Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Materials Today: Proceedings

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/matpr

Temporary sound barrier system from natural fiber polymeric composite

Azmah Hanim Mohamed Ariff a,b,⇑, Temitope T. Dele-Afolabi c, Tahrim Hossain Rafin a, Dong-Won Jung d,
Zulkiflle Leman a,b, Khairil Anas Md Rezali a, Recep Calin e
a
Department of Mechanical and Manufacturing Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, 43400 Serdang, Selangor, Malaysia
b
Research Center Advanced Engineering Materials and Composites (AEMC), Faculty of Engineering, Universiti Putra Malaysia, Serdang 43400, Malaysia
c
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, Ajayi Crowther University, PMB 1066, Oyo, Nigeria
d
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Jeju National University, 1 Ara 1-dong, Jeju 690-756, Republic of Korea
e
Material Engineering Department, Engineering Faculty, Kırıkkale University, Kırıkkale, Turkey

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

Article history: Sound barriers, rather than shutting off the source of noise, are the most effective method for reducing
Available online 23 November 2022 noise pollution and reducing the intensity from diverse sources. In the present study, a natural fiber
was employed alongside a polymer material to produce a sound barrier system. The natural fiber com-
Keywords: posite used was Rice Husk-PU reinforced composite. The harmonic analysis was performed through
Rice husk ANSYS to evaluate the sound absorbing coefficient and transmission loss. More so, the stress–strain anal-
Polyurethane ysis with the total deformation of the panel has been analyzed. In order to have better understanding of
ANSYS
the sound absorption coefficient and transmission loss, the frequency range on the simulation was set
Sound absorption coefficient
Transmission loss
between 0 and 4000 Hz. The result showed better sound absorption coefficient on the lower frequency
region when compared with standard and measured results from published paper. It also simulated
higher transmission loss at a high frequency region since high frequency means high sound intensity
level. For the validation of the simulated results, the data were compared with the tested experimental
results for the same material and a very small difference was observed.
Copyright Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Sympo-
sium on Polymeric Materials 2022.

1. Introduction
Despite acknowledging the importance of noise for the quality
of function and living, it is also a known fact, especially in the
transport and construction industries that noise induces various
health disorders such as hearing loss, sleep disturbances, exhaus-
tion, cardiovascular and physiological challenges, etc. [1–4]. Hence,
regulations and control measures for the highest permissible noise
exposure have been implemented for the protection of the hearing
system from elevated level noise [5]. As a developing country, con-
struction works are carried out daily in most parts of Malaysia
where long-term and varying sound blends create a significant
level of noise pollution. Moreover, initiatives created by the Malay-
sian government are in place to address the unyielding noise pol-
lution across the country. To achieve a significant level of noise
reduction in a system, there exist three fundamental components
to be considered namely, source, path, and receiver [6]. Among
⇑ Corresponding author.
E-mail address: azmah@upm.edu.my (A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff).
these components, research has shown the control of noise path
as the easiest way of noise reduction in a system. The process
involves the installation of a sound barrier to effectively obstruct
the sound energy and subsequently transmit the remaining few
due to the reflection achieved by the large variation of acoustic
impedance in the path of transmission [7]. Meanwhile, vast major-
ity of the commercial sound barriers are produced from synthetic
porous absorber materials like glass wool or fiberglass [6] which
are potentially hazardous materials to human health. Asbestos
fiber particulates including basalt wool, ceramic fiber, glass wool
and mineral wool are capable of causing varying degrees of lung
damages [8–10] when inhaled. Asdrubali reported that synthetic
materials such as foam glass poses high Global Warming Potential
(GWP) [11].
In recent years, research on natural fibers has been of great
interest because they provide good sound proofing performances
[12–14]. In addition, they are strong, biodegradable, abundant,
non-abrasive, and environmentally safe [15–17]. The sound
absorption mechanisms of porous fiber material are primarily the
viscous effects induced by the internal friction between the wall

