Are Resilient Bars an Effective Means of Reducing Noise Transmission?

Resilient bar systems help soundproof and reduce noise of a ceiling or wall. Resilient bars are commonplace in suspended timber floors, especially for change of use schemes. They can be an essential part of achieving compliance with Part E of the building regulations requirement for noise control of a partition. They are often used in connection with other sound insulating materials, such acoustic membrane plasterboard systems, and create an effective acoustic break between the bottom of existing joists and ceilings.

A resilient bar is a thin metal channel designed to substantially improve the sound insulation of plasterboard walls and ceilings. The channel effectively isolates the plasterboard from the studwork, eliminating direct contact and dissipating sound which would normally be transferred through the frame.

Resilient bars work by decoupling the new suspended ceiling from the joists, creating a gap. This gap decreases sound transmission propagated through it, as sound vibrations travel less freely in open space than from material to material. The new ceiling is in effect floating off the joists via a light weight steel channel. The sound is reduced as it travels through the flexible flange of the resilient bars as seen below.





                Without Resilient Bars                                                  With Resilient Bars

The use of resilient bars significantly improves the acoustic performance of a wide array of projects from an impact and airborne perspective, they also provide a cost-effective solution. Furthermore, acoustic insulation (another low cost material) can be fitted between joists (as shown in pink in the image above), allowing for further attenuation of vibration and unwanted noise.

However, adopting a more complex solution also raises the issue of build quality and installation. Sound transmission is susceptible to flanking around structures, if they are not installed correctly. If resilient bars are not fitted to the joists properly, the effect of decoupling by the resilient bars will be compromised, however, with proper instruction the installation methodology of resilient bars is simple.

In conclusion, resilient bars provide a cost-effective means of reducing noise transmission through a ceiling or wall and they are simple to install. Air Tightness Solutions have a positive experience of partition systems that have incorporated resilient bars as being a highly effective way of reducing propagated noise transmission.

Under-platform ventilation for the Northern Line Extension – Keeping Commuters of South London Cool

The Transport for London Northern Line Extension (NLE) project will provide significant ventilation at its new train stations. Air Tightness Solutions was appointed to assist in providing optimal ventilation performance at Battersea Power tube station.

The prestigious NLE project was handed over to Ferrovial Agroman and Laing O’Rourke (FLO), the same contractors whom achieved industry-leading safety results as HETCo for the new Terminal 2A at Heathrow Airport. We were delighted to work with FLO to identify the air leakage performance of blockwork wall that forms the dedicated ventilation shaft of the under-level platform of Battersea power tube station.

After temperatures reached 26°C on the tube network in the summer of 2017, heat extraction and occupier comfort became a central point in improving the London Underground service. The ‘Cooling the Tube’ programme, on going since 2008, involves techniques such as pumping fresh air across temporary fans to increase ventilation across platforms. It is understood that more than half the heat in the tunnels comes from train brakes and its motors; drawing away hot air at station platform reduces heat dumped into the tunnels as the trains exit.

However, record temperatures still reached a whopping 40°C in the tube network over the summer of 2018 and therefore the air conditioning of the new NLE tunnelling systems is a focal point in increasing heat reduction.

The new NLE tunnels will provide a large amount of airflow ventilation by utilising an under-platform air system at Battersea Power tube station. A blockwork wall forms an integral part of this airtight ventilation shaft. Air Tightness Solutions has provided the air permeability performance of four different treated samples of blockwork.

The test method comprised of an airtight plenum chamber being attached to each of the four individually treated samples. A fan and flow-measuring device were used to determine the air leakage performance of each sample.

FLO were delighted with the findings provided and Air Tightness Solutions are delighted to have the opportunity of working with FLO again in the near future on the remaining NLE project which is due to be opening in 2020.

Author: Jashan Goodary, Acoustic Engineer 

The importance of Dw and Rw in Sound Insulation Testing

The aim of this article is to discuss the importance of Rw and Dw in building acoustics, without delving too deeply into its mathematics and technical aspects.

What is Dw?

There are two parameters that are used to describe the sound insulation of a partition – Dw and Rw. Dw is a term that relates to the sound insulation between rooms on-site. Put simply, it is the noise level in the source room minus the noise level in the receiving room, the level difference as it’s termed. This is a performance standard used to describe final site requirements, which commonly is used to demonstrate compliance with building regulations for schools and residentials developments, and to achieve BREEAM credits.

Variations of Dw are specified more in-depth in documentation such as BB93 and HTM. For example, DnTw is the performance parameter required for schools and healthcare buildings. The nT represents the normalisation (n) of reverberation (T) which allows us to compare sound insulation results objectively on a level field, irrespective of the differences in reverberation. Effectively, normalization allows the measured reverberation to be weighted against the reference reverberation standard of ≤0.5 seconds, a value which represents the time taken for all the emitted sound in the source room to completely decay. Part E for residential purposes uses DnTw + Ctr, the Ctr accounting for a low frequency correction. This is the performance standard we use for acoustic testing at Air Tightness Solutions, as it is in compliance with the Building Regulations Document relevant to all new builds and refurbishments. The important thing to remember is that these acoustic parameters are all onsite performance targets.

What is Rw?

Now, before moving onto understanding Rw, it is useful to understand the process of sound transmission between two rooms subject to testing. Sound transmission between two rooms is the sum of many paths, with the dominant and obvious path transmitting directly through the separating partition. However, sound transmission paths are very much random and unpredictable, passing through undesirable barriers known as flanking. For example, if there is acoustic panelling hanging from the ceiling, then a flanking path exists around the panelling. This process is the same for mechanical ducts, penetrations and pipes running between rooms so also need to be considered.

Rw relates to the laboratory rated sound reduction index of a single element making up a partition wall/floor type. A laboratory test measures the wall performance in isolation of potential flanking paths, it is achieved off-site. This method suggests that if you were to build a 40 dB Rw wall of sound insulation then theoretically it could achieve 40 dB Dw on-site, given that the surrounding constructions provide no flanking whatsoever. In practise, a perfect value is of course unattainable, and therefore we must account for flanking. We also cannot be certain that Rw was determined correctly, the element tested in a lab could well have been of a different surface area to the actual element.

How do Dw and Rw affect each other?

To achieve the onsite Dw target, there are some factors to consider when using partitions with a sufficient Rw rating. It is useful to note that utilizing figures of both Dw and Rw give a representative sample of the wall type within a construction build for the benefit of minimizing the amount of testing required for multiple partitions.

If we consider DnTw, or DnTw + Ctr, theoretically, the DnTw on site should not change with reverberation time as nT refers to the normalisation of reverberation, allowing us to compare sound insulation results objectively on a level field irrespective of reverberation. However, calculation methods in standards such as BB93 still use RT within the formula to calculate Rw from DnTw. The problem therefore arises in that the Rw can vary significantly between partitions, even if they require the same Dw.

The RT affects the Dw (which is the true level difference, this is what we hear subjectively when testing on site), due to this, values in Rw can vary significantly. For example, if one party wall passes by a value of 53 dB but its target is to achieve 40 dB of sound insulation, then ascertaining each wall type on-site would be difficult, we do not want to be left with a vast multifarious blunder! The reduction of dB for walls that have passed in this manner may well be considered as over-designed, getting things right in the first place would greatly cut down on costs on post construction remedial work. At Air Tightness Solutions, we test partitions using DnTw + Ctr. Not only does this method account for the acoustic characteristics of sound decay in a particular room but also for the low frequency correction of white noise emission from our multi-directional speaker, giving very accurate and more valid measurements overall.


Author: Jashan Goodary, Acoustic Engineer