω) Power (W) CPU (%)
Idle w/o microphone 5.09 100.00 50.90 0.50 0.50

Idle with microphone 5.09 100.00 50.90 0.50 0.50
Processing w/o microphone 5.10 90.00 56.66 0.45 24.00
Processing with microphone 5.10 90.00 56.66 0.45 24.00
Processing with microphone and SD card 5.10 100.00 51.00 0.51 24.00
Configuration @ 150 MHz Voltage (V) Current (mA) Load resistance (Ω) Power (W) CPU (%)
Idle w/o microphone 5.12 40.00 128.00 0.20 0.50

Idle with microphone 5.12 40.00 128.00 0.20 0.50
Processing w/o microphone 5.12 40.00 128.00 0.20 96.00
Processing with microphone 5.12 40.00 128.00 0.20 96.00
Processing with microphone and SD card 5.12 40.00 128.00 0.20 96.00
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 16 of 22

5.2. Measurement comparison against the Class 1 SLM B&K Type 2240
Aiming to evaluate the developed system’s performance, a set of parallel measurements was
conducted using both the prototype and a Class 1 Brüel & Kjær Type 22403 sound level meter,
per Figure 12 (a). Due to the global pandemic situation (from March, 2020, to the time of publication),
the authors have had no physical access to the acoustic laboratory. Therefore, the measurements took
place at home using a test bench. It is comprised of a small chamber with a loudspeaker on top (model
JBL 4TR10A), with partial foam covering (to control for cavity resonances), and with two symmetrical
openings for the microphones, ensuring a very similar sound field at each side. Moreover, before each
measurement, the prototype’s sensitivity was adjusted to ensure that both SLMs returned the same SPL
value at 1 kHz.
First, prototype performance across the spectrum was verified. For this task, a noise with a flat
frequency response was generated in Matlab and filtered into 1/6-octave band signals ranging from
100 Hz to 16 kHz. All signals were adjusted to generate the same SPL levels in Type 2240 when played
through the speaker. LAeq values from both the developed system and Type 2240 were assessed and
compared. From the results, a correction curve was implemented to adjust the prototype’s frequency
response. Values below 100 Hz were not assessed due to loudspeaker limitations.
Following, several measurements were held to compare LAeq , LAF-max , and LC-peak values4 returned
by the SLMs, see Figures 12 (b) to (h). Four types of signals were used. The first was a flat noise
filtered into 1/3-octave band signals ranging from 100 Hz to 12.5 kHz (adjusted to generate the same
SPLs). This test was repeated three times and basic statistical analysis was performed. The second
was a flat noise filtered into 1/1-octave band signals ranging from 100 Hz to 8 kHz. Next, to verify the
response for a broadband signal, a flat noise filtered between 100 Hz and 16 kHz was used. Finally,
to ensure the system’s performance for environmental noise detection, a city soundscape recording
was reproduced several times (it can be found on freesound.org), varying its level from 6 dB above the
background noise (54 dB A-weighted) to 94 dB, in 6 dB increments.
The results presented in Figure 12 show that the prototype achieved an outstanding performance for
the frequency and amplitude range considered, as observed in Figures 12 (b) and (c). For the broadband
and city soundscape measurements, the results for LAeq are within ±0.2 dB, and LAFmax are within
±0.3 dB in comparison to Type 2240 (Figures 12 (e) and (f)). LCpeak showed a maximum error of 1 dB.
In addition, it should be noted that further tests must be performed in the laboratory to characterize
prototype responses. Ultimately, the proposed system has the potential to be in accordance with Class 1
SLMs, when concerning the 1/3-octave bands acceptance limits, while complying with Class 2 in the
frequency range.
Loudspeaker 1/3 octave flat noise: mean and confidence interval for 95%
Loudspeaker
+ cavity 6 flat noise: mean and confidence interval for 95%
1/3 octave
+ cavity 6
Prototype Type 2240
Relative level [dB ref. 1]
Prototype Type 2240 4

