Available online at www.sciencedirect.

com

Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248

www.elsevier.com/locate/apacoust

The modified method of measuring the complex transmission

coefficient of multilayer acoustical panel in impedance tube
Peng Dong-Li *, Hu Peng, Zhu Bei-Li
State Key Laboratory of Vibration, Shock & Noise, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai 200030, China

Received 14 April 2007; received in revised form 8 August 2007; accepted 4 October 2007
Available online 26 November 2007

Abstract

In order to improve the measuring precision of complex transmission coefficients in impedance tube, the influence that comes from the
transmission–reflection wave in the transmission tube is analyzed, and the modified formulas of complex reflection and complex trans-
mission coefficients are proposed. With the experiment of organic glass, it can be confirmed that the modified formulas are useful and can
decrease the demand of the tube end. Through the measurement of the complex transmission coefficients of multilayer acoustical panel,
the complex transmission coefficients of multilayer both forward and backward incidences are definitely the same in theory either normal
or oblique incidence. When sound wave is normal incidence, the method is also verified to be correct with experiments in impedance tube.
 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Impedance tube; Complex transmission coefficient; Four-microphone method; Multilayer acoustical panel; Transmission–reflection wave

1. Introduction In 2000, Bolton et al. [5] used Four-microphone method

In impedance tube, standing wave ratio and transfer
function method are used to measure the absorption coef-
ficient and sound impedance of acoustic material, and they
have already become standard measuring methods [1,2].
The measurement of complex transmission coefficient of
acoustic material in impedance tube came out those years,
going with the measurement of acoustical property, such as
complex wave number, of materials.
In 1997, Bolton et al. [3] first described a system to mea-
sure the absorption coefficient and transmission loss of
sealant materials in a duct. In their method, ASTM E
1050 [4] absorption measurement equipment was used
along with a new sample holder, a downstream micro-
phone holder (providing two additional microphone loca-
tions) and an anechoic termination (see Fig. 1). Orifice
measurements demonstrated that the method was correct.
The method was named as Four-microphone method later.
*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +86 021 62932202x814.
E-mail addresses: p-d-l@sjtu.edu.cn, bernou@163.com (D.-L. Peng).
and sample symmetry and reciprocity to obtain the wave
number and sound speed of porous material in a suitably
modified standing wave tube. What they considered was
an anechoic termination, and the transmission–reflection
wave could be neglected. This approach would be inaccu-
rate when the transmission–reflection wave cannot be
ignored.
Piquette and Forsythe [6] applied the Four-microphone
method to underwater sound measurement, and low-fre-
quency echo-reduction and insertion-loss of small pas-
sive-material samples was measured in a horizontal tube
filled with a propylene glycol/water mixture. In order to
make sure that the sound wave in the transmission region
was traveling wave, active cancellation methods were used.
Later in 2003, Park and lh [7] used Four-microphone
method to measure the acoustic impedance of a porous
woven hose in porous duct system.
The Four-microphone method used to measure the
transmission coefficient or characteristic impedance is pop-
ular those years. It is also important that the transmission
wave and the transmission–reflection wave should be sepa-
rated in the transmission region with two-microphones.

