Objective evaluation of sound eld and

sound environment reproduction in aircraft

mock-ups using acoustic imaging
Philippe-Aubert Gauthier
1
, Cdric Camier
1
, Thomas Padois
2
, Olivier Gauthier
1
, Yann Pasco
1
, and Alain Berry
1
1
GAUS, Universit de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, J1K 2R1, Canada and CIRMMT, McGill University, Montral, H3A 1E3, Canada
1
GAUS, Universit de Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, J1K 2R1, Canada
Correspondence should be addressed to Philippe-Aubert Gauthier (philippe_aubert_gauthier@hotmail.com)
ABSTRACT
Audio is also an active topic for acousticians in the aircraft manufacturing industry. Typical concerns are
sound quality, noise annoyance or realism, in case of ight simulators. Accordingly, sound eld reproduction
of real ight conditions in aircraft mock-ups is a valuable tool for jury testing, listening test or marketing
purposes. Recently, a cabin mock-up was developed to achieve multichannel sound eld reproduction. In
this paper, acoustic imaging with an 80-channel microphone array is applied to the objective evaluation, in
terms of spatial sound accuracy, of sound eld reproduction in the mock-up. Two imaging algorithms are
tested, compared and discussed with respect to their ability to provide meaningful attributes for an objective
evaluation and comparison of sound eld reproduction performance of environmental source distributions.
General conclusions about the applicability of acoustic imaging and tested algorithms for the spatial quality
assessment of spatial reproduction systems are also provided.
1. INTRODUCTION
In many situations, sound quality and noise annoyance of
vehicle sounds are oversimplistically described by sound
pressure levels or more complex psychoacoustic metrics
that remain numbers only meaningful to specialists [1].
In some situations, the opportunity to expose listeners
to the actual sounds is more pertinent. This is reected
by a recent trend in the vehicle manufacturer industry
that initiate applied audio research projects for the de-
velopment of sound simulators or vehicle mock-ups with
spatial sound reproduction to conduct studies of sound
quality and sound comfort. To this end, in the past few
years, we developed and conducted tests with an instru-
mented aircraft cabin mock-up to recreate sound environ-
ments of in-ight scenarios recorded with a microphone
array. These investigations and experiments are reported
in Refs. [2, 3, 4]. Reproducing a measured sound envi-
ronment with a physical sound eld reproduction method
is different in many points from sound eld reproduction
with Wave Field Synthesis (WFS) since the latter often
relies on the creation of a scene or environment by ac-
cumulating simple virtual sources such as point or plane
sources, i.e. ideal waves that can simplify the subjective
or objective assessments of spatial reproduction. Repro-
duction of measured sound environments imposes differ-
ent requirements for the objective evaluation of the re-
produced sound elds. This is the purpose of this paper.
2. PRIOR ART
2.1. Reproduction of vehicle sounds
Early work dedicated to sound reproduction or synthesis
of vehicles for sound quality or annoyance studies seems
to be NASAs ANOSS [5]. Recently, Janssens et al. [6]
investigated analysis and synthesis algorithms for aircraft
interior and exterior sounds. Other exemples of research
in this eld that blend acoustical, audio and vehicle en-
gineerings are [7, 8, 9, 10, 11]. In few of these cases,
the reproduction of spatial sound quality is of primary
aim. However, it is known that sound distribution around