Relative level [dB ref. 1]
4
2
2
0 0
-2 -2
-4 -4
Error Error1 Limits
Class Class 1 Class
Limits2 Limits
Class 2 ±0.5
Limits
dB ±0.5 dB
-6 -6
SD SD
cardcard Display
Display 100 100
200 200
400 400
1000 1000
2500 2500
6350 6350
12500 12500
FrequencyFrequency
[Hz] [Hz]
(a) Illustration
(b)error
(b) Mean Mean error between
between the prototype
the prototype and Typeand Type 2240
2240
(a) Illustration ofof the
(a) Illustrationthe
oftest
testbench
the test used used
bench
bench for comparison
used for tests. tests.
forcomparison
comparison (b) for
Measurement
flat for
noise noiseerror
flatfiltered in 1/3 between
octave
filtered thebands.
and
in 1/3bands.
octave prototype
tests. Type 2240 for flat noise filtered in 1/3 octave bands.
Figure 12: Test bench and comparison measurements results [1/2].
3
Since the Type 2240 has a frequency range from 8 Hz to 16 kHz, a low-pass filter with a cut-off frequency of 16 kHz
was applied to the prototype algorithm prior to the SPL calculations in order to guarantee a fair comparison. The free-field
microphone correction was also removed from both systems.
4
Peak is different from the maximum sound level. For peak, neither time-weighting nor RMS averaging occurred. It is
the true peak of the sound pressure.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 17 of 22
Mean LAeq for flat noise filtered in 1/3 octave bands L
Aeq
for flat noise filtered in 1/1 octave bands
96 Mean LAeq for flat noise filtered in 1/3 octave bands 96 LAeq for flat noise filtered in 1/1 octave bands
96 96
94 94
LAeq [dB ref. 20 µPa]
µPa]
94 94
LAeq [dB ref. 20 µPa]
ref.2020µPa]
92 92
92 92
90 90 90
[dBref.
90
LLAeq [dB
88 88 88
88
Aeq
86 86 LAeq LAeq
86
86 LAeq LAeq
LAeq LAeq Class
Class11limits
limits Class
Class 22 limits
limits LAeq LAeq Class
Class 1 limits ClassClass
1 limits 2 limits
2 limits
prototype
prototype 2240
2240 prototype
prototype 22402240
84 84 84
84
100100 200200 400
400 1000
1000 2500
2500 6350
6350 12500
12500 125
125 250
250 500
500 1000 2000
1000 2000 40004000 80008000
Frequency
Frequency[Hz]
[Hz] Frequency
Frequency [Hz]
[Hz]
(c)(c) Mean (d)
(d)LL values
valuesmeasured
measuredbyby
thethe
prototype andand
prototype Type 2240
Type 2240
(c) Mean
Mean LLAeq
LAeq valuesmeasured
values measuredby bythe
theprototype
prototype and
Aeq values measured by the prototype and
and Type 2240
2240 Aeq
Aeqvalues measured by the prototype and Type
(d) LAeq
for
forflat
flatnoise
noisefiltered in in
1/11/1
octave bands.
for
for flat
flat noisefiltered
noise filteredinin1/3
1/3octave
octavebands
bands (3
Type 2250 for flat noise filtered in 1/3 octave bands (3 (3 runs).
2250 for flat noisefiltered
filtered inoctave bands.
1/1 octave bands.
runs).
SPL values for broadband signal L

Aeq
values for a city soundscape recording
120 SPL values for broadband signal 110 LAeq values for a city soundscape recording
120 Prototype Type 2240 110.7
110 Prototype Type 2240
109.9
Prototype Type 2240 109.9 110.7 100 Prototype Type 2240
100
µPa]
94.5 94.6
100
ref.2020µPa]
94.5 94.6
100 90 88.5 88.6
88.3 88.4
90.4 90.5 90 82.5 82.6
88.5 88.6
90.4 90.5
88.3 88.4
80
80 76.5 76.6
82.5 82.6
80 80 [dBref. 70.4 70.6

76.5 76.6
70
70
70.4 70.6
SPL[dB
64.6 64.7
64.6 64.7
60 60 60
60
59.5 59.7
59.5 59.7
SPL
50
50
40 40 40
40
LAeq
LAeq LAFmax
L AFmax
LLCpeak
Cpeak
11 22 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7
Measurement
Measurement number
number
(e)(e)
SPL values
SPL valuesmeasured
measuredby
bythe
theprototype
prototype and
and Type 2240
2240
(e) SPL values
forfor
flatflat measured
noise
noise filtered by the
filteredbetween
between prototype
100
100 Hz and
Hz and 16 and Type
16 kHz. (f)(f)(f)LLAeq
LAeq values
valuesmeasured
measuredbyby
thethe
prototype andand
prototype Type
Aeqvalues measured by the prototype and Type
2240
Type 2240
for a acity
for citysoundscape
soundscaperecording (+6(+6
recording dBdB
every run).
every run).
2240 for flat noise filtered between 100 Hz and 16 kHz. 2240 for a city soundscape recording (+6 dB every
run).
LAFmax values for a city soundscape recording LCpeak values for a city soundscape recording
110 LAFmax values for a city soundscape recording 130 LCpeak values for a city soundscape recording
110 Prototype Type 2240 130 Prototype Type 2240
100 Prototype Type 2240 98.4 98.3 Prototype Type 2240 123.1123.4
µPa]
100 92.6 92.6 98.4 98.3

