Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 899–905

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Acoustics
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apacoust

Technical Note 注重能量 注重⽅向性

Characterizing diffusive surfaces using scattering and diffusion coefficients

混响室 in an anechoic chamber.
Yong Hee Kim, Hyung Suk Jang, Jin Yong Jeon ⇑
Department of Architectural Engineering, Hanyang University, Seoul 133-791, Republic of Korea

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: This paper presents the effects of height and coverage density of diffusive surfaces through the measure-
Received 6 January 2011 ments of scattering and diffusion coefficients using scale models. Measurements were conducted using a
Received in revised form 9 May 2011 1:10 scale model. Scattering coefficients of 1D, 2D, and 3D diffuser profiles as well as diffusion coeffi-
Accepted 11 May 2011
cients of the 3D diffuser profile (hemisphere) were measured. It was found that the structural height
Available online 12 June 2011
of the diffuser is closely related to the frequency characteristics of the scattering coefficients, while the
coverage density of the diffuser is closely related to the values of the scattering coefficients. Diffusion
Keywords:
coefficients were less sensitive to structural height and coverage density than were the scattering coef-
Diffuser
Scattering coefficient
ficients. Using the measurement results, scattering and diffusion coefficients were estimated. In addition,
Diffusion coefficient the relationship between scattering and absorption coefficients was discussed.
Scale model Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction tionships between scattering and absorption characteristics and

Recent studies on sound diffusion [1–5] have mostly focused on
quantifying diffuser characteristics under laboratory conditions,
namely the scattering coefficient and diffusion coefficient, which
are necessary for evaluating amount of scattered reflections and
uniformity of the first reflection, respectively. The scattering coef-
ficient quantifies the non-specular reflections relative to the ran-
dom incident sound energy based on Reverberation Time (RT)
measurement in a reverberation chamber, whereas the diffusion
coefficient quantifies the 2D reflections from the autocorrelation
function of the polar responses of the first reflections in an anec-
hoic chamber. Jeon et al. [6] conducted systematic investigations
to determine the optimum diffuser design for a concert hall using
hemispheric and cubic diffusers. Cox et al. [7] reviewed both scat-
tering and diffusion coefficients to clarify uses of each measure in
diffuser design. Although measurement methods for both coeffi-
cients have been standardized [8,9], there is still a lack of knowl-
edge on the actual characteristics of the scattering and diffusion.
Design parameters for quantifying diffusive surfaces such as dif-
fuser height or coverage density should be investigated. Coverage
density is defined as a ratio of corrugated part’s base area to unit
ground area.
In this study, scattering and diffusion coefficients of diffuser
profiles with various structural heights and coverage densities
were measured to characterize diffusing performance. Measure-
ment results are presented as reference material for the acoustic
community. Design guidelines of scattering and diffusion
coefficients for hemisphere diffuser cases are also suggested. Rela-
between scattering and diffusion coefficients are discussed.
2. Measurement set-up
2.1. Scattering coefficients
Based on ISO 17497-1 [8], measurements of scattering and
absorption coefficients of the test specimen were carried out in a
1:10 scale reverberation chamber. The absorption coefficient was
measured using an electrical spark source, and measurements
were carried out according to ISO 354 [10]. For scattering coeffi-
cient measurements, a turntable made with a circular rigid base
plate was used for measurement. The structural depth of the test
specimen was 24 mm, below the allowed maximum of 1/16 of
specimen diameter. Two joined tweeter speakers were located in
the corner of the reverberation chamber to output the MLS signals.
The signals were received at three positions using a 1/8-in. micro-
phone. The signals were recorded with the turntable fixed and
rotating, with and without specimen. The shape of the test sample
for the scattering coefficient was a 420-mm diameter circular
plate, and the shape of the test sample for the absorption coeffi-
cient was a rectangular plate (300 mm  400 mm). Environmental
conditions such as temperature and relative humidity were mea-
sured for correction of air absorption in accordance with the ISO
9613-1 [11].
2.2. Diffusion coefficients

⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +82 2 2220 1795; fax: +82 2 2220 4794. Diffusion coefficients can be measured using a 1:10 goniometer
E-mail address: jyjeon@hanyang.ac.kr (J.Y. Jeon). in a test chamber based on the specifications of AES-4id-2001 [9],

0003-682X/$ - see front matter Ó 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.apacoust.2011.05.006
900 Y.H. Kim et al. / Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 899–905

Table 1
1D and 2D diffuser cases according to the number of grooves and surface coverage
density.

