BRÜEL & KJAER-Influence of Tripods and Mic Clips
BRÜEL & KJAER-Influence of Tripods and Mic Clips
BRÜEL & KJAER-Influence of Tripods and Mic Clips
TECHNICAL REVIEW
No. 4 1985
Contents
Validity of Intensity Measurements in Partially Diffuse Sound Field
by Svend Gade
41
ABSTRACT
In this article a practical method is proposed and outlined for determining the
Dynamic Capability of Intensity analyzing systems and the Reactivity Index of
Intensity measurements. Furthermore, using this method, the amount of error due
to phase mismatch, the amount of random error, and the useful frequency range
for measuring intensity in different types of sound fields can be determined.
SOMMAIRE
Cet article propose et donne les grandes lignes d'une methode pratique pour
determiner la capacite dynamique des systemes d'analyse d'intensite acoustique
et I'indice de reactivite des mesures d'intensite. De plus, en utilisant cette
methode, la valeur de I'erreur due au dephasage, la valeur de I'erreur aleatoire et
la gamme de frequence utile pour les mesures d'intensite dans les differents
types de champ sonore peuvent etre determinees.
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
In diesem Artikel wird eine praktische Methode zur Bestimmung der dynamischen
Fahigkeiten und des Reaktivitatsindexes von Intensitatsmessungen vorgeschlagen
und beschrieben. AuBerdem laBt sich mit dieser Methode der Fehler durch
Phasenfehlanpassung, der Zufalligkeitsfehler und der fur verschiedene Schallfelder zulassige Frequenzbereich bestimmen.
Sound Intensity
Sound Intensity is a vector quantity, which describes the amount and the
direction of net flow of acoustic energy at a given position.
It can be shown [1,13] that the intensity vector
direction r can be calculated from
2
1 <9$
'' = - ^ T T T
pc
component
in the
< >
dr
3
r
where d$/dr is the phase gradient of the sound field in the direction, r,
2
p rms is the mean square pressure, pc is the impedance of the medium
and k is the wave number.
Equation (1) shows that intensity calculations using the two-microphone
method involves determination of the mean square sound pressure as
well as the phase difference of the sound field between the two micro
phone positions. The critical point for sound intensity calculations is the
phase measurement. The sound pressure is often taken as being the
mean pressure value between the two microphone signals.
(2)
*
'a ~ 'r
JULGAB
(4)
cop A r
where co is the angular frequency and p is the density of the air.
5
(5)
(6)
|0| ~
2
p rms
or
p Ar= p
/cAr
$AB
rms$AB
2
p rms/pc
(7)
(8)
(9)
Note that in practice the Reactivity Index, LK, is normally negative and
indicates an important character of the sound field as it is measured. LK
is not a direct measure of how reactive the sound field is, or how much
diffuse background noise is present. As an example of a highly reactive
sound field, a standing wave can be used. It can be shown (Refs.[12,13]
or see Appendix A) that in such a sound field the intensity is the
geometrical mean value between the maximum mean square pressure
7
o
CO
<D
c:
o
E
c:
CO
Q>
CO
CO
I
o
CO
CD
Cr
CD
CD
Q
o
CD
u.
and the minimum mean square pressure values normalized with respect
to the impedance of the medium, pc. In other words if the standing wave
ratio is 20 dB, then LK can take any value between -10dB and + 10dB
depending on the observation position in the standing wave.
Also note that LK cannot distinguish between different reasons for the
measured phase. If Lp is 3dB higher than the measured L, the situation
could be that we have
1)
2)
In the first case the upper frequency limit for the measuring system will
be two times higher than in the latter case as discussed earlier.
In fact there exists an infinite amount of different combinations of active,
reactive and diffuse sound fields where LK is - 3 d B .
All of the above discussion assumes that the intensity is determined
without error.
(10)
For the more general case, where free field conditions cannot be
assumed, equation (10) becomes
f / / (</> <)/</>
(11)
Using eqs.(8) and (9) the nomogram relation (7) can be written as
(Z
$ = io -*
/10)
(/cAr)
(12)
If a phase mismatch, <p, between the two channels exists and the phase
difference of the sound field is 0, the measured phase becomes
(L /10)
(f) <p = 10 *
(/cAr)
(13)
(14)
From Equation (13), the phase mismatch between the two channels is
given by
<p = io^-o/io) .
