Next Article in Journal
Labile and Stable Fractions of Organic Carbon in a Soil Catena (the Central Forest Nature Reserve, Russia)
Previous Article in Journal
Study on the Rooting Physiological Mechanism of Schisandra chinensis (Turcz.) Baill. Green-Branched Cuttings
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Forests
Volume 14
Issue 7
10.3390/f14071366
forests-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Sound Absorbing Properties of Selected Green Material—A Review

by
Eun-Suk Jang
1,2
1
Research Institute of Human Ecology, College of Human Ecology, Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju 54896, Republic of Korea
2
R&D Center, Sambo Scientific Co., Ltd., Seoul 07258, Republic of Korea
Forests 2023, 14(7), 1366; https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071366
Submission received: 17 May 2023 / Revised: 18 June 2023 / Accepted: 26 June 2023 / Published: 3 July 2023
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Advances in Sound Absorption of the Forest by Product and Wood-Based Materials and Its Application)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Noise pollution is often overlooked and invisible, but it significantly impacts the quality of human life. One of the most straightforward solutions to mitigate noise pollution is by using sound-absorbing materials. Recently, research trends to develop sound absorbing green materials, typically derived from agricultural by-products, have witnessed an uptick. This paper summarizes the sound-absorbing properties of various green materials found in the literature, including coconut fiber, kenaf fiber, rice bran, rice husk, rice straw, Hanji (a traditional Korean paper), tea-leaf fiber, mandarin peel, pineapple-leaf fiber, corn husk, peanut shell, sugar palm trunk, Yucca gloriosa fiber, fruit stones, wood barks, flax fiber, and nettle fiber. Natural fibers can be made by compressing the raw material or manufacturing them into fibrous materials or composites. The key variables that determine sound absorption performance are the thickness and density of the green material, as well as the presence of an air back cavity. Generally, thicker materials exhibit better sound absorption performance in the low- and mid-frequency range. Moreover, higher density is associated with better sound absorption performance at the same thickness. Additionally, increasing the distance between the sound-absorbing material and the air back cavity enhances sound absorption performance at low frequencies. Thus, these physical variables, rather than the specific materials used, primarily influence sound absorption capabilities. Therefore, various green materials, such as fibers, granules, and porous materials, can be effective sound absorbers if their thickness, density, and air back cavity are properly controlled.

1. Introduction

Currently, environmental pollution is a major problem in the world, and this affects air, water, and soil causing significant damage to nature and humanity. According to a recent study, up to 22% of diseases worldwide are caused by environmental pollution [1,2,3,4].
Noise is an invisible and overlooked type of pollution. The impacts of noise pollution on lives and cities decrease the quality of life. In Western Europe, it is regarded, after ambient particulate matter, as the leading cause of worsening health [5,6].
Noise pollution can be reduced by incorporating sound insulation and sound absorption materials in buildings. Sound insulation is a method of blocking sound energy, thus preventing noise from passing through partitioning, whereas sound absorption is a method of absorbing sound energy to reduce sound reverberation in confined ambients [7].
Sound absorption can be achieved using membrane-type, porous, and microperforated sound absorbers [8,9,10]. In this study, the author mainly discusses porous sound-absorbing materials.
Since the 1970s, synthetic fibrous materials (fibrous glass, asbestos, and mineral fibers) have found wide commercial sound absorbing applications due to their low cost and performance at mid and high frequencies [11,12,13]. On the other hand, they have adverse health effects, including cancer, depending on the frequency of exposure [13,14,15]. These effects extend to workers recycling these materials [16,17,18,19]. Synthetic fibers also contain volatile organic compounds and formaldehyde, which cause direct harm to occupants, including sick building syndrome.
“Green materials” consist of resources such as natural fibers and wood that are sustainable and renewable [20]. Natural fibers used as building materials can be produced on a mass scale with high quality and at competitive prices. Accordingly, they are attracting interest, due to their durability, nontoxicity, and excellent thermal insulation properties [12,21,22,23].
Green sound-absorbing materials include coconut fiber, kenaf fiber, and rice husk and rice straw, which are frequently used and produced; Hanji (Korean traditional paper); and various agricultural by-products (tea leaf, mandarin peel, pineapple-leaf, corn husk, peanut shell, sugar palm trunk, Yucca gloriosa, fruit stones, and wood bark particles, flax fibers, nettle fiber, areca nut leaf, denim shoddy, and jute fiber).
Recently, green sound-absorbing materials have been replacing synthetic fiber for sound absorption in buildings [11,24,25,26]. Numerous studies have been conducted to develop green sound-absorbing materials by remediating the problems associated with conventional synthetic sound-absorbing materials, including glass fiber, polyurethane foam, and polyester [27,28,29,30,31,32,33]. Notably, natural fibers from plants, animals, and minerals are employed in the building sector [29,34,35].
Figure 1 compares the price of synthetic and natural fibers from 2011 to 2017, revealing that natural fibers were cheaper [36,37,38].
Sound waves interacting with a material or surface can be categorized as incident or reflected sound. Incident sound refers to the sound waves that directly strike the material, whereas reflected sound refers to the sound waves that rebound off the material. In the context of sound absorption, the effectiveness of a material is determined by its capacity to convert incident sound energy into alternative forms, such as heat or vibrations, rather than reflecting it into the surrounding environment. An efficient sound-absorbing material should minimize sound energy reflection and maximize sound energy absorption [9,28,39,40].
The sound absorption coefficient serves as a metric for the amount of sound energy absorbed by a mate-rial relative to the incident sound energy. It represents the proportion of sound energy that is absorbed rather than reflected by the material. A higher sound absorption coefficient signifies a greater capability of the material to absorb sound and decrease sound reflection [9,28,39,40].
Most studies have measured the sound absorption coefficient (α) using an impedance tube (Figure 2). Impedance tubes are primarily designed to measure the sound absorption coefficient due to normal incident sound. They are most effective in measuring the sound absorption properties of materials when sound waves are directly incident on the sample at a perpendicular angle. However, impedance tubes are limited in their ability to accurately measure the abilities of materials to absorb sounds from different directions or at different incident angles [39]. The sound absorption coefficient is calculated using Equation (1) [41,42]
α = I a I i = P a 2 − P i 2 P i 2
where Ia—absorbed sound intensity, Ii—incident sound intensity, Pi—pressures of incident, and Pa—pressure of reflected waves.
In addition, the noise reduction coefficient (NRC) is calculated by averaging the sound absorption coefficients at 250, 500, 1000, and 2000 Hz (Equation (2)).
N R C = α 250 + α 500 + α 1000 + α 2000 4
According to ISO 11654 [43], the sound-absorbing performance is categorized using the NRC. The grading system is as follows: A, B, C, D, and E grades correspond to an NRC value ranging from 0.90 to 1.00, 0.80 to 0.85, 0.60 to 0.75, 0.30 to 0.55, and 0.15 to 0.25, respectively, and any performance below 0.10 does not receive a grade. This standardized grading system is used to assess and classify the sound absorption capabilities of materials, allowing for easy comparison and selection of suitable materials for specific applications [44].
Forests 14 01366 g002 550
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the impedance tube [45].
Figure 2. Schematic diagram of the impedance tube [45].
Forests 14 01366 g002
This study examined the sound absorption performance of various natural sound-absorbing materials presented in previous studies. Most of the references do not provide the raw data of sound absorption curves. Thus, this study extracted the raw data from the sound absorption curves in the references using Engauge Digitizer software (Version, 12.1) [46]. From extracted the raw data, this study recalculated the NRC and optimal sound absorption coefficient (peak value).

