>There is some otherwise nice real estate at the end of Navy runways,
> >neighborhoods in San Diego and Virginia Beach where pilots practice
> >taking off an aircraft carrier with after burners wide open.
>
> >A lot of residents would be willing to pay $5,000 or more to be able
> >to talk to other people in a room at the flip of a switch. If it
> >draws a lot of power or when there is little outdoor noise it might be
> >desirable to turn it off or have it automatically turn off after 5
> >minutes and then back on as soon as the noise exceeds a threshold.
>
> >Noise cancellation should be cheaper than redoing the walls and in
> >some ways it might be an easier problem than headphones where the
> >distances involved are only a cm.
>
> >A few noisy zones might be tolerable as long as the locations of quiet
> >zones in a room could be moved and adjusted.
>
> Maybe I missed it, but in all the proposals that have been
> bandied about here, nobody seems to have suggested "simple"
> servo systems:
This is actually fundamentally different than the speaker microphone solution. Servos are about keeping something still. Speakers and microphones are about movement.
The current could be measured for a "servo mic."
A servo system, of course, requires something stationary. This could easily be done with small panels that are perpendicular to the noise blocking panel. Only the component of sound that is perpendicular to the panel needs to be blocked and that won't appear much in the perpendicular panels.
Except maybe for the cost -- and it's not even clear why servo systems are so expensive anyway -- it's interesting why this isn't done with [noise blocking] headphones.
Does anyone know of any cheap servo systems? Bose sells noise cancellation headphones for less than $200. Force balance accelerometers like those on missile guidance systems cost over $1,000.
Dealing for the moment only with noise that
> gets into the house via transmission through the walls, we
> can envision walls covered with active panels. Each uses a
> servo system to hold a stationary position. If the interior
> of the wall doesn't move, then no sound passes through it.
The real problem is the high dynamic response of hearing. A 90% reduction in the noise "power" seems like a 10% reduction in noise so a small space between adjacent panels or the door and jam might be way too much for a satisfactory reduction in noise.
Of course, to handle high frequencies would require a *lot*
> of small servo panels.
High frequencies can be damped by conventional passive materials, foams etc.
Bret Cahill