0003-682X/$ - see front matter  2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2007.10.002
 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248
When the transmission–reflection wave reaches the sam-
ples, the second reflection wave and the second transmis-
sion wave will come out. If the transmission–reflection
wave cannot be neglected, the result will be inaccurate by
means of the Four-microphone method.
The research of the Four-microphone method began
from Zhu et al. in 1999 [8,9]. It was found that the acoustic
properties of the transmission tube end had significant
effect on the accuracy of the reflection coefficient and the
transmission coefficient of sample. When the absorption
coefficient of the end comes up to 0.99, the maximum error
of transmission pressure is ±10%. If the absorption coeffi-
cient is 0.96, the maximum error of transmission pressure
can reach ±20% [9]. If the tube end is open, the transmis-
sion coefficient curve will present intensity oscillation (see
Fig. 4). In practice, the end of transmission duct mainly
uses passive cancellation end, so it is difficult to achieve
total absorption at frequency range. Therefore the mea-
surement should be modified.
There are two parts in this paper: one is the modification
of the transmission–reflection wave, which can improve the
measurement precision of complex transmission coefficient;
the other is the measuring method of the complex transmis-
sion coefficient of the multilayer acoustical panel which is
important in noise-control applications and it is useful to
get the complex reflection coefficient and the complex
transmission coefficient of the multilayer acoustical panel.
Firstly, the modified formulas of the transmission–reflec-
tion wave of the complex reflection coefficients and the
complex transmission coefficients of single layer and multi-
layer sample are deduced, and then, the modified formulas
are verified by the experiments.
2. The Four-microphone method
The schematic diagram of the impedance tube used to
measure the complex reflection and complex transmission
coefficients of multilayer acoustic panel based on the
Four-microphone method is shown in Fig. 1. The duct
consists of reflection and transmission regions with a
loudspeaker at one end and an anechoic termination at
the other end. The loudspeaker is used to generate a plane
wave field in the impedance tube, and there are two-
microphones flush mounted at the reflection region and
Fig. 1. Schematic illustration of the impedance tube.
1241
two-microphones flush mounted at the transmission
region. The sample under test is positioned between them.
The tube end is an anechoic termination with an absorp-
tion wedge of 900 mm long, and the cut-frequency is
160 Hz. A single-microphone is used to make measure-
ments at four locations in sequence shown in Fig. 1 for
the purpose of no calibration of the microphone. It would
not be difficult to implement a multi-microphone mea-
surement of the new procedure, if a fast measurement is
necessary.
The four complex sound pressures p1–p4 at the four
measurement location x1–x4 which comprise various super-
position of positive- and negative-going plane waves in the
reflection region and transmission region of the impedance
tube are recorded down. When the sound filed is stable,
there are four sound waves in the tube (normal incidence
wave pA and reflection wave pB in the reflection tube, trans-
mission wave pC and transmission–reflection wave pD in the
transmission tube). The complex amplitudes of these four
waves in terms of the four measured sound pressures can
be expressed conveniently as
jðp1 ejkx2  p2 ejkx1 Þ
pA ¼ ð1aÞ
2 sin kðx1  x2 Þ
jðp2 ejkx1  p1 ejkx2 Þ
pB ¼ ð1bÞ
2 sin kðx1  x2 Þ
jðp3 ejkðx4 dÞ  p4 ejkðx3 dÞ Þ
pC ¼ ð1cÞ
2 sin kðx3  x4 Þ
jðp4 ejkðx3 dÞ  p3 ejkðx4 dÞ Þ
pD ¼ ð1dÞ
2 sin kðx3  x4 Þ
where k represents the wave number in the ambient fluid;
x1–x4 represent the four locations of the Four-micro-
phones; d represents the depth of the sample, and the time
factor ejxt is ignored.
If the tube end is anechoic termination, the transmis-
sion–reflection wave can be neglected. The definition of
complex reflection coefficient is the ratio of complex ampli-
tude of reflection wave and incidence wave at the front sur-
face. The definition of complex transmission coefficient
is the ratio of complex amplitude of transmission wave at
the back surface and incidence wave at the front surface.
The complex reflection r and complex transmission coeffi-
cient t can be expressed as
1242 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248

pB p ejkl1  p ejkðl1 þs1 Þ pB ¼ pA  r1 ¼ pB þ pD  t ð4aÞ

r¼ ¼ 1jkðl þs Þ 2
1  p ejkl1
pA p 2 e 1
1 pC ¼ pA  t ¼ pC þ pD  r1
pC sinðks1 Þ p3 ejks2  p4 jkðl1 þl2 Þ
t¼ ¼  e ð2bÞ
pA sinðks2 Þ p1  p2 ejks1
When the tube end is not anechoic termination, espe-
cially at low-frequency, it is difficult to achieve anechoic
termination requirement, and the results will become inac-
curate due to the transmission–reflection wave.
3. The modification of the transmission–reflection wave
In order to analyze the effect of transmission–reflection
wave on complex reflection coefficient and complex trans-
mission coefficient, the error was analyzed through theoret-
ical analysis and experimental test. The materials analyzed
in this section were homogeneous and isotropic.
3.1. Effect of transmission–reflection wave
As shown in Fig. 1, r1, a and t are reflection coefficient,
absorption coefficient, and transmission coefficient of the
materials, respectively, and r2 is the reflection coefficient
of the transmission tube end. If pA is the incidence wave,
then reflection wave, transmission wave and transmis-
sion–reflection wave can be expressed as
pB ¼ pA  r1 ð3aÞ
pC ¼ pA  t ð3bÞ
pD ¼ pC  r2 ð3cÞ
When the transmission–reflection wave is concerned, for
the second reflection and the second transmission, the reflec-
tion wave and the transmission wave can be expressed as
1.0
ð2aÞ
ð4bÞ
where pB and pC are the reflection wave and transmission
waves which contain second order waves. The symbol with
superscript ‘‘*’’ denotes the values which concern second order
waves. When the incidence wave pA is omitted, the reflection
coefficient and transmission coefficient can be expressed as
r1 ¼ r1 þ t2  r2 ð5aÞ