120
123.1123.4
µPa]
90 86.9 86.9 92.6 92.6

120 116.5
117.5
90
2020
117.5
86.9 86.9 116.5
81.0 81.0
80 111.6
ref.
81.0 81.0 110.7

8072.3 72.6 72.7 73.0
75.0 75.0
110 111.6
[dBref.
110.7
70 72.3 72.6 72.7 73.0
75.0 75.0
110 105.8
70 104.9
SPL[dB
105.8
102.3102.1 102.4102.2 104.9
102.1101.9
60 100
102.1101.9 102.3102.1 102.4102.2
60
SPL
100
50
50
40 40 90
90
1 1 2 2 33 44 55 66 77 11 22 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7
Measurement
Measurementnumber number Measurement
Measurement number
number
(g) L values measured by the prototype and Type 2240 (h) L values measured by the prototype and Type 2240
(g) L(g) LAFmax values measured by the prototype and Type 2240
AFmax
AFmax values measured by the prototype and Type (h)(h)LLCpeak
Cpeakvalues
Cpeak values measured by the prototype and Type 2240
measured by the prototype and Type
forfor
a city soundscape recording (+6 dB every run). fora acity
citysoundscape
soundscape recording
(+6(+6
dBdB every run).
2240 for aa city
city soundscape recording (+6 dB every
soundscape recording (+6 dB every 2240forfor recording
a city soundscape recordingevery run).
(+6 dB every
run). run).
Figure 12: Test bench and comparison measurements results [2/2].
5.3. Noise monitoring for long periods

Since the intended purpose of the prototype is to be an autonomous noise monitoring system, the
device was assembled and placed to measure in four different scenarios: in a shopping mall food court,
on the facade of a residence during morning and evening periods, and in a bedroom throughout the
night. The goal was to evaluate the system’s reliability and capability for measurement over long
periods.
The device was set to return Leq values and fast-weighted SPL values with A, C, and Z frequency
weightings for all measurements. The integration period was set to 125 ms. Thus, eight values were
saved for each parameter every second. Later, in post-processing, the global Leq was calculated.
Measurement in the food court was taken during lunchtime at the Park Lagos mall (Cabo Frio,
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 18 of 22

