Topic: Physical properties of common building material (Read 8884 times)

Sigert · « **on:** February 23, 2009, 07:23:50 AM »

Hi all,

I'm usually a silent observer, but one can't stay mute forever. I want to assemble a list of common building materials and their densities. But before I get into it, I thought I'd ask if maybe anyone already has such a list.

Second question: would there be other basic physical properties that would be of interest to a designer/acoustician? Properties that can be put into a relatively simple list.

Thomas Jouanjean · « **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2009, 09:54:54 AM »

Welcome Sigert!

AFAIC, I bought the lists from Labs etc, or I got them included with the softwares (ODEON - Combined industrial and auditorium for ex). For some specific ones, I paid to have private measurements done.

They do tend to get a bit crowded and confusing...

Other interesting infos (when available) are of resilience / elasticity, density, Fire rated or not etc.

Lots of lists are available on the net I think, the problem being that the source is often omitted, which doesn't always make them very solid.

Sigert · « **Reply #2 on:** February 23, 2009, 11:14:23 AM »

I have some time on my hands next week, so in any case I was going to skim the www for relevant data. I want to maximize the return of my effort by knowing what to look for AND by making sure I'm not sucking eggs doing work already done by other forum users.

I contacted a friend at the physics department of Leuven University to help me gather data aswell.

So, thusfar the list of parameters-to-be-listed would be:
-density
-fire rating
-resillience/elasticity

Sigert · « **Reply #3 on:** February 25, 2009, 08:47:46 AM »

How about industry standard dimensions? That one sounds usefull aswell.

Thomas Jouanjean · « **Reply #4 on:** February 25, 2009, 10:31:31 AM »

It will vary with every type of material. And sometimes from one brand to the other.

This is just one of those things you need to deal with while drawing plans and on construction sites. You get to learn all this pretty fast anyway.

No big deal. There is always a solution.

J.F.Oros · « **Reply #5 on:** February 25, 2009, 11:18:30 AM »

Thomas Jouanjean wrote on Mon, 23 February 2009 16:54

[...] I got them included with the softwares (ODEON - Combined industrial and auditorium for ex)[...]

Thomas, if i don't ask too much with this, can u tell me if you use Odeon for small room projects LF prediction (i know its mainly designed for large room acoustics)? Or maybe you use some kind of FEM/BEM software for that ? Thank you!

Thomas Jouanjean · « **Reply #6 on:** February 25, 2009, 12:37:37 PM »

J.F.Oros wrote on Wed, 25 February 2009 10:18

Thomas, if i don't ask too much with this, can u tell me if you use Odeon for small room projects LF prediction (i know its mainly designed for large room acoustics)? Or maybe you use some kind of FEM/BEM software for that ? Thank you!

Sorry, I don't wish to go into details - but Odeon gets it's fair share of use on almost all projects - it's a good software for many things. But I don't like the way of drawing surfaces in Odeon, and the transfer of CAD files is often a pain.

One thing, I don't design "in the software", I just do certain verifications on the models in the softwares.

Otherwise I use a pen and paper a lot too Smile

... and CAD.

J.F.Oros · « **Reply #7 on:** February 25, 2009, 01:18:08 PM »

Thank you for answering Thomas. It wasn't my intention to make you enter on details of course (i'm myself a bit of studio designer too and i know that some things we have to keep them under radar Very Happy

), i was mainly trying to find your opinion/experiences on using Odeon for small room acoustics (I only used CATT a little for acoustics modeling).

But I got your point anyway, thank you again and sorry for hijacking the original topic Smile

PS: pen & paper & CAD are my best friends too Very Happy

andrebrito · « **Reply #8 on:** February 25, 2009, 06:13:08 PM »

I think it is more important to use ODEON and other software in tracking rooms or large control roomsc where diffusion plays significant role.

I have only used them once in a small room but I will use it again in a project I'm doing for a small control room

andrebrito · « **Reply #9 on:** February 26, 2009, 10:14:30 AM »

About the initial question...

density, elasticity, maybe an Rw value or R or k if applicable, colour and method of application if particular

andrebrito · « **Reply #10 on:** February 27, 2009, 04:51:21 PM »

I think placing thermal properties (R or k) is as important as acoustics. In building regulations both are mandatory and go hand in hand.

Sigert · « **Reply #11 on:** February 27, 2009, 08:13:20 PM »

A quick (latenight) search tells me 'k' stands for Thermal conductivity and 'R' for Thermal resistance.

At first glance they seem totally usefull. Can anyone tell us more on these here factors?

Thomas Jouanjean · « **Reply #12 on:** February 28, 2009, 06:35:40 AM »

They are actually a good indicator of acoustical performance - when you get to know how to read them with that in mind. Not a rule, but a good overall guide.

It's often linked to density / resistance to flow properties.

Sigert · « **Reply #13 on:** March 02, 2009, 11:52:28 AM »

Conductivity and Resistance: sounds like direct opposites of eachother.

What is this Rw value you spoke about, Andre?

So, thusfar the list of parameters-to-be-listed would be:
-density
-fire rating
-resillience/elasticity
-Thermal conductivity
-Thermal resistance

Thomas Jouanjean · « **Reply #14 on:** March 02, 2009, 12:53:25 PM »

Sigert wrote on Mon, 02 March 2009 10:52

Conductivity and Resistance: sounds like direct opposites of eachother.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thermal_conductivity#Thermal_co nductance

Sigert wrote on Mon, 02 March 2009 10:52

What is this Rw value you spoke about, Andre?

