Low, movable partitions have become the standard method of providing individual space cubicles for millions of office workers throughout the world. The principal deficiency with all low participation systems is the lack of acoustical privacy. If a worker in a cubicle is able to hear what is said in the next cubicle, it may be hard to concentrate and result in the loss of efficiency and productivity. This invention consists of a sound diffraction device to be installed on the top of movable office partitions. The addition of this invention improves the acoustical performance of movable office partitions.
This invention consists of a device that is mounted on the top of a movable office partition to improve the acoustical efficacy of the partition. It is equally effective on new or on existing partitions and can be made to fit all the major brands in the movable partition market; It is attractive, lightweight, durable, inexpensive to manufacture and easy to install. The device is able to absorb incident sound and redirect diffracted sound to a path that will reduce sound levels reaching a listener in he next cubicle.
Existing movable office partitions usually consist of two 1″ thick fiberglass or other acoustically absorbent mats mounted on either side of a thin, rigid panel called a septum. The fiberglass is in the range of 3 to 6 pounds per cubic foot in density which is considerably greater than that used for thermal insulation. The edges of the fiberglass can be hardened if they are to be exposed, but this changes the acoustical absorbency; the broad exposed sides of the partition are usually covered with an acoustically transparent woven nylon fabric, sometimes with a backing sheet. Exposed and abutting edges (framework) of the partitions are usually made from a lightweight metal, wood or plastic. This exposed framework is a source of diffracted and reflected sound. The panels are joined by various interlocking devices. Almost all of the panels have one thing in common; they are modular, i.e. they are designed to be placed on centers that are measured in even whole numbers, with the exception of 18″ panels. The sizes generally run from 1′-0″ in width to 5′-0″ in width. The heights vary but 5′-0″ is probably the most common and is used as the basis for the examples of the effectiveness of this invention. A partition must be higher than both the source and the listener for the invention to make a significant improvement in the abatement of sound intrusion.
The diffraction abatement invention would be made in increments that coincide with the widths of the partitions. It would match or contrast with the office partitions depending on the buyer's choice. It would be made to clip over the top of the partitions and could easily be removed and reinstalled when the partitions are changed. The invention consists of a plastic, lightweight metal or fiberglass pipe core with an 8″+ or − diameter, which will act as a septum. Alternative core materials could be substituted provided they are rigid and dense. Attached to the bottom of the pipe core is a shallow legged inverted channel that will provide a solid, flat attachment surface. Fastened to the pipe channel with adhesive, rivets or screws is another channel designed to clip over the top of any manufacturer's movable partition. It would have a spring action and small inward curves in each leg of the channel to grip the partition's top frame. This makes it easy to attach and remove the device without tools. There are many other attachment methods and this detail is not germane to the acoustic results which constitute the basis of this patent application.
The core is wrapped with a fiberglass or other similar absorbent material. The absorbent material should consist of two or more layers of varying densities and thickness to create the most effective absorption coefficient. An example of a good combination is an outer layer of ⅛″, thick fiberglass having a density of 6 pounds per cubic foot covering a 1″, thick layer of fiberglass having a density of 3 pounds per cubic foot over a ⅞″, thick layer of fiberglass having a density of 4 pounds per cubic foot. The overall diameter would then be 1″-0″ (4″ of absorbent material and an 8″ core.) This is about the ideal diameter because it would absorb and refract sound frequencies above 1000 Hz and diffract sound frequencies below 1000 Hz. Larger sizes would be acoustically slightly more effective, but would be less stable and intrude into the space of a cubicle. Smaller sizes would be acoustically less functional.
The surface material would consist of an acoustically transparent woven fabric. Materials are available from various manufacturers that provide the correct acoustical properties, do not sag or “puddle,” are durable, have a low cost and come in many colors. These are the ideal characteristics for the covering of the diffraction abatement invention because they would match the companion partitions in color and texture.
The fabric should be adhered to a thin acoustical fiberglass backing to provide stability and a surface upon which to glue the fabric to the fiberglass sound absorbent material. An acceptable alternate method of attachment is to tightly wrap the fabric around the sound absorbent material and staple or otherwise mechanically attach it. In either case the fabric would be cut to fit and folded over the ends of the sound absorbent material and attached thereto with glue.
The ends of the device would be covered by a thin metal, fiberglass or plastic disk. The disk would be attached to the ends of the pipe septum by countersunk screws. The ends of the septum/pipe would have a glued or otherwise attached plug to create a surface for attachment of the end cover disk. This end treatment would abut the next device and be exposed where partitions end, such as at the entrance to cubicles.
A corner sound abatement device of similar design is optional at the manufacturer's judgment. The corners would be of the same construction as the linear devices, but would have 45 degree ends cemented together to form a 90 degree corner. The acoustic benefits would be the same.
This application claims the benefit of U.S. provisional patent application Ser. No. 60/777,885 filed Mar. 1, 2006.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3592289 | Aysta et al. | Jul 1971 | A |
4548292 | Noxon | Oct 1985 | A |
4750586 | Lerner et al. | Jun 1988 | A |
5035298 | Noxon | Jul 1991 | A |
5521338 | Shono et al. | May 1996 | A |
6810991 | Suzuki | Nov 2004 | B1 |
7178630 | Perdue | Feb 2007 | B1 |
20030019170 | Donnelly | Jan 2003 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20070204529 A1 | Sep 2007 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
60777885 | Mar 2006 | US |