ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA

Vol. 97 (2011) 607 – 617

DOI 10.3813/AAA.918441

Theoretical Determination of the

Random-Incidence Scattering Coefficients of
Infinite Rigid Surfaces with a Periodic
Rectangular Roughness Profile

Jean-Jacques Embrechts, Alexis Billon

Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, Intelsig group, University of Liège, Sart-Tilman
B28, 4000 Liège 1, Belgium. jjembrechts@ulg.ac.be

Summary
An exact solution is developed for the sound field reflected by an infinite rigid rough surface with a periodic
rectangular profile. The random-incidence scattering coefficient of this surface is derived from the numerical
calculation of this solution for several directions of the incident plane wave. Scattering coefficients’ values are
given in this paper for a great number of configurations by varying the geometrical parameters of the periodic
profile, leading to a very detailed description of the scattering properties of this kind of profile. In particular, it
is shown that, when the ratio H/L of the depth to the spatial period of the profile is small, the key parameter is
H/λ, the ratio of the depth of the profile to the wavelength. The random-incidence scattering coefficient tends
to increase with this ratio, as long as H/λ is less than 0.3. This evolution is similar to Gaussian and sine-
shaped profiles analysed in previous studies. For H/λ > 0.3, the coefficient’s value oscillates while converging
to an asymptotic value which depends on the width of the wells. Resonance effects have also been highlighted
for periodic rectangular profiles, in particular by comparing the computed scattering coefficients with the few
measured values published in the scientific literature. The scattering coefficients’ values published in this paper
can be introduced in room acoustics’ models to characterize periodic rectangular surfaces, provided that their
dimensions are much greater than the wavelength. Additional measurements and BEM computations are required
to deeply analyse the influence of the finite size and the acoustical absorption of real surfaces having this profile.
PACS no. 43.55.Br, 43.55.Mc

1. Introduction presently available. Some of them can be found for specific

In room acoustics, the scattering coefficient describes the
ability of a surface to redirect the incident sound energy
outside the specular direction. It is defined as the ratio of
the diffusely reflected energy to the total reflected energy,
“diffuse” being equivalent to “non-specular” in this defini-
tion [1, 2].
This coefficient must not be confused with the diffusion
coefficient [2, 3] of a surface, which instead describes the
uniformity of the spatial distribution of the reflected en-
ergy. This paper deals with the scattering coefficient (sym-
bol: s).
The influence of diffuse reflections in room acoustics
has been demonstrated and discussed by several authors,
for example by [2, 4, 5, 6]. Therefore, most room acous-
tics programs today take into account the scattering prop-
erties of surfaces through random-incidence scattering co-
efficients. However, only few values of this coefficient are
Received 27 January 2011,
accepted 28 April 2011.
surfaces in the book written by Cox and D’Antonio about
acoustic absorbers and diffusers [2]. Also, some laborato-
ries (most of them in universities) have set up equipments
in order to measure the random-incidence scattering coef-
ficient of some surfaces according to the ISO standard [1].
These measurements have been performed in real-scale
reverberation chambers [7, 8, 9, 10] or in scale-models
[7, 11]. The amount of results obtained and published by
these laboratories is however rather limited.
The users of room acoustics programs are thus often
confronted with the problem of estimating the scattering
coefficients of the surfaces included in their room model.
Some indications are sometimes given by the author of
their software, or by other users [12]. But, most of the time,
they must be satisfied with a very crude estimation based
on the relative dimensions of the roughness profiles with
respect to the wavelength.
Besides measurements, scattering coefficients can also
be obtained by numerical developments. Several meth-
ods have been proposed and applied, to periodic or non-
periodic roughness profiles, finite or infinite surfaces [2, 8,

© S. Hirzel Verlag · EAA 607

ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
Vol. 97 (2011)

13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18]. In particular, sine-shaped surfaces

have been recently investigated [13, 14]. They are char-
acterized by their
√ peak-to-peak amplitude p (or their rms
height σ = p/ 8) and their spatial period L. It has been
shown that their random-incidence scattering coefficient
significantly increases with the ratio σ/λ (λ is the wave-
length) until an asymptotic value srand 0.85 is reached
for a value of this ratio being approximately equal to 0.15.
In this respect, sine-shaped roughness profiles seem to be-
have quite similarly as random Gaussian profiles [18], but
this holds as long as the ratio σ/L is less than about 0.1,
otherwise different evolutions of the scattering coefficient
have been observed.
This kind of information can be really interesting for
the users of room acoustics programs. Indeed, periodic or
quasi-periodic surfaces’ profiles are not unusual in room
acoustics (they can even be very attractive from an archi-
tectural point of view, as pointed out in [19]) and they are
characterized by only few geometrical parameters whose
influence could be very intuitive. As their scattering coef-
ficient is often derived for surfaces with an infinite size,
it characterizes the scattering due to the roughness profile
only. However, this can be viewed as an inconvenience, in
particular when theoretical results are compared with mea-
surements performed on finite samples, as will be shown
later in this paper.
In this study, another periodic roughness profile is sys-
tematically investigated: the rectangular or square wave
Figure 1. Definition of the parameters of the periodic rectangular
profile: the spatial period L, the width 2A and the depth H of the
wells. The incident plane wave impinging along vector k gener-
ates several reflected plane waves, among which is the “mode n”.
profile does not depend on the y-coordinate. It is also a
rigid (perfectly reflecting) surface.
In this first step of the mathematical developments, the
incident sound field is a plane wave propagating in the di-
rection of the wave vector k, included in the vertical plane
(x, z). The angle φ0 is the angle of incidence between k
and the plane (z = 0). The norm of the wave vector k is
the wavenumber k = 2π/λ, where λ is the wavelength of
the incident wave.
The sound field reflected by an infinite periodic surface
can be expressed by a sum of plane waves [13, 21]. If the
incident plane is perpendicular to the corrugations as in
Figure 1, then the incident and reflected pressure fields do
not depend on the y-coordinate,
pinc (x, z) = e jk(x cos φ0 −z sin φ0 ) ,
profile (see Figure 1). This simple profile will be referred
in the following as the periodic rectangular profile (though
other names can be found in the literature such as “peri-
odic binary sample” [20] or “periodically uneven surface
of rectangular profile” [19]) The scattering coefficients of
infinite surfaces having this periodic profile are obtained
by the method of wave decomposition and mode match-
ing. The waveguide approach is then applied to find the
amplitudes of the radiating plane waves reflected by these
surfaces. From these amplitudes, the scattering coefficient
is computed first for oblique incidence (in section 2), and
then for random incidence (in section 3). Numerical val-
ues of the random-incidence scattering coefficient are pre-
sented in section 3 for a great number of combinations of
the roughness profile’s geometrical parameters, allowing
for a quite complete description of the scattering properties
by αn
of this kind of surfaces. Furthermore, the results obtained
for this periodic rectangular profile are compared with the
scattering coefficients of other profiles in section 4. Fi-
nally, the relation with measured scattering coefficients is
investigated in section 5.
2. Theoretical determination of the sound
2
field scattered by an infinite surface with
R0
. (3)
a periodic rectangular profile
Figure 1 gives a geometrical description of this surface and
the definition of its parameters: the spatial wavelength L,
the depth H and the width 2A of the wells. The roughness
608

