pith. sign in

arxiv: 2605.19492 · v1 · pith:VE5IGVOOnew · submitted 2026-05-19 · 💻 cs.CE

Building Acoustics 01: Finite Element Model of an Building Acoustics Test Facility to Predict the Sound Transmission Loss Based on DIN EN ISO 10140

Sebastian Schmidt , Sabine C. Langer This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-20 02:10 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.CE
keywords finite element methodbuilding acousticssound transmission losstest facilityDIN EN ISO 10140double-leaf wallvirtual prototypeacoustic simulation
0
0 comments X p. Extension
pith:VE5IGVOO Add to your LaTeX paper What is a Pith Number? 
\usepackage{pith}
\pithnumber{VE5IGVOO}

Prints a linked pith:VE5IGVOO badge after your title and writes the identifier into PDF metadata. Compiles on arXiv with no extra files. Learn more

The pith

A finite element model of a building acoustics test facility predicts sound transmission loss and matches theory for insulated double-leaf walls.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This paper develops a finite element model to simulate a standardized test facility for measuring how much sound passes through walls. The aim is to create a virtual way to test different wall designs and their noise-blocking performance early in the building process. The authors verified a smaller version of the model against commercial software before scaling up. They then ran simulations for three wall types and compared the results to known theoretical expectations. Good agreement appeared for the double-leaf wall that included insulation.

Core claim

The authors built a large-scale finite element model of the building acoustics test facility following DIN EN ISO 10140. Using a frequency- and domain-specific discretisation approach, they calculated sound transmission loss in one-third-octave bands from 8 Hz to 630 Hz for single- and double-leaf walls with and without insulation. The double-leaf wall with insulation produced results that aligned well with the theoretical sound transmission loss profile reported in the literature.

What carries the argument

Large-scale finite element model of the test facility with frequency- and domain-specific discretisation, after small-scale verification against COMSOL.

If this is right

  • Designers can estimate sound transmission loss for different material and geometry choices without building physical prototypes.
  • The model supplies predictions for both single-leaf and double-leaf walls in standardized frequency bands.
  • Insulation effects on transmission loss become quantifiable through virtual testing.
  • Early-stage acoustic design decisions can incorporate these estimates directly.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Such a model could shorten the cycle of testing new wall configurations by replacing some physical measurements with simulations.
  • Linking the approach to real measurement data from compliant facilities would allow calibration for wider use.
  • The same framework might extend to other standardized acoustic tests beyond transmission loss.

Load-bearing premise

The frequency- and domain-specific discretisation approach used for the large-scale model accurately represents the physical sound transmission without significant numerical artifacts or missing boundary effects.

What would settle it

Measuring sound transmission loss for the double-leaf wall with insulation in a physical test facility built exactly to DIN EN ISO 10140 and checking whether the one-third-octave band values from 8 Hz to 630 Hz match the simulation results.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.19492 by Sabine C. Langer, Sebastian Schmidt.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Schematic sketch of building acoustics test facility consisting of a source and receiving room as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Schematic sketch of the building acoustics test facility FE Model consisting of a source and receiving [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Total loss factor ηa,T applied to the fluid in the source and receiving room considering a rever￾beration time T = 1.5 s; total loss factor ηa,m applied to the fluid in the gap, if no insulation is applied, considering the propagation loss m; as well as the total loss factor ηs of the structure displayed over the building-acoustics-relevant frequency range 100 Hz to 3150 Hz. 12 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/fu… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Wavelength of the longitudinal resp. bending waves in air (fluid), glass wool (equivalent fluid) and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Single-leaf wall configuration (SLW1): sound pressure level (SPL) at microphone position SR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Single-leaf wall configuration (SLW1): sound pressure level (SPL) at microphone position RR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Double-leaf wall configuration without insulation (DLWnI): sound pressure level (SPL) at micro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Double-leaf wall configuration without insulation (DLWnI): sound pressure level (SPL) at micro [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Mean sound pressure level (SPL) over all receiver positions in the receiving room of the large-scale [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: Mesh convergence study of the large-scale building acoustics test facility with a double-leaf wall [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Sound transmission loss (STL) of the large-scale building acoustics test facility with a single-leaf [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_11.png] view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: Sound transmission loss (STL) of the large-scale building acoustics test facility with a double-leaf [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_12.png] view at source ↗
Figure 13
Figure 13. Figure 13: Sound transmission loss (STL) of the large-scale building acoustics test facility with a double-leaf [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_13.png] view at source ↗
Figure 14
Figure 14. Figure 14: Single-leaf wall configuration (SLW2): sound pressure level (SPL) at microphone position SR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_14.png] view at source ↗
Figure 15
Figure 15. Figure 15: Single-leaf wall configuration (SLW2): sound pressure level (SPL) at microphone position RR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p027_15.png] view at source ↗
Figure 16
Figure 16. Figure 16: Double-leaf wall configuration with insulation (DLWI): sound pressure level (SPL) at microphone [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_16.png] view at source ↗
Figure 17
Figure 17. Figure 17: Double-leaf wall configuration with insulation (DLWI): sound pressure level (SPL) at microphone [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_17.png] view at source ↗
Figure 18
Figure 18. Figure 18: Mean sound pressure level (SPL) over all receiver positions in the source room of the large-scale [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_18.png] view at source ↗
Figure 19
Figure 19. Figure 19: Mesh convergence study of the large scale building acoustics test facility with a double-leaf wall [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p029_19.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

