Impact Sound Reduction Performances of Additional Floor Mats for the Retrofitting of an Existing Apartment Building in Accordance with Test-Bed Conditions

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper needs to improve the quality of the figures, they are illegible therefore it is not possible to verify the correspondence between the data reported in the figure and that inserted in the text of the paper.

The paper reports experimental tests and does not introduce any theoretical calculations for the purpose of evaluating the DL.

As written, it should be considered a technical note

Author Response

Point 1: The paper needs to improve the quality of the figures, they are illegible therefore it is not possible to verify the correspondence between the data reported in the figure and that inserted in the text of the paper.

Response 1: All figures with graph have been redrawn with high resolution.

 

Point 2: The paper reports experimental tests and does not introduce any theoretical calculations for the purpose of evaluating the DL. As written, it should be considered a technical note

Response 2: While it is true that this paper does not include theoretical calculations regarding the impact sound reduction of floor coverings, as pointed out by the reviewer, it provides empirical evidence on the attenuation characteristics of the same test specimen under various reference floor conditions not previously mentioned in existing studies. Therefore, it is considered to be a valuable resource for the future revisions of ISO 10140-5 and KS F 2865. In line with this, extensive experiments have been conducted, and it is challenging to condense the substantial amount of data obtained from measurements conducted with different impact sources on each test bed into a technical note. Hence, we kindly request your understanding as we submit this as a regular article.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

It is believed that the article concerns a very interesting and important topic like the noise insulation of the impact sound generated  on slab  by children's. However, there are some necessary changes to the paper:

·         - All figures they are not legible the resoluction of graphs is very low, You should increase the resolution is necesary;

·         -a greater comparison between the Korean standard and the ISO standard would be necessary in my opinion

·     - In the end the bibliography is poor and must be integrated both in the introduction and in the other parts of the paper;

Final comment

The work deals with an interesting and current topic.

Next at the changes required the work is believed to be publishable.

Author Response

Point 1: It is believed that the article concerns a very interesting and important topic like the noise insulation of the impact sound generated on slab by children's. However, there are some necessary changes to the paper: All figures they are not legible the resoluction of graphs is very low, You should increase the resolution is necesary;

Response 1: All figures with graph have been redrawn with high resolution.

 

Point 2: A greater comparison between the Korean standard and the ISO standard would be necessary in my opinion

Response 2: As mentioned, the introduction part also includes a comparison between the Korean standard and the ISO standard.

 

Point 3: In the end the bibliography is poor and must be integrated both in the introduction and in the other parts of the paper;

Response 3: In addition to a new section in the introduction, we have improved the bibliography in the quotable parts of the manuscript.

Reviewer 3 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Excellent piece of work! I like the combined use of the tapping machine (standard in Norway), rubber ball (in some use in Norway) and bang machine (unknown in Norway).

Future research idea (if you haven't already done it): Put it into a database program and try multivariate regression. Maybe you can develop a single formula to cover all your research om floor mats on concrete slabs (or maybe it isn't possible)..

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Basically OK, sometimes a little editing could make the text even better. 

I don't need to review your revisions.

Author Response

Point 1: Excellent piece of work! I like the combined use of the tapping machine (standard in Norway), rubber ball (in some use in Norway) and bang machine (unknown in Norway).

Response 1: Thank you for your valuable comment.

 

Point 2: Future research idea (if you haven't already done it): Put it into a database program and try multivariate regression. Maybe you can develop a single formula to cover all your research om floor mats on concrete slabs (or maybe it isn't possible)..

Response 2: We will continue to conduct future studies as we have commented.

Round 2

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

The paper discusses sound attenuation from impact noise on house floors.

The authors performed measurements with different techniques.

In some cases they found differences in the values measured with the different techniques, but they did not highlight the reasons.

Furthermore, many differences are low frequency, in this case they could be due to the vibration modes of the attic, but also to possible anthropic noises that may come from outside, this condition was not discussed.

Furthermore, but for future work, considering that a lot of the difference occurs at low frequencies, and the ear is not sensitive to these frequencies, it would be appropriate to carry out tests with people who listen to the impact and then make a judgement.

Author Response

Point 1: The paper discusses sound attenuation from impact noise on house floors. The authors performed measurements with different techniques. In some cases they found differences in the values measured with the different techniques, but they did not highlight the reasons.

Response 1: As pointed out by the reviewer, we have highlighted and further explained in Section 4.2 of the discussion section why the different test-beds resulted in varying reduction results for the same mat specimen, a key experimental variable.

 

Point 2: Furthermore, many differences are low frequency, in this case they could be due to the vibration modes of the attic, but also to possible anthropic noises that may come from outside, this condition was not discussed.

Response 1: In this study, we used standard impact sources according to the guidelines of the standard codes, applied correction for background noise, and conducted measurements in conditions free of possible anthropic noises that may come from outside influences. This is described in Section 2.1. Impact Sound Sources and Measurement Method as a supplement.

 

Point 3: Furthermore, but for future work, considering that a lot of the difference occurs at low frequencies, and the ear is not sensitive to these frequencies, it would be appropriate to carry out tests with people who listen to the impact and then make a judgement.

Response 1: As pointed out by the reviewer, we have added direction for further research with listening experiments at the end of the conclusion.