t ¼ t þ r1  t  r2 ð5bÞ
So when the transmission–reflection wave is concerned,
the complex reflection coefficient r1 and transmission coef-
ficient t* by means of the Four-microphone method are dif-
ferent from the true reflection coefficient r1 and
transmission coefficient t. The error is related to the acous-
tical property of material and the complex reflection coef-
ficient of transmission tube end.
In order to analyze the effect of transmission–reflection
wave on complex reflection coefficient and complex trans-
mission coefficient, the theoretical error caused by trans-
mission–reflection wave is calculated with reflection
coefficient r2 of the tube end ranging from 0 to 1. Three
typical calculating samples are used, and solid line, dash
line, and dot line represented the theoretical error curses
of the three typical materials, respectively (solid line:
r1 = 0.2, a = 0.95, t = 0.1, dashed line: r1 = 0.9, a = 0.15,
t = 0.2, dotted line: r1 = 0.1, a = 0.18, t = 0.9). The three
samples are all homogeneous and isotropic materials, so
the reflection and transmission coefficients of front surface
and back surface are the same [5]. The calculated results are
shown in Fig. 2. Vertical coordinate is the maximum calcu-
30

25
0.8

20
| ψ ∗1−ψ1|( )

0.6
o
|r 1-r1 |

15
*

0.4
10

0.2
5

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
r2 r2

0.4 15

0.3
10
| ψ τ−ψτ|( )
o
|t -t |

0.2
*

5
∗

0.1

0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
r2 r2

Fig. 2. The measurement errors due to transmission–reflection wave (a) Measurement error of complex reflection coefficient (b) Measurement error of
complex transmission coefficient.
 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248 1243

late error of the complex reflection coefficient and the com- tion wave pB and transmission wave pC can be expressed
plex transmission coefficient caused by the transmission– as
reflection wave. It can be concluded that
pB  ejkx ¼ pA  r1  ejkx þ pD  t  ejkx ð6aÞ
The phase w1 of complex reflection coefficient and phase
jkðxdÞ jkðxdÞ jkðxdÞ
wt of complex transmission coefficient of sample are both pC  e ¼ pA  t  e þ pD  r1  e ð6bÞ
assumed to be 30, the phase w2 of complex reflection coef- According to formula (6), r1 and t modified by transmis-
ficient of transmission tube end is assumed to be 0, and sion–reflection wave can be deduced by the four measured
solid line: r1 = 0.2, a = 0.95, t = 0.1, dashed line: r1 = 0.9, waves, and the formulas are
a = 0.15, t = 0.2, dotted line: r1 = 0.1, a = 0.18, t = 0.9).
p p  pC pD
r1 ¼ A B2 ð7aÞ
r When the transmission tube end is full absorption pA  p2D
p p  pB pD
(r2 = 0), the maximum calculating errors of r1 and t t ¼ A C2 ð7bÞ
are zero, so that the amendment is not needed. pA  p2D
s When r2 becomes larger, the calculation errors of the Take formula (1) in formula (7), the true reflection
amplitude and phases of r1 and t also become larger. coefficient and transmission coefficient can be expressed as

p1 p2 ejkðx1 x2 Þ þp1 p2 ejkðx1 x2 Þ p21 p22 p3 p4 ejkðx3 x4 Þ þp3 p4 ejkðx3 x4 Þ p23 p24
sin2 kðx1 x2 Þ
 sin2 kðx3 x4 Þ
r1 ¼ ð8aÞ
ðp1 ejkx2 p ejkx1 Þ2 ðp4 e jkðx3 dÞ
p3 ejkðx4 dÞ Þ2
2
sin2 kðx1 x2 Þ
 sin2 kðx3 x4 Þ

p1 p3 ðejkðx2 þx4 dÞ  ejkðx2 þx4 dÞ Þ þ p2 p4 ðejkðx1 þx3 dÞ  ejkðx1 þx3 dÞ Þ  p1 p4 ðejkðx2 þx3 dÞ  ejkðx2 þx3 dÞ Þ  p2 p3 ðejkðx1 þx4 dÞ  ejkðx1 þx4 dÞ Þ
t¼
sin kðx3 x4 Þðp1 ejkx2 p2 ejkx1 Þ2 jkðx3 dÞ
p3 ejkðx4 dÞ Þ2
sin kðx1 x2 Þ
 sin kðx1 x2 Þðpsin
4e
kðx3 x4 Þ