prefl (x, z) = Rn e jk(x cos φn +z sin φn ) (1)
n
+ evanescent waves, z > 0.
This equation shows that the reflected pressure is com-
posed of radiating plane waves (first term) and evanescent
waves. The reflection coefficient Rn is the unknown com-
plex amplitude of the reflected plane wave number n and
the angle φn defines its direction (see Figure 1). This angle
is given by [13, 21]
λ
cos φn = αn = cos φ0 + n . (2)
L
The evanescent waves in (1) have a similar expression as
the radiating waves, except that cos φn is replaced
(|αn | > 1) and sin φn is replaced by β n = j αn2 − 1 [13,
21].
The amplitude R0 corresponding to the radiating wave
n = 0 is the specular reflection coefficient. Therefore, as
the surface is assumed to be perfectly reflecting, the direc-
tional scattering coefficient is, by definition (one minus the
specularly reflected power),
s(φ0 , k) = 1 −
To find the unknown complex amplitudes Rn , Holford [21]
proposed a method based on the general Helmholtz inte-
gral formulation. This procedure was already applied to
find the scattering coefficients of an infinite sine-shaped
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)

surface [13]. However, Holford’s method requires that the Furthermore, if ptot = pinc +prefl in (1), the gradient must
periodic profile could be expressed by a continuous func- satisfy the following conditions in z = 0:
tion z = f (x), a condition which cannot be met by the
periodic rectangular profile. ∂ptot L
= 0 for − + mL ≤ x < −A + mL
We rather use a method recently described by Ducour- ∂z 2
L
neau et al. [22], which considers the periodic rectangular and A + mL < x ≤ + mL, (7)
2
profile as an ensemble of waveguides. This waveguide ap- ∂ptot ∂pm
proach had already been described in several papers, for = for − A + mL < x < A + mL.
∂z ∂z
example in [19, 23]. A system of equations is derived for
the reflection coefficients Rn associated with each reflected By imposing these boundary conditions, the reflection co-
wave in (1), including the evanescent waves. efficients Rn are expressed
as functions of the coefficients
In the following, the mathematical developments lead- A
u,m . If we define βn = 1 − αn2 (if |αn | ≤ 1) or βn =
ing to this system of equations are described. The reader j αn2 − 1 (otherwise),
who is not interested by these developments can directly
2A 
+∞
move to equation (9) without loss of comprehension.
βn Rn = sin φ0 (2 − εn ) + Au,m e−jkα0 mL Xu
The wave equation is first solved to find the complex kL
u=0
pressure pm (x, z) into the rectangular wells (m is an inte-   ∗
ger indicating the number of each well). Rigid boundary · e jXu H −e−jXu H
Uu,n . (8)
conditions are imposed on the surfaces composing each
well, In this expression, (Uu,n )∗ is the complex conjugate of Uu,n .
Finally, by replacing Au,m in (8) by its value in (6), an infi-
∂pm nite system of equations for the coefficients Rn is obtained,
in z = −H : = 0 for − A + mL < x < A + mL,
∂z
∂pm 
+∞
in x = ±A + mL : = 0 for − H < z < 0. (4) βn Rn = sin φ0 (2 − εn ) + Yn,0 + Rr Yn,r
∂x
r=−∞

The solution for the complex pressure is the following (u − ∞ < n < +∞, (9)
is an integer): 2A 
+∞
   ∗
Yn,r = εu Xu tanh jXu H Uu,n Uu,r .
kL

+∞   u=0
pm (x, z) = Au,m e jXu (z+H) + e−jXu (z+H)
u=0 A solution can be found for the coefficients Rn if this
  system (9) is truncated to a finite number of equations
cos kxu (x − A − mL) . (5)
(−N ≤ n ≤ N): N is the first parameter of the solution.

