1976
DOI: 10.1016/0003-682x(76)90001-3
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Resilient mounting systems in buildings

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

1982
1982
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
4
3

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 13 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 1 publication
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…8 The international standard for measurement of resiliently mounted machines gives the free velocity. 9 Although the free velocity alone is not a sufficient measure of source strength, for resiliently mounted machines it can be used in combination with the spring stiffness of the mounts to give the contact forces.…”
Section: Vibration Activity Mobility and Structure-borne Powermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…8 The international standard for measurement of resiliently mounted machines gives the free velocity. 9 Although the free velocity alone is not a sufficient measure of source strength, for resiliently mounted machines it can be used in combination with the spring stiffness of the mounts to give the contact forces.…”
Section: Vibration Activity Mobility and Structure-borne Powermentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This can be described as a conventional mass-spring system, where the mass is the floating slab and the spring is the resilient layer. The resilient layer possesses internal damping as well, and a mass-spring-damping model 16 is more appropriate, as shown in Figure 1. According to theory, [17][18] the improvement in impact sound isolation of a floating floor, as a function of the frequency, has a positive 30 dB/decade slope, from the resonance frequency, f res , of the mass-spring system (slab-resilient layer) (2) The natural resonance frequency of the floor is given by Hz, (3) where s' is the dynamic stiffness per unit area of the resilient layer (including the stiffness of the trapped air) (MN/m 3 ) and m' is the mass per unit area of the slab (kg/m 2 ).…”
Section: Theorymentioning
confidence: 99%