ð8bÞ

t The better the absorption of material, the smaller the 3.3. Experimental test
effect of transmission–reflection wave.
The measurements are made using a modified imped-
3.2. The modified formulas ance tube made by ourselves (see Fig. 3). The diameter of
the tube is 0.1 m and the upper frequency for measurement
A sound field inside the impedance tube as shown in depending on the diameter of the tube is 2000 Hz. The
Fig. 1 is considered. The sound wave comes out of the lower frequency for measurement depends on the distance
loudspeaker, passes through the sample under test, between microphones. If the calculating error and input
achieves the end of transmission tube, reflected and trans- error are needed to be the same order of magnitude, the
mitted again and again, and at last, overlaps to the for- spacing of microphones and the frequency range have the
mer four waves pA, pB, pC, pD. Assuming the reflection relationship as follow [10]:
coefficient of the loudspeaker surface is small, the mea-
0:1c < f  d < 0:4c ð9Þ
sured wave pA can be regarded as the incidence wave,
then the reflection wave should be the first reflection In order to expand the measurement frequency range,
wave on the sample surface, and the transmission wave different spacing between microphones can be used in
should be the first transmission wave passing through teams. There are three combinations of the spacing of
the sample. But actually, when the transmission–reflec- microphones. The mounting spacing and measurement fre-
tion wave pD reaches the sample back, the second trans- quency range can be seen in Table 1. Hence the measure-
mission wave and second reflection wave will come out. ment frequency range of the impedance tube is from
The second transmission wave overlaps to the first reflec- 125 Hz to 1600 Hz. The cut-frequency of the tube end is
tion wave, and the second reflection wave overlaps to the 160 Hz, so when the frequency is lower than 160 Hz, the
first transmission wave. There are third and forth reflec- calculating error will be much bigger (see Figs. 4 and 7).
tion and transmission waves, and even much higher rank A single-microphone is used to make measurements at
waves. When the anechoic end is used, the high rank four locations in sequence shown in Fig. 1 for the purpose
waves which are smaller than the second reflection and of no calibration of the microphone. It will not be difficult
transmission waves of 1–2 order of magnitude (t Æ r2 or to implement a multi-microphone measurement of the new
r1 Æ r2) can be ignored. The samples in this section are procedure, if a fast measurement is necessary.
all assumed to be homogeneous and isotropic, so the In order to verify the correctness of the modified formula
reflection and transmission coefficients of front surface (8), the experiment is performed on an organic glass sample
and back surface are the same [5]. The measured reflec- of 1 cm thick and 1180 kg/m3 density. The sample is
1244 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248

mounted in the impedance tube with brim clamped [9]. Two

types of transmission tube end are used: one is absorption
wedge of 1.2 m length, and the cut-off frequency is 160 Hz;
the other is open end, which can be seemed as the reflection
end. In order to improve the signal-to-noise ratio, single fre-
quency signal is sent out from the loudspeaker each time.
The measuring results are shown in Fig. 4.
Conclusions can be drawn from Fig. 4:

r When the tube end is anechoic end, the amendment

and no-amendment calculating results of complex
reflection coefficient and complex transmission coeffi-
cient basically match together.
s When the tube end is open, the amendment calculating
results of complex reflection coefficient and complex
transmission coefficient basically match together with
Fig. 3. The picture of the impedance tube and test equipment. the results in the circumstance of anechoic termination
tube end.
t For open end and without modification, both reflection
coefficient and transmission coefficient have periodic
Table 1 fluctuations. The second reflection wave and the second
The distances between microphones of three frequency ranges
transmission wave of transmission–reflection wave add
Frequency (Hz) ‘1 (m) S1 (m) ‘2 (m) S2 (m) to the original reflection wave and transmission wave.
125–250 0.32 0.45 0.25 0.45 The transmission coefficient have more obvious periodic
200–630 0.12 0.07 0.25 0.2 fluctuations than the reflection coefficient, because the
500–1600 0.05 0.07 0.25 0.07
reflection coefficient of organic glass is much bigger than