2. Sound Absorbing Green Materials

2.1. Coconut Fiber

Coconut fiber is obtained from the outer coconut husk and primarily sourced from Southeast Asia. It is a marketable natural fiber because it is cheaper and lighter than synthetic fiber [30]. Numerous studies utilizing coconut fiber as interior building materials [40,47,48] and as a natural sound absorber have been conducted.
Figure 3 illustrates a schematic of the impedance tube and sound absorption curve of a coconut fiber sound absorber according to thickness (20, 35, and 50 mm) [49]. The NRC values were 0.20 at 20 mm thickness, 0.32 at 35 mm thickness, and 0.43 at 50 mm thickness. The NRC increased as the thickness of the sound absorber increased.
In addition, at a thickness of 20 mm, the maximum sound absorption coefficient was 0.83 at a frequency of 3651 Hz; it was 0.76 at 2564 Hz and a thickness of 35 mm, and it reached 0.88 at 1435 Hz and a thick-ness of 50 mm. Thicker coconut fiber sound absorbers demonstrated improved sound absorption capabilities, particularly at lower frequencies. The sound absorption mechanism is attributed to the air viscosity within the interconnected voids that separate the coconut fibers. Furthermore, the intricate void structure significantly influences sound energy absorption within the material. This behavior is a commonly observed in fibrous sound-absorbing materials [50,51].

2.2. Kenaf Fiber

Kenaf fiber is obtained from the annual plant of the Malvaceae family originating from India and Africa, and it is cultivated in more than 20 countries [52]. Kenaf has demonstrated good productivity, with a high growth rate and low crop rotation [53]. Kenaf fiber is used as food protection packaging material, in textiles, and for filtration, and it performs excellently as a filler for composite material [54].
Figure 4a compares the sound absorption curves of kenaf fiber (density: 93.5 kg/m3, thickness 40 and 45 mm, and rock wool sound absorber (density 100 kg/m3 and thickness: 45 mm). From an acoustic point of view, compared to rock wool material, the sound absorption performance of Kenaf fiber could outperform that of synthetic rock wool material. However, to achieve this, its sound absorber thickness must be greater than that of mineral wool, because kenaf has a lower density [55].
Figure 4 presents the sound absorption curve of kenaf fiber as a function of the thickness (Figure 4b), air back cavity (Figure 4c), and density (Figure 4d) [55]. Noticeably, the increase in the sound absorption performance corresponded to increasing material thick-ness. The absorption bandwidth improved significantly at lower frequencies; the thicker the absorber, the higher was the number of low-frequency components absorbed. Using an air back cavity between 0 and 30 mm increased the sound absorption performance at low frequencies, demonstrating an identical effect as that of a thick sound-absorbing material [55].
The overall sound absorption performance clearly improved as the bulk density of the sound absorber increased because the higher the sound absorber density, the better is the absorber tortuosity, leading to greater sound energy loss [55,56,57].
Husain et al. [58] investigated the sound absorption performance of needle-punched kenaf nonwoven fabrics for noise absorption in automotive applications through a web-forming process. Overall, the sound absorption performance of the kenaf fiber sheet was determined by the thickness and density of the sample. The NRC values of kenaf nonwoven sheet were 0.14 for 2-ply (thickness: 2.74 mm, density: 410 g/m2), 0.15 for 4-ply (4.52 mm, 994 g/m2), 0.19 for 6-ply (7.52 mm, 2069 g/m2), and 0.18 for 8-ply (8.22 mm, 2461 g/m2). On the other hand, the NRC of butyl rubber sound absorber was only 0.07 (3.64 mm, 5013 g/m2), and the NRC of a hybrid kenaf mixed with PET (4.71 mm 2507 g/m2) was 0.21.
An increase in the sample thickness due to an increase in the layer numbers enhanced the sound absorption performance. These characteristics were common to fibrous sound-absorbing materials [55,56,57]. Therefore, Kenaf fiber is expected to serve as an eco-friendly sound-absorbing material.

2.3. Rice Husks

Rice, along with wheat and corn, are one of the three staple crops worldwide, and it is the staple food in most Asian countries [59]. The kernel of rice mainly consists of the endosperm, bran, germ, and husk, with the latter accounting for 20–21% of the total seed weight [60,61]. These agricultural by-products have great potential in rice-producing countries; however, a decrease in rice consumption per capita has affected rice farmers, who have experienced increasing difficulty in generating profits [62].
Rice husks are usually incinerated or only recycled for low-cost applications such as thermal insulation materials, polymer composites, and concrete composites [60]. The uses of these by-products to expand to overall building materials, it would not only create added value for domestic farmers but also contribute to improving competitiveness within the construction industry by supplying cheap, green building materials [60,63,64,65,66]. From this perspective, several studies have been conducted to investigate the potential uses of rice husk as a sound-absorbing material.
Figure 5 shows the sound absorption curve of rice husk [67]. When the thickness of the rice husk sound absorption disk increased, the sound absorption coefficient (α) at low frequencies increased. The NRC of the rice husk disk extracted from the graph was 0.11 at 10 mm, 0.18 at 20 mm, and 0.33 at 30 mm.
Mahzan et al. [68] investigated the sound absorption performance of six types of rice husks mixed with polyurethane. The NRC was 0.36 for the polyurethane mixture with 15% rice husk and 0.65 for the mixture with 30% rice husk. Conclusively, as the rice husk content increased, the sound absorption performance improved.
Wang et al. [69] investigated the sound absorption performance of polyurethane composites based on the rice husk content and reported that a polyurethane–rice husk mixture comprising 5% chaff had the best sound absorption performance. Rice husk has a significant influence on the pore size and pore size distribution of polyurethane foam, which leads to a decrease in flow resistance and an improvement in sound absorption performance, suggesting that the improved sound absorption was attributable to the addition of rice husk. The rice husk was advantageous as the thickness of the porous polyurethane material did not need to be increased for improved sound absorption performance at low frequencies.
António et al. [60] analyzed the sound absorption performance of two boards made of a rice husk composite: one with expanded cork granules and the other with recycled rubber granules. Regarding the expanded cork granules, the NRC was 0.15 for the composite comprising 50% rice husk and 0.25 for the 75% rice husk. For recycled rubber granules, the NRC was 0.35 and 0.45 for 50% and 75% rice husk, respectively. The sound absorption performance increased with rice husk content.
Marques et al. [70] investigated the sound absorption characteristics of polymer-based composite materials fabricated using rice husk and expanded cork by-products. When the rice husk content was low, the density of the composite increased and the sound absorption coefficient (α) decreased over the entire frequency range.
These studies suggest that rice husk has sound absorption performance, and it can be applied to construction systems, including walls and ceiling. Rice husk has demonstrated excellent sound absorption behavior independently, as well as in composites with a polymer, which suggests that rice husk has great potential for use as a green sound-absorbing material.