the listener inuences auditory masking and, therefore,
overall sound quality or sound comfort. In our case, the
realization and development of the instrumented aircraft
cabin mock-up addressed spectral and spatial qualities
of reproduction using physical sound eld reproduction.
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
1
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
The goal was the reproduction of a sound eld, namely,
a target sound eld, inside full-scale aircraft cabin mock-
up. It is also recognized that the visual and general en-
vironment is important for jury testing and comfort stud-
ies. Therefore, vehicle mock-ups with real interior fur-
niture call for invisible sound sources when transformed
in sound environment simulators. For the aircraft cabin
mock-up, we relied on trim panel actuators as invisible
reproduction sources of sound eld reproduction [4], a
practicality that shares many common points with multi-
actuator panels as used in some WFS implementations
[12].
2.2. Objective evaluation of spatial sound
In the beginning of sound eld reproduction using WFS
in the 1990s, Verheijen [13] proposed a classication of
possible methods for the objective evaluation of WFS.
For spatial accuracy, he identied: pressure spatial distri-
bution, dummy-head measurements, multi-trace impulse
responses and sound intensity map in the listening area.
Then one can compare the measured metrics with the tar-
get metrics as created by the basic WFS virtual sources,
i.e. spherical or plane waves. However, there is no men-
tion of acoustic imaging techniques. More recently, per-
haps partly explained by the avaibility of large micro-
phone arrays, some acoustic imaging and microphone ar-
ray techniques have been applied for the objective spatial
evaluation of reproduced sound. A recent exemple is the
application of microphone array and sound eld analysis
to automotive audio [14]. Similar in many points with
acoustical holography [15], the authors method relies
on plane wave decomposition using spatial transform at
a dense rectangular and uniform microphone grid. More
recently, the authors used their system as a design tool
for the inclusion of a WFS system in a car [16]. On
the basis of impulse responses of all the loudspeakers to
the microphone grid, the authors simulate various WFS
scenarios or different loudspeaker setups in the conned
space of the car interior. An example of objective eval-
uation of WFS using microphone array is [17]. In this
latter case, the overall look of the reproduced sound eld
is compared with the targeted spherical wave.
2.3. Acoustic imaging
For engineers, the purpose of acoustic imaging is to vi-
sualize the spatial distribution of sound sources of ma-
chines to identify noise sources that could later be cor-
rected at further design or prototyping stages. Acous-
tic imaging can rely on classical moving intensity probe
methods or recent microphone array technologies such
as: neareld acoustical holography [15] and beamform-
ing (including high-resolution beamforming algorithms)
[18]. For acousticians and mechanical engineers, beam-
forming and acoustic imaging using microphone array is
different from typical beamforming audio applications.
If the latter is typically aimed to waveform estimation
[18] (extraction of a time signal from a noisy or unde-
sirable sound environment), acoustic imaging for noise
abatement does not look for signal extraction but for a
image, or map, of source distribution on the surface of
a studied device. One of the challenge is the precise
prediction of source power to create a hierachy of domi-