It must be “great enough” to properly evaluate the most
2
In this equation, kxu = uπ/(2A)

and Xu = k 2 − kxu if significant reflection coefficients, and particularly R0 . One
2
|kxu | ≤ k, otherwise Xu = j kxu − k 2 . way of verifying this is to compute the total fraction of en-
The constants Au,m in (5) are then expressed as func- ergy reflected in the far field. Since the surface is infinite
tions of the reflection coefficients Rn , by imposing that the and perfectly reflecting, we must have [13]
complex pressure pm (x) in z = 0 is equal to the sum of  2 
Rn sin φn sin φ0 = 1. (10)
the incident and the reflected pressures in (1), at least for
−A + mL < x < A + mL. This gives αn2 ≤1

  The expression of Yn,r in (9) includes an infinite sum. For

Au,m e jXu (z+H) + e−jXu (z+H) u → +∞, it can be shown that the absolute value of the

 terms decreases as 1/u3 . Therefore, this series has been

+∞
jkα0 mL
= εu e Uu,0 + Rn Uu,n , truncated to a finite number of terms, in such a way that
n=−∞ the magnitude of the relative truncation error is less than
jkαn 1   EPS: EPS is the second parameter of the solution.
jkAαn u −jkAαn
Uu,n = e − (−1) e Also, to speed up the calculations, it is worth noting that
2A kxu2
− k 2 αn2
if kαn = ±kxu , Yn,r = −(Yn,r )∗ , since Xu tanh(jXu H) is a pure imaginary
1 ±juπ/2 complex number.
Uu,n = e if kαn = ±kxu . (6)
2 Gaussian elimination and back substitution [24] have
been used to solve the system (9) with (2N +1) equations.
In this expression, εu = 1 if u = 0, otherwise εu = 2. Note Before analysing the results, we will now study the influ-
that the value of Uu,n does not depend on the number of ence of both parameters N and EPS on the solution. Sev-
the period m. Therefore, the only factor depending on this eral calculations of the directional scattering coefficient
number in the value of Au,m is e jkα0 mL . (3) have been made, for 0.1 ≤ L/λ ≤ 10, 0.1 ≤ H/L ≤ 1

609
ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
Vol. 97 (2011)

and 10◦ ≤ φ0 ≤ 90◦ . They first showed that the dif-

ferences between the scattering coefficients obtained with
EP S = 10−3 and EP S = 10−5 were less than 0.005,
for all cases. Concerning the influence of the parameter
N, five values have been tested for all geometrical con-
figurations (N = 3, 5, 10, 20, 50). The first two values
(N = 3 and 5) are definitively too small. The results sig-
nificantly converge from N = 10, but N = 20 is necessary
to reach differences in the scattering coefficients which are
less than 0.01 in most cases.
Figure 2 is an illustration of this study. It shows the
directional scattering coefficients computed for H/L =
0.49 and φ0 = 30◦ . Clearly, if the solution is still accept- Figure 2. The directional scattering coefficients of an infinite
able with N = 10 if L/λ ≤ 6, it is not at higher frequen- rigid surface with a periodic rectangular profile (H/L = 0.49)
cies. This is also illustrated in Figure 3, by the differences for an angle of incidence φ0 = 30◦ and several values of the
with the case N = 50. parameter N.
In the following, all calculations are performed with
EP S = 10−3 and N = 50.

3. Theoretical determination of the

random-incidence scattering coefficient
The determination of the random-incidence scattering co-
efficient requires the calculation of the directional coeffi-
cient for several directions of incidence, situated in and
also outside the plane perpendicular to the corrugations of
the surface. In reference [13], it is first shown that the scat-
tering coefficient for a direction of incidence making an
angle θ0 = 0 with the vertical plane (x, z) can be derived
from the corresponding scattering coefficient in θ0 = 0 by
simply shifting the frequency (“k” becomes “k cos θ0 ”),
the angle φ0 being the angle between the projection of the Figure 3. The directional scattering coefficients of an infinite
wave vector k in the plane (x, z) and the plane z = 0. rigid surface with periodic rectangular profile (H/L = 0.49):
This finally gives the random-incidence scattering coeffi- this Figure shows the differences between the coefficients calcu-
cient for a frequency f (see Figure 3 and equation (11) of lated with N = 5, 10 or 20 and the coefficients of the same profile
[13] for more details), obtained with N = 50. The angle of incidence is φ0 = 30◦ .

4 π/2
srand (f ) = sin φ0 dφ0 (11)
π 0 In the following, this double integral is solved for sev-
 f  2
f s(φ0 , θ0 = 0, k = 2πf /c) eral periodic rectangular profiles and the results are dis-
·
df , cussed. Comparisons with other types of surfaces and
0 f f2 − f 2
measurements in a reverberation room are reported later,
or, if we introduce L/λ = Lf /c, in sections 4 and 5.
 The numerical evaluation of (12) has thus been per-
4 π/2 formed for a great number of values of both parameters
srand (L/λ) = sin φ0 dφ0 (12)
π 0 L/λ and H/L. During this first set of evaluations, the ge-
 L/λ 
L 2 s(φ0 , θ0 = 0, k = 2πL /L) ometrical parameter 2A (i.e. the width of the wells, see
·
dL . Figure 1) has been fixed to L/2. The objective of these
0 L/λ (L/λ)2 − L 2
computations is to build up a collection of scattering co-
This double integral (based on the Paris formula) has been efficients values intended to the users of room acoustics
approximated by a method of numerical integration called programs. To this end, a “useful domain” has been esti-
the trapezoidal rule [24]. It is based on a piecewise linear mated for the geometrical parameters L/λ and H/L as
interpolation of the integrated function in the discretiza- follows. In practice, most diffusing surfaces have a spatial
tion intervals. A study of the convergence has shown that period L comprised between 0.04 m and 1.5 m: if results
the discretization steps of 2.5 degrees in φ0 and 0.1 in L/λ are expected up to 8 kHz, the first parameter L/λ can be
are necessary and sufficient to insure that the truncation less than 35. Moreover, usual diffusing surfaces are char-
error on the random-incidence scattering coefficient is less acterised by a ratio H/L that is less than 5 [25]. Finally,
than 0.01. considering that an asymptotic convergence will be ob-