Diffuser name Depth of V-cut Dimension Number of Surface

groove grooves coverage
density (%)
Three-grooved type 3 17
Five-grooved type 1D 5 25
Seven-grooved type 7 38
Nine-grooved type 21-mm 9 48
Two-grooved type 1+1 12
Six-grooved type 2D 3+3 32
Ten-grooved type 5+5 46

Fig. 1. Diagram of a 3D goniometer in 1:10 scale for measurement of diffusion

coefficients. 3. Structural heights and coverage densities of the diffusers

To understand the effects of diffuser height and coverage den-

as shown in Fig. 1. A circular diffuser specimen with a diameter of
0.3 m was used in the same manner as that of the scattering coef-
ficient measurement. Multi-MLS was adopted as the sound source
and was located 1 m from the reference point of the specimen, at
two incidence angles: 90° for normal incidence and 55° for oblique
incidence. The receivers were located 0.5 m from the reference
point of the specimen in a semi-circular plane.
sity on the measured scattering coefficients, three types of diffus-
ers were measured: 1D, 2D and 3D shapes. Rubber plates with
different numbers of V-cut grooves were selected for 1D and 2D
diffuser specimens. In 2D diffusers, the direction of the grooves
was crossed. As for the 3D diffusers, a hemispheric shape was se-
lected for the diffuser profile. Frequency range of 500–3150 Hz
was used for single number averaging of scattering and diffusion
coefficients.

Fig. 2. Diagram of one-dimensional diffusers with their surface coverage density. (a) Three-grooved type (17%), (b) five-grooved type (25%), (c) seven-grooved type (38%), and
(d) nine-grooved type (48%).
 Y.H. Kim et al. / Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 899–905 901

Fig. 3. Sample diagram of two-dimensional diffusers with their surface coverage density. (a) Two-grooved type (15%), (b) six-grooved type (35%), and (c) ten-grooved type
(54%).

Table 2
Scattering coefficients of 1D diffusers with V-cut grooves measured in the 1:10 reverberation chamber.

Surface coverage Frequency bands (Hz) Average at 500–

density (%) 3150 Hz
100 125 150 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000
17 0.10 0.02 0.00 0.04 0.06 0.02 0.00 0.25 0.29 0.51 0.38 0.55 0.45 0.22 0.41 0.52 0.53 0.40
25 0.12 0.07 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.03 0.18 0.28 0.57 0.74 0.67 0.44 0.57 0.58 0.60 0.73 0.51
38 0.10 0.02 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.09 0.49 0.56 0.74 0.85 1.17 0.73 0.67 0.61 0.87 0.83 0.74
48 0.09 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.04 0.03 0.10 0.08 0.57 0.90 0.88 0.86 0.62 0.62 0.83 0.81 0.61

Table 3
Scattering coefficients of 2D diffusers with V-cut grooves measured in the 1:10 reverberation chamber.

Surface coverage Frequency bands (Hz) Average at 500–

density (%) 3150 Hz
100 125 150 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000
12 0.17 0.06 0.07 0.05 0.03 0.05 0.07 0.16 0.18 0.23 0.46 0.41 0.33 0.38 0.35 0.43 0.50 0.33
32 0.11 0.04 0.07 0.06 0.04 0.05 0.07 0.17 0.23 0.40 0.72 0.69 0.57 0.64 0.63 0.69 0.75 0.53
46 0.11 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.08 0.27 0.32 0.51 0.88 0.95 0.76 0.67 0.74 0.86 0.87 0.66

3.1. Scattering coefficients of 1D and 2D diffusers
3.1.1. Measurement configurations
Table 1 shows the 1D and 2D diffuser profiles which were mea-
sured. A diffusive surface was made from a rubber sheet with a 24-
mm thickness. Four plates with different numbers of grooves were
measured. The section profiles of the diffusers are depicted in Fig. 2
with a V-cut angle of 60°. As the number of grooves increased, the
surface area of the diffuser specimen also increased. In this part,
coverage density of diffuser was calculated as a ratio of grooves’
base area to plate’s area. Table 1 shows the surface coverage den-
sity and the structural height of the diffuser specimen. Surface cov-
902 Y.H. Kim et al. / Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 899–905

