Plate-type acoustic metamaterial with cavities coupled via an orifice for enhanced

sound transmission loss

Linus Yinn Leng Ang, Yong Khiang Koh, and Heow Pueh Lee

Citation: Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 051903 (2018);

View online: https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5019602
View Table of Contents: http://aip.scitation.org/toc/apl/112/5
Published by the American Institute of Physics

Articles you may be interested in

High efficiency and broadband acoustic diodes
Applied Physics Letters 112, 051902 (2018); 10.1063/1.5020698

Acoustic metamaterial panel for both fluid passage and broadband soundproofing in the audible frequency range
Applied Physics Letters 112, 041903 (2018); 10.1063/1.5004605

Acoustic perfect absorption and broadband insulation achieved by double-zero metamaterials

Applied Physics Letters 112, 021901 (2018); 10.1063/1.5018180

Asymmetric absorber with multiband and broadband for low-frequency sound

Applied Physics Letters 111, 143502 (2017); 10.1063/1.4998516

Perspective: Acoustic metamaterials in transition

Journal of Applied Physics 123, 090901 (2017); 10.1063/1.5007682

Broadband sound transmission loss of a large-scale membrane-type acoustic metamaterial for low-frequency
noise control
Applied Physics Letters 111, 041903 (2017); 10.1063/1.4995405
 APPLIED PHYSICS LETTERS 112, 051903 (2018)

Plate-type acoustic metamaterial with cavities coupled via an orifice

for enhanced sound transmission loss
Linus Yinn Leng Ang,1,2,a) Yong Khiang Koh,2 and Heow Pueh Lee1
1
Department of Mechanical Engineering, National University of Singapore, 9 Engineering Drive 1,
Singapore 117575, Singapore
2
Kinetics Design and Manufacturing, Singapore Technologies Kinetics Ltd., 249 Jalan Boon Lay,
Singapore 619523, Singapore
(Received 14 December 2017; accepted 17 January 2018; published online 29 January 2018)
Membrane-type acoustic metamaterials generally involve a heavy platelet attached to a pretensioned
membrane. Their acoustical performance is characterised solely based on the resonant behaviour of
the membrane-platelet assembly. However, typical designs may pose manufacturing issues if
extended in scale for industrial applications. Examples include the spatial consistency of the plate-
let(s), the uniformity of the membrane pretension, and the durability of the membrane—not to men-
tion stress relaxation. As large-scale designs are recently gaining interest, it is imperative to address
the shortcomings for manufacturability. This study presents a proof-of-concept design using tension-
less membranes without any platelets. The results showed that the acoustical performance could be
complemented by the coupling effect between two enclosed cavities via an orifice. The orifice diame-
ter could serve as a tuning parameter for broadband or narrowband transmission loss at selected fre-
quencies. Consequently, the proposed design could address the shortcomings of membrane-type
acoustic metamaterials and complement their acoustical performance with the additional feature.
Published by AIP Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.5019602