R(w) indicates reduction of aerial sound transmission. It's the difference between two measurements (with and without soundproofing) in a lab.

ΔR(w)= Measurement 1- Measurement 2

R(w)+C indicates measurements done with pink noise to compensate for the human hear sensitivity (see dB(A))
http://ccrma.stanford.edu/~jos/st/DBA_A_Weighted_DB.html

ΔL(w) is the equivalent but for solidian noises. So it's reduction of impact noise. L(n,w).

You can't compare those two directly. You could have a high R(w) with a low L(n,w) and vice versa.

Sigert · « **Reply #15 on:** March 02, 2009, 09:34:49 PM »

Great stuff. Some data available there aswell. Let's see if it matches out to other sources.

I should realy stop reading forums at 3:30 at night. Sleep tight guys... ZZZzzz

Sigert · « **Reply #16 on:** March 03, 2009, 07:06:35 AM »

List of common building materials so far:
-Brick
-Concrete
-Mortar
-Gypsumboard
-Glass
-Fiberglass
-Wood OSB
-Wood MDF
-Wood Plywood
-Wood Strawboard

andrebrito · « **Reply #17 on:** March 03, 2009, 03:02:39 PM »

For curiosity, in buidig acoustics, you use R(w)+C or R(w) + Ctr according to the type of outside noise, if it has low frequency content or not

Sigert · « **Reply #18 on:** March 03, 2009, 05:38:48 PM »

I can't find much up-to-date info on either correction value. Are they still in use?

andrebrito · « **Reply #19 on:** March 03, 2009, 06:25:00 PM »

Yes, they are and at least where I live they are used for the facade building.

What happens is that if you have the values of sound insulation over frequency you can calculate the Rw and C or Ctr

franman · « **Reply #20 on:** March 03, 2009, 09:07:51 PM »

Sigert wrote on Tue, 03 March 2009 07:06

List of common building materials so far:
-Brick
-Concrete
-Mortar
-Gypsumboard
-Glass
-Fiberglass
-Wood OSB
-Wood MDF
-Wood Plywood
-Wood Strawboard

Fiberglass is toooo broad a material.. many, many submaterials within this broader heading, and they each have unique acoustic properties.. Rigid Fiberglass by density and thickness, Fiberglass batt by thickness, Mineral wool by thickness and density.. on and on and on... FWIW

We also have a database assembled from many texts and other sources over the years.. Use it on a daily basis for everything from calculating mass or structures to be floated, to calculating RT and for plugging in values in various simulations...

Sigert · « **Reply #21 on:** March 04, 2009, 09:36:17 AM »

I adapted the list a bit.

Parameters:
-Density
-Resillience/Elasticity
-Aerial sound transmission loss (Rw) + correction factors 'C' and 'Ctr'
-Solidian sound transmission loss (Lw)
-Thermal conductivity
-Thermal resistance
-Fire rating (General, Smokeproduction and Fallout)

Materials:
Cement, Portland
Concrete, Gravel
Concrete, limestone & Portland
Glass, window glass
Metal, Aluminium
Metal, Cast iron
Metal, Framing steel
Other, Gypsum board
Sand, Dry sand
Stone, Limestone
Stone, Marble
Stone, Red brick
Wood, Douglas fir
Wood, Strawboard
Wood, MDF
Wood, OSB
Wood, Plywood

Sigert · « **Reply #22 on:** March 06, 2009, 06:52:57 AM »

Density didn't seem to hard to find out. Except MDF, Plywood, OSB and fiberboard. From what I understand, their density is similar to that of the wood they're made of. Anyone have any info/experience to support this?

What's the difference between MDF and fibreboard anyway? Trying to avoid faulty translations.

tom eaton · « **Reply #23 on:** March 06, 2009, 08:33:19 AM »

I'm not sure what plain "fiberboard" is, as here in the states that would be close to an acoustic fiber sheet (a brown semi rigid 4x8 panel).

Second pic down here:
http://www.rdbmagazine.com/publication/article.jsp?pubId=1&a mp;id=4&pageNum=4

MDF (Medium Density Fiberboard, sometimes called particle board) is sawdust and glue, and is denser than plywood. Chipboard is made of roughly 1"x1" flakes of wood compressed and glued... less dense than MDF. OSB (oriented strand board) is between the two density wise, and has more structural integrity than either.

OSB is generally tongue and groove, and won't fall apart when wet like MDF does.

tom

Sigert · « **Reply #24 on:** March 06, 2009, 02:18:37 PM »

These are the times I wish the whole world had only one language. But Esperanto didn't catch on, did it? Smile

What I mean with fiberboard is what we call 'spaanplaat' in Dutch.
http://www.4izons.nl/hubo/images/spaanplaat.jpg

Sigert · « **Reply #25 on:** March 09, 2009, 10:22:48 PM »

Made a draft, a first version with the data I collected so far. Sorry in advance for not listing sources. They were to numerous. If I made any faulty translations or conversions, please point them out to me.
http://users.telenet.be/sigertdejean/downloads/physical%20pr operties%20draft01.pdf

Sigert · « **Reply #26 on:** March 12, 2009, 12:17:51 PM »

Just noticed my last post has a faulty link in it.

Modest update. Some new, some adjusted/corrected.
http://users.telenet.be/sigertdejean/downloads/draft02.pdf]

Sigert · « **Reply #27 on:** March 16, 2009, 04:18:26 PM »

Contribution, anyone?

R/E/P Community

Author Topic: Physical properties of common building material (Read 8884 times)