1.0 50

0.8 40

0.6 30
ψ1 ( )
ο
| r 1|

0.4 20

0.2 10

0 400 800 1200 1600 0 400 800 1200 160 0

f / Hz f / Hz
(a) Complex reflection coefficient

1.0 160

120
0.8
80

40
0.6
ψt ( )
ο
|t|

0.4 - 40

- 80
0.2
- 120

- 160
0 40 0 8 00 1 200 1600 0 400 800 1200 1600
f / Hz f / Hz
(b) Complex transmission coefficient

Fig. 4. The measuring results of organic glass in impedance tube. Solid line: anechoic termination without correction; dashed line: anechoic termination
with correction; dotted line: open termination without correction; dash-dot line: open termination with correction. (a) Complex reflection coefficient and
(b) Complex transmission coefficient.
 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248
the transmission coefficient, and the effect of the trans-
mission–reflection wave on transmission coefficient is
bigger than the effect on reflection coefficient, which is
coincident with the analyses in Fig. 2.
No matter the theory analyses or the experiment results,
it can be verified that the modified formulas (8) are correct.
The modified formulas of reflection coefficient and trans-
mission coefficient caused by the transmission–reflection
wave are useful to reduce the requirement of the absorption
of the tube end, and achieve the same measuring precision
as anechoic termination.
4. Measuring method of the transmission coefficient of
multilayer acoustical panel
4.1. Modified formulas
When the measuring samples are multilayer acoustical
panel, the reflection coefficient and the transmission coeffi-
cient are different as the sound wave incidents form differ-
ent sides. It is different from the homogeneous and
isotropic materials depicted in Section 3. Take one surface
of the sample as the front surface and the other as the back
surface. As shown in Fig. 5, when sound wave incidents to
the front surface of the sample, set the forward complex
reflection coefficient and complex transmission coefficient
as rf and tf; when sound wave incidents to the back surface
of the sample, set the backward complex reflection coeffi-
cient and complex transmission coefficient as rb and tb.
If the samples are homogeneous and isotropic, it is
enough to get the results with only one time measurement,
because the reflection coefficient and transmission coeffi-
cient of the two sides are the same. But to multilayer acous-
tical panel, the reflection coefficient and the transmission
coefficient of the two sides may be different, and two equa-
tions are not enough for four parameters. The first mea-
surement is performed when the front surface of the
sample faced to the loudspeaker, and the second measure-
ment is performed when the sample was turn around. The
first and second measurements are distinguished by sub-
script ‘1’ and ‘2’. According to two-time measurements,
the two group of parameters are obtained
pB1 ¼ pA1  rf þ pD1  tb ð10aÞ
pC1 ¼ pA1  tf þ pD1  rb ð10bÞ
pB2 ¼ pA2  rb þ pD2  tf ð10cÞ
pC2 ¼ pA2  tb þ pD2  rf ð10dÞ
Fig. 5. Schematic diagram of the two sides coefficients.
1245
It is enough for four equations. The complex coefficients
which have been modified can be expressed as
pA2 pB1  pC2 pD1
rf ¼ ð11aÞ
pA1 pA2  pD1 pD2
pA2 pC1  pB2 pD1
tf ¼ ð11bÞ
pA1 pA2  pD1 pD2
p p  pC1 pD2
rb ¼ A1 B2 ð11cÞ
pA1 pA2  pD1 pD2
pA1 pC2  pB1 pD2
tb ¼ ð11dÞ
pA1 pA2  pD1 pD2
where pA1, pB1, pC1, pD1 are the incidence wave, reflection
wave, transmission wave, transmission–reflection wave
measured at the first time, respectively; pA2, pB2, pC2, pD2
are the incidence wave, reflection wave, transmission wave,
transmission–reflection wave measured at the second time,
respectively.
4.2. Theory calculation
As to the multilayer acoustical panel, the complex
reflection coefficient mainly depends on characteristic
impedance of the first layer, so the forward and back-
ward complex reflections coefficients are different. But
the two side complex transmission coefficients are the
same (see Appendix).
The problem can be solved according to the multilayer
acoustical panel theory of Brekhovskikh [11]. The sample
for the calculation is an infinite, two-layer plate of rubber
and steel plate immerged in water. To rubber, density is
1100 kg/m3, depth is 0.05 m, the real part of Young’s mod-
ulus is 1.4 · 108 N/m2, the loss factor of Young’s modulus
is 0.23, the Poisson’s ratio is 0.49; to steel plate, density is
7840 kg/m3, depth is 0.01 m, Young’s modulus is
21.6 · 1010 N/m2, the Poisson’s ratio is 0.28; to water
for calculating, density is 1000 kg/m3, sound speed is
1476 m/s. Take the rubber as the front surface and the steel
as the back surface of the sample.
According to the literature [11], the calculating results of
complex reflection coefficient and complex transmission
coefficient are shown in Fig. 6. In order to get the rule of
complex coefficients of multilayer materials much clearly,
the computing frequency range is from 0 kHz to 20 kHz.
When the sound wave is normal incidence, the results are
shown in Fig. 6a; when the sound wave is oblique inci-
dence, the results are shown in Fig. 6b. h is the angle of
incidence sound wave and the normal direction of the
materials. As to multilayer acoustical panel:
1246 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248

