Ray-tracing prediction of optimal conditions for speech in realistic classrooms

Abstract Recent papers have discussed the optimal reverberation times in classrooms for speech intelligibility, based on the assumption of a diffuse sound field. Here this question was investigated for more ‘typical’ classrooms with non-diffuse sound fields. A ray-tracing model was modified to predict speech-intelligibility metric U50. It was used to predict U50 in various classroom configurations for various values of the room absorption, allowing the optimal absorption (that predicting the highest U50)—and the corresponding optimal reverberation time—to be identified in each case. The range of absorptions and reverberation times corresponding to high speech intelligibility were also predicted in each case. Optimal reverberation times were also predicted from the optimal surface-absorption coefficients using Sabine and Eyring versions of diffuse-field theory, and using the diffuse-field expression of Hodgson and Nosal. In order to validate the ray-tracing model, predictions were made for three classrooms with highly diffuse sound fields; these were compared to values obtained by the diffuse-field models, with good agreement. The methods were then applied to three ‘typical’ classrooms with non-diffuse fields. Optimal reverberation times increased with room volume and noise level to over 1 s. The accuracy of the Hodgson and Nosal expression varied with classroom size and noise level. The optimal average surface-absorption coefficients varied from 0.19 to 0.83 in the different classroom configurations tested. High speech intelligibility was, in general, predicted for a wide range of coefficients, but could not be obtained in a large, noisy classroom.

[1]  T W Tillman,et al.  Room acoustics effects on monosyllabic word discrimination ability for normal and hearing-impaired children. , 1978, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[2]  J. Pickett,et al.  Monaural and binaural speech perception through hearing aids under noise and reverberation with normal and hearing-impaired listeners. , 1974, Journal of speech and hearing research.

[3]  Lois Thibault,et al.  Implementation of ANSI S12.60 acoustical performance criteria, design requirements and guidelines for schools , 2001 .

[4]  J. Flanagan Analog Measurements of Sound Radiation from the Mouth , 1960 .

[5]  J. S. Bradley,et al.  Reverberation time and maximum background-noise level for classrooms from a comparative study of speech intelligibility metrics. , 2000, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[6]  A K Nábĕlek,et al.  Reception of consonants in a classroom as affected by monaural and binaural listening, noise, reverberation, and hearing aids. , 1974, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[7]  Murray Hodgson,et al.  Estimation of the absorption coefficients of the surfaces of classrooms , 2006 .

[8]  Murray Hodgson When is diffuse-field theory applicable? , 1996 .

[9]  Murray Hodgson,et al.  Effect of noise and occupancy on optimal reverberation times for speech intelligibility in classrooms. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[10]  J. S. Bradley,et al.  Speech intelligibility studies in classrooms. , 1986, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[11]  M. Hodgson Evidence of diffuse surface reflections in rooms , 1990 .

[12]  Murray Hodgson,et al.  Rating, ranking, and understanding acoustical quality in university classrooms. , 2002, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.

[13]  A. M. Ondet,et al.  Modeling of sound propagation in fitted workshops using ray tracing , 1989 .

[14]  Murray Hodgson,et al.  Experimental investigation of the acoustical characteristics of university classrooms , 1999 .

[15]  A. Nabelek,et al.  Monaural and binaural speech perception in reverberation for listeners of various ages. , 1982, The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America.