Armstong Ceiling Panels

I have 26 Armstrong ceiling panels that I want to use as sound absorbers either in my iso room or control room (living room). One side is textured white and the other is exposed yellow fiberglass. They are about 3/4" thick and meant to hang in metal framing you might see in an office ceiling. What is the best way to cover the exposed fiberglass side? Should I frame them in 1x2 pine and stretch fabric (if so, what kind of fabric?) or just glue gun fabric around the edges of the panels?

what are the edges like? you could stick them back-to-back if the edges are solid...

Interesting. That's a good idea... the edges have the same texture material as the finished side. The stuff is a little crumbly if you are rough with it, but but I could put a strip of something around the seam to hold it together and keep stray fiberglass from poking out. But what about if I do want to use it to deaden slapback in my small iso room (5'4"D x 6'W x 7'T)? The textured side is more reflective so I'm thining I would want the fiberglass side exposed (but covered in fabric) to kill the mid-high frequencies? The inside of the room is painted soundboard and it's pretty ambient in there for vocals and acoustics. (Or should I just use eggcrate or wedge foam for deadening the iso?) Here are some pics of one of the panels: And my soundroom:

it you make 12 pairs back-to-back and connect those into panels of 4 each angled about 15 degrees and put them across the corners, you can eliminate a bunch of the echo and get some absorption as well without having to deaden the space. then get a few rolls of regular insulation, cover those in cloth and tuck them into each corner. up top, put the last two tiles hanging down a bit and angled to break up the ceiling. if things are still ringing, invest in some rigid fiberglass and cloth and tuck that up into the corners along the ceiling-wall. avoid egg crates, cheap foam, etc. not only is it not effective (although the treatments decribed above won't be winning awards either...), foam and paper can easily become a deadly fire hazard.

Thank you kindly for the detailed advice and drawing. It really helps. Kirk~ www.kirkross.com

I forgot to mention that each panel is 2' x 4' -- your drawing appears to be using square panels so I think I might have twice as much material as your drawing calls for. Should I cut the panels in half or create the joined corner units (like you have in the corners) using four panels (pairs of back to back panels side by side)?

Just a tought based on belly work. If you make thicker panels of the ceiling tiles, I should not double them up. That specific painting type works a bit like Ecophon panels. I do have experience with this kind of material. It will reflects highs somewhat, causes some membrane effect improving lows, but which is positive when used on the room side (as meant). In fact these tiles can be very good to get a flat absorption curve in a suspended ceiling or wall cladding (improved by putting additional absorption behind them). However when a second layer comes in-between or on the backside, the whole thing will start behaving too much as a membrane damper. In itself a membrane damper can be a very good thing, but also involves a risk in this case because it will give a rather unpredictable result. Therefore I should combine these tiles with standard fiberglass to make them thicker.

Eric_Desart wrote:

Therefore I should combine these tiles with standard fiberglass to make them thicker.

Agreed, or peel off the facing from all but the outer-most panel. --Ethan

Ethan Winer wrote:

Eric_Desart wrote:

Therefore I should combine these tiles with standard fiberglass to make them thicker.

Agreed, or peel off the facing from all but the outer-most panel. --Ethan

1. What is "standard" fiberglass? is that Owens 705? 2. The decible reduction is fine (neighbors) as is the isolation (fridge buzz, etc.) so it's more that I want the [5'x6'] room to sound as good as possible... BUT... With such a small room, isn't the main concern making it as dead as possible? i.e. the room doesn't have a "sound" worth capturing to begin with. 3. Per the above, would I be better off loading every square inch with Auralex foam to make it totally dead... or is there such a thing as TOO dead when recording vocals and acoustic guitars? (or... maybe describe what a vocal recorded in room that is too dead sounds like).

kirkbross wrote:

1. What is "standard" fiberglass? is that Owens 705?

To me, "standard" fiberglass is the fluffy stuff used to insulate homes.

With such a small room, isn't the main concern making it as dead as possible? i.e. the room doesn't have a "sound" worth capturing to begin with.

Yes, exactly.

is there such a thing as TOO dead when recording vocals and acoustic guitars?

No, 100 percent dead is the ideal to aim for in this case. --Ethan

I may cover the exposed side of these panels in foam since the painted / textured side is pretty reflective... Foam question -- why is Auralex brand foam so much better than generic stuff which is a quarter of the price? I mean, isn't "dead is dead is dead" in terms of acoustics? (IE - this stuff -- http://www.foamdistributing.com/products/acousticeggcrate.html)

People know Foam Factory (your link) and has very bad experience with it. If someone claims he toke the initiative to compare them that was because of my doing (with aid of others). But there are other foam suppliers as well. The question is: do you need to cover them with foam at all? Being reflective towards the highs doesn't need to be a disadvantage at all. Can you find absorption curves of these tiles?