2.4. Rice Straw

The majority of rice straw, according to the International Rice Research Institute, is produced in Asia [71], with Japan producing 8.2 million tons in 2019 [72] and Korea producing an estimated 4 million tons as of 2020 [73]. Most rice straw is burned on site after harvest, which negatively impacts the atmosphere and public health because this combustion releases greenhouse gases and forms suspended particles [74,75,76].
Previous studies designed various methods for using rice straw to reduce environmental pollution, in particular, noise pollution, and numerous studies using rice straw as a building material, including for insulation, have been conducted [77,78,79,80]. This article presents the use of rice straw as a sound absorbent.
Figure 6 compares the sound absorption curve of rice straw with that of synthetic glass wool [21]. The NRC was 0.33 for glass wool and 0.24 for rice straw. The two graphs are comparable, but the sound absorption performance of rice straw is slightly lower than that of glass wool. The overall sound absorption characteristics for all frequency bands between the two materials were similar, although the NRC of rice straw was lower than that of glass wool.
Kang et al. [81] investigated the sound absorption characteristics of rice straw particle mats. The sound absorption coefficients (α) of the two methods were relatively similar. When the mat thickness was increased from 20 mm to 100 mm, the sound absorption coefficient (α) was 0.1–0.65 below 1000 Hz and 0.1–0.95 above 1000 Hz. These results demonstrate that the sound absorption coefficient (α) increased at low frequencies depending on the rice straw particle mat thickness.
Rice straw has better sound absorption properties when mixed with various materials than when used alone. Yang et al. [82] investigated the sound absorption characteristics of composite sound-absorbing materials mixed with rice straw and wood particles and observed that, as the rice straw content increased, the sound absorption coefficient (α) of rice straw composite board surpassed that of other wood-based materials (fiberboard and plywood).
These studies suggest that rice straw is more useful as a sound-absorbing composite material than other natural materials. Climate change has prompted increased interest in reducing greenhouse gases worldwide. Accordingly, interest in recycling agricultural by-products is growing, and a method of utilizing rice straw as a natural sound-absorbing material has a very positive outcome. If the use of rice by-products expands to building materials, it would not only create added value for domestic farmers but also contribute to im-proving competitiveness within the construction industry by supplying cheap, green building materials [60,63,64,65,66].

2.5. Hanji (Korean Traditional Paper)

Hanji is a Korean traditional paper fabricated from paper mulberry (Broussonetia kazinoki Sieb) [83] that is characterized by longer fiber length and higher molecular weight than wood fiber, imparting high tensile and tear strength, as well as excellent preservability [84]. Hanji is a traditional building material used in Korean houses for indoor environment (heat, light, and air) and humidity control. It is also a green material, whose manufacture and disposal do not damage the environment [85,86,87].
Hanji, being very thin paper, has almost no sound absorption performance, but Jang et al. [88] reported that, as the pore size of Hanji decreased, the sound absorption performance slightly increased.
Hanji would be much more effective as a membrane-type sound-absorbing material with an air back cavity than as a porous sound-absorbing material. Lee et al. [89] added an air back cavity of 0–12 cm to bilayer Hanji and observed no significant change as the NRC ranged between 0.31 and 0.33. However, as the air back cavity length increased, the sound absorption at low frequencies tended to increase (Figure 7).
When compared to ordinary copy paper, the sound absorption performance of Hanji was greater than that of copy paper at frequency ranges between 600 and 700 Hz and 2000 and 2100 Hz [90]. Moreover, as the basis weight was increased, the degree of impregnation increased, resulting in more sound absorption.
Compared to other natural materials, the sound absorption performance of Hanji remains insufficient. However, further research on sound-absorbing materials using Hanji is needed to increase the use of Hanji as a natural material unique to Korea.

2.6. Tea-Leaf Fiber Waste

Tea leaf waste fiber is obtained by drying and removing leaves after tea leaf processing. In industrial tea production, a considerable amount of tea leaf waste fiber is generated when extracting instant and bever-age tea. Therefore, various industries are exploring alternative uses for this waste fiber [91]. The sound absorption properties of tea leaf litter fibers described in the literature are presented herein.
Ersoy and Küçük [92] investigated the sound absorption characteristics of tea-leaf-fiber waste at 500–6300 Hz. Figure 8 shows the sound absorption curve of a tea-leaf-fiber sound absorber according to thickness. The sound absorption coefficient (α) of a 10 mm thick absorber was 0.26 at 6300 Hz, and the maximum sound absorption coefficient (α) at a thickness of 20 mm was 0.6 at 6300 Hz. The sound absorption coefficient (α) of a 30 mm thick absorber was 0.7 at 5600.
In addition, the sound absorption coefficient (α) significantly improved when a single layer of woven cloth was placed as a backing rather than pure tea-leaf-fiber itself.

2.7. Mandarin Peel

In 2020, the production of mandarin in the Jeju region of Korea approached 654,000 tons [93]. However, mandarin peels are rarely used, except in some herbal medicines [94].
Kang et al. [95] investigated the sound absorption characteristics of a sawdust–mandarin peel composite particle board and observed that the sound absorption coefficient (α) increased in the high-frequency band rather than the low-frequency band. They also revealed the characteristics of a typical porous sound absorber.
Figure 9 presents the effect of the amount of mandarin peel on the sound absorption curve of a sawdust–mandarin peel composite particle board. The sound absorption coefficient (α) increased to 0.52, 0.65, and 0.76 at 2000–3000 Hz as the mandarin peel content was increased from 10% to 40%. The authors suggest-ed that the sawdust–mandarin peel composite particle board could be used as a sound-absorbing ceiling material.

2.8. Pineapple Leaf Fiber

Pineapple leaves are a valuable source of premium natural fiber. It has numerous potential applications, including reinforcing plastics, providing thermal insulation, and conferring sound absorption properties [96].
Putra et al. [97] examined the sound absorption performance of extracted pineapple-leaf fiber. Figure 10 presents the sound absorption curve of extracted pineapple-leaf fiber according to thickness. Noticeably, as the thickness increased, the sound absorption coefficient (α) increased.
The sound waves in the sound-absorbing material experienced difficulty in moving through the fibers, and sound energy was lost due to friction between the sound waves and pineapple-leaf fibers. The complexity of the path between the fibers allowed sound waves to be captured and absorbed within the sample. The introduction of an air back cavity also improved sound absorption at low frequencies. By controlling the density of pineapple-leaf fibers or introducing an air cavity behind the sample, an average sound absorption of 0.9 above 1000 Hz could be achieved. The increase in the density of pineapple-leaf fibers correlated with increased air resistance and tortuosity.

2.9. Corn Husk

Corn is the most widely cultivated cereal crop globally, with a significant presence in numerous countries. Specifically, the United States and China collectively make up approximately 50% of the global corn market [98]. The stover of a corn plant typically comprises 50% stem (stalk), 35% leaves and cobs, and 15% hull. However, a significant portion of corn stover is treated as waste [99]. Only a small amount is utilized as household fuel or animal manure, whereas the majority of the residues are commonly incinerated. However, these residues can serve as a renewable resource [100].
Tang et al. [101] analyzed the effect of a multilayer structure and air back corn husk cavity. The average single-layer sound absorption was 0.158 at 100–2500 Hz, whereas that for a five-layer structure was 0.409 and increased with the number of layers added to the sample. Figure 11 presents the sound absorption curve of corn husk with respect to thickness. Researchers consider corn husk to be a green sound-absorbing material because it is thinner and lighter than commonly used porous materials. Increasing the air back activity also improved the sound absorption of corn husk at low frequencies. This study demonstrates that corn husk has good sound absorption performance and is suitable for noise reduction.

2.10. Peanut Shell

Generally, 230–300 g of shells are produced per kilogram of peanuts, and the global peanut shell waste reached 10.7–14 million tons in 2017 and 2018 [102]. Peanut shells have been extensively studied for industrial applications, such as biofuel production [103].
Malawade and Jadhav [104] investigated the sound absorption coefficient (α) of peanut shells. The thickness of the peanut shells ranged between 10 and 40 mm, and yellow dextrin powder was used as a binder. They considered weight ratios of the peanut shells to binder of 55:45, 60:40, 65:35, 70:30, and 75:25.
As shown in Figure 12, the sound absorption coefficient (α) increases as the thickness increased. The optimal sound absorption rate was obtained at a material-to-binder weight ratio of 70:30.
Jang (2022) [51] investigated the sound absorption performance of pure peanut shells. Peanut shells were packed in impedance tubes to a height of 3, 6, and 9 cm. The NRC was 0.23 at a 3 cm height, 0.43 at a 6 cm height, and 0.54 at a 9 cm height. Therefore, peanut shells are considered promising green sound absorbers.

