Method to resolve microphone and sample location errors in the two-microphone duct measurement method

Brian F. G. Katza)
Acoustics Department, The Pennsylvania State University, State College, Pennsylvania 16801

Received 5 January 1999; revised 18 September 1999; revised 17 May 2000; accepted 7 August 2000 Utilizing the two-microphone impedance tube method, the normal incidence acoustic absorption and acoustic impedance can be measured for a given sample. This method relies on the measured transfer function between two microphones, and the knowledge of their precise location relative to each other and the sample material. In this article, a method is proposed to accurately determine these locations. A third sensor is added at the end of the tube to simplify the measurement. First, a justication and investigation of the method is presented. Second, reference terminations are measured to evaluate the accuracy of the apparatus. Finally, comparisons are made between the new method and current methods for determining these distances and the variations are discussed. From this, conclusions are drawn with regards to the applicability and need for the new method and under which circumstances it is applicable. Results show that the method provides a reliable determination of both microphone locations, which is not possible using the current techniques. Errors due to inaccurate determination of these parameters between methods were on the order of 3% for R and 12% for Re Z. 2000 Acoustical Society of America. S0001-49660002311-0 PACS numbers: 43.58.Bh, 43.55.Ev, 43.20.Fn, 43.60.Qv SLE

I. INTRODUCTION

The measurement of acoustic absorption and acoustic impedance has been used for decades in the understanding of acoustics and material behaviors. The classical method using pure tones and a standing wave tube has, until recently, been the only reliable method for performing these measurements. The primary limitation of this classical method is the large amount of time needed for each frequency measurement. In the last few decades, measurement technology has advanced and now the two-microphone transfer function method for measuring acoustic absorption and impedance has become much more common. There have been a number of papers describing this method and examples of results.16 The two-microphone method, implemented here using random noise excitation, has a number of limitations, some similar to the standing wave ratio method, and some different. In both schemes, the distance from the sample to the microphone, either xed or mobile as in the standing wave tube, is an essential component in the calculation of the bom n and A acoustic properties of the test material. Bode examined the effects of some types of errors in the twomicrophone technique.1 They discussed the potential percentage variation in the results due to errors in measuring these distances. One method is suggested for determining the distance between the microphones in an attempt to reduce these errors. No suggestion is made for determining the distance to the sample other than using a ruler. The measurement standard requires knowledge of these locations to an accuracy of 0.01 cm.7 The purpose of this
a

article is to examine this requirement, its effect, and its attainment. A new method for determining the location of both microphones to the accuracy required by the measurement standard is presented. A third sensor is used at the termination position to assist in resolving the location of the measurement microphones to the necessary precision. The effect of errors in the locations of the sensors is investigated for calculations of the reection coefcient and impedance.
II. THE STANDARD TWO-MICROPHONE APPROACH A. Theory

A brief overview of the two-microphone method is presented here. This method utilizes the measured transfer function, h 12 , between two microphones to separate the incident ( p i ) and reected ( p r ) pressure waves. From this, it is possible to calculate the complex reection coefcient, R, at the measured surface. The complex impedance, Z, can be derived from this calculation. A plane wave tube was utilized in this research, congured as shown in Fig. 1. The theory behind this measurement can be described in the following manner. The measured transfer function in the frequency domain, H 12 , is dened by H 12 P 2 P 2i P 2r , P 1 P 1i P 1r 1

where P is the Fourier transform of p ( t ), and P ni and P nr are the pressures due to the incident and reected waves at sensor n. It is then possible to dene the following: H 12i P 2i , P 1i H 12r P 2r , P 1r R 1 P 1r , P 1i R 2 P 2r . P 2i 2
2231

Currently with Arup Acoustics, 155 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10013. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108 (5), Pt. 1, Nov 2000

2231

0001-4966/2000/108(5)/2231/7/$17.00

2000 Acoustical Society of America

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 143.107.252.69 On: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:27

FIG. 2. Anechoic termination construction showing conical wedge.