Rio de Janeiro, Brazil). The evaluation started at 12:20 pm and ended at 12:50 pm, rendering a total
of 30 minutes. This period was chosen since it is the most typical lunch break for workers in Brazil,
when the daily food court activity is at its peak. Seat occupancy and prominent sound sources during
the measurement session were assessed qualitatively and recorded on a notepad. In the beginning,
about 30% to 40% of the seats were occupied, over the second half of the time period, 40% to
60% occupancy was observed. Noise sources included conversations, background music, and kitchen
operations. Weather conditions such as temperature and relative air humidity were verified using the
weather.com database (20°C and 76%, respectively).
The residence where the facade noise was evaluated is located near the main access highway to
the city of Cabo Frio, Brazil. Accordingly, measurements were performed at the times in which most
workers transit to and from work; specifically, from 9:00 am to 10:00 am (for the morning period) and
from 6:00 pm to 7:00 pm (for the afternoon/evening period). Noticeable sound sources in the morning
were vehicles (cars, motorcycles, and trucks), construction sites, animals (birds and dogs), as well as
neighborhood activity, while in the evening, vehicles. The weather conditions for the morning were
20°C and 90% relative air humidity, and for the evening, 21°C and 82% relative air humidity.
The last measurement was held with the device placed on a wooden desk inside a bedroom. The
evaluation occurred from 10:25 pm to 6:18 am (approximately 8 hours). During this period, a wind
storm befell. Ultimately, all tests were performed successfully, and the prototype operated flawlessly.
SPL and Leq plots throughout the time for all evaluations are presented in Figure 13.
Food court A-weighted noise levels Food court Z-weighted noise levels
Food court A-weighted noise levels Food court Z-weighted noise levels
90 90
90 90
µPa]
ref.2020µPa]
80 80
80 80
70 70 70
[dBref.
70
SPL[dB
60 60 60
60
SPL
50 50 76.176.1
dB dB 74.7
74.7dBdB 74.7 dB
74.7 dB 50
50 78.778.7
dB dB 77.5 dB
77.5 dB 77.5 dB 77.5 dB
LAFL LAeq,10min
L LAFmax
L ==93.7
93.7dB
dB LLAeq == 75.3
75.3 dB
dB LZF
LZF LZeq,10min L LZFmax
LZeq,10min = 93.8
= 93.8 dB dB LZeqL= = 78.1
78.1
Zeq dB dB
AF Aeq,10min AFmax Aeq ZFmax
40 40 40
40
0 0 5 5 1010 1515 20
20 25
25 29.7
29.7 00 55 1010 15 15 20 20 25 25 29.7 29.7
Time
Time[min]
[min] Time
Time [min]
[min]
(a) Foodcourt
courtA-weighted
A-weightednoise
noise levels
levels (b) Food
Foodcourt Z-weighted noise levels
(a) Food(a) Food
court A-weighted
between12:20
12:20pm
noise
pmand
and12:50
levels
12:50 pm.
pm.
between (b) Food(b)court
between
court Z-weighted
Z-weighted noise
noise levels between
levels
between between12:20
12:20pmpm
andand
12:50 pm.pm.
12:50
12:20 pm and 12:50 pm. 12:20 pm and 12:50 pm.
Food court C-weighted noise levels Food court noise levels comparison
Food court C-weighted noise levels Food court noise levels comparison
80 78.1 dB 77.9 dB 100 95.7 dB
90 80
75.3 dB
75.3 dB
78.1 dB 77.9 dB 100 93.7 dB 93.8 dB
95.7 dB
93.7 dB 93.8 dB
90
µPa]
90
ref.2020µPa]
90
80 60
80 60
80
80
70 70
[dBref.
40
40 70 70
SPL[dB
60 60
60 60
SPL
20
20
50 50 78.578.5
dB dB 77.2
77.2dBdB 77.2 dB
77.2 dB
LCFL
CF
LCeq,10min
LCeq,10min LCFmax
LCFmax
==93.7
93.7dB
dB LLCeq == 77.9
Ceq
77.9 dB
dB 50 50
40 40 00
0 0 5 5 1010 1515 20
20 25
25 29.7
29.7 LAeq L LZeq L LCeq
LAeq LAFmax
LAFmax LZFmax
LZFmax LCFmax
LCFmax
Zeq Ceq
Time
Time[min]
[min]
(c) Foodcourt
courtC-weighted
C-weightednoise
noise levels
levels
(c) Food(c) Food
court C-weighted
between12:20
12:20pm
pmand
noise
and12:50
levels
12:50 pm.
pm.
between (d)(d)
Food
(d)Foodcourt
Foodcourt frequency-weighted
courtfrequecy-weighted noise
frequecy-weighted levels
levels
noise comparison.
comparison.
levels comparison.
between
12:20 pm and 12:50 pm.
Figure 13: Sound pressure levels and Leq for four different noise monitoring scenarios [1/3].
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 19 of 22

Facade A-weighted noise levels (morning) Facade Z-weighted noise levels (morning)
Facade A-weighted noise levels (morning) Facade Z-weighted noise levels (morning)
90 90
90 90
µPa]
80 80
ref.2020µPa]
80 80
70 70 70
70
[dBref.
60 60 60
60
SPL[dB
50 50 50
SPL
50
55.9 dB
55.9 dB 55.255.2
dB dB 54.9 dBdB
54.9 56.6 dBdB
56.6 56.0
56.0dB
dB 58.8 dB
58.8 dB 66.6
66.6 dB dB 64.464.4
dB dB 64.3 64.3
dB dB 69.0 dB
69.0 dB 64.4 dB64.4 dB 65.7 dB 65.7 dB
40 40 LAFL LAeq,10min
L LAFmax
L ==79.3
79.3dB
dB LLAeq == 55.8
55.8 dB
dB 40
40 LZF
LZeq,10min = 89.9
= 89.9 dB dB LZeqL= = 66.0
66.0
Zeq dB dB
0 0 1010 2020 3030 40