2.11. Sugar Palm Trunk Fibers

The sugar palm is a species similar to sugar cane and is a naturally occurring species in the humid regions of Southeast Asia [105]. Sugar palm fibers naturally envelop the entirety of the sugar palm trunk, extending from the uppermost part of the tree to its bottom [106].
Sugar palm trunk fiber is a type of bast fiber known for its high cellulose concentration, which contributes to its excellent tensile strength. This fiber has both durability and resistance to seawater, making it suitable for various applications [107].
Prabowo et al. [108] investigated the sound absorption characteristics of sugar palm trunk fibers. As the thickness of the fibers was adjusted and the bulk density was changed, the sound absorption coefficient (α) increased as the bulk density increased. The increased bulk density resulted in significant sound absorption as sound energy was dissipated due to friction between the sound waves and fibers.
Figure 13 shows the sound absorption curves of sugar palm trunk fibers (40 mm and 30 mm) with a 10 mm air back cavity. Sugar palm trunk fibers (30 mm) with a 10 mm air back cavity exhibited similar sound absorption as a material with a 40 mm thickness in the frequency range of 1000–2500 Hz. Creating an air back cavity in sound absorption materials can result in identical sound absorption performance even if the sample volume is reduced.

2.12. Yucca gloriosa Fiber

Yucca gloriosa fiber, also referred to as Spanish dagger fiber, is obtained from the foliage of the Yucca gloriosa plant. An indigenous plant to the southeastern region of the United States, it is classified under the Agavaceae botanical family. Its notable features include a rosette arrangement of elongated, blade-like leaves [109]. The mechanical properties of Yucca gloriosa fibers have made them a preferred choice as fillers in hybrid composites. These fibers are known for their ability to enhance the reinforcing characteristics of the composites [110].
Soltani et al. [109] investigated the sound absorption characteristics of Yucca gloriosa fiber. They demonstrated that the 15 mm-thick sample had an NRC of 0.18, but that of the 30 mm sample was 0.40. Thick samples had better sound absorption properties than thin samples.
Figure 14 presents the effects of the air back cavity distance on the sound absorption curves. When the air back cavity is large, the sound absorption coefficient (α) decreased at high frequencies, and it increased at low frequencies.
Yucca gloriosa fiber demonstrated similar sound absorption characteristics as other natural fibers.

2.13. Fruit Stone Wastes (Cherry, Apricot, Peach, Olive)

Fruit stone waste did not receive much attention in the past, but many studies have recently revealed that it can be used as a biomass feedstock for biofuel production [111].
Borrell et al. [112] investigated the sound absorption coefficient (α) of four types of fruit stone wastes (cherry, apricot, peach, and olive). The sound absorption coefficient (α) was dependent on the shape and size of the fruit stones. An increase in sample thickness correlated with an increase in sound absorption coefficient (α) at a low frequency. Apricot and cherry stones demonstrated the best sound absorption at low frequencies (Figure 15).
Fruit stones are effective sound-absorbing materials for reducing noise in buildings. The study suggested that expanding to other types of fruit stone and crop waste could create high-value-added products in the future.

2.14. Wood Bark

Various studies have examined the sound absorption capabilities of wood and wood-based materials. Wood cross-sections are naturally porous sound absorbers [113,114,115,116]. Additionally, when a hole is drilled in a wood panel and an air back cavity is introduced, it can act as a resonant sound absorber [117].
Kang et al. [118] analyzed the sound absorption performance of five spice coniferous barks and one spice hardwood bark. The specimens were prepared by crushing bark into different thicknesses and densities. The sound absorption coefficient (α) increased as the thickness increased.
Figure 16 presents the NRC of wood bark particles (filled thickness: 100 mm) as the packing density was adjusted from 0.12 to 0.16. The overall NRC increased as the packing density of wood bark particles increased. The bark particles had varying shapes according to the tree species, resulting in different sound absorption performances. Wood bark may be used as an environment-friendly road barrier material.

2.15. Nettle Fibers

Nettle, a versatile plant that can be grown in various regions of Asia, including nonagricultural lands, re-quires minimal resources. Nettle fiber is a natural fiber with excellent thermal and mechanical properties [119].
Recently, nettle fibers have been studied for use as a natural sound absorbing material. Raj et al. [120] investigated the NRC of nettle fiber 8–80 mm thick. The relationship between thickness and the increase in NRC seems to follow a logarithmic pattern. The optimal NRC (0.7) corresponded to a sound-absorbing sample thickness of 56 mm (Figure 17). Therefore, nettle fibers can be considered useful eco-friendly sound absorbers.

3. Conclusions

Green materials are low in toxicity and safe for human use, making them a preferred option for various applications. Their biodegradability reduces environmental impacts and promotes sustainability. Therefore, green materials are highly desirable as sound absorbing materials. This study reviewed a variety of green material sound absorbers: coconut fiber, kenaf fiber, rice bran, rice husk, and rice straw, Hanji, tea-leaf fiber, sawdust–mandarin peel, pineapple-leaf fiber, corn husk, peanut shell, sugar palm trunk, Yucca gloriosa fiber, fruit stones, wood barks, flax fiber, and nettle fiber.
For a majority of green sound-absorbing materials, as the thickness of the material increases, the density increases, or the air back cavity widens, the sound absorption coefficient at low frequencies is enhanced. Thick sound-absorbing material provides many spaces for sound energy to penetrate, effectively improving noise reduction. When an air back cavity is utilized, incident sound energy causes resonance, thereby absorbing sound. This result indicates that applying an air back cavity is much more efficient than using an absorbent with continuous thickness, thus saving material.
This review suggests that, in addition to the specific materials discussed, a wide range of granular, fibrous, and porous eco-friendly materials can be used as sound-absorbing materials. By carefully control-ling the physical properties, such as thickness, density, and the presence of an air back cavity, these mate-rials can effectively absorb sound. This implies that numerous possibilities for exploring and utilizing different eco-friendly materials for their sound-absorbing capabilities exist, expanding the range of options available for addressing noise pollution. However, the commercial use of green materials as sound absorbers requires their constant supply. In this context, rice husk and rice straw, which have sustainable production capacity, may have the most commercial value. In terms of continuous productivity, further study is needed to improve manufacturing cost, mechanical strength, heat resistance, and insulation.
Notably, natural materials have to overcome problems such as moisture fragility, decay, and low fire safety. If these limitations can be overcome, the potential for developing green sound-absorbing materials can be greatly increased to include the replacement of synthetic sound-absorbing materials.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

This article is part of the author (EUN-SUK JANG)’s Jeonbuk National University doctoral dissertation.