nating sources. To obtain high-resolution maps or to at-
tenuate the effect of background noise, acoustic imag-
ing often includes averaging of the time-domain signals
through the creation of the interspectral density matrix
of the microphone signals. This fundamental differ-
ence with waveform estimation methods allows for a in-
creased quality of the acoustical image or map. In our
case, working with sound environment of vehicle typi-
cally implies stationnary or nearly stationary sounds [4]
so that averaging is possible and should be exploited.
For the problem at hand, i.e. physical sound eld re-
production of a complex sound scene made from many
unknown distributed sound sources, acoustic imaging
is more adapted than aforementioned WFS evaluation
methods for comparison of target and reproduced sound
elds and spatial accuracy evaluation. The aim of this
paper is to study the applicability of acoustic imaging al-
gorithm and microphone array technologies to this pur-
pose. To this end, acoustic maps are computed for the
target and reproduced elds as measured at a 80-channel
microphone array. These maps represent how the in-
coming sound is spatially received from the mock-up
boundaries at the microphone array, i.e. the listening
region. Different acoustic imaging algorithms are com-
pared: 1) standard focused delay-and-sum beamform-
ing and 2) an high-resolution method that compensates
for the point-spread-function of standard beamforming
maps: CLEAN-SC.
3. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
The cabin mock-up is shown in Fig. 1. It models a Bom-
bardier CRJ900 with 8 seats and 6 windows. Details are
given in [2]. The main reproduction transducers are 32-
mm inertial actuators mounted on internal trim panels.
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 2 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
Fig. 1: Microphone array in the CRJ900 mock-up for the
measurement of the reproduced sound eld.
Fig. 2: Microphone array in the actual CRJ900 aircraft
for the measurements of the target sound eld as encoun-
tered in real ight conditions.
Four of these actuators are mounted on each of the 9 trim
panels. To induce vibration in the oor, 4 bass shakers
are attached to the oor. A subwoofer is included. The
microphone array inside the cabin mock-up is shown in
Fig. 1. As shown in Fig. 2, the microphone array is iden-
tical to the one used for the in-ight recording.
4. ACOUSTIC IMAGING
The focused beamforming algorithm [18] and a more re-
cent and promising algorithm, CLEAN-SC, are recalled.
4.1. Focused beamforming: delay-and-sum
The most common technique to process microphone ar-
ray data is beamforming. This technique has been widely
studied for noise source identication problems in the
eld of aeroacoustics [19, 20]. Beamforming is only
briey presented. Further details are found in textbook
[18]. Let rst consider an acoustic source radiated to-
ward a microphone array. The M microphone signals
are used to compute the Cross Spectral Matrix (CSM)
denoted C[k] C
MM
for frequency bin k. The aim of
beamforming is to delay and sum all microphone signals
in relation to a virtual source position. When the source
position is equal to the real source position, the sum is
maximum. The source power map for a scan grid of L
points provided by beamforming Q
BF
[k] C
LL
can be
written
Q
BF
= W
H
CW (1)
where W C
ML
= [w
1
, w
2
, , w
L
] is a matrix of nor-
malized steering vectors w
l
C
M1
and
H
the Hermitian
transpose. A normalized steering vector for a scan point
l = 1 L, i.e. a column of W is given by
w
l
= g
l