In the context of building acoustics, sound transmission loss estimations are crucial to quantify the noise pollution in buildings. When developing building prototypes in the sense of an acoustic-oriented design process, it is desirable to have an virtual prototype, especially in early development stages, to estimate, for instance, the influence of different material or geometry configurations on to the sound transmission loss. This contribution aims to present a simple virtual prototype of an building acoustics test facility in accordance with DIN EN ISO 10140 for the measurement of the sound transmission loss of single- and double-leaf walls with and without insulation. Here, the finite element method is used as the numerical modelling method of choice. In the course of this, geometry and mesh creation was done using SALOME 9.14 whereas the institute's in-house research code elPaSo was utilised for the matrix assembly and solving procedure. At first, elPaSo was verified by the commercial software COMSOL 6.3 considering a small-scale test facility. Afterwards, the large-scale test facility finite element model was created using a frequency- and domain-specific discretisation approach. The sound transmission loss of three different test specimens was estimated in one-third-octave bands from 8 Hz to 630 Hz, where the double-leaf wall with insulation exhibited good agreement to the theoretical sound transmission loss profile from literature.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a finite element model of a building acoustics test facility compliant with DIN EN ISO 10140, constructed with SALOME for geometry and meshing and the in-house code elPaSo for assembly and solution. The solver is first verified on a small-scale facility against COMSOL 6.3; a frequency- and domain-specific discretization is then applied to the large-scale facility to compute sound transmission loss in one-third-octave bands from 8 Hz to 630 Hz for three wall specimens (single-leaf, double-leaf, and insulated double-leaf), with the claim that the insulated double-leaf case shows good agreement with literature theory.

Significance. If the large-scale results prove numerically reliable, the work supplies a virtual-prototyping capability for early-stage acoustic design of building elements and demonstrates the use of an in-house acoustic FEM code with a commercial-software cross-check. The small-scale verification step is a constructive element that supports credibility in computational building acoustics.

major comments (2)
  1. [Large-scale test facility finite element model] Large-scale test facility finite element model: the frequency- and domain-specific discretization strategy is applied to the full facility (up to 630 Hz) without any reported mesh-convergence study, dispersion-error estimate, or boundary-condition sensitivity analysis. Because the headline agreement with literature theory for the insulated double-leaf wall rests entirely on these large-scale predictions, the absence of such checks leaves open the possibility that the observed match is influenced by under-resolved elements or incomplete absorption at the facility boundaries.
  2. [Results] Results for the three test specimens: no quantitative error bars, uncertainty quantification, or sensitivity analysis on material parameters or boundary absorption coefficients are supplied for the large-scale transmission-loss curves. This omission weakens the ability to judge whether the reported agreement for the insulated double-leaf wall is robust or partly an artifact of the chosen discretization.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Title] The title contains a grammatical error ('an Building' should read 'a Building').
  2. [Abstract] Abstract: the phrase 'influence of different material or geometry configurations on to the sound transmission loss' contains a redundant preposition; 'on' suffices.
  3. [Large-scale test facility finite element model] The manuscript would benefit from an explicit statement of the element-size rule (e.g., elements per wavelength) used in each frequency band for the large-scale mesh.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive feedback on our manuscript describing the finite element model of a DIN EN ISO 10140 test facility. We address the major comments point by point below and commit to revisions that strengthen the numerical validation and presentation of results without altering the core findings.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Large-scale test facility finite element model: the frequency- and domain-specific discretization strategy is applied to the full facility (up to 630 Hz) without any reported mesh-convergence study, dispersion-error estimate, or boundary-condition sensitivity analysis. Because the headline agreement with literature theory for the insulated double-leaf wall rests entirely on these large-scale predictions, the absence of such checks leaves open the possibility that the observed match is influenced by under-resolved elements or incomplete absorption at the facility boundaries.