1.0 180
| r b|

120
0.8

60
|r|,|t|

0.6 | r f|

ψ( )
ο
0
0.4
-60

0.2 | t f | , | t b| -120

-180
0 4 8 12 16 20 0 5 10 15 20
f / kHz f / kHz
(a) normal incidence (θ = 0 °)

1.0
180

0.8 | r b|
120

0.6 60
|r|,|t|

ψ( )
0
ο

| r f|
0.4
-60

0.2 | t f | , | t b|
-120

-180
0 4 8 12 16 20 0 4 8 12 16 20
f / kHz f / kHz
(b) oblique incidence ( θ = 20°)

Fig. 6. The calculating results of normal and oblique incidence to multiplayer from both forward and backward. Solid line: reflection coefficient of
forward incidence; dotted line: reflection coefficient of backward incidence; dashed line: transmission coefficient of forward incidence; dash-dot line:
transmission coefficient of backward incidence. (a) Normal incidence (h = 0) and (b) oblique incidence (h = 20).

r Complex reflection coefficient relates to the characteris-
tic impedance of incident surface closely. If both side
impedances of multilayer acoustical panel are different,
the complex reflection coefficients are also different.
When absorption material is in front, the complex
reflection coefficient is much smaller than that steel
plate is in front.
s Complex transmission coefficient only depends on the
structure of multilayer panel, not on the characteristic
impedance of the incidence face, so both sides of the
multilayer panel have the same complex transmission
coefficient.
t To oblique incidence, the complex transmission coeffi-
cients of multilayer acoustical panel of both sides are
totally the same, and the complex reflection coefficients
are different. Compared with normal incidence, oblique
incidence has oscillation at low-frequency.
4.3. Experimental test
The measurement of the multilayer panel is performed
in impedance tube which is used in Section 3.3. The tube
end is an absorption wedge. The procedure is the same as
in Section 3.3. The difference is that in this experiment
two-time measurements must be performed, one is the
front surface facing to sound source, the second is the back
surface facing to sound source. The calculating procedure
was in Section 4.1.
4 cm thick sponge and 1 mm thick artificial leather are
stacked together as the sample. The artificial leather is
defined as the forward incidence surface, and the sponge
is defined as the backward incidence surface. The amended
results of forward and backward normal incidence of com-
plex transmission coefficients and complex reflection coeffi-
cients are shown in Fig. 7.
r Forward and backward transmission coefficients are
totally the same. It indicates that, to multilayer acous-
tical panel, the normal incidence transmission coeffi-
cients are identical both in forward and backward
incidence, and it also validates that the former theoret-
ical calculations are correct.
s To multilayer acoustical panel, the reflection coeffi-
cients of two sides are different, and they depend
on the sound absorption properties of the incidence
surface of sample. Backward reflection coefficient
 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248 1247

1.0 t Because the two side characteristic impedances of multi-

| r f| layer acoustical panel are different, the modified formu-
0.8 las (11) of the two side complex reflection coefficient and
| r b| complex transmission coefficient are deduced with two-
time measurements in impedance tube.
0.6
u For multilayer acoustical panel structure, it can be
|r|,|t|

proved theoretically that no matter which side the

0.4 sound wave incidence to, the complex transmission
| t f | , | t b|
coefficients are the same. The results are also verified
0.2 at normal incidence circumstance by the experiments
in impedance tube.