g
H
l
g
l
(2)
with g
l
C
M1
the free-eld Green functions for the M
microphones and the l-th scan point. Beamforming is
widespreadly used because it is easy to implement and
it is robust in presence of measurement noise. Typically,
for a unique and ideal point source in x
l
, i.e. cartesian
location of the l scan point, the source induces a CSM
given by
C = g
l
g
H
l
(3)
so that the lter-and-sum bemforming method gives
source powers Q
BF
ll

at scan point l

Q
BF
ll

= w
H
l
Cw
l
= w
H
l
[g
l
g
H
l
]w
l
. (4)
This is known as the Point Spread Function (PSF) and it
describes the microphone array and beamforming algo-
rithm response to a single ideal point source and it ex-
presses the emergence of side lobes. According to these
equations, we note that the predicted source power at
scan point l is exact Q
BF
ll

= 1 for l = l

. Ideally, we
would have Q
BF
ll

= 0 for l = l

. However, using dis-

crete and nite microphone array induces leakage and
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 3 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
Fig. 3: Simulated PSF [dB ref 1] (normalized so that
0 dB is the maximum of the map) for the microphone
array and scan grid at 500 Hz used in this paper. The
unitary source position is shown as a white marker.
a non ideal PSF. The geometry and size of the micro-
phone array and scan grid with respect with the stud-
ied wavelength will dene the shape of the PSF artifacts.
Other algorithms such as CLEAN-PSF and CLEAN-SC
(CLEAN based on spatial Source Coherence) aims at the
reduction of sidelobe artifacts. APSF for the microphone
array used in this paper and caused by a single source, for
illustrative purpose, in Fig. 3. Besides the main lobe, one
notes the side lobes.
4.2. Beamforming deconvolution: CLEAN-SC
A whole class of algorithms that pertains to the CLEAN
family aims at the cleaning of standard dirty beam-
forming maps, where the dirt is caused by the side
lobes [21]. The original CLEAN algorithm is a tech-
nique that atronomical researchers rst used when using
multiple telescope imaging. The original CLEAN algo-
rithm is a simple iterative procedure that goes as follow
[21]: 1) Create a dirty map with side lobes using delay-
and-sum beamforming. 2) Search for the maximum peak
location in the dirty map. 3) Substract the appropriately
scaled PSF from the dirty map 4) Replace this PSF by
a clean beam (an ideal beam without side lobe). Re-
peat the process iteratively to get through all the sources
in decreasing amplitude. This is also known as CLEAN-
PSF. Equations and details are given in [21]. CLEAN-SC
Freq. [Hz] Notes and explanation
100 Emerging tones or peaks, rotating engine frequen-
cies and low-frequency Turbulent Boundary Layer
(TBL) or jet noise rumbles, structurne-borne trans-
mission to the interior.
300 Broadband noise caused by TBL or jet noise, air-
borne transmission to the interior, more diffuse dis-
tribution.
500 Same as above.
1195 Emerging tonal component caused by rotating ma-
chinery, not present at all microphones, see Fig. 4.
Table 1: Tested frequencies and corresponding sources.
is a revision of CLEAN-PSF that makes use of the fact
that the side lobes in an acoustic map are coherent with
the corresponding main lobe [21]. The main difference
is the mathematical formulation of the way that step 3 is
performed, i.e. how the PSF is subtracted from the dirty
map. Details of the algorithms are found in [21].
5. EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS
Reported results are based on 4-second recordings of tar-
get and reproduced sound elds. Calibrations of the mi-
crophone array were made both for the in-ight record-
ing and subsequent reproduction recordings. The re-
ported cases are based on the best reproduction results
presented in a companion paper [22]. The scan grid is a
cylindrical grid with a radius equal to that of the mock-
up. The length of the cylinder is corresponding to the
length of the mock-up. The grid of 2400 scan points is
shown in Fig. 3. For the computation of the CSM, we
rely on 4-second recordings sampled at 48 kHz. Fast
Fourier Transforms (FFT) are done with 8192 samples
weighted by an Hanning window. The FFT are averaged
over the 4 seconds with an overlap of 4096 samples.
Since the acoustic imaging techniques are implemented
in the frequency domain, acoustic maps of target and
reproduced sound distribution are presented for single
frequencies. Tested frequencies are shown in Tab. 1.
Power spectral densities at two microphones are shown
in Fig. 4.
The acoustical source power maps obtained for the tar-
get and reproduced sound elds using focused beam-
forming (Sec. 4.1) are shown in Figs. 5 to 8. Axis la-
bels are provided in Fig. 3. The maps are shown in dB
normalized to the maximum value of the target source
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 4 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
(a) Microphone # 14
10
2
10
3
10
4

Freq. [Hz]
P
o
w
e
r

/

F
r
e
q
.

[
d
B

r
e
f

1

/

H
z
]
)Welch Power Spectral Density Estimate, y = 20 dB


1
0
0
H
z
3
0
0
H
z
5
0
0
H
z
1
1
9
5
H
z
Target
Reproduced
(b) Microphone # 40
10
2
10
3
10
4

Freq. [Hz]
P
o
w
e
r

/

F
r
e
q
.