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2022.11.142
2214-7853/Copyright Ó 2023 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Selection and peer-review under responsibility of the scientific committee of the International Symposium on Polymeric Materials 2022.
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al.
of fiber and the airflow as well as by the heat loss from various
fibers [18]. Ismail et al. [19] reported that Arenga pinata fibers
demonstrated good absorption performance from 2000 to
5000 Hz. Zulkifli et al. [20] discovered that single layer of coconut
coir fiber exhibited excellent absorption performance at middle
and high frequencies and performed optimally at low frequencies
by using multiple layers. In order to achieve optimum performance
of a sound barrier made from natural fiber, there is need to rein-
force the natural fiber with a suitably selected polymer to reduce
fiber diameter, which increases sound absorption at low frequen-
cies by having a more tortuous route and large surface area,
improving the airflow resistivity of the fibrous material. The
increase in airflow resistivity induces energy loss by sound wave
friction with air molecules, improving low-frequency sound
absorption [21]. The utilization of kenaf and blankets of recycled
polyester as sound absorber system produced excellent absorption
performance at 1000–5000 Hz with average of 0.8. Marques et al.
[22] revealed that the addition of higher content of rice husk pro-
moted the sound absorption performance of a polymer-based com-
posite reinforced with rice husk and expanded cork by-products.
Arumugam et al. [23] reported a sound absorption coefficient of
6400 Hz for composite specimens developed utilizing both rice
husk and saw dust reinforced with hybridized polymer composites.
For sound barrier manufacturers, mathematical models are eco-
nomical tools in the process of product development to forecast
the acoustic performance of new sound barrier designs. Using ana-
lytical models, the implications of sound leakages were established
[24] and even intricate sound barrier systems were modelled [25].
For comprehensive application of mathematical models, computa-
tional physics methods can be utilized, e.g. finite element method
(FEM) [26] and boundary element method [27]. Simulation of por-
ous absorbing systems with FEM was performed by Craggs [28]
and elsewhere [29], the optimization of a sound barrier’s top edge
through a genetic algorithm in boundary element simulations was
achieved. This study focuses on the design of a low-cost and effi-
cient sound barrier from rice-husk-PU reinforced composite. The
investigation was conducted using the FEM to perform harmonic
analysis through ANSYS in order to determine the sound absorbing
coefficient and transmission loss. More so, the stress–strain analy-
sis and the total deformation of the designed acoustic panel were
performed.
2. Materials and methods
2.1. Materials selection and experimental work
Based on the porosity (70 %vol.), density (300 kg/m3), fiber
diameter (250–380 lm) and sound absorption coefficient (0.889
at 250 Hz) values [30–32], rice husk was selected out of the three
most available natural fibers in Malaysia (i.e. rice husk, oil palm
and kenaf) as the best candidate suitable for acoustic barriers.
The rice husk was initially treated with alkaline solution (5 wt%
NaOH) to improve the sound absorption coefficient. Thereafter,
the rice husk was washed and later subjected to drying for 24 h
under ambient condition as well as oven drying for 12 h at 80 °C.
In order to prepare the composite material, rice husk was rein-
forced with polyurethane by mixing ground rice husk with polyol
and isocyanate mixture and then pouring into a mold with of
1980 mm (length)  500 mm (width)  30 mm (thickness). The
ratio of rice husk to polyurethane was maintained at 1:3 which
is in agreement with the study of [33], where similar ratio demon-
strated the best sound absorption coefficient relative to other
ratios. Also, according to this study, the sound absorption coeffi-
cient of the developed rice-husk-PU reinforced composite panel
was obtained by positioning a sound source at one end of an impe-
439
Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449
dance tube while the sample panel was placed at the opposite end.
The sound source created a broadband stationary random sound
waves which propagated as plane waves in the tube, hit the sample
panel and then reflected. With this set up, it was possible to mea-
sure the sound absorption coefficient using the digital frequency
analyzer.
2.2. Design selection
In the design process, SOLIDWORKS software was employed to
model the 3D design of the prototype panel
(1980 mm  500 mm  30 mm) and later, the geometry was trans-
ferred to ANSYS for further analysis. To calculate total deformation
at various frequencies, transmission loss, and sound absorption
coefficient, the whole process was conducted in three steps of har-
monic analysis. At first, the modal analysis was done to know the
total deformation, and then it was transferred to harmonic