0 400 800 1200 1 600 2000

f / Hz Acknowledgement
Fig. 7. The experiment results of the composite structure consisted
of sponge and artificial leather of normal incidence. Solid line: The research work is supported by The Specific Subject
reflection coefficient of forward incidence; dotted line: reflection Scientific Research Foundation of University Philosophy
coefficient of backward incidence; dashed line: transmission coefficient Doctoral Station under the Grant 20040248011. We will
of forward incidence; dash-dot line: transmission coefficient of back- take this opportunity of expressing our sincere gratitude
ward incidence.
to State Key Laboratory of Vibration, Shock & Noise,
Shanghai Jiao Tong University for their help in performing
the underwater acoustic experiments.
(sponge is the incidence side) is smaller than forward
reflection coefficient, so it also proved that sponge’s Appendix. Implications of complex transmission coefficient
absorption properties is better than artificial of multilayer acoustical panel with two side incidences
leather’s.
According to the literature [11], multilayer acoustical
In general, the two side impedances of multilayer acous- panel of n  1 layers are shown in Fig. A1. The transmis-
tical panel are not identical, but no matter which side the sion coefficient is
sound wave incident upon, the transmission coefficients
Anþ1 Y Z jþ1 þ Z in iuj
j¼n ðjÞ
are identical (see Appendix), and this conclusion was also
T ¼ ¼ e ðA1Þ
mentioned by Rudgers [12]. According to power viewpoint, A1 ðjÞ
j¼1 Z j þ Z in
it is easy to understand: when the reflection coefficient of
the incidence surface is big, the reflected power is big, where A1 is the incidence sound wave in first layer, An+1 is
too, so the power which can get into the plate is small, the transmission wave in n + 1 layer, Zj, Zj+1 are the
and the absorbed power by the panel is also small; when impedance of layer j and layer j + 1, respectively, uj is
ðjÞ
the reflection coefficient is small, the reflected power is the phase shifting of sound wave in layer j, Z in is the input
small too, so the power which can get into the plate is impedance of back interface of layer j:
big, the absorbed power is also big. At last, the transmitted ðj1Þ
ðjÞ Z in  iZ j tguj
power keeps equal. Z in ¼ ðj1Þ
 Zj ðA2Þ
Z j  iZ in tguj
5. Conclusions For four layers, when the sound wave incidents from layer
1, the forward transmission coefficient is
r In order to assure the measurement precision of com-
plex transmission coefficient in impedance tube, the
absorption coefficient of the end of transmission region
must reach 0.99 at the measuring frequencies. It is dif-
ficult to achieve the requirement of the tube end, so the
modified formulas (8) are deduced to eliminate the
effect of transmission–reflection wave for homogeneous A1 A n+1
and isotropic materials.
s After the modification of the transmission–reflection
wave, the measurement precision is improved and
the requirement of absorption capability of tube
end is decrease. The experimental results prove that
the modified result is identical to the absorption
end. Fig. A1. Sound transmission coefficient of multilayer acoustical panel.
1248 D.-L. Peng et al. / Applied Acoustics 69 (2008) 1240–1248

ð2Þ ð3Þ
A4 Z 2 þ Z 1 iu1 Z 3 þ Z in iu2 Z 4 þ Z in iu3
T1 ¼ ¼ e  ð2Þ
e  ð3Þ
e
A1 Z 1 þ Z 1 Z 2 þ Z in Z 3 þ Z in

Z 2 þ Z 1 iðu1 þu2 þu3 Þ Z 2 ðZ 1 þ Z 3 Þ  itgu2 ðZ 1 Z 3 þ Z 22 Þ

¼ e 
2Z 1 Z 2 Z 3 ð1  itgu2 ÞðZ 1 þ Z 2 Þ

Z 4 ðZ 3 Z 2  iZ 1 Z 3 tgu2  i  Z 1 Z 2 tgu3  Z 22 tgu2 tgu3 Þ þ ðZ 1  Z 2  iZ 22 tgu2  iZ 2 Z 3 tgu3  Z 1 Z 3 tgu2 tgu3 Þ  Z 3