Conflicts of Interest

The author declares no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zwolak, A.; Sarzyńska, M.; Szpyrka, E.; Stawarczyk, K. Sources of soil pollution by heavy metals and their accumulation in vegetables: A review. Water Air Soil Pollut. 2019, 230, 164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Dwivedi, A.K. Researches in water pollution: A review. Int. Res. J. Nat. Appl. Sci. 2017, 4, 118–142. [Google Scholar]
  3. Grubisic, M.; van Grunsven, R.H.; Kyba, C.C.; Manfrin, A.; Hölker, F. Insect declines and agroecosystems: Does light pollution matter? Ann. Appl. Biol. 2018, 173, 180–189. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Li, Y.; Guan, D.; Tao, S.; Wang, X.; He, K. A review of air pollution impact on subjective well-being: Survey versus visual psychophysics. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 184, 959–968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Jariwala, H.J.; Syed, H.S.; Pandya, M.J.; Gajera, Y.M. Noise Pollution & Human Health: A Review. Indoor Built Environ. 2017, 1, 1–4. [Google Scholar]
  6. Xu, X.; Nie, S.; Ding, H.; Hou, F.F. Environmental pollution and kidney diseases. Nat. Rev. Nephrol. 2018, 14, 313–324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhu, X.; Kim, B.-J.; Wang, Q.; Wu, Q. Recent advances in the sound insulation properties of bio-based materials. BioResources 2014, 9, 1764–1786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Hamdan, N.I.; Zainulabidin, M.H.; Kassim, A.S.M. A Review on The Development of Panel and Membrane Sound Absorbers. Int. J. Integr. Eng. 2021, 13, 60–74. [Google Scholar]
  9. Egab, L.; Wang, X.; Fard, M. Acoustical characterisation of porous sound absorbing materials: A review. Int. J. Veh. Noise Vib. 2014, 10, 129–149. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Fuchs, H.V.; Zha, X. Micro-perforated structures as sound absorbers—A review and outlook. Acta Acust. United Acust. 2006, 92, 139–146. [Google Scholar]
  11. Arenas, J.P.; Crocker, M.J. Recent trends in porous sound-absorbing materials. Sound Vib. 2010, 44, 12–18. [Google Scholar]
  12. Berardi, U.; Iannace, G. Acoustic characterization of natural fibers for sound absorption applications. Build. Environ. 2015, 94, 840–852. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Samsudin, E.M.; Ismail, L.H.; Abdul Kadir, A. A review on physical factors influencing absorption performance offibrous sound absorption material from natural fibers. ARPN J. Eng. Appl. Sci. 2016, 11, 3703–3711. [Google Scholar]
  14. Zulkifli, R.; Nor, M.M.; Tahir, M.M.; Ismail, A.; Nuawi, M. Acoustic properties of multi-layer coir fibres sound absorption panel. J. Appl. Sci. 2008, 8, 3709–3714. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  15. Metintas, S.; Ak, G.; Metintas, M. A review of the cohorts with environmental and occupational mineral fiber exposure. Arch. Environ. Occup. Health 2019, 74, 76–84. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Kojola, W.H.; Moran, J.B. Commentary: Exposure Limits for Man-Made Mineral Fibers. Position of the Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO. Appl. Occup. Environ. Hyg. 1992, 7, 724–733. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Carel, R.; Olsson, A.C.; Zaridze, D.; Szeszenia-Dabrowska, N.; Rudnai, P.; Lissowska, J.; Fabianova, E.; Cassidy, A.; Mates, D.; Bencko, V. Occupational exposure to asbestos and man-made vitreous fibres and risk of lung cancer: A multicentre case-control study in Europe. Occup. Environ. Med. 2007, 64, 502–508. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Ahn, Y.S. Occupational cancer update. Korean J. Occup. Environ. Med. 2011, 23, 235–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Świątkowska, B.; Szeszenia-Dąbrowska, N. Spirometry: A predictor of lung cancer among asbestos workers. Inhal. Toxicol. 2017, 29, 18–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. De Luca, P.; Carbone, I.; Nagy, J. Green building materials: A review of state of the art studies of innovative materials. J. Green Build. 2017, 12, 141–161. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Abdullah, Y.; Putra, A.; Efendy, H.; Farid, W.; Ayob, M. Investigation on sound absorption coefficient of natural paddy fibers. Int. J. Renew. Energy Resour. 2013, 3, 8–11. [Google Scholar]
  22. Jayamani, E.; Hamdan, S. Sound absorption coefficients natural fibre reinforced composites. Adv. Mater. Res. 2013, 701, 53–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Miller, S.A. Natural fiber textile reinforced bio-based composites: Mechanical properties, creep, and environmental impacts. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 198, 612–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Jo, W.-J.; Sohn, J.-Y. Variations of Indoor Air Quality by Application of Environmentally Friendly and Absorbent Materials. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Plan. Des. 2008, 24, 227–234. [Google Scholar]
  25. Fu, X. Indoor Microbial Volatile Organic Compound (MVOC) Levels and Associations with Respiratory Health, Sick Building Syndrome (SBS), and Allergy. In Environmental Mycology in Public Health; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2016; pp. 387–395. [Google Scholar]
  26. Jeon, J.; Park, J.H.; Wi, S.; Yang, S.; Ok, Y.S.; Kim, S. Latent heat storage biocomposites of phase change material-biochar as feasible eco-friendly building materials. Environ. Res. 2019, 172, 637–648. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Yeon, J.-O.; Kim, K.-W.; Yang, K.-S.; Kim, J.-M.; Kim, M.-J. Physical properties of cellulose sound absorbers produced using recycled paper. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 70, 494–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Mohanty, A.; Fatima, S. Noise control using green materials. Sound Vib. 2015, 49, 13–15. [Google Scholar]
  29. Mamtaz, H.; Fouladi, M.H.; Al-Atabi, M.; Narayana Namasivayam, S. Acoustic absorption of natural fiber composites. J. Eng. 2016, 2016, 5836107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  30. Salva, J.K.C., Jr.; Yu, B.A.L. Coconut Coir Based Sound Absorber Board for Noise Pollution Control. APEC Youth Sci. J. 2017, 9, 13–18. [Google Scholar]
  31. Rubino, C.; Bonet Aracil, M.; Gisbert-Payá, J.; Liuzzi, S.; Stefanizzi, P.; Zamorano Cantó, M.; Martellotta, F. Composite eco-friendly sound absorbing materials made of recycled textile waste and biopolymers. Materials 2019, 12, 4020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Santhanam, S.; Temesgen, S.; Atalie, D.; Ashagre, G. Recycling of cotton and polyester fibers to produce nonwoven fabric for functional sound absorption material. J. Nat. Fibers 2019, 16, 300–306. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Do, N.H.; Luu, T.P.; Thai, Q.B.; Le, D.K.; Chau, N.D.Q.; Nguyen, S.T.; Le, P.K.; Phan-Thien, N.; Duong, H.M. Heat and sound insulation applications of pineapple aerogels from pineapple waste. Mater. Chem. Phys. 2020, 242, 122267. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. John, M.J.; Thomas, S. Biofibres and biocomposites. Carbohydr. Polym. 2008, 71, 343–364. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Fouladi, M.H.; Ghassem, M.; Ayub, M.; Jailani, M.; Nor, M. Implementation of coir fiber as acoustic absorber material. Noise Vib. Worldw. 2011, 42, 11–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Wenger, J.; Stern, T.; Schoggl, J.; Ree, R.; Corato, U.; Bari, I.; Bell, G.; Stichnothe, H. Natural Fibers and Fiber-Based Materials in Biorefineries: Status Report 2018; IEA Bioenergy: Paris, France, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  37. Peças, P.; Carvalho, H.; Salman, H.; Leite, M. Natural fibre composites and their applications: A review. J. Compos. Sci. 2018, 2, 66. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Kalauni, K.; Pawar, S. A review on the taxonomy, factors associated with sound absorption and theoretical modeling of porous sound absorbing materials. J. Porous Mater. 2019, 26, 1795–1819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Neri, M.; Levi, E.; Cuerva, E.; Pardo-Bosch, F.; Zabaleta, A.G.; Pujadas, P. Sound absorbing and insulating low-cost panels from end-of-life household materials for the development of vulnerable contexts in circular economy perspective. Appl. Sci. 2021, 11, 5372. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Cascone, S.M.; Cascone, S.; Vitale, M. Building insulating materials from agricultural by-products: A review. In Sustainability in Energy and Buildings; Littlewood, J., Howlett, R., Capozzoli, A., Jain, L., Eds.; Smart Innovation, Systems and Technologies; Springer: Singapore, 2020; pp. 309–318. [Google Scholar]
