Sound Absorption Properties of Natural Fibers: A Review
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Sound Absorption Mechanism
2.1. Empirical Model
2.2. Semi-Phenomenological Model
3. Acoustical Characterization
3.1. Impedance Tube Method
3.2. Reverberation Chamber Method
4. Natural Fiber Sound Absorber
4.1. Raw Natural Fiber Sound Absorber
4.2. Natural Fiber Assembly Sound Absorber
4.3. Natural Fiber Composite Sound Absorber
4.4. Comparison of Sound Absorption Performance between Natural Fiber Sound Absorbers
5. Conclusions
Author Contributions
Funding
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Marquis-Favre, C.; Premat, C.; Aubrée, D.; Vallet, M. Noise and Its Effects—A Review on Qualitative Aspects of Sound. Part I: Notions and Acoustic Ratings. Acta Acust. United Acust. 2005, 91, 613–625. [Google Scholar]
- Marquis-Favre, C.; Premat, C.; Aubrée, D. Noise and Its Effects—A Review on Qualitative Aspects of Sound. Part II: Noise and Annoyance. Acta. Acust. United Acust. 2005, 91, 626–642. [Google Scholar]
- Cao, L.; Fu, Q.; Si, Y.; Ding, B.; Yu, J. Porous materials for sound absorption. Compos. Commun. 2018, 10, 25–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Na, Y.; Jeff, L.; Johni, C.; Gilsoo, C. Sound Absorption Coefficients of Micro-Fiber Fabrics by Reverberation Room Method. Text. Res. J. 2007, 77, 330–335. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, T.; Xiong, X.; Mishra, R.; Novák, J.; Militký, J. Acoustic evaluation of Struto nonwovens and their relationship with thermal properties. Text. Res. J. 2018, 88, 426–437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Papadopoulos, A.M. State of the art in thermal insulation materials and aims for future developments. Energy Build. 2005, 37, 77–86. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- European Council Directive 67/548/EEC of 27 June 1967. On the approximation of laws, regulations and administrative provisions relating to the classification, packaging and labelling of dangerous substances. Off. J. Eur. Commun. 1967, 196, 1–98. [Google Scholar]
- Zhu, X.; Kim, B.J.; Wang, Q.W.; Wu, Q. Recent advances in the sound insulation properties of bio-based materials. BioResources 2014, 9, 1764–1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yahya, M.N.; Sheng Chin, D.D.V. A Review on the Potential of Natural Fibre for Sound Absorption Application. In Proceedings of the IOP Conference Series: Materials Science and Engineering, Melaka, Malaysia, 6–7 May 2017; Volume 226, p. 012014. [Google Scholar]
- Asdrubali, F.; Schiavoni, S.; Horoshenkov, K.V. A Review of Sustainable Materials for Acoustic Applications. Build. Acoust. 2013, 19, 283–311. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arenas, J.P.; Crocker, M.J. Recent trends in porous sound-absorbing materials. Sound Vib. 2010, 44, 12–18. [Google Scholar]
- Denton, M.J.; Daniels, P.N. Textile Terms and Definitions; Textile Institute: Manchester, UK, 2002. [Google Scholar]
- Chen, X. Modelling and Predicting Textile Behaviour; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Cox, T.J.; D’Antonio, P. Acoustic Absorbers and Diffusers: Theory, Design and Application, 3rd ed.; Taylor and Francis: New York, NY, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Zwikker, C.; Kosten, C.W. Sound Absorbing Materials; Elsevier: New York, NY, USA, 1949. [Google Scholar]
- Yang, T.; Mishra, R.; Horoshenkov, K.V.; Hurrell, A.; Saati, F.; Xiong, X. A study of some airflow resistivity models for multi-component polyester fiber assembly. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 139, 75–81. [Google Scholar]
- Xue, Y.; Bolton, J.S.; Gerdes, R.; Lee, S.; Herdtle, T. Prediction of airflow resistivity of fibrous acoustical media having two fiber components and a distribution of fiber radii. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 134, 145–153. [Google Scholar]
- Voronina, N. Acoustic properties of fibrous materials. Appl. Acoust. 1994, 42, 165–174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Delany, M.E.; Bazley, E.N. Acoustical properties of fibrous absorbent materials. Appl. Acoust. 1970, 3, 105–116. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Miki, Y. Acoustical properties of porous materials-Modification of Delany-Bazley models. J. Acoust. Soc. Jpn. 1990, 11, 19–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Johnson, D.L.; Koplik, J.; Dashen, R. Theory of dynamic permeability and tortuosity in fluid saturated porous media. J. Fluid Mech. 1987, 176, 379–402. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Champoux, Y.; Allard, J.F. Dynamic tortuosity and bulk modulus in air-saturated porous media. J. Appl. Phys. 1991, 70, 1975–1979. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Lafarge, D.; Lemarinier, P.; Allard, J.F.; Tarnow, V. Dynamic compressibility of air in porous structures at audible frequencies. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1997, 102, 1995–2006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, T.; Xiong, X.; Venkataraman, M.; Mishra, R.; Novák, J.; Militký, J. Investigation on sound absorption properties of aerogel/polymer nonwovens. J. Text. Inst. 2019, 110, 196–201. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, T.; Saati, F.; Horoshenkov, K.V.; Xiong, X.; Yang, K.; Mishra, R.; Marburg, S.; Militký, J. Study on the sound absorption behavior of multi-component polyester nonwovens: Experimental and numerical methods. Text. Res. J. 2019, 89, 3342–3361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Doutres, O.; Salissou, Y.; Atalla, N.; Panneton, R. Evaluation of the acoustic and non-acoustic properties of sound absorbing materials using a three-microphone impedance tube. Appl. Acoust. 2010, 71, 506–509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Jiang, N.; Chen, J.Y.; Parikh, D.V. Acoustical evaluation of carbonized and activated cotton nonwovens. Bioresour. Technol. 2009, 100, 6533–6536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Horoshenkov, K.V. A review of acoustical methods for porous material characterisation. Int. J. Acoust. Vib. 2017, 22, 92–103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Song, B.H.; Bolton, J.S. A transfer-matrix approach for estimating the characteristic impedance and wave numbers of limp and rigid porous materials. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2000, 107, 1131–1152. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pispola, G.; Horoshenkov, K.V.; Asdrubali, F. Transmission loss measurement of consolidated granular media (L). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2005, 117, 2716–2719. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Salissou, Y.; Panneton, R.; Doutres, O. Complement to standard method for measuring normal incidence sound transmission loss with three microphones. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2012, 131, EL216–EL222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Atalla, Y.; Panneton, R. Inverse Acoustical Characterization of Open Cell Porous Media Using Impedance Tube Measurement. Can. Acoust. 2005, 33, 11–24. [Google Scholar]
- Niskanen, M.; Groby, J.P.; Duclos, A.; Dazel, O.; Le Roux, J.C.; Poulain, N.; Huttunen, T.; Lähivaara, T. Deterministic and Statistical Characterization of Rigid Frame Porous Materials from Impedance Tube Measurements. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2017, 142, 2407–2418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Yang, T.; Saati, F.; Groby, J.-P.; Xiong, X.; Petrů, M.; Mishra, R.; Militký, J.; Marburg, S. Characterization on Polyester Fibrous Panels and Their Homogeneity Assessment. Polymers 2020, 12, 2098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- ASTM E1050-19. Standard Test Method for Impedance and Absorption of Acoustical Materials Using a Tube, Two Microphones and a Digital Frequency Analysis System; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2019. [Google Scholar]
- ISO 10534-1. Acoustics—Determination of Sound Absorption Coefficient and Impedance in Impedance Tubes—Part 1: Method Using Standing Wave Ratio; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1996. [Google Scholar]
- ISO 10534-2. Acoustics—Determination of Sound Absorption Coefficient and Impedance in Impedance Tubes—Part 2: Transfer-Function Method; International Organization for Standardization: Geneva, Switzerland, 1998. [Google Scholar]
- ASTM E2611-09. Standard Test Method for Measurement of Normal Incidence Sound Transmission of Acoustical Materials Based on the Transfer Matrix Method; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar]
- Benedetto, G.; Spagnolo, R. Reverberation Time in Enclosures: The Surface Reflection Law and the Dependence of the Absorption Coefficient on the Angle of Incidence. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1985, 77, 1447–1451. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- EN 20354. Acoustics-Measurement of Absorption in a Reverberation Room; European Committee for Standardisation: Brussels, Belgium, 1993. [Google Scholar]
- ASTM C 423-17. Sound Absorption and Sound Absorption Coefficients by the Reverberation Room Method; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA, USA, 2017. [Google Scholar]
- Oldham, D.J.; Egan, C.A.; Cookson, R.D. Sustainable acoustic absorbers from the biomass. Appl. Acoust. 2011, 72, 350–363. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Del Rey, R.; Uris, A.; Alba, J.; Candelas, P. Characterization of sheep wool as a sustainable material for acoustic applications. Materials 2017, 10, 1277. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Shtrepi, L.; Andrea, P. Towards a Sustainable Approach for Sound Absorption Assessment of Building Materials: Validation of Small-Scale Reverberation Room Measurements. Appl. Acoust. 2020, 165, 107304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Del Rey, R.; Alba, J.; Bertó, L.; Gregori, A. Small-Sized Reverberation Chamber for the Measurement of Sound Absorption. Mater. Constr. 2017, 67, 1–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Drabek, P. Comparison of two internationally recognized methods for determining the sound absorption coefficient. In Proceedings of the MATEC Web of Conferences, Crete, Greece, 14–17 July 2017; Volume 125, pp. 1–4. [Google Scholar]
- Horoshenkov, K.V.; Khan, A.; Bécot, F.-X.; Jaouen, L.; Sgard, F.; Pompoli, F.; Prodi, N.; Bonfigli, P.; Pispola, G.; Asdrubali, F.; et al. Reproducibility Experiments on Measuring Acoustical Properties of Rigid-Frame Porous Media (Round-Robin Tests). J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2007, 122, 345–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scrosati, C.; Martellotta, F.; Pompoli, F.; Schiavi, A.; Prato, A.; D’Orazio, D.; Garai, M.; Granzotto, N.; Di Bella, A.; Scamoni, F.; et al. Towards More Reliable Measurements of Sound Absorption Coefficient in Reverberation Rooms: An Inter-Laboratory Test. Appl. Acoust. 2020, 165, 107298. [Google Scholar]
- Ryder, M.L. Report of textiles from Catal Hüyük’ Anatolian Studies. J. Br. Inst. Archaeol. 1965, 15, 175–176. [Google Scholar]
- Kozłowski, R.M. Handbook of Natural Fibers—Volume 1: Types, Properties and Factors Affecting Breeding and Cultivation; Woodhead Publishing: Cambridge, UK, 2020. [Google Scholar]
- Glé, P.; Gourdon, E.; Arnaud, L. Modelling of the acoustical properties of hemp particles. Constr. Build. Mater. 2012, 37, 801–811. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Glé, P.; Gourdon, E.; Arnaud, L.; Horoshenkov, K.V.; Khan, A. The effect of particle shape and size distribution on the acoustical properties of mixtures of hemp particles. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2013, 134, 4698–4709. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Arenas, J.P.; Del Rey, R.; Alba, J.; Oltra, R. Sound-Absorption Properties of Materials Made of Esparto Grass Fibers. Sustainability 2020, 12, 5533. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Iannace, G.; Ciaburro, G.; Trematerra, A. Modelling sound absorption properties of broom fibers using artificial neural networks. Appl. Acoust. 2020, 163, 107239. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putra, A.; Khair, F.A.; Nor, M.J.M. Utilizing Hollow-Structured Bamboo as Natural Sound Absorber. Arch. Acoust. 2015, 40, 601–608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Tang, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, H.; Zhuang, X.; Yan, X. Corn husk for noise reduction: Robust acoustic absorption and reduced thickness. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 134, 60–68. [Google Scholar]
- Tang, X.; Liu, X.; Yan, X. Investigation on the Sound Absorption Properties of Waste Green Tea Residues Covered by Woven Fabric. J. Nat. Fibers 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Zunaidi, N.H.; Tan, W.H.; Majid, M.S.A.; Lim, E.A. Effect of physical properties of natural fibre on the sound absorption coefficient. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2017, 908, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Horoshenkov, K.V.; Khan, A.; Benkreira, H. Acoustic properties of low growing plants. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2013, 133, 2554–2565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Wong, N.H.; Kwang Tan, T.; Tan, P.Y.; Chiang, K.; Wong, N.C. Acoustics evaluation of vertical greenery systems for building walls. Build. Environ. 2010, 45, 411–420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Azkorra, Z.; Pérez, G.; Coma, J.; Cabeza, L.F.; Bures, S.; Álvaro, J.E.; Erkoreka, A.; Urrestarazu, M. Evaluation of Green Walls as a Passive Acoustic Insulation System for Buildings. Appl. Acoust. 2015, 89, 46–56. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Santoni, A.; Fausti, P.; Marescotti, C.; Mazzanti, V.; Mollica, F.; Pompoli, F.; Bonfiglio, P. Improving the sound absorption performance of sustainable thermal insulation materials: Natural hemp fibres. Appl. Acoust. 2019, 150, 279–289. [Google Scholar]
- Berardi, U.; Iannace, G. Acoustic characterization of natural fibers for sound absorption applications. Build. Environ. 2015, 94, 840–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Putra, A.; Or, K.H.; Selamat, M.Z.; Nor, M.J.M.; Hassan, M.H.; Prasetiyo, I. Sound absorption of extracted pineapple-leaf fibres. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 136, 9–15. [Google Scholar]
- Sari, N.H.; Wardana, I.N.G.; Irawan, Y.S.; Siswanto, E. Physical and Acoustical Properties of Corn Husk Fiber Panels. Adv. Acoust. Vib. 2016, 2016, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Yang, S.; Yu, W.; Ning, P. Investigation of the sound-absorbing behavior of fiber assemblies. Text. Res. J. 2010, 81, 673–682. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Or, K.H.; Putra, A.; Selamat, M.Z. Oil palm empty fruit bunch fibres as sustainable acoustic absorber. Appl. Acoust. 2017, 119, 9–16. [Google Scholar]
- Raj, M.; Fatima, S.; Tandon, N. An Experimental and Theoretical Study on Environment-Friendly Sound Absorber Sourced from Nettle Fibers. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 31, 101395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Koruk, H.; Genc, G. Investigation of the Acoustic Properties of Bio Luffa Fiber and Composite Materials. Mater. Lett. 2015, 157, 166–168. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Samaei, S.E.; Mahabadi, H.A.; Mousavi, S.M.; Khavanin, A.; Faridan, M.; Taban, E. The influence of alkaline treatment on acoustical, morphological, tensile and thermal properties of Kenaf natural fibers. J. Ind. Text. 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Soltani, P.; Taban, E.; Faridan, M.; Samaei, S.E.; Amininasab, S. Experimental and computational investigation of sound absorption performance of sustainable porous material: Yucca Gloriosa fiber. Appl. Acoust. 2020, 157, 106999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Da Silva, C.C.B.; Terashima, F.J.H.; Barbieri, N.; De Lima, K.F. Sound absorption coefficient assessment of sisal, coconut husk and sugar cane fibers for low frequencies based on three different methods. Appl. Acoust. 2019, 156, 92–100. [Google Scholar]
- Othmani, C.; Taktak, M.; Zain, A.; Hantati, T.; Dauchez, N.; Elnady, T.; Fakhfakh, T.; Haddar, M. Acoustic characterization of a porous absorber based on recycled sugarcane wastes. Appl. Acoust. 2017, 120, 90–97. [Google Scholar]
- Taban, E.; Tajpoor, A.; Faridan, M.; Samaei, S.E.; Beheshti, M.H. Acoustic Absorption Characterization and Prediction of Natural Coir Fibers. Acoust. Aust. 2019, 47, 67–77. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Qui, H.; Enhui, Y. Effect of Thickness, Density and Cavity Depth on the Sound Absorption Properties of Wool Boards. Autex. Res. J. 2018, 18, 203–208. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Patnaik, A.; Mvubu, M.; Muniyasamy, S.; Botha, A.; Anandjiwala, R.D. Thermal and sound insulation materials from waste wool and recycled polyester fibers and their biodegradation studies. Energy Build. 2015, 92, 161–169. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Piégay, C.; Glé, P.; Gourdon, E.; Gourlay, E.; Marceau, S. Acoustical model of vegetal wools including two types of fibers. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 129, 36–46. [Google Scholar]
- Buratti, C.; Belloni, E.; Lascaro, E.; Merli, F.; Ricciardi, P. Rice husk panels for building applications: Thermal, acoustic and environmental characterization and comparison with other innovative recycled waste materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 171, 338–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Liu, X.; Yan, X.; Zhang, H. Effects of pore structure on sound absorption of kapok-based fiber nonwoven fabrics at low frequency. Text. Res. J. 2016, 86, 739–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fatima, S.; Mohanty, A.R. Acoustical and fire-retardant properties of jute composite materials. Appl. Acoust. 2011, 72, 108–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Küçük, M.; Korkmaz, Y. The effect of physical parameters on sound absorption properties of natural fiber mixed nonwoven composites. Text. Res. J. 2012, 82, 2043–2053. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Ali, M. Microstructure, Thermal Analysis and Acoustic Characteristics of Calotropis Procera (Apple of Sodom) Fibers. J. Nat. Fibers. 2016, 13, 343–352. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mamtaz, H.; Fouladi, M.H.; Al-Atabi, M.; Namasivayam, S.N. Acoustic absorption of natural fiber composites. J. Eng. 2016, 2016, 1–11. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
- Dong, T.; Xu, G.; Wang, F. Adsorption and adhesiveness of kapok fiber to different oils. J. Hazard. Mater. 2015, 296, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ganesan, P.; Karthik, T. Development of acoustic nonwoven materials from kapok and milkweed fibres. J. Text. Inst. 2016, 107, 477–482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Attenborough, K. Sound Dissipation in Porous Media. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, The University of Leeds, Leeds, UK, 1969. [Google Scholar]
- Bravo, T.; Maury, C. Sound Attenuation and Absorption by Anisotropic Fibrous Materials: Theoretical and Experimental Study. J. Sound Vib. 2018, 417, 165–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Dobie, R.A.; Van, H.S. Hearing Loss: Determining Eligibility for Social Security Benefits; National Research Council (US) Committee on Disability Determination for Individuals with Hearing Impairments, Ed.; National Academies Press (US): Washington, DC, USA, 2004. [Google Scholar]
- Zakriya, M.; Ramakrishnan, G.; Gobi, N.; Palaniswamy, N.K.; Srinivasan, J. Jute-reinforced non-woven composites as a thermal insulator and sound absorber—A review. J. Reinf. Plast. Compos. 2017, 36, 206–213. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strobel, J.; Wigley, E.; Evans, N.; Hung, W. BUZZ–Acoustical engineering methodologies to measure student engagement. Proc. Res. Eng. Educ. Symp. 2009, 1, 1–6. [Google Scholar]
- Othmani, C.; Taktak, M.; Zein, A.; Hentati, T.; Elnady, T.; Fakhfakh, T.; Haddar, M.D. Experimental and Theoretical Investigation of the Acoustic Performance of Sugarcane Wastes Based Material. Appl. Acoust. 2016, 109, 90–96. [Google Scholar]
- Xiang, H.F.; Wang, D.; Liua, H.C.; Zhao, N.; Xu, J. Investigation on sound absorption properties of kapok fibers. Chin. J. Polym. Sci. 2013, 31, 521–529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Impedance Tube | Measured Parameter | Main Technique | Standard [35,36,37,38] |
---|---|---|---|
Two-microphone | Sound absorption coefficient (), Reflection coefficient () and Surface impedance () | Standing wave ratio method and transfer function method | ASTM E1050, ISO 10534-1 and ISO 10534-2 |
Three-microphone | Sound absorption coefficient (), Reflection coefficient (), Surface impedance (), Transmission loss (), Dynamic density () and Dynamic bulk modulus () | Transfer function method and two-load method | ASTM E1050, ISO 10534-1, ISO 10534-2 and ASTM E2611 |
Four-microphone | Two-load method | ASTM E1050, ISO 10534-2 and ASTM E2611 |
Researcher | Raw Material | Key Findings |
---|---|---|
Glé et al. [51,52] | Hemp particle | The acoustical properties of hemp particles can be predicted based on the characteristics and configuration of the particles. Particle size distribution has a positive effect on the sound absorption at low-frequency range. |
Arenas et al. [53] | Esparto grass | The sound absorption of raw esparto grass is comparable to traditional glass fiber materials with equivalent thickness. |
Iannace et al. [54] | Broom branch | Broom branch with small diameter has worse sound absorption performance than thicker broom branches. |
Putra et al. [55] | Bamboo | Transverse arranged bamboo showed better sound absorption then axial arranged samples. |
Tang et al. [56] | Corn husk | Corn husk has robust sound absorption because of its groove structure. |
Tang et al. [57] | Green tea residues | The waste green tea residues can be used for sound absorption as filling materials. |
Zunaidi et al. [58] | Rice straw | Rice straw fiber can absorb sound effectively. Fiber mass and diameter have a significant effect on the sound absorption coefficient. |
Horoshenkov et al. [59] | Growing plants | Leaf area density and dominant angle of leaf orientation are two key morphological characteristics for the acoustical properties. |
Wong et al. [60] | Vertical greenery systems | The vertical greenery system is one of the best sound absorbers compared with other building materials and furnishings. |
Researcher | Fiber Assembly | Key Findings |
---|---|---|
Santoni et al. [62] | Hemp fiber | An alkaline treatment performed on the hemp fiber after two combing processes can modify the morphology, then the acoustical performance can be further improved. |
Berardi and Iannace [63] | Kenaf fiber | Increasing the density from 50 kg/m3 to 100 kg/m3 results in sound absorption increasing at the frequency range of 200–2000 Hz. |
Wood fiber | Wood fiber sample with 6 cm thickness exhibits high sound absorption coefficient at 500 Hz and 1650 Hz. | |
Coconut fiber | Raw coconut fiber has good sound absorption coefficient at both low and medium frequencies. | |
Sheep wool | The sound absorption coefficient of sheep wool is high at medium and high frequencies, with a homogenous behavior. | |
Putra et al. [64] | Pineapple-leaf fiber | The pineapple-leaf fiber has comparable sound absorption coefficients with those of mineral wool and synthetic polyurethane foam. |
Sari et al. [65] | Corn husk fiber | The 20 mm thickness corn husk fiber panels treated in 2% and 5% showed 100% sound absorption in the low-frequency range from 1600 Hz to 3250 Hz. |
Yang et al. [66] | Cashmere fiber | The sound absorption of cashmere fibers increased gradually with increased density. |
Goose down | Goose down has much better sound absorption performance than those of cashmere fibers and acrylic fibers with the same density (i.e., ~11.8 kg/m3). | |
Kapok fiber | The sound absorption of kapok fiber has a small difference in the density range of 11.8–47.2 kg/m3. | |
Oldham et al. [42] | Cotton fiber | Cotton fiber has similar sound absorption properties with rock wool and glass fiber. |
Jute fiber | Although jute fiber has a larger diameter, the sound absorption characteristics are similar to wool fiber. | |
Sisal fiber | The sound absorption property of sisal fiber is relatively poor. | |
Or et al. [67] | Oil palm empty fruit bunch fiber | The fiber assembly with thicknesses of 40 mm and 50 mm having a density of 292 kg/m3 exhibited good sound absorption with a coefficient of 0.9 on average above 1 kHz. |
Raj et al. [68] | Nettle fiber | Nettle fiber needle punched nonwoven with 56 mm thickness and 90 kg/m3 density showed an optimum sound absorption. |
Koruk and Genc [69] | Luffa fiber | Sound absorption coefficients of a luffa fiber sample with a small thickness (12 mm) was quite high. |
Researcher | Composite | Production Method | Key Findings |
---|---|---|---|
Samaei et al. [70] | kenaf fiber + polyvinyl alcohol (PVA) | Glued together under pressure | The kenaf fiber treated in 6% concentration of NaOH had thinner diameter, better appearance and superior sound absorption than untreated fiber. |
Soltani et al. [71] | Yucca Gloriosa fiber + PVA | Glued together under pressure | The Johnson–Champoux–Allard model can precisely predict the acoustical properties of Yucca Gloriosa (YG) fiber. The YG fiber absorbed the sound effectively. |
Da Silva et al. [72] | Sisal fiber (or coconut husk) + PVA | Glued together under pressure | The sisal and coconut husk composites exhibited similar values of sound absorption although they have different microscopic structures. |
Othmani et al. [73] | Sugar cane + Resin | Glued together | Sugar cane is a good sound absorber at medium and high frequencies. |
Taban et al. [74] | Coir fiber + PVA | Glued together under pressure | Thicker coir fiber composite has a higher sound absorption coefficient. The Johnson–Champoux–Allard model can be used to predict the acoustic behavior of coir fiber composite. |
Qui et al. [75] | Coarse wool + Binding fibers | Laminated by heat pressing | Wool composite has an excellent sound absorption property |
Patnaik et al. [76] | Waste wool + recycled polyester fiber (RPET) | Needle punched | The RPET/waste wool composite exhibits the best sound absorption, thermal insulation, moisture absorption and fire properties. |
Piégay et al. [77] | Flax fiber + Polyester fiber | Thermal bonded | The sound absorption performance of flax fiber/polyester fiber composite is excellent in the frequency range of 1000–2000 Hz. |
Hemp fiber + Polyester fiber | Thermal bonded | Hemp fiber/polyester fiber composite has poor mid-frequency sound absorption performance although it has two times the thickness of flax fiber/polyester fiber composite. | |
Buratti et al. [78] | Rice husk + Polyurethane glue | Glued together | The rice husk composite in general presented better sound absorption properties than those of loose rice husk. |
Liu et al. [79] | Kapok fiber + Polyester fiber | Needle punched | Smaller pore diameter or greater porosity showed better sound absorption at low frequency for kapok composite. |
Fatima and Mohanty [80] | Jute fiber + Natural rubber latex | Glued together | Jute composite shows more significant acoustical attenuation properties than glass fiber. |
Küçük and Korkmaz [81] | Cotton + Polyester | Thermal bonded | The cotton/polyester composite resulted in the best sound absorption coefficient in the mid-to-high frequency ranges. |
Ali [82] | Calotropis + Resin | Glued together | High density Calotropis composite exhibited a good sound abruption behavior at high frequencies. |
Material | Thickness mm | Porosity % | Bulk Density kg/m3 | Fiber Diameter μm | Airflow Resistivity Pa s/m2 | Measured Frequency Hz | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Glass fiber | 25.4 | 98.7 | 28.8 | 7 | 8974 | 300–5000 | [86,87] |
Kenaf fiber + PVA | 30 | >85 | 200 | 68.23 ± 5.65 | 6210 | 63–6300 | [70] |
Yucca Gloriosa fiber | 30 | 85.24 | 200 | 130.8 | 17,730 | 63–6300 | [71] |
Sisal fiber + PVA | 20 | N/A | 214.6 ± 8.8 | 202 ± 64 | 4180 ± 336 | 172–2000 | [72] |
30 | N/A | 214.6 ± 8.8 | 202 ± 64 | 4180 ± 336 | |||
Coconut husk + PVA | 20 | N/A | 202.3 ± 14.6 | 190 ± 69 | 4559 ± 387 | ||
30 | N/A | 202.3 ± 14.6 | 190 ± 69 | 4559 ± 387 | |||
Sugar cane + PVA | 20 | N/A | 200.8 ± 10.8 | 384 ± 134 | 6480 ± 796 | ||
30 | N/A | 200.8 ± 10.8 | 384 ± 134 | 6480 ± 796 | |||
Coir fiber | 25 | 75.23 | 130 | 263 | 4810 | 63–6300 | [74] |
Coarse wool + Binding fibers | 12 | N/A | 249.54 | >50 | N/A | 60–6300 | [75] |
18 | N/A | 249.54 | >50 | N/A | |||
24 | N/A | 249.54 | >50 | N/A | |||
Pineapple-leaf fiber | 10 | N/A | 117 | N/A | N/A | 500–4500 | [64] |
20 | N/A | 117 | N/A | N/A | |||
30 | N/A | 117 | N/A | N/A | |||
Rice husk + Glue | 15 | 59.7 | 170 | N/A | N/A | 200–6400 | [78] |
Hemp fiber | 25 | N/A | 141 | 18.4 | N/A | 1000–4500 | [62] |
30 | N/A | 117 | 18.4 | N/A |
Material | Thickness mm | Porosity % | Bulk Density kg/m3 | Fiber Diameter μm | Airflow Resistivity Pa s/m2 | Measured Frequency Hz | Reference |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Glass fiber | 50.8 | 98.7 | 28.8 | 7 | 8974 | 300–6000 | [86,87] |
Sisal fiber + PVA | 40 | N/A | 214.6 ± 8.8 | 202 ± 64 | 4180 ± 336 | 172–2000 | [72] |
Coconut husk + PVA | 40 | N/A | 202.3 ± 14.6 | 190 ± 69 | 4559 ± 387 | ||
Sugar cane + PVA | 40 | N/A | 200.8 ± 10.8 | 384 ± 134 | 6480 ± 796 | ||
Sugar cane + Resin | 35 | N/A | N/A | 500–700 | 61,857 | 50–4000 | [91] |
Coir fiber | 35 | 76.12 | 130 | 263 | 4680 | 63–6300 | [74] |
Coir fiber | 45 | 76.90 | 130 | 263 | 4535 | ||
Flax + Polyester | 50 | N/A | 67 | 26.4 | 13,005 ± 260 | 143–1993 | [77] |
Hemp + Polyester | 100 | N/A | 45 | 44.2 | 2845 ± 70 | ||
Hemp fiber | 40 | N/A | 88 | 18.4 | 12,503 | 500–4500 | [62] |
60 | N/A | 59 | 18.4 | N/A | |||
Pineapple-leaf fiber | 40 | N/A | 117 | N/A | N/A | 500–4500 | [64] |
60 | N/A | 117 | N/A | N/A | |||
Kapok fiber | 60 | 97.7 | 8.3 | 15–23 | N/A | 100–6300 | [92] |
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. |
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Yang, T.; Hu, L.; Xiong, X.; Petrů, M.; Noman, M.T.; Mishra, R.; Militký, J. Sound Absorption Properties of Natural Fibers: A Review. Sustainability 2020, 12, 8477. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208477
Yang T, Hu L, Xiong X, Petrů M, Noman MT, Mishra R, Militký J. Sound Absorption Properties of Natural Fibers: A Review. Sustainability. 2020; 12(20):8477. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208477
Chicago/Turabian StyleYang, Tao, Lizhu Hu, Xiaoman Xiong, Michal Petrů, Muhammad Tayyab Noman, Rajesh Mishra, and Jiří Militký. 2020. "Sound Absorption Properties of Natural Fibers: A Review" Sustainability 12, no. 20: 8477. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12208477