610
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
Figure 4. The random-incidence scattering coefficient of infinite
surfaces with periodic rectangular profiles, as a function of the
ratio of the height H to the wavelength (case H/L ≤ 0.1).
served for most surfaces at high values of L/λ (see for
example Figure 11), we define our “useful domain” by
L H
≤ 30, ≤ 5. (13)
λ L
In the following, the variation of the random-incidence
scattering coefficient is plotted as a function of H/λ, be-
cause it will be shown that this ratio is the most significant
geometrical parameter of the profile, leading to the most
characteristic evolutions.
Figure 4 shows the results for slightly rough surfaces
(H/L ≤ 0.1). We first observe that several curves are not
completed: this could be quite confusing, but it is justi-
fied by the useful domain described by (13), i.e. H/λ <
30H/L. Also, the random-incidence scattering coefficient
srand = 0 for low values of L/λ, since there’s only one
radiating reflected wave, generated in the specular direc-
tion, for L/λ < 0.5. Therefore, the curves in Figure 4 re-
ally “start” at a value of H/λ = 0, depending on the ratio
H/L.
The random-incidence scattering coefficient then in-
creases monotonically to reach a first maximum value
comprised between 0.8 and 0.9. After this first maximum,
the function srand (H/λ) tends to oscillate with a remark-
able synchronicity. The periodicity of these oscillations is
approximately equal to Δ(H/λ) = 0.5. This value can be
related to the modal and resonant character of the plane
waves propagating into the rectangular wells in the z-
direction, as it will be explained later.
The amplitude of the oscillations is progressively atten-
uated and an asymptotic value is reached. For the slightly
rough surfaces, the curves traced in Figure 4 show little
dependence on the spatial period L.
Figure 5 shows the results obtained for moderately and
very rough surfaces. The first maximum of the scatter-
ing coefficient progressively decreases. For H/λ > 2 and
H/L ≤ 1, the amplitude of the oscillations becomes quite
small (less than 0.1 in srand ). For H/L > 1, they lose
their apparent periodic character. Figure 5 also shows the
ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)
Figure 5. The random-incidence scattering coefficient of infinite
surfaces with periodic rectangular profiles, as a function of the
ratio of the height H to the wavelength (case H/L ≥ 0.1).
Figure 6. The random-incidence scattering coefficient (s) of an
infinite surface with periodic rectangular profile, as a function
of L/λ (= (L/c)f ) and the ratio of the depth H to the spatial
period L.
asymptotic convergence to srand 0.65, for very small val-
ues of the wavelength. This convergence is slower, as the
ratio H/L increases above 1.
Finally, Figure 6 gives a complete overview of the re-
sults. For a given spatial period L of the profile, the verti-
cal axis of this representation can be viewed as a frequency
axis.
The resonances found in the scattering coefficient’s
curves, especially for slightly rough surfaces (Figure 4),
can be explained as follows. Let’s first consider the per-
pendicular incidence (φ0 = 90◦ ). If the frequency is such
that H/λ = 0.5 (or if this ratio is a multiple of 0.5), the in-
cident wave excites an axial mode (u = 0 in equation 5) in
the rigid cavities of the wells. This mode enforces the gra-
dient of the pressure to vanish in z = 0 at the entrance of
the wells (see Figure 1), which is exactly the same bound-
ary condition as the one imposed in (7) between the wells.
Therefore, all the plane z = 0 behaves like a perfectly
rigid interface and the reflection is perfectly specular (the
611
ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)
Figure 7. The reflection coefficients R0 and R1 and the direc-
tional scattering coefficient s of infinite surfaces with periodic
rectangular profiles (L = 1.5λ, A = L/4, φ0 = 90◦ ).
Figure 8. The reflection coefficients R0 , R−1 and R−2 and the di-
rectional scattering coefficient s of infinite surfaces with periodic
rectangular profiles (L = 1.5λ, A = L/4, φ0 = 30◦ ).
directional scattering coefficient is zero): this is shown in
Figure 7 on an example. In other words, if H/λ is a mul-
tiple of 0.5, the specular plane wave and the mode u = 0
in the cavities are sufficient to satisfy the equations and
the boundary conditions. On the other hand, if H/λ is an
odd multiple of 0.25, the acoustic impedance seen at the
entrance of a cavity is not infinite (it can even be zero un-
der some conditions). The plane z = 0 can therefore be
viewed as composed of a mosaic of different impedances,
which is known to create scattering. In the example of Fig-
ure 7, it is shown that the specular reflection coefficient R0
is minimum for H/λ = 0.25 and 0.75, while the scattering
coefficient is maximum by (3).
Now, for non-perpendicular incidences (φ0 = 90◦ ), the
axial modes in the wells, along the z-coordinate, are no
longer sufficient to satisfy the boundary conditions with
the specular plane wave, since the latter implies that the
pressure depends on the x-coordinate at the entrance of
the wells’ cavities. Figure 8 illustrates this for an exam-
ple: even if H/λ is a multiple of 0.5, the specular wave is
not the only radiating wave and the scattering coefficient is
not zero. As a result, the periodicity of the scattering coef-
612
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
Figure 9. Same as Figure 6, with the width of the wells 2A =
L/4.
ficients’ curve has been disturbed in some way and the ex-
trema are not all exactly at multiple values of H/λ = 0.25.
Finally, to compute the random-incidence scattering co-
efficient at a frequency f , equation (11) shows that it is
necessary to integrate the directional scattering coefficient
for all frequencies f < f : this implies that, while the
quasi-periodicity in Δ(H/λ) = 0.5 is preserved, the max-
ima of the scattering coefficients’ curve are slightly moved
to higher values of H/λ. This is clearly shown in Figure 4,
where the maxima are in 0.3, 0.85, 1.35, . . . instead of
multiple values of H/λ = 0.25.
We end this section with a short study on the influence
of the width of the wells. This parameter (2A) was fixed at
the value of a half period (L/2) in all the previous compu-
tations, particularly in Figure 6. Figure 9 shows the results
obtained with 2A = L/4. The function of L/λ and H/L
is similar to the case 2A = L/2 in Figure 6. However,
the random-incidence scattering coefficient values tend to
be smaller. In particular, the asymptotic value reached in
the small wavelength limit is here srand 0.40 instead of
srand 0.65.
Figure 10 shows the results obtained with 2A = 3L/4.
Again, a similar general evolution can be observed, to-
gether with small but significant differences. In particu-
lar, the asymptotic value here is srand 0.72 (somewhat
greater than the case 2A = L/2), but it is only reached for
surfaces having a relative depth H/L greater than about 0.4
(see also Figure 11).
4. Comparison with Kirchhoff approxima-
tion results and other rough surfaces
The Kirchhoff approximation (KA) is a method allowing
the computation of the polar scattering diagram of any
rough surface, provided that [26, 18]
• its roughness profile can be expressed by a function z =
ξ(x) (for 1D surfaces),
• its local slope is “not too high”,
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)