  41. Tudor, E.M.; Dettendorfer, A.; Kain, G.; Barbu, M.C.; Réh, R.; Krišťák, Ľ. Sound-absorption coefficient of bark-based insulation panels. Polymers 2020, 12, 1012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Shahani, F.; Soltani, P.; Zarrebini, M. The analysis of acoustical characteristics and sound absorption coefficient of woven fabrics. Text. Res. J. 2012, 82, 875–882. [Google Scholar]
  43. ISO11654; Acoustics—Sound Absorbers for Use in Buildings—Rating of Sound Absorption. International Organization for Standardization (ISO): Geneva, Switzerland, 1997.
  44. Kim, Y.; Lee, S. Sound absorption performance of noise barrier according to single number rating methods. Trans. Korean Soc. Noise Vib. Eng. 2017, 27, 243–250. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  45. Jang, E.-S.; Kang, C.-W. Investigation on the Malysian Duabanga Moluccana cross section as sound absorbing functional materials. Wood Res. 2022, 67, 558–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Mitchell, M.; Muftakhidinov, B.; Winchen, T.; Jedrzejewski-Szmek, Z. Engauge Digitizer Software. Available online: https://markummitchell.github.io/engauge-digitizer/ (accessed on 8 April 2023).
  47. Nor, M.J.M.; Jamaludin, N.; Tamiri, F.M. A preliminary study of sound absorption using multi-layer coconut coir fibers. Electron. J. Tech. Acoust. 2004, 3, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  48. Panyakaew, S.; Fotios, S. New thermal insulation boards made from coconut husk and bagasse. Energy Build. 2011, 43, 1732–1739. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  49. Rozli, Z.; Zulkarnain, Z. Noise control using coconut coir fiber sound absorber with porous layer backing and perforated panel. Am. J. Appl. Sci. 2010, 7, 260–264. [Google Scholar]
  50. Cao, L.; Fu, Q.; Si, Y.; Ding, B.; Yu, J. Porous materials for sound absorption. Compos. Commun. 2018, 10, 25–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Jang, E.-S. Peanut Shells as an Environmentally Beneficial Sound-Absorbing Material. J. Korean Wood Sci. Technol. 2022, 50, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Ayadi, R.; Hanana, M.; Mzid, R.; Hamrouni, L.; Khouja, M.l.; Salhi Hanachi, A. Hibiscus cannabinus L.—Kenaf: A review paper. J. Nat. Fibers 2017, 14, 466–484. [Google Scholar]
  53. Saba, N.; Jawaid, M.; Hakeem, K.; Paridah, M.; Khalina, A.; Alothman, O. Potential of bioenergy production from industrial kenaf (Hibiscus cannabinus L.) based on Malaysian perspective. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2015, 42, 446–459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Akil, H.; Omar, M.; Mazuki, A.M.; Safiee, S.; Ishak, Z.M.; Bakar, A.A. Kenaf fiber reinforced composites: A review. Mater. Des. 2011, 32, 4107–4121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Lim, Z.; Putra, A.; Nor, M.; Yaakob, M. Sound absorption performance of natural kenaf fibres. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 130, 107–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Ismail, L.; Ghazali, M.I.; Mahzan, S.; Zaidi, A.A. Sound absorption of Arenga pinnata natural fiber. World Acad. Sci. Eng. Technol. 2010, 67, 804–806. [Google Scholar]
  57. Koizumi, T.; Tsujiuchi, N.; Adachi, A. The development of sound absorbing materials using natural bamboo fibers. WIT Trans. Built Environ. 2002, 59, 157–166. [Google Scholar]
  58. Husain, S.N.H.; Abdul Razak, N.A.; Abdul Rashid, A.H.; Yahya, M.N.B.; Zamri Tan, N.Z.; Shaari, M.F.; Mahmood, S.; Marsi, N.; Mohamad Isa, H.M. Development of Kenaf Nonwoven as Automotive Noise Absorption. Appl. Mech. Mater. 2019, 892, 101–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Jung, D.; Yang, J.E.; Chung, L. Sensory characteristics of rice confections by descriptive analysis. J. Korean Soc. Food Cult. 2016, 31, 105–110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  60. António, J.; Tadeu, A.; Marques, B.; Almeida, J.A.; Pinto, V. Application of rice husk in the development of new composite boards. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 176, 432–439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Zou, Y.; Yang, T. Rice husk, Rice husk ash and their applications. In Rice Bran and Rice Bran Oil; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 207–246. [Google Scholar]
  62. Hsiaoping, C. Rice consumption in China: Can China change rice consumption from quantity to quality. In Rice Is Life: Scientific Perspectives for the 21st Century; International Rice Research Institute: Manila, Philippines, 2005; pp. 497–499. [Google Scholar]
  63. Oh, S.; Lee, S.; Park, S.; Lee, S.; Lee, W.; Cho, H.; Yeo, Y. Rice biotechnology and current development. J. Korean Soc. Int. Agric. 2016, 1, 24–36. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Kwon, Y.-H.; Hong, S.-G. Feasibility of Korean Rice Husk Ash as Admixture for High Strength Concrete: Particle Size Distribution, Chemical Composition and Absorption Capacity Depending on Calcination Temperature and Milling Process. J. Korea Acad. Ind. Coop. Soc. 2017, 18, 111–117. [Google Scholar]
  65. Chabannes, M.; Bénézet, J.-C.; Clerc, L.; Garcia-Diaz, E. Use of raw rice husk as natural aggregate in a lightweight insulating concrete: An innovative application. Constr. Build. Mater. 2014, 70, 428–438. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Qin, L.; Gao, X.; Chen, T. Recycling of raw rice husk to manufacture magnesium oxysulfate cement based lightweight building materials. J. Clean. Prod. 2018, 191, 220–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Buratti, C.; Belloni, E.; Lascaro, E.; Merli, F.; Ricciardi, P. Rice husk panels for building applications: Thermal, acoustic and environmental characterization and comparison with other innovative recycled waste materials. Constr. Build. Mater. 2018, 171, 338–349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Mahzan, S.; Ahmad Zaidi, A.M.; Ghazali, M.I.; Yahya, M.N.; Ismail, M. Investigation on sound absorption of rice-husk reinforced composite. In Proceedings of the MUCEET 2009, Malaysian Technical Universities Conference on Engineering and Technology, Kuantan, Malaysia, 20–22 June 2009. [Google Scholar]
  69. Wang, Y.; Wu, H.; Zhang, C.; Ren, L.; Yu, H.; Galland, M.A.; Ichchou, M. Acoustic characteristics parameters of polyurethane/rice husk composites. Polym. Compos. 2019, 40, 2653–2661. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Marques, B.; Tadeu, A.; António, J.; Almeida, J.; de Brito, J. Mechanical, thermal and acoustic behaviour of polymer-based composite materials produced with rice husk and expanded cork by-products. Constr. Build. Mater. 2020, 239, 117851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. IRRI. Rice Straw Management. Available online: https://www.irri.org/rice-straw-management (accessed on 13 June 2023).
  72. USDA. Rice Straw Market in Japan; JA2020-0078; USDA Foreign Agricultural Service: Washington, DC, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  73. KOSIS. Statistics on Rice Straw Production in Korea. Available online: https://kosis.kr/statHtml/statHtml.do?orgId=101&tblId=DT_1ET0032 (accessed on 13 June 2023).