response to know the equivalent radiated power and frequency
response of the sound barrier. Thereafter, it was transferred to har-
monics acoustics to find the desired transmission loss and sound
absorption coefficient. Meanwhile, rice husk and polyurethane
foam were not found in the material library of ANSYS due to short-
age of data. Hence, the data for these materials were added manu-
ally to run the simulation on the rice-husk-PU reinforced
composite panel.
2.3. Design simulation
An acoustic simulation using ANSYS software was created.
Acoustic simulation is one way to simulate and analyze the design
in acoustics conditions mathematically with Eigen system algo-
rithms allowing some physical calculations of the corresponding
mode shapes taken from the characteristic values associated as
scalars with a character vector of a square matrix [34]. In the pre-
sent study, harmonic analysis simulation was done in modal, har-
monic response, and harmonic acoustic analysis to find the desired
total deformation at different frequencies, transmission loss, and
sound absorption coefficient. The acoustic setup for the harmonic
acoustic simulation is presented in Fig. 1. For the modal analysis,
the analysis settings and fixed support were set up for a frequency
range between 100 Hz and 4000 Hz. Subsequently, this setup was
done after meshing. The meshing was done with 3756 nodes and
528 elements. Furthermore, the simulation was run with necessary
acoustic boundary conditions (radiation boundary and port inlet
and outlet) and acoustic excitation (mass source and surface veloc-
ity), where the acoustic region is the enclosure and the physical
region is the panel. The acoustic medium surrounding the sound
barrier and the sound source was created as the domain in which
acoustic waves propagate. Zero pressure was applied on the outer
faces to ensure absorption of outgoing waves, whereby no reflec-
tion will be considered in the simulation. The sound pressure level
in the computational domain was then calculated, representing the
effect of sound isolation of a particular noise barrier.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Equivalent radiated power and frequency response
Fig. 2 shows the relationship between the equivalent radiated
power (ERP) of the panel and the frequency. ERP is an IEEE stan-
dardized definition of directional radio frequency (RF) power
which measures the combination of the power emitted by the
transmitter and the ability of the antenna to direct that power in
a given direction. In the present study, the ERP exhibited the high-
est value within the frequency range of 100 Hz to 450 Hz, which
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al.
Fig. 1. Acoustic setup for harmonic acoustic simulation.
Fig. 2. Equivalent radiated power of the panel against frequency.
means that at this frequency range, the combination of the total
power emitted by the sound source is higher than the rest of the
frequency range. A similar frequency band (200–400 Hz) was
reported by Kim et al. [34] for the equivalent radiated power of
an enclosure panel for low-frequency noise and vibration
reduction.
The frequency response was performed in order to compute the
structural response to steady-state oscillatory excitation. The two-
frequency response performed in this simulation are the direc-
tional deformation and directional velocity. The graphs for fre-
quency response for amplitude and phase angle vs frequency are
shown in Figs. 3 and 4. It can be seen from the graphs that the fre-
quency response of both directional deformation and directional
velocity with respect to both the amplitude and phase angle are
constantly moving with the change of frequency range. At different
frequency input for the sound barrier panel, the amplitude
changes, which means that the extent of the vibration of the fre-
quency measured from the equilibrium position varies for different
ranges.
440
Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449
3.2. Total deformation
For the 62 modes examined, the frequencies at each mode are
summarized in Tables 1-6. The total deformation of the panel
based on selected frequencies (highlighted in Tables 1-6) are pre-
sented in Figs. 5-8. A clear distinction can be observed in the total
deformation of the panel as evidenced in the Figures for the differ-
ent frequencies. Total deformation at the beginning of the fre-
quency range (Fig. 5) can be observed to be high in the middle.
Whereas, as the frequency range increased, the total deformation
became uniform across the entire panel, especially for the fre-
quency range of 3991 Hz. Liu et al. [35] reported a similar observa-
tion in their study where the frequencies of noise from an adaptive
slat caused by deformation experienced significant changes.
3.3. Stress–strain analysis
Figs. 9-10 show the normal stress and total equivalent stress on
the sound barrier panel at modes 1 and 62 (i.e. 306.82 Hz and
3991 Hz). Clearly, the normal stress analysis represents only the
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Fig. 3. Graph of amplitude (directional deformation) and phase angle vs frequency.

