2.6. When does active control work best?
Description
This article is from the Active Noise Control FAQ, by Dr. Chris Ruckman
2.6. When does active control work best?
Active noise control works best for sound fields that are spatially simple. The classic example is low-frequency sound waves traveling through a duct, an essentially one-dimensional problem. The spatial character of a sound field depends on wavelength, and therefore on frequency. Active control works best when the wavelength is long compared to the dimensions of its surroundings, i.e., low frequencies. Fortunately, as mentioned above, passive methods tend to work best at high frequencies. Most active noise control systems combine passive and active techniques to cover a range of frequencies. For example, many active mufflers include a low-back- pressure "glass-pack" muffler for mid and high frequencies, with active control used only for the lowest frequencies.
Controlling a spatially complicated sound field is beyond today's technology. The sound field surrounding your house when the neighbor's kid plays his electric guitar is hopelessly complex because of the high frequencies involved and the complicated geometry of the house and its surroundings. On the other hand, it is somewhat easier to control noise in an enclosed space such as a vehicle cabin at low frequencies where the wavelength is similar to (or longer than) one or more of the cabin dimensions. Easier still is controlling low-frequency noise in a duct, where *two* dimensions of the enclosed space are small with respect to wavelength. The extreme case would be low-frequency noise in a small box, where the enclosed space appears small in all directions compared to the acoustic wavelength.
Often, reducing noise in specific localized regions has the unwanted side effect of amplifying noise elsewhere. The system reduces noise locally rather than globally. Generally, one obtains global reductions only for simple sound fields where the primary mechanism is impedance coupling. As the sound field becomes more complicated, more actuators are needed to obtain global reductions. As frequency increases, sound fields quickly become so complicated that tens or hundreds of actuators would be required for global control. Directional cancellation, however, is possible even at fairly high frequencies if the actuators and control system can accurately match the phase of the disturbance.
Aside from the spatial complexity of the disturbance field, the most important factor is whether or not the disturbance can be measured *before* it reaches the area where you want to reduce noise. If you can measure the disturbance early enough, for example with an "upstream" detection sensor in a duct, you can use the measurement to compute the actuator signal (feedforward control). If there is no way to measure an upstream disturbance signal, the actuator signal must be computed solely from error sensor measurements (feedback control). Under many circumstances feedback control is inherently less stable than feedforward control, and tends to be less effective at high frequencies. For a concise comparison of feedforward vs. feedback control, see Hansen, IS&VD 1(3).
Bandwidth is also important. Broadband noise, that is, noise that contains a wide range of frequencies, is significantly harder to control than narrowband (tonal or periodic) noise or a tone plus harmonics (integer multiples of the original frequency). For example, the broadband noise of wind flowing over an aircraft fuselage is much more difficult to control than the tonal noise caused by the propellers moving past the fuselage at constant rotational speed.
Finally, lightly damped systems are easier to control than heavily damped ones. (Damping refers to how quickly the sound or vibration dies out; it should not be confused with "dampening", which describes whether the system is wet!)
Continue to:
My Books