Fig. 4. Averaged scattering coefficients of 1D and 2D diffusers as a function of
surface coverage density.
erage density ranged from 17% to 48%. Fig. 3 shows the 2D diffuser
profiles measured. The diffusive surface was made using a rubber
sheet with a 24-mm thickness, in the same manner as those for
the 1D diffuser cases. Three plates with different numbers of
two-way grooves situated perpendicular to one another were mea-
sured. As the number of grooves increased, the surface area of the
diffuser specimen also increased. Surface coverage density ranged
from 12% to 46%.
3.1.2. Results
Table 2 shows the measured scattering coefficients by 1/3 oc-
tave frequency band. The 1D diffuser with V-cut grooves shows
high scattering coefficients, mainly above 500 Hz. The maximum
scattering coefficients were observed around 1000–1250 Hz. The
average scattering coefficients from 500 Hz to 3150 Hz were 0.40
for a three-grooved diffuser, 0.51 for a five-grooved diffuser, 0.74
for seven-grooved diffuser, and 0.64 for nine-grooved diffuser. As
the number of grooves increased, scattering coefficients also in-
creased. For a one-way pattern, the reflection occurred in a single
plane and the other direction acted as the plane surface.
Table 3 shows the measured scattering coefficients according to
the frequency bands. Similar to the results of the 1D diffuser, the
2D diffuser with V-cut grooves showed high scattering coefficients
mainly greater than 500 Hz. The maximum scattering coefficients
were also observed around 1000–1250 Hz, indicating that the fre-
quency characteristics of the scattering coefficients depended on
the profile of the diffuser. The average scattering coefficients from
500–3150 Hz were 0.33 for a two-grooved diffuser, 0.53 for a six-
grooved diffuser, and 0.66 for a ten-grooved diffuser. As the
number of grooves increased, the scattering coefficients also
increased.
Fig. 4 shows the relationship between the surface coverage den-
sity and the averaged scattering coefficients. The 1D diffuser with a
38% of surface coverage density showed the highest scattering
coefficient. The 2D diffuser with a 46% of surface coverage density
showed the highest scattering coefficient. As a result, it follows

Table 4
Scattering coefficients of 3D diffusers measured in the 1:10 reverberation chamber.