Fig 4. Graph of amplitude (directional velocity) and phase angle vs frequency.

Table 1
Frequencies for modes within the range of 1–10.

Mode 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Frequency 306.82 342.48 405.63 496.13 618.17 766.69 947.78 979.39 1011.1 1064.3
(Hz)

Table 2
Frequencies for modes within the range of 11–20.

Mode 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Frequency 1141.4 1149.1 1240.4 1368.5 1390.1 1468 1518.1 1694.2 1703.7 1875.2
(Hz)

Table 3
Frequencies for modes within the range of 21–30.

Mode 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Frequency 1903.5 1904.7 1932.9 1949.9 1969.8 2017 2101.9 2138.5 2170.9 2217.1
(Hz)

Table 4
Frequencies for modes within the range of 31–40.

Mode 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40
Frequency 2296.4 2344.1 2370.2 2407.5 2444.3 2520.6 2656 2706.2 2722.7 2867.3
(Hz)

x-direction, while for the equivalent stress, the analysis represents lent stress at 306.82 Hz, the middle section has more stress than
the whole object in all directions. The normal stress at 306.82 Hz the other parts of the panel. However, at higher frequency
shows more stress in the middle section. Similarly for the equiva- (3991 Hz), it can be seen that the stress is distributed among all

441
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Table 5
Frequencies for modes within the range of 41–51.

Mode 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51
Frequency 2897.5 2938.3 2945.8 2981.8 3014.6 3017.4 3027.2 3111.8 3166.9 3236 3370.4
(Hz)

Table 6
Frequencies for modes within the range of 52–62.

Mode 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62
Frequency 3387.6 3398.6 3410.5 3473.6 3493.9 3556.6 3709.3 3745.7 3769 3922 3991
(Hz)

Fig. 5. Total Deformation of the panel at a frequency of 306.82 Hz.

Fig. 6. Total Deformation of the panel at a frequency of 979.39 Hz.

other sections of the panel and has distributed uniformly through-
out the panel as evidenced in Figs. 11 and 12. The higher the fre-
quency, the more energy is being passed through the surface.
This is consistent with the findings if Ishizuka and Fujiwara [36]
where the significant noise reduction at higher frequency range
of noise barriers due to the porous pavement was reported.
Figs. 13-16 show the equivalent total strain and normal elastic
strain on the sound barrier panel at modes 1 and 62 (i.e. 306.82 Hz
and 3991 Hz). At 306.82 Hz, the strain analysis on the panel varies
for normal elastic strain and equivalent total strain. The reason for
this is that normal elastic strain is calculated based on x-direction,
whereas for the equivalent total strain, it is calculated over the
entire panel (i.e. in all directions). By comparing Figs. 13 and 14
there is a very slight change of strain for equivalent total strain,
whereas, for normal elastic strain, the strain is slightly higher in
the middle section of the panel. For mode 62 (at a frequency of
3991 Hz), the normal elastic strain and equivalent total strain show
the same phenomenon. The strain is higher all over the panel for
normal elastic strain, whereas for the equivalent total strain, the
strain remains at a value of 1.0297 along the whole panel except
for side edges. The variation of strains at different locations /fre-
quencies in composite honeycomb sandwich panels was also
reported elsewhere [37] which is consistent with the findings
above.

442
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Fig. 7. Total Deformation of the panel at a frequency of 3769 Hz.

Fig. 8. Total Deformation of the panel at a frequency of 3991 Hz.

Fig. 9. Equivalent stress at 306.82 Hz.

3.4. Sound absorption coefficient
The SAC is usually evaluated to know how much energy is
absorbed by the material compared to the incident energy. Sound
or noise, as a form of energy, can lose some of its energy while
passing through a material which defines how well the material
has sound absorbing quality. Higher sound absorption coefficient
means that the material can easily absorb more of the sound
energy, resulting in less noise or sound on the other side of the
material. The sound absorption coefficient of the rice-husk-PU
composite sound barrier panel has been plotted against various
frequencies as shown in Fig. 17. With different frequency inputs,
the sound absorption coefficient exhibited different values.
As seen in the figure, the panel exhibited high SAC values
between a frequency range of 100–1500 Hz. At 2700 Hz, the panel
exhibited the lowest frequency of approximately 0.41, and after-

443
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Fig. 10. Normal stress at 306.82 Hz.

Fig. 11. Equivalent stress at 3991 Hz.

Fig 12. Normal stress at 3991 Hz.

ward, the SAC rose slightly as the frequency increased. Elsewhere
[38], a relatively similar trend was observed for the SAC of a rice
straw mat as sound barrier system where SAC reached 0.97–0.98
in the 1000–1250 Hz range and then experienced a decline up to
0.77 at 5000 Hz frequency. Meanwhile, the SAC results in the cur-
rent study indicate how well the sound barrier material can absorb
the sound energy at various frequencies. Therefore, it can be sur-
mised that the rice-husk-PU composite sound barrier panel with
the peak values of SAC in the range 100 Hz to 1500 Hz can absorb
most of the sound or noise energy which is enough for the men-
tioned frequency region.
In order to ensure that the rice husk-PU composite sound bar-
rier panel is adequately designed with appropriate materials, the
SAC data analyzed through the ANSYS simulation was compared

444
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Fig. 13. Equivalent total strain at 306.82 Hz.