    Authors: We agree that explicit documentation of mesh convergence for the large-scale facility would increase confidence in the results. The discretization in the original work followed standard acoustic FEM guidelines (minimum 10 linear elements per wavelength at 630 Hz in fluid domains, with domain-specific adjustments for solids based on shear and longitudinal wave speeds). The small-scale verification against COMSOL 6.3 already demonstrated solver fidelity for comparable geometries and frequencies. In the revised manuscript we will add a dedicated subsection presenting mesh-convergence results at three representative one-third-octave bands (100 Hz, 315 Hz, 630 Hz) together with a short dispersion-error estimate derived from the linear-element rule of thumb. We will also include a brief boundary-absorption sensitivity check using literature ranges for the facility wall coefficients. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Results for the three test specimens: no quantitative error bars, uncertainty quantification, or sensitivity analysis on material parameters or boundary absorption coefficients are supplied for the large-scale transmission-loss curves. This omission weakens the ability to judge whether the reported agreement for the insulated double-leaf wall is robust or partly an artifact of the chosen discretization.

    Authors: The manuscript’s primary objective was to demonstrate the practical use of the in-house elPaSo code for virtual prototyping of building elements rather than to deliver a full probabilistic uncertainty study. The reported agreement for the insulated double-leaf case is with established analytical theory, which itself rests on simplifying assumptions. To address the referee’s concern we will augment the results section with a sensitivity analysis on the two most influential parameters (boundary absorption coefficient and wall material density). The outcomes will be shown as shaded bands around the nominal transmission-loss curves, providing quantitative indication of robustness. This addition remains within the scope of a major revision and does not require new experimental data. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Forward FEM simulation of test facility is self-contained with external verification

full rationale

The paper describes a standard finite-element workflow: geometry/mesh generation in SALOME, matrix assembly and solve in the institute code elPaSo, small-scale verification against the independent commercial solver COMSOL, followed by application of a frequency- and domain-specific discretization to the large-scale facility. Sound-transmission-loss values are then computed directly from the resulting fields and compared to independent literature profiles. No parameter is fitted to the target STL data, no output is defined in terms of itself, and no load-bearing premise rests on an unverified self-citation. The modeling steps therefore remain independent of the final comparison result.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model depends on standard linear acoustics assumptions and user-chosen discretization parameters that are not independently validated for the large-scale facility; no new entities are postulated.

free parameters (1)
  • mesh element size per frequency band
    Chosen to resolve acoustic wavelengths in the 8-630 Hz range; specific values not stated in abstract.
axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Linear acoustics and time-harmonic assumptions hold for the modeled sound fields
    Invoked implicitly for frequency-domain FEM solution of sound transmission.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5782 in / 1322 out tokens · 32664 ms · 2026-05-20T02:10:00.839175+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

47 extracted references · 47 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Ackermann: Simulation der Schalltransmission durch W¨ ande

    L. Ackermann: Simulation der Schalltransmission durch W¨ ande. PhD thesis, TU Braunschweig, 2002. https://doi.org/10.24355/dbbs.084-200511080100-673

    work page doi:10.24355/dbbs.084-200511080100-673 2002

  2. [2]

    J. F. Allard, N. Atalla: Propagation of Sound in Porous Media: Modelling Sound Absorbing Materials. John Wiley & Sons, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470747339

    work page doi:10.1002/9780470747339 2009

  3. [3]

    Altenbach, J

    H. Altenbach, J. Altenbach, N. Konstantin: Ebene Fl¨ achentragwerke, Grundlagen der Modellierung und Berechnung von Scheiben und Platten. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer Vieweg, 2023. https://doi.org/10. 1007/978-3-662-68391-0 23

    work page 2023

  4. [4]

    Arjunan, C

    A. Arjunan, C. J. Wang, K. Yahiaoui, D. J. Mynors, T. Morgan, V. B. Nguyen, M. English: Development of a 3D finite element acoustic model to predict the sound reduction index of stud based double-leaf walls. JSV 333(23) (2014) 6140-6155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2014.06.032

    work page doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2014.06.032 2014

