Triple leaf

Z, Thank you, great splaining :D Now I feel dumber :evil: Just kidding You know I get the same respond from the female gender about acoustical things :wink: T

very quick and simple output from WinFLAG, hope it helps Andrew

Andrew, Do you have this graph also in numbers? Exact mass, exact wool, exact whatever. Can you also make the same without wool? (also with numbers if possible?) Bob, Nice conclusions you entered here. :) I expected those tables to trigger you. But it were not just an arbitrary bunch, but I entered them as logical series. If you want to check certain combinations just give them. Warm regards Eric

Eric_Desart:

Do you have this graph also in numbers?

Have you ever heard of William Playfair (1759 - 1823). He invented charts and graphs. In 1786 he created the first published bar chart, which illustrated Scotland's 1781 trade surplus with America and its simultanious trace deficit with Russia. The reason I meantion it is you asked for numbers, and from American Scientist May-June 2006 pg 275:

pictures created to represent observations were necessarily less accurate and more interpretive than were numbers themselves. A "general mistrust of pictorial representation" in British science continued into the early 19th century (and a cautious skepticism about graphic representation remains part of scientific culture today). Watt tactfully urged Playfair to provide tables to support his arguments, pointing out that "the charts now seem to rest on your own authority, and it will naturally be enquired from whence you have derived your intelligence."

Graphical representation , he [Playfair] argues in the Breviary, can "facilitate the attainment of information, and aid the memory in retaining it." ... It conveys its message to the eye in an instant.

Eric_Desart: I have the formula for 1DOF with one wall infinite mass. I've been meaning to see if one of my books answers these questions: What's the formula for 1DOF with two normal masses? What's the formula for 2DOF with two normal masses?

z60611 wrote:

Eric_Desart:

Do you have this graph also in numbers?

Have you ever heard of William Playfair (1759 - 1823). <snip> ... It conveys its message to the eye in an instant.

A graph is more clear than numbers unless you want to draw mathematical conclusions. I want to see if these MSM fits my calculations and secondly what the effect is on the MSM by an alternative with and without wool, in function of the numerous discussions about it in relation to the speed of sound in absorption material.

z60611 wrote:

Eric_Desart: 1a) I have the formula for 1DOF with one wall infinite mass. I've been meaning to see if one of my books answers these questions: 1b) What's the formula for 1DOF with two normal masses? 2) What's the formula for 2DOF with two normal masses?

1a) That's true but incomplete, because 1b) you DO have the formula 1) for normal masses. You quoted him regularly yourself, but until now didn't see the relationship. Which is what indeed surpriced me until now (not only from you). You very recently entered Brian's summary at Studiotips about walls: http://forum.studiotips.com/viewtopic.p ... ght=#31547 In that you find:

Brian Ravnaas wrote:

rule #9 - the decoupling point rule. Calculate the depth of your air cavity by taking 1.4*thickness of insulation + thickness of dead air space. convert to millimeters. take [(mass 1 + mass 2)/(mass1*mass2*depth)]^0.5*1900. When you get that figure, multiply by 1.4 and you will have an estimate of the frequency at which your wall de-couples. Remember, de-coupling will make it worse below that point unless the wall is very heavily damped.

This formula is entered in different groups on several occasions already. I think you find it in the NRC/IRC docs also. I wonder why nobody ever made this link. MSM is MSM whether that relates to walls or paneltraps. Just try that formula and put in 1 extremely heavy mass (to simulte infinite mass) as argument. Forget about the 1.4 correction factor here and you come to exact the same result as the standard panel trap formula. I make my answer much more complicated than necessary just to trigger your reasoning here. You've seen this formula a lot already and the mechanism it represents is EXACTLY the same as the one valid for a panel trap. Bob this is related to respect I feel for you and your searching mind, not playing with you, just triggering what you clearly have and are. :) I know you're going to translate this now in pictures for others to explain this difference between both formulas. This magnitude and linearity of this 1.4 factor is still a question mark with unclear answers (confirmed by Brian himself somewhere else). If Brian does know more recent stuff about this I'm interested. It's in order to check/feel how this factor is integrated in that program that I asked Andrew for those WinFLAG numbers here. In as far this 1.4 is valid for walls it also should be integrated in the paneltrap formulas because we're speaking about exactly the same principles. This also shows the limitations of those standard published panel trap formulas. Besides several other effects it clearly ignores the a) effect of the mostly lacking infinite mass backing and b) the effect of the standard applied mineral wool (or whatever absorptive) filling. 2) The 2-DOF: I never found that one in the traditional acoustic books either. There are still lots of things I don't put on the net.

Hi Eric, I have attached the results with the material properties. Sorry the pages are a bit big :-) One has cavities with insulation, the other is air. I also changed the scale of the graphs to be a bit more clear. as before they are both plasterboard/gap 50mm/plasterboard/gap 50mm/plasterboard and plasterboard/gap 100mm/ 2xplasterboard I chose them for no specific reason, just to give an example. If you want me to do something with different data please let me know. Andrew

Andrew, Many thanks, but these links don't work anymore I get this error for both:

The selected Attachment does not exist anymore 404 File Not Found: The File files/triple_leaf_air_172.pdf does not exist.

To keep direct related threads together: Triple-leaf question for the experts http://www.johnlsayers.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=6895

try now

Andrew Steel: Those PDFs work.