Fig. 14. Normal elastic strain at 306.82 Hz.

Fig. 15. Equivalent total strain at 3991 Hz.

with the standard data to evaluate if the panel meets the require-
ments for a robust and efficient sound barrier system. The standard
reference of SAC for the given frequency is from the sound barrier
panel made of board and PE embossing, which is considered an
excellent sound barrier. Fig. 18 presents the plot of both the SAC
obtained and the standard values against the frequency.
445
From the plot, it can be evidenced that the SAC from the simu-
lation results exhibited higher values from 100 Hz up to 1200 Hz,
indicating better SAC relative to the standard reference. However,
beyond the 1200 Hz frequency (i.e. from 1250 Hz), the obtained
SAC values declined slowly to an SAC of 0.41 and afterwards, expe-
rienced a slight increase until frequency input of 4000 Hz. It is
important to note from Table 7 that the difference of both values
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Fig. 16. Normal elastic strain at 3991 Hz.

Fig. 17. Graph of SAC at different range of frequencies.

Fig. 18. Graph comparing the SAC of obtained and standard values.

at each frequency starting from the frequency of decline of the SAC barrier panel exhibited excellent SAC in the lower frequency region
obtained is negligible and can be overlooked since the simulation while with the slightly low SAC performance of the designed panel
results cannot be accurate with the standard tested results. Hence, relative to the standard reference panel, the panel designed in the
it can be surmised that the designed rice husk-PU composite sound

446
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Table 7 Usually, the high sound intensity levels for humans are considered
SAC difference at given from 90 dB onwards.
frequencies.
Fig. 20 presents the comparison plot for the obtained transmis-
Frequency Difference sion loss, the transmission for the standard and the transmission
100 0.84 loss for the reference which is the shifted reference curve taken
150.66 0.74 from the ASTM E413. Comparing the data between the obtained,
226.99 0.68 standard and reference, it can be evaluated whether the designed
342 0.50
515.26 0.25
acoustic panel is adequate for the sound absorption feature. From
776.31 0.13 the figure, it can be observed that the transmission loss of the
1169.6 0.04 obtained values for this project shows a considerable difference
1762.2 0.13 at the lower frequency region. Meanwhile, after the 1170 Hz fre-
2654.9 0.19
quency mark, the difference got smaller and at 2650 Hz, the
3150 0.17
4000 0.07 obtained value finally got closer to the standard and the reference
values.
It is also worth noting that at 3150 Hz and 4000 Hz, the simu-
lated transmission loss value surpassed the standard and reference
present study still has the capacity to demonstrate good sound
values. The peak value (46.27 dB) recorded for the simulated trans-
absorbing characteristics.
mission loss was at the 4000 Hz frequency mark. Meanwhile, it is
important to state that the massive difference in the lower fre-
3.5. Transmission loss quency region has no influence on the panel’s sound absorption
characteristics or quality. In the lower frequency region, the sound
Transmission loss can vary at a different frequency depending intensity level is low and within the average human comfortable
on the intensity of the sound or noise. The ratio of the transmitted hearing capacity, and hence it does not impact the sound intensity
power with the incident power shows how much transmission is level that much. It can be established from the sound intensity for-
being lost. As inferred from previous studies [39,40], transmission mula that frequency is directly proportional to the sound intensity,
loss in a sound-absorbing material is a prevalent factor where the which means that the sound intensity increases with increasing
more the loss, the more effective the material is for sound absorp- frequency. The sound intensity level at a higher range is very dis-
tion. The transmission loss shows greater results at a greater sound turbing and not recommended for human ears. Usually, more than
intensity which is usually found in higher frequencies. The simu- 90 dB of sound intensity level resulting from a higher frequency
lated transmission loss graph with frequency in the present study range is harmful to an average human, according to OSHA. There-
is shown in Fig. 19. fore, the elevated value of the obtained transmission loss at higher
Clearly from the figure, for the range between 100 Hz and frequency range showcases the designed rice husk-PU composite
1200 Hz, the transmission loss is very negligible and can be valued sound barrier panel in the study as a viable candidate for noise
around 1.19 dB, but as the frequency increases from 1200 Hz, the barriers.
transmission loss increases and reaches a peak value of 46.27 dB
at 4000 Hz. This is in good agreement with another study [41]
where the transmission loss of rice-straw mat with an additional 3.6. Validation of data
plywood layer increased with increasing frequency. The reason
for the lower transmission loss at the beginning is because the To validate the data obtained from the simulation, it was neces-
sound or noise ranging from 100 Hz to 1200 Hz has significantly sary to compare the data with the Rice Husk-PU reinforced com-
less intensity which means the incident power of the sound is posite data, which was tested for sound absorption coefficient
already low, and the transmitted power is 1.17 to 2 dB lower than through an impedance tube. According to Mahzan et al. [33], the
the incident power. Hence, the lower transmission loss at the rice husk-PU composite was tested for six different samples, and
beginning of the frequency. With gradual increment of the fre- the best SAC was found for 25 % rice husk mixed with PU foam.
quency beyond 1200 Hz, the transmission loss experiences an In this study, the data we got from the simulation was also evalu-
exponential increase since the higher frequency has higher sound ated for 25 % rice husk mixed with PU foam. The research [32]
intensity, indicating that the incident power is more and needs showed that 25 % rice husk was also compared with the virgin
to be minimized in the comfortable hearing range. High transmis- PU, which is the polymer. Fig. 21 presents the comparison among
sion loss is required more when the sound intensity level is higher. the simulated data, the tested data, and virgin polymer PU data.