FIG. 1. Impedance tube measurement setup showing measurement microphones Ch 1 and Ch 2. Dene s as the spacing between the sensors and l as the distance from the second sensor to the impedance surface.

After a little algebra the reection coefcient at microphone position 1, Ch 1, can be shown to be R 1

H 12 H 12i . H 12r H 12

If measurements are limited to frequencies below the rst cross mode frequency, only plane waves propagate, and the transfer functions H 12i and H 12r are simply e jks and e jks , respectively. In addition, translation of the calculated reection coefcient to the surface x 0 is only a multiplier of e j 2 k ( l s ) . When combined the result is R e j 2 k l s R 1 e j 2 k l s

H 12 e jks . H 12 e jks

The absorption coefcient is calculated simply as 1 R 2 . The surface impedance of the material is nally determined using Eq. 5 where Z s is the specic acoustic impedance of the surface and Z is the corresponding specic acoustic impedance ratio. Z Zs 1R . 0c 1 R 5

chosen. The internal diameter of the tube was 2.60 cm, with a wall thickness of 0.35 cm. A tube length of 1 m is long enough to ensure that only plane wave propagation is present. It is desirable to have the microphones as close as possible to the termination to obtain the greatest signal-tonoise ratio. The distance to the termination is limited by the presence of evanescent waves coming from the impedance termination, which is not necessarily perfectly planar. The standard suggests placing the near sensor no closer than one tube diameter away. A distance of two internal tube diameters was chosen here for the distance between microphone position 2, Ch 2, and the termination, resulting in a desired distance of l 5.2 cm. The sensor separation distance is dened in the standard such that s c /(2 f max) resulting in a maximum spacing of 2.86 cm. The optimal spacing, resulting in the minimal amount of error, is dened by choosing s 2 c /(4 f center). 1 Using 3.5 kHz as the center frequency of interest results in a desired separation distance of s 2.45 cm. The dimensions of the tube correspond to a value of ka 1 at 2.1 kHz. The system utilized miniature Sennheiser microphone capsules model KE 4-211-2, a 2.5 cm 1 in. diameter speaker, electronic preampliers, and a multi-channel Hewlett Packard spectrum analyzer. The sensor microphones used have an exposed diaphragm diameter of approximately 0.1 cm. The sensors are ush mounted in the tube, using a clay seal on the outside to ensure against leakage. An anechoic termination was constructed, as shown in Fig. 2.

B. Apparatus

The parameters of the system, tube diameter, and sensor locations were designed to obtain optimum results over the frequency range of interest. The chosen frequency range of interest was determined to be 16 kHz. The center frequency of this range was 3.5 kHz. The justication for this range is related to future work on the system, but can be summarized as the need to measure acoustic absorption and impedance in the frequency region of speech. It was also decided that the sensor positions would be xed, allowing for only a single microphone and sample spacing. The measurement method requires that only plane wave propagation occurs in the tube. For this reason, the upper frequency range is limited by the rst cross mode of the tube. The ASTM standard7 requires the diameter to be less than 0.586c / f max which, for an upper limit of 6 kHz, gives a maximum tube diameter of 3.35 cm. A 1-in. PVC tube was
2232 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 108, No. 5, Pt. 1, Nov 2000

C. Microphone calibration

The two microphones used in the impedance tube were calibrated relative to each other using the standard switching technique. For this setup, the transfer function was measured for the microphones in the measurement position, then the sensor positions were switched and the transfer function was measured. The geometric mean of the transfer functions is used as the calibration function in all subsequent calculations, where H cal H 12 H 21 and H 12calibrated H 12measured H cal . This ensured that any magnitude and phase variations in the measurement were a function of the sound eld, and not due to differences between the sensors. This procedure was performed prior to each measurement session, resulting in a separate calibration function for each data set to account for any possible effects due to ambient room conditions or drift of sensor characteristics.
Brian F. G. Katz: Resolve microphone and sample locations 2232

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 143.107.252.69 On: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:27