(15)
{kAr)
0 = (10(^/10) + io -*'
/10)
) kAr
(16)
f/l = 1 / ( 1 +
1o^o-iK)/^
(17)
or in logarithmic form
L^hase = -10 log [1 + 1 o^o-W/io)]
(18)
Equations (17) and (18) indicate that the error due to phase mismatch
only depends on the level difference between the Residual Intensity
Index of the measuring system and the measured Reactivity Index of the
sound field at the microphone positions.
10
for Intensity
measurements
11
12
Note that increasing the microphone spacing will increase the Dynamic
Capability but decrease both the upper and the lower frequency limit for
the system. Thus the nomogram can be used for calculation of the useful
frequency range as shown in Fig.5.
Random Error
For sound pressure measurements the normalized random error (68%
confidence interval) is inversely proportional to the square root of the BT
product (Bandwidth multiplied by Averaging Time) for BT^ 10.
random [P'rms] =
^]fBf
(19)
/ l - ((1 - y ) / 2y ) f $\x\ $
(20)
13
(21)
GDD
(22)
= {GDD + GPP)/GPP
(23)
Note that equation (23) also shows that the Reactivity Index, LK, gives an
indication of the Signal/Noise ratio for the measurements. As an exam
ple, when the propagating part of the sound field contributes 10% and
the diffuse part of the sound field contributes 90% of the total sound
pressure (or total energy density), LK is -10dB. In this case the Signal/Noise ratio is -9,5dB.
Using (21), (22) and (23) and GAA = GBB = GDD + GPP we get
{
y* =
"
AA
BB
14
+ sin (/cAr)]
(24)
and
(25)
Inserting equations (24) and (25) into (20) shows [8] that the required
averaging time (BT-product) depends on the desired statistical accuracy,
en and the Reactivity Index, K or LK, but not on the relative frequency,
/cAr(the free field phase), in the frequency range of interest as shown in
Fig.5, (see also Ref.[8]),
BT=
M f , y , $) = f2{er, LK)
(26)
The curves for 5%, 10%, 20% and 40% accuracy are shown in Fig.7.
These curves indicate that a change in Reactivity Index of - 5 d B requires
an increase in the averaging time by a factor of approximately 10 to yield
the same statistical accuracy.
Fig.8 shows on linear axes er[l] tfBTas a function of K.
15
1 we have
r
er[l]
YBT^
0,42 fP
0,42 (K+
,pc
1)
+ 1)
(27)
Sound Fields
At a given point in a sound field there will be an acoustic pressure, p,
and a particle velocity, u. A natural way of classifying the sound field for
intensity measurements is whether p and u are correlated or not.
The diffuse sound field is an example where p and u are uncorrelated. In
this case there is no amplitude gradient or phase gradient of the sound
field. All the energy is stored in the sound field.
16
Conclusion
For intensity measurements in highly diffuse environments one must
always measure the Residual Intensity Index, LK0 (or the Dynamic Capability) of the measuring system as well as the Reactivity Index, LK of the
sound field in the direction given by the microphone orientation at the
point considered.
17
and
Acknowledgement
For useful discussions the author wishes to thank Dr. J. Pope and T.G.
Nielsen M.Sc, Bruel&Kjaer.
18
References
[ 1]GADE, S.
[ 2] FAHY, F.J.
[ 3] CHUNG, J.Y.
[ 6] ROLAND, J.
[ 7] ELKO, G.W.
[ 8] DYRLUND, O.
[ 9] BENDAT, J.S.,
PIERSOL, A.G.
Francis-
19
[13] JACOBSEN, F.
[15] HUBNER, G.
[16] RASMUSSEN, P.
[17] POPE, J.
"A Systematic Study of the PressureIntensity Index", 1985, Internoise Proceedings, pp.1179-1182
20
[21] BOCKHOFF, M.
[25] TICHY, J.
