View Single Post
Old 19th September 2020 | Show parent
  #13
Deleted 56021e5
Guest
I am not saying math is not accurate,I am saying there are limits and you need to be aware of them.

You do what the paper does, you test these formulas and software against configurations that have been tested in the lab.

What is the problem with studio recording situations ? When you want to test a partition that has at least 70 dB reduction you rarely have lab measurements for those situations.

Usually what happens with these formulas or software, they overestimate the Rw-STC values for very high soundproofing values (at least SoundFlow does). So you need to be careful when you use them.

They probably work fine for a glass configuration with 40-50 dB reduction.

I have not yet tested triple glazing configurations with Soundflow since I use tested lab solutions for my client's projects and they are all double glazing.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kyle P. Gushue View Post
I read that paper a while ago, i was actually looking for it recently but forgot its title.

Have you done triple glazing estimates with soundflow? It would be interesting to compare them to test data in the CBD and Vinokur papers.

If the computer models are limited, and math not that accurate, then how do we asses these situations?

Ive only ever used double glazed windows, and just used a mass based approach. The triple glazing scenario seems to require more than that.