Figure 11. The random-incidence scattering coefficient of infinite

surfaces with periodic rectangular profiles, as a function of the
ratio of the spatial period L to the wavelength. The width of the
Figure 10. Same as Figure 6, with the width of the wells 2A =
wells 2A = 3L/4.
3L/4.

• and the direction of incidence is “not too grazing”.

In particular, Thorsos [26] precised these conditions of va-
lidity for the random Gaussian rough surfaces.
By comparing the polar scattering diagram with the one
computed for a flat surface having the same size as the
rough surface, one can obtain the (directional) scattering
coefficient [18], or more precisely what is called the “free-
field correlation scattering coefficient” [3, 15]. Finally, in-
tegrating for all directions of incidence gives the random-
incidence scattering coefficient.
Figure 12. Example of a Gaussian roughness profile generated
The KA method, completed by the directional correla-
in [18] with the following parameters: rms height σ = λ and
tion method, has been applied to random Gaussian sur-
correlation length T = 5λ. This is a 1D-surface, the height above
faces respecting the KA conditions of validity in [18]. A the average plane is z(x) and it is presented here relatively to the
Gaussian roughness profile is defined by two parameters: wavelength λ.
the rms height or amplitude (σ) and the correlation length
(T ).
Figure 12 shows an example of such a profile. The KA
method is valid for these surfaces if the correlation length
is greater than the wavelength and the ratio σ/T does not
exceed 0.25. The angles of incidence and scattering mea-
sured from the normal to the mean plane of the corruga-
tions should also not exceed 60 degrees.
The results obtained in [18] are recalled in Figure 13.
It is shown that the random-incidence scattering coeffi-
cients tend to increase with the rms height of the roughness
profile. They don’t depend significantly on the correlation
length of the Gaussian profile, as long as this geometrical
parameter is greater than the wavelength.
This dependence on the rms height or depth of the pro-
file is quite similar to the general behaviour observed in
the previous section for the periodic rectangular profiles. Figure 13. Comparison of the random-incidence scattering coef-
The results obtained for these profiles are also represented ficients obtained by the KA method for Gaussian surfaces [18]
in Figure 13 (the rms height for the periodic rectangular and the corresponding coefficients computed in this study for pe-
riodic rectangular profiles (A = L/4). All these Gaussian sur-
profile is H/2).
faces respect the conditions of validity of the Kirchhoff approxi-
It is indeed shown that the scattering coefficient of both mation.
sets of surfaces increases monotonically, up to the rms
height’s value of approximately 0.15λ, as long as H/L ≤
0.1. For greater values of the rms height, the Gaussian sur- while the periodic rectangular profiles follow a more com-
faces’ coefficients tend to converge to an asymptotic value, plex evolution (beginning of the oscillations).