ð1  itgu3 Þ½Z 2 ðZ 1 þ Z 3 Þ  itgu2 ðZ 1 Z 3 þ Z22 Þ

eiu1 eiðu2 þu3 Þ

¼   Z 4 ðZ 3 Z 2  iZ 1 Z 3 tgu2  i  Z 1 Z 2 tgu3  Z 22 tgu2 tgu3 Þ þ ðZ 1  Z 2  iZ 22 tgu2
Z 1 2Z 2 Z 3 ð1  itgu2 Þð1  itgu3 Þ

 iZ 2 Z 3 tgu3  Z 1 Z 3 tgu2 tgu3 Þ  Z 3 ðA3Þ

When the sound wave incidents from layer 4, the backward

transmission coefficient is

ð2Þ ð3Þ
A1 Z 3 þ Z 4 iu4 Z 2 þ Z in iu3 Z 1 þ Z in iu2
T2 ¼ ¼ e  ð2Þ
e  ð3Þ
e
A4 Z 4 þ Z 4 Z 3 þ Z in Z 2 þ Z in
Z 3 þ Z 4 iðu2 þu3 þu4 Þ Z 3 ðZ 2 þ Z 4 Þ  itgu3 ðZ 2 Z 4 þ Z 23 Þ
¼ e 
2Z 2 Z 3 Z 4 ð1  itgu3 ÞðZ 3 þ Z 4 Þ
Z 1 ðZ 2 Z 3  iZ 2 Z 4 tgu3  iZ 3 Z 4 tgu2  Z 23 tgu2 tgu3 Þ þ ðZ 3 Z 4  iZ 23 tgu3  iZ 2 Z 3 tgu2  Z 2 Z 4 tgu2 tgu3 Þ  Z 2

ð1  itgu2 Þ½Z 3 ðZ 2 þ Z 4 Þ  itgu3 ðZ 2 Z 4 þ Z 23 Þ
eiu4 eiðu2 þu3 Þ
¼   Z 1 ðZ 2 Z 3  iZ 2 Z 4 tgu3  iZ 3 Z 4 tgu2  Z 23 tgu2 tgu3 Þ þ ðZ 3 Z 4  iZ 23 tgu3
Z 4 2Z 2 Z 3 ð1  itgu2 Þð1  itgu3 Þ
 iZ 2 Z 3 tgu2  Z 2 Z 4 tgu2 tgu3 Þ  Z 2 ðA4Þ

Compare T1 and T2, when layer 1 and layer 4 are the same [4] ASTM Standard E 1050-90. Impedance and absorption of acoustical
medium: materials using a tube, two microphones, and a digital frequency
analysis system.
eiu1 eiu4 [5] Song BH, Bolton JS. A transfer-matrix approach for estimat-
¼ ðA5Þ ing the characteristic impedance and wave numbers of limp
Z1 Z4
and rigid porous materials. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;107(3):
So T 1 ¼ T 2 ðA6Þ 1131–52.
[6] Piquette JC, Forsythe SE. Low-frequency echo-reduction and inser-
According to the induction method, it is also correct for tion-loss measurements from small passive-material sample under
n + 1 layers. ocean environmental temperatures and hydrostatic pressures. J
So when the left half infinite and the right half infinite Acoust Soc Am 2001;110(4):1998–2006.
medium are the same medium, no matter which side the [7] Park CM, lh JG. Inverse estimation of the acoustic impedance of a
sound wave incidents from, the transmission coefficients porous woven hose from measured transmission coefficients. J Acoust
Soc Am 2003;113(1):128–38.
are the same. [8] Zhu Bei-li, Luo Xiao-hui. The measurement method of insulation in
standing wave tube. Noise Vib Control 2000(6):41–3.
References [9] Qu Bo, Zhu Bei-li. Four-microphone method of sound
transmission in the standing wave tube. Noise Vib Control
[1] ISO 10534-1(1996). Acoustics-determination of sound absorption 2002:44–6.
coefficient and impedance in impedance tubes—part 1: method using [10] Zhu Bei-li, Xiao Jin-xin. A two-hydrophone transfer function method
standing wave ratio. for measuring low-frequency acoustic properties and its error
[2] ISO 10534-2(1998). Acoustics-determination of sound absorption analysis. ACTA Acustica 1994(5):351–60.
coefficient and impedance in impedance tubes—part 2: transfer- [11] Brekhovskikh. Wave in multilayers. Beijing: Science Press; 1980. p.
function method. 45–53.
[3] Bolton JS, Yun RJ, Pope J, Apfel D. Development of a new sound [12] Rudgers AJ, Solvoid CA. Apparatus-independent acoustical-material
transmission test for automotive sealant materials. SAE Trans J Pass characteristics obtained from panel-test measurements. J Acoust Soc
Cars 1997;106:2651–8. Am 1984;76:926–34.