Height Density Frequency bands (Hz) Average at

(mm) (%) 500–3150 Hz
100 125 150 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000
7.5 14 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.20 0.21 0.24 0.25 0.09
28 0.14 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.17 0.31 0.46 0.47 0.46 0.17
57 0.12 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.03 0.11 0.09 0.13 0.40 0.57 0.52 0.41 0.19
71 0.04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.01 0.16 0.40 0.45 0.46 0.58 0.16
10 14 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.10 0.12 0.25 0.29 0.28 0.35 0.31 0.16
28 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.05 0.19 0.38 0.46 0.56 0.54 0.53 0.25
57 0.05 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.14 0.41 0.52 0.74 0.67 0.51 0.29
71 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.05 0.06 0.03 0.06 0.14 0.34 0.57 0.54 0.66 0.53 0.25
12.5 14 0.06 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.07 0.06 0.09 0.17 0.23 0.20 0.34 0.28 0.39 0.24 0.20
28 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.09 0.22 0.31 0.45 0.47 0.51 0.48 0.37 0.28
43 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.04 0.14 0.32 0.50 0.59 0.65 0.36 0.30 0.29
57 0.04 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.05 0.02 0.14 0.31 0.54 0.62 0.60 0.56 0.46 0.32
71 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.11 0.10 0.29 0.54 0.64 0.64 0.55 0.44 0.32
15 14 0.03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.11 0.19 0.27 0.27 0.34 0.31 0.37 0.31 0.21
28 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.04 0.03 0.08 0.32 0.53 0.55 0.54 0.44 0.41 0.32 0.33
57 0.05 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.05 0.03 0.44 0.72 0.63 0.63 0.57 0.44 0.30 0.39
71 0.03 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.07 0.03 0.11 0.33 0.48 0.62 0.79 0.56 0.54 0.57 0.37
17.5 14 0.05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.12 0.12 0.25 0.31 0.29 0.33 0.25 0.30 0.30 0.22
28 0.16 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.08 0.20 0.39 0.49 0.49 0.55 0.46 0.50 0.48 0.35
57 0.03 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.20 0.56 0.86 0.78 0.59 0.56 0.51 0.51 0.45
71 0.02 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.02 0.15 0.58 0.66 0.85 0.80 0.48 0.60 0.67 0.45
20 14 0.10 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.05 0.08 0.14 0.15 0.28 0.36 0.30 0.31 0.28 0.32 0.24 0.25
28 0.15 0.01 0.01 0.05 0.03 0.01 0.03 0.03 0.16 0.30 0.44 0.56 0.54 0.53 0.47 0.54 0.42 0.40
43 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.01 0.06 0.15 0.34 0.52 0.68 0.66 0.63 0.55 0.56 0.57 0.46
57 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.02 0.18 0.42 0.76 0.75 0.85 0.76 0.54 0.61 0.76 0.54
71 0.09 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.11 0.27 0.58 0.81 0.70 0.71 0.67 0.77 0.68 0.52
22.5 14 0.16 0.03 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.06 0.14 0.21 0.22 0.29 0.38 0.36 0.33 0.30 0.31 0.18 0.28
28 0.19 0.06 0.01 0.02 0.00 0.02 0.00 0.21 0.24 0.39 0.47 0.58 0.54 0.44 0.47 0.48 0.41 0.42
57 0.07 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.09 0.22 0.53 0.77 0.77 0.66 0.61 0.57 0.54 0.57 0.53
71 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.02 0.03 0.17 0.52 0.87 0.91 0.91 0.79 0.60 0.68 0.72 0.61
25 14 0.02 0.03 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.06 0.15 0.21 0.26 0.29 0.31 0.38 0.35 0.30 0.29 0.31 0.28
28 0.08 0.02 0.02 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.03 0.22 0.27 0.31 0.43 0.58 0.52 0.43 0.42 0.43 0.41 0.40
57 0.00 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.09 0.31 0.58 0.77 0.77 0.75 0.61 0.56 0.62 0.63 0.56
71 0.05 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.04 0.06 0.23 0.47 0.73 0.78 0.83 0.75 0.65 0.70 0.77 0.58
 Y.H. Kim et al. / Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 899–905 903

Table 5
Diffusion coefficients of 3D diffusers using a 1:10 goniometer.

Height Density Frequency bands (Hz) Average at 500–

(mm) (%) 3150 Hz
100 125 150 200 250 315 400 500 630 800 1000 1250 1600 2000 2500 3150 4000
12.5 43 0.22 0.23 0.22 0.17 0.18 0.16 0.17 0.20 0.26 0.26 0.24 0.30 0.21 0.37 0.48 0.21 0.15 0.28
17.5 14 0.12 0.11 0.12 0.15 0.14 0.18 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.25 0.28 0.27 0.20 0.27 0.23 0.21 0.17 0.24
28 0.18 0.18 0.21 0.18 0.22 0.24 0.31 0.36 0.37 0.35 0.40 0.39 0.41 0.49 0.37 0.28 0.21 0.38
43 0.28 0.25 0.34 0.32 0.29 0.38 0.47 0.44 0.41 0.47 0.41 0.47 0.48 0.44 0.36 0.27 0.22 0.42
57 0.23 0.28 0.32 0.23 0.34 0.35 0.38 0.35 0.31 0.32 0.41 0.43 0.35 0.33 0.54 0.48 0.41 0.39
20 0.20 0.23 0.21 0.32 0.27 0.33 0.34 0.28 0.29 0.37 0.28 0.27 0.40 0.54 0.38 0.32 0.19 0.35
22.5 0.33 0.31 0.38 0.36 0.43 0.43 0.37 0.31 0.31 0.41 0.55 0.45 0.44 0.42 0.48 0.38 0.34 0.42
25 43 0.11 0.11 0.14 0.12 0.17 0.18 0.24 0.32 0.41 0.51 0.55 0.55 0.67 0.62 0.50 0.30 0.22 0.49
30 0.28 0.27 0.29 0.26 0.23 0.21 0.20 0.26 0.34 0.34 0.37 0.38 0.33 0.29 0.51 0.25 0.20 0.34
40 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.27 0.20 0.20 0.24 0.33 0.34 0.36 0.37 0.41 0.35 0.34 0.44 0.34 0.26 0.36
50 0.28 0.32 0.31 0.26 0.24 0.26 0.33 0.35 0.35 0.40 0.45 0.34 0.27 0.30 0.33 0.17 0.13 0.33