Membrane-type acoustic metamaterials have been stud-
ied extensively over the past decade.1–11 Their designs gen-
erally involve a heavy platelet attached to a pretensioned
rubber membrane. If properly designed, these metamaterials
may be a potential alternative for noise control in the indus-
try.12 For example, Sui et al.13 showed improved noise
reduction by adding a pretensioned latex membrane in a hon-
eycomb sandwich panel. This improvement was achieved
without much weight (low material density) and spatial
(small thickness) penalties—beneficial in vehicle and aircraft
cabins. But careful design is necessary so that the acoustical
performance of a small-scale specimen is not compromised
by the global dynamic response of a large-scale specimen.14
Recently, more complex designs have been reported to
improve the acoustical performance. For example, a con-
straint structure15 could be used to suppress certain eigenmo-
des of the membrane or a perforated membrane16 could be
used to introduce the effect of a Helmholtz resonator.
Alternatively, active controls could also be introduced to
tune the acoustical performance.16–19
The acoustical performance of membrane-type acoustic
metamaterials depends on the resonant behaviour of the mem-
brane with or without the platelet(s). To achieve the desired
outcome, tuning of the membrane and the platelet parameters
is necessary. However, typical designs may pose manufactur-
ing concerns if extended in scale for industrial applications.
Examples include the uniformity of the membrane pretension,
the spatial consistency of the platelet(s), and the durability of
the membrane—not to mention stress relaxation. With recent
interest in large-scale designs,20–23 it is imperative to address
the shortcomings for manufacturability. Recent studies have
a)
Electronic addresses: ylang@u.nus.edu and anglinus@stengg.com
shown that plastic membranes may eliminate pretension and
provide better durability in contrast to rubber membranes.23,24
The acoustical performance, however, is still governed solely
by the membrane resonances.
This study—numerical and experimental—considers a
plate-type acoustic metamaterial showing that the acoustical
performance could be complemented by the coupling effect
between two enclosed cavities via an orifice in addition to
the resonant behaviour of the membranes.
Printed from polylactide filaments via fused deposition
modelling (MOMENT Moment S), each specimen was assem-
bled from three components and two Mylar films. Figure 1(a)
shows the three-dimensional (3D) rendering of the specimen
alongside the dimension labels. A film (dm ¼ 127 lm thick)
was first adhered on one side of the inner frame by an
industrial-grade double-sided tape (Nitto Denko No. 500). The
tape width was larger than Lo to avoid discontinuity, which
could cause air leakages from the cavities. Next, the excess
membrane was removed by cutting. The same steps were
repeated to adhere the membrane on the other side of the inner
frame. Finally, an outer frame (3 mm thick) was adhered on
the exposed surface of each membrane. The outer frames
served to emulate a pinned boundary condition along the mem-
branes’ edges and prevent accidental damage to the regions
adhered to the inner frame. The frame outer Lo and inner Li
lengths were 6 and 4 cm, respectively. The smaller Ls and
larger Ll cavities had widths of 1 and 2.5 cm, respectively. The
partition thickness tp was 5 mm. The orifice was situated at the
centre point of the partition. Several diameters were investi-
gated (D ¼ 0, 3, 5, and 7 mm). Note that D ¼ 0 mm served as
the reference specimen to identify the orifice’s effect. Overall,
the specimen had a total depth of d ¼ 20 þ 2 dm mm. The
specimen had a surface density of 2.54 kg/m2 when D ¼ 0 mm,

0003-6951/2018/112(5)/051903/5/$30.00 112, 051903-1 Published by AIP Publishing.

