
doi: 10.1121/1.396355
More refined measurements of the complex reflection coefficients using single-frequency excitation and a lock-in amplifier for data analysis have revealed a limitation in the two-microphone transfer function technique for impedance tube measurements. A fixed choice of microphone positions for all frequencies as suggested by the current standard ASTM E1050-86 will compromise the accuracy of measurements. For accurate measurements, one of the microphone positions has to be close to a minimum pressure point of the standing-wave pattern, preferably the first minimum point. The choice of the other microphone position does not seem to be critical as long as the separation of the two positions is not close to a half-wavelength. The procedure employed in this study uses sequential sampling with one microphone instead of simultaneous sampling with two microphones. It presents a technique that is better than the existing standard methods for impedance tube measurements.
impédance acoustique, data analysis, acoustical impedance, Acoustics, single-frequency excitation, Acoustique, standing wave ratio method, astm e 1050-86 standard, one- microphone sequential sampling, complex reflection coefficients, two-microphone transfer function technique limitation, fixed vs. varied microphone positions, standing-wave pattern minimum pressure point, lock- in amplifier
impédance acoustique, data analysis, acoustical impedance, Acoustics, single-frequency excitation, Acoustique, standing wave ratio method, astm e 1050-86 standard, one- microphone sequential sampling, complex reflection coefficients, two-microphone transfer function technique limitation, fixed vs. varied microphone positions, standing-wave pattern minimum pressure point, lock- in amplifier
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 10 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