Fig. 19. Graph of Transmission loss at different ranges of frequencies.

447
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al. Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449

Fig. 20. Graph comparing the transmission loss of the obtained, standard, and reference values.

Fig. 21. Graph showing the validation of the obtained simulated data.

Clearly from the figure, it can be observed that the simulated validation is accepted since the margin of difference is small and
data shows the same values as the tested data from frequency 0– the simulated data is higher than the tested or experimental one.
250 Hz. Here the data of PU, which is the polymer, has also been
included to show how virgin PU shows sound absorption capacity
within the same frequency range. Due to the shortage of data pro-
4. Conclusions
vided in the experimental investigation of [33], which has been
used as a reference for validating the simulated data, the range
An effective sound barrier was designed and modeled to
of frequency considered is within a range from 0 to 2000 Hz. More
achieve acceptable SAC and transmission loss. Since it is nontoxic
so, the line of simulated and tested showed the same results until
and biodegradable, the natural fiber composite used in this
250 Hz. Thereafter, it can be noticed that the SAC difference is in
research was rice husk-PU reinforced composite, which was
the range of 0.3 to 0.2 which is negligible to some extent. Since
designed and simulated using ANSYS software. All the data were
the simulated data does not show less SAC than the tested data,
evaluated and analyzed in the frequency range of 100 Hz to
it can be concluded that the SAC is validated. The reason for show-
4000 Hz. Both the SAC and transmission loss were compared with
ing the difference between the simulated and tested data is
the standard data, and it was evaluated that the panel demon-
because the simulated results represent the behavior of the same
strated acceptable SAC in the lower frequency region compared
object based on its theoretical model. Whereas the tested or exper-
to the standard data. From the data analyzed, it can also be con-
imental data represent the actual behavior of the object under test
cluded that the panel has higher transmission loss at a higher fre-
with specific measuring errors and conditions. Nevertheless, the
quency. The designed acoustic panel showed a minimal difference,
specifically in SAC at the higher frequency region, which validates
448
A. Hanim Mohamed Ariff, T.T. Dele-Afolabi, T. Hossain Rafin et al.
the utilization of a temporary natural sound barrier made of natu-
ral fiber composite.
CRediT authorship contribution statement
Azmah Hanim Mohamed Ariff: Conceptualization, Funding
acquisition, Project administration. Temitope T. Dele-Afolabi:
Writing – original draft, Data curation. Tahrim Hossain Rafin:
Writing – review & editing, Investigation. Dong-Won Jung: Visual-
ization, Funding acquisition. Zulkiflle Leman: Supervision,
Resources. Khairil Anas Md Rezali: Supervision, Resources. Recep
Calin: Visualization, Supervision.
Data availability
The authors are unable or have chosen not to specify which data has
been used.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interest regarding
the publication of this article.
Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank Universiti Putra Malaysia for
the financial support through the Research Management Center
of Universiti Putra Malaysia (UPM/GP-IPB/2020/9688700).
References
[1] H.P. Lee, Z. Wang, K.M. Lim, Assessment of noise from equipment and
processes at construction sites, Build. Acoustics 24 (1) (2017) 21–34.
