首页> 外文会议>International Meeting on Low Frequency Noise and Vibration and Its Control; 20040830-0901; Maastricht(NL) >Acoustical Standards for Classroom Design Comparison of International Standards and Low Frequency Criteria
【24h】

Acoustical Standards for Classroom Design Comparison of International Standards and Low Frequency Criteria

机译:国际标准和低频标准的教室设计比较的声学标准

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Many countries have acoustical standards or regulations for educational facility design and construction. They are based on speaking and hearing abilities of teachers and learners. Criteria are often stipulated for reverberation decay time, sound isolation and allowable background noise. The standards may use single number A-weighted overall level descriptors (dBA), or octave band spectrum criteria (NC, RC, NR, etc.). A-weighted overall level criteria control mid- to high frequencies better than lower frequencies. Very few, if any countries specify low frequency noise standards, although limitations are implicit in spectrum criteria curves, such as (North American) Noise Criteria (NC) or Room Criteria (RC) or (European) Noise Rating (NR). Many educators focus on mid- to high-frequency effects on speech intelligibility, but low frequency noise (LFN) may cause some (upward) masking of speech with reduction of intelligibility. In addition, LFN may affect student attitudes, behavior, performance and/or fatigue. This paper compares.acoustical criteria from several countries with respect to spectrum. Frequency spans of reverberation, sound isolation and background noise are contrasted with hearing and speech characteristics of children and adult learners. Principal findings of some LFN research by others are introduced, such as annoyance, speech intelligibility and fatigue. While this paper does not present a quantitative measure or model for low frequency noise versus learning, it investigates links between acoustical environment and learner success potential. Tabular comparisons of acoustical criteria and graphic charts of representative criteria will be presented. General recommendations are made, based on findings inferred from review and comparispn of standards.
机译:许多国家/地区针对教育机构的设计和建造制定了声学标准或法规。它们基于教师和学习者的口语和听力能力。通常为混响衰减时间,声音隔离和允许的背景噪声规定了标准。这些标准可以使用单个数字A加权的总体电平描述符(dBA),或八度频段频谱标准(NC,RC,NR等)。 A加权总体级别标准比中低频更好地控制中高频。很少有国家指定低频噪声标准,尽管频谱标准曲线中隐含了限制,例如(北美)噪声标准(NC)或房间标准(RC)或(欧洲)噪声等级(NR)。许多教育者专注于中高频对语音清晰度的影响,但是低频噪声(LFN)可能会导致语音的某些(向上)掩蔽,从而降低清晰度。此外,LFN可能会影响学生的态度,行为,表现和/或疲劳。本文比较了几个国家在频谱方面的声学标准。混响,声音隔离和背景噪声的频率跨度与儿童和成人学习者的听觉和言语特征形成对比。介绍了其他一些LFN研究的主要发现,例如烦恼,语音清晰度和疲劳。尽管本文没有提供针对低频噪声与学习的定量方法或模型,但它研究了声学环境与学习者成功潜力之间的联系。将介绍声学标准的表格比较和代表标准的图形图表。根据对标准的审查和比较得出的结论提出一般建议。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号