[
d
B

r
e
f

1

/

H
z
]
)
Welch Power Spectral Density Estimate, y = 20 dB


1
0
0
H
z
3
0
0
H
z
5
0
0
H
z
1
1
9
5
H
z
Target
Reproduced
Fig. 4: Power spectral density estimates of target and
reproduced sounds at two microphones. Test frequencies
for are shown as dashed vertical lines.
map at the studied frequency. This normalization al-
lows for the independent comparison of the sound in-
coming directions and source levels. From these g-
ures that provide left and right side views of the cylin-
drical scan grid, one clearly observes the shape corre-
spondence of the reproduced source power maps and the
target source maps. This evidence shows that our aircraft
cabin mock-up with sound eld rendering system is ef-
cient for recreating the spatial sound distribution of the
targeted sound environment. However, closer look and
comparison of the color scales highlight a source level
error that is sometimes positive or negative, for this case
it ranges from 4 to -3 dB. From other results [4] and from
the PSD shown in Fig 4 this was expected. In the case
of the 1195 Hz emerging tone, one can clearly note the
asymmetrical sound distribution of the target and repro-
duced source maps. This highlights the fact that the in-
strumented aircraft sound mock-up is not only able to
reproduce surrounding sound environment but localized
sources.
Figures 9 and 10 show similar source power maps ob-
tained for the same cases but with CLEAN-SC. At 100,
300 and 500 Hz, there is a clear correspondence between
the main source positions in the target and reproduced
acoustical source power map. Hence suggesting, as for
the focused beamforming results, that spatial sound re-
produced is efciently achieved. However, the target
map does not match well with the reproduced map at
1195 Hz. Although this would suggest a reduced spa-
tial accuracy, this CLEAN-SC result must be interpreted
with care. Indeed, the dirty maps (Fig. 5) from which
the CLEAN-SC map is obtained places the strongest
source on the left side and in front of the cylindrical scan
grid. However, the CLEAN-SC result at 1195 Hz for the
target sound eld placed the strongest source on the right
side and at the bottom of the cylinder. This suggests that
the iterative CLEAN-SC algorithm may have failed for
this test case. Accordingly, we suggest that the CLEAN-
SC algorithm may be more suited for localized-source
scenarios as it replace a maximum in the beamforming
dirty map by a localized source in a clean map. This
is further discussed in the next section.
6. DISCUSSION
From the reported experiments, on the basis of target
and reproduced source maps, we observed that the sound
eld reproduction inside the aircraft mock-up can pro-
vide an good spatial accuracy. It was also shown that
acoustic imaging is efcient for the objective evaluation
of spatial accuracy of reproduced sound elds and sound
environments using microphone array. One of the sim-
ple advantage is the possible independent comparison of
spatial sound distribution and power level of the spatial
distribution. Although this is a valuable tool for the com-
parison and evaluation of spatial source distribution, it is
not guaranteed that the acoustical source maps are the
real source distribution over the scan grid, which is, in
our case, the mock-up trim panels. Indeed, the acoustical
source power maps show the source distribution as seen
from the microphone array or heard from the listening re-
gion. A relevant result in this trend is that most of the re-
ported acoustical source power maps place the strongest
source on the front oor. This is also corresponds to
the scan points which are the farthest from the micro-
phone array and since we rely on normalized beamform-
ing using free-eld Green function (Eq. (2)) the geomet-
rical attenuation of the Green functions is compensated.
Therefore, for farthest scan points, the detected source
level might increased. For future experiment, we should
achieve similar tests but with a spherical scan grid around
the listening area, i.e. the microphone array, while as-
suming that listeners are immersed in a full surrounding
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 5 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
sound environment. Furthermore, the use of a standard,
i.e. platform-independent, scan grid could then be more
easily transposed to other cases or vehicle types.
Besides the application of the tested algorithms and
microphone array to our specic applied case, namely
sound eld reproduction inside aircraft cabin mock-up,
the provided results allow for an extended discussion
about applicability of the method to spatial sound repro-
duction accuracy. It is rst and foremost adapted to the
evaluation of reproduced sound environment that have