III. RESOLUTION OF APPARATUS PARAMETERS A. Microphone distance to termination

According to the ASTM standard for the twomicrophone impedance tube measurement, the distance from the end microphone to the surface sample must be known to an accuracy of 0.01 cm.7 In the standard this requirement is waived for highly absorptive, roughly textured surfaces. If we chose to measure materials that are not highly absorptive, then this requirement must be fullled. It is therefore necessary to determine the distance from this microphone to the rigid or semirigid termination. The diaphragm, however, had an exposed diameter on the order of 0.1 cm, which is much larger than the prescribed location accuracy of 0.01 cm. Therefore, even if it were possible to measure the physical distance with a caliper or laser scheme, the precision required is on a scale smaller than the size of the diaphragm. It is therefore necessary to determine the distance from the acoustic center of the closer diaphragm to the termination. A standard way to determine this position, from the standing wave ratio tube method, is to move the position of the microphone, and scan for pressure minima. This method contains possible errors in determining the exact acoustic position of the end of the tube, requiring end corrections to be determined and included. From this position, it is possible to calculate this distance quite easily. In designing this system, the position of the microphones was determined, and then xed. In addition, due to the small tube diameter, the insertion of a probe microphone inside the tube would most likely disturb the sound eld in the tube such that the plane wave assumption would be compromised. Therefore, a method which allows for the xed position of the microphone must be devised. Similar to the traditional method of scanning the sound eld for the pressure minima at a given frequency and transforming the problem to the frequency domain, it should be possible to perform the same measurement by sweeping frequency and determining the exact frequency at which the xed microphone is at a pressure minima. The necessary frequency precision was determined as follows: the approximate distance to the termination was measured to be 5 cm. Using 343 m/s as an approximate sound speed, this would result in a rst null for a quarter wavelength to be at 1715 Hz. A variation of 0.01 cm would yield a distance of 5.01 cm, and a quarter wavelength frequency of 1711.6 Hz. From this rough calculation, a frequency resolution of 3.4 Hz is necessary. The accuracy of the acoustic method for determining the position of the microphones is limited, in part, by an accurate determination of the sound speed. The speed of sound was calculated taking into account measures of the temperature, barometric pressure, and relative humidity and using a polynomial approximation of published data and atmospheric effects on sound speed as described in Pierce.8 Using a rough calculation based on a frequency of 1.7 kHz with a wavelength of 20.18 cm, the resulting changes in conditions to achieve an error of 0.01 cm are T 2.7 C, P 16.9 mbar, or RH 85%. These are all well within the measurement accuracy of standard laboratory equipment.
2233 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 108, No. 5, Pt. 1, Nov 2000

FIG. 3. Potential data for distance calculation: raw impedance sensor sound pressure ( Ch 2); transfer function between one impedance microphone, ( Ch 2) and the termination microphone ( Ch 3); and transfer function between the two impedance microphones ( Ch 1 and Ch 2). The y-scale has been normalized for both the linear and log data so that all the data sets can be visually compared.

Sweeping the frequency at a resolution of 3.4 Hz is possible, but, due to the fact that the exact null is hidden within the noise oor which results in a minima that spans approximately a 1015-Hz range, precise determination of this frequency would not be possible by simply choosing the frequency at which the null occurs. Instead, interpolation of the data curve surrounding the null was used to extrapolate the frequency null and avoid contamination of the prediction by the noise oor. In doing this, it was also possible to sweep frequencies at a resolution of 4 Hz as the curve shape, not the exact frequency of any one specic data point, is important. For condence in the interpolation, the shape of the frequency spectrum data should be smooth in the region before and after the null. The raw pressure data, measured as a function of frequency for either of the two measurement microphones, contains a dense resonant structure of the tube system. These resonances are in addition to the nulls due to the distance from the termination. An example of a raw microphone measurement is shown by the dotted curve in Fig. 3. It is clear to see that exact determination of the null position would be difcult using the raw pressure data, due to the inuence of the tube resonances. These resonances depend on termination impedance, tube length, and driver, but not the sensor location. In order to remove this corruptive inuence so that the measurement contains only distancedependent information useful for determining the distance to the termination, a microphone was placed ush with the termination. A termination consisting of a steel disc with a microphone designated Ch 3) ush mounted in the center was constructed for this measurement, as shown in Fig. 4. The termination sensor was sealed in position and, since it was located at the termination, contained the resonance information of the system, without any interference from location specic modal effects. The change in the termination impedance due to the presence of the miniature sensor is negligible to the distance calculations. The effect would be a
Brian F. G. Katz: Resolve microphone and sample locations 2233