21
APPENDIX A
AeJ(o>t-kx)
Bej[ut+kx)
- - - L f JE- m
(A.2)
p J dx
J(a3t kx)
u = A
cop
The mean square pressure is
ikx
^2 = - L p p* = J - (A e~
2
= (A
v
2
2Jkx
+ B + AB e~
+Be
-B e
cop
+ikx
) (A e
2Jkx
+ BA e
2
p max
= r- (A + Bf
+jkx
i{wt+
+ B e~
and
2
p min
= {A-Bf
(A.3)
Jkx
= {A + B + 2 A B cos 2/ex)
This means that
kx)
(A.4)
at node, kx = *fe + mr
(A.6)
jkx
Jkx
-Be )
(A e
Jkx
kx
- B e~' )
= - y - ( I (A + B - AB e'
= I
j2kx
+J2kx
- AB e
) (A + B - 2 AB cos 2/ex)
(A.7)
= J
u mjn
and
2
u max
J . - (A - Bf
at antinode, kx = 0 + mr
{A + B)
at node, kx = TT/2 +
(A.8)
rnr
(A.9)
The pressure has maxima where velocity has minima and vica versa.
The time averaged intensity is
l=Re[
p u*
= Re f {A e~
\-pc
= Re f Lpc
jkx
+ Be
Jkx
) (A e
J
2
= Re f (A - B + 2ABjs\n
=
pc
- Be*)'
2
J
2
2
J2kx
J2kx
]-{A -B - AB e+ AB e )
2
Lpc
Jkx
2kx)
J
1- (A - B ) = - 1 - (A + 8) (A - B)
v
y
2
'
pc
2
(A.10)
'
Eq. (A.10) shows that the intensity is constant along the standing wave.
Now we define the standing wave ratio, R, as
2
P min
(A-Bf
P max''pc = A + B =
/
A-B
= (
min/pc
'
I = R ( A 13)
{
A-B>
(P~ max/pC)
(A.14)
23
that the intensity is the geometrical mean value between the maximum
and minimum mean square pressures normalized with respect to pc.
Thus on a logarithmic (dB) scale the intensity level is the arithmetical
mean value between the maximum and minimum sound pressure level.
See also Refs. [12,13].
L
L, =
+ L
(A.15)
Fig.A.1 shows pressure, intensity and velocity levels for the second
mode in a tube where the standing wave ratio is 25 dB.
Fig.A.2 shows the phase difference between pressure and velocity for
the same case. There is a maximum phase difference between the 2
quantities when their levels in dB are the same. For a standing wave
ratio of 25dB the phase difference is 83. At these points the sound field
is highly reactive.
Fig. A.1. The level of pressure, Intensity and velocity for a standing wave,
where the standing wave ratio is 25dB. One wavelength is
shown
24
Fig. A.2. The phase difference between pressure and velocity for a
standing wave, where the standing wave ratio is 25dB. One
wavelength is shown
Fig.A.3 shows pressure, intensity and velocity levels for the second
mode in a tube where the standing wave ratio is 100dB.
Where the pressure and the velocity have their maximum or minimum
values the phase difference is 0. At these points the sound field is
purely active.
Figs.A.1 and A.3. also reveal that there are more positions in a standing
wave where the pressure level is higher than the intensity level (LK is
negative) than where the intensity level is higher than the pressure level
(LK is positive).
Fig.A.4 shows the relative amount of positions in a standing wave as a
function of standing wave ratio, where we have LK positive.
In this Appendix reference values of p0 = 20n Pa, u0 = 50nm/s, and
2
l0 = 1 pW/m have been used.
25
Fig. A.3. The level of pressure, Intensity and velocity for a standing wave,
where the standing wave ratio is 100dB. One wavelength is
shown
Fig. AA. The relative amount of positions in a standing wave, where the
Intensity level is higher than the pressure level, that is LK > OdB
26
APPENDIX B
(B.1)
LhR: Noise
(B.2)
2
where /_, and LIR are measured quantities. If instead of using 1 pW/m
and 20 fi Pa (/_, = OdB and Lp = OdB) as our references use the pressure
levels LpR and Lp as indicated in Fig.B.1 we have
LK : Signal Noise
(B.3)
LKS>: Noise
(B.4)
-in i~~
\'measured]
/r,
L f p = 10 log
(B.5)
'true
,-*
measurements
27
/
L*,P -
1 0 l0
= 10
10
9 (10LK/IO
' (l
10 L K ,O/IOJ
+10(^0-^10)
(Z
L /10
= - 10 log (l + io -^- ^
(B.6)
Equation eq. (B.6) is shown in Fig.B.2 for reactivity indices larger as well
as smaller than the Residual Intensity index.