been recorded using microphone array. Indeed, in this
case it is easy to apply similar acoustic imaging algo-
rithms to the recorded target array signals and recorded
reproduced array signals. Since array processing such
as classical beamforming introduces PSF that is heav-
ily dependent on the microphone array and scan grid ge-
ometries, it is more relevant to achieve such comparison
with the same microphone array, i.e. for the target sound
eld capture and recording of the reproduced sound eld.
Otherwise, then one could rely on CLEAN-SC algorithm
to ensure that the array-dependent PSF artifacts are re-
duced so that the spatial distortion of the specic array
is attenuated. However, in this paper we also shown that
CLEAN-SC might not be the most adapted method for
the objective evaluation of a surrounding sound environ-
ment with distributed sound source as CLEAN-SC tends
to replace distributed sound source by few single local-
ized sources.
The objective evaluation method tested in this paper,
could also be transposed to WFS that rely on the ac-
cumulation of simple theoretical sources for the virtual
creation of a full sound environment. This would need
some adjustments. Indeed, since WFS scenes involve
idealistic virtual sources, there is no target recording at
the microphone array that will be used for the recording
of the reproduced sound elds. Two approaches are pos-
sible: 1) theoretical simulation of the target sound eld at
the array using ideal virtual sources of the virtual scene
and 2) simple display of expected virtual source positions
over the reproduced acoustic image. For the latter case,
if proper spatial accuracy is reached, each main lobes of
the reproduced acoustic image should coincide with an
marked expected virtual position. For systems that are
aimed at the creation of precisely localized source po-
sition, as suggested previously, CLEAN-SC would be
more adapted and precise than classical beamforming.
For the case of WFS, there is an additional compromise
that is different from the paradigm of sound environment
reproduction in mock-up. Indeed, in this paper, we sim-
ply assumed that sound are emerging from the mock-
up inner boundary. This is a valid physical assumption
that dictated the shape of the scan grid. However, with
WFS, virtual source can be positioned at different dis-
tances hence introducing the issue of what the shape of
the scan grid should be. The scan grid should be de-
rived from a simple surface (sphere or cube) that simply
surround the listening area. For the evaluation of sys-
tem devoted to musical sound reproduction, we suggest
that spatial accuracy evaluation using acoustical imaging
should be done with broadband noise signals. Indeed,
this allows the use of the CSM matrix and averaging that
can provide a much more rened acoustic map.
7. CONCLUSION
Results of sound eld reproduction inside an aircraft
cabin mock-up were evaluated. The aim of the objec-
tive evaluation was the spatial accuracy of the reproduced
sound environment in comparison with the target sound
environment. The principal objective of this paper was to
evaluated the usability and efciency of acoustic imaging
using microphone array as a formal evaluation method of
spatial sound reproduction. Classical beamforming and
CLEAN-SC algorithms were compared. On the basis of
the provided results, we suggest that both algorithms can
be used. However, we suggest that CLEAN-SC is a bet-
ter choice for localized virtual source since it allows for
the distinction of tiny details in the acoustical image. For
distribution sound source reproduction, classical focus-
ing beamforming seems to be more appropriate. Besides
this general conclusion, the results presented in this pa-
per also shown that the instrumented cabin mock-up with
multichannel equalization is able to provide a reproduced
sound environment that is spatially very similar to the
target sound environment.
8. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This is a project involving: Consortium for Research and
Innovation in Aerospace in Qubec, Bombardier Aro-
nautique and CAE, supported by a Natural Sciences and
Engineering Research Council of Canada grant.
9. REFERENCES
[1] C.A. Powell, J.M. Fields, Human response to air-
craft noise, in Aeroacoustics of ight vehicles,
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 6 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
Theory and practice, Volume 2: Noise control,
H.H. Hubbard Ed., Acoustical Society of America,
Woodbury, 1995.
[2] P.-A. Gauthier, C. Camier, F.-A. Lebel, Y. Pasco, A.
Berry, Experiments of sound eld reproduction in-
side aircraft cabin mock-up, presented at the 133rd
Audio Eng. Soc. Convention, San Francisco, 2012.
[3] C. Verron, P.-A. Gauthier, J. Langlois, C. Guas-