[2] P.J. Lee, M.H. Shim, J.Y. Jeon, Effects of different noise combinations on sleep, as
assessed by a general questionnaire, Appl. Acoust. 71 (9) (2010) 870–875.
[3] T. Saeki, T. Fujii, S. Yamaguchi, S. Harima, Effects of acoustical noise on
annoyance, performance and fatigue during mental memory task, Appl.
Acoust. 65 (9) (2004) 913–921.
[4] M. Picard, S.A. Girard, M. Simard, R. Larocque, T. Leroux, F. Turcotte, Association
of work-related accidents with noise exposure in the workplace and noise-
induced hearing loss based on the experience of some 240,000 person-years of
observation, Accid. Anal. Prev. 40 (5) (2008) 1644–1652.
[5] ISO, I. (2001). 10534-2: Acoustics-Determination of sound absorption
coefficient and impedance in impedance tubes-Part 2: Transfer-function
method. BS EN ISO, 10534-2.
[6] A.Y. Ismail, N.A.M. Shadid, A.M.M. Nizam, Development of green curtain noise
barrier using natural waste fibres, J. Adv. Res. Mater. Sci. 17 (1) (2016) 1–9.
[7] F.J. Fahy, P. Gardonio, Sound and structural vibration: radiation, transmission
and response, Elsevier, 2007.
[8] M. Jäckel, Á. Sáfrány, P. Hargittai, R. Szo } ke, F. Pott, T. Kerényi, Lung effects of
conventional and biosoluble glass fibers as asbestos substitutes. An
experimental study, Medicine 4 (2) (2005) 275–283.
[9] S.H. Park, Types and health hazards of fibrous materials used as asbestos
substitutes, Saf. Health Work 9 (3) (2018) 360–364.
[10] N.M. Marian, G. Giorgetti, C. Magrini, G.C. Capitani, L. Galimberti, A. Cavallo, C.
Viti, From hazardous asbestos containing wastes (ACW) to new secondary raw
material through a new sustainable inertization process:
multimethodological mineralogical study, J. Hazard. Mater. 413 (2021).
[11] F. Asdrubali. Survey on the acoustical properties of new sustainable materials
for noise control, in: Proceedings of Euronoise, vol. 30, European Acoustics
Association, Tampere, 2006, May, pp. 1-10.
[12] E. Taban, A. Khavanin, A. Ohadi, A. Putra, A.J. Jafari, M. Faridan, A. Soleimanian,
Study on the acoustic characteristics of natural date palm fibres: Experimental
and theoretical approaches, Build. Environ. 161 (2019).
[13] S. Gokulkumar, P.R. Thyla, L. Prabhu, S. Sathish, Measuring methods of acoustic
properties and influence of physical parameters on natural fibers: a review, J.
Nat. Fibers (2019).
Materials Today: Proceedings 74 (2023) 438–449
[14] G. Thilagavathi, N. Muthukumar, S. Neela Krishnanan, T. Senthilram,
Development and characterization of pineapple fibre nonwovens for thermal
and sound insulation applications, J. Nat. Fibers 17 (10) (2020) 1391–1400.
[15] T. Hassan, H. Jamshaid, R. Mishra, M.Q. Khan, M. Petru, J. Novak, M.
Hromasova, Acoustic, mechanical and thermal properties of green
composites reinforced with natural fibers waste, Polymers 12 (3) (2020) 654.
[16] Y.G. Thyavihalli Girijappa, S. Mavinkere Rangappa, J. Parameswaranpillai, S.
Siengchin, Natural fibers as sustainable and renewable resource for
development of eco-friendly composites: a comprehensive review, Front.
Mater. 6 (2019) 226.
[17] T.D. Ngo, Natural fibers for sustainable bio-composites, Natural and artificial
fiber-reinforced composites as renewable sources 3 (2018) 107–126.
[18] H. Mamtaz, M.H. Fouladi, M. Al-Atabi, S. Narayana Namasivayam, Acoustic
absorption of natural fiber composites, J. Eng. (2016).
[19] L. Ismail, M.I. Ghazali, S. Mahzan, A.A. Zaidi, Sound absorption of Arenga
Pinnata natural fiber, World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 67 (2010) 804–806.
[20] Z. Rozli, Z. Zulkarnain, Noise control using coconut coir fiber sound absorber