  5. [5]

    Atalla, R

    N. Atalla, R. Panneton, P. Debergue: A mixed displacement-pressure formulation for poroelastic mate- rials. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 104(3) (1998) 1444-1452. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.424355

    work page doi:10.1121/1.424355 1998

  6. [6]

    Atalla, F

    N. Atalla, F. Sgard: Finite element and boundary methods in structural acoustics and vibration. CRC Press, 2015

    work page 2015

  7. [7]

    H. D. Baehr, K. Stephan: W¨ arme- und Stoff¨ ubertragung. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer Vieweg, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-49677-0

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-662-49677-0 2016

  8. [8]

    H. E. Bass, L. C. Sutherland, A. J. Zuckerwar: Atmospheric absorption of sound: Update. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88(4) (1990) 2019–2021. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.400176

    work page doi:10.1121/1.400176 1990

  9. [9]

    H. E. Bass, L. C. Sutherland, A. J. Zuckerwar, D. T. Blackstock, D. M. Hester: Atmospheric absorption of sound: Further developments. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 97(1) (1995) 680–683. https://doi.org/10.1121/1. 412989

    work page doi:10.1121/1 1995

  10. [10]

    Blech, S

    C. Blech, S. C. Langer: Systematische Untersuchung mathematischer Korrelationskriterien im Fre- quenzbereich. 43. Jahrestagung f¨ ur Akustik, Kiel, Germany, 2017

    work page 2017

  11. [11]

    Blech, N

    C. Blech, N. Dreyer, M. Friebel, C. Jacob, M. Shamil Jassim, L. Jehl, et al.: SURESOFT: Towards Sustainable Research Software. Technische Universit¨ at Braunschweig, 2022. https://doi.org/10.24355/ dbbs.084-202210121528-0

    work page 2022

  12. [12]

    Blech, H

    C. Blech, H. K. Sreekumar, Y. H¨ upel, S. C. Langer: Efficient Solution Strategies for Cabin Noise Assessment of Wave-Resolving Aircraft Fuselage Models. J. Theor. Comp. Acout. 32(4) (2024) 2450018. https://doi.org/10.1142/S259172852450018X

    work page doi:10.1142/s259172852450018x 2024

  13. [13]

    K. U. Bletzinger, M. Bischoff, E. Ramm: A unified approach for shear-locking-free triangular and rectangular shell finite elements. Computers & Structures 75(3) (2000) 321-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0045-7949(99)00140-6

    work page 2000

  14. [14]

    J. S. Bolton, Y. J. Kang: Elastic porous materials for sound absorption and transmission control. SAE Technical Paper 971878 (1997). https://doi.org/10.4271/971878

    work page doi:10.4271/971878 1997

  15. [15]

    Clasen: Numerische Untersuchung der akustischen Eigenschaften von trennenden und flankierenden Bauteilen

    D. Clasen: Numerische Untersuchung der akustischen Eigenschaften von trennenden und flankierenden Bauteilen. PhD thesis, TU Braunschweig, 2008. https://doi.org/10.24355/dbbs.084-200806100200-2

    work page doi:10.24355/dbbs.084-200806100200-2 2008

  16. [16]

    Craggs, G

    A. Craggs, G. Stead: Sound Transmission Between Enclosures - A Study Using Plate and Acoustic Finite Elements. Acustica 35(2) (1976) 89-98

    work page 1976

  17. [17]

    Dietz: Aerodynamik des Fliegens, Von den Grundlagen bis zur Flugzeugauslegung

    M. Dietz: Aerodynamik des Fliegens, Von den Grundlagen bis zur Flugzeugauslegung. Berlin, Heidel- berg, Springer Vieweg, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-68234-0

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-662-68234-0 2024

  18. [18]

    V.: DIN EN ISO 4109-1:2018-01 Schallschutz im Hochbau - Teil 1: Mindestanforderungen, 2018

    Deutsches Institut f¨ ur Normung e. V.: DIN EN ISO 4109-1:2018-01 Schallschutz im Hochbau - Teil 1: Mindestanforderungen, 2018

    work page 2018

  19. [19]

    V.: DIN EN ISO 10140-2:2021-09 Akustik – Messung der Schalld¨ ammung von Bauteilen im Pr¨ ufstand – Teil 2: Messung der Luftschalld¨ ammung, 2021