051903-2 Ang, Koh, and Lee
FIG. 1. (a) 3D rendering of the specimen alongside the dimension labels. (b) Set-up of the specimen and the holder in the impedance tube (viewed from the
downstream side). (c) 3D numerical model of the impedance tube. The inset shows the holder and the specimen with the first membrane and the interior fluid
domain removed for clarity.
2.51 kg/m2 when D ¼ 3 mm, 2.46 kg/m2 when D ¼ 5 mm, and
2.39 kg/m2 when D ¼ 7 mm.
The experiment was conducted based on ASTM
E2611.25 The specimen was mounted in the impedance tube
(BSWA SW422) by an in-house designed holder. The holder
was made from a highly dense material (stainless steel) to
ensure that its dynamic behaviour would not influence the
results in the frequency range of interest (0.1–1.6 kHz). Two
mounting frames were used to secure the specimen in the
holder. Precautions were taken to minimize sound leakages:
(1) tapes were applied along the contacting edges between
the specimen and the holder and on the bolt holes; (2) model-
ling clay was applied along the outer edges of the mounting
frames that were in contact with the holder and along the
outer edges of the holder that were in contact with the
impedance tube. Figure 1(b) shows the described set-up.
To reduce experimental errors that could be attributed to
the installation of the holder in the impedance tube, the
installation was repeated five times where a set of three mea-
surements was recorded for each repetition. Subsequently,
the datasets were used to compute the expanded uncertainty
U% as given by26
" #
XM
U % ¼ k % sx þ2 2
bk ; (1)
k¼1
where k% ¼ 2 for a confidence level of 95%; sx denotes the
standard deviation; M and bk denote the number of system-
atic error sources and the standard deviation estimate of the
k-th systematic error source. In this study, the microphones
were considered as the only systematic error source where
bk ¼ 60.3 dB according to the manufacturer’s datasheet.
The numerical model was developed in ABAQUS 2017,
involving three main segments—upstream tube, specimen,
and downstream tube [Fig. 1(c)]. The dimensions of the
upstream and downstream tubes (10 cm diameter) and the
microphone positions with respect to the specimen were kept
identical to the test set-up except for the omission of the
mounting frames. This omission was simplified by specify-
ing zero displacement in the z-direction on the frame surfa-
ces that were in contact with the mounting frames in the
experiment. Experimentally, the distance between each pair
of upstream/downstream microphones was either 8 or 30 cm
Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 051903 (2018)
depending on the measured frequency range. Numerically,
this distance was found to have a negligible influence on the
results. Hence, the distance was kept at 8 cm in the numerical
model. Table I lists the material properties specified in the
simulation. All values were taken from either a handbook27
or the manufacturer’s datasheet except for the structural loss
factor of Mylar, which was measured via dynamic mechani-
cal analysis by Singapore Institute of Manufacturing
Technology. The density and the bulk modulus of air were
1.18 kg/m3 and 142 kPa, respectively.
An incident wave loading of a unit magnitude (1 Pa)
was specified to propagate from the upstream to the anechoic
end (non-reflecting) of the downstream tube [Fig. 1(c)]. Zero
displacement was specified in the x- and y-directions on the
outer surface of the holder to emulate the constraints due to
the tube walls. Tie constraints were specified on all acoustic-
structure interfaces using the surface-to-surface approach to
achieve an acoustic-structure interaction. The constraints
were specified according to the software’s recommendations
where the slave surface should preferably be of a lower wave
speed in relative to the master surface.28 Solid-to-shell cou-
pling was specified between the membranes’ edges and the
contacting surfaces of the frames. The remaining boundaries
of the fluid domains were set as sound hard. The fluid and