613
ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)
Figure 14. Comparison of the random-incidence scattering coef-
ficients obtained for sine-shaped surfaces in [14] and the corre-
sponding coefficients computed in this study for periodic rect-
angular profiles (A = L/4). The parameter for the sine-shaped
surfaces is the ratio p/L, where p is the peak-to-peak amplitude
of the corrugations (corresponding to H for the periodic rectan-
gular profile).
Also, for low values of the rms height (less than 0.15λ),
the periodic rectangular surfaces tend to offer slightly
greater scattering coefficients than the Gaussian ones.
Figure 14 is a comparison of the results obtained for two
types of infinite rigid surfaces : with periodic sine-shaped
and rectangular profiles. The sine-shaped surfaces results
have been obtained by the Holford-Urusovskii’s method
[13, 14]. Again, the rms height of the periodic rectangular
profile is H/2 and, if p represents the √ peak-to-peak am-
plitude of the sine- shaped profile, p/ 8 is its rms height.
Similar behaviours are again observed, as long as the rms
height relative to the wavelength is less than 0.15, and the
ratio H/L ≤ 0.1. For greater values of this ratio, the sine-
shaped surfaces’ scattering coefficients significantly dif-
fer from the periodic rectangular surfaces’ coefficients ob-
tained with the same rms height.
5. Relation with measured random-
incidence scattering coefficients
Three methods are presently known to give a measure of
the random-incidence scattering coefficient [3]:
• the “reverberation chamber method”, standardized in an
ISO document [1],
• the phase-locked averaging of free-field responses as
the surface is moved [27],
• and the free-field correlation method, involving the
measurement of the complete free-field polar distribu-
tion of the reflected pressure.
The last method can lead to a very long and tedious proce-
dure if 2D (two angles) polar distributions must be mea-
sured, and it is therefore practically restricted to computed
polar distributions, obtained for example by BEM [15, 28]
or the KA method [18].
In the first two methods, the diffuse reflected component
is eliminated (or at least attenuated) by averaging some
614
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
measured quantity (the impulse response and the reverber-
ant decay in the first case, the reflected complex pressure in
the second case), in order to extract the coherent specular
contribution. This allows to derive the specular reflection
coefficient and, therefore, the scattering coefficient.
Before comparing theoretical and measured values of
the scattering coefficient, one must first determine to
which method our definition of the scattering coefficient
corresponds. In fact, the theoretical definition (3) used
in this paper corresponds to the free-field correlation
method. Indeed, the complex specular reflection coeffi-
cient rs is defined in this method as the one which mini-
mizes the differences between the free-field distribution of
the reflected pressure (1) and the distribution rs p0 (x, y, z),
where p0 (x, y, z) is the pressure reflected in the same con-
ditions by a perfectly reflecting flat surface located in
z = 0 and having the same (infinite) dimensions as our
rough surface [15, 18]. If the incident wave vector is in the
vertical plane (x, z), then
p0 (x, y, z) = e jk(x cos φ0 +z sin φ0 ) . (14)
Obviously, the coefficient minimizing the differences with
the polar distribution (1) is rs = R0 . Therefore, if it is con-
sidered that our rough surface is also perfectly reflecting,
introducing this expression of rs in equation (1) of [18]
gives the correlation scattering coefficient scor = 1−|rs |2 =
1 − |R0 |2 , which is identical to our definition (3). Note that
this correspondence can also be proved for other directions
of incidence situated outside the plane (x, z), by analogy.
The definition of the scattering coefficient (3) does not
correspond to the phase-locked averaging measurement
method. This can be shown by applying the same theoret-
ical developments as the ones proposed by Sakuma et al.
in [15]. More details about these developments are given
in the Appendix.
It is also shown in [15] that the results obtained by the
reverberation room method are prone to better correspond
with the free-field correlation method than with the phase-
locked averaging method.
After this short introduction on the measurement meth-
ods, it is concluded that the definition of the scattering
coefficient used in this paper corresponds to the free-field
correlation approach, which itself is close to the statistical
averaging used in the reverberation room method.
All these measurement methods are rather new, com-
pared to the measurement of the absorption coefficient.
Therefore, only few results are presently available in the
scientific literature, in particular if we search for periodic
rectangular profiles. In Cox’ book [2], several polar re-
sponses are given and its Appendix C lists the random-
incidence scattering coefficients of several single plane
diffusers, but not for periodic rectangular profiles.
In his thesis, Hargreaves [29] has measured the random-
incidence scattering coefficient of a circular plate (1.55m
diameter) covered with a periodic arrangement of rectan-
gular varnished battens. Measurements results have been
obtained in a real-scale reverberation chamber between
100 Hz and 2000 Hz. However, as the spatial period of
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
this sample is L = 0.1 m, the theory for infinite periodic
surfaces reveals that scattering begins at about 1700 Hz
(L/λ > 0.5, see section 3). The results published by Harg-
reaves are therefore mostly influenced by the finite size of
the sample. Moreover, the author recognizes that his mea-
sured values are “unjustifiably high, especially at high fre-
quencies”.
Choi and Jeong [11] also measured the random-inci-
dence scattering coefficient of varnished periodic battens.
They use a 1:5 scale model of a reverberation room and
published results between 100 Hz and 2500 Hz FS (full-
scale). The dimensions of the periodic roughness profile
are in this case L = 0.30 m FS, H = 0.15 m FS and
A = L/4. The results of Choi and Jeong show a more
or less pronounced maximum in the scattering coefficient
curve in the third-octave band of 500 Hz, quite close to
the quarter-wavelength resonance frequency of the wells
(H/λ 0.25). However, an infinite surface with H/L =
0.5 cannot exhibit a similar curve since scattering only be-
gins at 567 Hz. The comparison with the results of Choi
and Jeong is therefore not satisfying.
Further results have been found in the thesis of De
Geetere [8]. In this case, there were 7 rectangular battens,
regularly spaced (L = 42.4 cm) on a circular turntable
made of multilayered wood (3 m diameter). The height of
the rectangular profile is H = 6 cm. Measurements are
carried out in a real-scale reverberation room. Figure 15
shows the results of the measurements compared with the
theoretical scattering coefficients obtained for the infinite
surface having the same profile (H/L = 0.1415). The cor-
respondence between both curves is fairly good. It must
also be noted that De Geetere proposed a correction to his
measured values to take into account the scattering coef-
ficient of the base plate. This correction is not included in
the results of Figure 15, but it would result in an increment
of about 0.1 of the scattering coefficient, for the frequen-
cies greater than 800 Hz. If applied, this correction would
probably enhance the correspondence between measured
and theoretical results. Also note that the measurement
results of De Geetere are integrated in third-octave fre-
quency bands, but the integration of our theoretical results
in third-octave bands does not change their presentation
significantly.
What can be concluded about this comparison? Well, it
is known that the scattering of finite surfaces not only de-
pends on their roughness profile, but also on their finite
size (including the so-called edge effect). By comparing
with a flat surface having the same size and dimensions
as the rough surface, the reverberation room measurement
method is intended to isolate the influence of the rough-
ness profile. Also, the theoretical determination of the scat-
tering coefficient of an infinite surface only depends on its
profile. One therefore expects that both results should cor-
respond. Previous studies performed on sine-shaped sur-
faces indeed showed a very good correlation between mea-
sured and theoretical results [13, 15].
The edge effect of the diffuser itself is particularly sig-
nificant at (relatively) low frequencies in the reverbera-
ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)
Figure 15. Comparison of the random-incidence scattering coef-
ficients measured by De Geetere [8] for a periodic arrangement
of rectangular battens and the infinite surface with the corre-
sponding rectangular profile (H/L = 0.1415).
tion room measurements, depending on the ratio of the
dimensions of the surface sample to the wavelength. In
figure 15, it could explain the small differences observed
below 500 Hz. But the edge effect is not the only influ-
ence related to the finite size of the surface. In the case of
periodic surfaces, the finite number of periods is another
factor that could explain differences, though this effect is
rather difficult to estimate without BEM calculations for a
finite sample. The theoretical and real surfaces also differ
by their absorption: even if it is kept to low values in De
Geetere’s experiments, it could be responsible for the at-
tenuation of the resonance peak around 1600 Hz which has
been computed for the perfectly rigid surface. However, a
better agreement is observed for the second peak around
5 kHz.
These resonance effects seem to play a key role in the
comparison of theoretical and measured scattering coeffi-
cients. In this respect, the 1D periodic rectangular profile is
more critical than its sine-shaped equivalent, since a better
correspondence was established for one of these profiles
in [13].
In any case, more systematic investigations are needed
to identify the reasons of these differences between mea-
surements and theory. BEM computations could help to
precise the role of finite size and absorption effects. But
also, more measurement results are certainly needed to al-
low for additional comparisons.
6. Conclusion
An exact solution has been developed for the sound field
reflected by an infinite rigid rough surface with a periodic
rectangular profile. The numerical calculation of this so-
lution for several directions of the incident plane wave al-
lows to derive the random-incidence scattering coefficient
of this surface.
This was done for a great number of configurations by
varying the geometrical parameters of the periodic profile:
the spatial period L, the depth H and (to a less extent) the
615
ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)
width 2A of the wells, leading to a very detailed descrip-
tion of the scattering properties of this kind of profile (see
Figures 4 to 10).
For H/L < 0.2, the key parameter is the ratio of the
depth of the profile H to the wavelength. As this ratio in-
creases, the random-incidence scattering coefficient also
increases, reaching a first maximum value at H/λ 0.3.
It then oscillates while converging to an asymptotic value
(Figure 4) which depends on the width of the wells. For
H/λ < 0.3, the random-incidence scattering coefficient
follows an evolution similar to the Gaussian and the sine-
shaped profiles. It seems therefore that, if the corrugations
of the surface are sufficiently small in amplitude compared
to the wavelength and to the correlation length or the spa-
tial period, the kind of profile has little influence on the
value of the scattering coefficient. This must of course be