  74. Romasanta, R.; Sander, B.; Gaihre, Y.; Alberto, M.; Gummert, M.; Quilty, J.; Nguyen, V.; Castalone, A.; Balingbing, C.; Sandro, J. How does rice straw burning compare with other straw management practices in terms of on-field CH4 and N2O emissions? A comparative field experiment. Agric. Ecosyst. Environ. 2017, 239, 143–153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Hussein, Z.; Ashour, T.; Khalil, M.; Bahnasawy, A.; Ali, S.; Hollands, J.; Korjenic, A. Rice Straw and Flax Fiber Particleboards as a Product of Agricultural Waste: An Evaluation of Technical Properties. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 3878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  76. Sander, B.O.; Quilty, J.; Balingbing, C.; Castalone, A.G.; Romasanta, R.; Alberto, M.C.R.; Sandro, J.M.; Jamieson, C.; Gummert, M. An assessment of irrigated rice production energy efficiency and environmental footprint with in-field and off-field rice straw management practices. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 16887. [Google Scholar]
  77. Yang, H.-S.; Kim, D.-J.; Lee, Y.-K.; Kim, H.-J.; Jeon, J.-Y.; Kang, C.-W. Possibility of using waste tire composites reinforced with rice straw as construction materials. Bioresour. Technol. 2004, 95, 61–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Wei, K.; Lv, C.; Chen, M.; Zhou, X.; Dai, Z.; Shen, D. Development and performance evaluation of a new thermal insulation material from rice straw using high frequency hot-pressing. Energy Build. 2015, 87, 116–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Ferrandez-Garcia, C.C.; Garcia-Ortuño, T.; Ferrandez-Garcia, M.T.; Ferrandez-Villena, M.; García, C.E.F. Fire-resistance, physical, and mechanical characterization of binderless rice straw particleboards. BioResources 2017, 12, 8539–8549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, J.; Zuo, Y.; Xiao, J.; Li, P.; Wu, Y. Construction of compatible interface of straw/magnesia lightweight materials by alkali treatment. Constr. Build. Mater. 2019, 228, 116712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Kang, C.-W.; Jang, E.-S.; Jang, S.-S.; Kang, H.-Y. 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. 2018, 46, 362–367. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Yang, H.-S.; Kim, D.-J.; Kim, H.-J. Rice straw–wood particle composite for sound absorbing wooden construction materials. Bioresour. Technol. 2003, 86, 117–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kwon, H. A study on the present situation of Hanji costume design and production. J. Korean Soc. Knit Des. 2007, 5, 1–8. [Google Scholar]
  84. Jeon, Y.B.; Kim, K.H.; Lim, H.A. A study on the properties of Jumchi Hanji for application as shroud materials. J. Korean Soc. Cloth. Text. 2014, 38, 397–403. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  85. Lee, J.; Lim, J. The experimental study on the efficiency of ventilation of Korean paper (hanji). Korean J. Air-Cond. Refrig. Eng. 2004, 16, 482–489. [Google Scholar]
  86. Lee, J.; Hwang, H. A Study on the performance of controlling indoor humidity and air quality of the traditional Korean paper (Hanji) as building materials. J. Archit. Inst. Korea Plan. Des. 2007, 23, 211–218. [Google Scholar]
  87. Park, T.Y.; Lee, S.G. A study on coarse Hanji yarn manufacturing and properties of the Hanji fabric. Fibers Polym. 2013, 14, 311–315. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Jang, E.-S.; Kang, C.-W.; Kang, H.-Y.; Jang, S.-S. Sound Absorption Property of Traditional Korean Natural Wallpaper (Hanji). J. Korean Wood Sci. Technol. 2018, 46, 703–712. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Lee, M.; Kim, N.; Kim, M. Evaluation on the sound absorption of mulberry paper (Hanji) backed by an air cavity and porous material. J. Korean Soc. Living Environ. Syst. 2008, 15, 92–101. [Google Scholar]
  90. Cho, J.-H.; Kim, K.-J.; Park, S.-B.; Eom, T.-J. Comparison of the functional properties of Hanji depending on the different manufacturing process. J. Korea Tech. Assoc. Pulp Pap. Ind. 2009, 41, 42–48. [Google Scholar]
  91. Abdul Rahman, N.H.; Chieng, B.W.; Ibrahim, N.A.; Abdul Rahman, N. Extraction and characterization of cellulose nanocrystals from tea leaf waste fibers. Polymers 2017, 9, 588. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  92. Ersoy, S.; Küçük, H. Investigation of industrial tea-leaf-fibre waste material for its sound absorption properties. Appl. Acoust. 2009, 70, 215–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Kim, S.-U.; Ko, S.-B. A Study on the Ordinance in Connection with the Production and Distribution of Citrus in Jeju Special Self-Governing Province. J. Korea Acad. Ind. Coop. Soc. 2022, 23, 351–359. [Google Scholar]
  94. Jeoung, S.-H.; Gim, S.-B.; Choi, H.-J.; Kim, D.-H. Study of Anti-microbe Activity of Essential oil (Unshiu oil) purified from Citrus unshiu S. Marcov. J. Haehwa Med. 2012, 20, 67–78. [Google Scholar]
  95. Kang, C.; Jin, T.; Kang, H.-Y. Effect of Flame Resistant Treatment on the Sound Absorption Capability of Sawdust-mandarin Peel Composite Particleboard. J. Korean Wood Sci. Technol. 2015, 43, 511–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Kengkhetkit, N.; Amornsakchai, T. Utilisation of pineapple leaf waste for plastic reinforcement: 1. A novel extraction method for short pineapple leaf fiber. Ind. Crops Prod. 2012, 40, 55–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Putra, A.; Or, K.H.; Selamat, M.Z.; Nor, M.J.M.; Hassan, M.H.; Prasetiyo, I. Sound absorption of extracted pineapple-leaf fibres. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 136, 9–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Tanklevska, N.; Petrenko, V.; Karnaushenko, A.; Melnykova, K. World corn market: Analysis, trends and prospects of its deep processing. Agric. Resour. Econ. Int. Sci. E-J. 2020, 6, 96–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Sokhansanj, S.; Turhollow, A.; Cushman, J.; Cundiff, J. Engineering aspects of collecting corn stover for bioenergy. Biomass Bioenergy 2002, 23, 347–355. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Ibrahim, M.; Sapuan, S.; Zainudin, E.; Zuhri, M. Potential of using multiscale corn husk fiber as reinforcing filler in cornstarch-based biocomposites. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2019, 139, 596–604. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Tang, X.; Zhang, X.; Zhang, H.; Zhuang, X.; Yan, X. Corn husk for noise reduction: Robust acoustic absorption and reduced thickness. Appl. Acoust. 2018, 134, 60–68. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Sorita, G.D.; Leimann, F.V.; Ferreira, S.R.S. Biorefinery approach: Is it an upgrade opportunity for peanut by-products? Trends Food Sci. Technol. 2020, 105, 56–69. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Nazir, A.; Laila, U.-E.; Bareen, F.-E.; Hameed, E.; Shafiq, M. Sustainable management of peanut shell through biochar and its application as soil ameliorant. Sustainability 2021, 13, 13796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Malawade, U.A.; Jadhav, M.G. Investigation of Peanut Shell as Alternative Sound Absorbing Material. Am. J. Mech. Mater. Eng. 2019, 3, 53–60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  105. Ilyas, R.; Sapuan, S.; Atiqah, A.; Asyraf, M.; Nurazzi, N.; Norrrahim, M.N.; Jenol, M.A.; Harussani, M.; Ibrahim, R.; Atikah, M. Thermal Properties of Sugar Palm Fiber-Based Hybrid Composites. In Natural Fiber-Reinforced Composites: Thermal Properties and Applications; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2022; pp. 53–83. [Google Scholar]