40 50
50 60
60 00 1010 2020 30 30 40 40 50 50 60 60
Time
Time[min]
[min] Time
Time [min]
[min]
(e)(e)Facade
FacadeA-weighted
(e) Facade A-weighted A-weightednoise
noise noiselevels
levels levels
between 9:00 am (f)(f)Facade
Facade
(f) Facade Z-weighted Z-weighted
noise noise
Z-weighted levels
noise
levels levels
between 9:00 am
between9:00
between 9:00am
amand
and10:00
10:00 am.
am. between
between9:00 amam
9:00 andand
10:00 am.am.
10:00
and 10:00 am. and 10:00 am.
Facade C-weighted noise levels (morning) Facade noise levels comparison (morning)
Facade C-weighted noise levels (morning) Facade noise levels comparison (morning)
90 66.0 dB 64.9 dB 89.9 dB
90 66.0 dB 64.9 dB 90 89.9 dB 89.3 dB
89.3 dB
µPa]
60 55.8 dB 90
80
ref.2020µPa]
60 55.8 dB
80 79.3 dB
80 79.3 dB
80
70 70
40
70 70
[dBref.
40
60 60
SPL[dB 20
60 60
50 50 20
SPL
50 50
65.6 dB
65.6 dB 62.762.7
dB dB 63.0 dBdB
63.0 68.1 dBdB
68.1 63.0
63.0dB
dB 64.9 dB
64.9 dB
40 40 LCFL LCeq,10min
L LCFmax
L ==89.2
89.2dB
dB LLCeq == 64.9
64.9 dB
dB
CF Ceq,10min CFmax Ceq
00 40 40
0 0 1010 2020 3030 40
40 50
50 60
60 LAeq L LZeq L LCeq
LAeq LAFmax
LAFmax LZFmax
LZFmax LCFmax
LCFmax
Zeq Ceq
Time
Time[min]
[min]
(g)(g)Facade
FacadeC-weighted
(g) Facade C-weighted C-weightednoise
noise noiselevels
levels levels
between 9:00 am (h)
(h)Facade
Facade
(h) Facade frequecy-weighted
frequecy-weighted
frequency-weighted noise levels
noise levels
noise levels
between9:00
between 9:00am
amand
and10:00
10:00 am.
am. comparison
comparison forfor
thethe
morning period.
morning period.
and 10:00 am. comparison for the morning period.
Facade A-weighted noise levels (evening) Facade Z-weighted noise levels (evening)
Facade A-weighted noise levels (evening) Facade Z-weighted noise levels (evening)
80 80
80 80
µPa]
ref.2020µPa]
70 70
70 70
60 60 60
60
[dBref.
50 50 50
SPL[dB
50
SPL
40 40 57.3 dB 58.458.4
dB dB 55.7 dBdB 55.3 dBdB 55.5
40
40
57.3 dB 55.7 55.3 55.5dB
dB 55.7 dB
55.7 dB 62.4 dB 62.4 dB
LAFL LAeq,10min
L LAFmax
L ==73.7
73.7dB
dB LLAeq == 56.5
56.5 dB
dB LZF
LZeq,10min = 81.3
= 81.3 dB dB LZeqL= = 64.5
64.5 dB dB
30 30 AF Aeq,10min AFmax Aeq 30
30 ZFmax Zeq
0 0 1010 2020 3030 40