    Deutsches Institut f¨ ur Normung e. V.: DIN EN ISO 10140-2:2021-09 Akustik – Messung der Schalld¨ ammung von Bauteilen im Pr¨ ufstand – Teil 2: Messung der Luftschalld¨ ammung, 2021

    work page 2021

  20. [20]

    V.: DIN EN ISO 10140-4:2021-09 Akustik – Messung der Schalld¨ ammung von Bauteilen im Pr¨ ufstand – Teil 4: Messverfahren und Anforderungen, 2021

    Deutsches Institut f¨ ur Normung e. V.: DIN EN ISO 10140-4:2021-09 Akustik – Messung der Schalld¨ ammung von Bauteilen im Pr¨ ufstand – Teil 4: Messverfahren und Anforderungen, 2021

    work page 2021

  21. [21]

    V.: DIN EN ISO 10140-5:2021-09 Akustik - Messung der Schalld¨ ammung von Bauteilen im Pr¨ ufstand - Teil 5: Anforderungen an Pr¨ ufst¨ ande und Pr¨ ufeinrichtungen, 2021

    Deutsches Institut f¨ ur Normung e. V.: DIN EN ISO 10140-5:2021-09 Akustik - Messung der Schalld¨ ammung von Bauteilen im Pr¨ ufstand - Teil 5: Anforderungen an Pr¨ ufst¨ ande und Pr¨ ufeinrichtungen, 2021. 24

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    V.: DIN EN 61260-1:2014-10 Elektroakustik – Bandfilter f¨ ur Oktaven und Bruchteile von Oktaven – Teil 1: Anforderungen, 2014

    Deutsches Institut f¨ ur Normung e. V.: DIN EN 61260-1:2014-10 Elektroakustik – Bandfilter f¨ ur Oktaven und Bruchteile von Oktaven – Teil 1: Anforderungen, 2014

    work page 2014

  23. [23]

    EAA Computational Acoustics. Zenodo. https://zenodo.org/communities/eaa-computationalacoustics

    work page

  24. [24]

    Fahy: Foundations of Engineering Acoustics

    F. Fahy: Foundations of Engineering Acoustics. Academic Press, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/ B978-0-12-247665-5.X5000-0

    work page 2003

  25. [25]

    International Organization for Standardization: ISO 9613-1:1993-06 Acoustics - Attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors, Part 1: calculation of the absorption of sound by the atmosphere, 1993

    work page 1993

  26. [26]

    Kaltenbacher: Numerical Simulation of Mechatronic Sensors and Actuators

    M. Kaltenbacher: Numerical Simulation of Mechatronic Sensors and Actuators. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-40170-1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-642-40170-1 2015

  27. [27]

    Kling: Investigations into damping in building acoustics by use of downscaled models

    C. Kling: Investigations into damping in building acoustics by use of downscaled models. PhD thesis, RWTH Aachen, 2008

    work page 2008

  28. [28]

    S. C. Langer, H. Antes: Analyses of sound transmission through windows by coupled finite and boundary element methods, Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 89(1) (2003) 78-85

    work page 2003

  29. [29]

    S. C. Langer: Paving the Path for Acoustics-Oriented Design, 31st International Congress on Sound and Vibration, Incheon, Korea, 2025

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    A. W. Leissa: Vibration of plates, Scientific and Technical Information Division. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 1969

    work page 1969

  31. [31]

    R. H. Lyon, R. G. DeJong: Theory and Application of Statistical Energy Analysis, Second Edition. Boston, Butterworth-Heinemann, 1994. https://doi.org/10.1016/C2009-0-26747-X

    work page doi:10.1016/c2009-0-26747-x 1994

  32. [32]

    S. P. S. Maluski, B. M. Gibbs: Application of a finite-element model to low-frequency sound insulation in dwellings. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108(4) (2000) 1741–1751. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.1310355

    work page doi:10.1121/1.1310355 2000

  33. [33]

    Meier, A

    A. Meier, A. Schmitz, G. Raabe: Inter-Laboratory Test of Sound Insulation Measurements on Heavy Walls: Part II — Results of Main Test. Building Acoustics 6(3) (1999) 171-186. https://doi.org/10.1260/ 1351010991501392

    work page 1999

  34. [34]

    M¨ oser, W

    M. M¨ oser, W. Kropp: K¨ orperschall - Physikalische Grundlagen und technische Anwendungen. Berlin, Heidelberg, Springer, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-49048-7