The upper right hand curve shows the case when
Sig
Lf
measured
S l
Lf
true
= Sign
LlResiduai
'9
^/, measured
S l
Lf true +
S l
Li; Residual-
'9
'9
Lit measured +
'9
Lf
true
=4= S i g n Lf
Resjduai
or
s
Lf
true
S i g n Lf measured
'9
L( Residual
Where LK0-LK = + 3dB we have the case that the measured level
L
is
i, measured
equal to the true level of the signal L{ true but having the
wrong sign.
When measuring in a sound field where the intensity is equal to zero, the
two upper curves go towards infinity.
In this case the measured intensity will be the Residual Intensity of the
analyzer LfR. Thus LK0 - LK= OdB and we have an infinitely high overestimat'ion of the true intensity.
These curves are of course only of academic interest and should never
be used for correction of measured intensity levels. On the other hand
they indicate that the measured intensity level should always be at least
7dB above the Residual Intensity level to ensure a correct sign and an
accuracy in estimating the true intensity level better than 1 dB.
29
APPENDIX C
Random Error
From Refs.[7,10] we have that the variance of the imaginary part of the
Cross-spectrum can be expressed as
2
G B B +
= YBT
lm G^e~Re GAB]
(C.1)
(C.2)
pcoAr
Now we have
and
(C.3)
= ^ ^ f f
(C.4)
e, ['] =
~f
(C5)
2rn
- [
|m
AB]
Im GAB
1
=
\&AA
2BT I
30
'
GBB
lm
GAB
lm G e
Re
AB~\
-I
/Q
g\
where y
\m GAB)/y
2
6
rcot *
. - 1 - L[1
2er
lm GAB
2
lm GAB
_ Re GAB
2
lm GAB
- i
J-2
< - ?Vt']
2
J
,0.7,
sin
$
2
using cot $ =
=
we have
sin^$
rl
2BT
1
=
er
7 sin $
2
(1 _ 7 )
r
L
1 +
2 7 sin $
1
(C8)
r 1
(1 - y ) cot
$1
31
ABSTRACT
Use of microphone clips and tripods to support microphones causes disturbance
of the sound field and thus causes errors in sound level measurements. This
article illustrates the amount of errors introduced for different mounting configu
rations, and shows how these errors can be kept to a minimum.
SOMMAIRE
Les pinces et les trepieds utilises pour maintenir les microphones provoquent des
perturbations du champ sonore qui peuvent fausser les mesures du niveau
sonore. Get article illustre I'amplitude des erreurs provoquees par les differents
types de montage, et montre comment ramener ces erreurs a un minimum.
ZUSAMMENFASSUNG
Mikrofonhalter und Stative verursachen Storungen im Schallfeld und beeinflussen
somit die Schallmessung. In diesem Artikel wird der sich fur verschiedene
Aufbauten ergebende Fehler diskutiert und gezeigt, wie sich diese Fehler auf ein
Minimum reduzieren lassen.
Introduction
A free-field equalized microphone measures the sound pressure existing
at the position of the diaphragm in the absence of the microphone, thus
compensating for the interference created in the sound field due to the
microphone itself. If a microphone clip, extension rods and tripod are
used to support the microphone, however, disturbance of the sound field
can be caused, especially if the latter is mounted close to the micro
phone [1]. To investigate the amount of error introduced, measurements
were carried out in an Anechoic Chamber, using a small loudspeaker,
and a 1/2" free field Microphone Type 4133 suspended by thin strings
from metal wires. Their relative positions in the Anechoic Chamber are
shown in the sketch of Fig.1.
32
set-up
33
Measurement Procedure
The instrumentation set-up used is shown in Fig.2. As a test signal an
impulse was transmitted via the loudspeaker, and analysed using a
Narrow Band Spectrum Analyzer Type 2031. The frequency response
obtained is shown in Fig.3a. The rather heavy ripples in the frequency
range above 6 kHz, as seen in the figure, were found to persist when the
analysis was repeated. It was found to be caused by sound reflections
from the wire mesh constituting the floor. Covering the wire mesh with
rockwool and repeating the measurements gave a response curve as
illustrated in Fig.3b. The ripples can be seen to be significantly reduced.