the solid domains were discretised by quadratic elements
(AC3D20 and C3D20R, respectively), while the membranes
were discretised by linear shell elements (S4R). Note that
quadratic shell elements (S8R) would be suitable only for
thick plates.28 All domains were discretised with at least six
elements per wavelength.
Complex pressure values were extracted from the micro-
phone nodes [Fig. 1(c)] to compute the transmission loss
(TL) based on the transfer matrix method as given by25
TL ¼ 20 log10 jsj; (2)
TABLE I. Material properties specified in the simulation.
Density Young’s Poisson’s Structural
Material (kg/m3) modulus (GPa) ratio loss factor
Stainless steel 7800 206 0.28 …
Polylactide 1250 2.1 0.36 …
Mylar 1380 5.1 0.38 0.03
051903-3 Ang, Koh, and Lee Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 051903 (2018)

where s denotes the transmission coefficient as given by25
2eikd
s¼ ; (3)
T11 þ T12 =qo co þ qo co T21 þ T22
where k denotes the wavenumber; Tij denotes the transfer
matrix element in row i and column j; qo denotes the density
of air; and co denotes the sound speed in air.
Figure 2(a) shows the measured and simulated TL
curves of the specimen when D ¼ 0 mm. Note that the nor-
mal incidence mass law is included only as a reference with
respect to an unbounded panel of equivalent surface density
and does not provide a direct indication of the acoustical
benefit and drawback of the small-scale specimen.29 As this
specimen was used as a benchmark to identify the orifice’s
effect later, its acoustical performance was not tuned for
low-frequency noise control applications. Comparing both
curves, good agreement in the overall trend was observed
with four dips (491, 1000, 1169, and 1428 Hz) and one peak
(1079 Hz). Experimentally, the peak and the dips occurred at
around the same frequency with a maximum deviation of
2.9%. The mode shapes at 491 and 1169 Hz corresponded
to the in-phase translational motion of the membranes in the
normal direction (dipolar resonance), while the mode shapes
at 1000 and 1428 Hz corresponded to the coupling between
the membranes and the larger cavity. This coupling resulted
in an out-of-phase translational motion of the membranes in
the normal direction (monopolar resonance). Dipolar and
monopolar resonances could suggest the presence of
negative effective mass density and negative effective bulk
modulus, respectively. In this case, the homogenization
scheme—not considered in this study—may be applied to
determine both parameters.30
When D ¼ 3 mm, one new peak (653 Hz) and one new
dip (637 Hz) were predicted [Fig. 2(b)]. This phenomenon
was due to the resonant behaviour of both cavities coupled
via the orifice [View A in Fig. 2(b)]. As a result, when one
cavity was expanding, the other cavity was contracting. The
remaining peak and dips were attributed to that when
D ¼ 0 mm [Fig. 2(a)]. Good agreement in the overall trend
was observed between the measurement and the simulation.
However, the new peak and dip were absent in the measure-
ment. This absence could be reasoned by the fact that fused
deposition modelling is known to produce orifices with poor
cylindricity compared to other additive manufacturing tech-
niques—such as stereolithography or selective laser sinter-
ing—or conventional machining methods.31 Hence, the
geometrical inaccuracy with respect to the small orifice
diameter (3 mm) could have influenced the resonant behav-
iour due to the orifice, resulting in the missing peak and dip.
Also, the acoustic boundary layer thickness could be large
relative to the orifice diameter. Hence, viscous losses due to
the interaction with the acoustic boundary layer—not consid-
ered numerically—could also “smear out” the new peak and
dip.32 These hypotheses can be reinforced by the measured
TL curves when larger orifice diameters (D ¼ 5 and 7 mm)
were considered [Figs. 2(c) and 2(d), respectively].
The missing peak and dip were now reflected in the mea-
surement at 874 and 806 Hz, respectively, when D ¼ 5 mm,
and at 948 and 868 Hz, respectively, when D ¼ 7 mm.