that the scattering coefficient for both the 1D and 2D diffusers was
highly correlated with the surface coverage density.
3.2. Scattering and diffusion coefficients of 3D diffusers
3.2.1. Measurement configurations
The scattering coefficients of different sizes and surface cover-
age of 3D diffusers with wooden hemispheres were measured in
a 1:10 scale model reverberation chamber. Four cases of different
surface coverage and eight cases for different structural height of
hemisphere diffusers were considered. In case of 12.5 mm and
20 mm-height cases, 43% of coverage density was additionally
measured (Total 34 cases). As for measurement of diffusion coeffi-
cients, eight types of hemispheric diffusers with different struc-
tural heights (12.5, 15, 17.5, 20, 22.5, 25, 30, 40, and 50 mm)
were measured. The coverage density in all measurement cases
was fixed at 43%. In case of 17.5 mm-height diffuser, three more
cases for different coverage density was considered (14%, 28%
and 57%).

Fig. 5. Contour map of scattering and diffusion coefficients of hemisphere diffusers. Fig. 6. Scattering and absorption coefficients averaged for 500–3150 Hz of the 3D
Both coefficients were averaged from 500 Hz to 3150 Hz. (a) Scattering coefficients diffusers. (a) Effects of structural height (coverage density was fixed as 71%) and (b)
and (b) diffusion coefficients. effects of surface coverage (structural height was fixed as 20 mm).
904 Y.H. Kim et al. / Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 899–905
Fig. 7. Comparison of scattering coefficients of 1D, 2D and 3D diffusers with similar coverage density and structural height.
3.2.2. Results
The measurement results of scattering coefficients were shown
in Table 4. The results show that hemispheres with a height of
more than 15 cm (as converted to full scale) had the highest aver-
age (500–3150 Hz) scattering coefficient. It was also found that the
scattering coefficient increased when the diffuser coverage density
reached about 50–60% for hemispheres. The structural height of
the diffuser tended to shift the frequency characteristics of the
scattering coefficients. When the height of the diffuser was in-
creased, the scattering coefficients at the lower frequencies were
increased. The scattering coefficients increased when the surface
coverage increased from 14% to 57%. The surface coverage did
not affect frequency characteristics of scattering coefficients when
the sizes of the diffusers were fixed. In most cases, the average
scattering coefficient for 500–3150 Hz increased as the surface
coverage increased up to 57%, although having too many diffusers
is not effective for increasing the scattering coefficient. The 71%
surface coverage showed almost the same value as that of 57%,
and, therefore, the 57% surface coverage showed better efficiency
than that of 71% in terms of diffusing reflected energy. In sum,
the coverage densities of the diffusers tended to determine the va-
lue of the scattering coefficient. When the coverage densities of the
diffusers increased, the scattering coefficients increased across the
frequency bands.
Table 5 shows the measurement results of diffusion coefficients.
The frequency characteristics of the diffusion coefficients did not
vary much with the structural height of the diffusers. The average
diffusion coefficients from 500–3150 Hz were 0.28 for 12.5 mm,
0.42 for 17.5 mm, 0.35 for 20 mm, 0.42 for 22.5 mm, 0.49 for
25 mm, 0.34 for 30 mm, 0.36 for 40 mm, and 0.33 for 50 mm.
The maximum diffusion coefficient was observed at the case of
25 mm-height diffuser. For different coverage densities (14%,
28%, 43%, and 57%), averaged diffusion coefficients from 500–
3150 Hz were 0.24 for 14%, 0.38 for 28%, 0.42 for 17.5 mm and
0.39 for 57%. In the same manner with the scattering coefficient,
43% of coverage density showed the maximum value than the
57% case.
3.3. Estimation of scattering and diffusion coefficients
Fig. 5 shows the systematic comparison with diffuser height
and coverage density on scattering and diffusion coefficients. The
contour maps were created using the measurement results and
the Kringing gridding method. Although the measurement data
was limited, Fig. 5 suggests an approach for estimating the scatter-
ing and diffusion coefficients of hemispheric diffusers using the
structural height and coverage density without measurement. In
Fig. 5a, the scattering coefficient of the hemispheric diffusers in-
creased with structural height but showed maximum values at
around 50% of coverage density. In Fig. 5b, the diffusion coefficient
of the hemispheric diffusers tended to be increased by both struc-
tural height and coverage density, but its variation was relatively
small in comparison with those of the scattering coefficient cases.
3.4. Scattering and absorption coefficients
Absorption coefficients of the hemispheric diffuser profiles
were used for the scattering coefficient measurement. Wooden
hemispheric diffusers were arranged in a rectangular shape. The
measurement was conducted based on ISO 354 in a 1:10 scale
reverberation chamber. As previously discussed, the average scat-
tering coefficients for the range of 500–3150 Hz increased as the
diffuser height increased to 200 mm, while the absorption coeffi-
cient decreased as the diffuser height increased, as shown in
Fig. 6a. However, both the absorption and scattering coefficients
increased as the coverage density increased, as shown in Fig. 6b.
4. Discussion and conclusion
In this paper, the effects of height and coverage densities of geo-
metric irregularities within a scattering surface on the scattering
and diffusion coefficients of diffusers were investigated. Both scat-
tering and diffusion coefficients are useful to describe the charac-
teristics of a diffusive surface. The definition of the scattering
coefficient is useful for geometric room acoustic models which
have separate algorithms for specular and scatter components. It
also has a clear physical meaning and an easy measuring process
based on absorption coefficient measurement. From the measure-
ment results of 1D, 2D, and 3D diffuser profiles, scattering coeffi-
cients depended on the structural height and coverage density of
the diffuser profiles. For the geometries examined structural height
is closely related to the frequency characteristics of scattering coef-
ficients, while coverage density is closely related to the values of
scattering coefficients. As shown in Fig. 7, 1D and 2D of diffusers
with directional shapes showed higher scattering coefficients than
3D diffusers with omni-directional shape. It is possible to charac-
terize the scattering performances of diffusive surfaces using
scattering coefficient measurement. However, absorption charac-
teristics vary according to the structural height and coverage
density of the diffuser. Since it is usually wanted to achieve high
scattering without absorption, for the hemisphere diffusers exam-
ined in this study, the structural height of the diffusers is more
important than is the coverage density due to the absorption char-
acteristics of the diffusers. However, selection of both height and
density should be investigated carefully because coverage density
determines the amount of scattering. In the future, many types
of diffusers should be measured and estimated for practical appli-
cation of diffuser design.
 Y.H. Kim et al. / Applied Acoustics 72 (2011) 899–905 905

