4.7 Article

Characterisation of the acoustic impedance of vegetated roofs with a multiple-geometry approach

Journal

APPLIED ACOUSTICS
Volume 199, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2022.108997

Keywords

Multiple-geometry approach; Acoustic surface impedance; Vegetated roof; In-situ measurement

Categories

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [52008054]
  2. China Scholarship Council

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Urban vegetation, such as vegetated roofs, plays a crucial role in restoring ecological balance, providing pleasant environments, and reducing urban noise levels. This study proposes a unique multiple-geometry approach for determining the acoustic impedance model parameters of vegetated roofs.
Urban vegetation, such as vegetated roofs, is highly important for recovering the ecological balance and for providing visually pleasant environments. Also, it has the potential to reduce urban noise levels. The acoustic surface impedance of vegetated roofs can be determined by an in-situ two-microphone technique. However, different initial estimations of the impedance model parameters can retrieve completely different sets of material properties, but the same impedance, which makes no sense physically. The work as presented in this paper investigates the multiple-geometry approach with respect to its uniqueness in the determination of the acoustic impedance model parameters of vegetated roofs. The uniqueness of the new proposed method is first validated for typical porous materials where impedance tube measurements and physical measurements provide reference results. Then, a new proposed measurement system was implemented on three urban vegetated roofs. The results show that the proposed measurement system succeeded in uniquely characterising the acoustic impedance model parameters of vegetated roofs. (C) 2022 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available