40 50
50 60
60 00 1010 2020 30 30 40 40 50 50 60 60
Time
Time[min]
[min] Time
Time [min]
[min]
(i)(i)Facade
FacadeA-weighted
(i) Facade A-weighted A-weightednoise
noise noiselevels
levels levels
between 6:00 pm (j)(j)Facade
Facade
(j) Facade Z-weighted Z-weighted
Z-weighted
noise noise levels
noise
levels levels
between 6:00 pm
between6:00
between 6:00pm
pmand
and7:00
7:00pm.
pm. between
between6:00 pmpm
6:00 andand
7:00 pm.pm.
7:00
and 7:00 pm. and 7:00 pm.
Facade C-weighted noise levels (evening) Facade noise levels comparison (evening)
Facade C-weighted noise levels (evening) Facade noise levels comparison
90 (evening)
80 64.5 dB 63.7 dB 90 81.3 dB
80 64.5 dB 63.7 dB
80 81.3 dB
79.5 dB
60
µPa]
56.5 dB 79.5 dB
60 80
ref.2020µPa]
56.5 dB 73.7 dB
70 73.7 dB
70
70
70
60 60 40
40
[dBref.
60 60
50 50
SPL[dB
20 50 50
20
SPL
40 40 61.5 dB
40 40
61.5 dB
LCFL LCeq,10min
LCeq,10min LCFmax
L ==79.0
79.0dB
dB LLCeq == 63.7
63.7 dB
dB
30 30 CF CFmax Ceq
00
0 0 1010 2020 3030 40
40 50
50 60
LAeq LAFmax
LAFmax LZFmax
LZFmax LCFmax
LCFmax
Zeq Ceq
Time
Time[min]
[min]
(k)(k)Facade
FacadeC-weighted
(k) Facade C-weighted C-weightednoise
noise noiselevels
levels levels
between 6:00 pm (l) Facade(l)frequency-weighted
(l)Facade
Facadefrequecy-weighted
frequecy-weighted noise
noise levels
noise levels
levels comparison
between6:00
between 6:00pm
pmand
and7:00
7:00pm.
pm. comparison
comparison forfor
thethe
evening period.
evening period.
and 7:00 pm. for the evening period.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 20 of 22

Bedroom A-weighted noise levels Bedroom Z-weighted noise levels
90 Bedroom A-weighted noise levels 90 Bedroom Z-weighted noise levels
90 90
80 80
µPa]
80 80
ref.2020µPa]
70 70
70 70
[dBref.
60 60 60
60
SPL[dB
50 50 50
50
SPL
51.4 dB
51.4 dB 49.9 49.9
dB dB 49.549.5
dB dB 45.4 dBdB
45.4 45.4 dBdB
45.4 45.8
45.8dB
dB 46.3
46.3 dB
dB 46.3 dB
46.3 dB 59.1
59.1 dBdB 57.857.8
dB dB 57.657.6
dB dB 55.6 55.6
dB dB 55.5 dB 55.8 dB
55.5 dB 55.8 dB 55.8 dB55.8 dB
55.8 dB 55.8 dB
40 40 40
40
LAFL LAeq,60min
L LAFmax
L ==83.0
83.0dB
dB LLAeq == 50.2
50.2 dB
dB LZF
LZeq,60min = 86.5
= 86.5 dB dB LZeqL= = 58.2
58.2
Zeq dB dB
0 0 120
120 240
240 360
360 474
474 00 120
120 240240 360360 474 474
Time
Time[min]
[min] Time
Time [min]
[min]
(m)
(m) BedroomA-weighted
Bedroom A-weightednoise
noise levels
levels (n)
(n)Bedroom
BedroomZ-weighted noise
Z-weighted levels
noise levels between
(m) Bedroom A-weighted
between10:25
10:25pm
noise
pmand
and6:18
levels
6:18 am.
am.
between (n) Bedroom Z-weighted
between
noise levels
between between10:25 pmpm
10:25 andand
6:18 am.am.
6:18
10:25 pm and 6:18 am. 10:25 pm and 6:18 am.
Bedroom C-weighted noise levels Bedroom noise levels comparison

90 Bedroom C-weighted noise levels Bedroom noise levels comparison
90 90
60 58.2 dB 86.5 dB 87.4 dB
80 60 58.2 dB 53.7 dB 90 83.0 dB 86.5 dB