  106. Sanyang, M.L.; Sapuan, S.; Jawaid, M.; Ishak, M.; Sahari, J. Recent developments in sugar palm (Arenga pinnata) based biocomposites and their potential industrial applications: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2016, 54, 533–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Imraan, M.; Ilyas, R.; Norfarhana, A.; Bangar, S.P.; Knight, V.F.; Norrrahim, M. Sugar Palm (Arenga pinnata) Fibers: New Emerging Natural Fibre and its Relevant Properties, Treatments and Potential Applications. J. Mater. Res. Technol. 2023, 24, 4551–4572. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Prabowo, A.E.; Diharjo, K.; Prasetiyo, I. Sound Absorption Performance of Sugar Palm Trunk Fibers. E3S Web Conf. 2019, 130, 01003. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  109. Soltani, P.; Taban, E.; Faridan, M.; Samaei, S.E.; Amininasab, S. Experimental and computational investigation of sound absorption performance of sustainable porous material: Yucca Gloriosa fiber. Appl. Acoust. 2020, 157, 106999. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. Samaei, S.E.; Asilian Mahabadi, H.; Mousavi, S.M.; Khavanin, A.; Faridan, M. Effect of Alkali treatment on diameter and tensile properties of Yucca Gloriosa fiber using response surface methodology. J. Nat. Fibers 2022, 19, 2429–2442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. Solangi, N.H.; Kumar, J.; Mazari, S.A.; Ahmed, S.; Fatima, N.; Mubarak, N.M. Development of fruit waste derived bio-adsorbents for wastewater treatment: A review. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 416, 125848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Borrell, J.G.; Sanchis, E.J.; Alcaraz, J.S.; Belda, I.M. Sustainable sound absorbers from fruit stones waste. Appl. Acoust. 2020, 161, 107174. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Jang, E.-S.; Kang, C.-W. The pore structure and sound absorption capabilities of Homalium (Homalium foetidum) and Jelutong (Dyera costulata). Wood Sci. Technol. 2021, 56, 323–344. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Jang, E.-S.; Kang, C.-W. Why the sound-absorbing performance of heartwood and sapwood differs in yellow poplar (liriodendron tulipifera) cross-sections? Wood Res. 2022, 67, 372–382. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Jang, E.-S.; Kang, C.-W. Investigation of the pore structure and sound-absorbing capability of the Chinese parasol tree (Firmiana simplex (L.) W. Wight) and Chinese tulip poplar (Liriodendron chinense) transverse sections as eco-friendly, porous, sound-absorbing materials. J. Porous Mater. 2022, 29, 1791–1796. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  116. Jang, E.-S.; Kang, C.-W. Effect of porous traits of hardwoods cross-section on sound absorption performance—Focus on 6 species of Korean hardwoods. Wood Fiber Sci. 2021, 53, 260–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Peng, L.; Liu, M.; Wang, D.; Song, B. Sound absorption properties of wooden perforated plates. Wood Res. 2018, 63, 559–572. [Google Scholar]
  118. Kang, C.-W.; Jang, E.-S.; Jang, S.-S.; Kang, H.-Y.; Kang, S.-G.; Oh, S.-C. Sound Absorption Rate and Sound Transmission Loss of Wood Bark Particle. J. Korean Wood Sci. Technol. 2019, 47, 425–441. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Bajpai, P.K.; Meena, D.; Vatsa, S.; Singh, I. Tensile behavior of nettle fiber composites exposed to various environments. J. Nat. Fibers 2013, 10, 244–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  120. Raj, M.; Fatima, S.; Tandon, N. An experimental and theoretical study on environment-friendly sound absorber sourced from nettle fibers. J. Build. Eng. 2020, 31, 101395. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Forests 14 01366 g001 550
Figure 1. Comparison of the price of natural and synthetic fibers (2011–2017) [37].
Figure 1. Comparison of the price of natural and synthetic fibers (2011–2017) [37].
Forests 14 01366 g001
Forests 14 01366 g003 550
Figure 3. Sound absorption curve of coconut fiber sound absorber according to thickness [49].
Figure 3. Sound absorption curve of coconut fiber sound absorber according to thickness [49].
Forests 14 01366 g003
Forests 14 01366 g004a 550Forests 14 01366 g004b 550
Figure 4. Sound absorption coefficient curve of kenaf fiber [55]. (a) Kenaf and rock wool fiber, (b) Thickness, (c) Air back cavity, (d) Density.
Figure 4. Sound absorption coefficient curve of kenaf fiber [55]. (a) Kenaf and rock wool fiber, (b) Thickness, (c) Air back cavity, (d) Density.
Forests 14 01366 g004aForests 14 01366 g004b
Forests 14 01366 g005 550
Figure 5. Sound absorption curve of rice husk according to width [67].
Figure 5. Sound absorption curve of rice husk according to width [67].
Forests 14 01366 g005
Forests 14 01366 g006 550
Figure 6. Comparison of sound absorption curves of rice straw and synthetic glass wool [21].
Figure 6. Comparison of sound absorption curves of rice straw and synthetic glass wool [21].
Forests 14 01366 g006
Forests 14 01366 g007 550
Figure 7. Sound absorption curve of Hanji (2 layer) depending on air back cavity [89].
Figure 7. Sound absorption curve of Hanji (2 layer) depending on air back cavity [89].
Forests 14 01366 g007
Forests 14 01366 g008 550
Figure 8. Sound absorption curve of tea leaf fiber depending on absorber thickness [84].
Figure 8. Sound absorption curve of tea leaf fiber depending on absorber thickness [84].
Forests 14 01366 g008
Forests 14 01366 g009 550
Figure 9. Sound absorption curve of a sawdust–mandarin peel composite particle board depending on content of mandarin peel [95].
Figure 9. Sound absorption curve of a sawdust–mandarin peel composite particle board depending on content of mandarin peel [95].
Forests 14 01366 g009
Forests 14 01366 g010 550
Figure 10. Sound absorption curve of pineapple-leaf fiber depending on thickness [97].
Figure 10. Sound absorption curve of pineapple-leaf fiber depending on thickness [97].
Forests 14 01366 g010
Forests 14 01366 g011 550
Figure 11. Sound absorption curve of corn husk depending on thickness [101].
Figure 11. Sound absorption curve of corn husk depending on thickness [101].
Forests 14 01366 g011
Forests 14 01366 g012 550
Figure 12. Effect of thickness on the sound absorption curve of peanut shells with binder (weight ratio of 70:30) [104].
Figure 12. Effect of thickness on the sound absorption curve of peanut shells with binder (weight ratio of 70:30) [104].
Forests 14 01366 g012
Forests 14 01366 g013 550
Figure 13. Sound absorption curve of sugar palm trunk fibers of 40 mm thickness and 30 mm thickness with a 10 mm air back cavity [108].
Figure 13. Sound absorption curve of sugar palm trunk fibers of 40 mm thickness and 30 mm thickness with a 10 mm air back cavity [108].
Forests 14 01366 g013
Forests 14 01366 g014 550
Figure 14. Sound absorption curve of Yucca gloriosa fiber depending on air back cavity distance.
Figure 14. Sound absorption curve of Yucca gloriosa fiber depending on air back cavity distance.
Forests 14 01366 g014
Forests 14 01366 g015 550
Figure 15. Sound absorption curves of olive stones, cheery stones, apricot stones, and peach stones (thickness 95–98 mm) [112].
Figure 15. Sound absorption curves of olive stones, cheery stones, apricot stones, and peach stones (thickness 95–98 mm) [112].
Forests 14 01366 g015
Forests 14 01366 g016 550
Figure 16. NRC of wood bark particles depending on their density (g/cm3) [118].
Figure 16. NRC of wood bark particles depending on their density (g/cm3) [118].
Forests 14 01366 g016
Forests 14 01366 g017 550
Figure 17. NRC of nettle fibers depending on the thickness.
Figure 17. NRC of nettle fibers depending on the thickness.
Forests 14 01366 g017
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Jang, E.-S. Sound Absorbing Properties of Selected Green Material—A Review. Forests 2023, 14, 1366. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071366

AMA Style

Jang E-S. Sound Absorbing Properties of Selected Green Material—A Review. Forests. 2023; 14(7):1366. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071366

Chicago/Turabian Style

Jang, Eun-Suk. 2023. "Sound Absorbing Properties of Selected Green Material—A Review" Forests 14, no. 7: 1366. https://doi.org/10.3390/f14071366

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop