Low-Frequency Impact Sound Insulation Descriptors Considering CLT Floors: ISO and ASTM Standards
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Impact sound insulation performance is evaluated using weighted normalized impact sound pressure level (Ln,w) per ISO 717-2 and Impact Insulation Class (IIC) per ASTM E989, both measured using a standardized tapping machine in one-third-octave bands from 100-3150 Hz. Impact sounds below 100 Hz are correlated with subjective human annoyance. To account for low-frequency performance, these standards introduce additional descriptors, such as spectrum adaptation terms (CI,50-2500) in ISO and Low Impact Insulation Class (LIIC) in ASTM. Another test method involves the ISO rubber ball, which closely resembles the excitation of human hearing in the low-frequency range. The resulting spectrum performance is expressed by the standardized maximum impact sound pressure level (LAFmax,V,T). This study examines the correlation between low-frequency impact sound insulation descriptors in ISO and ASTM standards. Various laboratory-based impact sound insulation measurements were conducted on different CLT floor assemblies using both a standardized tapping machine and a rubber ball. ISO and ASTM acoustic descriptors are plotted against LAFmax,V,T. The results show a strong correlation between tapping machine and rubber ball measurements in ISO standards. However, no correlation is observed between LIIC and LAFmax,V,T. Finally, the necessity of considering both standards' descriptors in describing low-frequency impact sound performance is discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".