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 143.107.252.69 On: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:27

TABLE I. Microphone distance to termination calculations for each null in measurement ( Ch 1:3 nulls, Ch 2:2 nulls using rigid termination with imbedded sensor. A series: termination was glued to end of tube. B series: termination was glued and surrounded with clay seal. Trial null frequency kHz A-1 A-2 A-3 B-1 B-2 B-3 1.1 7.67 7.67 7.67 7.69 7.69 7.69 Ch 1 cm 3.4 7.67 7.67 7.66 7.68 7.68 7.67 5.6 7.68 7.67 7.67 7.68 7.68 7.68 Ch 2 cm 1.6 5.29 5.29 5.29 5.30 5.30 5.30 4.8 5.32 5.32 5.32 5.33 5.36 5.33

FIG. 4. Modied impedance tube setup showing the two standard measurement microphones, Ch 1 and Ch 2, and the additional third termination sensor, Ch 3, used for determining the measurement microphone locations.

very minor shift in the location of the frequency nulls, less than the 3.4-Hz resolution needed. A measured transfer function between one of the measurement microphones and the termination microphone yields the necessary data see Ch 2/Ch 3 curve in Fig. 3. Several nulls exist over the selected frequency range, each one capable of being used to determine the distance. This allows for error checking and redundancy in the distance calculation. Use of the transfer function between the impedance sensors, H 12 curve Ch 2/Ch 1 in Fig. 3, containing distinct peaks and nulls, is not suitable for determining distances. As seen in Fig. 3, the peak and null positions for H 12 are shifted up in frequency from the correct positions and would not be useful in distance determination. This shift can be seen in relation to both the raw pressure measurement ( Ch 2) and the transfer function with respect to the termination sensor ( Ch 2/Ch 3). Interpolation of the frequency minima was determined using the termination sensor transfer functions. A secondorder polynomial t was utilized for the left and right side of each minima, where the intersection produced the result. From this position in frequency the distance was calculated 1 3 , 4, or 5 depending on the null 4 4 wavelength null and as a function of the speed of sound, determined from the air properties in the experimental chamber at the time of measurement. The interpolation method used to determine the frequency null minima was repeatable for a given frequency null within approximately 1.5 Hz. Details of the interpolation method can be found in the thesis by Katz.9 Several measurement trials were performed with the results given in Table I with the corresponding null frequencies. Taking an average for the distances determined from each Ch 2 null from Table I, the distance l was determined to be 5.31 cm.
B. Spacing between microphones

termination and determining the phase delay between the two sensors, again using the transfer function.1 This method of measurement is totally independent of the previous method and was therefore used as a reference check. With the anechoic termination, the transfer function was measured for the sensors in their normal position, and also with the positions switched. The microphone spacing was then calculated using the phase delay, , between the two calibrated sensors, normalized with respect to frequency, as dened in Eq. 6: s H 12 / H 12 H 21 . 2 f 6

As the termination is not completely anechoic at low frequencies, there is some variation/oscillation in the result as a function of frequency. The results of the separation calculation are shown in Fig. 5. To determine a single spacing distance, an average of the separation values was determined. The average value over 16 kHz was used. The wide variations at lower frequencies cannot be used with condence.