tavino, Spectral and spatial analysis/synthesis of
interior aircraft sounds, accepted for publication,
IEEE Transactions on Audio, Speech and Language
Processing (2013).
[4] P.-A. Gauthier, C. Camier, O. Gauthier, Y. Pasco, A.
Berry, Aircraft sound environment reproduction:
Sound eld reproduction inside a cabin mock-up
using microphone and actuator arrays, Presented
at the 21st International Congress on Acoustics,
Montral, 2013.
[5] D.A. McCurdy and R. E. Grandle, Aircraft noise
synthesis system, NASA technical memorandum
89040, 1987.
[6] K. Janssens, A. Vecchio, H. Van der Auweraer,
Synthesis and sound quality evaluation of exterior
and interior aircraft noise, Aerospace Science and
Technology 12 (2008) 114-124.
[7] N. Epain, E. Friot, G. Rabau, Indoor sonic boom
reproduction using ANC, Proceedings of Active
2004.
[8] S. Rizzi and B. Sullivan, Synthesis of virtual envi-
ronments for aircraft community noise impact stud-
ies, in 11th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference
(2005) 2291-2306.
[9] H. Ploner-Bernard, A. Sontacchi, G. Lichteneg-
ger, S. Vssner, Sound-system design for a pro-
fessional full-ight simulator, presented at the 8th
International Conference on Digital Audio Effects
(DAFx05), 2005.
[10] M. Keller, A. Roure, F. Marrot, Acoustic eld re-
production for psychoacoustics experiments: appli-
cation to aircraft interior noise, Proceedings of Ac-
tive (2006).
[11] E. Bongini, Modle acoustique global et synthse
sonore du bruit dun vhicules : application aux
vhicules ferroviaires, PhD Thesis, Universit de
Provence, France (2008).
[12] P. Basilio, J.J. Lpez, J. Escolano, L. Hrchens,
Multiactuator panels for wave eld synthesis:
Evolution and present developments, J. Audio
Eng. Soc. 58 (2010) 10451063.
[13] E.N.G. Verheijen, Sound reproduction by wave
eld synthesis, Ph.D. thesis, Technische Univer-
siteit Delft, 1998.
[14] M.J. Strau, D. de Vries, Application of multi-
channel impulse response measurement to automo-
tive audio, presented at the 125th Audio Eng. Soc.
Convention, Sans Francisco, 2008.
[15] E.G. Williams, Fourier Acoustics Sound Radi-
ation and Neareld Acoustical Holography, Aca-
demic Press, San Diego, 1999.
[16] J. Nowak, M. Strau, Sound eld reproduction
analysis in a car based on microphone array mea-
surements, presented at the 48th AES International
Conference: Automotive Audio, Munich, 2012.
[17] H. Kutschbach, Verication for spatial sound sys-
tems, presented at the AES 24th International Con-
ference, Canada, 2003.
[18] H. Teutsch, Modal Array Signal Processing: Prin-
ciples and Application of Waveeld Decomposition,
Springer, Berlin, 2007.
[19] S. Krober, K. Ehrenfried, L. Koop, A. Lauterbach,
A. Henning, Systematic comparison of micro-
phone array measurements in open and closed wind
tunnels, 16th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Confer-
ence, AIAA-2010-3734, Sweden, 2010.
[20] T. Padois, C. Prax, V. Valeau, Numerical vali-
dation of shear ow corrections for beamforming
acoustic source localisation in open wind-tunnels,
Applied Acoustics, 74 (2013) 591-601.
[21] P. Sijtsma, CLEAN based on spatial source coher-
ence, Aeroacoustics 6 (2007) 357374.
[22] P.-A. Gauthier, C. Camier, O. Gauthier, Y. Pasco,
A. Berry, Sound eld reproduction of real ight
recordings in cabin mock-up, presented at the AES
52nd International Conference, UK, 2013.
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 7 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
Fig. 5: Acoustical source power maps [dB] correspond-
ing to the target sound eld obtained using focused
beamforming at 100, 300, 500 and 1195 Hz (left side).
Fig. 6: Acoustical source power maps [dB] correspond-
ing to the reproduced sound eld obtained using focused
beamforming at 100, 300, 500 and 1195 Hz (left side).
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 8 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
Fig. 7: Acoustical source power maps [dB] correspond-
ing to the target sound eld obtained using focused
beamforming at 100, 300, 500 and 1195 Hz (right side).
Fig. 8: Acoustical source power maps [dB] correspond-
ing to the reproduced sound eld obtained using focused
beamforming at 100, 300, 500 and 1195 Hz (right side).
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 9 of 10
Gauthier et al. Evaluation of sound eld reproduction by acoustic imaging
Fig. 9: Acoustical source power maps [dB] correspond-
ing to the target sound eld obtained using CLEAN-SC
at 100, 300, 500 and 1195 Hz (left side).
Fig. 10: Acoustical source power maps [dB] corre-
sponding to the reproduced sound eld obtained using
CLEAN-SC at 100, 300, 500 and 1195 Hz (left side).
AES 52
ND
INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE, Guildford, UK, 2013 September 24
Page 10 of 10