with porous layer backing and perforated panel, Am. J. Appl. Sci. 7 (2) (2010)
260–264.
[21] T. Yang, L. Hu, X. Xiong, M. Petrů, M.T. Noman, R. Mishra, J. Militký, Sound
absorption properties of natural fibers: a review, Sustainability 12 (20) (2020)
8477.
[22] B. Marques, A. Tadeu, J. Antonio, J. Almeida, J. de Brito, Mechanical, thermal
and acoustic behaviour of polymer-based composite materials produced with
rice husk and expanded cork by-products, Constr. Build. Mater. 239 (2020).
[23] H. Arumugam, B. Krishnasamy, G. Perumal, M.A. Aleem, A. Muthukaruppan,
Bio-composites of rice husk and saw dust reinforced bio-benzoxazine/epoxy
hybridized matrices: thermal, mechanical, electrical resistance and acoustic
absorption properties, Constr. Build. Mater. 312 (2021).
[24] H. Yiu Wong, K. Ming Li, Prediction models for sound leakage through noise
barriers, J. Acoustical Soc. Am. 109 (3) (2001) 1011–1022.
[25] S.I. Hayek, Mathematical modeling of absorbent highway noise barriers, Appl.
Acoust. 31 (1–3) (1990) 77–100.
[26] J.Z. Zhu, The finite element method: its basis and fundamentals, Elsevier, 2013.
[27] C.A. Brebbia, J. Dominguez, Boundary element methods for potential problems,
Appl. Math. Model. 1 (7) (1977) 372–378.
[28] A. Craggs, A finite element model for rigid porous absorbing materials, J. Sound
Vib. 61 (1) (1978) 101–111.
[29] S. Grubeša, K. Jambrošić, H. Domitrović, Noise barriers with varying cross-
section optimized by genetic algorithms, Appl. Acoust. 73 (11) (2012) 1129–
1137.
[30] M.N. Yahya, M. Sambu, H.A. Latif, T.M. Junaid, A study of acoustics
performance on natural fibre composite, in: IOP Conf. Ser.: Mater. Sci. Eng.,
vol. 226, No. 1. IOP Publishing, p. 012013.
[31] Z. Chen, Y. Xu, S. Shivkumar, Microstructure and tensile properties of various
varieties of rice husk, J. Sci. Food Agric. 98 (3) (2018) 1061–1070.
[32] R. Rahmad, Sound absorption of palm coir fiber, J. Sci. Technol. 10 (4) (2018).
[33] S. Mahzan, A.A. Zaidi, M.I. Ghazali, M.N. Yahya, M. Ismail, Investigation on
sound absorption of rice-husk reinforced composite, Proc. MUCEET (2009) 19–
22.
[34] H.G. Kim, C. Nerse, S. Wang, Topography optimization of an enclosure panel for
low-frequency noise and vibration reduction using the equivalent radiated
power approach, Mater. Des. 183 (2019).
[35] Y. Liu, H. Guo, T. Hu, Q. Qu, P. Liu, Experimental Investigation of Slat Noise
Attenuation with Trailing Edge Bending Deformation, in: 25th AIAA/CEAS
Aeroacoustics Conference, 2019, p. 2408.
[36] T. Ishizuka, K. Fujiwara, Performance of noise barriers with various edge
shapes and acoustical conditions, Appl. Acoustics 65 (2) (2004) 125–141.
[37] S. Kumar, K. Renji, Estimation of strains in composite honeycomb sandwich
panels subjected to low frequency diffused acoustic field, J. Sound Vib. 449
(2019) 84–97.
[38] C.W. Kang, E.S. Jang, S.S. Jang, H.Y. Kang, Comparison of transfer function
method and reverberation room method in measuring the sound absorption
coefficient of rice straw particle mat, J. Korean Wood Sci. Technol. 46 (4)
(2018) 362–367.
[39] P.A. Thakare, N. Kumar, V.B. Ugale, Sound transmission loss and flexural
a strength assessment of hybrid composite reinforced with natural fibers and
kevlar, Mater. Today: Proc. 19 (2019) 686–690.
[40] T.W.M. Salih, An investigation into practical values of sound transmission loss
across natural luffa fibers, A TARTALOMBÓL 106 (2020).
[41] C.W. Kang, E.S. Jang, S.S. Jang, H.Y. Kang, Measurement of sound transmission
loss in a sound barrier filled with the rice-straw particles by the transfer
function and laboratory measurement methods, J. Korean Wood Sci. Technol.
46 (4) (2018) 338–345.
449