Using the distance to termination data for both measurement microphones it is possible to determine the spacing between the microphones, s, a distance necessary for the acoustical calculations. Using the results from Table I and taking an average for the distances determined from each null, the separation distance was determined to be 2.37 cm. This distance can also be calculated by using an anechoic
2234 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 108, No. 5, Pt. 1, Nov 2000

FIG. 5. Microphone separation distance calculation determined from measured phase delay. Thick curve shows a running average. The horizontal lines correspond to the average value from 1 to 6 kHz and distance determined using the frequency null method. Vertical lines correspond to ka 1 and the optimal performance frequency for the microphone spacing used. Brian F. G. Katz: Resolve microphone and sample locations 2234

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 143.107.252.69 On: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:27

The optimum frequency for the given microphone spacing which is equivalent to a quarter wavelength, f opt c /4s 3.7 kHz, and the location of ka 1 are also indicated. Note that at this frequency the two methods agree. Results of this measurement are a separation distance of 2.30 cm, with a repeatability of 0.006 cm, within the measurement standard. In comparison to the frequency null method for measuring the distance devised above, though, there is a denite difference on the order of 0.06 cm, which is above the standards threshold for determining the distances. The exact nature of the difference between the measurement techniques is unclear. For a typical measurement, accuracy of 0.06 cm would probably be sufcient. In this case, it is unclear how one would go about measuring an acoustic distance to any greater accuracy and be condent in the results. The results from the new method for distance measurements, using the frequency null interpolation, were chosen to be used in subsequent calculations as both s and l are required, and the anechoic spacing measurement only determines s. The resulting distances used in measurements therefore are s 2.37 cm and l 5.31 cm.
IV. RESULTS A. Reference terminations

FIG. 6. Reection coefcient reference measurements showing the measured values for a rigid top, open middle, and anechoic bottom terminations. Theoretical values for rigid1 and anechoic0. Theoretical value for the open termination is shown by the dashed line.

As there are no materials which have an absolutely dened reection coefcient or impedance, there are limited tests which can be performed to verify the calculations and assumptions. The case of an innitely rigid termination is theoretically possible, but in all practical purposes cannot be achieved or measured experimentally due to electrical noise, losses through the tube walls, or other factors. Measurements of a rigid termination, though, aid in showing the limitations of the specic experimental apparatus. The same holds true for an anechoic termination. It is impossible to make a totally anechoic termination, but an experimental effort towards such can be measured and used to further quantify the behavior of the measurement system. The impedance of an ideally rigid termination would be innite. It is therefore not practical to compare the measured impedance to the theoretical value. On the other hand, the reection coefcient is well dened and is suitable to use for these evaluations. An ideal rigid termination has a reection coefcient R 1. An ideal anechoic termination has a reection coefcient R 0. The experimental measurements of the physical implementation of these idealized terminations are shown in Fig. 6. There are some losses in the system since the tube is not innitely rigid, as seen in the lowfrequency limit of the rigid termination. Additional errors can be seen in the low-frequency limit of the anechoic termination, which, when considered with the rigid and duct size limit, restrict the functional frequency range of the system to 16 kHz. Over this frequency range, the results of this measurement for the rigid termination produce a mean reection coefcient of R 0.97, which for all practical purposes can be considered rigid. The anechoic termination measurement results in a mean reection coefcient of R 0.05 over this range. For all practical purposes this anechoic termination is sufcient.
2235 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 108, No. 5, Pt. 1, Nov 2000

The only termination which has a well-dened solution, other than the idealized rigid and anechoic terminations, is an open-ended termination. The reection coefcient for an unanged thin-walled circular duct has the analytical approximation given in Eq. 7,

