Review of acoustic comfort evaluation in dwellings: part II—impact sound data associated with subjective responses in laboratory tests

Vardaxis, Nikolaos-Georgios; Bard, Delphine

doi:10.1177/1351010x18772026

Cited by 25 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 19 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The fulfillment of the criteria is rated in this review in a scale of high (+++), moderate (++), low (+), as happened in the previous parts. 1,2 The results are tabulated in Table 3 while the Bradford Hill's criteria are as follows:…”

Section: Evaluation Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Review of acoustic comfort evaluation in dwellings: Part III—airborne sound data associated with subjective responses in laboratory tests

Vardaxis

Bard

2018

Building Acoustics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic comfort has been used in engineering to refer to conditions of low noise levels or annoyance, while current standardized methods for airborne and impact sound reduction are used to assess acoustic comfort in dwellings. However, the results and descriptors acquired from acoustic measurements do not represent the human perception of sound or comfort levels. This article is a review of laboratory studies concerning airborne sound in dwellings. Specifically, this review presents studies that approach acoustic comfort via the association of objective and subjective data in laboratory listening tests, combining airborne sound acoustic data, and subjective ratings. The presented studies are tabulated and evaluated using Bradford Hill's criteria. Many of them attempt to predict subjective noise annoyance and find the best single number quantity for that reason. The results indicate that subjective response to airborne sound is complicated and varies according to different sound stimuli. It can be associated sufficiently with airborne sound in general but different descriptors relate best to music sounds or speech stimuli. The inclusion of low frequencies down to 50 Hz in the measurements seems to weaken the association of self-reported responses to airborne sound types except for the cases of music stimuli.

show abstract

Section: Evaluation Of Included Studiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is accompanying part I, which reviewed subjective responses to field data from building surveys 1 and part II, which reviewed subjective responses to impact sound data in laboratory tests. 2 This article is focused on subjective responses relevant to airborne sound data used in laboratory tests.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Review of acoustic comfort evaluation in dwellings: Part III—airborne sound data associated with subjective responses in laboratory tests

Vardaxis

Bard

2018

Building Acoustics

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Acoustic comfort seems to be rather determined by more factors than just the sound level [15,16]. For a review of the variety of definitions, descriptions, and indicators of acoustic comfort, see [20,21,22]. The study reported in this paper uses a subjective evaluation of acoustic comfort and discomfort.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Acoustic Comfort in Virtual Inner Yards with Various Building Facades

Taghipour

Sievers

Eggenschwiler

2019

IJERPH

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Housing complex residents in urban areas are not only confronted with typical noise sources, but also everyday life sounds, e.g., in the yards. Therefore, they might benefit from the increasing interest in soundscape design and acoustic comfort improvement. Three laboratory experiments (with repeated-measures complete block designs) are reported here, in which effects of several variables on short-term acoustic comfort were investigated. A virtual reference inner yard in the ODEON software environment was systematically modified by absorbers on building facades, whereby single-channel recordings were spatialized for a 2D playback in laboratory. Facade absorption was found, generally, to increase acoustic comfort. Too much absorption, however, was not found to be helpful. In the absence of any absorbers on the facade, absorbing balcony ceilings tended to improve acoustic comfort, however, non-significantly. Pleasant and unpleasant sounds were associated with comfort and discomfort, accordingly. This should encourage architects and acousticians to create comfortable inner yard sound environments, where pleasant and unpleasant sound occurrence probabilities are designed to be high and low, respectively. Furthermore, significant differences were observed between acoustic comfort at distinct observer positions, which could be exploited when designing inner yards.

show abstract

“…Building occupants are exposed to a variety of distinct environmental conditions, including thermal, visual, aural, and olfactory stimuli. An extensive body of literature (including review papers) deals with single-domain influences, such as thermal [34][35][36][37], visual [38,39], or aural [40,41] perception. In comparison, fewer research efforts have been conducted to explore multi-domain exposure situations.…”

Section: State Of the Artmentioning

confidence: 99%

Introducing IEA EBC annex 79: Key challenges and opportunities in the field of occupant-centric building design and operation

O’Brien

Wagner

Schweiker

et al. 2020

Building and Environment

167

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite the fact that buildings are designed for occupants in principle, evidence suggests buildings are often uncomfortable compared to the requirements of standards; difficult to control by occupants; and, operated inefficiently with regards to occupants' preferences and presence. Meanwhile, practitioners-architects, engineers, technology companies, building managers and operators, and policymakers-lack the knowledge, tools, and precedent to design and operate buildings optimally considering the complex and diverse nature of occupants. Building on the success of IEA EBC Annex 66 ("Definition and simulation of occupant behavior in buildings"; 2013-2017), a follow-up IEA EBC Annex 79 ("Occupantcentric building design and operation"; 2018-2023) has been developed to address gaps in knowledge, practice, and technology. Annex 79 involves international researchers from diverse disciplines like engineering, architecture, computer science, psychology, and sociology. Annex 79 and this review paper have four main areas of focus: (1) multi-domain environmental exposure, building interfaces, and human behavior; (2) data-driven occupant modeling strategies and digital tools; (3) occupant-centric building design; and (4) occupant-centric building operation. The objective of this paper is to succinctly report on the leading research of the above topics and articulate the most pressing research needs-planned to be addressed by Annex 79 and beyond.

show abstract

Review of acoustic comfort evaluation in dwellings: part II—impact sound data associated with subjective responses in laboratory tests

Cited by 25 publications

References 19 publications

Review of acoustic comfort evaluation in dwellings: Part III—airborne sound data associated with subjective responses in laboratory tests

Review of acoustic comfort evaluation in dwellings: Part III—airborne sound data associated with subjective responses in laboratory tests

Acoustic Comfort in Virtual Inner Yards with Various Building Facades

Introducing IEA EBC annex 79: Key challenges and opportunities in the field of occupant-centric building design and operation

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About