87.4 dB
µPa]
50.2 dB 53.7 dB
80 83.0 dB
ref.2020µPa]
50 50.2 dB
80
50 80
70
70 40
40 70
70
[dBref.
60 60 30
30
60 60
50 50 SPL[dB
SPL
20
20
54.5 dB 54.0 54.0
dB dB 53.553.5
dB dB 51.9 dBdB 51.8 dBdB 52.1
52.1dB 52.4
52.4 dB 52.4 dB 50 50
40 40 54.5 dB 51.9 51.8 dB dB 52.4 dB
10
10
LCFL LCeq,60min
L LCFmax
L ==86.5
86.5dB
dB LLCeq == 53.7
53.7 dB
dB
CF Ceq,60min CFmax Ceq 40 40
00
0 0 120
120 240
240 360
360 474
LAeq LAFmax
LAFmax LZFmax
LZFmax LCFmax
LCFmax
Zeq Ceq
Time
Time[min]
[min]
(o)(o)Bedroom
(o) Bedroom BedroomC-weighted
C-weightednoise
C-weighted noisenoise levels
levels
levels between (p)Bedroom
Bedroom frequency-weighted noise levels
(p)
(p) Bedroomfrequecy-weighted noise
frequecy-weighted levels
noise comparison.
levels comparison.
between10:25
between 10:25pm
pmand
and6:18
6:18 am.
am.
10:25 pm and 6:18 am. comparison.
6. CONCLUSION
This study presented a small embedded system based on a MEMS digital microphone and
Teensy microcontroller for applications in noise monitoring (or general SPL measurement).
Procedural/electrical testing revealed that the system fulfills Class 1 SLM weighting and filtering
IEC standards.
Acoustic test bench measurements with a calibrated Class 1 SLM led to spectral and overall
correction filter coefficients which achieved approximately the same SPL and Leq values as the Class 1
(although limited in frequency up to 12.5 kHz, in this case within Class 2 frequency range). After
the filtering, relative levels ranged ±0.5 dB, in general, which are exceptional results, given the
relatively small budget of the prototype. Finally, field measurements revealed adequate performance
with low power and CPU consumption, enabling long-term measurements (depending on the mobile
supply device). Further testing will be carried out in the laboratory when it is possible to return to
in-person activities. Moreover, support files for this project can be accessed via the GitHub repository
https://github.com/eac-ufsm/internoise2021-MEMS .
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors want to thank all the support from the Acoustical Engineering Program at the Federal
University of Santa Maria (UFSM, Brazil), as well as its scholarship programs FIPE and FIEX, which
assisted this project. In special, the first author wants to acknowledge the Internoise 2021 for the grants
for students of Latin America and for electing this project as a winner. Thanks to Denison Oliveira and
Fernando Diaz from HBK/Brüel & Kjær for the support concerning the Type 2240. Finally, a special
thanks also to Joseph Lacey for the text proofreading.
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 21 of 22

REFERENCES
[1] A. D. Pierce. Acoustics – An Introduction to Its Physical Principles and Applications. Springer
International Publishing, 2019. ISBN 978-3030112134. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-11214-1.
[2] F. Jacobsen and P. M. Juhl. Fundamentals of General Linear Acoustics. Wiley, 2013.
[3] G. Müller and M. Möser. Handbook of Engineering Acoustics. Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg,
Berlin, 2013. ISBN 978-3540240525. doi: 10.1007/978-3-540-69460-1.
[4] D. A. Bies, C. Hansen, and C. Howard. Engineering noise control. CRC press, 2017.
[5] IEC. Electroacoustics – Sound level meters – Part 1: Specifications. Standard IEC 61672-1:2013,
International Electrotechnical Commission, 2013. International standard.
[6] IEC. Electroacoustics – Sound level meters – Part 2: Pattern evaluation tests. Standard IEC 61672-
2:2013, International Electrotechnical Commission, 2013. International standard.
[7] HBK – Brüel & Kjær. Instrumentation: Sound Level Meter, 2021. URL https://www.bksv.com.
[8] S. Santini and A. Vitaletti. Wireless Sensor Networks for Environmental Noise Monitoring. In 6th
GI/ITG KuVS Fachgespraech Drahtlose Sensornetze, pages 98–101, Aachen, Germany, Jul. 2007.
[9] J. Farrés. Barcelona noise monitoring network. In EuroNoise 2015, Maastricht, NL, May 2015.
[10] E. Vidaña-Vila, J. Navarro, C. Borda-Fortuny, D. Stowell, and R. M. Alsina-Pagès. Low-cost distributed
acoustic sensor network for real-time urban sound monitoring. Electronics, 9(12):1–25, 2020. ISSN
2079-9292. doi: 10.3390/electronics9122119.
[11] P. Malcovati and A. Baschirotto. The evolution of integrated interfaces for MEMS microphones.
Micromachines, 9(7):1–20, n. 323, 2018. ISSN 2072-666X. doi: 10.3390/mi9070323.
[12] P. von Pflug and D. Krischker. Aspects of the use of MEMS microphones in phased array systems. In
Proceedings of Internoise 2017, Hong Kong, China, Aug. 2017. URL http://bit.ly/int2017-mems-array.
[13] Philips Semiconductors. I2S Bus Specification (Revised), 1996. Application note.
[14] Knowles. Sisonic design guide, 2017. Application Note (AN24).
[15] PJRC – P. J. Stoffregen. Teensy 4.0 Development Board, Teensy Audio Library, Audio System Design
Tool, & Creating New Audio Objects, 2021. URL https://www.pjrc.com.
[16] A. Z. Leão and W. D’A. Fonseca. Study of the system identification technique implemented in
Arduino Due and Teensy 3.6 microcontrollers (original: Estudo da técnica de identificação de sistemas
implementada em microcontroladores Arduino Due e Teensy 3.6). Acústica & Vibrações, 32(49):5–14,
2017. ISSN 1983-442X. URL http://bit.ly/teensy-av-2017.
[17] J. Lewis. Analog and Digital MEMS Microphone Design Considerations, 2013. Analog Devices,
Technical Article (MS-2472).
[18] MEMSensing Microsystems. MSM261S4030H0 – I2 S digital output mems mic. with multi modes
(datasheet), v 1.7, 2018.
[19] Cortex Microcontroller Software Interface Standard. CMSIS DSP Software Library, 2021.
[20] IEC. Electroacoustics – Octave-band and fractional-octave-band filters – Part 1: Specifications.
Standard IEC 61260-1:2014, International Electrotechnical Commission, 2014. International standard.
[21] IEC. Electroacoustics – Octave-band and fractional-octave-band filters – Part 2: Pattern-evaluation tests.
Standard IEC 61260-1:2016, International Electrotechnical Commission, 2016. International standard.
Cite this article