1 1 19 2 e 1/2 ka 1 ka 4 ln , 6 ka 12 3 1 , ka 1, e ka ka 1 32 ka 2

ka 1,

where a is the tube cross-sectional radius and ln() 0.5772.10 Comparison of the measured and theoretical value for the open ended tube termination can be seen in Fig. 6. The error in the theoretical approximation is less than 3% in the region between ka 1 and the optimal operating frequency of the design. The frequency at which there is the minimal amount of error in the measurement as described in Sec. II B is 3.7 kHz. This is the frequency at which the sensors are at /4. At this frequency, and down to approximately 2.2 kHz ( ka 1), the measured response agrees very well with the theory. The impedance for an anechoic termination is well dened. The impedance of a totally absorptive material should be simply the impedance of the propagating medium, in this case air. Plotting the specic acoustic impedance ratio, dened as the specic acoustic impedance normalized by the characteristic acoustic impedance of the medium ( 0 c ), results in Fig. 7. The mean values for the anechoic impedance ratio measurement over the selected frequency range are Z 1.02, Re Z1.01, and Im Z0.02. Ideally, the real component of the impedance ratio should be equal to unity and the imaginary component equal to zero. These results are sufciently close to the theoretical values. Deviations from the theory below ka 1 could be due to low-frequency limitations of the two-microphone technique, which occur when the phase difference between the sensor
Brian F. G. Katz: Resolve microphone and sample locations 2235

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 143.107.252.69 On: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:27

FIG. 7. Impedance measurement of the anechoic termination. The specic acoustic impedance ratio Z is plotted as Z s / 0 c with Re Z and Im Z. An ideally anechoic termination would have Re Z1 and Im Z0.

FIG. 8. Variations in the measured reection coefcient of a 1.5-cm dense foam sample for various microphone location values: s 2.37 and l 5.31, s 2.30 and l 5.2, s 2.30 and l 5.31, and s 2.37 and l 5.2.

locations is too small. Increased error above the designed optimum frequency is expected to some degree. The amount of deviation for this measurement could be due to the inaccuracy of the idealized theory to take into account the wall thickness of the tube at these higher frequencies, as well as the condition of s c /(2 f max) becoming less applicable. It is expected that over the range where the measurement corresponds to the theory, the error in further measurements will be small, increasing as the range is exceeded. From the results of the reference measurements of the rigid, anechoic, and open terminations there can be condence in the measurement of the unknown acoustical properties of future test samples.
B. Test sample

The variation in the calculation of acoustic impedance though is noticeably greater. As shown in Fig. 9 the errors between the methods are on the order of 12%. The results for the Re Z vary quite substantially with s 0.06 cm and l 0.11 cm. This is a more serious difference and cannot bom, n and A be as easily ignored. As determined by Bode these errors increase as the material sample becomes more rigid, where both the reection coefcient and specic acoustic impedance increase.
V. CONCLUSION

A test sample was used to examine the effects of the new method for determining the microphone locations in the two-microphone method. A 1.5 cm thick disc of dense acoustic foam was measured. The variation on the acoustic absorption and specic acoustic impedance was evaluated for different microphone location estimations. Two possibilities for each distance were utilized in this investigation. The distance between the microphones, s, can be either 2.30 cm as determined using the phase method or 2.37 cm from the new frequency null method. The distance to the sample, l, can be either 5.2 cm as designed and measured by eye or 5.31 cm as determined using the frequency null method. Using the same measured data transfer functions, the calculations for the reection coefcient, R, and the specic acoustic impedance ratio, Z, were performed. As the sample bom,1 it is n and A is not a very rigid material, following Bode not expected that the effects due to distance errors would be noticeable. As can be seen in Fig. 8, there is not a great deal of variation in the calculation of the magnitude of the reection coefcient due to errors in s and l. The discrepancy is about 3% between the new method and the old. An error of this sort can easily be tolerated in most experiments.
2236 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 108, No. 5, Pt. 1, Nov 2000

In this article an improvement to the two-microphone impedance tube method for measuring acoustic absorption and specic acoustic impedance characteristics of a planar sample has been presented. This technique requires very accurate knowledge of the location of the sensors and sample

FIG. 9. Variations in the measured specic acoustic impedance ratio of a 1.5-cm dense foam sample for various microphone location values: s 2.37 and l 5.31, s 2.30 and l 5.2, s 2.30 and l 5.31, and s 2.37 and l 5.2. Brian F. G. Katz: Resolve microphone and sample locations 2236