FIG. 2. Simulated, measured, and analytical TL curves of the specimen when (a) D ¼ 0 mm; (b) D ¼ 3 mm; (c) D ¼ 5 mm; and (d) D ¼ 7 mm alongside the
mode shapes at the eigenfrequencies. Views A, B, and C show the top view of the mode shape. The shaded region represents the limits of the experimental
uncertainty at a confidence level of 95%. (e) Simulated normal displacement (magnitude) ratio R when D ¼ 3 mm alongside the displacement profile of the
membranes at each peak frequency. Blue and red dashed lines—extending to (b)—represent the dip and the peak frequencies, respectively. (f) Change in TL
between D ¼ 5 mm and D ¼ 0 mm. The shaded region highlights the orifice’s effect.
051903-4 Ang, Koh, and Lee
Comparing the mode shapes in Figs. 2(c) and 2(d) with Fig.
2(b), the newly captured peak and dip were indeed due to the
resonant behaviour of the two cavities coupled via the orifice.
The orifice’s effect can be associated with a “tonraum”
resonator.33 Assuming that the cavities’ boundaries are rigid,
the cavity-orifice-cavity system can be seen as a one-
dimensional spring-mass-spring system. Knowing the acous-
tic stiffness of each cavity and the mass of the neck,34 the
system’s natural frequency fn can be estimated by
 0:5
co AðVs þ Vl Þ
fn ¼ ; (4)
2p Vs Vl L0
where A and L0 denote the cross-sectional area and the effec-
tive length of the neck, respectively; and Vs(l) denotes the
volume of the smaller (larger) cavity. Since fn / A0.5, an
increase in D would lead to a higher natural frequency. This
understanding supports the observations where the dip fre-
quency shifted from 637 to 833 Hz, and to 891 Hz, when D
was increased from 3 to 5 mm, and to 7 mm, respectively
[Figs. 2(b)–2(d)].
In Figs. 2(a)–2(d), the discrepancies in peak/dip fre-
quency between the simulation and the measurement could
be due to the idealization of boundary conditions in the
numerical model35 and the deviation in material properties in
contrast to that given in the handbook27 or manufacturer’s
datasheet. For the discrepancies in TL between the simula-
tion and the measurement, it could be due to the loud-
speaker’s limitation to generate a loud noise signal in the
impedance tube, resulting in a maximum TL of only
40–45 dB.
Till now, the focus has been placed on understanding
the physics behind the dip frequencies but not the peak fre-
quencies. The discussion will now focus on the latter by ana-
lysing the normal displacement (magnitude) ratio of the
second to the first membrane based on D ¼ 3 mm as an
example [Fig. 2(e)]. Mathematically, the ratio R is given by
U ?;m2 =U ?;m1 , where U ? denotes the average normal dis-
placement (magnitude) of the entire membrane and sub-
scripts m1 and m2 denote the first and second membranes,
respectively.
A ratio of 1 would imply that both membranes had the
same displacement profile regardless of their relative phase,
suggesting a resonant behaviour of the specimen as indicated
by the blue dashed lines in Figs. 2(b) and 2(e). At the peak
frequencies (red dashed lines), the ratios were less than 1,
suggesting that the second membrane was nearly motionless
relative to the first membrane. This understanding could be
reinforced by the displacement profile of the membranes
[Fig. 2(e)] where the second membrane functioned like a
“noise shield”, minimizing sound transmission. Significant
TL improvement due to the orifice’s effect could also be
achieved. For example, when D ¼ 5 mm, the TL improved
by up to 35 dB despite a drop in TL by up to 17.2 dB at the
dip frequency [Fig. 2(f)]. It must be emphasized that, if
extended in scale, careful design is necessary. Else, the
acoustical performance observed in small-scale specimens
may be considerably different in large-scale specimens due
to the influence of the boundary conditions and the global
dynamic response of the structure.14
Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 051903 (2018)
FIG. 3. Relationship between the orifice diameter and the corresponding TL
peak and dip frequencies.
Having understood the physics behind the TL curves,
the design aspects of the specimen are next discussed for tun-
ing purposes. Recalling the results, an upward shift in the TL
peak and dip frequencies was observed when the orifice
diameter was increased. This relationship is shown in Fig. 3.
Both trendlines showed an incremental shift in frequency for
a large orifice. For a small orifice, the frequency gap between
the trendlines was closer compared to that of a large orifice.
This information may be useful when tuning the specimen
for a given scenario. For example, with an orifice diameter
of 5–6 mm, the specimen may be potential as a see-through
noise barrier at construction sites.36 As this study focused on
the orifice’s effect to enhance TL, the specimens were not
tuned for low-frequency noise control applications. For this
consideration, other parameters can be tuned apart from the
orifice diameter. For example, the acoustic stiffness of each
cavity and the flexural stiffness of each membrane could be
reduced to shift the TL peaks and dips to the lower frequen-
cies. If extended in scale, larger specimens could also be
considered because the size is no longer constrained by the
impedance tube. Consequently, with larger membrane area
and cavity volume, the TL peaks and dips would occur in the
low-frequency range.
In conclusion, this study has shown that the acoustical
performance of a plate-type acoustic metamaterial could be
complemented by the coupling effect between two cavities
via an orifice in addition to the resonant behaviour of the
membranes. This consideration could address the shortcom-
ings of typical membrane-type acoustic metamaterials—such
as the membranes’ durability, stress relaxation, pretension,
and the spatial consistency of the platelet(s)—which may
pose manufacturing issues if extended in scale for industrial
applications.
The authors acknowledge the financial support provided
by the Singapore Economic Development Board (EDB) and
Singapore Technologies Kinetics Ltd. (ST Kinetics) under
the EDB Industrial Postgraduate Program (EDB-IPP) (Grant
No. COY-15-IPP/120005). The authors thank Dr. Le Quan
Ngoc Tran for performing dynamic mechanical analysis on
the Mylar film. The authors thank Nitto Denko (Singapore),
Pte. Ltd. for the sponsorship of customized adhesive tapes.
1
C. J. Naify, C. M. Chang, G. McKnight, and S. R. Nutt, J. Appl. Phys.
108, 114905 (2010).
2
C. J. Naify, C. M. Chang, G. McKnight, and S. R. Nutt, J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 132, 2784 (2012).
3
C. J. Naify, C. M. Chang, G. McKnight, and S. R. Nutt, J. Appl. Phys.
110, 124903 (2011).
051903-5 Ang, Koh, and Lee Appl. Phys. Lett. 112, 051903 (2018)