○ F. R. Mello; W. D’A. Fonseca; P. H. Mareze. MEMS digital microphone and Arduino compatible
microcontroller: an embedded system for noise monitoring. In 50th International Congress and
Exposition on Noise Control Engineering — Internoise 2021, pages 1–12, Washington, DC,
USA, Aug. 2021. doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557.
BibTeX file .
doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 22 of 22
View publication stats

MEMS Digital Microphone and Arduino Compatible Microcontroller: An Embedded System For Noise Monitoring

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

MEMS Digital Microphone and Arduino Compatible Microcontroller: An Embedded System For Noise Monitoring

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

MEMS digital microphone and Arduino compatible microcontroller: an

Conference Paper · August 2021

Felipe Ramos de Mello William D'Andrea Fonseca

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Propagação e atenuação sonora em dutos e filtros acústicos. View project

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

William D’Andrea Fonseca2

Paulo Henrique Mareze3

PACS: 43.58.Fm, 43.50.Yw, 43.60.Qv, 07.07.Df, 43.38.Kb .

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 1 of 22

2. THEORY, HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE

2.1. Sound pressure and Sound Pressure Level (SPL)

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 2 of 22

(a) RMS steps.

(b) SPL vs. Leq .

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 3 of 22

2.5. Microelectromechanical microphones (MEMS)

2.6. Teensy 4.0 and Teensy Audio Library

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 4 of 22

VDD GND VDD GND

VDD GND VDDL/RGND

Teensy 4.0 NXP iMXRT10621,⋄ 600 MHz 2 MB (Flash Memory) 1 MB 32 channels

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 5 of 22

3.2. Audio objects for sound pressure level calculations

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 6 of 22

(g) Prototype fully assembled.

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 7 of 22

USB input SPL values USB output

(a) Signal flow for the gray-box method.

Fast or Slow Leq

1/1 or 1/3 oct Level

(b) Designed SLM workflow.

4.1. Time-weighting filters (Fast & Slow)

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 8 of 22

Decay curves for Fast and Slow time-weightings

4 kHz sine wave

4.2. Frequency-weighting filters (A & C)

A-weighting filter validation according to C-weighting filter validation according to

[dB ref. 1 @ 1 kHz]

(a) A frequency-weighting validation. (b) C frequency-weighting validation.

4.3. Octave and fractional octave band filters

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 9 of 22

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

-10 -10 -10 -10

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

-10 -10 -10 -10

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

-10 -10 -10 -10

doi: 10.3397/IN-2021-2557. Page 10 of 22

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

-10 -10 -10 -10

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

-10 -10 -10 -10

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

Normalized level [dB ref. 1]

-10 -10 -10 -10