This spectrum was stored in the memory of the analyzer as a reference.
As there is not enough energy in the impulse below 500 Hz, measurement
results in this article are not valid below this frequency.
w
A microphone clip UA0588 with its swing arm in the horizontal position
was now mounted on the microphone. To examine the influence of
sound reflections from the clip, the impulse signal was again analyzed
and the reference spectrum was subtracted from it. The difference in dB
is shown in Fig.4a. A similar curve was also obtained with the swing arm
in the vertical position, and is illustrated in Fig.4b. As expected, the
disturbance caused by the swing arm in the vertical position is higher
extension
rod
and the two-piece extension rod. It can be seen that the errors are
reduced to 0,2dB for angles less than 60 and to 0,5dB for 90.
The use of the flexible extension rod is probably even more imperative in
conjunction with the pressure microphone, when it is used in a free field,
and has therefore to be mounted at 90 incidence. Fig.8b shows the
reduction in error achievable with the flexible extension rod compared
with Fig.8a where the microphone clip is mounted close to the
microphone.
Finally, Fig.9 shows the results obtained with an 1 " Microphone Type
4145 with the microphone clip UA0802 and the two-piece extension rod
mounted at 90 from the horizontal microphone. Compared to the
results of Fig.5d for the 1/2" microphone, the error is significantly lower,
approximately 0,3dB. This is because the 1 " microphone is consider
ably less sensitive than 1/2" microphones to reflections coming from
behind the microphone as can be seen from Figs.10a and b.
37
Fig.7. Errors caused using a flexible extension rod and the two-piece
extension rod at
a. 0 from the horizontal
b. 60 from the horizontal
c. 90 from the horizontal
d. "Control Meas"
cup
Fig.9.a Errors caused by microphone clip for a V' microphone with the
two-piece extension rod at 90 from the horizontal
b. "Control Meas"
Conclusions
From the results it is obvious that mounting of the microphone directly
on the tripod should be avoided. To keep errors within 0,5dB, the
two-piece extension rod should be made use of, and should be mounted
preferably less than 60 from the horizontal. For the same configuration,
the error can be reduced further down to 0,2 dB by inserting the
flexible extension rod between the microphone and the preamplifiers on
which the microphone clip is mounted. One inch microphones are
considerably less sensitive to clips and tripods than 1/2" microphones.
It should be noted that results obtained in this article using narrow band
analysis can be considered to be the worst cases, such as obtained
when dealing with pure tones or very narrow bands of noise. In practice,
1
where broad band noise is emitted and measurements carried out in /3
octaves, which is very often the case, considerably lower errors will
occur on account of averaging in the relatively broader bandwidths.
Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank Peter Moller for his assistance with the
measurements.
39
References
[1] ZOLLNER, M.
for
41
The portable Field Balancing Set, Type 3537 a development of the earlier
Type 9537, is a handy, battery operated system which combines all the
measuring instruments needed for both single- and two-plane balancing
of rigid rotors without dismounting them from their own bearings.
Measurement of the unbalance vibration is made via two Type 4370
Delta Shear piezoelectric Accelerometers. Signal conditioning is car
ried out in a Charge Preamplifier, Type 2635 and the vibration level
displayed on an Indicator Unit, Type 2433 which has a thermometer-type
logarithmic display. The unbalance phase is displayed with a resolution
of 1 on a Phase Indicator, Type 2976 with liquid crystal display. The
phase reference is provided by an infra-red tachometer probe, which
can operate at up to 800 mm from the rotor. Signal filtering is provided
by a Tracking Filter, Type 1626 which tracks the rotation frequency
42
without prior tuning. Furthermore, Type 1626 has a sweep mode which
enables frequency analyses of machine vibration to be performed.
The 3537 comes combined in a light-weight carrying-case together with
battery chargers. Weighing only 10 kg, the Type 3537 is truly portable
and ideal for field balancing applications.
43
44
BV 0022-11