2
confirmed by studying other profiles.
1 2π
For 0.2 < H/L < 5, the oscillations are less significant
2π R0 (ϕ) dϕ
. (A3)
and they progressively lose their apparent periodic charac-
ter (Figure 5).
With this detailed information, the users of room acous-
tics programs are able to include in their model quite ac-
curate scattering coefficients to characterize periodic rect-
angular profiles. However, the scattering of the roughness
profile is not the only contribution to the global scattering
properties of real surfaces, since it is known that their fi-
nite size also creates scattering. The theoretical values pre-
sented in this paper should therefore be restricted to sur-
faces whose dimensions are much greater than the wave-
length. The comparisons of computed scattering coeffi-
cients with the few measured values published in the sci-
entific literature have also highlighted the key role played
by the resonance effects for 1D periodic rectangular pro-
files.
Another method (for example BEM computations)
must be used to deeply analyse the influence of the finite
size of real surfaces, by comparing with the results for in-
finite surfaces published in this paper. The absorption of
the profile probably also influences the resonance effects.
The present method could in principle be adapted to allow
for non-rigid parts of the surface, by imposing impedance
boundary conditions. This application is scheduled for the
next phase of this study. Finally, more measurement results
are certainly needed to allow for additional comparisons.
Appendix
Correspondence with the phase-locked averaging
method
Our theoretical definition (3) does not correspond to the
phase-locked averaging measurement method. Indeed, if
we rotate the rough surface with the periodic rectangular
profile around the point x = y = z = 0, while keeping
the incident vector as indicated in Figure 1 (the angle φ0
is fixed), it can be shown that the reflected pressure prefl is
still composed of a series of plane waves, just like in (1),
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
In this equation, the angle ϕ represents the rotation of the
surface and it is comprised between 0 and 2π. The specular
term n = 0 is always propagating in the same direction
(independent on the angle ϕ), i.e. kxn = k cos φ0 , kyn = 0
and kzn = k sin φ0 , but R0 (ϕ) depends on ϕ. Averaging
this specular term gives the directional specular reflection
coefficient

