近年ISO建築聲學之隔音量測與評定標準已成為國際上通用性較高之標準,我國隨此趨勢進行CNS建築聲學標準之修訂。目前國內有兩種樓板衝擊音現場量測標準。本研究以住宅樓板為研究對象,以現場量測方式進行樓板衝擊音隔音性能分析,比較CNS兩種量測標準之差異性。此外,針對架高木地板之制振材料位置及吸音材料對於改善樓板衝擊音之效果進行評估。結果顯示CNS 8464與CNS 15160-7在量測所得之衝擊聲壓位準並無明顯差異,但依CNS 15160-7修正等價吸音面積或迴響時間後,聲壓位準L與L'n、L'nT各頻率均相差6 dB以上。樓板總厚度在160 mm至215 mm時,樓板衝擊音單一數值參量僅差1~2 dB,但藉由裝修天花板及架高木地板後可獲得較佳之改善。裝修天花板包含200 mm空氣層時,單一數值參量可降低11 dB,增加架高木地板之高度,單一數值參量可降低3~8 dB。相較於未置入制振墊,置入制振墊後,各頻率可降低 2dB以上。置入玻璃纖維棉後,頻率160 Hz~400 Hz可改善5 dB之樓板衝擊音。
The ISO architectural acoustics measurement and evaluation criteria have become more universal international standard in recent years, we modified Chinese National Standards (CNS) with international trend in Taiwan. In Taiwan, we have two standards of the floor impact sound of field measurement. In this study, our object is residential floor to measure the performance of floor impact sound insulation and compare the two CNS standards in Taiwan. On the other hand, we referred to effect of impact sound on raised wooden floor are placed by vibration- resistant and sound absorbing materials. The results showed that the impact sound pressure level in CNS 8464 and CNS 15160-7 measuring methods was insignificantly. After we amend the equivalent sound absorption area or response time, impact sound pressure level L was differs L'n and L'nT more than 6 dB in each frequency. The floor total thickness of 160 mm to 215 mm, floor impact sound insulation performance was insignificant, the single-number quantity only difference 1 ~ 2 dB; however, we fitting the ceiling and raised wooden floor could improvement floor impact sound. We decorating ceiling with 200 mm air layer, the single –number quantity could be reduced 11 dB. With the height increasing of the raised wooden floor, the single-number quantity could reduce the 3 ~ 8 dB. Comparison did not put up the vibration- resistant pad and put vibration- resistant pad, each frequency could reduce more than 2 dB. Into the glass fiber could improve the frequency of 160 Hz ~ 400 Hz of the floor impact sound reduced more than 5 dB.