4 22
C. J. Naify, C. M. Chang, G. McKnight, F. Scheulen, and S. R. Nutt, P. Marinova, S. Lippert, and O. von Estorff, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 142,
J. Appl. Phys. 109, 104902 (2011). 2400 (2017).
5 23
J. Mei, G. Ma, M. Yang, Z. Yang, W. Wen, and P. Sheng, Nat. Commun. S. Varanasi, J. S. Bolton, and T. H. Siegmund, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 141,
3, 756 (2012). 602 (2017).
6 24
Z. Yang, H. M. Dai, N. H. Chan, G. Ma, and P. Sheng, Appl. Phys. Lett. F. Ma, M. Huang, and J. H. Wu, J. Appl. Phys. 121, 015102 (2017).
25
96, 041906 (2010). ASTM, ASTM E2611-09: Standard Test Method for Measurement of
7
F. Ma, J. H. Wu, M. Huang, W. Zhang, and S. Zhang, J. Phys. D: Appl. Normal Incidence Sound Transmission of Acoustical Materials Based on
Phys. 48, 175105 (2015). the Transfer Matrix Method (ASTM International, West Conshohocken,
8
F. Ma, J. H. Wu, and M. Huang, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 48, 465305 (2015). PA, USA, 2009).
9 26
Y. Zhang, J. Wen, H. Zhao, D. Yu, L. Cai, and X. Wen, J. Appl. Phys. H. W. Coleman and W. G. Steele, Experimentation, Validation, and
114, 063515 (2013). Uncertainty Analysis for Engineers, 3rd ed. (John Wiley & Sons,
10
G. Ma, M. Yang, Z. Yang, and P. Sheng, Appl. Phys. Lett. 103, 011903 Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009), Chap. 2, pp. 29–60.
27
(2013). F. Cardarelli, Materials Handbook: A Concise Desktop Reference, 2nd ed.
11
M. Yang, G. Ma, Z. Yang, and P. Sheng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 134301 (2013). (Springer, London, England, 2008).
12 28
L. Y. L. Ang, Y. K. Koh, and H. P. Lee, Int. J. Appl. Mech. 8, 1650072 SIMULIA, Abaqus Analysis User’s Guide (SIMULIA, Providence, RI,
(2016). USA, 2017).
13 29
N. Sui, X. Yan, T. Y. Huang, J. Xu, F. G. Yuan, and Y. Jing, Appl. Phys. F. J. Fahy and P. Gardonio, Sound and Structural Vibration: Radiation,
Lett. 106, 171905 (2015). Transmission and Response, 2nd ed. (Academic Press, Cambridge, MA,
14
A. Peiffer, M. Grunewald, and P. Lempereur, Appl. Phys. Lett. 107, USA, 2007), Chap. 5, pp. 277–373.
30
216101 (2015). M. Yang, G. Ma, Y. Wu, Z. Yang, and P. Sheng, Phys. Rev. B 89, 064309
15
X. Wang, H. Zhao, X. Luo, and Z. Huang, Appl. Phys. Lett. 108, 041905 (2014).
31
(2016). P. Shah, R. Racasan, and P. Bills, Case Study Nondestr. Test. Eval. 6, 69
16
F. Langfeldt, H. Kemsies, W. Gleine, and O. von Estorff, Phys. Lett. A (2016).
32
381, 1457 (2017). D. T. Blackstock, Fundamentals of Physical Acoustics (John Wiley &
17
H. Zhang, Y. Xiao, J. Wen, D. Yu, and X. Wen, Appl. Phys. Lett. 108, Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2000).
33
141902 (2016). I. Malecki, Physical Foundations of Technical Acoustics, 1st ed.
18
X. Chen, X. Xu, S. Ai, H. Chen, Y. Pei, and X. Zhou, Appl. Phys. Lett. (Pergamon Press, Oxford, England, 1969), Chap. 9, pp. 375–424.
34
105, 071913 (2014). L. E. Kinsler, A. R. Frey, A. B. Coppens, and J. V. Sanders, Fundamentals
19
S. Xiao, G. Ma, Y. Li, Z. Yang, and P. Sheng, Appl. Phys. Lett. 106, of Acoustics, 4th ed. (John Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2000),
091904 (2015). Chap. 10, pp. 272–301.
20 35
L. Y. L. Ang, Y. K. Koh, and H. P. Lee, Appl. Phys. Lett. 111, 041903 (2017). R. D. Cook, D. S. Malkus, M. E. Plesha, and R. J. Witt, Concepts and
21
F. Langfeldt, W. Gleine, and O. von Estorff, in Proceedings of the INTER- Applications of Finite Element Analysis, 4th ed. (John Wiley & Sons,
NOISE 2016, edited by W. Kropp (Deutsche Gesellschaft Fuer Akustik, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2002).
36
Hamburg, Germany, 2016), pp. 7551–7562. H. P. Lee, Z. Wang, and K. M. Lim, Build. Acoust. 24, 21 (2016).