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 143.107.252.69 On: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:27

to a detail which exceeds visual and other nonacoustic measurement methods. This is due in large part to the fact that the required precision is smaller than the typical sensor microphone diaphragm, requiring an estimation of the location of the acoustic center of the microphone. A new method is devised which utilizes a termination sensor and the measured transfer function between it and the two measurement microphones. From this measurement, the location of the sensors relative to the termination can be determined by calculating the frequencies at which the sensors are at a null. Results of this measurement method are compared to other methods, including visual observation and calculation of the microphone separation using phase delay measurements. The results of the new frequency null method do not agree with the previous methods within the measurement precision. But, the fact that this method produces both the microphone separation and the distance to the sample, while the phase delay method cannot produce the latter, is a marked improvement. In addition, the phase delay method shows a great deal of variation as a function of frequency which the new method does not. The effects of an erroneous determination of the sensor locations was examined for a test sample of typical acoustic dense foam. Variation in the calculated reection or absorption coefcient were on the order of 3% for induced errors of 2%3% in the microphone positions, and is probably negligible with other experimental factors. Variations in the calculated specic acoustic impedance were greater, on the order of 12% for the same induced errors and test sample. This level of error is rather large for an unknown experimental error and must be considered if the two-microphone measurement method is being used for impedance measurements. The errors due to these effects increase with the rigidity of the test material, making reliable measurements of high impedance materials a nontrivial task. Finally, the ASTM standard for this measurement technique requires a precision which exceeds the variations between the two methods, making the choice of distance calculations very important, the

effects of which must be examined when making these sorts of acoustic measurements to ensure that accurate and reliable results are obtained. It is also questioned whether or not the standard is reasonable, as it requires precision in excess of most measurement techniques.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The author is grateful to his supervisor Dr. Jiri Tichy for his assistance in this work. Further thanks are offered to Timothy Leishman for his assistance with the impedance tube and providing insight and encouragement throughout this work. Part of this work was nanced by the Applied Research Lab and the Acoustics Department of The Pennsylvania State University.
bom, Inuence of errors on the two-microphone n and M. A H. Bode method for measuring acoustic properties in ducts, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 79, 541549 1986. 2 W. T. Chu, Transfer function technique for impedance and absorption measurements in an impedance tube using a single microphone, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 80, 555560 1986. 3 J. Y. Chung and D. A. Blaser, Transfer function method of measuring in-duct acoustic properties. I. Theory, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68, 907913 1980. 4 J. Y. Chung and D. A. Blaser, Transfer function method of measuring in-duct acoustic properties. II. Experiment, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 68, 914921 1980. 5 A. F. Seybert and D. F. Ross, Experimental determination of acoustic properties using a two-microphone random excitation technique, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 61, 13621370 1977. 6 C. Suzuki, H. Yano, and H. Tachibana, A new method for measuring normal incident sound absorption characteristics of materials using acoustic tube, J. Acoust. Soc. Jpn. E 23, 161167 1981. 7 ASTM E 1050-90, Standard Test Method for Impedance and Absorption of Acoustical Materials Using a Tube, Two Microphones, and a Digital Frequency Analysis System. 8 A. D. Pierce, Acoustics Acoustical Society of America, New York, 1991. 9 B. F. G. Katz, Measurement and Calculation of Individual Head-Related Transfer Functions Using a Boundary Element Model Including the Measurement and Effect of Skin and Hair Impedance, Doctoral thesis, The Pennsylvania State University, 1998. 10 H. Levin and J. Schwinger, On the radiation of sound from an unanged circular pipe, Phys. Rev. 734, 383406 1948.
1

2237

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 108, No. 5, Pt. 1, Nov 2000

Brian F. G. Katz: Resolve microphone and sample locations

2237

Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://acousticalsociety.org/content/terms. Download to IP: 143.107.252.69 On: Tue, 11 Mar 2014 15:36:27