References [7] Cox TJ, Dalenback B-IL, D’Antonio P, Embrechts JJ, Jeon JY, Mommertz E,
Vorländer M. A tutorial on scattering and diffusion coefficients for room
acoustic surfaces. Acta Acust United Acust 2006;92:1–15.
[1] Mommertz E, Vorländer M. Measurement of the sound scattering coefficients
[8] ISO 17497. Acoustics – sound-scattering properties of surfaces. Part 1:
of surfaces in the reverberation chamber and in the free field. In: Proc of 15th
Measurement of the random incidence scattering coefficient in a
ICA, II, Trondheim, Norway; 1995. p. 577–80.
reverberation room, Geneve; 2004.
[2] D’Antonio P, Cox TJ. Two decades of sound diffusor design, development. Part
[9] AES-4id-2001(r2007). AES information document for room acoustics and
1: Applications and design. J Audio Eng Soc 1998;46(11):955–76.
sound reinforcement systems characterization and measurement of surface
[3] Vorländer M, Mommertz E. Definition and measurement of random-incidence
scattering uniformity. J Audio Eng Soc 2001; 49: 149–65.
scattering coefficients. Appl Acoust 2000;60:149–65.
[10] ISO 354. Acoustics – measurement of sound absorption in a reverberation
[4] Hargreaves TJ, Cox TJ, Lam YW, D’Antonio P. Surface diffusion coefficients for
room, Geneve; 2003.
room acoustics: free-field measures. J Acoust Soc Am 2000;108(4):1710–20.
[11] ISO 9613. Acoustics – attenuation of sound during propagation outdoors. Part
[5] Cox TJ, D’Antonio P. Acoustic absorbers and diffusers – theory. Design and
1: Calculation of the absorption of sound by the atmosphere, Geneve; 1993.
application. Oxon: Spon Press; 2004.
[6] Jeon JY, Lee SC, Vorländer M. Development of scattering surfaces for concert
halls. Appl Acoust 2004;65:341–55.