1 2π
rs (φ0 ) = R0 (ϕ) dϕ. (A2)
2π 0
If it is assumed that the terms n = 0 are significantly at-
tenuated by phase-locked averaging (which is not a priori
obvious), the reflected power associated with this coher-
ent component is |rs (φ0 )|2 , and consequently the phase-
locked averaging directional scattering coefficient is
save (φ0 ) = 1 −
0
Clearly, this definition (A3) leads to different values of the
random-incidence scattering coefficient, if (A3) is used in-
stead of (3) in the Paris’ formula (integration over φ0 ).
This was already emphasized by Sakuma et al. in [15] and
the reader is referred to this paper for more details.
References
[1] ISO 17497-1: Acoustics. Measurement of the sound scat-
tering properties of surfaces. Part 1: Measurement of the
random-incidence scattering coefficient in a reverberation
room. 2004.
[2] T. J. Cox, P. D’Antonio: Acoustic absorbers and diffusers.
Taylor and Francis, London and New York, 2009.
[3] T. J. Cox, B.-I. L. Dalenback, P. D’Antonio, J. J. Em-
brechts, J. Y. Jeon, E. Mommertz, M. Vorländer: A tutorial
on scattering and diffusion coefficients for room acoustic
surfaces. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 92 (2006)
1–15.
[4] M. R. Hodgson: Evidence of diffuse surface reflection in
rooms. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 89 (1991) 765–771.
[5] M. Barron: Auditorium acoustics and architectural design.
Spon, London and New York, 2000.
[6] Y. W. Lam: A comparison of three diffuse reflection mod-
elling methods used in room acoustics computer models. J.
Acoust. Soc. Am. 100 (1996) 2181–2192.
[7] M. Vorländer, J. J. Embrechts, L. De Geetere, G. Vermeir,
M. H. de Avelar Gomes: Case studies in measurement of
random incidence scattering coefficients. Acta Acustica
united with Acustica 90 (2004) 858–867.
[8] L. De Geetere: Analysis and improvement of the experi-
mental techniques to assess the acoustical reflection proper-
ties of boundary surfaces. PhD thesis, Laboratorium bouw-
fysica, University of Leuven, Belgium, 2004.
[9] J. J. Embrechts: Practical aspects of the ISO procedure for
measuring the scattering coefficient in a real-scale exper-
iment. Proceedings of Forum Acusticum, Sevilla, Spain,
2002, 6.
[10] I. Schmich: Retour d’expérience sur la mise en application
de la norme ISO 17497-1. Proceedings of the 10th C.F.A.
(Congrès français d’acoustique), Lyon, France, 2010, 6.

prefl (x, y, z) = Rn (ϕ)e j(kxn (ϕ)x+kyn (ϕ)y+kzn (ϕ)z) . (A1) [11] Y.-J. Choi, D.-U. Jeong: Some issues in measurement of the
n
random-incidence scattering coefficients in a reverberation

616
Embrechts, Billon: Scattering coefficients of profiles
room. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 94 (2008) 769–
773.
[12] I. Bork: A comparison of room simulation software. The
second round robin on room acoustical computer software.
Acta Acustica united with Acustica 86 (2000) 943–956.
[13] J. J. Embrechts, L. De Geetere, G. Vermeir, M. Vorländer,
T. Sakuma: Calculation of the random-incidence scattering
coefficients of a sine-shaped surface. Acta Acustica united
with Acustica 92 (2006) 593–603.
[14] J. J. Embrechts: Random-incidence scattering coefficients
of infinite sine-shaped surfaces. Proceedings of Forum
Acusticum, Budapest, Hungary, 2005, 4.
[15] T. Sakuma, Y. Kosaka, L. De Geetere, M. Vorländer: Re-
lationship between the scattering coefficients determined
with coherent averaging and with directivity correlation.
Acta Acustica united with Acustica 95 (2009) 669–677.
[16] J. Redondo, R. Pico, M. R. Avis, T. J. Cox: Prediction of
the random-incidence scattering coefficient using a FDTD
scheme. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 95 (2009)
1040–1047.
[17] J. A. Hargreaves, J. Cox: A transient boundary element
method for acoustic scattering from mixed regular and thin
rigid bodies. Acta Acustica united with Acustica 95 (2009)
678–689.
[18] J. J. Embrechts, D. Archambeau, G. B. Stan: Determination
of the scattering coefficient of random rough diffusing sur-
faces for room acoustics applications. Acta Acustica united
with Acustica 87 (2001) 482–494.
[19] A. De Bruijn: The sound absorption of an absorbing peri-
odically uneven surface of rectangular profile. Acustica 18
(1967) 123–131.
ACTA ACUSTICA UNITED WITH ACUSTICA
Vol. 97 (2011)
[20] T. J. Hargreaves, T. J. Cox, Y. W. Lam, P. D’Antonio: Sur-
face diffusion coefficients for room acoustics: Free-field
measures. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 108 (2000) 1710–1720.
[21] R. L. Holford: Scattering of sound waves at a periodic
pressure-release surface: An exact solution. J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 70 (1981) 1116–1128.
[22] J. Ducourneau, L. Bos, V. Planeau, A. Faiz, S. S. Lami, A.
Nejade: Prediction of the acoustic pressure above periodi-
cally uneven facings in industrial workplaces. J. Sound Vib.
329 (2010) 2276–2290.
[23] Y. Ando, K. Kato: Calculations on the sound reflection
from periodically uneven surfaces of arbitrary profile.
Acustica 35 (1976) 321–329.
[24] G. Dahlquist, A. Björck: Numerical methods. Prentice
Hall, Englewood Cliffs, 1974.
[25] I. Schmich. personal communication.
[26] E. I. Thorsos: The validity of the Kirchhoff approximation
for rough surface scattering using a Gaussian roughness
spectrum. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83 (1988) 78–92.
[27] M. Vorländer, E. Mommertz: Definition and measurement
of random-incidence scattering coefficients. Appl. Acoust.
60 (2000) 187–199.
[28] L. D. Geetere, J. J. Embrechts, G. Vermeir: Calculation of
the scattering coefficient of a sine-shaped surface by us-
ing the 3D BEM method. Proceedings of the Institute of
Acoustics 25 (2003) 75–83.
[29] T. J. Hargreaves: Acoustic diffusion and scattering coeffi-
cients for room surfaces. PhD thesis, Department of acous-
tics and audio engineering, University of Salford, U.K.,
2000.
617