I guess I'm mainly trying to find the EASIEST way to cover the exposed fiberglass to prevent shedding so I can use them in whatever manner (without just permanently attaching them to the inside walls of my ISO room). Buying 24 pieces of pre-cut 2'x4' foam (whatever brand) and gluing them to the fiberglass side of each panel seems easier (and cleaner) than buying bulk fabric, cutting 2'x4' pieces and gluing all the edges down for 24 pieces. The NRC of my panels is 0.95 -- here's the specific link: http://www.armstrong.com/commceilingsna/ceiling_data.jsp?item_id=44608.0

kirkbross wrote:

I guess I'm mainly trying to find the EASIEST way to cover the exposed fiberglass to prevent shedding so I can use them in whatever manner (without just permanently attaching them to the inside walls of my ISO room). Buying 24 pieces of pre-cut 2'x4' foam (whatever brand) and gluing them to the fiberglass side of each panel seems easier (and cleaner) than buying bulk fabric, cutting 2'x4' pieces and gluing all the edges down for 24 pieces. The NRC of my panels is 0.95 -- here's the specific link: http://www.armstrong.com/commceilingsna/ceiling_data.jsp?item_id=44608.0

Kirk, I don't understand. I reread your previous message and you referred to the reflective side of the panel which you wanted to cover. I told that's likely not necessary. Now you refer to the fiberglass site. I've no idea how you're going to mount this stuff. If not visible I even shouldn't bother about it. If you want to cover it, you can glue spray whatever against it, and fabric will cheaper and nicer. Can you please first describe what you want to do with them exactly? Does this foam side becomes visible then or not? About this absorption data. I need to see the complete curves, not just a single number NRC.

Ahhh... yes the fiberglass will will be covered. The white, factory-textured side will be facing AWAY from the sound source because (I thought) the fiberglass side would absorb reflections better. The textured side seems like a "harder" surface that would just reflect highs back to the mic but that is just an amateur guess. I have not hung any of these panels to test them yet. Maybe I should do that... I do not have curve information unfortunately -- only what is on their site. I was thinking of hanging them like gullfo's drawing above. I COULD just spray glue the fiberglass side to the walls, but I want to be able to re-use them in another room some day. I want them to be self-contained sound panels that don't shed and can be hung anywhere by hooks or Velcro or something like that.

No Kirk, It will not "just reflect these highs back". But therefore it's useful that you maybe email them asking for absorption curves which they certainly have. In fact it's useful to know in how far they act as a membrane or not. Often it can be an advantage having this painted side to the source in order to prevent too much mid and high frequent absorption. See how standard rooms are designed here with slat/slot resonators. The basic idea is just to prevent too much mid and high absorption. But it's of course more fun, knowing these curves. If you want to glue foam (I'm not advising this, just responding to your repeated request), and Auralex feels too expensive for you then search for other companies. But you can use flat foam also. While not exclusive, if you find polyester foam with a density of around 30 kg/m3 then you likely have good foam in your hands. If you have yellow pages and search for acoustics, lots of these industrial acoustics companies have such foams as well. Also note that this profiling of that foam is at the expense of low frequent absorption, hence flat foam is possibly even better, but it all depends. I rather leave these practical things to the experts here.

Kirk, If this NRC = 0.95, which is a rounded average of the 250, 500, 1000 and 2000 Hz bands, one could assume that (but it's much better to see a curve) that this reflection in the highs is not too high. In that case you maybe could put them back to back together, and put them in a frame if you like.

Eric_Desart wrote:

In that case you maybe could put them back to back together, and put them in a frame if you like.

yea... like Eric said ;-)

Did it last night -- I took the 26 panels, put them back to back and duct taped the seam (with cool purple duct tape). Now I have 13 really nice, 2" thick panels. I have to figure out a way to hang them since I can't screw eye hooks into the panels (too soft). I might glue a thin strip of wood on one edge so I have something to screw in eye hooks, but if you have any suggestions on how to hang these...

:finger: We do have such hooks here for that purpose (cheap baffels are hanged that way in the industry) which we call pig's tails. But the best thing was to glue something thin between these panels sticking out somehow, allowing to make a hole in it. Now ...., no idea :snack: :blah: like these new emoticons .....

G0** :cen: da :cen: d Eric, what's up with all those fu :cen: g emoticons? yer bored? haha :horse:

Eric_Desart wrote:

...But therefore it's useful that you maybe email them asking for absorption curves which they certainly have.

Here are the curves: I'm still trying to find a non-destructive way to mount these things. I was going to glue some small pieces wood to the corners (on the edges) so I could screw in eye hooks, but then I realized the wood pieces would be glued to the duct tape and not the panels, so the weight of them hanging would just pull the tape off.

Kirk, Can you give the type name of that board and the measurement description? What you're looking at are boards in a suspended ceiling of 400 mm cavity, with framed edges. These look like boards with extreme low entrance empedance, meaning that the impression you got from the reflections in the highs are not really conformed by these measurements, and will have relative little effect. This also means that they will show relative little membrane effect. Hence you can compare that with Bob's absorption page for E-400 mount. Can you still remove this tape without damaging these boards to much? You must make a choice here, otherwise you must frame them. Another possibility, but only if you treat these things with care is trying these long stiching needles where women stich sweaters, or whatever this is called, with. I don't know enough English to find the right words here. But if you stick from these 1 foot needles in the edge of these boards, and the density is high enough, you could use that thicker head of that needle to hang them on. But even then it should have been better that you spray glued these back sides together. Hence you brought yourself a bit in trouble not thinking about that in advance. It should have been easy to spray glue some perforated thin stuff in-between these 2 boards, sticking out a bit on the top side.

I know they are ceiling panels. I included the specific model info in a previous post. Optima Open Plan, 2' x 4'. Back to back they are about 2" thick. I chose not to spray glue them together because I wanted to be able to separate them in the future if necessary for another application. I could string fishing line through each corner, but I'm worried about compromising the integrity of the textured surface as it is very crumbly and falls apart somewhat easily. What is your first language out of curiosity?

kirkbross wrote:

What is your first language out of curiosity?

:yahoo: I'm a Belgian, so we speak Belgian. (sorry, I have to try all these new fun smileys here) Just joking ....., My mother tongue is Dutch (:) my father's too), which is called Flemish here. Belgian does not exist as a language, but we have 3 official languages: Dutch, French and German. The Germans are a minority, just having fun seeing the Flemish and French in endless disputes.