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-540-49048-7 2010

  35. [35]

    Panneton: Comments on the limp frame equivalent fluid model for porous media

    R. Panneton: Comments on the limp frame equivalent fluid model for porous media. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122(6) (2007) EL217–EL222. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2800895

    work page doi:10.1121/1.2800895 2007

  36. [36]

    R¨ omer, M

    U. R¨ omer, M. Bollh¨ ofer, H. K. Sreekumar, C. Blech, S. C. Langer: An adaptive sparse grid rational Arnoldi method for uncertainty quantification of dynamical systems in the frequency domain. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 122(20) (2021) 5487–5511. https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.6761

    work page doi:10.1002/nme.6761 2021

  37. [37]

    A. G. Prinn: A Review of Finite Element Methods for Room Acoustics. Acoustics 5(2) (2023) 367-395. https://doi.org/10.3390/acoustics5020022

    work page doi:10.3390/acoustics5020022 2023

  38. [38]

    Schmidt, S

    S. Schmidt, S. C. Langer: Building Acoustics 01: Finite Element Model of an Building Acoustics Test Facility to Predict the Sound Transmission Loss Based on DIN EN ISO 10140 (Version 01) [Data set]. Zenodo, https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18669593, February 2025

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.18669593 2025

  39. [39]

    Schmitz, A

    A. Schmitz, A. Meier, G. Raabe: Inter-Laboratory Test of Sound Insulation Measurements on Heavy Walls: Part I — Preliminary Test. Building Acoustics 6(3) (1999) 159-169. https://doi.org/10.1260/ 1351010991501383

    work page 1999

  40. [40]

    G. R. Sinambari, S. Sentpali: Ingenieurakustik, Physikalische Grundlagen, Anwendungsbeispiele und ¨Ubungen. Wiesbaden, Springer Vieweg, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-27289-0 25

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-658-27289-0 2020

  41. [41]

    H. K. Sreekumar, R. Ullmann, S. Sicklinger, S. C. Langer: Efficient Krylov Subspace Techniques for Model Order Reduction of Automotive Structures in Vibroacoustic Applications, in Model Reduction of Complex Dynamical Systems, ISNM, vol. 171. P. Benner, T. Breiten, H. Faßbender, M. Hinze, T. Stykel, R. Zimmermann, Editors, Cham, Birkh¨ auser, 2021. https:/...

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72983-712 2021

  42. [42]

    H. K. Sreekumar, C. Blech, S. C. Langer: Large-scale vibroacoustic simulations using parallel direct solvers for high-performance clusters. 47. Jahrestagung f¨ ur Akustik, Wien, Austria, 2021. https://doi. org/10.24355/dbbs.084-202212141330-0

    work page doi:10.24355/dbbs.084-202212141330-0 2021

  43. [43]

    H. K. Sreekumar, S. C. Langer: elPaSo Core - Elementary parallel solver core module for high perfor- mance vibroacoustic simulations. 2023. https://doi.org/10.24355/dbbs.084-202301301305-0

    work page doi:10.24355/dbbs.084-202301301305-0 2023

  44. [44]

    T. E. Vigran: Building Acoustics. London, Taylor & Francis Ltd, 2008. https://doi.org/10.1201/ 9781482266016

    work page 2008

  45. [45]

    W. M. Willems, A. Wagner, D. Stricker: Schallschutz: Bauakustik, Grundlagen – Luftschallschutz – Trittschallschutz. Wiesbaden, Springer Vieweg, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-28454-1

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-658-28454-1 2020

  46. [46]

    Wulkau, S

    M. Wulkau, S. C. Langer: Virtual test facilities for building acoustic predictions using FEM. Proc. Appl. Math. Mech. 11(1) (2011) 643-644. https://doi.org/10.1002/pamm.201110311

    work page doi:10.1002/pamm.201110311 2011

  47. [47]

    O. C. Zienkiewicz, R. L. Taylor, J. Z. Zhu: The Finite Element Method Set, Its Basis and Fundamentals. Elsevier, 2005. 26 A elPaSo-Verification based on a Small-Scale Test Facility - Re- sults 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1,000 40 60 80 100 120 Frequency in Hz SPL in dB (ref 2e−5 Pa) elPaSo COMSOL Figure 14: Single-leaf wall configuration (SLW2): s...

    work page 2005